FrogNog 1 #26 July 22, 2004 QuoteIs this adjustable MLW arrangement new on the Jav? Did it replace an older design... I just find it surprising that 2 fatalities have occured in about 1 year with at their core an equipment failure, if this same tyep of equipment has been used for a while.... It may be nothing more than coincidence. If this failure had some random chance of happening, it could go a long time without failing then two could fail at once. It's also possible that gear age, wear, or some other factor could be a link. But our minds have a way of seeing patterns where there are none. -=-=-=-=- Pull. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #27 July 22, 2004 QuoteIs this adjustable MLW arrangement new on the Jav? Did it replace an older design... I just find it surprising that 2 fatalities have occured in about 1 year with at their core an equipment failure, if this same tyep of equipment has been used for a while.... I believe the Miami incident was on a rig that was about a year old. My old J5 that was found in the Stage 3 category last year was a DOM95. I have no idea what the DOM was at SDC for this last accident. Oh yea, I know for a fact that I fully check out my rig before every first jump each weekend - and even with a full/complete gear check I never saw any wear on the MLW. Here is something else - I've recently been told that Sunpath is not the only company that uses this hardware for adjustable MLWs. Do you think those other companies should issue a SB (much like the SB offered for the gromet in the main tray)? What is the differenace that hasn't caused a break yet in their setup? Why are not all companies going to the hardware used on the tandem passenger harness?_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #28 July 22, 2004 QuoteWhy are not all companies going to the hardware used on the tandem passenger harness? Which one? They are not all designed the same either.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #29 July 22, 2004 Looks like someone's given up on them... http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=310&item=3688898742&rd=1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #30 July 22, 2004 Those containers were manufactured in 96. I don't believe SunPath offered the adjustable harness then. That sale is probably unrelated. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #31 July 22, 2004 "The serial numbers of the Javelin containers are 12425,12426,12427(all with a DOM 09/96) & 13702,13703,13704,13705 (with a DOM of 07/97) Each has a fully adjustable harness for all shapes & sizes!" Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #32 July 22, 2004 QuoteThat sale is probably unrelated Actually it probably is. After I posted I realised that the auction was listed a couple of days before the SB... but I guess there's no way of knowing who knew before it was published. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #33 July 23, 2004 QuoteThose containers were manufactured in 96. I don't believe SunPath offered the adjustable harness then. That sale is probably unrelated. _Am I had a DOM1995 J5 with an adjustable harness, so I would assume they offered it back then. JP - I don't know much about the tandem harness - that is why I was asking._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fast 0 #34 July 23, 2004 QuoteThose containers were manufactured in 96. I don't believe SunPath offered the adjustable harness then. That sale is probably unrelated. _Am Probally unrelated yes, but... Maybe not. They may have given up on them before the SB came out. Also, I'm pretty sure you can see the adjustable MLW in one of the pictures.~D Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me. Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tahoedog 0 #35 July 24, 2004 Sale ended early; seller is no longer registered ebay user. Maybe there -uh- was a lack of interest. Now if we can just get these things out of the sky... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #36 July 24, 2004 >Now if we can just get these things out of the sky... I'll be happy to take a few off people's hands! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #37 July 24, 2004 QuoteNow if we can just get these things out of the sky... Why??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #38 July 24, 2004 You've been making quite a few claims and statments that would be more credible if we knew more about you.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #39 July 24, 2004 QuoteSale ended early; seller is no longer registered ebay user. Maybe there -uh- was a lack of interest. Or maybe someone bought them.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hookitt 0 #40 July 24, 2004 Quote>Now if we can just get these things out of the sky... I'll be happy to take a few off people's hands! Would you put them back in service with the current harness design? Without the "Administrators" approval, you couldn't change the design anyway but I'm curious as to whether you feel the harness design is fine the way it is, or you would make some changes if you could? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tahoedog 0 #41 July 24, 2004 J.P, I've emailed you twice so far and not gotten a response. Who I am is not the issue. My qualifications are not the issue. THE ISSUE IS SAFETY!! The issue is a theory which could explain why these rigs are failing. Again, Skydive Chicago (about which YOU had only good things to say) inspected the rig three times before a guy was killed in it. In the interest of safety, there's no reason why the things should not be grounded until a thorough, independent investigation is completed. I normally wouldn't do this in a public forum, but for whatever reason, my attempts at contacting you privately have failed. Now, please voice any of your personal concerns about me privately. (sorry everybody) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #42 July 24, 2004 Quote(everybody else - the name thing is a different matter) Then why post about it here? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #43 July 25, 2004 QuoteIn the interest of safety, there's no reason why the things should not be grounded until a thorough, independent investigation is completed. That's exactly what this service bulletin requires. The rigs are all grounded until a master rigger certifies them as airworthy. Are you suggesting that ALL Master Riggers are somehow under the influence of Sun Path? Why do we need to get these rigs "out of the sky" even after they've been cleared as safe by a Master rigger? Do you not trust the judgement of master riggers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tahoedog 0 #44 July 25, 2004 Please read all posts on this topic. Your question is answered on post #6. This is not a rigger oversight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #45 July 25, 2004 >Would you put them back in service with the current harness design? I'd perform the inspection (or have it done) and then use them as spare/demo rigs (as in demonstration jumps.) I could use a rig that can hold a Mojo 240 and a Manta. >but I'm curious as to whether you feel the harness design is fine >the way it is, or you would make some changes if you could? I think it's acceptably safe for my use; I would make a few changes if I had the facilities to test the changes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #46 July 25, 2004 >In the interest of safety, there's no reason why the things should not > be grounded until a thorough, independent investigation is completed. Ram-air mains often have lineover malfunctions; these have killed people. Someone who doesn't know much about skydiving might say "Ram-airs are proven unsafe! They should all be grounded until you can determine _exactly_ why lineovers occur, and make sure they never happen again." However, experienced jumpers know that the instance of lineovers is pretty low if gear is properly maintained and packed. Acceptably low, to most jumpers. And the alternative - going back to rounds - would be far, far worse. >Who I am is not the issue. My qualifications are not the issue. >THE ISSUE IS SAFETY!! While the issue is indeed safety, your qualifications do come into play if you claim you know enough about the relative risks of using adjustable harnesses vs fixed harnesses for students, and are sure that removing adjustable harnesses from the equation would improve, rather than reduce, safety. If Sandy Reid, Jim Wallace or Rick Horn thought that it would be safer to temporarily switch to fixed harnesses, I'd listen to them. If someone with 30 jumps thought that, I wouldn't pay as much attention to them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #47 July 25, 2004 I recieved your e-mail. I feel otheres have addressed the points I questioned.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #48 July 25, 2004 QuoteJ.P, I've emailed you twice so far and not gotten a response. Who I am is not the issue. My qualifications are not the issue. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When people do not post their full profile, we take them less seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #49 July 25, 2004 QuoteQuoteIn the interest of safety, there's no reason why the things should not be grounded until a thorough, independent investigation is completed. That's exactly what this service bulletin requires. The rigs are all grounded until a master rigger certifies them as airworthy. Are you suggesting that ALL Master Riggers are somehow under the influence of Sun Path? Why do we need to get these rigs "out of the sky" even after they've been cleared as safe by a Master rigger? Do you not trust the judgement of master riggers? Judgement to do what? If this is a problem in the engineering of the rig (and I'm not saying it is) then maybe even a master rigger is not qualified to analyze it. Maybe it will take a mechanical or materials engineer to figure out what's up.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tahoedog 0 #50 July 26, 2004 Quoteyour qualifications do come into play if you claim you know enough about the relative risks of using adjustable harnesses vs fixed harnesses for students, and are sure that removing adjustable harnesses from the equation would improve, rather than reduce, safety. You're implying that I have a problem with all adjustables. Should a moderator put words in the mouth of somebody who never said them? The topic is, "Sun Path grounds Javelins with adjustable MLW." Although my thoughts are based on the Javelin with AMLW, it conceivably may or may not affect others. I don't know. I haven't looked at them. That's not the topic. I'm no expert. If somebody in the industry was truly an expert, this whole mess would have been prevented. I'm just somebody who understands physics and saw what seems to be a leverage issue. Your quote of me somehow neglected to include the next sentence in which I said that the theory is the issue. Have you seen my theory? It's no work of art, but the general concept has not yet been disputed. It would be nice to see more people like (you know who you are) asking to first see a possible reason as opposed to jumping on the defensive. I could be wrong. I'd like to be proven wrong to set my mind at ease. It is just a theory containing thoughts which could be proven or disproven. That's what theory is about. I haven't the facilities to do that. Before you pass judgement on anything I have to say, please read what it is that I have to say first. Your ram-air analogy only supports my point. Rounds aren't as safe. A harness in which two people died might not be quite as safe others. You can drop names like Sandy, Rick, Jim, B.J, Mike, Bill, Hank, Rebecca, Albert, and others until your fingers are numb. Somebody who's an expert in skydiving can influence policies. Somebody who's an expert in physics cannot change its laws. The theory is in enough places where people of influence can exert more leverage than I could ever exert on my own. Anybody who's interested in what I have to say, I will respond to you as best I can. It might take time. If you already hate me and my fat, loud mouth, be thankful. This is my last post for a long time. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a summer to enjoy. Peace. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kallend 1,623 #49 July 25, 2004 QuoteQuoteIn the interest of safety, there's no reason why the things should not be grounded until a thorough, independent investigation is completed. That's exactly what this service bulletin requires. The rigs are all grounded until a master rigger certifies them as airworthy. Are you suggesting that ALL Master Riggers are somehow under the influence of Sun Path? Why do we need to get these rigs "out of the sky" even after they've been cleared as safe by a Master rigger? Do you not trust the judgement of master riggers? Judgement to do what? If this is a problem in the engineering of the rig (and I'm not saying it is) then maybe even a master rigger is not qualified to analyze it. Maybe it will take a mechanical or materials engineer to figure out what's up.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tahoedog 0 #50 July 26, 2004 Quoteyour qualifications do come into play if you claim you know enough about the relative risks of using adjustable harnesses vs fixed harnesses for students, and are sure that removing adjustable harnesses from the equation would improve, rather than reduce, safety. You're implying that I have a problem with all adjustables. Should a moderator put words in the mouth of somebody who never said them? The topic is, "Sun Path grounds Javelins with adjustable MLW." Although my thoughts are based on the Javelin with AMLW, it conceivably may or may not affect others. I don't know. I haven't looked at them. That's not the topic. I'm no expert. If somebody in the industry was truly an expert, this whole mess would have been prevented. I'm just somebody who understands physics and saw what seems to be a leverage issue. Your quote of me somehow neglected to include the next sentence in which I said that the theory is the issue. Have you seen my theory? It's no work of art, but the general concept has not yet been disputed. It would be nice to see more people like (you know who you are) asking to first see a possible reason as opposed to jumping on the defensive. I could be wrong. I'd like to be proven wrong to set my mind at ease. It is just a theory containing thoughts which could be proven or disproven. That's what theory is about. I haven't the facilities to do that. Before you pass judgement on anything I have to say, please read what it is that I have to say first. Your ram-air analogy only supports my point. Rounds aren't as safe. A harness in which two people died might not be quite as safe others. You can drop names like Sandy, Rick, Jim, B.J, Mike, Bill, Hank, Rebecca, Albert, and others until your fingers are numb. Somebody who's an expert in skydiving can influence policies. Somebody who's an expert in physics cannot change its laws. The theory is in enough places where people of influence can exert more leverage than I could ever exert on my own. Anybody who's interested in what I have to say, I will respond to you as best I can. It might take time. If you already hate me and my fat, loud mouth, be thankful. This is my last post for a long time. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a summer to enjoy. Peace. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
