0
NotBond

Chute deployment handles

Recommended Posts

Just an odd question - the old WWII chutes had a ripcord handle on the chest. How and why did it move to the back of the container? Wouldn't a chest handle be easier to use?
Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyways... - John Wayne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My rig has a handle on the chest-the RESERVE. You are absolutely right that it is easier to find and use.;)

I'm not a rigger, but I would guess that we have BOC over leg pouches and the other older stuff to make bridles shorter and easier to stow. Also, the springloaded pilotchute ripcords are on your right hip to make routing the ripcord smoother and shorter.
You will probably notice that almost all rigs have the main handle in approximately the same spot (right lower). Makes it a lot safer to switch between rigs.
Again, not a rigger correct me if wrong.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

My rig has a handle on the chest-the RESERVE. You are absolutely right that it is easier to find and use.;)

I'm not a rigger, but I would guess that we have BOC over leg pouches and the other older stuff to make bridles shorter and easier to stow. Also, the springloaded pilotchute ripcords are on your right hip to make routing the ripcord smoother and shorter.
You will probably notice that almost all rigs have the main handle in approximately the same spot (right lower). Makes it a lot safer to switch between rigs.
Again, not a rigger correct me if wrong.



why would you think that shorter bridles are the desired effect or are safer ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

My rig has a handle on the chest-the RESERVE. You are absolutely right that it is easier to find and use.;)

I'm not a rigger, but I would guess that we have BOC over leg pouches and the other older stuff to make bridles shorter and easier to stow. Also, the springloaded pilotchute ripcords are on your right hip to make routing the ripcord smoother and shorter.
You will probably notice that almost all rigs have the main handle in approximately the same spot (right lower). Makes it a lot safer to switch between rigs.
Again, not a rigger correct me if wrong.



why would you think that shorter bridles are the desired effect or are safer ?



Also not a rigger, but it's my understanding that the BOC came around after several incidents of misrouting going from the main closing pin to the pouch on the belly-band (of course, that involved velcro, etc, etc). There were also some issues with the Rear-of-Leg mount, but I can't quite remember the details. Again, I think it involved misrouting).

Back to the OP, in a nutshell, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. If the path from closing pin to the pilot chute "bundle" is shorter, there's less opportunity to misroute it, and thus less of an opportunity to find yourself at 1500 feet (or wherever they pulled back in "those days") ;) and not be able to get your main out.

So in that case, though the person you responded to may have minced his words, yes, a "shorter bridle" is safer. Not that it's *actually* shorter, but it just has less ground to cover. The less distance it has to cover from closing pin to pilot chute, the better.
Signatures are the new black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the old... chutes had a ripcord handle on the chest. How and why did it move to the back of the container? Wouldn't a chest handle be easier to use?



Yep. And they're freefly friendly too. Even safe for head-down speed dives. Ever heard of a ripcord handle blowing loose from it's pocket? I didn't think so. But spring-loaded pilot chutes on a main aren't "cool", so people jump more dangerous stuff just to be fashionable.

Previous discussion:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1440948;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yep. And they're freefly friendly too. Even safe for head-down speed dives. Ever heard of a ripcord handle blowing loose from it's pocket? I didn't think so. But spring-loaded pilot chutes on a main aren't "cool", so people jump more dangerous stuff just to be fashionable.



Interesting. So, does anyone make a rig with front rip cords?

FWIW, I'm not trying to start anything here - only have two jumps, so what do I know? But, when I pulled on the second, I had to take two craks at it before it released, and I thought it was kind of an awkward position.
Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyways... - John Wayne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ever heard of a ripcord handle blowing loose from it's pocket? I didn't think so. But spring-loaded pilot chutes on a main aren't "cool", so people jump more dangerous stuff just to be fashionable.



I'm sorry, but this is complete BS.

Maybe people don't want a 2 lb weight hanging off of their main. How many sport jumpers even jump non-collapsible PCs now?

Maybe people don't want to buy a pilot chute that is more expensive and doesn't last as long as one made of all fabric.

Maybe people don't want to keep extra ripcords around so they aren't stuck on the ground if they drop one.

So on and so forth.

Even if it were "just to be fashionable", which it obviously is not, what is so wrong with that? The trend in the history of parachuting gear is that it is getting better and safer; one could do much worse than to follow along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Ever heard of a ripcord handle blowing loose from it's pocket? I didn't think so. But spring-loaded pilot chutes on a main aren't "cool", so people jump more dangerous stuff just to be fashionable.



Maybe people don't want a 2 lb weight hanging off of their main. How many sport jumpers even jump non-collapsible PCs now? Maybe people don't want to buy a pilot chute that is more expensive and doesn't last as long as one made of all fabric. Maybe people don't want to keep extra ripcords around so they aren't stuck on the ground if they drop one.



Yep, your reply confirms what I said. They would rather jump a more malfunction-prone deployment method, for the sake of a few more miles per hour canopy speed, possibly saving a few bucks on maintenance, and being too stupid to keep spare parts on hand.

Yeah, those are good reasons to jump more dangerous gear.

And ironically, many of these people are the same ones who spend thousands on a Cypress, and wouldn't think of jumping without it. Yet a Cypress adds expense, weight and maintenance. But they consider that worthwhile, for the added safety. But a spring-loaded pilot chute that eliminates the horseshoe malfunctions common with throw-out pilot chutes? No way!

Quote

Even if it were "just to be fashionable", which it obviously is not, what is so wrong with that? The trend in the history of parachuting gear is that it is getting better and safer; one could do much worse than to follow along.



Belly band pilot chutes were the trend for a while, and everyone followed along. There's a good reason they're not around any more. High wing loadings and low hook turns are fashionable too. Do them, or you won't be cool! It's worth the extra risk of being injured or killed, so that the cool people will like you.

Not all trends are good trends. Follow the crowd at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skydive Radio episodes 16 and 17 feature Bill Booth discussing this topic (among others) at length. Since he's the one who gave us the hand-deployed PC, there's a lot to be learned from listening to the man himself.

(Not trying to kiss Booth-ass, I just found the discussion to be very interesting. ;))


Show #16: http://media.libsyn.com/media/skydiveradio/sr16_11_22_05s.mp3

Show #17:http://media.libsyn.com/media/skydiveradio/sr17_11_29_05s.mp3
T.I.N.S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yep, your reply confirms what I said. They would rather jump a more malfunction-prone deployment method, for the sake of a few more miles per hour canopy speed, possibly saving a few bucks on maintenance, and being too stupid to keep spare parts on hand.



It in no way confirms what you said. You said that people were doing it purely because it was the fashionable thing to do. You were wrong about that.

Quote

Yeah, those are good reasons to jump more dangerous gear.



I'm curious who makes the freebag you use on your main.

People make reasonable trades of safety for convenience on a regular basis.

Quote

Belly band pilot chutes were the trend for a while, and everyone followed along. There's a good reason they're not around any more.



And everyone who followed the trend got rid of their belly band PCs. The good trends stay, the bad trends go.

Say you're the average jumper without the perspective of decades of observation and the knowledge and abilities to correctly make a cost/benefit analysis of gear features. Is there a better place to start from than to take advantage of the sum experience of parachuting equipment R&D by looking around to see what seems to be working for most people?

Quote

High wing loadings and low hook turns are fashionable too. Do them, or you won't be cool! It's worth the extra risk of being injured or killed, so that the cool people will like you.



Now you're just being cranky and argumentative for the sake of it. Nobody I know thinks low turns are cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

why would you think that shorter bridles are the desired effect or are safer ?



...So in that case, though the person you responded to may have minced his words, yes, a "shorter bridle" is safer. Not that it's *actually* shorter, but it just has less ground to cover. The less distance it has to cover from closing pin to pilot chute, the better.



Thanks Lloyddobbler, you are right. That is what I meant. Less chance to misroute, easier to stow, less bridle to be flapping around if it comes loose, that kind of thing. PLEASE, correct me if I'm wrong. I know perfectly well that I have many wrong ideas. I'm far more interested in getting the right answer and correcting my misconceptions than being right first and feeding my ego.:)
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Maybe people don't want to buy a pilot chute that is more expensive and doesn't last as long as one made of all fabric.

I'm curious who makes the freebag you use on your main.

Now you're just being cranky and argumentative for the sake of it. Nobody I know thinks low turns are cool.



You really don't know what you are talking about.

An MA-1 spring loaded pilot chute will last far longer than a hand deploy and the cost is about the same.

Do you think because the main is deployed by a ripcord it must have a free bag? Not.

If no one thinks “low turns” are cool what do you call a high performance landing under a sub 110 sq. ft. canopy?

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yep, your reply confirms what I said. They would rather jump a more malfunction-prone deployment method, for the sake of a few more miles per hour canopy speed, possibly saving a few bucks on maintenance, and being too stupid to keep spare parts on hand.

Yeah, those are good reasons to jump more dangerous gear.



Yes John, they really fucking are good reasons!

You may not have noticed, but people skydive in order to have fun, not to be as safe as they can be. Do you jump anything but static line rounds? You're adding danger to your jump. Do you jump at all? You're adding danger to your weekend!

So, John, given that people skydive to have fun, we see that to many skydivers, higher performence canopies are fun. Higher performance canopies (and even mid/low performance canopies) suffer greatly from having sky-anchors attached to them, which is what spring loaded PCs will always be.

If you want to trundle in all weekend on a massive great F111 with a spring loaded PC hanging off it, be my guest! But if you want to criticize those who choose to fly anything a little sportier, then you'll beacting no better than a clueless whuffo.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ripcord handles located on the front of the jumper were most of the time used for spring loaded pilot chute both for reserve and main like it is still the case for a modern reserve. When Bill Booth invented the springless throw away pilot chute, it needed a pocket and pilot chute which first were located on a belly band with the handle on the right side. Then the pilot chute pocket moved to the front of the leg strap then to the rear. Those 3 locations were involving velcro going from the pocket to the rear right side of the main container to steady the bridle. Later on in mid-eighties came the BOC or in other words the pilot chute handle came on the right bottom corner of the main container and the pilot chute in a pocket stitched below the main container. The BOC advantage is that there is few to none of the bridle exposure and no velcro. The disadvantage is that the handle is no more visible which can cause a problem sometimes. A lot of manufacturers tried their own way to locate a handle to trigger the main parachute opening but the throw away system became the standard and later came the pull out system which is less common.
Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I always thought throw away PC's/BOC were safer then spring loaded PC/ripcord setup.



Not necessarily. When your life is on the line and you have only one chute remaining, your reserve, how is it deployed? A ripcord. If throw-outs were so great, we would have them for reserves too. But we don't.

Quote

I thought PC hesistation was one of the main reasons they ditched the spring loaded PC.



True, but that's only a minor problem, which usually clears within a second or two. I don't think I've ever read a single incident report in which a pilot chute hesitation was listed as the root cause of the fatality or injury.

On the other hand, incidents from jumpers not being able to see and reach their BOC pilot chutes, pilot chutes prematurely deploying from their pockets, snagged bridles, pilot chute handles detaching from the pilot chute, worn bungee cord center lines, misrouted bridles, etc., are numerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Nobody I know thinks low turns are cool.



Heck, at the drop zones I frequent, everyone goes "Ohhh" and "Ahhh" in adulation of low altitude high speed hook turn landings. It's the "in" thing to do. We even have a competition for it, called "swooping", in which low hook turns are a necessary element of the setup. Everyone appreciates the daring of a well-executed near-death hook turn, which results in a spectacular high-speed ground-skimming landing. The problem is, some of them go wrong and result in spectacularly bad landings. Then people go "Ohhh" and "Ahhh" for a different reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Yes John, they really fucking are...
...you'll beacting no better than a clueless whuffo...



I'm not going to respond to that kind of tone. I'm willing to discuss my views, but I'm not going to be a jerk about it. Yeah, I know I'm being controversial, but the idea is to get people to think about the choices they make, and not just blindly follow the crowd.

Quote

You may not have noticed, but people skydive in order to have fun, not to be as safe as they can be.



Yep, jumping itself is dangerous. And everyone should get to make their own choices between risk and reward. But I would hope they would be well-informed choices, and not just because "all the cool people are doing it".

Quote

Higher performance canopies (and even mid/low performance canopies) suffer greatly from having sky-anchors attached to them, which is what spring loaded PCs will always be.



Actually, my deployment bag turns inside-out over the base of the spring-loaded pilot chute and streamlines it - there really isn't much drag back there at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

spring-loaded pilot chute that eliminates the horseshoe malfunctions common with throw-out pilot chutes?



It's very dangerous to post such incredibly misleading statements.

Spring loaded main pilot chutes do not eliminate the possability of a horseshoe malfunction. I wouldn't say such malfunctions were "common" with throw outs either.

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.

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