petition for exemption to the 120 day reserve repack cycle denied

[riggerrob 558]

Wendy,

The repack cycle was only 30 days when natural materials (silk, pongee and cotton) were the norm.
Silk pretty much disappeared form North American factories during the Second World War.
By the time skydiving became popular in the USA (early 1960s), everyone was jumping military surplus nylon parachutes left over from the Korean War, ergo, USPA was able to successfully petition the FAA to extend the repack cycle to 60 days.
A few years after the 60 day cycle proved successful, USPA again petitioned to extend the repack cycle to 120 days, which has been the American standard ever since.
A few countries (Canada, Britain, etc.) with short jumping seasons (less than 180 days) have adopted 180 day repack cycles. In practice, this means that most Canadian skydivers get their reserves repacked once per year, in the spring. Canadian skydivers who can afford winter vacations in Florida or Arizona get their reserves repacked twice per year.

A 180 day repack cycle would work well in Northern states like Wisconsin or New Hampshire, but would be dangerous for Californians who make more than 350 jumps per year, because their gear would fray to a dangerous level before a rigger saw it again.

[bob.dino 0]

As a counterpoint, Australia has both a year-round season and a 180-day repack cycle.

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

A 180 day repack cycle would work well in Northern states like Wisconsin or New Hampshire, but would be dangerous for Californians who make more than 350 jumps per year, because their gear would fray to a dangerous level before a rigger saw it again.

There are a lot of warm weather countries from which to draw information regarding this subject. Is your conclusion based on such information?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

Quote

A 180 day repack cycle would work well in Northern states like Wisconsin or New Hampshire, but would be dangerous for Californians who make more than 350 jumps per year, because their gear would fray to a dangerous level before a rigger saw it again.

There are a lot of warm weather countries from which to draw information regarding this subject. Is your conclusion based on such information?

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

I rigged in the Southern California desert for nine years (1992 to 2001).
The first year I only worked on pilot emergency parachutes at Manley Butler's factory in California City. There I concluded that the maximum repack cycle on PEPs should be 2 years, but some customers were such slobs, that 100 days would be a safer repack cycle for them.
Then I moved to the Perris, Elsinore and Hemet region working in a variety of lofts (Square One, Air Affair, Adventure Sports Loft and Riggiing Innovations). After repacking huge amounts of faded, frayed and filthy skydiving gear, I concluded that harsh California sun fades nylon rapidly, while the salts in desert soils pre-maturely wear out nylon fabric. I also noted that the more ambitious weekend jumpers made 350 jumps per year, far too long a period between inspections.

In conclusion, I may be arrogant and opinionated, but my opinions are based on nine years experience rigging in the Southern California desert.

[nate_1979 9]

Just curious, how does the sun fading nylon etc. have anything to do with a reserve which is still in a container after 180 days? I know that I dont get my main checked out or anything on reserve repacks...

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[sundevil777 93]

As some others have suggested, perhaps the proposal to extend the repack cycle should be combined with a new requirement for an external inspection at an intermediate period. It could be a reasonable way to monitor those who are rough on their equipment.

It would put riggers in a tough spot though, having to "judge" equipment. I wonder how many riggers would want that burden, compared to keeping the current situation.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[riggermick 6]

Quote

Quote

Quote

A 180 day repack cycle would work well in Northern states like Wisconsin or New Hampshire, but would be dangerous for Californians who make more than 350 jumps per year, because their gear would fray to a dangerous level before a rigger saw it again.

There are a lot of warm weather countries from which to draw information regarding this subject. Is your conclusion based on such information?

Gotta agree on that one Rob.

Mick.

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

I rigged in the Southern California desert for nine years (1992 to 2001).
The first year I only worked on pilot emergency parachutes at Manley Butler's factory in California City. There I concluded that the maximum repack cycle on PEPs should be 2 years, but some customers were such slobs, that 100 days would be a safer repack cycle for them.
Then I moved to the Perris, Elsinore and Hemet region working in a variety of lofts (Square One, Air Affair, Adventure Sports Loft and Riggiing Innovations). After repacking huge amounts of faded, frayed and filthy skydiving gear, I concluded that harsh California sun fades nylon rapidly, while the salts in desert soils pre-maturely wear out nylon fabric. I also noted that the more ambitious weekend jumpers made 350 jumps per year, far too long a period between inspections.

In conclusion, I may be arrogant and opinionated, but my opinions are based on nine years experience rigging in the Southern California desert.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I also noted that the more ambitious weekend jumpers made 350 jumps per year, far too long a period between inspections.

So your opinion is based on the needs of the very small minority that are jumping a lot? Rather than the norm who might be doing 30-75 jumps in that 6 month period. Couldn't they just know to do it more often?

With some countries at one year now...

[Hooknswoop 19]

Let's step back and look at what are the pro's/con's of 120-days/180-days/1-year reserve inspection and re-packs.

Re-packing a reserve that is fine wears on the reserve material.

the 120-inspection isn't just re-packing the reserve, the entire system is looked over (sometimes the main and sometimes not).

A rigging error that won't get caught until the next inspection would be even worse on a 1-year cycle, of course if the reserve is OK, then a 1-year cycle means less chances for a rigger to make a mistake.

Some rigs get a lot of jumps in 4 months, some very little.

A system that goes by number of jumps or time, whichever comes first won't work because people will blow off the jump requirement and wait till the time requirement is due.

A system I would really like would allow a rigger to sign off the reserve for another 120-days based on an outside inspection of the container is imperfect at best and could result in some riggers signing off anything and others re-packing everything. Then there is the cost, how much for an outside inspection and how much for a re-pack?

'Commercial' rigs like tandem/student/rental, see more use and abuse. When the person jumping isn't reposonsible for the maintenance and the owner isn't jumping it, maintenance issues can get lost in the cracks.

I see some rigs that could easily go 1-year as long as nothing unusual happens and others that barely make it 120-days.

Cypres1 batteries. If they are due before the reserve is, they should be replaced. I rarely sign off a reserve trusting the owner to bring it back before the batteries are to get them replaced before 120-days is up. A lot of times, if the Cypres1 batteries didn't have at least 1 year left, they would get replaced very early on a 1-year re-pack cycle. Making a note on the card probably won't get noticed by manifest and if the jumper forgets or blows it off, they are jumping out-of-date batteries.

Given the condition of a lot of rigs I see that are due for a 120-day re-pack, I think it would be a bad idea to extend the re-pack cycle.

Derek

[gemini 0]

Quote

Let's step back and look at what are the pro's/con's of 120-days/180-days/1-year reserve inspection and re-packs.

Another pro is that with the 180 day cycle, the jumper pays twice a year instead of 3 times a year.

Oh, wait a minute that is a con since the rigger will only get paid twice a year instead of 3 times a year!

Come on isn't there a rigger in a country with a 180 day cycle who can tell us what he is seeing and what problems the longer cycle has created? I don't think injury/fatality rates are necessarily higher in those countries to indicate real problems, but can't someone tell us the facts instead of all this rigger speculation on how bad it is?

Blue skies,

Jim

[rigger_john 0]

Quote

Quote

Let's step back and look at what are the pro's/con's of 120-days/180-days/1-year reserve inspection and re-packs.

Another pro is that with the 180 day cycle, the jumper pays twice a year instead of 3 times a year.

Oh, wait a minute that is a con since the rigger will only get paid twice a year instead of 3 times a year!

Come on isn't there a rigger in a country with a 180 day cycle who can tell us what he is seeing and what problems the longer cycle has created? I don't think injury/fatality rates are necessarily higher in those countries to indicate real problems, but can't someone tell us the facts instead of all this rigger speculation on how bad it is?

We use 6 month cycles in the UK, As I said earlier I cant think of one time I have found a problem that would not have been one had the clyle been less. I have Rigger friends in Germany who use 1 year repacks they find that the repack time doesn't cause problems.

As for the con that riggers will only get paid twice a year, thats true so you have to increase your price

_________________________________________

Nullius in Verba

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Another pro is that with the 180 day cycle, the jumper pays twice a year instead of 3 times a year.

Oh, wait a minute that is a con since the rigger will only get paid twice a year instead of 3 times a year!

If you think I, or almost any other rigger, rigs for the money, you have no idea what we do and how much we get paid.

Quote

Come on isn't there a rigger in a country with a 180 day cycle who can tell us what he is seeing and what problems the longer cycle has created? I don't think injury/fatality rates are necessarily higher in those countries to indicate real problems, but can't someone tell us the facts instead of all this rigger speculation on how bad it is?

I would like to hear from riggers in Countries with 180+ day re-pack cycles how often rigs get brought to them for repairs or to get something looked at before the reserve is due. That is rare in my experience in the U.S.

Quote

tell us what he is seeing

Quote

someone tell us the facts instead of all this rigger speculation

You think what I am seeing is specualtaion, but what a rigger in another country is seeing are facts?

I'm not sure why you seem to be taking offense to this.

Derek

[riggermick 6]

Another pro is that with the 180 day cycle, the jumper pays twice a year instead of 3 times a year.
Oh, wait a minute that is a con since the rigger will only get paid twice a year instead of 3 times a year!
-----------------------------------------------------------


Any rigger who's in it for the money is in the wrong game, just look at how most full time riggers live :Hint, if your house has wheels your'e not rich. And as far as getting paid twice a year over three times a year, can you say price increase. Don't be a cheapskate.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Come on isn't there a rigger in a country with a 180 day cycle who can tell us what he is seeing and what problems the longer cycle has created? I don't think injury/fatality rates are necessarily higher in those countries to indicate real problems, but can't someone tell us the facts instead of all this rigger speculation on how bad it is?

[billvon 2,396]

>You think what I am seeing is specualtaion, but what a rigger in
>another country is seeing are facts?

Well, since you have not been maintaining gear on a 180 day cycle, your estimate of the condition of the rigs after 180 days is speculation (but not your observation of the condition after 120 days.) OTOH the observations of other riggers who maintain rigs on a 180 day cycle are pretty factual, when it comes to what a rig will look like after 180 days.

As a side comment, we haven't seen problems with rigs that go between six months and two years between repacks (Amy's been getting a lot of foreign rigs to repack lately.) We tend to see more problems with heavily-used local rigs on the more standard 120 day cycle. The problems crop up over the course of a few years, though, not within four months.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Well, since you have not been maintaining gear on a 180 day cycle, your estimate of the condition of the rigs after 180 days is speculation (but not your observation of the condition after 120 days.) OTOH the observations of other riggers who maintain rigs on a 180 day cycle are pretty factual, when it comes to what a rig will look like after 180 days.

Right, I can safely say that for too many rigs, extending the re-pack cycle would be a bad idea. I don't need to hear what happens in other countries, I see the condition of rigs after 120 days and 180-days would just be worse.

Derek

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Right, I can safely say that for too many rigs, extending the re-pack cycle would be a bad idea. I don't need to hear what happens in other countries, I see the condition of rigs after 120 days and 180-days would just be worse.

Yeee. That is a strait and perfect solution. What a freedom you have! Sure that is the right way to solve attitude problems.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Yeee. That is a strait and perfect solution. What a freedom you have! Sure that is the right way to solve attitude problems.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.

Derek

[phoenixlpr 0]

Ops. I think we have something in common now.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Yeee. That is a strait and perfect solution. What a freedom you have! Sure that is the right way to solve attitude problems.

Um, OK, let me be more specific.

What solution are you refering to?

What freedom are you refering to?

What attitude problems are you refering to?

Derek

[gemini 0]

Quote

If your'e ok with the increased odds of somthing happening out of your control get your RATING and stop whining about the cost. When you pack your own rig it will be FREE! and when you pack someone elses rig you will be on your way to RICHES! Of course you will want to stash a portion of this newly found disposable income for any future litigation you may be involved in due to your increased exposure. Have fun with it.

Hook, just wanted facts from the guys already seeing 180 day cycles. If they all say go back to 120 days for safety sake, then that woulda' been the end of it.

Just suspicious of anyone who benefits (regardless of the amount) making broad statements against something like this.

Mick, play nice now!

Blue skies,

Jim

[Samurai136 0]

I'm guessing the attitude being referred to is that U.S. Skydivers don't take care of their gear. The poor gear maintenance by some U.S. skydivers is tied to their attitude about their gear.

Which is kind of what I was getting at earlier. Perhaps their attitude would change if the repack cycle was extended to 180 days. Perhaps it wouldn't.

If the attitude some skydivers have about gear maintenance changed (improved), the argument you've presented against a 180 repack/inspection diminishes.

It seems to me that they are two different issues and should be addressed as separate issues. No matter how long the repack cycle is skydivers should take their gear maintenance very seriously. Their life saving device is literally in their hands, not the rigger's. Riggers only see the equipment every 120 days or longer.

I understand the argument for 120 days is based on 'safety'. Although I don't see there isn't any quantifiable degree of saftey that is related to the length of the repack cycle. Would a 100 day repack cycle be more safe than 120? Why? By how much? How much worse would a 130 day repack cycle be? Why? How much worse?

It's hard to quantify because the answer is dependent on the attitude of the owner of the equipment. If they take care of their gear a 360 day repack cycle could be a totally reasonable proposition.

Ken

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken