0
Rdutch

PIA review

Recommended Posts

Bill,
the stainless piece that Rob was talking about sits in a pocket and works as sort of a cam. This cam action does one of two different things, depending on which end of it is lifted higher. If the "riser" end of the RSL pulls up higher, the cam stays attached and pulls the pin and hauls the bag out of the container. If the reserve is fired manually, the bridle lifts the cam from the other side and it rotates to disconnect itself from the riser RSL. To my recollection, that is exactly how Bill described it to me at his booth at PIA. At any rate, it was a convincing argument and we at Raeford are going to immediately retrofit them onto all our Sigmas and possibly our student rigs at some later date. Bill is great to talk to. Last I saw him he was sucking face with a pretty girl right outside the sports bar in the Adams Mark, soon after returning from a RWS dinner. NICE!

Another thing I forgot to mention was that I saw Rob Warner's "hand mount" PC-type camera thingie. You known, the kind like those Aussies are using. Beezie Shaw was telling me about how he and Chris Martin were going to start using them at their DZ. Rob then walked up and showed me the think. Unfortunately for me, I failed to put two and two together and didn't make out that this was "RiggerRob". Neither did I have my skymonkey hat on, so it was a missed "dropzone.commer meeting" so to say. Sorry, Rob! :S. Anyway, the hand mount thing looked nice and might be something I may obtain to try out, seeing as how my neck can't take a video helmet anymore.

Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In answer to:
1. IS THE SKYHOOK BASED ON THE SORCERER? Actually, it's the other way around. I did my first of many series of tests on what would become the "Skyhook" in the mid 80's. During one of thoses test series, Mark and Marta Hewitt (who developed the Sorcerer) were working here at the Relative Workshop. The system that ended up on their Sorcerer seems to be an adaptation of one of my early designs. It however, will not work on an internal, spring loaded pilot chute rig...only on a rig like the Sorcerer, which has an external, hand deployed RESERVE pilot chute. It requires you to pull the reserve's hand deployed pilot chute out of the pouch to release the connection between the reserve pilot chute bridle and the main riser. If the reserve container comes open prematurely, you have a horse shoe malfunction of the reserve. You can see that this would not be a good system to have on a normal skydiving rig where the reserve container can also be opened by a Cypres, broken loop, or pushed out pin. I could not use such a system until I solved that nasty little problem. I needed a system that automatically released the connection, no matter how the reserve container was opened.

2. IS THE SKYHOOK LIKE ERIC FRADET'S SYSTEM? As far as I know, Eric's system (while designed many years after my early attempts) was developed independently, (Eric is a very smart guy, who I admire tremendously) It was not put on the general market however, because it failed to address several key problems, which needed to be solved before the system would truly be ready for the mass market. (For instance, if the RSL riser released prematurely, it pulled the reserve bag right into the still attached side of the main canopy...not a good thing, generally.

With the Skyhook, I have solved this, and other problems (such as reliability and rigger friendliness) I felt must be solved before I could market such a device. The Skyhook is now tested and ready for market. It will show up first on our Sigma Tandem and Vector Student rigs, and shortly thereafter on all Vectors and Microns. It is retrofittable to all previous Vector models, but retrofit kits are last on the agenda.

I will put the videos up at www.relativeworkshop.com as soon as I can. We will also make video CD's available in a few weeks. I hope this answers your questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ehhhhhh HHHEMMMM

the biggest bitcher about our last Mindwarp design, and not even an honorable mention for the COOL Bonehead Display.................

Bastard!

Peace and
Love jeanie



You KNOW I told you guys in person that I loved the newly redesigned, non-"penis" looking MindWarp!:P
It was a great fix. Speaking of your booth: me and Steve were hanging out a couple of nights ago.

Chuckie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

> I know of 2 that died because of it and Directly.

Which incidents were those?



Since nothing is available about the catapult fatalities on the net, other than the one fatality already mentioned. I cant post the other one. And my source for it (which he showed me documentation about) is currently sailing around the world. But just because Its not on the net it doesn't mean it didn't happen. For now all I can post is this:

Hi, Ray --

I can't speak for Booth or anyone else, but the Catapult has been criticized
for being a liability in a situation like this:

Say you're tumbling badly when you deploy your reserve, and its pilot chute
snags on your foot and creates a horseshoe.

But the "secondary" pilot chute does its job and pulls the bagged reserve
out of the pack tray and starts lifting it above you.

Unfortunately, at that point the primary pilot chute comes free. It goes up
and wraps around the bagged reserve, creating a bag lock.

You die.

We party, which is what I hope you'll do when I burn in.

I don't know if this has happened. We've reported on incidents where the
Catapult seemed to be an asset, and we've reported on at least one where it
was seen as a factor in the accident.
--Mike


That was from Mike truffer publisher of skydiving magazine. Im sure if he wanted to take the time to look through past publications he could find the whole story.

But if the catapult was such a good system why isn't it used by anyone? And why is it that Fliteline that went out of buisness, then back in buisiness not using it?
***

>The catapult was designed by a well known and different company that
> sold it, and in the testing stage it was proven to be dangerous.

The catapult was designed by Mick Cottle; I participated in some of the early tests. Which test proved it to be dangerous?

>But the out of buisiness company used it anyway, because it is a great
>sales pitch, to people that dont know what they are buying.

Mick designed it because a reserve PC problem almost killed him years ago while he worked at Perris. You shouldn't listen to DZ gossip to get your info about gear.

Quote



OK after checking into this more you are right about who designed this, but it was researched by another company thoroughly, and here is one of their observations about the catapult.

"why we didn't use the dual pilot chute "catapult" system after testing it in the late 80's was this. It's not smart enough to tell the difference between a pilot chute hesitation and a horseshoe. This means it could lift the bag out of the container during a hesitation, and get it higher than the hesitating pilot chute, causing an entanglement between the pilot chute and the deploying reserve lines. Also the "Y" shaped bridle, with a pilot chute at each end, stands no chance whatever of making it past a horseshoe malfunction. It's like launching a grappeling hook into the mess above you"***




>You obviously are talking about something you havent seen. If you
> have seen both you would definitely see what the systems are and
>how they are different.

I have no idea how it works beyond your desription that it works like a sorcerer, and I have seen that in action quite a bit. If you would like to explain how this one works, instead of making clever sarcastic remarks, I'm sure people would find your description interesting.
Quote



Since you admit that you don't know how it work's, then why did you feel like you should question, what I was only observing. Any questions you had should have been posted at the designer. Thankfully the designer desided to talk about his product, and until the video and description of it is on the web, description is almost impossible without seeing it.
Quote


>and in high speed, any canopy will open faster with faster fall rate.

The Racer tests were from a cutaway, not a high speed deployment. As in all tests done by a manufacturer, take anything they say with a grain of salt. (For a good story ask Bill Booth about John Sherman's Racer vs Vector test.)

Quote



Like I said before Apples to oranges if you have seen what I was talking about you would know what you were commenting about.***

>The skyhook is opening canopies in 1.6 seconds from cutaway, not
> deployment.

It improved .2 seconds since yesterday?

Quote



Hmm Can you say typo? You know what I meant I think you are trying way too hard to make me look bad when all I was trying to do initally was let anyone that wasn't available to go to the PIA know what I saw. It was not my intenton to get into a war of words, Ideas with you.



>Of course it is a bad Idea, no one wants to cutaway at 500 ft, but the
> truth is, it will happen, and if I was at 500 ft with a mal, I would want
> whatever was the fastest safest deployment system out there.

Fortunately, if you find yourself in such a situation, you have the choice to cut away first or simply deploy your reserve. I teach my students to never cut away below 1000 feet; if they ever get that low, so many other things have gone wrong that just getting more nylon over their head is a better idea than cutting away and trying to get their reserve out before impact. Keep in mind that altimeters aren't even accurate to more than a few hundred feet; what you think is 500 feet may be 300. Using the cutaway handle at all at such an altitude is a very, very bad idea.



How do I say this and not upset you? What a student is taught rarely happen's. Just because you teach someone to not cutaway less than 1000 ft doesn't mean he won't. All this system does is help the people that make bad choices to live. I am sure you know that just because you tell someone not to cut away under 1000 ft they will still do it. And given the choice of riding in a mal at 975 ft, I would much prefer having a system that would save me from riding a mal, or a reserve fired into the mal (As to your instructions) into the ground as apposed to cutting away and living. Do you really tell your student's to put more nylon over their head if they cant cutaway before they reach 1000 ft? A lineover is a lot safer than a downplane, or even worse a reserve/main entanglement. But if you can loose the lineover/linetwist safely and fly a safe reserve wouldn't you rather choose that option?
I am sure that you don't tell your student's to pull their reserve under 1000ft, if there is a problem with their main and you just misworded thing's.


Ray
Small and fast what every girl dreams of!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But if the catapult was such a good system why isn't it used by anyone? And why is it that Fliteline that went out of buisness, then back in buisiness not using it?



Because of the nature of all the quotes in your message, I'm not sure but are you saying Fliteline is back in business, and not using the catapult?
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>But just because Its not on the net it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Right, but it's even worse evidence that it did.

> and we've reported on at least one where it was seen as a factor in the accident.

I strongly suspect it was the case I mentioned, since it created a huge stink before Fliteline responded to it and examined the evidence (the gear and photos of the scene.)

>Unfortunately, at that point the primary pilot chute comes free. It goes up
>and wraps around the bagged reserve, creating a bag lock.

Is it better to die due to a horseshoe mal than a bag lock? In any case, the catapult is designed to pull the canopy out of the bag BEFORE it starts pulling on the main PC; that's why it's 1/3 of the way up the bridle, rather than halfway. Could it clear at exactly the same time as the catapult starts to work, and then additionally manage to launch _through_ the line groups and tie off the reserve? Of course. With enough imagination anything's possible.

>Also the "Y" shaped bridle, with a pilot chute at each end, stands no
> chance whatever of making it past a horseshoe malfunction. It's like
> launching a grappeling hook into the mess above you"

I agree, which is why the catapult does not use a Y-shaped bridle.

>But if the catapult was such a good system why isn't it used by
>anyone?

Because it's patented.

> And why is it that Fliteline that went out of buisness, then back in
> buisiness not using it?

Fliteline went out of business when Kat Folger sued Mick and Dave over her husband's death. A suspension line on his main got stuck under the lip of a grommet in the main pack tray, causing an unclearable main in tow. The reserve PC's did not clear the mess.

>Since you admit that you don't know how it work's, then why did you feel
> like you should question, what I was only observing.

Because I don't learn unless I ask questions; you seemed to have very strong opinions on a system, which I assumed meant you knew something about it (or the reflex, for that matter.) Feel free to not answer if you don't want to.

>Hmm Can you say typo? You know what I meant I think you are trying
> way too hard to make me look bad when all I was trying to do initally
> was let anyone that wasn't available to go to the PIA know what I saw
>It was not my intenton to get into a war of words, Ideas with you.

Sorry, I didn't mean to get into a war with you. This sounds like an interesting system, one that could potentially speed up reserve deployments. As I mentioned, the entire system (including the reserve) has to be taken into account before a good comparison with other systems is possible, and the system evaluated against others (i.e. is the added complexity worth the additional X feet of reserve flight?) It might well turn out to be a worthwhile addition to the safety equipment we have available to us.

I guess I just found it odd that you would so readily trash a system you know little about (the catapult) while at the same time pushing another new reserve system so strongly, again one that you admit knowing little about. Most of my questions were aimed at trying to figure out your logic there. Sorry if it came across as a 'war of words.'


>How do I say this and not upset you? What a student is taught rarely
> happen's.

Hmm. In my experience they do what they are taught, even when things go to hell. We've had students start spinning on their backs, then watched as they threw off both JM's. Three seconds later, as instructed, they pulled. We've had students cut away as they were getting dragged at 15mph down the field, and have had students cut away succesfully from literally dozens of mals from high speed to lineover. We've even had students be unable to open their mains and open their reserves instead.

With good instruction students do what you teach them to do. If they didn't a lot more of them would die.

> Do you really tell your student's to put more nylon over their head if
>they cant cutaway before they reach 1000 ft?

Heck yes. If they are ever in freefall at 1000 feet, no matter what else is going on or what's over their head, pull the reserve. If they're under a main and they aren't going to survive the landing, pull the reserve. It is the most important thing they can do at that point, and the thing that will most likely save their lives.

Landing under two canopies is often survivable, landing under a high speed mal rarely is.

> But if you can loose the lineover/linetwist safely and fly a safe reserve
> wouldn't you rather choose that option?

I would, down to about 800 feet; a student who may be slow on his procedures, or who takes 4 seconds to read his altimeter and act on the information, may not. It is safer to open your reserve at 200 feet into a lineover mal than cut away at 100 and land under a partially inflated reserve. Students need more buffer than a few hundred feet, which is less than a second at terminal.

Keep in mind that a student opens at 4500 feet; his cutaway hard deck is 2500 feet. If he's still having a problem at 1000 feet and he hasn't been able to solve it, via cutting away, finding his main handle, dealing with a stuck riser, dealing with an entanglement etc it's time to try your last resort; he has less than three seconds (worst case) before he loses that last option.

>I am sure that you don't tell your student's to pull their reserve under
> 1000ft, if there is a problem with their main and you just misworded
> thing's.

Nope. Would you honestly tell a student to consider cutting away a mal below 1000 feet? Would you honestly tell a more experienced friend to cut away at 400? I wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

For instance, if the RSL riser released prematurely, it pulled the reserve bag right into the still attached side of the main canopy



So how is this solved? Without seeing the system or pictures of it, it's difficult to visualize how it works. Is the Skyhook attached to one riser only, as was mentioned in an earlier post?

Are there pictures available of the system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skyhook:
Bill Booth's most recent contribution to this style of RSL is the Collins lanyard.
If a skydiver wearing a Skyhook-equipped Vector cuts away from a partially inflated main, the RSL (attached to the right main riser) pulls the Collins lanyard (to ensure that the left release cable is pulled), then the RSL pulls the reserve ripcord, finally the RSL pulls on the Skyhook (a stainless steel hook sewn to the freebag bridle) to lift the freebag off the jumper's bag.

If there is no main out, pulling the reserve ripcord (or scaring your Cypres) results in a normal reserve deployment, as if the Skyhook was never installed. In this scenario, the reserve bridle disconnects at the Skyhook.

Basically, it is a race between the main riser and the reserve pilotchute. Whichever pulls first lifts the freebag off the jumper's back.

Judging from USPA's 2002 fatality report, at least 2 more jumpers would be alive if they had worn some sort of RSL. Booth's Skyhook just happens to be the quickest RSL on today's market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My recollections of PIA Symposium 2003:

Military

Convergence

Skyhook

Swimming pool

Good weather

Glen Bangs contribution to 2 squares out study

Travelling faster than my luggage.

Military presence was way up at this year's Symposium, which is good. The military industrial complex should pay its way in our sporting sandbox. It also means that manufacturers will be less sensitive to the mood swings of skydiver purchasing patterns.

Convergence. It seems that skydiving manufacturers are converging on common patterns. They seem to be converging on two container patterns and a handful of canopy designs aimed at a handful of niches. Even the Russians and East Germans seem to be copying Vectors.
Though the Czechs introduced a new AAD that sort of looks like a Cypres, but all the components are in one box nestled in the pack tray.

The sly old fox Bill Booth is not resting on his laurels. The inventor of the hand-deploy pilotchute and 3-Ring release just introduced the Skyhook - the fastest RSL on the market.

The Adams Mark Hotel has a fitness room and swimming pool on the roof. My fondest memories of the Symposium were swimming laps as the sun rose.

Weather was great in Jacksonville. Temperatures varied from frost in the mornings to 75 degrees in the afternoons. Floridians may have grumbled about the frost, but it was heaven for skydivers from more northerly climates.

At the final banquet, we got to tease USPA's new President, Glen Bangs about his contribution to the two squares out study. To Mr. Bang's credit, his main was out before he scared his Cypres.

Travelling to the Symposium was a long, drawn out process, with way too many frivolous security checks, but I cannot complain too loudly. I travelled so fast that I arrived in JAcksonville way ahead of my luggage! Ha! Ha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And which one are you volunteering to speak on?;) BTW, speaker presentations are not for selling new products. Booths are.

As of right now I'll be doing the speaker schedule for the next symposium. If anyone would like to volunteer, or suggest a speaker we should approach, please contact me. It's never to early to collect ideas.

Thanks,

Terry

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Ehhhhhh HHHEMMMM

the biggest bitcher about our last Mindwarp design, and not even an honorable mention for the COOL Bonehead Display.................

Bastard!

Peace and
Love jeanie



You KNOW I told you guys in person that I loved the newly redesigned, non-"penis" looking MindWarp!:P
It was a great fix. Speaking of your booth: me and Steve were hanging out a couple of nights ago.

Chuckie


So, when will we get to see this new design? I just turned my old Bonehead external audible into a camera helmet, so, I need to get a new helmet (minus the "penis" look:P) for those jumps where I don't want a camera hanging off the side. Anyone have any pics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the skyhook looks very cool, but there is one thing I don't understand. with the rsl activation, how does the reserve pin get pulled? does the rsl lanyard have a "y" junction?
________________________________________________________
Abbie drove me to Idaho and all I got was this lousy sigline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0