MEL, your input?

[theonlyski 3]

We all know that you're a big proponent for master riggers to do most of the work involved in rigging, so I would like to know what your opinion on what should be senior work, and what should be master work.

Please, go into detail... something like patches are, patches that involve a seam are, line splices are...

Thank you.

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

We all know that you're a big proponent for master riggers to do most of the work involved in rigging, so I would like to know what your opinion on what should be senior work, and what should be master work.

Well, First off I am a proponet more of the regs since that's what we have to teach.
In learning the regs, basically going through the first published in the CAA days to the ones of today, I have found most of the basis for them.

Basically why they are written....


To start off there was only one rigger rating, Parachute Rigger.

With that rating you had to work in the Parachute Loft(which was certified by the way) under the direct supervision of a Parachute Rigger whcich was a long drawn out process.

There was an outcry to have a rating easier to get because all that most people wanted was to "just pack my own reserve" kind of deal.
So the two ratings came about: Master and Senior.

The senior rigger rating was generated to do just what people said they wanted, pack reserves and do simple repair work. Emphasis on simple.

But what happened over the years, was not the intent of the regs.

Lack of oversight, among other things, led most senior riggers to believe that they could do anything they wanted. In fact, most built their own rigs, modified their own reserves to steerable ones, etc.

With the 65.111 Interp, it basically backs my belief that the Senior Rigger can only do simple patches, reserve repacks, assemblies, and velcro replacement kind of stuff.

Of note, only Master Riggers could legally assemble parachute componets until about 18-20 years ago.
That was changed to allow the senior riggers also.

The senior rigger is basically an entry level rigger. That rating is just a stepping stone to the Master rating.

With the legal interp of 65.111 , the draft is in conflict with law.

Legal is on top of it now.

MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

[likestojump 3]

Quote

***

Of note, only Master Riggers could legally assemble parachute componets until about 18-20 years ago.
That was changed to allow the senior riggers also.

With the legal interp of 65.111 , the draft is in conflict with law.

Legal is on top of it now.

MEL

Just to be clear - are you proposing that Senior riggers loose the legal ability to assemble ?

the OP was wondering about what specific things do YOU think should be up to Master and up to Senior ticket holders ?

[theonlyski 3]

Quote

With the 65.111 Interp, it basically backs my belief that the Senior Rigger can only do simple patches, reserve repacks, assemblies, and velcro replacement kind of stuff.

With that, and the whole 'affecting the airworthiness' its not hard to argue that a patch or maybe even some mis-sewen velcro could easily affect the airworthiness of a h/c or reserve... so where is the line drawn?

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

Just to be clear - are you proposing that Senior riggers loose the legal ability to assemble ?

No, just making the statement of how the regs have changed to allow it.


MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

With that, and the whole 'affecting the airworthiness' its not hard to argue that a patch or maybe even some mis-sewen velcro could easily affect the airworthiness of a h/c or reserve... so where is the line drawn?

Sorry, I left that out earlier.

Patches that encompass a seam are considered Major repairs by the FAA's definition.

See below from 8900.1;

O. Major Repair. A repair that fits one or more of the following:

1)Might appreciably affect airworthiness by changing weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, or flight characteristics if improperly done; or
2)Is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations.

There are some other documents to support that also.


MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

[theonlyski 3]

Quote

Quote

With that, and the whole 'affecting the airworthiness' its not hard to argue that a patch or maybe even some mis-sewen velcro could easily affect the airworthiness of a h/c or reserve... so where is the line drawn?

Sorry, I left that out earlier.

Patches that encompass a seam are considered Major repairs by the FAA's definition.

See below from 8900.1;

O. Major Repair. A repair that fits one or more of the following:

1)Might appreciably affect airworthiness by changing weight, balance, structural strength, performance, powerplant operation, or flight characteristics if improperly done; or
2)Is not done according to accepted practices or cannot be done by elementary operations.

There are some other documents to support that also.


MEL

Could you give me examples of what you consider master rigger work, and what you consider senior work?

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

Could you give me examples of what you consider master rigger work, and what you consider senior work?

From my earlier post:

Quote

With the 65.111 Interp, it basically backs my belief that the Senior Rigger can only do simple patches, reserve repacks, assemblies, and velcro replacement kind of stuff.

To expand, Senior riggers can do reserve repacks, patches that do not include seams, velcro replacement, BOC replacement,assemble both reserve and main parachutes and their componets,change AAD batteries, install AADs, Make closing loops.

Pretty much everything else is Master Rigger's duties.


MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

[councilman24 36]

And remember,

All of this is supposed to apply to mains as well as reserves. You just don't have to keep records.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[theonlyski 3]

Quote

And remember,

All of this is supposed to apply to mains as well as reserves. You just don't have to keep records.

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[tdog 0]

Quote

Of note, only Master Riggers could legally assemble parachute componets until about 18-20 years ago....

But what happened over the years, was not the intent of the regs.

Lack of oversight, among other things, led most senior riggers to believe that they could do anything they wanted. In fact, most built their own rigs, modified their own reserves to steerable ones, etc.

And we all know rigs built today are identical to those built 25 years ago.

Change can be good. Perhaps it was lack of oversight, perhaps it was intentional that change occurred... But the one thing the FAA does well is be reactionary. Reactionary to either people crying loud for regulations to be made more strict, or reactionary to incidents...

Quote

Legal is on top of it now.

I just wish those who write letters to "legal" and host meetings with "legal" were more concerned with education, cooperation, and finding and preventing the root causes of real safety concerns than advocating for more government regulations.

A while back I asked the community for a list of known incidents and/or fatalities caused by poor workmanship illegally (or even legally) done by senior riggers. I have read every fatality report in the archives. I question, from my own research, if this is a problem that "legal" should be tackling with a lot of energy. I have seen one of my best friends and a lot of people I have known die in our sport, so I do take this seriously and study incidents with serious concern.

One of the first rigs I inspected as a rigger, years ago, was previously inspected and assembled by a well respected out of state rigger with the word "master" infront of his title that I recognized in the community by name, but not by face. It was a wakeup call when the reserve lines fell off the riser due to human error. I discovered he was doing a task he had never done before and made assumptions that he knew how to do the task.

I have personally come to believe that the concept of "senior" and "master" are silly and just ways for the government to try to regulate with good intentions but poor implementation. Just as silly as the "back" vs "seat" when I think these should really be "sport" and "emergency" as packing a single parachute round is so different than packing a dual parachute sport rig.

It is pretty clear that the FAA requires riggers to only do work that they 1) have the manual or instructions to complete and 2) have experience and training in the area of operation.

I think the solution is to make these rules (perform only tasks you are trained/mentored to do) even stronger in the language and placement within the regs. There is no reason why a senior rigger, who has mentored under a qualified instructor, should not be able to replace, for an example, a line or lineset after mentoring and "signoff". But that same rigger might have only packed 2 or 3 pilot emergency rigs to get their rating and be terribly uncurrent in rounds. If you want to advocate regulations, I rather see the rigger certificate to be more closely aligned with a pilot's licence, where a senior rigger can do certain tasks, and then they can add tasks by testing and mentoring, just like a pilot can add instrument, multi engine, commercial, etc to his private pilot's license.

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

I just wish those who write letters to "legal" and host meetings with "legal" were more concerned with education, cooperation, and finding and preventing the root causes of real safety concerns than advocating for more government regulations.

First, I really do not write letters to "legal" , I usually just pick up you phone, both when someone from Washington calls me and I call them.


Second, I am always about safety and education, ask anyone that knows me.

Quote

Change can be good. Perhaps it was lack of oversight, perhaps it was intentional that change occurred... But the one thing the FAA does well is be reactionary. Reactionary to either people crying loud for regulations to be made more strict, or reactionary to incidents...

Excuse me!?

The purposed AC would be more lax, not more strict. The outcry is from both the liberals and the people trying to cover their ass.

Quote

while back I asked the community for a list of known incidents and/or fatalities caused by poor workmanship illegally (or even legally) done by senior riggers. I have read every fatality report in the archives. I question, from my own research, if this is a problem that "legal" should be tackling with a lot of energy. I have seen one of my best friends and a lot of people I have known die in our sport, so I do take this seriously and study incidents with serious concern.

Who in their right mind is going to list publicly, things that will surely drag them into a court trial?

Quote

One of the first rigs I inspected as a rigger, years ago, was previously inspected and assembled by a well respected out of state rigger with the word "master" infront of his title that I recognized in the community by name, but not by face. It was a wakeup call when the reserve lines fell off the riser due to human error. I discovered he was doing a task he had never done before and made assumptions that he knew how to do the task.

Well, since I seem to fit all of those descriptions, let"s clear the air by stating it was not me.

Quote

I have personally come to believe that the concept of "senior" and "master" are silly and just ways for the government to try to regulate with good intentions but poor implementation. Just as silly as the "back" vs "seat" when I think these should really be "sport" and "emergency" as packing a single parachute round is so different than packing a dual parachute sport rig.

I bet your outlook would be different if you actually had your Master's rating.
Ask Terry Urban about that. He was a Senior rigger for like maybe 25? years.

Quote

I think the solution is to make these rules (perform only tasks you are trained/mentored to do) even stronger in the language and placement within the regs. There is no reason why a senior rigger, who has mentored under a qualified instructor, should not be able to replace, for an example, a line or lineset after mentoring and "signoff". But that same rigger might have only packed 2 or 3 pilot emergency rigs to get their rating and be terribly uncurrent in rounds. If you want to advocate regulations, I rather see the rigger certificate to be more closely aligned with a pilot's licence, where a senior rigger can do certain tasks, and then they can add tasks by testing and mentoring, just like a pilot can add instrument, multi engine, commercial, etc to his private pilot's license.

Way to complicated!

We can not even agree who gets to do what now!


BS,
MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

[tdog 0]

Mel, good morning.

1) You are right, it was NOT you who made the mistake on the rigging. I never meant to say it was you. Actually, I said it was an out of town rigger who I had not met, we actually met at PIA in Reno, therefore it can't be you! EVERYONE - I know of no mistakes made by MEL in rigging workmanship. Sorry if it sounded otherwise.

2) "Who in their right mind is going to list publicly, things that will surely drag them into a court trial?" Well, I never asked for, at the time, any details that would bring people into a court case... Just statistical information with links back to publicly available incident reports (such as dropzone.com incident threads or USPA reports on their website).

And the public request included a way to get in touch with me privately with my phone number and email address included to allow private replies. You and Terry and some others did respond. Skydivers talk about fatalities and incidents all the time without fear of court cases. Because no one replied with any data other than a few anecdotal stories, I tore thru all the incident reports I could and found that rigging mistakes done by riggers of any kind are appear to be not statistically significant in the fatality reports. Rigging mistakes done by non-riggers seem to be much more of an issue. We all see online and in person sloppy workmanship here and there - for an example there was a rig posted online that had non-factory approved mods. But this is a perfect example of how the rigger (senior or master) failed to follow the directive both types of riggers have to follow - in my own words only do what you are trained to do, know how to do, and have been approved to do.

3) You said my idea to do away with a general "master" rating and replace it with endorsements was "way to complicated"... Well, I think it could be done with ease. A document, either in the Parachute Handbook, in the regs themselves, or in separate circular, could outline in table form types of repairs and maintenance and the cert required. There are only really a few types of things in the big picture, canopy fabric, canopy lines and their attachments, and the container. Replacing or repairing lines is a skillset. Sewing container harnessing is a skillset. Sewing or repairing container fabric and hardware (grommets, AAD pockets, etc) is a skillset. Sewing parachute fabric is a skillset. So there are basically 4 big picture "repair or maintenance" skillsets: harness, container, lines, parachute.

It would be so simple to say that a senior rigger can only assemble, inspect, and pack rigs - period. To sew on a reserve, you need endorsements for non-seam patches and a higher standard endorsement for seams and attachment points. To repair or replace lines you need a line checkoff. To sew or replace non-structural components on the container an endorsement, and a higher standard endorsement for structural/harness modifications or repairs.

Truck drivers do it... Class A and B (A = tractor trailer, B = no trailer but bus or heavy trucks) drivers licences, with sub-endorsements of tanker, bus, hazmat, multiple trailers, etc.

Pilots do it... Start as a private. Once you get hours, experience and testing you can add more endorsements.

It could be kept simple enough, but at the same time prove that riggers have the experience, mentoring, and testing required to do tasks. Each endorsement would need logbook entries of supervised work, followed by a letter from a rated individual as a reference, and then an exam conducted by a DPRE in the area of operation.

Quote

I bet your outlook would be different if you actually had your Master's rating.

I wonder why? Honestly, why? I am confused, perhaps you can explain more. Perhaps it is because you don't know me well and don't know my experience other than what we have talked about online (some of it being devil's advocate). I don't share everything online, and we only have briefly met in person - therefore you assume my outlook is limited or different in some way.

Here is the flaw in the system, and perhaps why I don't place creditability in it. Some master riggers are great (I assmue you would be one of these). As all government systems do, they also can fail...
One master riggers, again someone I met out of state briefly, but not you, told me how he got his master's... He worked as a reserve packer in a busy reserve loft at a dropzone for a summer and racked up over 100 sport back reserve packjobs, but had previous years of experience to earn the 3 year requirement. He then purchased a used seat rig and packed it over and over and over again until his log book had the proper number. Then he went and got his master's with a "few hours of testing"... He coached me how to do it with pride.

Over the years we (you and I) have debated the concept of who should be able to replace a lineset. This guy had never replaced a lineset, just done some repairs here and there, but somehow got his masters. Contrast that to someone who actually wanted to learn, and actually has walked up to three master riggers and said, "Can I replace that lineset while you watch and teach me?" and who went to seminars at PIA for an example on the same subject. If I was a customer, I would want the senior rigger who has been mentored by experts any day over the master rigger who pencil whipped his ticket.

Granted, this story is not the typical master rigger - but I have seen more than one who just did not impress me as being a "master".

If we switched to my "more complicated" system of actually testing knowledge, and demanding experience - for a "rigger" to get a cert allowing him to repair or replace linsets - this master rigger who pencil whipped his ticket, would have had to have documented a certain quantity of lineset replacements under supervision in his apprenticing program, followed by a practical exam on the area of operation. Now all of a sudden this "master" rigger level certificate would mean something other than slamming a lot of packjobs and finding a DPRE that will sign you off. Even if this guy cheated the system and pencilwhipped his experience, he would have had to pass a specific test and shown the knowledge, and thus at least appear to be qualified.

In recap - You said it yourself, you talk to Washington all the time, I just am hoping that you are striving for change (or reversal of unintended change) that really matters, really promotes safety, and is focused on areas of weakness that are currently documented in real, statistically significant, not theoretical, issues appearing in the field.

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

I wonder why? Honestly, why? I am confused, perhaps you can explain more. Perhaps it is because you don't know me well and don't know my experience other than what we have talked about online (some of it being devil's advocate). I don't share everything online, and we only have briefly met in person - therefore you assume my outlook is limited or different in some way.

T,
That was actually more of a generic reply about most Senior riggers that get their rating, then sit back and complain about what they should be able to do.
But once that same rigger puts forth just a little more effort and gains the Master rigger rating (it is Not that hard) seems to change his or her views of the regs.
I know you are supposed to be working on yours, so how close are you to the O&P?

Quote

Here is the flaw in the system, and perhaps why I don't place creditability in it. Some master riggers are great (I assmue you would be one of these). As all government systems do, they also can fail...
One master riggers, again someone I met out of state briefly, but not you, told me how he got his master's... He worked as a reserve packer in a busy reserve loft at a dropzone for a summer and racked up over 100 sport back reserve packjobs, but had previous years of experience to earn the 3 year requirement. He then purchased a used seat rig and packed it over and over and over again until his log book had the proper number. Then he went and got his master's with a "few hours of testing"... He coached me how to do it with pride.

Yes, I agree. I think the requirements are too lax and simplistic. But I have to comply with the Regs.

My personal opinion is to go back to certificated lofts. Loft log books, and only one rating.

We would then have less auguments about about who, what, and when.

But then again, if everyone got a Master's rating,it would be exactly the same.

BS,
MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com