is there More then 1 reserve chute?

[YOUCEF 0]

HELLO
i have maybe idiot question
is there More then 1 reserve chute? why always have 1 PRINCIPAL AND ONE reserve
why not 2 reserve
did any company manufacturing this ??

[RiggerLee 61]

Size, bulk, weight make it a point of diminishing return. There are also issues of routeing of risers and bridles. You can have three canopies. We do things like that for test jumping. I have a rig I test jump with. I have also built systems for tirshes for canopy relative work. Bumper cars with parachutes. Some times they get tangled up and the ability to deploy a round reserve on a long bridle can be helpful when your tumbling to the ground in a mass of nylon. But in any normal circumstance all of this is just way more trouble then it's worth.

Lee

Lee
[email protected]
www.velocitysportswear.com

[Quagmirian 40]

RiggerLee

But in any normal circumstance all of this is just way more trouble then it's worth.

That's the crux of it. Parachutes are so reliable that unless you're doing something out of the ordinary, having a third canopy can actually make you less safe, because it's more complexity and more procedures to get wrong.

[CTSkydiver 0]

RiggerLee

tirshes

Tertiary. As in Primary (1st), Secondary (2nd), Tertiary (3rd).

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi YOUCEF,

Quote

did any company manufacturing this ??

Yes, Strong Enterprises, Inc. did.

See the attached photos,

Jerry Baumchen

[councilman24 36]

To OP, photos from Jerry are of a very specific intentional cutaway rig made with handles that mimic their tandem rig. A cutaway, intentional or real is required to get a tandem rating. This rig, and I've jumped it, is so those without a cutaway can do an intentional cutaway. This rig has essentially two mains, with the second main ripcord activated to simulate tandem reserve. I second main, the simulated reserve, malfunction then a "normal" reserve is available. This rig is not the same as a tertiary added to a rig for CRW. Others have also made 'factory' intentional cutaway rigs. Notably Rigging Innovations for the Golden Knights. My problem with theirs is you cannot choose to open the main that you intend to land without opening and cutting away the first, often non landable canopy. In the event of an aircraft emergency or other reason to abort the intentional cutaway I want to be able to open the #2 canopy, the one I was planning on landing.

Years ago I added a front mount with three ring release to a harness so others could get a cutaway. Less complex and you go back into freefall with your normal rig.

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

[RiggerLee 61]

I also favor a front mount. I'm not sure I'd say that it's any less complicated. The point is that they are all significantly more complicated and involve fundamental changes to your procedures which is how almost every one gets into trouble jumping them. People have killed them selves pulling handles out of sequence. Doesn't the USPA require a C license to do an intentional cutaway? Seems silly since it could happen on their first AFF but as odd as it sounds intentional cutaways are more dangerous then emergency ones. It's the gear. It's more complicated and it's not what you've been trained to use. The latter could be corrected but you're talking about adding that complexity to ordinary rigs for ordinary jumps for an infinitesimal, or at least very small increase in safety. How many actual reserve malfunctions do you have a year? Now raise your hand if you know some one that has died doing an intentional cutaway... My hands up. You can jump a third canopy if you want to but it's not worth the price.

Lee

Lee
[email protected]
www.velocitysportswear.com

[IanHarrop 37]

Back in the old days....

[inline reserves.jpg]

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[JohnMitchell 14]

Now THAT'S a cutaway rig!

I remember seeing cutaway demos at airshows when I was a kid. Cool as hell. I've never done an intentional but I do have 14-15 regular cutaways.

[mark 102]

RiggerLee

they are all significantly more complicated

Emergency procedure for 3-canopy system with MARD on the first of the two reserves, total malfunction of the #1 (Main) canopy, MARD failure to disconnect when attempting to deploy the first of the two reserves: this results in a pilot chute in tow.

Plan A: disconnect the RSL. In freefall. Maybe with gloves on. But this releases the towed pilot chute, hopefully in time.

Plan B: deploy the #1 canopy, then cutaway the #1 canopy, hoping for an ordinary MARD deployment of the first reserve and not an entanglement. Except that you had a total on #1 in the first place.

Plan C: deploy the second reserve, hoping for a good deployment. Except that the first reserve container is open, and is the first reserve still in the container or has it fallen out and started tangling on stuff?

-Mark

[gowlerk 1,904]

Quote

MARD failure to disconnect when attempting to deploy the first of the two reserves: this results in a pilot chute in tow.

That is not supposed to be possible. Unless misrigging occurs. Plus it is nearly as complicated, and likely with just one reserve. The only real difference is that option C is available.

[jcd11235 0]

JohnMitchell

I've never done an intentional but I do have 14-15 regular cutaways.

I've had ~8 myself, all intentional and well-planned, just timed randomly!

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[JohnMitchell 14]

Yeah, I guess mine were intentional.