JerryBaumchen 1,048 #51 May 7, 2014 Hi Michael, QuoteIf you're willing to throw away the recommendations of the AAD manufacturer then how about using some aircraft cable for a closing loop with your cypres. IMO, in the USA, you are req'd to use the same material that the product was TSO'd with. Now, I do agree that this is not 'usually' listed in any Owner's Manual; however, a simple letter or telephone call should get any rigger the answer. I have no problem with anyone ( that includes you ) with not agreeing with me. I really get irked when some mfr of a non-certificated device can tell the mfr of a certificated device what he has to do. What if a container mfr said that only gutted Type 2 suspension line could be used as a Locking Loop? What would you do then if your customer wanted a CYPRES installed in that container? Things to think about. JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
erdnarob 1 #52 May 12, 2014 Hi Jerry What you are saying is just common sense. As riggers, we have to use our judgment to make the difference between manufacturer abuse and the common sense stuff. I understand that a rookie rigger will hesitate not to go by the book. It takes a certain experience (like attending seminars at PIA symposium or/and visit manufacturer factories...) to spot what I call exagerated demands. Fortunately, none of US manufacturers do that kind of abuse. The subject we are discussing reminds me the companies which are found breaking antitrust laws. They are severely punished in the US. In Canada we have laws to protect customers from companies trying to set up a monopoly and other laws protecting from false publicity or other abuses. For me there are three aspects we have to consider above all when using a piece of equipment, it is : 1) structural soundness 2) function 3) compatibility Nothing new here. If those three aspects are met, we have the tools to justify what we are doing. BTW I have packed a reserve in a WINGS container equiped with the BOOST M.A.R.D. for the first time. The BOOST is very similar to the M.A.R.D. demo you have sent me few years ago. I wonder what Eric Fradet would say about it. RegardsLearn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #53 May 12, 2014 Eric Fradet is "in the loop" about Mr. Baumchen's M.A.R.D. Eric designed a similar M.A.R.D. for the Advance harness/container made in France. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #54 May 12, 2014 gowlerkNow I'm starting to feel like maybe I've been reckless in the past. In my supply bin I have a container with reserve closing loops in it. Most of them are pre-made ones from Vigils, CYPRES, or M2s that I've installed. When I need a new loop for a repack I just grab one. I don't even know what brand any of them are. Please don't tell on me. ............................................................................ Hee! Hee! Back in the late 1990s, I earned Airtec's approval to sew in Cypres pockets. Since then, I have retrofitted hundreds of containers for electronic AADs. Whenever anyone asked me to sew in pockets for (electronic) AADs, I just reached into my bin full of Cypres pockets and sewed them in according to the Cypres manual. It was only very late in the assembly process that I realized that they just bought an Argus or Astra or Vigil. By that late in the process, I was too lazy to remove the Cypres pocket ... sew in a Vigil pocket ... etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hackish 8 #55 May 17, 2014 erdnarobI understand that a rookie rigger will hesitate not to go by the book. We will ignore the advice Cypres tries to give about others using their washers - they didn't manufacture the Vigil they have no right to try and dictate the rules for installing it. Since as you describe only rookies follow instructions it is interesting to find the innovative things these non-rookies have invented. Stuffing the nose into the width reduction folds. Not rolling the VTC-2R noses, rubber banding the slider up to the stabilizers, wrapping as many as 6 turns of sealing thread on brake lines and L-bars, using gutted 550 for reserve closing loops. Even interesting science experiments can have unintended consequences. Remember burning 2 holes in a reserve experimenting to see if a cutter could go on the bottom of a vector pack tray? In principle it seems like a good idea - after all it works on a wings. I think the advice of disregarding manufacturer instructions is poor at best. Very few riggers will ever have better advice than the guys who designed and tested a system. Many will have worse advice. -Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,048 #56 May 17, 2014 Hi Michael, Quote they didn't manufacture the Vigil they have no right to try and dictate the rules for installing it. So now we have something we both can agree with. IMO the AAD mfrs did not manufacture the container either ( a TSO certificated product ); so they 'have no right to try and dictate any rules for installing it.' JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
erdnarob 1 #57 May 17, 2014 Well said Jerry, you are just in few words summarizing my thoughts. Lets use our brain, judgement and basic rules learned from our rigger course (structural soundness, function and compatibility). All equipement manufacturers started building equipement in their basement. I remember in the 70s when came out the three ring release. People who gave me the instructor course made fun of the 3 rings saying that was another gimmick. In Montreal in 1976 (when the now rookies were not born) I could try a demo where the three rings were just held in place by a straw to drink beverage. I was pulling one side of the webbing and another guy the other side. The straw barely bend. When I withdraw the straw, the release was flawless. As a mechanical engineering technologist and former drafman designer, I understood that we had the release of the future. Now it is the standard of the world. All of that to say that some people with a title can hide behind their title to impose their view. Fortunately some other are thinking. It always easier to believe than to think. Going along with abusive demands and adopting attitude of some people who like to keep their old and comfortable slippers, we would still jump with Capewell release on sport equipement. Capewell were beautifully designed and are still in use today but in our sport, everybody agrees that the 3 ring release is superior. Even the Chinese and Russians have adopted it. But to appreciate that, I guess one needs some perspective, knowing equipment history and do a follow up of the technology evolution. I was happy to jump a modified paratrooper T-10 in the 70s. But now, I much more appreciate flying a Katana and a rig equiped with the three rings. Rookies should listen more about the people who have seen and experienced equipment for several decades.Why scaring people by calling a law which doen't exist anyway ? Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,048 #58 May 17, 2014 Hi Andre', Quote equipement manufacturers started building equipement in their basement. And you can add my name to that list. When the FAA came to look over/inspect my 'facilities' I showed them an area in my basement about 7 ft x 9 ft. I had a somewhat small workbench & two sewing machines. JerryBaumchen PS) I once heard that Bill Booth started in his then girlfriend's garage. I also heard that Ted Strong started in his parent's basement. And I heard that Lowell Bachmann started in one his parent's bedrooms. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #59 May 18, 2014 hackish***"... It is interesting to find the innovative things these non-rookies have invented. ... using gutted 550 for reserve closing loops. ..." -Michael ................................................................................. Hah! Hah! Gutted 550 cord was fashionable for closing loops before electronic AADs. Now we have better material for closing loops: Cypres cord. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hackish 8 #60 May 20, 2014 JerryBaumchen Quote they didn't manufacture the Vigil they have no right to try and dictate the rules for installing it. So now we have something we both can agree with. IMO the AAD mfrs did not manufacture the container either ( a TSO certificated product ); so they 'have no right to try and dictate any rules for installing it. The issue here is that the AAD manufacturer provided instructions on how to assemble and use their product and that includes what closing loop material you are allowed to use. Choosing to ignore the rules and deciding to install THEIR product in an unapproved way or with unapproved components is the real problem. Taken right from the CSPA's list of BSRs. The principle Andre is trying to promote is directly in violation of the rules he is supposed to follow. QuoteIn the event that an Automatic Activation Device is installed in the harness/container system, this device shall be serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and service directives. Using your understanding of the systems should be applied to situations and judgements not covered by the manufacturers' published instructions, not to contradict them. -Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
