0
sky490

Riggers Mistakes

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

Quote

Who is Accountable? The other day I witnessed a cut away that the reserve looked very funny. After the jumper landed I relised that his Rigger forgot to attach one line (the outside right front on an Tempo reserve) to the riser. The jumper was mot injured but the reserve was hard to fly straight and impossable to flair. My question "is this noted in some Rigger lifetime history or something?

Does this issue make you want to have rigs repacked more often than 120 days or longer than 120 days? Just think, a rigger is human and can make mistakes which you could be jumping. Of course you would rather not have to jump a riggers mistake, but if you were, would you rather jump it for 120 days or 180 days?



the answer is: doesn't matter.
More or less repacks does not affect error rate of riggers. if you got a bad reserve repacked, there is the same amount of chance that it would be repacked incorrectly the next time.



I think it does matter. The shorter repack cycle makes it more likely the error is found before you have to use your reserve. I kinda like that idea.

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>What do you think ?
That's a tough question. We've been training riggers the same way ever since I can remember. And while I might be wrong, has there ever been a case of a rigger directly being held responsible for killing someone?

The only ones I can think of, off the bat, is the occasional military rigger who goes berserk and sabotages the rigs he works on.

Most people, I've talked to, who went through that two weekend rigger course (everyone knows the one I mean) says it's great. But, that's a bit like asking a freshly minted first jump student if they liked their Instructor.

One thing the FAA might do is change the rigger designations as they are confusing to new jumpers. "Senior" rigger sounds great, like the top of the heap, when its really "Master" rigger that's the higher rating. But what would they change it to, Junior and Senior, Peon and Master, Little Sew and Big Sew . . . ?

The worst rigger mistake I ever saw personally was back when there was Velcro running down the sides of most reserve containers to contain the main risers. A visiting rigger field repaired some failed stitching on the Velcro by hand and without unpacking the rig. And he inadvertently passed the needle and thread thru the reserve canopy. Fortunately, it was caught in the next repack cycle. A few years later Patrick de Gayardon did sort of the same thing, while modifying his wingsuit & container, and it killed him, but I'm not sure if Patrick was a rigger.

I guess I can say, in my local area at least, I know grumpy riggers, egotistical riggers, riggers who charge too much and riggers who charge too little. But I can honestly say I'd let anyone of them pack my own reserve . . .

NickD :)BASE 194

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Who is Accountable? The other day I witnessed a cut away that the reserve looked very funny. After the jumper landed I relised that his Rigger forgot to attach one line (the outside right front on an Tempo reserve) to the riser. The jumper was mot injured but the reserve was hard to fly straight and impossable to flair. My question "is this noted in some Rigger lifetime history or something?

Does this issue make you want to have rigs repacked more often than 120 days or longer than 120 days? Just think, a rigger is human and can make mistakes which you could be jumping. Of course you would rather not have to jump a riggers mistake, but if you were, would you rather jump it for 120 days or 180 days?



the answer is: doesn't matter.
More or less repacks does not affect error rate of riggers. if you got a bad reserve repacked, there is the same amount of chance that it would be repacked incorrectly the next time.



I think it does matter. The shorter repack cycle makes it more likely the error is found before you have to use your reserve. I kinda like that idea.



The shorter repack cycle means that there are more opportunities to make a mistake because the rig has to get packed more times every year.

That argument works both ways and it is pretty stupid. I always use the same rigger because it is a person that I trust to not make the type of mistake that would kill me.

The good argument is that, the more times the reserve is repacked is the more wear put on the reserve. The H/C wear is affected only by how much and where you jump.
~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>the more times the reserve is repacked is the more wear put on the reserve.
I've been hearing that one since the 1980s when PD first said it was a factor. I don't buy it. Look at how many times you handle and pack your main, not to mention the cycles of real uses, is there some big spat of mains blowing up? And you can go back to when all mains were F-111 and find the same thing.

In a small sense you might argue it affects porosity somewhat, but this old wives' tale is meant mainly to sell more reserves . . .

NickD :)BASE 194

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Who is Accountable? The other day I witnessed a cut away that the reserve looked very funny. After the jumper landed I relised that his Rigger forgot to attach one line (the outside right front on an Tempo reserve) to the riser. The jumper was mot injured but the reserve was hard to fly straight and impossable to flair. My question "is this noted in some Rigger lifetime history or something?

Does this issue make you want to have rigs repacked more often than 120 days or longer than 120 days? Just think, a rigger is human and can make mistakes which you could be jumping. Of course you would rather not have to jump a riggers mistake, but if you were, would you rather jump it for 120 days or 180 days?



the answer is: doesn't matter.
More or less repacks does not affect error rate of riggers. if you got a bad reserve repacked, there is the same amount of chance that it would be repacked incorrectly the next time.



I think it does matter. The shorter repack cycle makes it more likely the error is found before you have to use your reserve. I kinda like that idea.



The shorter repack cycle means that there are more opportunities to make a mistake because the rig has to get packed more times every year.

That argument works both ways and it is pretty stupid. I always use the same rigger because it is a person that I trust to not make the type of mistake that would kill me.

The good argument is that, the more times the reserve is repacked is the more wear put on the reserve. The H/C wear is affected only by how much and where you jump.



You're entitled to your opinion though I don't appreciate the personal attack.

I did a repack for a young lady with a pop-top style reserve once and when I fired the reserve, the pilot chute went to full extension as expected. What was not expected was to find the 4 temporary pins still in the reserve (hidden under the pilot chute cap). If not for the repack cycle, would that have been found prior to a fatality?

I will agree that repacks do cause some wear (very little IMO) and that is a valid argument for a longer cycle. However, there are a number of factors that weigh in on the other side like unforeseen (and unseen) issues like chemicals spilled on the reserve, things puncturing the container/reserve where it's not obvious, etc.

As a rigger and having worked for multiple manufacturers, I have seen some pretty bizarre things that makes me hesitant to recommend a longer cycle than currently exists. YMMV

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:)
Thanks for the post.

The FAA can changed the words to "RIGGER" & "MASTER RIGGER", how that sounds ?

The whole point is changing the training system & methods, for years I'm saying that should be study at approved "RIGGING SCHOOLS" for riggers & "RIGGING HIGH SCHOOLS" for Master Riggers, with the same subjects & training level, so riggers around the world will have the same study.

After done at the school the Rigger will have to work for a time let's say for a year at a loft under & with a Master Rigger & after finishing that he/she will take the tests & become a RIGGER.

When time come for the Rigger to move to a Master level he/she will attend the "RIGGING HIGH SCHOOL" & after done there will work for a time like 6 month at a loft with & under a Master Rigger & when this is done he/she will take the tests.

I know it sounds like: WHAT ???? but think about that, well, maybe we will have less riggers in the market but we will have much more high trained & educated riggers & Master Riggers.

Rigging is not a hobby it's a full job with a lot of life time learning - riggers are students for life !!!

Rigging become more HI-TEC, materials changed all time. parachuting systems are more HI-TEC & complicated, repairs are more complicated too on all these H/P canopies, same for relines & dealing with all kind of the H/P lines.

I saw relines done by riggers & Master Riggers & it was sad to see the errors & the poor work, same for ASS. I&R.

I'm sorry but to my opinion you can not be a Rigger in 2 full weekends, maybe in 2-3 full weeks you might be a "RIGGER" with basic skills.

There are too much rigging issues in the market, there are mfg. errors the riggers does not know to find & stop & more.

What do you think now ? I can open that wider but I'll stop here.

Safe Rigging & Safe Riggers !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>"RIGGER" & "MASTER RIGGER", how that sounds ?
That sounds about right, and I think it should be done.

It's funny, I can't argue against any of your other points. I've been saying the same thing for years about Instructors. Bad riggers still have to somehow drum up business for themselves. Bad instructors have students automatically marched into their classrooms like lambs to the slaughter.

So while I agree Rigger University would be a terrific idea, and I can see the little riglets scurrying around from class to class (only second year riglets are allowed the little tool pouch on their belts) you are going to run into the same problem I encounter with Instructor University.

Nobody is going to spend the money and time to get that kind of an education just to go on to make starvation wages. The real problems in this sport are economic so we lose the best instructors and the best riggers to other professions.

NickD :)BASE 194

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(not directed at the last poster, rather commenting the concept as a whole)

Quote

I did a repack for a young lady with a pop-top style reserve once and when I fired the reserve, the pilot chute went to full extension as expected. What was not expected was to find the 4 temporary pins still in the reserve (hidden under the pilot chute cap). If not for the repack cycle, would that have been found prior to a fatality?



Frequent repacks do not increase or decrease the chance of a mistake being caught.

Assuming all riggers are created equal, meaning that all riggers have an equal chance of making a mistake(say, 1%), the probability that the last rigger made a mistake is always 1%, regardless of how many times the rig is I&R'd.

That said, if you want your rig repacked by someone else because you don't trust the previous rigger, well, maybe you shouldn't have had him/her pack your rig in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You talk alot about some of these short courses. I think you'll find that a longer slower appentaceship like what you are proposeing is more commen then you think. In fact traditionally that is the way it has been done. Not just in rigging but for pilots and macanics. The whole FAA standard is built around the idea of a mentor takeing a student under his wing where he learns his "craft" under the guidence of this instructor.
I'm trying to remember when DeWolf started running his shake and bake course. I don't know exactly when people started to realize that you could teoreticaly cram all the specified requirments into about ten days. I don't think it was that much of a problem becouse I don't beleave any one walked out of there with any illusions that they had more then a student lissons. Over the years a number of people have decided to open there own little rigging schools. The Idea developed that you could make money off of this by selling people there ticket. I'm not saying that they did not meat the requirements I'm just commenting on motovations. Now these people are out there trying to fill courses. They're waveing there arms around. That's why you see them. Some times they make it seem that there course is the only way to get your ticket. That's not true. In fact I think they are still in the minority. Of all the riggers we have around here only one is from a "quick" course. And he's not bad. Coming along nicely. Every one else was mentored. The fastest I've seen got her ticket in about five months. I worked in a loft for a couple of years before I took my test.
Now I used to work at Quincy with Wag. I do admit that I have seen some scarry things show up in that trailor from some of the more out of the way corners of the country. If I was you I would worry less about how people are initally trained and more about how they work afterwards. The biggest problems seem to come from people that end up working in isolation. People that get left behind. If any thing I'd like to see more continueing education. On the whole thoue I think you'll find the standards in the industry to be very high. I think there are other greater wories out there.

Lee
Lee
[email protected]
www.velocitysportswear.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right . . .

Sandy Reid of Rigging Innovations when there were in Perris ran, and probably still does in Eloy, a terrific rigging course. I saw the same students there for quite some time. They appeared able to build entire rigs before they graduated. And his students would come from all over the world. And stitch for stitch nobody builds a better rig than Sandy.

I guess what we were talking about earlier was more for the masses . . .

NickD :)BASE 194

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:)
Well said !!!!

The person builds his/her way of doing rigging.

I agree the work done after getting the ticket is more ????

It is up to the person to be educated & study more & more.

;) Riggers are LIFE students.

Keep doing well.

Safe Rigging !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:)
Sandy have at Eloy, AZ. the US Rigging Academy & this is what I mean "Rigging Schools"

You right, the students out from that school have a lot of info. & sewing practice BUT still have a long way to go as all of us all time.

Continue education is the key !!!!

Safe Rigging !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I did a repack for a young lady with a pop-top style reserve once and when I fired the reserve, the pilot chute went to full extension as expected. What was not expected was to find the 4 temporary pins still in the reserve (hidden under the pilot chute cap). If not for the repack cycle, would that have been found prior to a fatality?



I've never packed a rig that needed 4 temp pins to get the repack done. What kind of rig was it?

___________________________________________
meow

I get a Mike hug! I get a Mike hug!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I've never packed a rig that needed 4 temp pins to get the repack done. What kind of rig was it?



Sounds like a "pop-top style reserve ". Have you ever seen a racer? Sure you have, a PTR looks like a racer reserve on your belly or on your back, that is the most common rig where you might find 4 temp pins under a PC cap.;)
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hi sunshine,

It would be a Dan Poynter-designed PopTop container; circa ~ 1969.

You might find the original packing instructions (that used the four-pin method) on-line somewhere.



Honestly, i don't see many rigs manufactured before the 90's. I had to pack an old military rig during my rigging class 5 years ago, but thats the only time i ever dealt with an "old" rig.

Thanks for answering my question. :)

___________________________________________
meow

I get a Mike hug! I get a Mike hug!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Hi sunshine,

It would be a Dan Poynter-designed PopTop container; circa ~ 1969.

You might find the original packing instructions (that used the four-pin method) on-line somewhere.



Honestly, i don't see many rigs manufactured before the 90's. I had to pack an old military rig during my rigging class 5 years ago, but thats the only time i ever dealt with an "old" rig.

Thanks for answering my question. :)


Yeah, sorry to show my age... :$

It was an SST probably built around 1974. The repack was at the 1975 Turkey meet in Z-Hills. 4 temp pins were used to hold the flaps in place until the final two loops from the pilot chute cap were pulled down trough the 4 flaps and on through the back of the container to be secured, then (usually) you would remove the temp pins. BTW, these temp pins had the usual large red flags on them; they had been neatly tucked in under the pilot chute cap. A sure fatility if she had needed her reserve during the meet.

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A well-trusted rigger I know has a big board on his wall that has all the stupid stuff he has found in reserve pack jobs. He puts it all on the wall as a daily reminder not to do stupid stuff.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Same story, different story teller, I've known a few others who saw this rig.



Only four people saw this rig. Jeff Searles who owned Z-Hills Commercial Center at the time, Jim Hooper who was ASO, the rigger who packed the rig who happened to be attending the meet, and me.

It was decided not to alert the owner. Jeff and/or Jim may have reported the incident to the FAA or not, I do not know and I left that to them.

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


You're entitled to your opinion though I don't appreciate the personal attack.

I did a repack for a young lady with a pop-top style reserve once and when I fired the reserve, the pilot chute went to full extension as expected. What was not expected was to find the 4 temporary pins still in the reserve (hidden under the pilot chute cap). If not for the repack cycle, would that have been found prior to a fatality?

I will agree that repacks do cause some wear (very little IMO) and that is a valid argument for a longer cycle. However, there are a number of factors that weigh in on the other side like unforeseen (and unseen) issues like chemicals spilled on the reserve, things puncturing the container/reserve where it's not obvious, etc.

As a rigger and having worked for multiple manufacturers, I have seen some pretty bizarre things that makes me hesitant to recommend a longer cycle than currently exists. YMMV



I wasn't saying you're stupid, I just don't like that argument. One rigger to the next is likely to make the same number of mistakes. I wouldn't ever use a rigger that I thought was more likely to make a mistake than some other rigger that I could use. Catching mistakes and making mistakes happens at the exact same time. Regardless of how long the repack cycle is, its just as likely that the rigger I use and trust is going to make a mistake.

As for the other stuff, well... I think that it comes down to skydiver responsibility to make sure that their rig isn't left some place to get screwed up. If stuff gets spilled on my rig that I don't know what it is, I am going to do something about it. The point being is that, at least to me, it would seem the the total amount of wear on a reserve in its lifetime is VERY limited. It gets wear if it has to be used and if it has to be packed.

If a 180 day repack cycle means its going to take longer before I have to send my reserve off to PD to get inspected or before it loses as much value, then that works for me! The only thing I envision being a problem with a longer repack cycle is that the closing loop could wear out before that time. I think my rigger is cool enough to replace it at every repack though, cause it always seems new. So I am not worried much about that either.
~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


I wasn't saying you're stupid, I just don't like that argument.



Yeah, I was expecting to hear from you again. I apologize for what I said, after re-reading the post, I realized you were attacking the argument and not me.

I still personally believe it's long enough now. I have never seen an example to support the added wear argument and I still think unseen things can happen such as punctures from the outside, chemical intrusion, whatever...

I can't say anything bad happened when it went from 60 to 120 days, and maybe 180 would be fine. But... if there is something wrong inside my reserve container, I like the odds of discovery before disaster better with a more frequent cycle. You could make a formula of cycle time/ jumps. If you make a jump a day, (and assuming a fatal error or damage in your reserve), would you rather make 120 jumps or 180. Do your odds of a mal or wrap change with jump frequency? Just food for thought...

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


I wasn't saying you're stupid, I just don't like that argument.



Yeah, I was expecting to hear from you again. I apologize for what I said, after re-reading the post, I realized you were attacking the argument and not me.

I still personally believe it's long enough now. I have never seen an example to support the added wear argument and I still think unseen things can happen such as punctures from the outside, chemical intrusion, whatever...

I can't say anything bad happened when it went from 60 to 120 days, and maybe 180 would be fine. But... if there is something wrong inside my reserve container, I like the odds of discovery before disaster better with a more frequent cycle. You could make a formula of cycle time/ jumps. If you make a jump a day, (and assuming a fatal error or damage in your reserve), would you rather make 120 jumps or 180. Do your odds of a mal or wrap change with jump frequency? Just food for thought...



then why not repack your reserve every night if that is the argument?

(just playing devils advocate here)
Scars remind us that the past is real

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


I wasn't saying you're stupid, I just don't like that argument.



Yeah, I was expecting to hear from you again. I apologize for what I said, after re-reading the post, I realized you were attacking the argument and not me.

I still personally believe it's long enough now. I have never seen an example to support the added wear argument and I still think unseen things can happen such as punctures from the outside, chemical intrusion, whatever...

I can't say anything bad happened when it went from 60 to 120 days, and maybe 180 would be fine. But... if there is something wrong inside my reserve container, I like the odds of discovery before disaster better with a more frequent cycle. You could make a formula of cycle time/ jumps. If you make a jump a day, (and assuming a fatal error or damage in your reserve), would you rather make 120 jumps or 180. Do your odds of a mal or wrap change with jump frequency? Just food for thought...


then why not repack your reserve every night if that is the argument?

(just playing devils advocate here)


I like it :ph34r:

I can repack mine every night if I like, but I'm a rigger. Seems like the idea is to find a balance between likely issues and how much time to allow for them. I certainly agree that in a pristine environment with current materials in use, you could repack every two years or even a longer cycle.

In the real world, if it exists, things can happen in the trunks of cars, getting into and out of aircraft, etc., that might not be detected by anything but a repack.

I can see both sides of the argument, I just feel more comfortable on the conservative side when it comes to safety and especially when it comes down to my last parachute...

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


I wasn't saying you're stupid, I just don't like that argument.



Yeah, I was expecting to hear from you again. I apologize for what I said, after re-reading the post, I realized you were attacking the argument and not me.

I still personally believe it's long enough now. I have never seen an example to support the added wear argument and I still think unseen things can happen such as punctures from the outside, chemical intrusion, whatever...I am not taking a side on this topic as I see both ends and I really don't know what to think. (and I am a S Rigger) However, it seems to me PD thinks repacking wear is an issue because when we repack a PD reserver we are to check the boxes on the label and send the canopy in after a certin number or repacks. If there is another reason someone please tell me as I am just making a guess here

I can't say anything bad happened when it went from 60 to 120 days, and maybe 180 would be fine. But... if there is something wrong inside my reserve container, I like the odds of discovery before disaster better with a more frequent cycle. You could make a formula of cycle time/ jumps. If you make a jump a day, (and assuming a fatal error or damage in your reserve), would you rather make 120 jumps or 180. Do your odds of a mal or wrap change with jump frequency? Just food for thought...


"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0