mjosparky 3 #26 February 5, 2005 QuoteThe MLW is passed through a 5000 lb link at the bottom, comes back up and through an adapter at the top. What I don't understand, the Type XIII webbing, 7000 lb., passes through a 5000 lb. link at the bottom and then goes up to a friction adapter, 2500 lb., at the top. A system is only as strong at the weakest link and almost all hardware on a rig is rated at 2500 pounds. Has there ever been a harness failure due to opening loads of any kind, symmetrical or not.? I don't think so. The risers will fail long before the harness does. jmo SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sid 1 #27 February 5, 2005 Quote Has there ever been a harness failure due to opening loads of any kind, symmetrical or not.? I don't think so. The risers will fail long before the harness does. jmo Sparky http://www.sunpath.com/downloads/bulletins/sp03.pdfPete Draper, Just because my life plan is written on the back of a Hooter's Napkin, it's still a life plan.... right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hookitt 0 #28 February 5, 2005 The harness in this incident failed at the chest strap junction. It wasn't the lift web, but it did fail. linkMy grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kbone 0 #29 February 5, 2005 Why don't they just do a recall? Fix the harness so people don't have to buy a new container? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #30 February 5, 2005 QuoteQuote Has there ever been a harness failure due to opening loads of any kind, symmetrical or not.? I don't think so. The risers will fail long before the harness does. jmo Sparky http://www.sunpath.com/downloads/bulletins/sp03.pdf I am aware of the SB from Sunpath. That was not caused by one hard opening but repeated wear from the adjuster. If one opening is produces enough force to sheer Type XIII webbing, the riser would go first. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sid 1 #32 February 7, 2005 QuotePeter!!! WHAT???????Pete Draper, Just because my life plan is written on the back of a Hooter's Napkin, it's still a life plan.... right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #33 February 7, 2005 QuoteWhy don't they just do a recall? Fix the harness so people don't have to buy a new container? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That would be too expensive. After "wear point X" it becomes quicker and simpler to manufacture completely new harnesses. I suspect that this Safety Notice s a subtle way for Jump Shack to ground older student harnesses that are still in service. Since the American legal system prohibits manufacturers from openly admitting that their early products were anything less than perfect, they have to find more subtle ways of warning the public. For example, Relative Workshop has never admitted there was anything wrong with Vector I reserve pilotchutes, but no self-respecting rigger has packed a Vector I pilot chute in the last decade. Oddly, there are still hundreds of Vector Is still flying, but they all have Vector II pilot chutes. If a Student Racer has been jumped hard for more than 8 years, it will wear out. If any student rig is not faded, frayed and filthy after 8 years service, then maybe you are in the wrong business. No-one expects parachutes to last forever. Similarly, if you have to send your Strong tandem main for an 8-year check, you are in the wrong business, because you are not making enough jumps per year to pay off the mortgage on your tandem rig. Since the better/busier schools only use square reserves, they can sell their older Student Racers to second or third tier schools - with round reserves - and vastly slower paces. The vastly slower pace of third tier schools reduces Jump Shack's legal risk. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiverek 55 #34 February 7, 2005 QuoteSince the better/busier schools only use square reserves, they can sell their older Student Racers to second or third tier schools - with round reserves - and vastly slower paces. The vastly slower pace of third tier schools reduces Jump Shack's legal risk. Yes, but in this case the "second or third tier schools" would have to put students on main and reserve parachutes that are both ROUND. What school would do it? BTW, do BSRs prohibit students from jumping round mains nowadays? I recall seeing such recommendations or regulations somewhere, but I am not sure... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
