Ms.sofaking 0 #51 March 7, 2007 I still can't find the answer to:What if it came from the manufacturer without an RSL to begin with? Is it "airworthy"? Or what needs to be done then?"I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RiggerLee 61 #52 March 7, 2007 Right now as it reads there is no answer. As it is writen right now you are in the same boat as the rest of us. They have made no provision for DOM or SN of the rigs affected. There is no way at this time to tell if a rig ever had an RSL. You should contact them your self on this question. Perhaps they could publish a list of SN exempt from this. LeeLee [email protected] www.velocitysportswear.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,384 #53 March 7, 2007 >So I had to have a RSL fitted in order to jump but I didn't have to have >it connected. So i now have a lanyard with a small spinnaker shaclke free >to entangle itself in my 3 ring? >Is that not correct? Well, per Sunpath you have to have it connected unless it's an emergency situation (at least in the US). However, should you want to disconnect it, there are several places to stow the shackle as others have described. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ms.sofaking 0 #54 March 7, 2007 Thank You."I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,384 #55 March 7, 2007 Update - Sunpath has changed the wording of their bulletin to allow users to disconnect the RSL before the skydive. The new wording reads: "The user can 'disengage' the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle, if in an emergency situation or to avoid a possible emergency situation ONLY." (The italics/underlines are theirs.) Link is here: http://www.sunpath.com/downloads/bulletins/RSL_MasterV1.2.pdf Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #56 March 7, 2007 QuoteUpdate - Sunpath has changed the wording of their bulletin to allow users to disconnect the RSL before the skydive. The new wording reads: "The user can 'disengage' the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle, if in an emergency situation or to avoid a possible emergency situation ONLY." (The italics/underlines are theirs.) Link is here: http://www.sunpath.com/downloads/bulletins/RSL_MasterV1.2.pdf Okay then, all crw and video jumpers can just call their jumps "emergency situations" "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ernokaikkonen 0 #57 March 7, 2007 Quote"The user can 'disengage' the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle, if in an emergency situation or to avoid a possible emergency situation ONLY." (The italics/underlines are theirs.) So now jumpers just need to declare that they are avoiding the possible emergency situation of 'unstable reserve deployment', and they can disconnect the RSL at will. Right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #58 March 7, 2007 Still no good. Doesn't allow me to disconnect the RSL shackle in order to cut the main risers away and switch main canopies. As that is not an "emergency situation" or an attempt to "avoid a possible emergency situation" it is presumably an "alteration" and as such requires a Master Rigger to sign off on it. Though of course one could argue that it doesn't really matter much as I then undo the "alteration" when I snap the shackle back up before enplaining... so effectively the FAA would never know to be able to pull anyone's tickets. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #59 March 7, 2007 QuoteI was 'told' at PIA (I do not have anything in writing so am using 'told') that: UPT/Vector added the SkyHook without going through a Minor Change. Sunpath/Javelin added another flap (req'd for the SkyHook) via the Minor Change process. Again, this is what I was told. So, adding a RSL/Skyhook to the design of a rig is a minor change, but removing or even disconnecting an RSL is an alteration? I am only getting more confused. It appears to me that even Sun Path is confused. Does thier statement specifically cover simply removing the RSL and covering the hook Velcro w/ loop Velcro? Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,047 #60 March 7, 2007 Hi Mark, To answer your question as written: yes, IMO. Now, people may not like that 'defendable' position (I looked the word tenable up) but I think that they are on good grounds here. Again, IMO. Stay tuned, film at 11:00. Jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sid 1 #61 March 7, 2007 Quote So now jumpers just need to declare that they are avoiding the possible emergency situation of 'unstable reserve deployment', and they can disconnect the RSL at will. Right? Nice one!!!!!!!! or you could always buy a rig that doesn't HAVE to...... (my boss puts her hand over my mouth and drags me away from the keyboard )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
Hooknswoop 19 #62 March 7, 2007 OK, I have decided to hell with Sun Path, I'll continue to pack Javelins w/o an RSL. This is stupid. If the FAA wants my ticket, come get it. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ms.sofaking 0 #63 March 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteOK, I have decided to hell with Sun Path, I'll continue to pack Javelins w/o an RSL. This is stupid. If the FAA wants my ticket, come get it. Are you sure about that?You are going to be awfully busy.Can I send mine to you before the line gets to long?"I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #64 March 7, 2007 Quote I still can't find the answer to:What if it came from the manufacturer without an RSL to begin with? Is it "airworthy"? Or what needs to be done then? That answer is very simple. If it left the factory without an RSL, it is most certainly airworthy in that regard. But also at the same time if you wanted to install a "field" RSL on it (since it originally did not come with one) you would have to go throught the paperwork process to do so. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ms.sofaking 0 #65 March 7, 2007 Thanks. So then can a rigger repack the reserve? Can I still get on a plane? Or will I have to carry some kind of proof it came from the manufacturer like this?"I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #66 March 7, 2007 Quote There is no way at this time to tell if a rig ever had an RSL. Sure there is! Either the double rings will still be on the #4 Flap or the just stitch holes where they were once sewn. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,384 #67 March 7, 2007 >If it left the factory without an RSL, it is most certainly airworthy in that regard. I don't think that's a defensible position. I've seen rigs come from the factory with defective/missing components. "The factory delivered it that way" is insufficient rationale to assemble/pack a system that does not meet published standards. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ms.sofaking 0 #68 March 7, 2007 OK, this is getting confusing.Especially for someone who is not a rigger. I don't have it as bad as others do, I have something else to jump.But, I'm unclear on what I need to do with my Javelin that came with no RSL. There is no grandfather clause or alotted time to do this?"I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #69 March 7, 2007 Quote I don't think that's a defensible position. I've seen rigs come from the factory with defective/missing components. "The factory delivered it that way" is insufficient rationale to assemble/pack a system that does not meet published standards. Bill, All the newer models since 1994-95(?) have had RSLs installed. I am talking about the ones before that. The ones where they only installed the double rings on the #4 flap if it was ordered with an RSL. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,384 #70 March 7, 2007 >But, I'm unclear on what I need to do with my Javelin that came with no RSL. The short answer is give it to your rigger when its next repack is due, and he will determine whether it needs the signoff. His opinion is the most important to you, since he will be the one repacking your reserve (or deciding he can't!) For a better answer I'd suggest calling Sunpath - they are the ultimate authority. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ms.sofaking 0 #71 March 7, 2007 Thanks.I'll call my rigger tonight.I bet I won't be able to get through to Sunpath.I imagine they are pretty busy with questions and order cancellations."I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #72 March 7, 2007 Quote For a better answer I'd suggest calling Sunpath - they are the ultimate authority. Since they(Sun Path) report or answer to the FAA, I would say they(FAA) would be the ultimate authority! But yes, you are right about calling SP and should if you have any questions. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MakeItHappen 15 #73 March 7, 2007 QuoteHi Jan, QuoteDoes that need yet another FAA TSO? I was 'told' at PIA (I do not have anything in writing so am using 'told') that: UPT/Vector added the SkyHook without going through a Minor Change. Sunpath/Javelin added another flap (req'd for the SkyHook) via the Minor Change process. Again, this is what I was told. Well, I can see that there is a difference between RWS and Sunpath mods to add a MARD and that the Sunpath mods are more significant. Quote PS) I 'understand' that the PIA committee for the TSO standards is considering some type of testing for certification if a SkyHook is used (M.A.R.D. = Main canopy Assisted Reserve Deployment in their language). Here's a question for you Jan: what req'ments would you want in the standard? I know you might be joking with this question, but I'll give you an answer anyway. The scenarios that RWS tested should be included. The bag lock, spinner, total etc. The one scenario that has not been tested, even by RWS, is the entanglement scenario. It's just too dangerous to ask a real jumper to jump this scenario. But I think some sort of entanglement scenario ought to be at least looked into, maybe not added to an official requirement. A 'sort of' test on this might be dropping a dummy with a main attached (PC stuck in pocket, lines on grommets, riser hung on reserve pack tray etc) perhaps from a balloon. The cutaway loops get cut by a cutter system at a terminal like velocity. The Skyhook system goes into action to pull the reserve. Then look at whether the reserve clears the main and whether or not the Skyhook lanyard drops off the reserve bridle line. There could be a systemic problem with the Skyhook in this scenario. The only way we can find out today is to wait for it to happen in real life (and death). This scenario has not been tested. The reason I think there might be a systemic problem in this scenario is that the skyhook lanyard could pull at a sharp angle to the hook. The lanyard may not necessarily drop off the hook as it would in a total. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kruse 0 #74 March 8, 2007 Here's my interpretation of the FARs. * FAR 65.129 d&e says a manufacturer can authorize an alteration. *Advisory circular 105-2C Sec. 8 (which is not an FAR and therefore not law), forgets to mention that a manufacturer can authorize alterations. If any conflict between the two exists, FAR part 65 should be followed. Sun Path has specifically authorized removal of the RSL by a master rigger in their latest bulletin. We don't need FAA authorization. Here's my interpretation of Sun Paths Letter dated 2-27-2007, Question #5 response from Sun Path says a master rigger can "approve"and"certify" a previously removed RSL with notations on "data cards/logbooks". In the case of a simple lanyard removal,a master rigger could approve,(or not approve) the alteration without unpacking the reserve. That's just my interpretation. My opinion......Sunpath is simply following advice from legal council,... cut them a break.Other manufacturers may soon follow suit. Mark Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TitaniumLegs 8 #75 March 8, 2007 QuoteStill no good. Doesn't allow me to disconnect the RSL shackle in order to cut the main risers away and switch main canopies. As that is not an "emergency situation" or an attempt to "avoid a possible emergency situation" it is presumably an "alteration" and as such requires a Master Rigger to sign off on it. Excellent point! (>o|-< If you don't believe me, ask me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
masterrigger1 2 #64 March 7, 2007 Quote I still can't find the answer to:What if it came from the manufacturer without an RSL to begin with? Is it "airworthy"? Or what needs to be done then? That answer is very simple. If it left the factory without an RSL, it is most certainly airworthy in that regard. But also at the same time if you wanted to install a "field" RSL on it (since it originally did not come with one) you would have to go throught the paperwork process to do so. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ms.sofaking 0 #65 March 7, 2007 Thanks. So then can a rigger repack the reserve? Can I still get on a plane? Or will I have to carry some kind of proof it came from the manufacturer like this?"I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #66 March 7, 2007 Quote There is no way at this time to tell if a rig ever had an RSL. Sure there is! Either the double rings will still be on the #4 Flap or the just stitch holes where they were once sewn. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,384 #67 March 7, 2007 >If it left the factory without an RSL, it is most certainly airworthy in that regard. I don't think that's a defensible position. I've seen rigs come from the factory with defective/missing components. "The factory delivered it that way" is insufficient rationale to assemble/pack a system that does not meet published standards. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ms.sofaking 0 #68 March 7, 2007 OK, this is getting confusing.Especially for someone who is not a rigger. I don't have it as bad as others do, I have something else to jump.But, I'm unclear on what I need to do with my Javelin that came with no RSL. There is no grandfather clause or alotted time to do this?"I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #69 March 7, 2007 Quote I don't think that's a defensible position. I've seen rigs come from the factory with defective/missing components. "The factory delivered it that way" is insufficient rationale to assemble/pack a system that does not meet published standards. Bill, All the newer models since 1994-95(?) have had RSLs installed. I am talking about the ones before that. The ones where they only installed the double rings on the #4 flap if it was ordered with an RSL. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,384 #70 March 7, 2007 >But, I'm unclear on what I need to do with my Javelin that came with no RSL. The short answer is give it to your rigger when its next repack is due, and he will determine whether it needs the signoff. His opinion is the most important to you, since he will be the one repacking your reserve (or deciding he can't!) For a better answer I'd suggest calling Sunpath - they are the ultimate authority. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ms.sofaking 0 #71 March 7, 2007 Thanks.I'll call my rigger tonight.I bet I won't be able to get through to Sunpath.I imagine they are pretty busy with questions and order cancellations."I'm not sure how it's going to turn out, except I'll die in the end, she said. So what could really go wrong? -----Brian Andreas Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #72 March 7, 2007 Quote For a better answer I'd suggest calling Sunpath - they are the ultimate authority. Since they(Sun Path) report or answer to the FAA, I would say they(FAA) would be the ultimate authority! But yes, you are right about calling SP and should if you have any questions. Cheers, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #73 March 7, 2007 QuoteHi Jan, QuoteDoes that need yet another FAA TSO? I was 'told' at PIA (I do not have anything in writing so am using 'told') that: UPT/Vector added the SkyHook without going through a Minor Change. Sunpath/Javelin added another flap (req'd for the SkyHook) via the Minor Change process. Again, this is what I was told. Well, I can see that there is a difference between RWS and Sunpath mods to add a MARD and that the Sunpath mods are more significant. Quote PS) I 'understand' that the PIA committee for the TSO standards is considering some type of testing for certification if a SkyHook is used (M.A.R.D. = Main canopy Assisted Reserve Deployment in their language). Here's a question for you Jan: what req'ments would you want in the standard? I know you might be joking with this question, but I'll give you an answer anyway. The scenarios that RWS tested should be included. The bag lock, spinner, total etc. The one scenario that has not been tested, even by RWS, is the entanglement scenario. It's just too dangerous to ask a real jumper to jump this scenario. But I think some sort of entanglement scenario ought to be at least looked into, maybe not added to an official requirement. A 'sort of' test on this might be dropping a dummy with a main attached (PC stuck in pocket, lines on grommets, riser hung on reserve pack tray etc) perhaps from a balloon. The cutaway loops get cut by a cutter system at a terminal like velocity. The Skyhook system goes into action to pull the reserve. Then look at whether the reserve clears the main and whether or not the Skyhook lanyard drops off the reserve bridle line. There could be a systemic problem with the Skyhook in this scenario. The only way we can find out today is to wait for it to happen in real life (and death). This scenario has not been tested. The reason I think there might be a systemic problem in this scenario is that the skyhook lanyard could pull at a sharp angle to the hook. The lanyard may not necessarily drop off the hook as it would in a total. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kruse 0 #74 March 8, 2007 Here's my interpretation of the FARs. * FAR 65.129 d&e says a manufacturer can authorize an alteration. *Advisory circular 105-2C Sec. 8 (which is not an FAR and therefore not law), forgets to mention that a manufacturer can authorize alterations. If any conflict between the two exists, FAR part 65 should be followed. Sun Path has specifically authorized removal of the RSL by a master rigger in their latest bulletin. We don't need FAA authorization. Here's my interpretation of Sun Paths Letter dated 2-27-2007, Question #5 response from Sun Path says a master rigger can "approve"and"certify" a previously removed RSL with notations on "data cards/logbooks". In the case of a simple lanyard removal,a master rigger could approve,(or not approve) the alteration without unpacking the reserve. That's just my interpretation. My opinion......Sunpath is simply following advice from legal council,... cut them a break.Other manufacturers may soon follow suit. Mark Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TitaniumLegs 8 #75 March 8, 2007 QuoteStill no good. Doesn't allow me to disconnect the RSL shackle in order to cut the main risers away and switch main canopies. As that is not an "emergency situation" or an attempt to "avoid a possible emergency situation" it is presumably an "alteration" and as such requires a Master Rigger to sign off on it. Excellent point! (>o|-< If you don't believe me, ask me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
