masterrigger1 2 #51 January 31, 2011 Quote But, where does it say we have to log ANY work done on the data card? .....on the data card MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #52 January 31, 2011 QuoteQuote But, where does it say we have to log ANY work done on the data card? .....on the data card MEL Where? I see nothing on the data card that requires any logging, just a spot for remarks (in case there are defects found)"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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #53 January 31, 2011 Quote So MEL, where do I have it wrong? Where is it more than opinion, but regulation, that the card MUST say "A, I, & R" instead of "packed"? T, There is no one sentence that states you have to write AIR. It simply states you must record work performed. With that said, if you have been writting I & R, you must believe that it is required or you simply would not do it. The actions of Inspecting a parachute are required. Most people write this on the data card. The actions of packing or repacking are required. Most people write this on the data card. The actions of airing a parachute are required. A lot of people of late are not writing this on the data card. It is either from lack of knowledge or that they are simply lazy. So tell me why you think I and R needs to be on the data card and not the airing requirement? I can tell you this, in a practical exam, failure to list all work performed , results in a failure here in my region. I have that in my test plan. MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likestojump 3 #54 January 31, 2011 Let's throw another wrench into what I will now be thinking of as MELeaucracy : We all (even MEL) agree that a canopy must be Inspected prior to Packing. in English, "to air" (in verb sense) means to expose to air. How is the canopy not aired when it is being inspected ? the regulation does not call for a specific amount of "airing" time. riggerrob previously pointed out that the regulation (which starts of with the words thoroughly dried) had to do with parachutes made of natural fibers. Sounds to me that reading the FAR is like the whole religious text reading craze - ones read peace and tolerance others read a call to kill the infidels. Personally, I like Status Quo. Mel likes paperwork. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #55 January 31, 2011 Quote in English, "to air" (in verb sense) means to expose to air. In Parachute talk it means hanging in the air, hence the drying towers with hanging racks.... if you really want to get technical! Quote How is the canopy not aired when it is being inspected ? You can say that. It would be just like a lot of people say "inspected" when all that they do is note the color of the parachute before packing. But there still alot of people that do very good inspections also. Quote riggerrob previously pointed out that the regulation (which starts of with the words thoroughly dried) had to do with parachutes made of natural fibers. In the early years all parachutes were made of natural fibers. The minimum airing time was not lowered or changed until about the late 1980's IIRC. That's 40 plus years after nylon parachutes came about. Quote Sounds to me that reading the FAR is like the whole religious text reading craze - ones read peace and tolerance others read a call to kill the infidels. I don't quite hear the war drums... Quote Personally, I like Status Quo. Mel likes paperwork. Negative Ghost Rider! I hate paperwork! That is why I try to educate BEFORE they go take a test somewhere. Failures during testing take twice the paperwork.. BS, MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likestojump 3 #56 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote in English, "to air" (in verb sense) means to expose to air. In Parachute talk it means hanging in the air, hence the drying towers with hanging racks.... if you really want to get technical! I am just trying to "make sense" of this by applying the same standard of reading the CFR as you are. So far I am failing. QuoteQuote How is the canopy not aired when it is being inspected ? You can say that. It would be just like a lot of people say "inspected" when all that that do it note the color of the parachute before packing. But there still alot of people that do very good inspections too. But, but, but... In Parachute talk Inspection means to examine carefully. QuoteQuote riggerrob previously pointed out that the regulation (which starts of with the words thoroughly dried) had to do with parachutes made of natural fibers. In the early years all parachutes were made of natural fibers. The minimum airing time was not lower or changed until about the late 1980's IIRC. couldn't this mean that perhaps this is one of many verbiages left over from the "old days" which are pretty much no longer pertinent ? QuoteQuote Sounds to me that reading the FAR is like the whole religious text reading craze - ones read peace and tolerance others read a call to kill the infidels. I don't quite hear the war drums... I was merely pointing out that while two parties are reading the same text, their understanding differs wildly. QuoteQuote Personally, I like Status Quo. Mel likes paperwork. Negative Ghost Rider! I hate paperwork! That is why I try to educate BEFORE they go take a test somewhere. Failures during testing take twice the paperwork.. BS, MEL Could have fooled me, your constant referrals to FAA forms and regs, as well as the holy quest for limitation of the Senior Rigger to being a glorified dbag attachment tool certainly fooled me :) Lastly, could you please point us to the FAA definition of "Air"(verbal sense) and to the current federal code of this "parachute talk" that you are referring to. Also I ask you to please keep personal opinion out of this. Just, so, you know, the playing field is level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #57 February 1, 2011 Quote Lastly, could you please point us to the FAA definition of "Air"(verbal sense) and to the current federal code of this "parachute talk" that you are referring to. Also I ask you to please keep personal opinion out of this. Just, so, you know, the playing field is level. That answer is "...until thoughly dry". That is the official time limit as per one of the Official FAA Test Questions. Again the time limit went from 48 hours, to 24 hours, to 8 hours, and now "until thoughly dry". So whatever airing needs to be done in order to check for "until thoughly dry" is in your court. Sorry, I do not have anything better than that. I am positive this will come up at the PIA meeting in Reno, so stay tuned! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tdog 0 #58 February 1, 2011 Quote .....on the data card Well played. Well played. So I can validate your point, what FAR or FAA document number is stamped on the bottom of the cards you use to authenticate them as being an official standard of the FAA? And - what FAR or document do you use to translate the "remarks" field to be something more specific than "remarks"? (I have three different packing data cards in front of me that simply say "remarks", not "services performed") I want to see how the packing data card places additional record keeping requirements on the rigger in addition to those I quoted from the FARs in a previous post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tdog 0 #59 February 1, 2011 Quote With that said, if you have been writting I & R, you must believe that it is required or you simply would not do it. P.S. I have been writing "A, I & R". I had a DZ office manager call me from out of state asking what I did. I said, "Air out, inspect and repack." They said, "is that an I&R"? I said, "yes"... Since then, I have been writing "I&R" more often because it seems that, at least in my neck of the woods, people expect to see that and expect that to mean "repack per the FAA regulations and thus let this skydiver jump it at my DZ." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites likestojump 3 #60 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote With that said, if you have been writting I & R, you must believe that it is required or you simply would not do it. P.S. I have been writing "A, I & R". I had a DZ office manager call me from out of state asking what I did. I said, "Air out, inspect and repack." They said, "is that an I&R"? I said, "yes"... Since then, I have been writing "I&R" more often because it seems that, at least in my neck of the woods, people expect to see that and expect that to mean "repack per the FAA regulations and thus let this skydiver jump it at my DZ." my understanding has been : A-I-R=Assemble/Inspect/Repack. I-R=Inspect/Repack I see a lot of gear pass through me, and I see more "I+R" than "AIR" for regular repacks. Also, see some that put "Assemble Inspect Repack" on the first entry, and "Inspect & Repack" on the rest. This one makes the most sense. BTW, I see some cards where the same rigger used both AIR and IR interchangeably :( Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites stratostar 5 #61 February 1, 2011 QuoteI had a DZ office manager call me from out of state asking what I did. I said, "Air out, inspect and repack." They said, "is that an I&R"? I said, "yes"... That kind of crap speaks volumes to the amount of fucking stupid ass people we now have in the sport these days.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggerrob 558 #62 February 1, 2011 I used to just write "A,I&P" but some people got confused, so now I write "Ass, I&P" to define a new assemble, inspect ad pack. I only "Air, inspect and repack" for clumsy pond-swoopers! Hah! Hah! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #63 February 1, 2011 Quote So I can validate your point, what FAR or FAA document number is stamped on the bottom of the cards you use to authenticate them as being an official standard of the FAA? The H/C's name is usually on the original data card. Quote what FAR or document do you use to translate the "remarks" field to be something more specific than "remarks"? CFR 65.129 e) Pack, maintain, or alter a parachute in any manner that deviates from procedures approved by the Administrator or the manufacturer of the parachute; or The manufacturer's instructions usually state that you should log the work and place the data card somewhere. So,: 1. The manufacturer's Name is on the card 2.The FAA reqires you to follow the manufacturer's instructions. . 3.The manufacturer's manuals usually state that you should log the work on the data card. 4. ...and call the canopy and H/C manufacturer and ask them directly what you should be writing on the card. That should be interesting! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peek 20 #64 February 1, 2011 QuoteLet's throw another wrench into what I will now be thinking of as MELeaucracy : Hey, I bet I can throw another wrench into the churning gears of this thread! What is a "pack" versus a "repack"? When you assemble you are packing, not repacking, right? And what if your buddy brings you his rig having pulled the ripcord and opened up the whole rig and aired the canopy himself? That's a pack job isn't it, and not a repack? Just for everyone's information, I write, "Assenble and pack" or "Inspect and pack" depending on whether I have assembled it. I'm just not that worried about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #65 February 1, 2011 Quote The manufacturer's instructions usually state that you should log the work and place the data card somewhere. Just going off of 3 popular containers... From the Infinity manual: Quote FILL OUT THE PACKING DATA CARD WITH THE CANOPY SERIAL NUMBER, MANUFACTURER'S NAME, AND THE DATE OF MANUFACTURE. & Sign the packing data card (previously filled out) and insert it in the pocket provided behind the left ring cover. Mirage G3: Quote IMPORTANT: Do not forget to replace the completed packing data card in the proper pocket. UPT V3: Quote Dress the container, seal, and sign and log the reserve. Close the pin cover. Unless my young eyes are blind, it would appear that none of them state 'Work Performed' Quote So,: 1. The manufacturer's Name is on the card So the replacement cards from paragear are not authorized because they're not the manufacturers name on the card? Or would it just take a master rigger to approve the alteration and use of non listed part replacements. Quote 2.The FAA requires you to follow the manufacturer's instructions. As previously stated a few paragraphs up, they don't say anything about logging the work performed, so logging it, could be in violation of the manufacturers instructions, couldn't it? Quote 3.The manufacturer's manuals usually state that you should log the work on the data card. Nope, at least the 3 I just quoted say sign & seal. Bottom line: 65.131 doesn't say you have to log work performed on the data card, only required to log it on your riggers log. The manufacturers (that I referenced anyways) don't specifically state that they require work performed to be logged. You shouldn't be calling out Sandy for not writing A&I&P on the data card, when its not even required."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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #66 February 1, 2011 Quote Bottom line: 65.131 doesn't say you have to log work performed on the data card, only required to log it on your riggers log. The manufacturers (that I referenced anyways) don't specifically state that they require work performed to be logged. You shouldn't be calling out Sandy for not writing A&I&P on the data card, when its not even required. So ...you just got your rigging certificate and already you know more than the rest of us right? Tell you what, don't put anything on the data card and see where that will get ya! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #67 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote Bottom line: 65.131 doesn't say you have to log work performed on the data card, only required to log it on your riggers log. The manufacturers (that I referenced anyways) don't specifically state that they require work performed to be logged. You shouldn't be calling out Sandy for not writing A&I&P on the data card, when its not even required. So ...you just got your rigging certificate and already you know more than the rest of us right? Tell you what, don't put anything on the data card and see where that get ya! MEL No, but I can read the part about logging required. I'm not trying to piss in your cornflakes, but you're calling someone out on something that you say is required... Show me where its required?"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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tdog 0 #68 February 1, 2011 Quote2.The FAA reqires you to follow the manufacturer's instructions. I am confused. You believe the PRH is full of opinions and inaccuracies and thus needs to be replaced or rewritten. When challenged for examples by someone else, you cited the packing data card shown in the PRH as being wrong. I quoted FAA rules that specifically address what must be written in the riggers log and what must be written on the card, per the FARs. I could not find any regulations that regulate what is in the "Remarks" field of the card with enough specific detail that I would feel comfortable saying the card in the PRH violates those rules. When I challenged you on this, you just told me in the post that you have to follow the manufacturer's instructions when filling out the packing data card. Here is why I am confused... The packing data card you are criticizing as being wrong on page 7 of the PRH - was given to the FAA for their publication, by the manufacture, as an example of an appropriately filled out card for their rig. So if we are to follow the manufacturer's instructions per CFR 65.129 as you quote - then unfortunately even if you disagree with it - the card in the PRH handbook is correct since it was approved by the manufacture as an example as it appears to meet all the requirements. While I honestly think "more is better" when you write down information on a packing data card, this is my opinion and I understand it is opinion. I tend to agree with you, "A-I-R" is a better and more accurate comment to put on the card. But I know this is just opinion. I respect riggers that also put I&R because I know when they do an I&R, they must follow all the other rules, such as counting tools per the manufacturer's instructions and/or airing the canopy and/or sealing the rig, etc... Just calling you out a bit - if you are going to be very loud that the PRH is wrong, I am going to challenge you in areas where I think you believe it is wrong due opinions, not facts. P.S. I still respect you even though I challenge you (and myself) in these concepts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #69 February 1, 2011 Quote I am confused. You believe the PRH is full of opinions and inaccuracies and thus needs to be replaced or rewritten. When challenged for examples by someone else, you cited the packing data card shown in the PRH as being wrong. I am not the only one that thinks this. The FAA also knows this to be true now after so many people pointed out the issues. QuoteHere is why I am confused... The packing data card you are criticizing as being wrong on page 7 of the PRH - was given to the FAA for their publication, by the manufacture, as an example of an appropriately filled out card for their rig. So if we are to follow the manufacturer's instructions per CFR 65.129 as you quote - then unfortunately even if you disagree with it - the card in the PRH handbook is correct since it was approved by the manufacture as an example as it appears to meet all the requirements. In this case the same guy that wrote the book just so happens to be also the manufacturer. Again, a manufacturer cannot diminish the "standards" set forth by the FAA. Here again I will point out that airing is still a requirement as per the regulations. I just put in a call for you guys to Washington. Let's see what their answer is. It will be pretty quick I'm sure on this one. Quote Just calling you out a bit - if you are going to be very loud that the PRH is wrong, I am going to challenge you in areas where I think you believe it is wrong due opinions, not facts. I guess I am confused. Is airing a parachute still not a requirement? (Fact based) I guess you only issue you have is whether or not you need to write AIR, INSPECT, REPACK in the remarks column on the data card. I guess which ever you do (all or nothing, either blank or A.I.R.) the example in the book would be still wrong..correct? MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tdog 0 #70 February 1, 2011 Quote In this case the same guy that wrote the book just so happens to be also the manufacturer. Again, a manufacturer cannot diminish the "standards" set forth by the FAA. Here again I will point out that airing is still a requirement as per the regulations. He is still the manufacture. And you previously said we had to follow the manufacturer's instructions citing the FAA FARs. If other manufactures suggest their cards must be filled out differently, then we would have to respect their wishes. QuoteIs airing a parachute still not a requirement? (Fact based) It is. So are about 50 other things you have to do when packing a reserve, such as counting tools, looking for SB compliance, sealing the rig with a seal, ensuring the pull force is not in excess of limits, etc. Do you ever write "Opened Manual, Aired out, Inspected, Packed, Checked for SBs, Verified Battery, Sealed, Counted Tools, Filled out Logbook?" I still contend, "I&R" has become the industry standard, along with "A, I &R" of notating that a complete reserve repack has taken place, of which, airing out is only one of many sub-actions, and therefore, the packing data card in the PRH is not in error, especially since it was provided by the manufacture as their approved technique. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #71 February 1, 2011 Quote He is still the manufacture. And you previously said we had to follow the manufacturer's instructions citing the FAA FARs. If other manufactures suggest their cards must be filled out differently, then we would have to respect their wishes. ....up to the point that it does not violate the regs. You have to abide by the CFR's, your responsibilites, and privileges as a rigger in order to maintain those privileges. Quote It is. So are about 50 other things you have to do when packing a reserve, such as counting tools, looking for SB compliance, sealing the rig with a seal, ensuring the pull force is not in excess of limits, etc. Do you ever write "Opened Manual, Aired out, Inspected, Packed, Checked for SBs, Verified Battery, Sealed, Counted Tools, Filled out Logbook?" What you stated are Givens. What I am speaking of are direct actions that are required in writing in the CFR's. The things thatt you are bring up are not. Quote I still contend, "I&R" has become the industry standard, along with "A, I &R" of notating that a complete reserve repack has taken place, of which, airing out is only one of many sub-actions, and therefore, the packing data card in the PRH is not in error, especially since it was provided by the manufacture as their approved technique First, Industry standards (which in this case is not) are not what you follow as a certificated rigger. You follow the regs...are you are supposed too. Since you brought it up Intitals or abbreviations are not really legal in FAA documents which you can find in FMIS. You supposed to spell out words. The FAA hates blanks and lack of format. If you have the time go through there and study some of the stuff in there. Lastly, as I am completely done with this issue, record keeping is a big time concern with regards to two high profile fatalities. This is one reason that it will not be long for the wait! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #72 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote He is still the manufacture. And you previously said we had to follow the manufacturer's instructions citing the FAA FARs. If other manufactures suggest their cards must be filled out differently, then we would have to respect their wishes. ....up to the point that it does not violate the regs. WHAT regs state you must record work performed on the parachute data card? I've asked you this several times, you've skated around it, every time. Quote Quote It is. So are about 50 other things you have to do when packing a reserve, such as counting tools, looking for SB compliance, sealing the rig with a seal, ensuring the pull force is not in excess of limits, etc. Do you ever write "Opened Manual, Aired out, Inspected, Packed, Checked for SBs, Verified Battery, Sealed, Counted Tools, Filled out Logbook?" What you stated are Givens. What I am speaking of are direct actions that are required in writing in the CFR's. The things that you are bring up are not. An air, inspect and repack is given, provided that I signed the data card, and sealed the packjob. You're skating around the issue, show me ONE spot in the CFR's that says I have to log work performed on the parachute data card, (not the riggers log book, but the actual parachute data card that goes with the h/c & reserve) I bet you're an awesome rigger and examiner, but the fact of the matter is, that statement doesn't exist. It worries me that you're willing to pass it off as the law, when there is not once piece of supporting evidence to that effect. What else are you misleading people into believing? You say you've abandon this discussion, why? Why would you abandon a discussion when you know you're right, and have the word of the law to back you up. Why not just show us where it states that we have to log all work performed (and not givens) on the data card? I expect I won't get a reply that answers these questions."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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites stratostar 5 #73 February 1, 2011 Quoterecord keeping is a big time concern with regards to two high profile fatalities. Please give more details, thanksyou can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrigger1 2 #74 February 1, 2011 In the Ohio tandem incident, it is unclear who exactly did what and when. The other is somewhat Hush-hush because of the lawsuit. MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites stratostar 5 #75 February 1, 2011 Thanks, I assume in the Ohio TDM your talking about the racer rig.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 3 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
masterrigger1 2 #57 February 1, 2011 Quote Lastly, could you please point us to the FAA definition of "Air"(verbal sense) and to the current federal code of this "parachute talk" that you are referring to. Also I ask you to please keep personal opinion out of this. Just, so, you know, the playing field is level. That answer is "...until thoughly dry". That is the official time limit as per one of the Official FAA Test Questions. Again the time limit went from 48 hours, to 24 hours, to 8 hours, and now "until thoughly dry". So whatever airing needs to be done in order to check for "until thoughly dry" is in your court. Sorry, I do not have anything better than that. I am positive this will come up at the PIA meeting in Reno, so stay tuned! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tdog 0 #58 February 1, 2011 Quote .....on the data card Well played. Well played. So I can validate your point, what FAR or FAA document number is stamped on the bottom of the cards you use to authenticate them as being an official standard of the FAA? And - what FAR or document do you use to translate the "remarks" field to be something more specific than "remarks"? (I have three different packing data cards in front of me that simply say "remarks", not "services performed") I want to see how the packing data card places additional record keeping requirements on the rigger in addition to those I quoted from the FARs in a previous post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tdog 0 #59 February 1, 2011 Quote With that said, if you have been writting I & R, you must believe that it is required or you simply would not do it. P.S. I have been writing "A, I & R". I had a DZ office manager call me from out of state asking what I did. I said, "Air out, inspect and repack." They said, "is that an I&R"? I said, "yes"... Since then, I have been writing "I&R" more often because it seems that, at least in my neck of the woods, people expect to see that and expect that to mean "repack per the FAA regulations and thus let this skydiver jump it at my DZ." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likestojump 3 #60 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote With that said, if you have been writting I & R, you must believe that it is required or you simply would not do it. P.S. I have been writing "A, I & R". I had a DZ office manager call me from out of state asking what I did. I said, "Air out, inspect and repack." They said, "is that an I&R"? I said, "yes"... Since then, I have been writing "I&R" more often because it seems that, at least in my neck of the woods, people expect to see that and expect that to mean "repack per the FAA regulations and thus let this skydiver jump it at my DZ." my understanding has been : A-I-R=Assemble/Inspect/Repack. I-R=Inspect/Repack I see a lot of gear pass through me, and I see more "I+R" than "AIR" for regular repacks. Also, see some that put "Assemble Inspect Repack" on the first entry, and "Inspect & Repack" on the rest. This one makes the most sense. BTW, I see some cards where the same rigger used both AIR and IR interchangeably :( Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #61 February 1, 2011 QuoteI had a DZ office manager call me from out of state asking what I did. I said, "Air out, inspect and repack." They said, "is that an I&R"? I said, "yes"... That kind of crap speaks volumes to the amount of fucking stupid ass people we now have in the sport these days.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #62 February 1, 2011 I used to just write "A,I&P" but some people got confused, so now I write "Ass, I&P" to define a new assemble, inspect ad pack. I only "Air, inspect and repack" for clumsy pond-swoopers! Hah! Hah! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #63 February 1, 2011 Quote So I can validate your point, what FAR or FAA document number is stamped on the bottom of the cards you use to authenticate them as being an official standard of the FAA? The H/C's name is usually on the original data card. Quote what FAR or document do you use to translate the "remarks" field to be something more specific than "remarks"? CFR 65.129 e) Pack, maintain, or alter a parachute in any manner that deviates from procedures approved by the Administrator or the manufacturer of the parachute; or The manufacturer's instructions usually state that you should log the work and place the data card somewhere. So,: 1. The manufacturer's Name is on the card 2.The FAA reqires you to follow the manufacturer's instructions. . 3.The manufacturer's manuals usually state that you should log the work on the data card. 4. ...and call the canopy and H/C manufacturer and ask them directly what you should be writing on the card. That should be interesting! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peek 20 #64 February 1, 2011 QuoteLet's throw another wrench into what I will now be thinking of as MELeaucracy : Hey, I bet I can throw another wrench into the churning gears of this thread! What is a "pack" versus a "repack"? When you assemble you are packing, not repacking, right? And what if your buddy brings you his rig having pulled the ripcord and opened up the whole rig and aired the canopy himself? That's a pack job isn't it, and not a repack? Just for everyone's information, I write, "Assenble and pack" or "Inspect and pack" depending on whether I have assembled it. I'm just not that worried about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #65 February 1, 2011 Quote The manufacturer's instructions usually state that you should log the work and place the data card somewhere. Just going off of 3 popular containers... From the Infinity manual: Quote FILL OUT THE PACKING DATA CARD WITH THE CANOPY SERIAL NUMBER, MANUFACTURER'S NAME, AND THE DATE OF MANUFACTURE. & Sign the packing data card (previously filled out) and insert it in the pocket provided behind the left ring cover. Mirage G3: Quote IMPORTANT: Do not forget to replace the completed packing data card in the proper pocket. UPT V3: Quote Dress the container, seal, and sign and log the reserve. Close the pin cover. Unless my young eyes are blind, it would appear that none of them state 'Work Performed' Quote So,: 1. The manufacturer's Name is on the card So the replacement cards from paragear are not authorized because they're not the manufacturers name on the card? Or would it just take a master rigger to approve the alteration and use of non listed part replacements. Quote 2.The FAA requires you to follow the manufacturer's instructions. As previously stated a few paragraphs up, they don't say anything about logging the work performed, so logging it, could be in violation of the manufacturers instructions, couldn't it? Quote 3.The manufacturer's manuals usually state that you should log the work on the data card. Nope, at least the 3 I just quoted say sign & seal. Bottom line: 65.131 doesn't say you have to log work performed on the data card, only required to log it on your riggers log. The manufacturers (that I referenced anyways) don't specifically state that they require work performed to be logged. You shouldn't be calling out Sandy for not writing A&I&P on the data card, when its not even required."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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #66 February 1, 2011 Quote Bottom line: 65.131 doesn't say you have to log work performed on the data card, only required to log it on your riggers log. The manufacturers (that I referenced anyways) don't specifically state that they require work performed to be logged. You shouldn't be calling out Sandy for not writing A&I&P on the data card, when its not even required. So ...you just got your rigging certificate and already you know more than the rest of us right? Tell you what, don't put anything on the data card and see where that will get ya! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #67 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote Bottom line: 65.131 doesn't say you have to log work performed on the data card, only required to log it on your riggers log. The manufacturers (that I referenced anyways) don't specifically state that they require work performed to be logged. You shouldn't be calling out Sandy for not writing A&I&P on the data card, when its not even required. So ...you just got your rigging certificate and already you know more than the rest of us right? Tell you what, don't put anything on the data card and see where that get ya! MEL No, but I can read the part about logging required. I'm not trying to piss in your cornflakes, but you're calling someone out on something that you say is required... Show me where its required?"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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tdog 0 #68 February 1, 2011 Quote2.The FAA reqires you to follow the manufacturer's instructions. I am confused. You believe the PRH is full of opinions and inaccuracies and thus needs to be replaced or rewritten. When challenged for examples by someone else, you cited the packing data card shown in the PRH as being wrong. I quoted FAA rules that specifically address what must be written in the riggers log and what must be written on the card, per the FARs. I could not find any regulations that regulate what is in the "Remarks" field of the card with enough specific detail that I would feel comfortable saying the card in the PRH violates those rules. When I challenged you on this, you just told me in the post that you have to follow the manufacturer's instructions when filling out the packing data card. Here is why I am confused... The packing data card you are criticizing as being wrong on page 7 of the PRH - was given to the FAA for their publication, by the manufacture, as an example of an appropriately filled out card for their rig. So if we are to follow the manufacturer's instructions per CFR 65.129 as you quote - then unfortunately even if you disagree with it - the card in the PRH handbook is correct since it was approved by the manufacture as an example as it appears to meet all the requirements. While I honestly think "more is better" when you write down information on a packing data card, this is my opinion and I understand it is opinion. I tend to agree with you, "A-I-R" is a better and more accurate comment to put on the card. But I know this is just opinion. I respect riggers that also put I&R because I know when they do an I&R, they must follow all the other rules, such as counting tools per the manufacturer's instructions and/or airing the canopy and/or sealing the rig, etc... Just calling you out a bit - if you are going to be very loud that the PRH is wrong, I am going to challenge you in areas where I think you believe it is wrong due opinions, not facts. P.S. I still respect you even though I challenge you (and myself) in these concepts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #69 February 1, 2011 Quote I am confused. You believe the PRH is full of opinions and inaccuracies and thus needs to be replaced or rewritten. When challenged for examples by someone else, you cited the packing data card shown in the PRH as being wrong. I am not the only one that thinks this. The FAA also knows this to be true now after so many people pointed out the issues. QuoteHere is why I am confused... The packing data card you are criticizing as being wrong on page 7 of the PRH - was given to the FAA for their publication, by the manufacture, as an example of an appropriately filled out card for their rig. So if we are to follow the manufacturer's instructions per CFR 65.129 as you quote - then unfortunately even if you disagree with it - the card in the PRH handbook is correct since it was approved by the manufacture as an example as it appears to meet all the requirements. In this case the same guy that wrote the book just so happens to be also the manufacturer. Again, a manufacturer cannot diminish the "standards" set forth by the FAA. Here again I will point out that airing is still a requirement as per the regulations. I just put in a call for you guys to Washington. Let's see what their answer is. It will be pretty quick I'm sure on this one. Quote Just calling you out a bit - if you are going to be very loud that the PRH is wrong, I am going to challenge you in areas where I think you believe it is wrong due opinions, not facts. I guess I am confused. Is airing a parachute still not a requirement? (Fact based) I guess you only issue you have is whether or not you need to write AIR, INSPECT, REPACK in the remarks column on the data card. I guess which ever you do (all or nothing, either blank or A.I.R.) the example in the book would be still wrong..correct? MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tdog 0 #70 February 1, 2011 Quote In this case the same guy that wrote the book just so happens to be also the manufacturer. Again, a manufacturer cannot diminish the "standards" set forth by the FAA. Here again I will point out that airing is still a requirement as per the regulations. He is still the manufacture. And you previously said we had to follow the manufacturer's instructions citing the FAA FARs. If other manufactures suggest their cards must be filled out differently, then we would have to respect their wishes. QuoteIs airing a parachute still not a requirement? (Fact based) It is. So are about 50 other things you have to do when packing a reserve, such as counting tools, looking for SB compliance, sealing the rig with a seal, ensuring the pull force is not in excess of limits, etc. Do you ever write "Opened Manual, Aired out, Inspected, Packed, Checked for SBs, Verified Battery, Sealed, Counted Tools, Filled out Logbook?" I still contend, "I&R" has become the industry standard, along with "A, I &R" of notating that a complete reserve repack has taken place, of which, airing out is only one of many sub-actions, and therefore, the packing data card in the PRH is not in error, especially since it was provided by the manufacture as their approved technique. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #71 February 1, 2011 Quote He is still the manufacture. And you previously said we had to follow the manufacturer's instructions citing the FAA FARs. If other manufactures suggest their cards must be filled out differently, then we would have to respect their wishes. ....up to the point that it does not violate the regs. You have to abide by the CFR's, your responsibilites, and privileges as a rigger in order to maintain those privileges. Quote It is. So are about 50 other things you have to do when packing a reserve, such as counting tools, looking for SB compliance, sealing the rig with a seal, ensuring the pull force is not in excess of limits, etc. Do you ever write "Opened Manual, Aired out, Inspected, Packed, Checked for SBs, Verified Battery, Sealed, Counted Tools, Filled out Logbook?" What you stated are Givens. What I am speaking of are direct actions that are required in writing in the CFR's. The things thatt you are bring up are not. Quote I still contend, "I&R" has become the industry standard, along with "A, I &R" of notating that a complete reserve repack has taken place, of which, airing out is only one of many sub-actions, and therefore, the packing data card in the PRH is not in error, especially since it was provided by the manufacture as their approved technique First, Industry standards (which in this case is not) are not what you follow as a certificated rigger. You follow the regs...are you are supposed too. Since you brought it up Intitals or abbreviations are not really legal in FAA documents which you can find in FMIS. You supposed to spell out words. The FAA hates blanks and lack of format. If you have the time go through there and study some of the stuff in there. Lastly, as I am completely done with this issue, record keeping is a big time concern with regards to two high profile fatalities. This is one reason that it will not be long for the wait! MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #72 February 1, 2011 QuoteQuote He is still the manufacture. And you previously said we had to follow the manufacturer's instructions citing the FAA FARs. If other manufactures suggest their cards must be filled out differently, then we would have to respect their wishes. ....up to the point that it does not violate the regs. WHAT regs state you must record work performed on the parachute data card? I've asked you this several times, you've skated around it, every time. Quote Quote It is. So are about 50 other things you have to do when packing a reserve, such as counting tools, looking for SB compliance, sealing the rig with a seal, ensuring the pull force is not in excess of limits, etc. Do you ever write "Opened Manual, Aired out, Inspected, Packed, Checked for SBs, Verified Battery, Sealed, Counted Tools, Filled out Logbook?" What you stated are Givens. What I am speaking of are direct actions that are required in writing in the CFR's. The things that you are bring up are not. An air, inspect and repack is given, provided that I signed the data card, and sealed the packjob. You're skating around the issue, show me ONE spot in the CFR's that says I have to log work performed on the parachute data card, (not the riggers log book, but the actual parachute data card that goes with the h/c & reserve) I bet you're an awesome rigger and examiner, but the fact of the matter is, that statement doesn't exist. It worries me that you're willing to pass it off as the law, when there is not once piece of supporting evidence to that effect. What else are you misleading people into believing? You say you've abandon this discussion, why? Why would you abandon a discussion when you know you're right, and have the word of the law to back you up. Why not just show us where it states that we have to log all work performed (and not givens) on the data card? I expect I won't get a reply that answers these questions."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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #73 February 1, 2011 Quoterecord keeping is a big time concern with regards to two high profile fatalities. Please give more details, thanksyou can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrigger1 2 #74 February 1, 2011 In the Ohio tandem incident, it is unclear who exactly did what and when. The other is somewhat Hush-hush because of the lawsuit. MELSkyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #75 February 1, 2011 Thanks, I assume in the Ohio TDM your talking about the racer rig.you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites