Slinks!

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

Still not buyin' it, Kris. First of all, those tests don't show me (or you) anything. I still don't see any numbers. I don't see any testing procedures either. You've seen that deal where the sprinter dashes out to the lead against the race car? Well that don't make him faster. And you're not comparing apples to apples. Wouldn't it be just as easy to install a soft link wrong as it is to over or under tighten a metal link? Did I here of someone going in or getting hurt recently because of an improperly installed soft link? Or is that my imagination?

Keep these thoughts in mind as we go along this thread:

Soft links are not any more or any less likely to malfunction, break, stretch or be installed wrong when compared to their metal counterparts, by any usefull or even perceptible measure!

Yes, of course they are lighter and less bulkier than metal links, being made out of that lightweight, space age nylon, polymer an all. But by a usefull amount? Nope!

Note: you forgot the 'less aerodynamic drag' gambit and the popular 'easier to gey my slider over' manuever.

I'm not going to bother trying to address that 'breaking on opening being an advantage' deal. That doesn't even make any sense.

As far as the digging into your back because of the big canopy in the small container goes, well...

And what have you got against the French, anyway?

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

So your saying that the size, weight, stength and whatever else difference between L-bars and French links is comparable to the difference between French links and soft links?

That's like saying the BOC is as much of an improvment over the legstrap pilot chute pouch ......as was the throw-out method versus the ripcord method. You don't think that do you?

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

mjosparky · May 10, 2005

Quote
So your saying that the size, weight, stength and whatever else difference between L-bars and French links is comparable to the difference between French links and soft links?

That's like saying the BOC is as much of an improvment over the legstrap pilot chute pouch ......as was the throw-out method versus the ripcord method. You don't think that do you?

Yes I am. And you did not answer the question. What need did they fill, and what problem did the fix?

Could it be that they are cheaper, lighter, were stylish when first introduced and thought to be easer to install?
Why is it that sports gear is the only gear that went to the Rapide link?

This thread is not about placement of a PC.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

mr2mk1g · May 10, 2005

Quote

I'm not going to bother trying to address that 'breaking on opening being an advantage' deal. That doesn't even make any sense.

The sense behind it is the difference in the failure modes of the two kinds of links.

One possible failure mode of a French link goes like this:
Hard opening on improperly installed link
Barrel cracks and breaks - link bends
Bent link holds lines like an open safety-pin.
Jumper doesn’t notice and continues with decent.
Lines detach from riser below 500ft.
Canopy suffers unrecoverable malfunction.
Jumper dies.

The same kind of failure on a S-link would go like this:
Hard opening on improperly installed link
S-link breaks or otherwise detaches
Canopy suffers unrecoverable malfunction.
Jumper initiates emergency procedures at above 2000ft.
Jumper lives.

S-links either break on opening or they survive to landing. There have been a number of instances of Rapide links surviving opening and then releasing lines once the tension is released on the ground. Should this occur in the air as a result of low control input the jumper would be in a very difficult situation.

skymedic · May 10, 2005

I've witnessed the pulls with my very own eye's...the riser always failed before a slink would come close.

Marc
otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman....

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

show me some of those incidents...

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

Kris · May 10, 2005

Luckily, there are no fatalities that I know of, yet. But I've personally been witness to someone who landed and as soon as the tension was off the canopy, the lines on the right, rear riser dumped out due to a bent link.

Do a search on "bent link" and you'll see plenty of threads where people got lucky, including several pics of bent open links.

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

mr2mk1g · May 10, 2005

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

Where are we going with this, Marc? Are we now talking about which would fail first, metal or fabric links? Or are we talking about which type would we want to fail first? ...I can't even make a sentence out of that! I hope there isn't anyone out there making the argument that soft links are better than metal links because...when they do fail, it's easier to detect the problem ??

Ironically enough, I have a first hand story that somewhat supports that argument. several years ago a jumpmaster that worked at my DZ landed with a twisted French link. He noticed it at a point well before landing but low enough to where he wasn't comfortable chopping it. His desicion.

So there you go. If he would have used soft links he might have -noticed -it -sooner? Or maybe he could have put little nicks with a hot knife on each riser so it would fail there first ....so he could see it sooner? Maybe?? No?

Making the argument for something because when it breaks it will be easier to deal with, well....

Sorry Marc! I'm not trying to dog you! I think you are actually trying to help me to make my point.

I juat gave 'em another set of French links and told 'em to make sure he tightened 'em up right. He was happy with that.

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

Kris · May 10, 2005

Actually, I believe it was Bill Booth who has even come out and stated that equipment should have some failure points like risers that break. Better they break on an extremely hard opening, then cut them away and go to one's reserve, than to have a person break instead.

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

mr2mk1g · May 10, 2005

Quote
I hope there isn't anyone out there making the argument that soft links are better than metal links because...when they do fail, it's easier to detect the problem ??

No - one of the reasons many people like slinks is because when they fail they do so on opening - ie at a point where you can use your reserve. When rapide links fail they may well hold on until you're half way through your dive before letting go at 50ft. Then you're dead.

Besides... according to the tests carried out on them, the riser will fail before the correctly installed s-link will... just as it will with a rapide link. Neither are likely to fail unless you do something wrong with them... like over tighten them/under tighten them or simply misinstall them.

But should you misinstall your links when would you prefer them to fail? 2000ft or 200ft?

Rapide links are fine I'm sure. Hell I have them on my reserve and certainly wouldn't bat an eyelid at using them on anyone elses kit. But that doesn't mean they are better.

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

Hey! No fair using the same example three times! Oh, and one of your examples has moved to another location on the web.

And thank you for making my point for me, once again. In none of those examples (and to be completely forthright, I didn't read every word. My eyes started to glaze over after looking at the same bent French link three times) did the link fail! In all of the examples, near as I can tell, someone forgot to tighten the links, or maybe over tightened them?

Class, I'll give you five more minutes on this project and then it's recess.

Geeez...

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

PhreeZone · May 10, 2005

PD and RWS test on RWS's webbing destroyer machine. (I don't know the name of it but thats what is does

) Talk to PD or RWS about it but when I was there 2 years ago they showed me results that a slink will outlast a metal link to a force of 2000+ more pounds at least.

Slinks will not fail later, they are an all or nothing. 1 or 0. Its either going to work or it did'nt. If its still connected after opening then it's going to last till you land. I've got a Rapid Link in my hand that is complelty bent open and lines fell off as soon as the jumper landed and tension was removed. Had he done anything like a hook turn or hit turbulence it could have fallen off then.

Slinks also do not damage sliders. I can't tell you how many dings and burrs I've seen on sliders caused by slamming into metal links. Rubber bumpers are not a solution since I've seen a mal caused by one of them sliding up the lines and pinching off the canopy. I had to have new grommets put on my slider last year (Thanks PookieBearRigging!) since the previous owner had metal links and it split the grommt into burrs that could tear up my lines.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Kris · May 10, 2005

Quote
In all of the examples, near as I can tell, someone forgot to tighten the links, or maybe over tightened them?

Which is yet another thing that one doesn't have to worry about with Slinks.

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

mr2mk1g · May 10, 2005

Quote
In all of the examples, near as I can tell, someone forgot to tighten the links, or maybe over tightened them?

Yup - neither rapide or slink should fail unless you put human error into the equation. Are you suggesting no one dies from human error?

Remove human error and tests show slinks survive openings that break risers. As far as I'm concerned that's strong enough. On the flip side I'm sure rapide links are strong enough in cases where no human error is present. The failure mode I'm highlighting is one cause by human error - one where human error on a rapide link can kill and human error on a slink is far less likely to kill. I'd rather people put themselves in a situation where human error is less likely to kill them.

You might have looked at the same picture several times - there was only one in my links. The majority of those I posted were links to individual posts in several different threads, each one being an individual account of a bent rapide link. That is afterall what you asked for.

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

"Rapide links are fine I'm sure. Hell I have them on my reserve and certainly wouldn't bat an eyelid at using them on anyone elses kit. But that doesn't mean they are better."

I didn't say that French links are better! Where did I say that? The original point I was trying to make was that soft links are not 'better' then metal links! And that jumpers are using them because someone told them so. But they don't really understand why! And then they pass that crap to next year's 100 jump wonder.

Look at it this way; It was a big improvement going from belly mounted reserves to tandem rigs (for you youngin's, when they first started putting both the main and reserve on the back in one container, they called that a 'tandem rig') That didn't mean belly mount reserves all of a sudden go bad did they?

And I do love a good square parachute over them round ones! But that doesn't make rounds any more dangerous then they were, does it?

Soft links are not dangerous or bad. I never said that they were. Or even implied that they were. I don't think??

What I'm saying is that they do not fix a problem or markedly improve performance over what they may replace! And no one has shown my anything to disprove my theroy.

Hey! I'm all for innovation and change. But let's understand the proceess behind each change and the reasoning and intent for it.

But...I apologize for getting salty about it.

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

So...did you ever find any examples of a French link actually failing?

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

"So we use them on the main and can use them on some reserves. I saw a bridle attached to a canopy this weekend with a slink and thought "damn thats cool!"

Got me thinking - anywhere else we can use slinks instead of metal?

What about using larger cord in the same fashion for hip rings? chest rings?"

This is what I'm talking about. This cat want's 'em because they're "cool".

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

tso-d_chris · May 10, 2005

Quote
So...did you ever find any examples of a French link actually failing?

Since with respect to a TSO, which apply to Slinks and rapid links on the reserve, a failure is ANY CHANGE IN A COMPONENT THAT ADVERSELY AFFECTS ITS AIRWORTHINESS. Including links to previous threads, there have been many examples given. Just because a bent rapid link does not spill lines DOES NOT MEAN IT HAS NOT FAILED.

I have yet to hear how a rapid link can be considered as good as a Slink. Slinks are stronger, and problems are evident at time of failure. This is perhaps their greatest benefit.

For Great Deals on Gear

tso-d_chris · May 10, 2005

Quote
This is what I'm talking about. This cat want's 'em because they're "cool".

As a rigger, I amsure you are aware of the potential canopy damage that can occur if nylon get trapped between the connector link or bridal attachment ring,and the D-bag grommet. Are you suggesting there is no practical advantage to using a Slink in such an application verses a rapid link.

For Great Deals on Gear

brettpobastad · May 10, 2005

Chris, that's just down right stupid! I'm sorry man, you're probably a good guy an all. I'm sure your rigging work is just fine and you probably buy beer when your supposed to, but goddamit read the words that you just typed! First you say that soft links are stronger, then you say "but if they do break, at least you'll see it in time" (not your exact words) So do we use them because they are stronger or because it's easier to notice a failure?

One 'failure' I definitley see is that when a component isn't installed or assembled correctly, it cannot do it's job. The component did not, I repeat DID NOT ....fail! The human that hooked it up wrong 'failed'.

"It's only arrogance if you can't back it up"

hookitt · May 10, 2005

Quote
This is what I'm talking about. This cat want's 'em because they're "cool".

Many good innovations have come from seeing something cool and wanting to expand upon it.

By the way, I'll put my money on Ed's rigger anyday

My grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto

tso-d_chris · May 10, 2005

Quote
So do we use them because they are stronger or because it's easier to notice a failure?

Both. They are stronger, so they are less likely to fail. However, should they fail, they fail immediately and totally, eliminating the possibility of them dumping their lines 100 ft off the deck.

Quote
One 'failure' I definitley see is that when a component isn't installed or assembled correctly, it cannot do it's job. The component did not, I repeat DID NOT ....fail! The human that hooked it up wrong 'failed'.

If it is improperly installed and then used, and changes in a manner that affects its airworthiness occur, that IS A FAILURE. That the failure was due to incorrect installation does not change the fact that a failure occured.

BTW I am not a rigger, and never claimed to be. I do think it is important to know as much as possible about my gear.

For Great Deals on Gear

pilotdave · May 10, 2005

Quote
The original point I was trying to make was that soft links are not 'better' then metal links!

I have nothing against metal links, but you keep failing to respond to any argument as to why soft links ARE better. You say they aren't, others give reasons why they are. Belly reserves didn't become more dangerous when better gear was developed. Rounds didn't become more dangerous when squares came about. But that doesn't mean newer containers and newer mains are not better than old ones. Slinks don't make metal links dangerous. But that doesn't mean slinks aren't better.

Make ANY argument as to why they are equal.

Dave

Hooknswoop · May 10, 2005

Quote
Ironically enough, I have a first hand story that somewhat supports that argument. several years ago a jumpmaster that worked at my DZ landed with a twisted French link. He noticed it at a point well before landing but low enough to where he wasn't comfortable chopping it. His desicion.

So there you go. If he would have used soft links he might have -noticed -it -sooner? Or maybe he could have put little nicks with a hot knife on each riser so it would fail there first ....so he could see it sooner? Maybe?? No?

You misunderstand. With Slinks you won;t ever be in a situation of noticing a problem too low to cutaway. If they were to fail, they would fail completely, on deployment. You would know immediately. I know of only 1 Slink failure and that was indirectly caused by Rapide links. The rapide links had damaged the slider grommets, creating a sharp edge. The owner replaced the links with Slinkw ithout checking his slider grommets-go figure. The slider grommet cut through a Slink.

Slinks are stronger than Rapide links.
Slinks do not damage slider grommets.
Slinks do not bend open creating the possibility of the lines falling off too low for the jumper to do anything.
Slinks are easier to install, requiring no tools, no lock tite, and no nail polish, or slider bumpers.
Slinks are easier to inspect for wear.
Slinks have less bulk.

Slinks are better than Rapide links in every way.

Derek

Sign In

Sign In

Slinks!

Recommended Posts

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

mjosparky 3

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

mr2mk1g 10

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

skymedic 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Kris 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

mr2mk1g 10

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Kris 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

mr2mk1g 10

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

PhreeZone 15

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Kris 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

mr2mk1g 10

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

brettpobastad 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

tso-d_chris 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites