Vector 3 main flap (not pin) snag potential

[wmw999 2,116]

One thing to consider in that fatality is that the guy with the skyhook also cut away a little higher than the guy with the RSL. Not to take away from the skyhook, but it's better to have more facts rather than fewer.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Reginald 0]

Thank you. More info is always better. That said I'd argue that if one finds themselves in a terrible situation low to the ground that the skyhook is the preferred equipment.

"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP

[johnny1488 1]

Terrible incidents all, but all completely avoidable.

The only way a skyhook benefiets is if you trust it when you cutaway extremely low.

And its going to let some people down.

All in all my point is, call it what it is, a glorified rsl. If thats what makes you feel safe when you skydive, awesome. Like the people that stay off jumps that they would do if they had a cypres. Its about your skill, not your backup systems.

Even the skyhook can malfunction.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3438681;search_string=Skyhook;#3438681

Johnny
--"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!"
Mike Rome

[Skydivesg 6]

Ben, nice post. Though I'm sure some people will just choose to ignore it.

As I've been reading this thread I've been biting my lip because I can sometimes get too involved. But I'm glad someone finally mentioned that having an extra 200 hundred feet under a reserve is a good thing.

And if people just use some basic physics theory when it comes to highly loaded high speed mals, they would have a better understanding of the benefits of the Skyhook.

But as you eluded some people will never change their minds regarless of how much information is available.

A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinon still.

Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

[Rstanley0312 0]

I agree..... I am a low timer but I am also a reader..... I may have read through the IRM and SIM more than a large majority of up jumpers.... the point is it seems like there is hostility towards Vector or UPT. I don't get why it is hard to aknowledge that the skyhook is a good thing and I believe the magnetic riser covers are as well. I do not think heistation from tuck tabs have caused horrible things to happen especially if they are designed well but I do feel the the magnets help equal deployment of the risers which just logically make snese. With all that said..... I LOVE MY VECTOR 3!! It fits great, it is comfortable, and I fell good that I have a skyhook. I would recommend a vector to anyone. For some of you old timers I jump at Richmond and back in the day Steve Stewart built Sweet Hogs when the wonder hogs were being made. I had a long talk with him about the skyhook being worth it as well as the rig in total.... he said and I quote "its one of the best" and "time is always worth it" some of you may not know him but I can tell you that if he says it I trust it with out question.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[rhys 0]

Quote

It's a gimmick to sell rigs. I'm not saying it doesn't work, but what problem does it solve except for sagging sales of an outdated rig?

that is a laugh, i suppose all the major safety features on your 'cooler', more advanced' rig were not developed by the relative workshop/bill booth?

You'd look pretty cool rocking capewells and a spring loaded pilot chute.

Outdated, my ass!

Come on mate, it is pretty clear you don't like vectors but don't make an idiot of yourself.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Terrible incidents all, but all completely avoidable.

Yeah completely avoidable by not skydiving anymore.

You missed the point. It is possible to find yourself extremely low no matter how good of a skydiver you are.

[FLJB 0]

True.

I don't want to get wrapped up in RSL vs Skyhook battles, but have not regular RSL's also had saves that opened on heading from spinning-on-your-back mals as well? i know mine regular RSL did. Perhaps that is more related to body position and rigger skill than the RSL itself, but it is important to note that spinning on your back with a regular RSL does not mean a death sentence.

One VERY important non-safety fact about skyhooks - you are less likely to lose a bridle and freebag upon cutaway. I have seen many skyhook cutaways where everything was together in one pile on landing. turning a potentially $300 cutaway to a $50 -$60 cutaway. Freebags and bridles are expensive and may not be on hand at the DZ, depending where you are jumping, so it may mean the difference between the end of a boogie or not. just something to consider...

[brettski74 0]

Quote

Terrible incidents all, but all completely avoidable.

I think statements like this are where the "cool" factor comments are coming from. I'm sure that the people involved in that incident would have agreed that it was completely avoidable, also, but somehow, it still happened despite both of them having the experience of over 1000 jumps. We're all human. Humans make mistakes.

Quote

The only way a skyhook benefiets is if you trust it when you cutaway extremely low.

Not true. An extra 200 feet under reserve might mean an extra 12 seconds or more of canopy flight for me to figure out my stall point and locate a suitable landing area. There was an incident on the 100-way camp back in May where a skydiver was under her reserve low over ground with many hazards. While I don't believe that there was an RSL involved in this instance, it does show that there may be situations where an extra 100-200 feet under your reserve may be beneficial in avoiding injury, such as providing more time to find a safe location to land and more altitude to fly there.

Quote

All in all my point is, call it what it is, a glorified rsl.

That's why UPT call it the Skyhook RSL. I don't think anyone at UPT is trying to pretend it's not an RSL. I'd suggest that the only people who would suggest otherwise neither own a skyhook nor know anything about them.

Quote

If thats what makes you feel safe when you skydive, awesome.

My training and experience make me feel safe. That doesn't mean I shouldn't invest in better backup systems. I think I'm a safe driver, too, but that doesn't mean that I reject the idea of anti-lock brakes and airbags as being good ideas.

Quote

Even the skyhook can malfunction.

As can a normal RSL. The skyhook reduces the risks of certain failure modes, such as a reserve bridle entanglement during a spinning malfunction. It also adds new failure modes specific to the skyhook, such as what can happen if the AAD fires at the right time during a skyhook deployment. There are modifications to the skyhook RSL system to mitigate this risk, but most out there won't have those modifications at present.

I think the skyhook adds value and reduces more risk than it creates. Does it do enough to justify the price. I think it does. So do many others. You disagree. Good for you.

[billvon 2,380]

>It is possible to find yourself extremely low no matter how good of a skydiver you are.

That is exactly right. And if the Skyhook gives you the confidence you need to cut away at 200 feet, it might just kill you.

[beowulf 1]

If it's a choice between riding in a spinning main and cutting away and hoping that your reserve opens fast enough. I think I would rather have the skyhook there to give me a better chance.

Now that doesn't mean I wouldn't do the same with out a Skyhook. The Skyhook shouldn't change any procedures. You should always mind your harddeck, but there are and have been circumstances that have put someone low and no option other then to cutaway and hope there reserve gets out quick enough. Even the best can find themselves in that situation.

[brettski74 0]

Quote

That is exactly right. And if the Skyhook gives you the confidence you need to cut away at 200 feet, it might just kill you.

Who was suggesting that, Bill?

If you find yourself spinning at 1500 feet over a heavy machinery shop, the skyhook might give you the extra altitude you need to fly over it and land safely in the open field next door, or the altitude you need to turn and avoid landing downwind in 15 knot winds on a reserve you've never flown before.

The argument that we should reject something that allows a wider margin of safety just because someone may misuse it or overestimate the level of improvement is a very weak one. Under typical use, the skyhook RSL mitigates more risk than it creates.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Even the best can find themselves in that situation.

Nah bro, didn't you know...?

...there are some in here that are far too cool and experienced for any abnormal shit to happen to them.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[tdog 0]

Quote

>It is possible to find yourself extremely low no matter how good of a skydiver you are.

That is exactly right. And if the Skyhook gives you the confidence you need to cut away at 200 feet, it might just kill you.

MY OPINION

As I tell people when they ask my opinion... The skyhook might help you when everything else is trying to kill you, especially user error.

I jumped a skyhook equipped rig for 1000 jumps and never used it (so sad, I wanted to)... I don't think I once thought, "shit, I can cutaway lower".

How many people smash their cars into trees thinking, "I have airbags, I can do that?" If a skydiver thinks the skyhook is foolproof and takes greater risks because of it, then they might just get what they deserve...

If a skydiver is going to die under a failing canopy at 200 feet, and cuts away in a panic instead of deploying their reserve into the mess - the skyhook just might help in the same way car airbags just might help....

[jerm 0]

Quote

Quote

Even the best can find themselves in that situation.

Nah bro, didn't you know...?

...there are some in here that are far too cool and experienced for any abnormal shit to happen to them.

oh will you get off it already? why are you so hung up on coolness? Nobody here is bringing cool or fashion or "i have too many jumps" into this, yet you keep pretending that they do.

i could just as easily accuse _you_ of trying to be the cool guy by insisting on having the latest whiz-bang gadget. does that new gadget make you sleep better at night, Mr cool upt fanboy? Does getting that extra word in on the forums even though you haven't said anything help your ego?

see? adds nothing to the conversation other than thinly veiled personal attacks. So please, further the conversation or don't waste the bandwidth, this isn't the bonfire.

For my part, i think the skyhook, and MARDs in general, are great bits of kit that people spend way too much energy and rig-buying-decision-making power on.

One thing that nobody here has brought up as a downside to the skyhook is how it complicates the rigging. Between the collins lanyard and the skyhook, there's a lot of added complexity that, while not rocket science, should be taken into account as points of failure and confusion for both the user and (hopefully to a lesser extent) the rigger.

All that being said, if my sport-rig manufacturer (i jump them all the time on tandems) started supporting the skyhook, would i jump one? Not sure, it's still an RSL after all, though a more compelling one, for sure.

Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

[rhys 0]

Quote

oh will you get off it already? why are you so hung up on coolness?

Quote

Mr cool upt fanboy?

Quote

adds nothing to the conversation other than thinly veiled personal attacks...

that is the pot calling the kettle black now isn't it.

on a serous note, There is a misconception with RSL's in general. They are seen as a complete hazard and that those with ample experience do not need one.

With a MARD system this is not the case anymore.

You really think the skyhook is complex? i find it really simple, the collins is really easy to check, and is just a part of the routine gear check.

There are extra things in there but they are far from complex.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Slurp56 0]

Quote

I think the skyhook adds value and reduces more risk than it creates. Does it do enough to justify the price. I think it does. So do many others. You disagree. Good for you.

Brettski,

I dont think Johnny is making that argument. I think the argument that he is making, and the argument that I tend to agree with, is that the skyhook isn't important enough to be basing your container purchase around. If the skyhook is available on the container you've decided to purchase, and it interests you, then by all means, order it.

(Brettski, the following is in addition to my post, but not aimed at you)

To liken the additional safety features of a MARD to those of safety equipment found on automobiles is also really grasping at straws. It's apples to oranges and just boils down to a warm fuzzy if you choose to rationalize it that way.

It's also rediculous to be quoting altitudes or times as absolutes in this thread. To assume that a skyhook equipped rig will give you an extra 200 feet or 12 seconds of working time is foolish.

It feels strange for someone like me, who really hasnt been around skydiving all that long, to say: "I remember when the policy used to be to get as much fabric over your head as possible." Never has a low cutaway been an option.

________________________________________
I have proof-read this post 500 times, but I guarantee you'll still manage to find a flaw.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

The skyhook will save you if you have to cutaway low.

If it works. I have had a breakaway on a SkyHook equipped rig and had the SkyHook disengage and fail to do it's designed job. Instead I had a normal RSL opening.

You may get the canopy to line stretch sooner with one, but you'll have a longer snivel.

The SkyHook is neat, but too many people see it as "magic beans".

In reality from a breakaway you're not saving more than about 100 ft on average.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[JackC 0]

Quote

You may get the canopy to line stretch sooner with one, but you'll have a longer snivel.

Why? What's different about the reserve canopy in a skyhook equiped rig?

[NovaTTT 1]

Quote

What's different about the reserve canopy in a skyhook equiped rig?

Nothing - the reserve parachute is the same and completely unchanged. The Skyhook, which is located outside the freebag, is the difference.

In simplest terms, the Skyhook connects the reserve bridle, the main riser, and the reserve pin.

In the event of a cutaway, the main acts to extract the reserve directly, acting in lieu of the reserve PC.

In the event of a total malfunction and reserve deployment, the Skyhook is designed to disengage from the reserve bridle and the reserve would deploy normally.

Edited to add: Skyhook

"Even in a world where perfection is unattainable, there's still a difference between excellence and mediocrity." Gary73

[Gato 0]

This is in direct reply to no one, and being the low-timer I am, I hope I'm not out of line.

Isn't most of this (Skyhook) debate really about personal decision altitudes? Or, just personal decisions?

By that, I mean that in the beginning, aren't most people's "hard decks" based on a number of factors, least of which is whether that person has an RSL? Now that people have seen the footage of the 2 BASE jumpers cutting away, it might lead some people to change their personal hard decks. Maybe your decision altitude was 1800, but now you can make it 1000, or 800, or wherever you feel confident that little piece of metal will do its job. (I was told both of those reserves were packed slider-down, by the way!)

When I was going through the rigger's course this year I had a jumper (500+ jumps) who had a V3 on order ask me if I would cut away at 500 feet under a spinning main if I had a Skyhook. All I could do was look at him funny and ask, "Why am I under a spinning main at 500 feet?" (He does fly a sub-150 Stiletto.)

He didn't really have an answer, but personally, I think the Skyhook might give some people a false sense of security. Maybe.

I wouldn't mind having one, though. Nothing wrong with having an extra bit of time on my side.

(And just to clarify, I think the V3 is a damn fine rig, Skyhook or no.)

T.I.N.S.

[billbooth 10]

Most people seem to be missing the main reason why I developed the Skyhook RSL in the first place. (Hint: It is NOT the fact that it is faster than a "normal" RSL.

Let me digress for a moment. My first skydiving invention was the hand deployed main pilot chute. Yes, it was faster than than a spring loaded pilot chute, but that is just one of its advantages. Its main benefit is the elimination of pilot chute hesitations which cause all sorts of problems beyond just slower main openings. But that still left the reserve pilot chute subject to hesitations. What's worse, because everybody uses hand deployed main pilot chutes nowadays, almost no one remembers how to clear a hesitation.

The Skyhook RSL is my attempt at removing reserve pilot chute hesitations from the picture, and because 95 out of a 100 reserve uses follow a breakaway (not a total) it is pretty damn effective.

The Skyhook's second main advantage is that it deploys the reserve, not into the relative wind, but exactly where the main just was, or directly in-line with the vertical axis of the body. This means that as your reserve comes out of the bag, you are in "perfect" body position, and all line groups are all exactly the same length. This means cleaner reserve openings with fewer line twists. If you deploy while you are spinning, with an old fashioned RSL, the pilot chute deploys your reserve into the relative wind, which will normally be at some angle to your body's vertical axis. This means uneven line lengths at line stretch, and a greater chance that the reserve bag or lines will come in contact with your body. This can cause a reserve malfunction or hard opening at any altitude.

If you jump a small elliptical without an RSL, and your plan it to "get stable" after your breakaway before you pull your reserve, you'd better pull high in the first place. It can often take 600-800 feet to breakaway, figure out which way is up, and then "get stable", locate and pull your reserve handle, from a bad spinning main malfunction. On our Skyhook video, you can watch a experienced jumper breakaway from a spinner and take NINE (9) seconds to locate and pull his reserve.

Anyway, these are just a few reasons why a Skyhook is a good idea. Jumping without one is exactly like putting out a first jump static line student on a non-pilot chute assisted, internal spring loaded pilot chute rig, instead of using a direct bag static line system. No one would do this nowadays because a direct bag gives much more reliable openings, with very little chance of the student entangling with the deploying main. The Skyhook does the same thing for the reserve. And remember, when you have your first spinning malfunction, YOU are exactly like a first jump student.

[bill6870 3]

Thank you for your post Bill but what is your take on the main flap being a potential snag point?

Blue Skies

[rhys 0]

Quote

If you jump a small elliptical without an RSL, and your plan it to "get stable" after your breakaway before you pull your reserve, you'd better pull high in the first place. It can often take 600-800 feet to breakaway, figure out which way is up, and then "get stable", locate and pull your reserve handle, from a bad spinning main malfunction. On our Skyhook video,

I had tention knots today on my JVX86 loaded at 2.2, it was rotating hard after trying both risers and toggles it was still diving and spinning fast, I cutaway and within 1 and 2 seconds I had a fully inflated reserve, I was fliming a tandem (will post video later) and was open reasonably high, I was inflated under my reserve by 2000' (3/4 linetwist) and had ample time to practice flare my raven-m 109 which helped me have a standup landing.

Thanks for your work Bill, it paid off for me today.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[brettski74 0]

Quote

I dont think Johnny is making that argument. I think the argument that he is making, and the argument that I tend to agree with, is that the skyhook isn't important enough to be basing your container purchase around. If the skyhook is available on the container you've decided to purchase, and it interests you, then by all means, order it.

You need to read the post in the context of the entire thread. He's specifically said more than once that he considers the skyhook to be a bad idea, period.

Quote

To liken the additional safety features of a MARD to those of safety equipment found on automobiles is also really grasping at straws.

So is suggesting that better safety features can only lead to people overestimating their utility and taking risks that ultimately might lead to their death. It could happen, but isn't that a failure in training rather than a shortcoming of the equipment? Hand deploy pilot chutes and 3-ring release systems and depend on additional pressure not to screw up or should we use the better equipment and teach our students and novices a more appropriate attitude to safety?

Quote

It's also rediculous to be quoting altitudes or times as absolutes in this thread. To assume that a skyhook equipped rig will give you an extra 200 feet or 12 seconds of working time is foolish.

It feels strange for someone like me, who really hasnt been around skydiving all that long, to say: "I remember when the policy used to be to get as much fabric over your head as possible." Never has a low cutaway been an option.

I wasn't advocating a low cutaway. I agree with you. Maybe this was the part that didn't apply to me, because the rest seemed pretty specific...

A low cutaway is a bad idea. Whether you have a skyhook or not, your emergency procedures and decision altitude really shouldn't change. I was counterpointing the comment that a skyhook is only useful for doing low cutaways. Quite the contrary. More altitude provides more time under canopy. A higher reserve opening at any altitude means more time to figure out how it flies and where to land it. If I'm going to have any chance of understanding how useful it can be and under what circumstances, then I'm going to have to quantify the effects of the device in some way. How much higher will I be open? How much extra time will that give me? Under what circumstances will that help me and how?

It's ridiculous to read numbers on here as absolute or accurate in any way. Most numbers stated on here are approximate at best, and in the hypothetical context of this discussion, estimates or examples, only. As always, your mileage may vary. Perhaps this helps...

Quote

[If the skyhook gives me] An extra 200 feet under reserve [and my descent rate is 1000 feet per minute given the wing loading, canopy design, density altitude and other conditions, it] might mean an extra 12 seconds or more of canopy flight [depending on how I fly the canopy] for me to figure out my stall point and locate a suitable landing area.