Older Gear

[Airman1270 0]

I have a Wonderhog w/a Strong lopo manufactured in 1977. Have been using the rig since the mid-80's, including two terminal reserve deployments, the last one in 1997.

The rig is well-maintained and in excellent shape. Yet, I understand there are riggers who won't service it due to its age.

If this is true, why? As a rigger, are you not qualified to evaluate the airworthiness of a piece of equipment?

So far this has not been a problem, but I don't travel much. I'd hate to end up at a distant DZ and be refused a repack, etc., because of some sort of "older gear" prejudice on the part of someone who was in diapers when I made my first jump, and whose experience with older stuff is dominated by "thought I was gonna die" campfire stories.

Thanks,
Jon S.

[PhreeZone 15]

Some DZ's are moving towards a no round reserve policy. A lot of this is due to the surrounding area and the lack of suitable landing areas. I know Pitts Meadow has this policy, pretty sure a few DZ's in FL have it too.

With the Wonderhog if I have questions while packing it there is no one for me to call and ask questions to. RWS does'nt really support them anymore. Also if you don't bring the owners manual with you, you can not be gaurenteed that the rigger will have one to pack off of. Having the packing instructions to refrence from is required for the repack to be legal accourding to the FAR's.

Personally... that rig was from before I was born. I would have a really hard time signing off on it unless it passed pull tests and I was able to really inspect every part of that really throughly. That coupled with my very limited knowledge of inspecting rounds... I'd refer you to some one else if I was doing it.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[riggerrob 558]

The biggest problem is that few young riggers know how to pack round reserves.
For example, I just finished teaching a CSPA Rigger A course.
Only 2 of the 6 aspiring riggers cared about packing round reserves. They are both from an old-school DZ that still has round reserves in their student rigs. But they are planing to buy square reserves for their students as soon as they can afford to, probably winter 2006.

[councilman24 36]

There are several issues that keep me from packing particular rigs. Yes, supposedly we are qualified to evaluate the airworthiness of a piece of equipment. But, very few of us have the tools to measure changes in porosity. The only way to test a harness is to failure. Fabric tensile testing is useful but limited.

So, we have a system that is 27 years old. Can I tell if the strength of the harness stitching has degraded? Nope. At some point we just have to bite the bullet and say it may be airworthy, but I'm not sure, so I won't put my name on it.

That being said each rig is individual and I might choose to make an exception, after educating the owner about my doubts.

Also, at some point rigs are so out of date from a design stand point that is it ethical to put them in the air? I won't pack rigs without full stowage diapers, with a few exceptions for strong pilot rigs from long time customers. Certainly not for skydivers. I won't pack original swifts, most of the time. When there are at least 3,4, or 5 generations of more reliable equipment is it ethical to put a customer out on a C-9 with the lines stowed in the container? As an antique? But when it's your last chance to live I reserve my right not to put my name on it and have someone ask why you let this outdated gear in the air.

But I have the luxury of not making my living at rigging and can chose my customers.

This is version of the arguement. Many riggers will pack things unless the KNOW they are unairworthy. I chose the opposite.

It's not older gear prejudice. But it may be the lack of knowledge mentioned above.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[stratostar 5]

(quote)
With the Wonderhog if I have questions while packing it there is no one for me to call and ask questions to. RWS does'nt really support them anymore.(quote)

I disagree, I found Bill Booth and his employees to be very helpful with info and parts for a 77 wonderderhog I put together this summer.
I talk to Bill in PMs and I talked to the RWS shop on the phone.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

because of some sort of "older gear" prejudice on the part of someone who was in diapers when I made my first jump, and whose experience with older stuff is dominated by "thought I was gonna die" campfire stories.

It might be for the same reason you don't jump gear that was made when you were in diapers. Design and materials improve, the world moves on, you either move with it or get left behind.

If you feel the gear is airworthy, take the time and get your riggers ticket and sign it off yourself. Problem solved.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[UDSkyJunkie 0]

Quote

I'd hate to end up at a distant DZ and be refused a repack, etc., because of some sort of "older gear" prejudice on the part of someone who was in diapers when I made my first jump

let me start by saying that I wasn't even born when you made your first jump. That being said, I would be uncomfortable packing YOUR 25+ year-old rig, not because it's old, but because I have no way of knowing it's history with any certainty. On the other hand, my father has a 1980 wonderhog clone with a Security SAC reserve (passed the acid mesh test) that I would put my seal on because I know it has been taken care of.

Now, when you say it's perfectly airworthy, are you trying to decieve? almost certainly not, but someone at a "distant DZ" doesn't know you... just my two cents.

"Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

[peek 20]

1. Parachute riggers are qualified to evaluate the airworthiness of a parachute system and with their sign-off, return it to service.

2. Aircraft mechanics are qualified to evaluate the airworthiness of an aircraft and with their sign-off, return it to service.

Parallel situations? Legally, of course they are.


So why are many parachute riggers unwilling to even inspect (much less sign-off if airworthy) many 20-25 year old parachute systems?

So why are aircraft mechanics willing to sign-off the 195x Cesna 182's many of us are jumping from? And why are so many of us willing to think nothing of getting into them for a ride to altitude?

Riggers that are afraid of older gear can NEVER give me a reasonable answer to this question. NEVER.

Procedures exist for determining if both aircraft and parachute systems are airworthy.

[PhreeZone 15]

>Riggers that are afraid of older gear can NEVER give me a reasonable answer to this question. NEVER.

Because the knowledge level is not being passed on to new riggers. I still can't find anyone to walk me through acid mesh tests locally since there is nothing to test on. I've never been taught the correct way to inspect the nylon or kevlar lines and what is acceptible wear. I've never found anyone that can explain to me why I should certify a piece of fabric that I can not properly test (poresity), that has materials that are older then I am, that has a lot of unique things (t-10 closing hooks, diapers) that is a last chance when there are 25 years worth of improvements out there.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[stratostar 5]

(Quote)
Because the knowledge level is not being passed on to new riggers. I still can't find anyone to walk me through acid mesh tests locally since there is nothing to test on.(quote)

Then you haven't been looking very hard.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[bob.dino 0]

But if he's likely to get asked to pack one once a decade, why would he go chasing tricky-to-find information that he may never use?

[stratostar 5]

Well there are a lot more acid mesh rounds around then you might think and it's good to know how to an easy test so one can pack pilot bail out rigs or sport rigs, not really tricky at all just need to know who to ask.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

(Quote)
Because the knowledge level is not being passed on to new riggers. I still can't find anyone to walk me through acid mesh tests locally since there is nothing to test on.(quote)

Then you haven't been looking very hard.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

At the last Canadian riggers' course, we avoided talking about parachutes more than 20 years old, because very few 20-year-old parachutes are still in Canadian skies and we did not want to over load young riggers with information they will rarely use.

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

Well there are a lot more acid mesh rounds around then you might think and it's good to know how to an easy test so one can pack pilot bail out rigs or sport rigs, not really tricky at all just need to know who to ask.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

When pilots bring me round canopies from the acid mesh ear, I dutifully drag out my bromocreasol and clamps and do all the appropriate tests.
Then I ask them why they are wearing a low-speed parachute while flying a high-speed airplane and gently try to convince them to consider replacing pilot emergency parachutes (PEP) more than 20 years old.

Bromocreasol testing was only a stop-gap measure - to get skydivers back in the air - until they could afford Ravens.
Acid mesh testing should never have become a 20 year process.
I wish all the round reserves from the acid mesh era would quietly disappear.

[Airman1270 0]

...So why are many parachute riggers unwilling to even inspect (much less sign-off if airworthy) many 20-25 year old parachute systems?...Riggers that are afraid of older gear can NEVER give me a reasonable answer to this question. NEVER...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Thanks for the replies, both here and the P.M.'s.

I've become involved in a spirited debate with a rigger in another state who has declared, sight unseen, my rig to be a dangerous piece of crap that he would NEVER have anything to do with.

Despite the fact that it's been well maintained and stored in a climate-controlled room, and that I've used it for nearly 20 years without incident, he decided that it's not airworthy, period. Not because there's anything wrong with it, but because it's old. He even cited his many jumps and his instructor rating as factors enabling him to make this judgement.

I asked how a rig, which was the state-of-the-art just 25 years ago, could become dangerous despite being in excellent shape; his reply was that better gear has since been invented.

He is afraid that if he services my old gear and something bad happens, he'll be held responsible. Not because theres anything wrong with it, but because it's old.

I saw this coming nearly 20 years ago when a well known rigger announced he would not pack or otherwise service round reserves, because he thinks squares are better.

Not too long ago, I predicted that people getting into the sport now would accumulate several years' experience without ever having any experience with rounds, older containers, or making hundreds of jumps without an AAD. Some of these people would
eventually run their own DZ's and start banning perfectly good equipment and requiring AAD's because they had been conditioned to regard older stuff & lack of an AAD as dangerous.

Methinks some newer jumpers have listened to one too many "twisted belly band" campfire stories.

Cheers,
Jon

[stratostar 5]

At the last Canadian riggers' course, we avoided t
(quote)
talking about parachutes more than 20 years old, because very few 20-year-old parachutes are still in Canadian skies and we did not want to over load young riggers with information they will rarely use.
(quote)

Thats all and well, but here in the USA I still know a lot of jumpers who still have and use phantom reserves
I just took off line my 26ft and sold it to a guy who had a 24ft he wanted a bigger canopy, it tested fine
from day one, I see alot of them around for todays market, granted not like 15 yeras ago but they are still in the air.
My point was if phree really wanted to know how to do the test there are plenty of riggers in the Ohio/Indiana area that can and do the test and have the rigs to do the test on, I know of at least 4 riggers off the top of my head up there he could talk to in order to learn and do the test.
To many jumpers today talk shit about how bad a round is main or reserve with out any idea of the truth about them, there is nothing wrong with a round parachute that is airworthy even if it is more then 20 years old, hell my 1964 MK1 paracomander
works just fine, and so will my strong lopo thats in my 77 wonderhog I jumped this rig 8 times this season
and you know what, it worked just fine every time.
When I repack the lopo it looks just like a brand new canopy as if it was made last week, but it's a 74
and passed the tensel every time.
So by your logic it should go in the trash and not in the air, over all the years round reserves have been in use how many people have died because they hung one out compaired to how many have been saved, there are lot of pilots who owe their lives to
a round, jumpers too.
So if a young rigger don't want to take the time to learn about them fine, but part of getting your ticket is knowing where to get the info, it is out there,pointers manual, beckmons, and there are plenty of riggers who know the info or where to get it.
So if someone REALLY wants to learn it then they need to get off their lazy ass and go learn it!

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[masterrig 1]

When I was working on my Senior certificate, my instructor told me; "Rounds are out there and they still make them!" Since then, I have and still do, work on round parachutes. As some of these parachutes got older, I just do what so many other riggers do... get-out the Bromocresol and 'special' clamps! I have searched and searched and find very little, concerning 'life-span' of parachute equipment in the U.S. That is left to us riggers to determine airworthiness. I wonder sometimes, why, a 30 - 40 year old military rig that has been in someone's attic or closet is 'just fine' to jump yet, a 20 - 25 year old 'sport' rig is not... it's too old!? The same materials are used in sport rigs as in military rigs. Those materials 'deterioriate'. Maybe, we should set mandatory age limits on parachutes, harness-containers. You'll probably get 5 different responses from 5 different riggers in regard to one parachute, harness-container. Do we 'shop around' till we find a rigger who agrees with us as to airworthiness of our older rig? If and when, age limits are placed on parachutes, harness-containers, we are till then, leaving the responsibility of airworthiness to riggers.

Chuck

[PhreeZone 15]

>Thats all and well, but here in the USA I still know a lot of jumpers who still have and use phantom reserves

Thats odd, out of all the jumpers I know in Ohio I know of only one that uses a round and he'll break both legs if he's ever forced to use it since he's jumping a 26 foot at about 275-300 lbs. I assisted in packing that round so I know it was outside the acid mesh tests also. Richmond has a lot of old gear at it, that might explain why there are a lot more rounds there then elsewhere. I'd love to come over and see how to do it but with no names associated with people its hard to meet them.

Managing the classifieds here I get a feel for what types of gear are still on the market. Total for the year there are approx 12-14 round reserves that have went through the classifieds. At least 5 of those were listed for more then 4 months and ever sold. Thats out of the 250-300+ reserves I've seen listed. Only about half a percent of the used canopies being sold are rounds.

PEP are still using rounds, but they are no longer using Acid mesh so thats not a concern any longer.

If you want a novelity rig fine, go for it. But if a round was such a great canopy why is'nt it in your primary rig?

I know where to go in PPM's and the other stuff, but actually studying hands on with a rigger to do the tests and to verify I am doing them correctly and picking up tips is a whole nother issue. I know at least one major rigging school does not teach the acid tests, they are mentioned in passing.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[airtwardo 6]

Interesting debate~

I have a 78 Wonderhog, Pud pullout, 26' Strong LoPo,
F111 252 with a Raper instead of a bag.

Took it out of the closet this weekend and used it
for some hanging harness training for a couple of
friends..
(That by the way didn't receive any, and were told
they didn't NEED any...?
AFF level 3 on one guy, level 4 on the other)

I checked the data card and it hadn't been packed
since '88.
We pulled the reserve and the old MA1 jumped
about 5 feet.
The reserve has never had an opening shock.

I'm not a rigger...

(Did stay at a Holiday Inn Express though)

I did a cursory inspection of the whole rig and
everything seemed fine to me.

*Although somehow the harness seemed to be a lot
tighter than I remember...must have shrunk,
I certainly couldn't have gotten any FATTER!

(Data card was a bit yellowed)

I was going to send it up to you Sparky for and
inspect and repack and then give it to a .commer
we know that's on a fixed income but would really
like to get back in the air...

Good idea or bad?

I mean sure there is plenty of "Better" gear out there
but in my opinion, if it works it doesn't have to be shinny.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[stratostar 5]

Make you a call to Steve Stewart he was a dpre
in that area at one time.
He is also a master rigger and has a lot of older gear
to work with.
Roger Humphrey or Greg Baliey or Don Brewer or Gorge Capitanio all of them jump at swc and all of them could teach you, the best would be Roger he's been jumping for 50 years now and is a master rigger.
Or call Jerry Macdonald or Eric Camble at ssk.
(quote)
PEP are still using rounds, but they are no longer using Acid mesh so thats not a concern any longer.
(quote)
I know a couple people who still have them in their sport rigs and also in their belly warts too.
I have also seen them come through the loft as well.
So people do still use them.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[mjosparky 3]

Next time you are in the area, let me know. I will look it over. If it is still airworthy, in my opinion, I will put a couple of test jumps on it to see if I was right. It's been awhile since I have seen a "frap strap".

PM me with the .commer you had in mind.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[SkinnyEd 0]

My last jump was in 1985 after 10 years in the sport. I've been pondering about what to do with my old gear and ended up finding this forum.
Well I guess even trying to sell anything is pretty much a waste of time!

Interesting comments and a fun read though.
Seems to be a lot more concern about gear details that in "my day" were of trivial concern. In the mid 70's I was jumping a cheapo made in 1949, and it worked just fine (Still have it). We used the old "thumb test" to check fabric, but then again loosing a canopy panel from a round was no big deal. Heck, just another modification.

Funny to hear how "scary" old gear is to young eyes. Yea it's come a long way, but there were lots of safe jumps made with the old stuff.
What's ironic it seems (from what I hear) folks are finding new ways to keep on bouncing... pretty much at the same rate as they were 20 or 30 years ago. (Gawd... that long ago! owch my aching back.)
I would think, that if belly warts and rounds were sooo dangerous, there would be some kind of positive statistical trend indicating that? (Maybe there is... I've been out of the loop so please don't beat me up if I got it wrong.)
I guess "safer gear" depends on your point of view?
Funny to read that round reserves are being looked down upon and "shunned".
(I guess DC-3/D-18's must be pretty scarry things these days too?)

Well one positive thing about the old gear.... it was a heck of a lot cheaper to get in the air! Sure it seems like horse & buggy technology now, but it was all we had! Fun times.

If anyone can point to a collector of "antique" gear, I'd be interested.

-Ed

[Airman1270 0]

...I'd hate to end up at a distant DZ and be refused a repack, etc., because of some sort of "older gear" prejudice on the part of someone who was in diapers when I made my first jump, and whose experience with older stuff is dominated by "thought I was gonna die" campfire stories...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Guys, this keeps getting better. I'm getting angry P.M.'s from this guy in Colorado who got his panties in a wad over my original post. He says old rigs are dangerous even if they're in good condition and operate the way they were designed.

When asked for details, he says they lack riser covers, "adequate pin protection," etc. He also says rounds are dangerous, etc., and went on to criticize their substandard reserve deployment.

Funny, all these years, including three round reserve rides, and I never had a problem.

Wait 'till he finds out about the static-line T-10's I trained on, or my first reserve ride being an unmodified ("pilot chute removed") 24' chest-mount..

This guy's real upset about a bunch of things, including my refusal to bow to his "expertise."

How do these people rate a rigger's ticket if they believe all equipment manufactured before 2000 is inherently dangerous?

Cheers,
Jon

[Hooknswoop 19]

OK, since you continue to twist my words, I should clarify a few things.

Quote

When asked for details, he says they lack riser covers, "adequate pin protection," etc.

I said the rig lacks pin protection, riser protection, bridle protection, and the reserve system is poor at best.

Vacum tubes work as designed, but if your Cessna 182 has radios w/ vacum tubes, it isn't legal anymore. Aircraft radios must be solid state. If they work as designed, why did the FAA ground all aircraft w/ radios w/ vacum tubes, even if the radio was in 'brand-new' condition?

Quote

and went on to criticize their substandard reserve deployment.

I said compare round malfunction stastics for diapered and non-diapered rounds.

Quote

This guy's real upset about a bunch of things, including my refusal to bow to his "expertise."

LOL. I am offended that you called me prejudiced, even though in your first post you are obviously prejudiced against any rigger that refuses to pack your 1977 Wonderhog. You hear only what you want to hear.

Quote

How do these people rate a rigger's ticket if they believe all equipment manufactured before 2000 is inherently dangerous?

Wow, I didn't know I thought gear manufactured before 2000 was dangerious. Once again, you are putting words in my mouth. You hear only what you want to hear. I have the kit for testing Ph, clamps, etc and know how to use them. I know how to pack rounds and have over 50 jumps on them. I'll pack gear older than 2000 and do so all time. Packed one last night, in fact. So, once again, you are wrong.

Simple solution for you: Get your Rigger's certificate. It isn't that hard and not expensive. If you have the time and money to skydive, you have the time and money to get your certificate. Then you may pack anything you wish. Until then, you are dependent on rigger's determininations of airworthiness. I'm sure you can find someone to pack your rig for you, but it is unfair to criticize someone that won't. If your rig is so great, why did you buy a modern rig?

Austrailia has a max life span of 20 years for gear, so there is an entire country where you couldn't jump your rig. There are a lot of riggers that won't pack gear older than 20-years old. Rarely is it because they are lazy or don't have the knowledge. Rigging is hard work for little profit.

I tried to answer your question why a rigger wouldn't be willing to pack your rig. You seem to take that answer as a personal insult and then try to insult me and my abilities impling that I cannot comprehend old gear and am biased against it for no good reason.

Fatality rates have remained fairly constant, even though there are a lot more jumps being made per year than 20 years ago. The other difference is the cause of fatalities. Rarely it is gear failure, unlike 20 years ago.

Can you jump and walk away using a 1977 Wonderhog? Yes. It is not guarenteed death. There is a much higher chance of a gear-related incident with the rig though. For $35.00 I'm not willing to take that risk. For what? What's the big deal about HAVING to jump an old rig? What's the big deal? What's wrong w/ your new rig? I just see it as worth the risk, and the FAA entrusts me with that decision. If you have a problem with that, I'm sorry, but it is my decision. I would think you would respect that since I have your safety in mind. Why would you attack me and ridicule me for leaning towards the side of safety?

I would be more than willing to place your 2 rigs side by side and show you the safety improvements your new rig has over your old rig. I think you'll be surprised.

Don't ask questions you don't want to hear the answers to.

Derek

[airtwardo 6]

Easy fellers...we're all friends!

I got what sounds like essentially the same PM from you
Hook, hope you don't mind but I'll post in part my response.

As I said, this is one of the few issues you and I will
have to agree to disagree on....

And that is by no means an assault on you.
In fact...
You are the kind of rigger I would choose
if we were closer.

I know from our communication that you are sharp
and you care, you're dedicated.

My point being...
In a side by side comparison between my rigs,
I really don't see that much of a difference in regard
to safety issues.
Old one has a 3 ring too, and all the handles are in the
same place.

And as I illustrated below, some of the features on the old
rig could (IMO) be viewed as better that what the current trend dictates.

Sure I would rather deploy and land a square reserve.

But that doesn't mean I think rounds are not sound.
I have one in my pilots rig, as do most emergency bailout systems..including the military.

I'm curious as to what the actual statistics (ratio) are regarding fatalities caused by gear failure, then & now.

Off the top of my head...
I recall the old green star rigs killing some people because they modified the reserve system on their own.
I don't remember any 'new' student systems being recalled back 'then' because of things like adjustable harnesses separating, and killing people.

Part of the point in my original post was that I have this
gear I'm not using, and know someone that has a lot of jumps, is also a rigger, but because of some quirks of life...
can't afford gear to jump, and would love to get in
the air.

If deemed airworthy, materials and structurally, why not
get a fellow jumper back in the breeze?

From a DESIGN standpoint, this rig...those canopies...
are as safe or possibly safer, than 'some' of the gear
made today.
What on this rig,
again materials possibly weakening because of age aside..
is so much more dangerous than my rig made this year?



**********************************************
From our PM's yesterday~

Quote

Becaue the sport has changed and gear has changed. Jumpers don't realize the hazards of older gear. They learned on modern gear and that's all they know.

Quote

What they learned on then, they should continue to jump?

Reverse the logic and no one would buy the latest thing
because they would have to have additional training in order
to use it safely.

Quote

Even if a jumper knows what he is doing w/ the gear, it just isn't safe compared to a Mirage/Vector III, etc. Think reserve rides, riser geometry, riser protection, pin protection, bridle protection, etc

Quote

As to the hazards of older gear...

There were far fewer premature deployments before
the springs came out of the pilot chutes,
and they started hanging them on the OUTSIDE of the
container.

Bridle protection...
That rig has no bridle exposed.
There is a small pud both Velcro and spring / elastic stays
that keep it on the corner seam...
Even if it were to get knocked loose, it will only rotate 45 degrees up or down
...even THEN it's easier to grab than a BOC
hackey handle.
And it's a pull out not a throw out which is safer,
no PC in tow.

Riser protection...
That rig has 1 inch Velcro bands near the top of the reserve.
Never had a riser come loose in 1000 plus jumps, last weekend I was on an otter with 2 people who's 'new'
rigs riser tuck flaps opened several times on the ride UP!

There has also been some concern recently regarding
the large / stiff riser retaining flaps possibly
slowing down the reserve deployment sequence in
the case of a total on some rigs.

Riser geometry...
The canopy in that rig is a 252...exact same construction,
materials and geometry on several of the canopies that
placed in the top ten in accuracy at the nationals this year.

Pin protection...
Basicly the same tuck flap as on many 'current' rigs in production.


Clearly in some ways the sport has changed since gear
like this was state of the art.

But the physics are the same...
the planets pull, the aircraft speed and the human body
are all real similar to 25 years ago.

Head down..freestyle...?
I was doing that 25 years ago with Roger and Carl Nelson,
they called it Freak Flying and nobody was dying doing
it then.

In fact with the bigger slower F111 canopies back then
if there WAS a premature deployment, it may knock your snot
loose but wouldn't kill ya.

I was talking with a some manufactures at he PIA
convention a few years ago.

And to make it short...
a lot of the 'new & improved' gear every year is basically
a marketing tool to sell new rigs. The hot shoes gotta have
the newest and latest on the block...the problem from an
equipment makers point of view, is that to pass TSO the
harness & container have to be so well made that with care,
they will last indefinitely.
Can't stay in business if no one buys 'new' rigs.

That's why Strong is rebating for return of used
Tandem stuff...The gear coming in is still good,
they want to get 'fresh' replacement gear built &
going out the door. New capital coming in.

Old ideas...
How come nobody uses a raper on a main anymore?

(Not a "frap strap", a raper holds ALL the lines
not just one stow, similar concept...
Raper was patented)

They pack easier, take up less volume, malfunction less
than bagged mains, and actually put less wear on the
canopt itself.

A better idea..? yup
Safer...? yup.
Cheaper too!
The MAIN reason they don't use them now is because
the bag is what helps the container keep its shape,
keeps it looking 'cool'...

Collapsible Pilot Chute...
A few months ago I was on a plane with several AFF Ins.
candidates doing eval jumps.
One female candidate was hopping around the plane
trying to see if see'd "set" her pilotchute...it started an epidemic and 1/2 the people on the plane were taking off their rigs to double check...

The 252 in that 'old' rig as a triangular position bridle set up
which not only slows the opening, but lays the PC flat on top
of the canopy..no drag, no entanglement, nothing to set or
double check.

And... has a slider that comes completely off with
the pull of one line...canopy blossoms out even bigger
and flys better.


No,
that's one of the few points we'll have to agree to
disagree on...
I think if it's airworthy...structurally that is, it
isn't anymore dangerous than transitioning to
the "latest" thing coming down the pike.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~