Zahry 0
Recommended Posts
Zahry 0
>>> moved from prev forum <<<<
... unfortunately not those who sell anything for a dollar ...
QuoteQuoteWow, That is a lot.
Kinda scary that you have all these issues, but have 1000+ Reserve pack jobs and 4000+ jumps on the system. Why do you continue to pack/ jump the system if it is such a "death trap"?
Funny you assuming I had all those issues. Learning is an interesting process and I found out good education and observation is sufficient substitute for my own cockups. I know the symptoms, I know the causes so why do you think I'll be waiting for the consequences? Long story short - why should I repeate mistakes someone has done before me in past?
And why I pack it and maintaining such a death trap? Because I have a job to do and responsibility to the TMs. I want to give them the best chance they'll go home on the end of the day and I don't want to see anyone going home in a coffin. I'm well aware of the dangers of DHT and I have the knowledge I've got from riggers I've previously worked with - and they had to learn all of that the hard way (thanks Dave and Dave). That, in my opinion, is giving me the best chance to cheat the odds in this game of russian roulette.
Long story short - if i'll quit someone else will come and it might be as well new unexperienced rigger who doesn't have a clue about the maintenance demads of DHT. And than you have a dead bodies walking to work every day. They just don't know yet.
Unless SE will be forced to redesign and recertify their DHT to comply with safety standarts (hopefuly just because of good arguments not because of too many fatal accidents) there is nothing much going to happen except sometimes we will have to clean up the mess.
The DZ owners don't want to or can afford to replace the gear because of the huge cost, SE don't want to admit there is anything wrong because redesign the system or recalling all the systems back to the factory would kill their company for good - plus there will arise the legal responsibility as well. And in middle of that you have a lot of confused people and riggers who have to deal with the pressure from both sides and take the punishment for someones greed, lack of good judgement and no sense of responsibility -
I reckon now is the time to push back.Quote*** BUT you can get away with it by carefully inspecting the rig before each jump and GOOD MAINTENANCE
Good idea, I think the tandem manufatures should adopt this.
everyone who does anything with DHT has to remember that - but good maintenance doesn't fix the reserve system problem.Quote***How can you justify such a HUGE design flaw on reserve system?
While the Dual Hawk may not be the most modern system, It passed the same testing process as every other system.
You can sit and pick out flaws/ scenario's in every system out there.
THIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE. Exactly as you wrote - the DHT is NOT a modern design. It is one of the OLDEST systems (first i believe) on the market and it has been certified way in PAST when piggybacks and square canopies were still novelty and no one had a clue what can possibly go wrong. It is widely IGNORED FACT!
As far as I know DHT has NEVER been tested to comply with present safety standarts. I couldn't find any records of retesting the whole thing again in recent years. The so called reseve system is a hard evidence it hasn't been done - it is just another main system with disconnected dbag with main canopy in it. Present standart is - the freebag should prevent horseshoe malfunction and baglock on reserve - and DEFINITELY NOT PROMOTE IT. The DHT is NOT up to present minimum safety standart. (and I'm not going into details about opening characteristics of MR425 which never been designed as a reserve in first place! And that's the whole core of the snowballing problems)
If you want to compare DHT to other modern tandems I'm strongly engouraging you to DO SO. Have a look at each element of each system, how it works, why it works like that and compare it to others and ask yourself - what can passibly go wrong with those things. Nothing is just good or bad but as we learn more and more you can make yourself a better picture whats right and what's wrong.
My conclusion is - The DHT is old rusty chain which constantly tries to break brak with no propper backup in place.Quote***Skydiving is natural segregation of heroes and idiots ;-)
...and those who will pack anything for a dollar...
... unfortunately not those who sell anything for a dollar ...
feuergnom 22
IMHO: with this whole arguement you try to divert the discussion from the main cause of the incident which triggered the whole debate: Non-existing maintenance and care
maybe - I am not a rigger, just a strong rated TI, so my opinion is surely biased - DHT's are high maintainance. but maintaining DHT's and keeping them safe, seems pretty easy to me. ever tried to change a kill-line on a vector? this is high maintainance in my eyes. take this as a sidenote, because i have no interest in bashing any manufacturer for how they design their gear like you do
if you really don't like strongs and working with them convince your dzo to buy other gear, this is a free world. until then it is your job as the dz's rigger to keep any tandem equipment in a working and safe condition and stick to manufacturer recommendations and safety bulletins by the book - which the dz where the incident happend failed to do
maybe - I am not a rigger, just a strong rated TI, so my opinion is surely biased - DHT's are high maintainance. but maintaining DHT's and keeping them safe, seems pretty easy to me. ever tried to change a kill-line on a vector? this is high maintainance in my eyes. take this as a sidenote, because i have no interest in bashing any manufacturer for how they design their gear like you do
if you really don't like strongs and working with them convince your dzo to buy other gear, this is a free world. until then it is your job as the dz's rigger to keep any tandem equipment in a working and safe condition and stick to manufacturer recommendations and safety bulletins by the book - which the dz where the incident happend failed to do
The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle
dudeist skydiver # 666
dudeist skydiver # 666
pchapman 261
Interesting perspective in the original post.
Why would anyone buy Strong tandems any more, with the Sigma out there? I'd guess UPT charges a big premium for their system, and of course DZ's stick with what they already have unless they completely replace all their tandem gear and retrain instructors.
I hadn't previously heard much critique or discussion of the Strong reserve system.
What exactly is the use of Kevlar in the reserve? Not just Kevlar lines but also some reinforcing in the canopy?
I try to keep an open mind on the design. But statistics be damned, I can't help be a little suspicious as I had two friends blow up Strong tandem reserves, with not very reassuring explanations from the company. However, I only heard what others said the company said, and haven't seen any actual report.
In one case, the company suggested the rigger might not have packed the reserve properly, snugging up those chokers correctly, something like that. It is always possible but the rigger was experienced and detail oriented and we had zero reason to suspect she did something wrong.
That accident came after an inadvertent main container opening with the drogue out, leaving the bag spinning around. The speed would have been drogue terminal or maybe more if the drogue were choked off. The video shows that the instructor properly released the drogue & jettisoned the main. A hole blew into the reserve on opening; they only had a few cells open; but got a couple more cells shortly before crashing in a field and incredibly didn't break anything.
In the second case, the instructor had a hard pull on the drogue, couldn't get it out, ended up at tandem terminal, blew up the reserve, with instructor and student receiving serious injuries. The company apparently said the instructor should have pulled the reserve earlier, before ending up at tandem terminal. I can see the point about not screwing around too long but it doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling about their reserves when the advice is basically not to use them at high speed.
So I'm curious whether there have been many other issues or I just hung out with unlucky people!
Why would anyone buy Strong tandems any more, with the Sigma out there? I'd guess UPT charges a big premium for their system, and of course DZ's stick with what they already have unless they completely replace all their tandem gear and retrain instructors.
I hadn't previously heard much critique or discussion of the Strong reserve system.
What exactly is the use of Kevlar in the reserve? Not just Kevlar lines but also some reinforcing in the canopy?
I try to keep an open mind on the design. But statistics be damned, I can't help be a little suspicious as I had two friends blow up Strong tandem reserves, with not very reassuring explanations from the company. However, I only heard what others said the company said, and haven't seen any actual report.
In one case, the company suggested the rigger might not have packed the reserve properly, snugging up those chokers correctly, something like that. It is always possible but the rigger was experienced and detail oriented and we had zero reason to suspect she did something wrong.
That accident came after an inadvertent main container opening with the drogue out, leaving the bag spinning around. The speed would have been drogue terminal or maybe more if the drogue were choked off. The video shows that the instructor properly released the drogue & jettisoned the main. A hole blew into the reserve on opening; they only had a few cells open; but got a couple more cells shortly before crashing in a field and incredibly didn't break anything.
In the second case, the instructor had a hard pull on the drogue, couldn't get it out, ended up at tandem terminal, blew up the reserve, with instructor and student receiving serious injuries. The company apparently said the instructor should have pulled the reserve earlier, before ending up at tandem terminal. I can see the point about not screwing around too long but it doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling about their reserves when the advice is basically not to use them at high speed.
So I'm curious whether there have been many other issues or I just hung out with unlucky people!
ojibwe 0
My rigger will only pack Sigmas, cites obvious design safety features. What premium justifies human lives? If you can possibly manage the time, please redesign.
MB 3864 Urantia Book and RUSH fan
RiggerLee 61
I've been packing DHT from strong sence my second jump in 1991. I'd have to go back an count how many reserve packjobs. Absolutely no clue how many hours I've spnt sewing on them. Gripeing about strong tandoms has been a standard pass time in the loft for years.
i can sit here and pick apart any design on the market. I keep saying that one day I'll buld a new tandom rig... but what ever. Are strongs my faverat? No. Do they have flaws? A pile of them. are a lot of your bitches valled? Yes. But haveing said all of that I got to tell you your being a little harsh. There are flaws in every system out there. Strong has a working system. It does work. Lot's and lots of jumps on them out here. They've had fatalities, every body has. It has weeknesses, the reserve canopy is a perfect example, but you cant say it's a death trap not when it's been around as long as it has with as many jumps as it has on it.
Now if you want to set down and brain storm ideas mods and upgrades for improving the strong tandom I think that would be a great thread. But with your wild ravings your comeing off as a borderline lunitic tool.
Lee
i can sit here and pick apart any design on the market. I keep saying that one day I'll buld a new tandom rig... but what ever. Are strongs my faverat? No. Do they have flaws? A pile of them. are a lot of your bitches valled? Yes. But haveing said all of that I got to tell you your being a little harsh. There are flaws in every system out there. Strong has a working system. It does work. Lot's and lots of jumps on them out here. They've had fatalities, every body has. It has weeknesses, the reserve canopy is a perfect example, but you cant say it's a death trap not when it's been around as long as it has with as many jumps as it has on it.
Now if you want to set down and brain storm ideas mods and upgrades for improving the strong tandom I think that would be a great thread. But with your wild ravings your comeing off as a borderline lunitic tool.
Lee
riggerrob 558
"Why Strong DHT doesn't have a lot safer reserve system yet?
... because on deployment 1/2 of the reserve container was ripped away when the main canopy lines didn't deploy correctly.
...
- above mentioned ripped off reserve corners ... look into reserve compartment and focus your attention on the construction of the reserve corners. ... the corners are held just by a few fairly weak stitches. ..."
........................................................................
This problem is not unique to Strong Dual Hawk containers.
I have had to re-sew reserve containers back onto Flexon, Javelin, Sidewinder, Talon, Vector 1, Vector 2, etc. containers.
The problem starts with containers originally designed to be deployed on belly being deployed at a wider variety of angles.
The problem is exacerbated by packers wrapping main risers around the lower corners of reserve containers.
I was able to convince the Sidewinder factory to follow EOS, Atom, Wings, etc. example of sewing trianglar "line guides" to lower corners of reserve containers.
The latest Vector 3 and Mirage use alternative methods to prevent peeling reserve containers off.
That being said, all the Strong Tandems here have a little extra zig-zag stitching in the lower corners of the reserve containers.
... because on deployment 1/2 of the reserve container was ripped away when the main canopy lines didn't deploy correctly.
...
- above mentioned ripped off reserve corners ... look into reserve compartment and focus your attention on the construction of the reserve corners. ... the corners are held just by a few fairly weak stitches. ..."
........................................................................
This problem is not unique to Strong Dual Hawk containers.
I have had to re-sew reserve containers back onto Flexon, Javelin, Sidewinder, Talon, Vector 1, Vector 2, etc. containers.
The problem starts with containers originally designed to be deployed on belly being deployed at a wider variety of angles.
The problem is exacerbated by packers wrapping main risers around the lower corners of reserve containers.
I was able to convince the Sidewinder factory to follow EOS, Atom, Wings, etc. example of sewing trianglar "line guides" to lower corners of reserve containers.
The latest Vector 3 and Mirage use alternative methods to prevent peeling reserve containers off.
That being said, all the Strong Tandems here have a little extra zig-zag stitching in the lower corners of the reserve containers.
riggerrob 558
" ... drogue release system is a chapter for itself ...
.........................................................................
Most of the other tandem manufacturers also use variations on 3-Ring release, so you would have to start bashing Atom, Next, Racer, Vector 1, Vector 2, etc.
.........................................................................
Most of the other tandem manufacturers also use variations on 3-Ring release, so you would have to start bashing Atom, Next, Racer, Vector 1, Vector 2, etc.
riggerrob 558
" ... Flexipins have to be checked frequently because of the damage caused by kinks in the housings and the sharp edges of unproperly finished housings ... "
..........................................................................
This problem is not unique to Strong.
Most of the tandem manufacturers (Jump Shack, Parachutes de France, Strong, United Parachute Technologies, etc.) have issued Service Bulletins reminding us to inspect flex pins on a regular basis.
Flex pins are "high wear items."
If you are not willing to inspect - and replace - high wear items, you should get out of the student business!
..........................................................................
This problem is not unique to Strong.
Most of the tandem manufacturers (Jump Shack, Parachutes de France, Strong, United Parachute Technologies, etc.) have issued Service Bulletins reminding us to inspect flex pins on a regular basis.
Flex pins are "high wear items."
If you are not willing to inspect - and replace - high wear items, you should get out of the student business!
riggerrob 558
" ... MR425 hasn't been intentionaly designed as a reserve (as far as I know it used to be a main and it was opening pretty hard and from what I've heard not really reliably) and the kevlar lines used (who knows why?) are transfering full force of the opening shock directly into harness and back to canopy - not the best feature if you need to slow down quickly on short distance (to make the opening bearable the MR425 has to be flat packed and the nose is rolled/folded ..."
...........................................................................
Ah!
The arrogance of youth!
Perhaps you are not old enough to have jumped Pioneer Hi-Lifter 370. Performance Designs 360 and Strong 425 as mains.
I jumped all of those canopies back when they were fashionable as tandem mains.
I made 1,500 jumps on F-111 tandem mains before SET-400 was introduced.
Trust me, Strong 425 was the "least of the evils."
Maybe I should relate a phone call from a nearby DZO. "Good news! You got another save - on a Vector Tandem reserve - last week. Bad news! The opening sucked! It was stalling and rocking all over the sky!"
Granted, Strong 425 main canopies only lasted about 600 jumps, but solo main canopies - made of the same materials (F-111 fabric with Dacron lines) - only lasted 600, maybe 800 jumps before retirement. By 800 jumps, most F-111 canopies flare like bag-locks!
ALL F-111 canopies open harder than modern ZP mains.
What is your point?
As for Kevlar lines and reinforcing tapes on Strong reserves ... they were the best materials, with the highest strength to weight ratio available, when that system was certified back in the early 1980s. Granted, kevlar suspension lines only survive a few dozen hard openings - before they start snapping, but reserves are limited to twenty deployments (before retirement), so what is your fuss????
Modern zero-stretch lines like Spectra, Vectran and HMA transmit opening shock to the harness at about the same rate as Kevlar.
What is your point?
Speaking of retiring Strong 425 reserves. Back in the 1990s, after we had 20 jumps on Strong reserves, we used to reline them with Dacron and put another 400 jumps on the, before the fabric wore out.
As for criticising Strong's reserve packing methods ... that packing method was fashionable for mains back when the system was certified. I even used to pack my Strato-Cloud that way.
As for suggesting that Strong Enterprises design and certify a more modern reserve canopy ... do you have nay idea how expensive test drops are?
Hint: solo test drops start at $800 per jump!
A few years back, Strong re-tested their tandem gear at 600 pounds.
That being said, I believe that hanging more than 400 pounds of meat under a tandem is just asking for shoulder and spine and leg problems.
...........................................................................
Ah!
The arrogance of youth!
Perhaps you are not old enough to have jumped Pioneer Hi-Lifter 370. Performance Designs 360 and Strong 425 as mains.
I jumped all of those canopies back when they were fashionable as tandem mains.
I made 1,500 jumps on F-111 tandem mains before SET-400 was introduced.
Trust me, Strong 425 was the "least of the evils."
Maybe I should relate a phone call from a nearby DZO. "Good news! You got another save - on a Vector Tandem reserve - last week. Bad news! The opening sucked! It was stalling and rocking all over the sky!"
Granted, Strong 425 main canopies only lasted about 600 jumps, but solo main canopies - made of the same materials (F-111 fabric with Dacron lines) - only lasted 600, maybe 800 jumps before retirement. By 800 jumps, most F-111 canopies flare like bag-locks!
ALL F-111 canopies open harder than modern ZP mains.
What is your point?
As for Kevlar lines and reinforcing tapes on Strong reserves ... they were the best materials, with the highest strength to weight ratio available, when that system was certified back in the early 1980s. Granted, kevlar suspension lines only survive a few dozen hard openings - before they start snapping, but reserves are limited to twenty deployments (before retirement), so what is your fuss????
Modern zero-stretch lines like Spectra, Vectran and HMA transmit opening shock to the harness at about the same rate as Kevlar.
What is your point?
Speaking of retiring Strong 425 reserves. Back in the 1990s, after we had 20 jumps on Strong reserves, we used to reline them with Dacron and put another 400 jumps on the, before the fabric wore out.
As for criticising Strong's reserve packing methods ... that packing method was fashionable for mains back when the system was certified. I even used to pack my Strato-Cloud that way.
As for suggesting that Strong Enterprises design and certify a more modern reserve canopy ... do you have nay idea how expensive test drops are?
Hint: solo test drops start at $800 per jump!
A few years back, Strong re-tested their tandem gear at 600 pounds.
That being said, I believe that hanging more than 400 pounds of meat under a tandem is just asking for shoulder and spine and leg problems.
RiggerLee 61
What year was the reserve originaly "certified". I use the term losely as I recall it was really waver/experamintal program. How dose the testing they did then compare to what we've now established as the standard? Don't have the specs in front of me and don't know what they used before seing as they were makeing it up as they went. They them selves admit that it will blow to hell at tandom terminal. Shurely the TSO c23d is higher then that.
What year did they switch to nilon tapes every where on the maine? As it has a closer streach to the fabric under load, any thing would be better then kevlar, I'd bet it has a higher survivability yet they never upgraded the reserve.
and as I recall TSO c23d does allow the use of free fall bullets or dumbies to test canopies. Just roll it out the back of the plane and let it fall till it's going as fast as you like. No more supper high speed passes with specal aircraft. It's nolonger beyond the doable.
Lee
What year did they switch to nilon tapes every where on the maine? As it has a closer streach to the fabric under load, any thing would be better then kevlar, I'd bet it has a higher survivability yet they never upgraded the reserve.
and as I recall TSO c23d does allow the use of free fall bullets or dumbies to test canopies. Just roll it out the back of the plane and let it fall till it's going as fast as you like. No more supper high speed passes with specal aircraft. It's nolonger beyond the doable.
Lee
Zahry 0
Quote" ... MR425 hasn't been intentionaly designed as a reserve (as far as I know it used to be a main and it was opening pretty hard and from what I've heard not really reliably) and the kevlar lines used (who knows why?) are transfering full force of the opening shock directly into harness and back to canopy - not the best feature if you need to slow down quickly on short distance (to make the opening bearable the MR425 has to be flat packed and the nose is rolled/folded ..."
...........................................................................
Ah!
The arrogance of youth!
Perhaps you are not old enough to have jumped Pioneer Hi-Lifter 370. Performance Designs 360 and Strong 425 as mains.
I've done some jumps on PD 360 and VS 386 and some things just did their job but their time is way over. I think you agree it is easy and inexpensive to replace main canopy but replacing whole system is incredibly expensive. Question is - How much is too much?
QuoteI jumped all of those canopies back when they were fashionable as tandem mains.
I made 1,500 jumps on F-111 tandem mains before SET-400 was introduced.
Trust me, Strong 425 was the "least of the evils."
It doesn't change the fact main canopy designed as a main canopy is a main canopy - you are a rigger and a very good one. You know reserves are designed different than mains because there are required different opening characteristics and the same is valid for deployment system on reserves.
Now is year 2009 not 1980. I've heard the same arguments before "If you are complaining jump LoPos, ParaCommanders, Thunderbows" - and I did. It made me appreciate those people who stepped up and stepped over those dead legends and moved us forward. And I bet once you were helping to push the safety level up as well ...
QuoteMaybe I should relate a phone call from a nearby DZO. "Good news! You got another save - on a Vector Tandem reserve - last week. Bad news! The opening sucked! It was stalling and rocking all over the sky!"
I agree. Breaks set so deep it stalls after opening. It is a cheat how to beat the tests on tandem terminal. There are already more modern and better reserves on the market. But you can't say MR425 is not bad because VS360 is not good - it doesn't make sense
QuoteGranted, Strong 425 main canopies only lasted about 600 jumps, but solo main canopies - made of the same materials (F-111 fabric with Dacron lines) - only lasted 600, maybe 800 jumps before retirement. By 800 jumps, most F-111 canopies flare like bag-locks!
ALL F-111 canopies open harder than modern ZP mains.
What is your point?
my point is in these days we know more about materials, openings, construction and safety. What's the point to throw it out of the window and ignore it?
QuoteAs for Kevlar lines and reinforcing tapes on Strong reserves ... they were the best materials, with the highest strength to weight ratio available, when that system was certified back in the early 1980s. Granted, kevlar suspension lines only survive a few dozen hard openings - before they start snapping, but reserves are limited to twenty deployments (before retirement), so what is your fuss????
As I wrote before, now is year 2009 not 1980. There are far better materials and technologies now. Kevlar lines worn by constant rubbing on sharp edges of plastic chokers can snap any time without any warning - and unless you know exactly what you are looking for afterwards you'll never find it was exactly on the same place where the plastic choker was sitting before.
QuoteModern zero-stretch lines like Spectra, Vectran and HMA transmit opening shock to the harness at about the same rate as Kevlar.
What is your point?
Come on, are you pulling my leg? Try the other one - it has a bell on it :-) - Spectra doesn't stretch? Since when and how that happened? As far as I know spectra lines still shrink and stretch in dependence on heat and weight applied ...
Vectran and HMA - true. It doesn't stretch but have you seen it on reserves??? Those lines are used because designers want to keep the same trim over period of hundreds of jumps to keep the same performance on canopy with 10 jumps as well as 500. Zero stretch lines are for competition canopies to reduce drag and to help keep more constant performance and more constant recovery arch On top of it - Most people don't have a clue how extremely difficult is to design canopy to open reasonably with those lines and how complex is designing the opening.
Tell me, was MR425 thoroughly tested and is it well designed for the purpose it serves?
Was the MR425 intended to be used for hundreds of jumps as a swooping canopy/reserve as well?
QuoteSpeaking of retiring Strong 425 reserves. Back in the 1990s, after we had 20 jumps on Strong reserves, we used to reline them with Dacron and put another 400 jumps on the, before the fabric wore out.
As for criticising Strong's reserve packing methods ... that packing method was fashionable for mains back when the system was certified. I even used to pack my Strato-Cloud that way.
Exactly - it is old way and time has moved on. Don't tell me now you'll let your dentist to do your teeth the same way they did it in 1890 or 1960? Back in the day you haven't had an option and no one knew better - now it is a different story
QuoteAs for suggesting that Strong Enterprises design and certify a more modern reserve canopy ... do you have nay idea how expensive test drops are?
Hint: solo test drops start at $800 per jump!
A few years back, Strong re-tested their tandem gear at 600 pounds.
So what. It costs $800 per jump. Everyone has to pay it - not just SE. If they can afford to make it safe that's bad - it's time to take it of the market than.
Are you saying it is not good to question the safety of DHT because testing it and making it safe would cost money???
On the contrary I'm well aware how expensive and how difficult (and that will be the main issue here) is to pass tests for tandem reserve. Especially if the reserve blows up on one of the 3 required jumps on tandem terminal with full weight on. Or if you find it didn't blew up but it would kill both the passenger and TM as well. Or on the end you find the canopy and people survived but because of those changes the canopy doesn't opens to slow on low speeds or stalls after opening - Does it sound familiar?
QuoteThat being said, I believe that hanging more than 400 pounds of meat under a tandem is just asking for shoulder and spine and leg problems.
I fully agree unfortunately average passenger is now more and more heavy
Zahry 0
Quote" ... Flexipins have to be checked frequently because of the damage caused by kinks in the housings and the sharp edges of unproperly finished housings ... "
..........................................................................
This problem is not unique to Strong.
Most of the tandem manufacturers (Jump Shack, Parachutes de France, Strong, United Parachute Technologies, etc.) have issued Service Bulletins reminding us to inspect flex pins on a regular basis.
Flex pins are "high wear items."
If you are not willing to inspect - and replace - high wear items, you should get out of the student business!
Yes - other systems has a few issues as well. BUT strong DHT has almost the same number of problems as other systems all together that's not just flexipins. Of course you can take a DHT and start pointing on other systems and say "See - this rig has tis problem common with DHT, THAT rig has THAT problem common with DHT". Try to do it the other way. It looks like the DHT has enough problems for all the different systems available on the market.
Lets compare two bigest players in a game in USA. UPT and SE -
UPT started with VECTOR 1 and no drogue and say PD 360. They went through Vector II, Vector III and different main designs (surelly it wasn't for free) and ... NOW THEY HAVE A SIGMA!!! It might have still a few flaws but they proved the will to learn, change and improve. And it is to our mutual benefit.
Lets have a look at SE. Third of century ago they started the whole thing with DHT and MR425 ... and now ... we STILL have the same DHT and MR 425 with a few not really functional mods. And it looks like ALMOST EACH minor mod had to be paid for by human lives.
WHAT DOES IT TELLS YOU?
Zahry 0
QuoteIMHO: with this whole arguement you try to divert the discussion from the main cause of the incident which triggered the whole debate: Non-existing maintenance and care
QuoteNo - it is not. The whole discussion is here to show there is lot more to it than just poor maintenance and care and expose the behavior which seems to me is totaly suspiciousl
maybe - I am not a rigger, just a strong rated TI, so my opinion is surely biased - DHT's are high maintainance. but maintaining DHT's and keeping them safe, seems pretty easy to me. ever tried to change a kill-line on a vector?Quote:-) yes, I've tried. It is very easy job
this is high maintainance in my eyes. take this as a sidenote, because i have no interest in bashing any manufacturer for how they design their gear like you doQuote
I'm not trying to bash SE down, I'm merely trying to make the old dinosaur to move!!!
if you really don't like strongs and working with them convince your dzo to buy other gear, this is a free world.QuoteI'm trying - and we've got first sigma here and I've got for us one different tandem system for free. And I tell you its not an easy job to change something. Money is the name of the game and lot of pople preffer to close their eyes, cover their ears and shut their mouth instead of doing something
until then it is your job as the dz's rigger to keep any tandem equipment in a working and safe condition and stick to manufacturer recommendations and safety bulletins by the book - which the dz where the incident happend failed to doQuoteYes, it is a good advice BUT Is it enough?
Zahry 0
Quote
Now if you want to set down and brain storm ideas mods and upgrades for improving the strong tandom I think that would be a great thread. But with your wild ravings your comeing off as a borderline lunitic tool.
Lee
Hi Lee, first step in improving things is identifing if there is a problem, what kind of problem it is and if there is a way how to correct it - That's why I've started the thread.
I'm pulling skelletons out of someones closet right now but it wasn't me who put them in there...
peek 20
Quote... unfortunately average passenger is now more and more heavy
Tomas, I'm sorry, I need to comment on the logic of this one. If you follow the manufacturers weight limitations, it doesn't matter how fat we are all getting. If the student is heavier the instructor must be lighter, etc. The weight limitations do not guarantee safety, but they help.
As far as the original thread about the fatalities in the Czech Republic, well, haven't we found that the owners/users of that Dual Hawk did many, many things wrong?
A properly maintained and properly used tandem system from any manufacturer is acceptably safe.
Zahry 0
QuoteQuote... unfortunately average passenger is now more and more heavy
Tomas, I'm sorry, I need to comment on the logic of this one. If you follow the manufacturers weight limitations, it doesn't matter how fat we are all getting. If the student is heavier the instructor must be lighter, etc. The weight limitations do not guarantee safety, but they help.Quoteyes
As far as the original thread about the fatalities in the Czech Republic, well, haven't we found that the owners/users of that Dual Hawk did many, many things wrong?
A properly maintained and properly used tandem system from any manufacturer is acceptably safe.
Hi Garry, I agree, if you put your hart and soul in it - anything can be maintained and serviced. I'm sorry for beeing harsh but you could use even condom 1000 times if you'll maintain it properly and use it carefuly - but would you do that?
Maintenance was definitely one of the mayor factors of the accident - but not the only one. And don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to apologise them for overlooking the one broken part. That's one link in a chain. Size of the canopy? It looks like their disgusting marketing trick - "buy set400 and you are invincible". It would make me laugh if is wasn't so outrageous - volume is almost the same. Do we have to measure now exact volume of each packjob and readjust closing loop lengths before each jump? It sounds ridiculous
Scary thing is - any of those dozens and dozens weak points and flaws which can go wrong with strong DHT - EACH OF THOSE can start the chain of events resulting in someone DEAD. It's like loaded gun with hundreds of little hidden triggers pointing at people. You can maintain those triggers - I'm not saying it is impossible - I'm doing it every day but once you'll forget one - the gun will fire straight into your face. I have a feeling you know it, right?
long story short: Strongs report is NOT INDEPENDENT and they are hiding, ignoring and twisting impontant facts.
acmik 0
Quote
As far as the original thread about the fatalities in the Czech Republic, well, haven't we found that the owners/users of that Dual Hawk did many, many things wrong?
Well, actually we have not... there is still just SE press release, not final report from CZ legal authority. It's IMHO just one side of the coin so far...
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
feuergnom 22
QuoteQuote
As far as the original thread about the fatalities in the Czech Republic, well, haven't we found that the owners/users of that Dual Hawk did many, many things wrong?
Well, actually we have not... there is still just SE press release, not final report from CZ legal authority. It's IMHO just one side of the coin so far...![[:/]](//www.dropzone.com/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png "[:/]")
so what will the czech autorities say? that the TI/E did everything right? will the czech authorities stand up and defend that they overruled the manufacturer recommendations, service bulletins and the guidelines under which the rating is to be issued? GIVE ME A BRAKE!
Do you think the outcome would be any different if there had been the same amount of neglect with any other manufacturers gear? and the owner would have cared to come personally to your corner of the world to lead the investigation himself? no? then stop kidding everybody and stop opening diverting battlegrounds.
The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle
dudeist skydiver # 666
dudeist skydiver # 666
acmik 0
Quote
so what will the czech autorities say? that the TI/E did everything right? will the czech authorities stand up and defend that they overruled the manufacturer recommendations, service bulletins and the guidelines under which the rating is to be issued? GIVE ME A BRAKE!
I dont know... but I see you have some better information then all of us - would you be so kind and share them? Or is it just a bad feeling?
Quote
Do you think the outcome would be any different if there had been the same amount of neglect with any other manufacturers gear? and the owner would have cared to come personally to your corner of the world to lead the investigation himself? no? then stop kidding everybody and stop opening diverting battlegrounds.
Yes, I do think it will be different in some aspects. But even if not, it's quite important for many of us to have independent report to judge the accident.
Do you expect manufacture do blame it's own product? What about giving a brake?
I'm going to wait for final report regardless SE press release. Some other will do the same, some are already decided and don't need it. That's life.
feuergnom 22
QuoteDo you expect manufacture do blame it's own product?
IF the product had been used following all recommendations and guidelines two people still would be living. period. or do you argue the findings on the system owned (or rented/leased/whatever) by the I/E in question?
if you own a vector/sigma or even a MarS and don't keep them in a working order (Regular Ispection & Repack, Repairs as necessary, etc) you'll be fucked sooner or later as well
The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle
dudeist skydiver # 666
dudeist skydiver # 666
QuoteDo you expect manufacture do blame it's own product? What about giving a brake?
I'm going to wait for final report regardless SE press release. Some other will do the same, some are already decided and don't need it. That's life.
I'm all for waiting for the report from the czech authorities, but if you look at many of the points in the SE report, they are factual and could easily be proven flase if they indeed were false.
SE would know for sure if the TM was certified to jump a DHT. That's a significant point, and one that SE would know for sure.
Along those same lines, SE is the also the final authority on the 8 year inspections. They would know for sure if they had seen these rigs 8 years after production, and they had not.
If the rigs had reserve repack cards, or there was any proof that the reserves has been repacked on any sort of regular basis (riggers log, etc), I'm sure they would have provided that to Ted during his visit. As it was, Ted saw no proof, and reported as such.
If the rigs been inspected on a 25 jump interval, again, paperwork would have been presented to Ted. Again, no paperwork = no inspections.
The only possibility is that the reserve repacks and 25 jump inspections were performed, but not at the specified interval, so the paperwork was withheld at the time of Ted's visit. Ted's only conclusion was that this work was never performed, when in reality it may have been done at some point at some other interval.
Either way, the reports of an un-certified TM, rigs without an 8 year, and no proof of reserve repacks or 25 jump inspections remain factual. Regardless of what the czech authorities reveal, Ted's report is certainly an eye-opener.
feuergnom 22
Since you put so much effort in your posts I’ll give you the credit of being truly concerned and that you want to change something for good. On many points we should (and surely can) agree that we disagree and I have no interest in this developing into a nice pissing contest.
I’ll take just a few shots
You say “I'm not trying to bash SE down, I'm merely trying to make the old dinosaur to move!!!”
Well it comes across totally different. Do you really think that this message will be heard at all? I know there’s been much talk about a new design going on and many people wait for it. And I have a bet for you: If they presented a new design within the next month people like you would be outraged “why it took the so long to come out with it” and “why did we have to jump the old stuff for such a long time?” YaddaYaddaYadda
Next point - you say tandems are a death trap: Did you, in your long career as a packer and rigger (how many thousand of packjobs have you got?) ever take the time to read the warning label in bright orange on mains, reserves and containers? Bingo! Skydiving is a fucking minefield. Welcome to the real world. And it is your F******* job as a rigger to keep your jumpers safe. If you have worked out how YOU can improve some detail, get in touch with the manufacturer in question. If it is something that hasn’t been thought about already and your invention comes in handy, I am sure it will turn up in the next update.
Speaking of updates: You criticise, that DHT-design is just one giant patch. I bet you post this from a computer running on windows. Updating gear in small steps (as being done on DHT’s) is _IMHO_ an evolutionary process. You do not have to reinvent everything from scratch over and over again to keep a system and a good team running. Heck I could even cite Bill Booth that with every safety update idiots evolve as well finding new ways to kill themselves (and others) making the whole process nearly worthless
Your other point – the MR425 reserve not being designed as a reserve: Can you spell Decelerator or Raven? In the rare case of a malfunction - again IMHO – I want my reserve to be as big and strong as possible. I need Kevlar to do this? Fine – just use it! If I blow up a cell or two being at terminal or over with a master 425 I’ve still got something larger left over than if I jumped a PD 360. And if I go for a reserve-ride I surely don’t want the fucker to rock all over the sky stalling and recovering because of setup/trim issues. Thanks – I’ll stick to Masters!
I am sure someone really clever will come up and state the superiority of the sigmas. Well that was Booths shot to get rid of all the inherent design flaws of the vectors without getting the new design totally free of (possible) bugs. Even the much acclaimed Skyhook had a major fuckup needing a “ghetto-fix”
You ask if proper maintenance of tandem equipment is enough to keep TI’s safe out there: Honestly I don’t know. Remember: This is still a minefield. But it is the most vital first step never to be missed.
Still another point: TSO’s – do your reading and find out if ANY manufacturer has multiple TSO’s for one design. AFAIK everybody’s just got one. Vector 1 & 2 ran under the original wonderhog TSO (If I am wrong on this, correct me, I’ll freely apologise)
I definitely know how hard this whole incident (how I hate that word) must be for everyone directly involved and I can understand that many people want to get the spotlight off the people involved – but in this process you blur the lesson: Do what you want and how you feel if you go out alone. But under no circumstances leave the proven path when it comes to taking a student/passenger/punter/peace of living cargo with you
That’s the last post on my behalf in this forum, because I think I have said all I had to say. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me has more details. Over & out
If it really bugs anybody - PM me
edit:
I just found the following lines posted by riggerrob in this thread
i guess they speak for themselves
I’ll take just a few shots
You say “I'm not trying to bash SE down, I'm merely trying to make the old dinosaur to move!!!”
Well it comes across totally different. Do you really think that this message will be heard at all? I know there’s been much talk about a new design going on and many people wait for it. And I have a bet for you: If they presented a new design within the next month people like you would be outraged “why it took the so long to come out with it” and “why did we have to jump the old stuff for such a long time?” YaddaYaddaYadda
Next point - you say tandems are a death trap: Did you, in your long career as a packer and rigger (how many thousand of packjobs have you got?) ever take the time to read the warning label in bright orange on mains, reserves and containers? Bingo! Skydiving is a fucking minefield. Welcome to the real world. And it is your F******* job as a rigger to keep your jumpers safe. If you have worked out how YOU can improve some detail, get in touch with the manufacturer in question. If it is something that hasn’t been thought about already and your invention comes in handy, I am sure it will turn up in the next update.
Speaking of updates: You criticise, that DHT-design is just one giant patch. I bet you post this from a computer running on windows. Updating gear in small steps (as being done on DHT’s) is _IMHO_ an evolutionary process. You do not have to reinvent everything from scratch over and over again to keep a system and a good team running. Heck I could even cite Bill Booth that with every safety update idiots evolve as well finding new ways to kill themselves (and others) making the whole process nearly worthless
Your other point – the MR425 reserve not being designed as a reserve: Can you spell Decelerator or Raven? In the rare case of a malfunction - again IMHO – I want my reserve to be as big and strong as possible. I need Kevlar to do this? Fine – just use it! If I blow up a cell or two being at terminal or over with a master 425 I’ve still got something larger left over than if I jumped a PD 360. And if I go for a reserve-ride I surely don’t want the fucker to rock all over the sky stalling and recovering because of setup/trim issues. Thanks – I’ll stick to Masters!
I am sure someone really clever will come up and state the superiority of the sigmas. Well that was Booths shot to get rid of all the inherent design flaws of the vectors without getting the new design totally free of (possible) bugs. Even the much acclaimed Skyhook had a major fuckup needing a “ghetto-fix”
You ask if proper maintenance of tandem equipment is enough to keep TI’s safe out there: Honestly I don’t know. Remember: This is still a minefield. But it is the most vital first step never to be missed.
Still another point: TSO’s – do your reading and find out if ANY manufacturer has multiple TSO’s for one design. AFAIK everybody’s just got one. Vector 1 & 2 ran under the original wonderhog TSO (If I am wrong on this, correct me, I’ll freely apologise)
I definitely know how hard this whole incident (how I hate that word) must be for everyone directly involved and I can understand that many people want to get the spotlight off the people involved – but in this process you blur the lesson: Do what you want and how you feel if you go out alone. But under no circumstances leave the proven path when it comes to taking a student/passenger/punter/peace of living cargo with you
That’s the last post on my behalf in this forum, because I think I have said all I had to say. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me has more details. Over & out
If it really bugs anybody - PM me
edit:
I just found the following lines posted by riggerrob in this thread
QuoteWe have a GLOBAL STANDARD ... a global standard that most tandem manufacturers and national aero sport organizations agreed on more than a decade ago.
Was it 1993 or 1994 that leading tandem manufacturers told us to install AADs?
It was so long ago that it has became the global standard.
Similarly, it has been 25 years since leading manufacturers said that new tandem instructors must be trained/approved/stamped on the forehead by a factory-approved Tandem Examiner.
Another 25 year old global standard.
Just a little background on why Strong Ent. insists on 8-year inspections. It is a subtle admission that their first eight years of production were ... er ... crude. And they wanted them back to the factory for all the updates.
Just so that it does not sound like I am picking on Strong, the Vector I tandems that I started on were pretty crude too: no AADs, no drogues, etc.
After they got a few rigs back, Strong Ent. started to notice that after they had been jumped hard in the Southern California Desert, some rigs were scrap!
If it sounds like I am picking on Strong ... I told a Vector owner to not send his faded and frayed 14 year old Vector II tandem - to my loft - because I refuse to sew any more patches on it!
Yes, Strong Ent. may have set the toughest inspection standards, but other manufacturers are only slightly looser. This is a marketing ploy.
When you get significantly outside of Storng Ent's inspection guidlines, you are just plain dangerous!
Local laws are insignificant if you ignore global standards.
IOW a judge will ask:"What would a reasonable man/professional instructor/professional rigger have done?"
The bottom line is: if you ignore global standards, you suffer the death penalty!
i guess they speak for themselves
The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle
dudeist skydiver # 666
dudeist skydiver # 666
RiggerLee 61
Oh my god. I can't beleave you've got me defending SE.
How much is to much?
I don't know any one that doesnt want better gear. Haveing said that there are limits. You can stand up all self ritious screaming that there is no price too high to pay for safty. That is the cry of a nieve child. The only way to totaly insure safety is to stay on the ground. There are limits top what every one will pay. Unless you are independently welthy there are limits to what you will pay. The cost of tandom gear, hell all skydiveing gear, is all ready through the roof. even now it's beyond the reach of many small dz's. A couple of months age a groop came through and baught out all the closets full of old gear there at the drop zone. Shit they had retired be cause we thought it was worn out. And these guys were happy to get it. What's a DHT go for right now? $10,000 rings a bell. Let's say all the manufactores decided to pull out all the stops, fix all the problems, and go for %100 saftey. That would include the doubleing of all prices across the board. you and every one else would be squealing like a little bitch. The industry couldn'ttake it. Skydiveing would end. None of that is an exaguation. It's not just what SE or UPT are willing to spend, it's what you and every one else is willing to pay. So don't put it all on them. Most of there decisions are based on you. If "you", you here being the drop zone industry as a whole, were willing to pay for a fully redesigned system SE would have come forward with it by now. It's not just the manufacteror it's also the market.
You know reserves are designed different than mains because there are required different opening characteristics and the same is valid for deployment system on reserves.
Now is year 2009 not 1980. I've heard the same arguments before "If you are complaining jump LoPos, ParaCommanders, Thunderbows" - and I did.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe I should relate a phone call from a nearby DZO. "Good news! You got another save - on a Vector Tandem reserve - last week. Bad news! The opening sucked! It was stalling and rocking all over the sky!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree. Breaks set so deep it stalls after opening. It is a cheat how to beat the tests on tandem terminal. There are already more modern and better reserves on the market. But you can't say MR425 is not bad because VS360 is not good - it doesn't make sense
For the record SE lopo's are still one of the best pilot canopies out there for the range of speeds for which they were designed. And your optama is not superier for that perpouse. You have to judge things based on what they were designed for. VS360 is a fine example. It was designed to survive opening. Tweeking the breaks isn't some cheep trick. Every manufactor of every canopy does that. It's the easiest way to adjust the opening. And choseing a supper deep setting is a ligitament way of slowing the opening way way down. And that's what you need when your going 180+.
Got to go. I'll pick at your post more later.
Lee
How much is to much?
I don't know any one that doesnt want better gear. Haveing said that there are limits. You can stand up all self ritious screaming that there is no price too high to pay for safty. That is the cry of a nieve child. The only way to totaly insure safety is to stay on the ground. There are limits top what every one will pay. Unless you are independently welthy there are limits to what you will pay. The cost of tandom gear, hell all skydiveing gear, is all ready through the roof. even now it's beyond the reach of many small dz's. A couple of months age a groop came through and baught out all the closets full of old gear there at the drop zone. Shit they had retired be cause we thought it was worn out. And these guys were happy to get it. What's a DHT go for right now? $10,000 rings a bell. Let's say all the manufactores decided to pull out all the stops, fix all the problems, and go for %100 saftey. That would include the doubleing of all prices across the board. you and every one else would be squealing like a little bitch. The industry couldn'ttake it. Skydiveing would end. None of that is an exaguation. It's not just what SE or UPT are willing to spend, it's what you and every one else is willing to pay. So don't put it all on them. Most of there decisions are based on you. If "you", you here being the drop zone industry as a whole, were willing to pay for a fully redesigned system SE would have come forward with it by now. It's not just the manufacteror it's also the market.
You know reserves are designed different than mains because there are required different opening characteristics and the same is valid for deployment system on reserves.
Now is year 2009 not 1980. I've heard the same arguments before "If you are complaining jump LoPos, ParaCommanders, Thunderbows" - and I did.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe I should relate a phone call from a nearby DZO. "Good news! You got another save - on a Vector Tandem reserve - last week. Bad news! The opening sucked! It was stalling and rocking all over the sky!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree. Breaks set so deep it stalls after opening. It is a cheat how to beat the tests on tandem terminal. There are already more modern and better reserves on the market. But you can't say MR425 is not bad because VS360 is not good - it doesn't make sense
For the record SE lopo's are still one of the best pilot canopies out there for the range of speeds for which they were designed. And your optama is not superier for that perpouse. You have to judge things based on what they were designed for. VS360 is a fine example. It was designed to survive opening. Tweeking the breaks isn't some cheep trick. Every manufactor of every canopy does that. It's the easiest way to adjust the opening. And choseing a supper deep setting is a ligitament way of slowing the opening way way down. And that's what you need when your going 180+.
Got to go. I'll pick at your post more later.
Lee
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites