Icarus OM 7 H main or reserve ?

[rapaz 0]

Hi, I just saw a main with a reserve label, or a reserve sold more expensive as a main ?

Nico

 

[sfzombie13 307]

my main has one like that too.  i had to send it back to get a bridle attachment point sewed on and they swapped out sliders with one that didn't have a hole in it.  i love jumping reserves like mains, and you've got it backwards, i got them cheap as hell.  one came in the container i paid $400 for.  a brand new one may cost closer to a new main though. 

[shadeland 5]

That is weird. The OM-7 is a hybrid canopy (ZP and I assume F-111 style). Do they really have a TSO on that? Searching the TSO database, I see only: CIMSA Ingenieria de Sistemas, S.A. for the same city as Icarus... and the model number doesn't really tell us anything. 

What the heck is going on here? 

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

On 6/17/2023 at 11:52 AM, rapaz said:

Hi, I just saw a main with a reserve label, or a reserve sold more expensive as a main ?

Nico

 

Hi nico,

The first canopy that I know of that was both a main & a reserve was the ParaCommander.  Pioneer did not initially plan on getting it certificated, but some European countries req'd that ALL canopies used there had to be certificated.  So, Pioneer went thru the testing to obtain the certification.  They had to use a longer bridle line to get it to pass the tests.

The first canopy that I know of that did this from the get-go was the Raven series of canopies.

I'm thinking that they might all go down the same production line and then get determined as a main or reserve near the end of the production line.

Anyone else?

Jerry Baumchen

[shadeland 5]

2 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi nico,

The first canopy that I know of that was both a main & a reserve was the ParaCommander.  Pioneer did not initially plan on getting it certificated, but some European countries req'd that ALL canopies used there had to be certificated.  So, Pioneer went thru the testing to obtain the certification.  They had to use a longer bridle line to get it to pass the tests.

The first canopy that I know of that did this from the get-go was the Raven series of canopies.

I'm thinking that they might all go down the same production line and then get determined as a main or reserve near the end of the production line.

Anyone else?

Jerry Baumchen

The weird thing is their reserves and this main are made from different materials from what I can tell. The OM-7 is a hybrid (presumably some ZP, though I'm not sure) and their other reserves (regular and nano) are not. So is this a labeling error or did they also TSO a partly ZP canopy, too? 

Does material count in a TSO? I would assume it does. But maybe not? 

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

6 hours ago, shadeland said:

The weird thing is their reserves and this main are made from different materials from what I can tell. The OM-7 is a hybrid (presumably some ZP, though I'm not sure) and their other reserves (regular and nano) are not. So is this a labeling error or did they also TSO a partly ZP canopy, too? 

Does material count in a TSO? I would assume it does. But maybe not? 

Hi shade,

Re:  Does material count in a TSO?

Possibly, the regs are IMO very vague to non-existent as to what all must be included in the specifications that have to be submitted.  Also, they could have submitted a number of fabrics from which they could build with.

In 1964, Security introduced a 1.1 oz fabric in their new Crossbow 26 ft conical canopy.  A year or two later, they came out with a 26 ft conical Lo-Po canopy.  It also used a 1.1 oz fabric; only this Lo-Po fabric had been calendared [ sp? ] to obtain a lower porosity fabric.  It could easily be argued that it was still the same 1.1 oz as used originally.

See how that works?

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 1,912]

The Icarus World website does not list or claim it to be a reserve. As a hybrid canopy presumably with a ZP top skin I would not want to have to pack it. I once briefly owned a Raven MZ. It was very difficult to pack neatly. I Ebayed that sucker to someone far away.

[Deyan 31]

My money is on labeling error. If it was TSO'd, would have been C23f and not "d"

[gowlerk 1,912]

2 hours ago, Deyan said:

My money is on labeling error. If it was TSO'd, would have been C23f and not "d"

That doesn't say much about QC over at the Icarus World factory does it? If someone from there doesn't come up with an explanation soon it will say even worse things.

[shadeland 5]

4 hours ago, Deyan said:

My money is on labeling error. If it was TSO'd, would have been C23f and not "d"

Their reserves are approved under c23d

[Deyan 31]

8 hours ago, shadeland said:

Their reserves are approved under c23d

Yes. Because they were designed, tested and certified before Sept 2012. OM-7 is 4 years old canopy. If it was TSO tested it would have been C23f. The label says C23d which makes me believe it was a labeling error rather than the canopy actually being TSO certified.

[sfzombie13 307]

not if it was approved under the old tso as most containers are, although that is only what i have heard on this forum and i have no knowledge other than that. 

On 6/19/2023 at 7:13 AM, gowlerk said:

I Ebayed that sucker to someone far away.

was it red?  i got mine from ebay i think.  if it was yours, thanx a bunch i love that canopy.  fits in the container just a tad smaller than the 218.  of course that is as a main not a reserve. 

[shadeland 5]

4 hours ago, Deyan said:

Yes. Because they were designed, tested and certified before Sept 2012. OM-7 is 4 years old canopy. If it was TSO tested it would have been C23f. The label says C23d which makes me believe it was a labeling error rather than the canopy actually being TSO certified.

It doesn't matter when it's made, it matters which TSO it was approved under when the application process was done. If you buy a PD Reserve made today, it will have been built under the TSO c23c authorization. The UPT Vector 3 is still manufactured under c23b IIRC (from 1959). If a company wanted to update their TSO to c23f from any earlier TSO, they would have to re-do the process. Considering how expensive the process can be, it's unlikely anyone would. Consumers don't much care (and honestly I don't think they should, other factors are far more important), so there's no reason to update a TSO in most cases. 

[shadeland 5]

Update: I emailed Icarus, and they confirmed it was a labeling error. The OM-7 does not have a TSO. 

But this brings up the fact that they do a packing log on the data label (so does PD) and I love that. I wish the the others did that.