cones

[rapaz 0]

Any good reason to keep using cones and end tabs eyes and elástic hooks like the navy NB 8
Tanks
Nico

[Unstable 8]

I'm throwing this out there, but the NB-8 is still in production and in active use. As a matter of fact, there is a flight school under the wing of a local State University that uses 2008-vintage NB-8s for spin training.

=========Shaun ==========

[rapaz 0]

What about the 22 lbs on the reserve handle with cones?, or with a bulky packjob?, service bulletins on cones? More easy to bent pines?, prevent premature openings for loop failure in large troop military jumps?

[dpreguy 14]

The design is all about instant openings. Pack opening bands do just that - they strip away the sides of the pack completely; and with the steel spring bands at the floor of the pack, the canopy is not only exposed, but it is pushed out at the same time. Talk about getting the canopy into the air! Pilot chute too of course. Not only the NB 8 but the Army and Air Force B 12's too. Yes the design is 50 or 60 years old but......

Also, as I recall, the NB 8 also uses a loop closure for the lower part of the container, as well as cones.

It is a very reliable design - result oriented.

(DB Cooper chose it over the other two. No that is an endorsement! Humor intended)

[riggerrob 558]

Pack-opening bands pre-date spiral springs in pilot-chutes. Before reliable spiral springs were installed in MA-1 pilot-chutes, we needed extra, external springs to pull the side flaps away from the pilot-chute and allow it to escape into the wind.
GQ Security 150 (pilot emergency parachute introduced circa 1970) was the last significant design with an extra, external spring to assist the pilot-chute in escaping. The primary function of the Security 150's extra spring is to remove the nylon closing loops.
Since then we have learned to trust a single MA-1 spiral spring to push the pilot-chute out into the wind. MIL SPEC MA-1 springs push a minimum of 18 pounds.