Broken steering line

[billvon 2,400]

>You will also increase the chance of a (very) bad landing and injury.
If you cannot land with rear risers you should learn. It is an important safety skill.
>In the almost 19 years I am in this sport I've seen or heared of several
>rear-riser landings and they were all bad (sometime's very bad) landings.
And I know several people who jump canopies loaded above 2:1 who land with rear risers regularly - they initiate with rear risers and finish with toggles. It is very doable, even at high loadings.
-bill von

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

And I know several people who jump canopies loaded above 2:1 who land with rear risers regularly - they initiate with rear risers and finish with toggles. It is very doable, even at high loadings.

They finish with toggles. That's the important point here, since in the scenario mentioned above that's going to be impossible.
Your example, while true, is not relevant to this discussion.
-
Jim

[PhreeZone 15]

But those people are alos inducing a ton of speed for thier landings and are using the toggles to ensure a no step landing. I hope if you break a steering line you would'nt be hooking your canopy any more and would infact be on a very long and striaght final. It is possible to do it on any canopy, it just depends on if the jumper wants to land said canopy.
If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will....

[prost 0]

Ok this is getting a little off subject but as we have been over before If you can land it with increased speed you can land it without. The canopy slows down to that speed anyway.
Your example, while true, is not relevant to this discussion.>
I still think it is. They finnish with toggles but there is no reason that you could not slide it out instead. He is also talking about canopies loaded over 2 to 1. For most jumpers it is possible to have a stand up landing on rear risers.
William

[Hooknswoop 19]

"I still think it is. They finnish with toggles but there is no reason that you could not slide it out instead. He is also talking about canopies loaded over 2 to 1. For most jumpers it is possible to have a stand up landing on rear risers."
Could I land my VX-60 loaded at 3.1:1 with only rear risers? Yes. Would I? Not if I could help it. If I can't make a stand up landing on what I have, time to go to my reserve. Personal choice.
I have watched several people attempting rear riser swoops, land on their backs, hard. Straight in under a highly loaded canopy with only rear risers is not going to be a nice landing.
Hook

[billvon 2,400]

>They finish with toggles. That's the important point here, since in the scenario
> mentioned above that's going to be impossible.
Correct. However, they have no problem bringing their vertical speed to zero and slowing down their horizontal speed, and this is exactly what you do with toggles. Once your vertical speed is zero and your feet are on the ground, the only issue is sliding vs running, a situation familiar to anyone who has ever landed a small canopy in no wind or downwind conditions. You will not be able to slow the canopy down as much, but you can certainly land it.
>Your example, while true, is not relevant to this discussion.
As it allows one to land without toggles (albeit faster) it is very relevant.
-bill von

[prost 0]

Big difference in 3.1 to 1 and somewhere around 2.2 that a lot of high performance pilots fly. At my 2.4 I would land it on rear risers.
William

[steve1 5]

I'm just wondering how far I should pull my rear risers down to flare on landing. I know this probably varies from canopy to canopy, and I need practice this up high. As you can tell I don't have a lot of experience using rear risers on a square canopy. I always landed my para-commander this way. I'd reach up as high as could and do a chinup behind my head on landing. I'll bet this is way to much flare on today's canopies. Thanks for the advice. Steve

[AvK 0]

That expert swoopers use their rear risers for better swoops is not relevant.
First they don’t have broken steering lines, second they use their toggels in the last fase of the landing and third they have practiced this type of landings hondreds of times. Most jumpers aren’t expert swoopers and don’t want to be.
The 4 S’es could work when your on 2000 feet, what if you get near to the ground and wind, turbulence etc get grip of you. Not to speak of the guy that suggest’s to cut your second steering line too. Do you have time for that or want to spend time on that? The moment you discover a broken steering line you have plenty of time to use your reserve.
Today I made a few jumps. In midair I practised rear riser flying, yes I did.
On my Stiletto 120 and 85 kilo’s of body weight I concluded that the margin is about 12 centimeters (4 inches) before stalling the canopy. I also concluded that my airspeed didn’t slow down much, only my vertical speed slowed down to zero. Of course this was with ok steering lines, so circumstances where ideal. My guess is that if you land with rear risers you will stop your decent rate, but your canopy keeps flying at high speeds. This may result in more rear riser input and a straight on your back landing because of the small margins. I’m still talking about ideal circumstances.
Things get worse when your steering lines are broken.
Or do you want me to practice with broken lines which I first cut off myself?
The people suggesting that I should practice rear-riser landings miss my point in this discussion. Why should I practice a skill that I could use once in a 1000-2000 jumps.
Specially when that skill itself is riskfull because of the very small margins you have.
It is NOT riskfull to use your reserve, that’s my point.

[PLFKING 3]

I broke steering lines twice on deployment on my old canopy (PD-230 at 1:1.1). Both times had a slight built-in turn, and both times I landed it with rear risers.....this is something I practice with every jump up high, and I felt confident doing so. I just waited an extra half-second before flaring (the 4 "Oh Shit" rule instead of the 3 "Oh Shit" rule) And I too look at my reserve as a "last-chance" parachute. I hope the only time I ever see it is during repacks. If my main is square and steerable in any way, I'm landing it.
Don

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

And I too look at my reserve as a "last-chance" parachute.

Like you, I look at my reserve as a last chance parachute, but makeing the blanket statement that everyone should land on rear risers in the event of a broken steering line is, in my opinion, wrong. It's a decision that each jumper will have to make when it happens. Some may not have the appropriate skills to do so, and there may be additional circumstances which make this dangerous. I recommend that they go for the reserve. But... that's just me.
-
Jim

[Hooknswoop 19]

" It's a decision that each jumper will have to make when it happens."
I suggest making the decision before it happens.
Hook

[billvon 2,400]

>That expert swoopers use their rear risers for better swoops is not relevant.
As I mention above, it most definitely is.
>First they don’t have broken steering lines . . .
Correct. However, a broken steering line in a correctly-rigged parachute is similar to not using your toggles, so your parachute flies in a similar way.
>second they use their toggels in the last fase of the landing .. .
Again correct. They level out with rear risers. Once leveled out you can land - this is what the flare is for, to bring your vertical speed to zero and to reduce your horizontal speed. Toggles let you slow down further, but if you can land the canopy in no wind/downwind with toggles, you can generally land into the wind without.
>and third they have practiced this type of landings hondreds of times.
Not before they did it the first time. They were in the same situation that you are in now.
>Most jumpers aren’t expert swoopers and don’t want to be.
Not being an expert canopy pilot can get you killed if you're jumping a 2:1 loaded main. If you cannot control your parachute during all phases of canopy flight (including a high performance landing) you should learn. It is not a nice-to-know - in fact, incompetence under canopy is now this sport's #1 killer.
>Today I made a few jumps. In midair I practised rear riser flying, yes I did.
>On my Stiletto 120 and 85 kilo’s of body weight I concluded that the margin is
> about 12 centimeters (4 inches) before stalling the canopy.
Good! This is exactly the kind of stuff that can save your life if you ever need to use it.
>I also concluded that my airspeed didn’t slow down much, only my vertical speed
>slowed down to zero.
Right, and this is why many swoopers use this technique. From such an observation you might conclude that you don't want to try it in no-wind conditions, and that you would want X knots of wind before you'd try to land in rear risers only. Knowing this _before_ you need it to save your life is a very good thing.
>The people suggesting that I should practice rear-riser landings miss my point in
> this discussion. Why should I practice a skill that I could use once in a
>1000-2000 jumps.
Because if something kills you only in one out of 1000-2000 jumps, you're still dead. I practice emergency procedures even though I have only had two sport-gear cutaways in 2800 jumps, and I recommend that everyone else do so as well.
>It is NOT riskfull to use your reserve, that’s my point.
Your reserve can malfunction and kill you. Like a main parachute, it can blow lines and panels, have lineovers, bag locks and PC-in-tows. I am more likely to land safely under a Sabre 150 with a broken steering line (flaring with rear risers) than under an unknown and untested reserve.
Again, you don't have to learn to land with rear risers. There's no requirement anywhere to do that. But until you do, you have a gap in your training, and I recommend that people do not downsize until they fill that gap.
-bill von

[prost 0]

Thanks Bill. You saved me a lot of typing.
William

[AvK 0]

>However, a broken steering line in a correctly-rigged parachute is similar to not using your toggles, so your parachute flies in a similar way.<
AvK: This is exactly the point where your wrong.
If your steering lines are broken, your tail section is waving through the air. The performance of your main is decreased a lot.You are flying a deformed main at this point.
>It is not a nice-to-know - in fact, incompetence under canopy is now this sport's #1 killer.<
AvK: And again you support my point of view in this topic, if you land a deformed main you are increasing the risk of injury or death. How can you be competend on a deformed main?
In Europe, statistics show that people landing main parachutes with broken lines, are injured or killed more often than people landing their reserves.
>I practice emergency procedures even though I have only had two sport-gear cutaways in 2800 jumps, and I recommend that everyone else do so as well.<
AvK: Today I made my 2306th jump, I have practiced my reserve procedure at least 2306 times now, probably more……… Putting the worldwide standard -first safety rule- in this discussion is rather out of bounds.
>Your reserve can malfunction and kill you. Like a main parachute, it can blow lines and panels, have lineovers, bag locks and PC-in-tows.<
AvK: Of course they can!
But I consider that risk a lot less, then getting injured or killed on a deformed main, so I use my reserve.
Statisticaly a parachute malfunctions once in a 1000 times, if that happens to you, the risk of a malfunction on your reserve is 1 on 100.000
I’ll take that ‘risk’.
And I can’t imagine, that in fact some people are learning students to land on rear risers.
Students don’t know better than you learn them. Specialy students don’t have the landing skills of experts and can’t handle the small margins of rear riser landing.
Another thought I have about this (fine) discussion is WHEN will you use your reserve anyway?
A broken D-line?
A broken A-line?
A broken line in the middle or on the outside? Etc….
If you have a deformed main: Hit the reserve! That’s my point.
> an unknown and untested reserve.<
AvK: Know your gear and trust your gear. And your gear holds a perfect reserve too. By the way….. it is at least TSO tested, even in Europe.
Final verdict of AvK:
Of course everybody is free to make his own decision. No doubt about that.
But if I had doubts on my reserve, I would quit jumping immediately.
A long time nothing happens…….
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some notes to people who might want to know a little more about AvK:
If your not interested: SKIP THIS!!!
I’m in this sport since 1984. Today I made exactaly 2306 jumps now.
I jumped: C9 - T10 - PC mark 1 (75 jumps and a lot of fun) - and several square mains like Raven2, PD190, BT40 and Stiletto120.
I do a lot of RW (sorry FS), until now exactly 1628 RW jumps including big ones (72 is the Dutch record), also a lot of Sit- and Free Flying and did about 200 CREW jumps, about 400 camera jumps and a lot of instruction including freefall, student instruction, demo’s etc. Competited the Nationals in Holland about 12 times in RW4, RW8 and CREW4 and CREW8, sometimes as a cameraman but mostly as team-member. I jumped several planes like C-172, C-182, C-185, C-206T, C-207T, C-(Grand)Caravan, Pilatus Porter, Twin Otter, DC-3, F27, F60, Hercules, Balloons, Boeing Steerman, Helicopters like CH53 and MI26.
I once pulled my reserve because of a deformed main and once landed a BI-plane because of an Cypres activation (dumb dumb and dumber.......It can happen to you too.....be warned....)
I consider myself an expert swooper, at least I’m one of the known ‘better swoopers’ on my dropzone.
So I’m not the worlds best skydiver, but I'm also not a nono, some of the replies try to suggest that……..unfortunatelly.
Blue Sky, Have Fun, Be Save
[More on the light side mode:]
If you have a problem, don’t care what it is, if you need a hand, I can assure you this:
Your Reserve can help....... (remember Billy Swan? Yes I’m old.....39.....)
[End of light side mode]
(This message will destruct itself 5 seconds after you have red it............turn off your computer NOW.........Bill Gates isn't responsible for what happens next.........)

[billvon 2,400]

>AvK: This is exactly the point where your wrong.
>If your steering lines are broken, your tail section is waving through the air. The
> performance of your main is decreased a lot.You are flying a deformed main at this
> point.
Not usually. To prove this to yourself, go to Bridge Day and watch people jump normal canopies with a line-release mod. You will see all sorts of canopies - Ravens, Sabres, Monarchs, and yes, even Stilettos - jumped with no slider and the line mod. Often you will see people attempt to land them with the brake lines released. You will note that 90% of them fly with no distortion of the tail. The remaining 10% have tails that "flip up" and cause a much faster than normal descent, but fortunately these are greatly in the minority, and are generally older F-111 7 cells.
>AvK: And again you support my point of view in this topic, if you land a deformed
>main you are increasing the risk of injury or death. How can you be competend on a
> deformed main?
I am more competent under my Sabre 150 with no brakes than under an unknown reserve. I know I can land the 150 with rear risers alone - I cannot safely land a smaller reserve with a lineover.
>AvK: Today I made my 2306th jump, I have practiced my reserve procedure at least
> 2306 times now, probably more……… Putting the worldwide standard -first safety
> rule- in this discussion is rather out of bounds.
Why? In a previous post, you questioned the wisdom of practicing something that might only hurt you once every 1000-2000 jumps. Emergency procedures surely fall into this category, since malfunctions occur at about that rate (at least for me.)
>Statisticaly a parachute malfunctions once in a 1000 times, if that happens to you,
>the risk of a malfunction on your reserve is 1 on 100.000
A common mistake. The chance of a double mal is 1 in 100,000. However, the instant you cut away, the odds drop to around 1 in 1000 (using your numbers.) The odds of me killing myself trying to land that Sabre 150 are less than that, so it is safer for me to land it with rear risers.
>I’ll take that ‘risk’.
That's fine - I will not. a 1 in 1000 chance of death is too much for me if I know I can safely land without taking that chance.
>And I can’t imagine, that in fact some people are learning students to land on rear
> risers.
>Students don’t know better than you learn them. Specialy students don’t have the
> landing skills of experts and can’t handle the small margins of rear riser landing.
Students jump larger canopies that are more easily landed with rear risers.
>If you have a deformed main: Hit the reserve! That’s my point.
We specifically teach students _not_ to cut away from landable mains even if they are deformed (i.e. closed end cells, PC in front.) Instead, we teach them to cut away from unlandable mains.
>AvK: Know your gear and trust your gear. And your gear holds a perfect reserve
>too.
No parachute is perfect. I can make the same error packing my reserve that I make packing my main. It is less likely, since I pack my reserve with more care, but entirely possible.
>By the way….. it is at least TSO tested, even in Europe.
I have seen brand new TSOed reserves with missing crossports and missing bartacks on the lines. There is no guaranteee that a new reserve is perfect. Using it is surely better than landing with a lineover, but taking a chance on it is _not_ better than landing with your main.
A question for you - if your reserve is indeed perfect, is there any issue with cutting away regularly for fun?
>But if I had doubts on my reserve, I would quit jumping immediately.
And if I were ever to believe that my gear was perfect I would consider doing the same. It is not - heck, that's why we have reserves in the first place.
-bill von

[AvK 0]

Hi Bill,
Seems we are having this discussion the 2 of us....No problem, I dont't have discussions every day with someone from the States.
>Why? In a previous post, you questioned the wisdom of practicing something that might only hurt you once every 1000-2000 jumps. Emergency procedures surely fall into this category, since malfunctions occur at about that rate (at least for me.)<
AvK: You are taking my reaction out of its bounds and you know it....
The reserve procedure is a worldwide standard procedure.
Rear riser landings are not, and I also mentioned the very small margins of rear riser landings. So this comperasion isn't fair, beyond I should have any wisdom......( don't know if this is good writing in American)
>A question for you - if your reserve is indeed perfect, is there any issue with cutting away regularly for fun?<
AvK: That is a stupid question, a moderator not worthy. I talk about a deformed main you are cutting, not about a perfect flying canopy you cut from for fun.
Please don't kid me.
Seems to me you are losing arguments.....(teasing mode)

[Hooknswoop 19]

"Seems we are having this discussion the 2 of us....No problem, I dont't have discussions every day with someone from the States. "
No, a bunch of people are reading, learning and making desicions based on this conversation, information is power.
I have landed a Fury 220, twice, on rear risers, at night (don't ask). Stood up the landing both times.
A broken steering line may or may not be landable, more than likely, landable. If I had a steering line break on my Safire 189, I would land it. No big deal. It is open, flying, controllable , and landable, why temp fate by cutting it away and using my reserve?
I am not afraid to use my reserve, in fact on a couple off recent test jumps I expected to have to use my reserve (turned out I only needed once of the two jumps). I have used my reserve 11 times in 2801 jumps.
As for teaching students to land with rear risers, why not? If I can teach someone how to land a Sabre 230 with toggles, then I can teach them how to land it w/ rear risers. I have them practice rear riser turns and flares after a few jumps.
Hook

[billvon 2,400]

>The reserve procedure is a worldwide standard procedure.
Correct; rear riser landings are not. There are three reasons for this:
1. New materials (Kevlar especially) are more prone to unexpected breaking. This was not as much of an issue with Dacron or Spectra, which looked worn out before it broke.
2. Smaller parachutes make it more important to practice landing without brakes. Despite your earlier claims, landing with rear risers on larger F111 or even ZP canopies is not a very big issue. Smaller canopies require more skill (and practice.)
3. Nowadays, fatalities under a working canopy are one of the primary causes of death in this sport. Given that, I think we have to start pushing canopy skills as much as we push standard emergency procedures (for example.)
>Rear riser landings are not, and I also mentioned the very small margins of rear
> riser landings.
I agree. They are hard to do. They need to be practiced _before_ they are needed.
>AvK: That is a stupid question, a moderator not worthy. I talk about a deformed
>main you are cutting, not about a perfect flying canopy you cut from for fun.
The question still stands - if, indeed, reserves do not fail as you claim, where is the harm in cutting away from a good canopy for practice, fun, etc? I suspect you believe as I do - that your reserve is _not_ perfect, and thus there is no reason to take the additional risk of a reserve mal if there is no problem with your main.
Is a broken brake line sufficient reason to cut away from a main? Is the risk assumed by keeping the main more than the risk of a reserve mal? Well, that's the big question. It is my assertion that you can't really make this call until you try it. If you _do_ try, under perfect conditions (i.e. ideal winds, landing area) and decide that it's too risky under normal conditions, then you've made a decision based on good information. If you just assume you should always cut away, you are making a less informed decision.
-bill von

[Jimbo 0]

Bill, you said:

Quote

The question still stands - if, indeed, reserves do not fail as you claim, where is the harm in cutting away from a good canopy for practice, fun, etc? I suspect you believe as I do - that your reserve is _not_ perfect, and thus there is no reason to take the additional risk of a reserve mal if there is no problem with your main.

When you know that what AvK said was this:

Quote

Statisticaly a parachute malfunctions once in a 1000 times, if that happens to you, the risk of a malfunction on your reserve is 1 on 100.000

He's already acknowledged that he is aware that reserve parachutes can malfunction. You even responded to this. What gives?
AvK also said this, which makes some sense to me:

Quote

And again you support my point of view in this topic, if you land a deformed main you are increasing the risk of injury or death. How can you be competend on a deformed main?

Your reply was simply this:

Quote

I agree. They are hard to do. They need to be practiced _before_ they are needed.

So, I have to ask. Is it your recommendation that in the event of a broken steering line that everyone try to land it with rear risers? Or should only those who have practiced this before try and land it, leaving those who have not practiced this procedure free to go for the silver?
I do realize that this is a skill which could probably save some limbs and even lives, but again, to make the blanket statement that everyone should be landing any main with rear risers in the event of a broken steering line seems wrong. Or, are you not suggesting that? Because it seems like you are.
Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to get this all sorted out.
-
Jim

[billvon 2,400]

>He's already acknowledged that he is aware that reserve parachutes can
>malfunction. You even responded to this. What gives?
I disagree with the premise that you should always trust your reserve 100%, which he mentioned earlier:
"It is NOT riskfull to use your reserve, that’s my point."
"And your gear holds a perfect reserve too."
"But if I had doubts on my reserve, I would quit jumping immediately."
This contradiction seems to be at the heart of the argument. If your reserve is perfect, if there's no risk in its deployment, then there is no question - cut away from anything, including a good canopy for fun. If it is extremely unreliable, there's no question that you _should_ try to land any survivable main. I think that it is somewhere in between - more reliable than a typical main, not perfect. That means there is value in having the skill to land main parachutes under many types of minor mals, including closed end cells, small rips, and broken lines (including brake lines.) If practice can improve your odds of not needing your reserve (and therefore increasing your odds of survival) you should.
>So, I have to ask. Is it your recommendation that in the event of a broken
>steering line that everyone try to land it with rear risers? Or should only those
> who have practiced this before try and land it, leaving those who have not
>practiced this procedure free to go for the silver?
Basically. I think it is a skill that should be practiced. If you have never tried it at all, and you have a small canopy, use your reserve. If you _have_ tried it, you can make a more informed choice. For me, Sabre 150 - definitely land. Saphire 129 - would depend on winds. With good (8+ kts) wind I would land in rear risers; otherwise I would cut it away.
>I do realize that this is a skill which could probably save some limbs and even
> lives, but again, to make the blanket statement that everyone should be landing
> any main with rear risers in the event of a broken steering line seems wrong.
I think just about everyone _can_ land in rear risers, and should practice this sufficiently so that it is a) an option and b) they can make a better decision on whether to land in them or not. I think that the blanket statement "you should always cut away from a broken brake line" is even worse than the idea that you never should. You should not be afraid to use your reserve if you need it; at the same time, you should realize that reserves can (and have) malfunction, so it's a good idea to not use it unless you absolutely need it to land safely.
Landing in rear risers, for most people, is a straightforward skill to learn. I definitely think it is a skill that should be mastered before downsizing.
-bill von

[weber 0]

I landed my old Hornet 210 at 1.2 loading after a broken line no problem...

[Bruno 0]

AvK
can you detail more on difference in broken steering line and just released one? I think this is the point to well understand for a correct decision
Thanks
Bruno

[AvK 0]

This will be my last contribution to this discussion.
Overlooking the ‘battle field’ I think this was a very useful discussion.
I guess this topic is almost to its end.
Conclusions that I take are:
I consider that everybody must make his own decision what to do in case of a broken steering line.
I consider this topic very useful for other readers making this decision.
I consider a broken steering line on today’s modern parachutes as a serious problem.
I consider landing with rear risers more riskful than using my reserve.
I consider learning students landing by rear risers very riskful
I consider a main with broken steering lines as a deformed main
Bruno wants to know why:
A main with released toggles is keeping its profile/shape because of the maximum steering line length at that point. When you make a turn, that same maximum length will keep the profile intact. If you are flying with broken steering lines, the part between the edge of the tail and the D-lines, is living a life of its own. Can you imagine what can happen when you try to land such a deformed canopy?
Riskfull to me means:
- very small margins on rear riser input
- high-speed landings that won’t stop by pulling your rear risers a little more, your on your back before you know it.
- In my opinion you can’t compare practicing ‘normal’ rear riser landing with landing a main with a broken steering line, your canopy acts very different in that situation.
- I still can’t see why anybody would practice rear riser landing if your toggles are ok. Pointing to expert swoopers who use a part of this technic for better swoops is not relevant in this discussion.
- If you land a main with a broken steering line, when will you use your reserve anyway? A broken d-line, c-line etc (I mentioned this before)
- What if the four S’es are ok, and at 1000 feet turbulence or hard winds make you doubt your first decision?
- Having doubts about your reserve is ok, having doubts about the flying capability of a deformed main is better.
Billmon is the moderator of this discussion. In my opinion he has often abused parts of my words by putting it out of its context or by suggesting that I am not competend. In my replies I have told him that several times in a not to be mistaken way. Some readers seem to support my point of view on that.
BTW: I don’t have a problem with Bill’s point of view on this subject, I have a problem with how he handles other peoples opinions in his replies. It is better, not to highlight quotes out of a coherent reply, and give that quote a life of its own for your own purpose.
But maybe that is my own problem and maybe he did not do it on purpose.
American/English isn’t my speaking language, maybe some misunderstanding comes from that.
Anyway: This weekend I made 5 jumps, I had a lot of fun and a few beers too.
I also spend a few hours on this (fine) discussion.
CA in an other topic…..
Blue Sky – Have Fun – Be Save
AvK

[billvon 2,400]

>Billmon is the moderator of this discussion. In my opinion he has often abused
>parts of my words by putting it out of its context or by suggesting that I am not
> competend.
I'm sorry that I came across that way. I do not suggest you are incompetent at all; I just disagree with some of your assertions i.e. that it is generally more risky to land a main parachute with broken steering line(s) than use a reserve. It is a disagreement I have had with people in the past. I don't insist that everyone think like I do; my purpose as moderator here is mainly to try to keep people from flaming each other or making personal attacks on each other, neither of which has been going on here.
There are two purposes to the threads that appear here. The first is for two or more people to debate a given topic, whether it's landing in rear risers, using a cypres etc. There is generally no right or wrong answer to these debates. The second purpose is general information for lurkers - a great many people read these posts and don't comment on them. They just serve as background information for these people, people who may have never even considered the topic before. For the second set of people, seeing dissenting positions is (I think) a good thing. It lets them make up their own mind, rather than just listening to someone tell them what the "right" thing to do is.
Anyway, don't take my disagreeing with you as evidence that I don't think you are competent. You have contributed to this discussion by coherently presenting your opinion on the rear-riser issue, and that helps everyone reading the thread - even if I don't completely agree with you.
-bill von