atom contqainer

[dannyg412 0]

Is it legal to pack anything other than a Pdf reserve in an atom container??

[riggerrob 558]

Depends who you ask ...
Parachutes de France will probably tell you no, simply because they have not tried to pack all the different sozes, from all the other manufacturers into Atoms.
In the United States, an FAA Master Rigger will tell you that he can substitute other square reserves with similar pack volume, then he will get into a lengthy debate about which year that particular Atom was made and whether it was covered by an FAA TSO or a European JTSO or JAAR TSO, or fell into the grey area in between, etc.
If you take your Atom and reserve to a Canadian Rigger B, he will take a quick look at volume and compatibiity charts and decide.

[dragon2 0]

We've got a few Atoms with non-PdF reserves. Doesn't happen a lot, usually people order a rig and reserve together and they stay together. But over here it isn't illegal, apperantly

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[JockeS 0]

So what could happen if you pack a non PD reserve in an Atom? Im about to buy an Atom rig with a microlite 150 reserve.. Its my first gear so I want it all to be right..
Btw, what do you guys think of the LOR2 system?

Blue Ones

[JohanW 0]

I've taken a quick scroll down my manual and nowhere does PdF say in it you cannot legally pack anything else than a PdF reserve in it. They do give packing volume examples with their own reserves, but I cannot anywhere read into that that those are the only ones you can pack in there.

Actually, the following text seems to me to leave open explicitly the possibility of installing a reserve from a different manufacturer:

Quote

WARNING
If slider bumpers are required by the reserve canopy manufacturer they must be properly installed to insure (sic? I think) that they do not interfere with proper slider functionning (sic) and deployment of the canopy.
Follow the canopy manufacturer’s instructions.

Do note PD and PdF are different companies.

It would really help if you would fill out your profile, at least with the country under whose rules you are jumping. I have version 7 of the manual, dated July 1997, and it says TSO C23d. (Newer manual versions may or may not supercede older ones. ) I had actually heard the rig did not have a TSO, only the European equivalent which apparently is not legal in the USA, so there are bound to be legal intricacies for Americans. See also the above post from riggerrob. AFAIK, if you're from anywhere else, this is not a problem, not even when jumping in the USA.

As long as the pack volume matches between rig and reserve, there should be no special problems with compatibility. I have no opinion on the Microlite 150 itself; I don't know it. I think Atoms are nice rigs; I do know them - I own one, have more than 1200 jumps on it and have jumped several other rigs, other Atoms and other assorted brands and models. There are subtle differences between different versions, but for a first rig any of these are unlikely to be a problem if your rigger and your instructor are OK with your purchase.

Regarding the LOR2 system - consult with your rigger. It's different. At least there's more experience with it than with magnetic riser covers.

Would you happen to know the exact type of Atom you are about to buy? (33, 34, 35 or 37 before the dash, 3, 2, 1 or single to quad 0 after it.) (It's probably a 34-0, possibly a 34-1.)

Frankly, if the rig/reserve combo has been in use as sold, and especially if the reserve has been deployed before, I would not worry too much about it. But hey - I'm an unknown voice from the weird wide web. Consult with your rigger. If your rigger is the seller, get an independent opinion. Take the opportunity to learn about gear. And not just from duh Innernet either. Have coffee with an actual human being and sit down and talk. (All the riggers I know serve coffee.) You don't know what you don't know yet; you may very well get answers to questions you didn't know to ask yet.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[BKR 0]

No it is not legal as it is clear in paragraph 5.1 from the AS 8015/B. No other reserve brands has been tested into the Atom. Any reserve set into a container must have been tested as required by the AS, this is a point that it is not respected at all by users and riggers.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[JohanW 0]

What is AS 8015/B and where might we find it?

And, if it is not respected by users and riggers, is it enforced? Honestly curious here.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[BKR 0]

AS is the standard used for the certification of parachutes. Why it is not respected??? business and false infos to the users.
If you need a hard copy of the AS I can forward it to you via [email protected]

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[pchapman 261]

Quote

AS is the standard used for the certification of parachutes. Why it is not respected??? business and false infos to the users.

Johan: AS8015 might be out on the web somewhere but is rare. Normally the SAE that controls it will sell it for $50+. TSO-C23d basically says 'follow 8015', and 8015 lists all the different strength tests & drop tests that manufacturers do.

But Jerome has a point. That one paragraph is one of those things that seems to be totally ignored, on the face of it. Customers wouldn't stand for parachuting companies forcing them to use only a particular brand of reserve.

But the interpretation could be disputed; one of those things that give riggers hours of fun on this site arguing about what things mean and what rules apply.

That paragraph 5.1 talks about qualifying stuff either as components (canopy, harness/container) separately, or together as a system. If it is as a system, "The airworthiness of a parachute assembly, including other separately approved nonoriginal components, is the responsibility of the manufacturer who performs the certificating tests for the parachute assembly. The manufacturer shall publish and make available a list of interchangeable components which have passed the following tests [...]".

One might argue that that doesn't actually say all components MUST be certified as a system, just that it says who is responsible IF everything is certified together. So unless there's other wording elsewhere, nothing says one can't assemble a system from multiple certified components -- a certified harness from one place, a certified reserve from another. That's where, at least in the US, FAA rigger rules on rigger discretion come into play.

But that's a bit of rules lawyering and there may be plenty of counterarguments.

Still in the end: IF nobody cares about what reserve goes into a PdF rig, then it is OK because nobody will stop you. Or does one hear of PdF grounding rigs of theirs they find with others' reserves?

[BKR 0]

Even if components are certified separately when a assembly of such components is made both of them must have performed all drop tests together. The manufacturer (which one???)is responsible and must be able to proove it. This is the main problem and this paragraph has been withdrawn from the new upcoming AS8015/C (TSO.C23e)

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[P-dro 0]

Is there a timeframe for the publication of this document ?

[irishrigger 31]

personally i would not order a atom container,we have quiet a few in our club here in ireland.most people like theres very much and its nice and comfy.
my problem with them is there after sales service.it is almost non exsistend.i tried to order a replacement freebag for a customer and he had to wait almost 5 months for it.i had to order spare cutaway and reserve handles for an atom,6 months later they eventually arrived.one skydiver send a blue track back to them for a relinehe got it back after 3 months and who ever did the job over there managed to bar tack a d-line on the outside of a stabilser line! i was glad that i hung the canopy up for the assembly,it was very easy to see the mistake that way.no one here in ireland has orderd a new atom in the last 5 years because waiting times were uo to 12 months and there after sales are the worst i have ever seen.
just my two cents worth

[dragon2 0]

I wouldn't order anything new from PdF either, but since we have plenty of spare parts in our country and atoms are good rigs and there are plenty of them here, I wouldn't say no to a good 2nd hand atom, in fact I jump one

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

Hi Jerome,

Re: AS8015/C (TSO.C23e)

I don't get on the FAA's website unless necessary but I am of the understanding that the reference document for C23(e) is PIA TS-135.

Terry, you out there?

JerryBaumchen

[BKR 0]

You are right Jerry, I have the document but it seems still some discussions with FAA for final approval.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[downwindnc 0]

not related to the subject above

I have an atom with a cypres and the double loop LOR system etc

what do I use for closing loop material and where do I get it

all I have is the standard Airtec cypres spectra material

any alternatives

[likestojump 3]

the Atom manual shows using a double Cypres loop.

[downwindnc 0]

correct me if I'm wrong

if it is a single pin atom, then std cypres loop is ok. If it is the dual pin/rsl with both loops through the cutter, then a smaller width material is required. The few of these I have worked on definitely have a smaller width loop material.

in your attachment, compare the photos of the loops, the width measurements and part numbers,

[riggerrob 558]

The latest word from Parachutes de France (2011 PIA Symposium) is to use standard Cypres cord, when making closing loops for LOR.

[bes 0]

Does it mean putting two standart Cypres closing loops inside one cypres cutter?(which doesn't sound ok to me) Or putting two LOR2 pins into the loop of only one standart Cypres loop? (which I heard was done by some riggers but not recommended by PdF.)

[koppel 3]

is that for Airtec or PdF to say?

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

is that for Airtec or PdF to say?

...................................................................

PARACHUTES de FRANCE sales reps - at the 2011 PIA Symposium - said to make reserve closing loops out of standard CYPRES cord, when an LOR is installed on an ATOM container.

That sort of standardisation simplifies work for field riggers, because now they only have to stock one type of cord (Cypres cord) for reserve closing loops.

In my experience, Cypres cord works great even for reserves containing FXC 12000 AADs, but it does not last as long as closing loops made from stronger (say 500 or 800 pound) Spectra suspension line. One advantage of installing a closing loop - made with Cypres cord - is that reduces ripcord pull force by about 5 pounds.

[riggerrob 558]

"

Quote

Does it mean putting two standard Cypres closing loops inside one cypres cutter? ....)

"

......................................................................
Yes!
According to PARACHUTES DE FRANCE sales reps - at the 2011 PIA Symposium - you are supposed to make ATOM LOR closing loops from CYPRES cord.
I read that to mean manufacturing two closing loops and only inserting one pin per closing loop .... as per the ATOM packing manual.

Putting two closing loops through one Cypres cutter is no big deal. Remember that Cypres cutters are far stronger than they need to be ... strong enough to cut steel ripcord cable. So now the most important variable is: "How much loose Cypres cord is above the cutter?"
Only the field rigger can answer that.

Also remember that Parachutes de France issued a Service Bulletin - a couple of years ago - telling riggers to re-locate the Cypres cutter higher (left side flap) in the reserve container.

[bes 0]

Damn, I tried and saw that it's impossible to put two standart cypres loops in one cypres washer. Which leads one to use two washers for two loops.
Here comes the problem that at least one loop will be resting on the edge of the other loop's washer while under tension.(doesn't seem good).
One of the washers will be resting a bit diagonal on the grommet so the edge of the washer may harm the grommet.
Also you would have to vary the length of two loops to maintain even tension on the pins.
I am about to decide keep using the LOR2 loops provided by PdF. Any recommendations on the matter would be very appreciated.