theonlyski 3 #101 June 22, 2011 QuoteQuote How exactly would you install a closing loop into a container if it's already installed in the cutter? It's not as easy of a concept as you might think. Put the cutter on the outside of the rig under the reserve cover on top of the top flap? As long as we are going to condone putting it under a top flap and the problem that creates, hell, just put it outside the top flap under the pin cover so you can see it. That's the point I'm making... it's such a rare situation that trying to negate it will simply make it more complicated. Putting the cutter on the top flap? Sure... going to have to put some sort of barrier on it to keep it from getting fouled up, extra protection for the cutter head/control wire, making it so you can actually have a pin go thru the closing loop mounted directly on top of the cutter... (not to mention the many more cutters that will be damaged by the use of positive leverage tools and temp pins that gouge the surface) IMO the Cypres cutter isn't the problem, and I don't think it needs to be changed at all. Shit happens, one in a million shot... I don't see anyone trying to change the ability of lightning to strike and kill someone. ETA: The lightning doesn't require a waiver either."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
DiverMike 5 #102 June 22, 2011 QuoteAs long as we are going to condone putting it under a top flap and the problem that creates, hell, just put it outside the top flap under the pin cover so you can see it. Then watch the incidents go up because of foreign objects entering the cutter since it is not as protected. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 135 #103 June 22, 2011 Just brainstorming here.... why wouldn't we have a shrapnell cutter in there, or could we have an Amazon mod on the actual cutters (by adding a chainsaw to it)... Beware, do not put your knee inside the reserve tray. imagine you have a car accident because your mechanic didn't tighten the bolts of your wheels, and on the first turn you went straight into the wall. Would you sue the brake manufacturer because the brakes failed to stop the car ? In a logical world you wouldn't... In some people's minds posting in this thread, yes, for sure, the brake manufacturer should have installed a nuts&bolts controller on the wheels... In the same logical world, there would be some kind of attack on the mechanic who did not do his job properly... Now if you take the manual of your car, and read it, and understand it, you will certainly find a paragraph where you see everything you need to check prior to run said car...scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Divalent 89 #104 June 22, 2011 QuoteIt's not that far of a stretch, considering the courts, to say that the cutter should have a sensor to indicate whether the closing loop is present and under tension inside the cutter. All this talk about requiring a sensor is just plain stupid. A sensor might make sense if a loop could get dislodged once properly installed, but that is not the case. If the loop is properly routed throught the cutter at closing time, a sensor would be pointless beyond that time: any information it would tell you would be fairly reliable information about the functioning of the sensor, not whether the loop is still in the cutter. Right now the most reliable sensor that could possibly be used to confirm the proper routing of the closing loop is already being used: the human visual system and brain. It ain't perfect, but it is orders of magnitude more reliable than any electronic component will every be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Divalent 89 #105 June 22, 2011 Quoteimagine you have a car accident because your mechanic didn't tighten the bolts of your wheels, and on the first turn you went straight into the wall. Would you sue the brake manufacturer because the brakes failed to stop the car ? It's worse than that: they want to sue the bolt manufacturer for failing to have a sensor in the bolt that alerts the consumer that the bolt wasn't tight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #106 June 22, 2011 QuoteHow exactly would you install a closing loop into a container if it's already installed in the cutter? It's not as easy of a concept as you might think. If all rigs had the cutter in the bottom of the reserve tray (along with the issues that had) this design wouldn't be that horrible, but making a closing loop and attaching it to the cutter segment would involve even more steps and defeat the whole point of the design change. Given that many rigs locate the cutter above the PC, however, it would be awfully difficult to connect the portion of the loop that was going through the PC to the cutter segment while it was under tension. And once you wipe the sweat away you'll have proudly packed a reserve total... ...hence my joke in post #94. In summary: Trae hopes "we get better AAD's out of cases like this" whereas I hope we don't get shittier ones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrBill2455 0 #107 June 22, 2011 It is apparent that this is a unique situation and with all of the attention surrounding this case, riggers are more likely to double check their work and be more careful in their processes. To the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #108 June 22, 2011 Quote To the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? I welcome it, schedule permitting, any one is free to come check out the entire process from pop to sign/seal/log. (I say schedule permitting because some repacks I will do at times that are convienant for me, may not be convienant for the owner)"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
Divalent 89 #109 June 22, 2011 QuoteTo the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? If I were concerned that my rigger might fail to route the closing loop through my AAD, I'd be WAY more concerned about other errors made up to that point. Afterall, this error did not make the reserve useless. (So if I were concerned he'd make *that* mistake, I would probably just find another rigger that I could trust.) Having said that, if I asked a rigger to let me watch the whole process, and he said I couldn't under any circumstances (assuming I'd accomodate his schedule and the requirements for his work area) I also probably find another rigger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaTTT 1 #110 June 22, 2011 Quote To the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? Current I&R Pricing $60 If you watch: $65 If you help: $100 "Even in a world where perfection is unattainable, there's still a difference between excellence and mediocrity." Gary73 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #111 June 22, 2011 Quote Quote To the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? Current I&R Pricing $60 If you watch: $65 If you help: $100 I have one additional category $60 If you watch $65 If you ask questions: $80 If you help: $100 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
topdocker 0 #112 June 22, 2011 Quote Quote Quote To the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? Current I&R Pricing $60 If you watch: $65 If you help: $100 I have one additional category $60 If you watch $65 If you ask questions: $80 If you help: $100 I hate watching my reserve getting packed. Its like watching paint dry... topJump more, post less! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaTTT 1 #113 June 22, 2011 Right on! "Even in a world where perfection is unattainable, there's still a difference between excellence and mediocrity." Gary73 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #114 June 22, 2011 QuoteQuoteAs long as we are going to condone putting it under a top flap and the problem that creates, hell, just put it outside the top flap under the pin cover so you can see it. Then watch the incidents go up because of foreign objects entering the cutter since it is not as protected. *sigh*....I should have put in a couple of those "tongue in cheek" smilies.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #115 June 22, 2011 QuoteTo the riggers out there: if a skydiver asked to watch you route their loop and close their reserve pack job would you be offended by this or would you think they are being a cautious skydiver? Seems to me (not a rigger) that a good rigger would welcome the opportunity to teach youngsters more about how their gear works as the work is being done....but that's just me.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ERAUSkydiver 0 #116 June 23, 2011 In the spacecraft world, if we're closing out a compartment or piece of equipment for flight that will not be seen again either until it's back on the ground or ever, we take close-out photographs. These document the configuration of the equipment at the time the compartment was buttoned up for flight. The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #117 June 23, 2011 Quote In the spacecraft world, if we're closing out a compartment or piece of equipment for flight that will not be seen again either until it's back on the ground or ever, we take close-out photographs. These document the configuration of the equipment at the time the compartment was buttoned up for flight. The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. The absolute brilliance of simplicity! I like it. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #118 June 23, 2011 It's not that simple. Who views them to ensure compliance, or are they just used for investigative purposes in the event of an accident?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hcsvader 1 #119 June 23, 2011 Pretty simple to provide a couple of print outs with the invoice for the reserve pack.Have you seen my pants? it"s a rough life, Livin' the dream >:) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #120 June 23, 2011 Quote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea!My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerpaul 1 #121 June 23, 2011 QuoteIn the spacecraft world, if we're closing out a compartment or piece of equipment for flight that will not be seen again either until it's back on the ground or ever, we take close-out photographs. These document the configuration of the equipment at the time the compartment was buttoned up for flight. The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. That's fine in an environment where there are multiple people participating in the documentation effort. But the parachute rigger, all alone, late at night, might take the photo, and then do something that disturbs things. All I am saying is that the validity of the photo can be questioned, and rightly so. If you really want to make it difficult for a mistake to get into the air, prohibit solo rigging. Require a photo too, if you like. But a second set of eyes is really what you had in the spacecraft world, photo notwithstanding. No, I am not suggesting only buddy-system rigging. But if you want to solve this problem, I believe that buddy-system rigging is what it would take. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #122 June 23, 2011 ....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Great idea, but where do you stop? A rigger can make several critical mistakes. Do you have him photograph/video the whole process, or just trust him/her to do it correctly? We need to remember this was one misrouted reserve pack job out of tens of thousands done yearly. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gweeks 1 #123 June 23, 2011 Quote Current I&R Pricing $60 If you watch: $65 If you help: $100 I have one additional category $60 If you watch $65 If you ask questions: $80 If you help: $100 I think you guys are being tongue in cheek about this and this is a little off topic but I encourage people, especially newer jumpers, to watch me inspect and repack their reserve and ask questions because I think it's a valuable learning experience. I remember watching a reserve I&R when I was a newer jumper (thank you Kruse!) and feeling more confident in my gear knowing how it was all put together. It may take a little longer but I don't charge more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #124 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea! Who was that masked man? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerpaul 1 #125 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea! Who was that masked man? Photos can be faked. (Not likely here, but they could, especially if enough is at stake.) Photos can be taken and changes occur afterwards. Since the problem we want to deal with here is some sort of carelessness, why expect that there will be any better care for the photo responsibility than the rigging responsibility? The photo suggestion sounds good at first, but doesn't hold water in the final analysis, because, in many ways, it is not the photo that provides the surety. If you want some real insurance, you need at least one more set of eyes. In the spacecraft example, there are surely more than one set of eyes watching even as the photos are taken. It is the eyes, not the photos, that provide the security. The photo serves only to bolster the story told by the people who were watching. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
