0
Bandito

Tandem Drogues

Recommended Posts

Does it annoy anyone else that this guy won't just come out and say what he thinks?

Seriously "dude," post what you mean to say or STFU about it. It is VERY clear you have something against a certain DZ, owner, opperation. Yet you try to make your idiotic post seem unbiased.

If you have some FACTS to share, share them, if not take it to the bonfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Has anyone ever used a Strong Drogue on a Vector tandem? if so, was the mod difficult? What was the performance like? Did it outlast the vector Drogue? Is it even legal?



Getting this thread back on track -- and probably better off in Gear & Rigging -- I'm actually curious about these questions, and I'm interested in hearing from someone who has experience with both Strong and Vector tandem systems. I know the Vector system; I don't know much about Strong.

I imagine, but do not know, that it would be a fairly simple matter to attach a Strong drogue to a Vector system or vice versa. Depending on where the kill line goes, the Strong drogue might need a Strong bag, and a Vector might need a Vector bag. Would that be right? After that, both have 3-ring releases for the bridle.

As for performance, do I understand correctly that the Vector drogue collapses before extracting the bag, and the Strong drogue collapse after. Is that right? If so, I would expect different snatch force. Does the canopy design need to be different as a result?

Thanks in advance,
Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having a few years of rigging on both i see little advantage. You would need to add an attachment on the d-bag for the drogue and two grommets to the sides of it for the kill line. It would be easiest to adapt a new style vector bag with the 2700 pound webbing running though it and just leave the inside portion free. You would also need to upgrade the flimsy 1000 pound square weave attachment on the sigma canopy to something that will handle the momentum of the collapsing drogue. There is some advantage to this over the old style vector d-bag as it places the load on the bag to pull the canopy out instead of the bridal attachment. You would also get rid of the wearing scrunch on all upt rigs.

All being said why replace a simple, functional, softer opening system for a far more complex system. Referring to Strong's very over designed envelope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Heck with it, ill bite. Since i know who Bandito is as he was kick out of the dropzone for stealing many years ago, then failed at his attempt to run a dropzone.



Obviously you have me confused with this guy...

Quote

Former sheriff candidate arrested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bandito,

I don’t know who you are but I sure would like to meet you. You have said a lot that is not true, just to prove a point I don’t own a bonehead helmet nor was I wearing one (concrete). You have been saying a bunch of BS that isn't true. I bet you a lot of money you wouldn’t repeat it to my face or the face of anyone at the DZ! You need to just shut your mouth about things and people you don’t know!! Stop telling lies and passing bad info!! You have no Idea what happened so shut up. Skydive Colorado, the owner and the jumpmasters there are awesome safe skydivers and people that would never do anything that is wrong, illegal, or that would cause someone to get hurt! Your just someone with a personal problem that needs to solve it like a man and stop hiding behind your computer. The DZO jumps the same gear as everyone else and maintains it meticulously! I would jump any of his gear again today! Neil is a great person, skydiver, and teacher. So if you need to settle something with him than do it, stop hiding and go handle your beef like a grown up and stop talking about people and things you know nothing about.

Greg whitehurst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg, is "shut up" the best you can do? Since you were the "man in charge" during the jump then why don't you just tell the story? Even the moderator has posted that he was pm'd and informed that the DZ told everyone there not to not talk about the incident (unfortunately for skydive colorado, skydivers can't keep seem to keep their mouths shut, huh?). If you can possibly save someone's life by letting them know what happened then why won't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"
Quote

... And avgas has much lower vapour pressures, which affects vapor lock susceptibility of the fuel system.
...

"

..........................................................................

A long time ago (1990s?) EAA proved that most autogas meets aviation vapour pressure standards below 15,000 feet MSL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First, not passing wrong and bad info like your dumbass is much better than remaining silent for now! Second, I received a massive head injury and can’t remember anything of the entire jump so unlike you I am not going to pass bad info, I will let the facts and experts tell the story. I’m not some scared little punk like you saying lies and passing completely wrong info! Say who you are or meet me somewhere and we can talk about this more. Your choice of where and when since you want to know so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greg, If you can't remember anything then how do you know that I'm not right? Also, if the "facts and experts" that you speak of are the ones with the most to loose then how can you believe them? I'm pretty sure that if it comes down to you or them - you are going under the bus. Think about it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know you’re wrong because we have way more knowledgeable and experienced people than you looking into this accident and you’re saying stuff that we all know from the facts to be 100% wrong so stop speculating!!! You have no idea and are by no means helping anyone with the wrong info your passing!! The real story will come out for all to hear when it’s allowed to. So are we going to meet or what?? Stop being a coward! Once again who are you??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

...we have way more knowledgeable and experienced people than you looking into this accident...
The real story will come out for all to hear when it’s allowed to.

When people are looking at the facts dispassionately it's generally OK to let the facts come out as they come out.

If you're looking at them only to prove (or disprove) a point, then you need to wait until they're all in.

Which kind of looking at are they doing? Note: I'm not in Colorado, I don't know who Bandito is, I'd say it's pretty clear he has an agenda (and I don't care for agenda posting), but what's wrong with letting facts out as they become available, rather than only after they can be packaged appropriately?

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"

Quote

... And avgas has much lower vapour pressures, which affects vapor lock susceptibility of the fuel system.
...

"

..........................................................................

A long time ago (1990s?) EAA proved that most autogas meets aviation vapour pressure standards below 15,000 feet MSL.



Early 80s.

Lots of good info about autogas usage on the EAA Autogas website. It talks about volatility (vapor pressure) octane (some will be surprised about that) and a bunch of other interesting stuff.

Rather than try to convince some people that they are wrong, I'll let them find it out for themselves.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The EAA publications clearly state how automotive fuels have greater vapour pressure and that is why they had to carefully evaluate various different engines or airframes for a fuel that was outside the original design considerations. It also acknowledges that vapour lock can occur earlier with auto gas than avgas in adverse conditions -- and it has happened even with aviation gas.

Perhaps this is a "glass half full or half empty" argument.

I haven't re-read the thread to figure out why we're talking about this in a Tandem Drogue thread, but I wanted to correct a belief that auto and avgas are basically the same thing. They are not, even if in certain circumstances one can be used safely in place of the other. Hope that's good enough...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

...we have way more knowledgeable and experienced people than you looking into this accident...
The real story will come out for all to hear when it’s allowed to.

When people are looking at the facts dispassionately it's generally OK to let the facts come out as they come out.

If you're looking at them only to prove (or disprove) a point, then you need to wait until they're all in.

Which kind of looking at are they doing? Note: I'm not in Colorado, I don't know who Bandito is, I'd say it's pretty clear he has an agenda (and I don't care for agenda posting), but what's wrong with letting facts out as they become available, rather than only after they can be packaged appropriately?

Wendy P.



It's been my experience that when information leaks, rather than being presented as a whole... people will stop listening when they hear what they surmised and not go beyond that if additional information conflicts with their hypothesis.
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's true for some people; I guess that when things linger, I think that some information is better than none.

Looking back at some epic Incidents threads, I can see what you're saying.

I just also remember so many Powerpoint pitches (or similar) where there is clearly a conclusion we're being lead to, rather than a desire to share information so that we can evaluate it and come to a conclusion.

Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

That's true for some people; I guess that when things linger, I think that some information is better than none.

Looking back at some epic Incidents threads, I can see what you're saying.

I just also remember so many Powerpoint pitches (or similar) where there is clearly a conclusion we're being lead to, rather than a desire to share information so that we can evaluate it and come to a conclusion.

Wendy P.



Agreed. About a year ago I went to the USCG On-Scene Coordinator's Course (Advanced PIO) in Yorktown. One thing I did learn was, "This is the information we currently have... We will let you know more at xx/xx/xx at 18:00 hrs." The initial report need be swift and transparent, the initial conclusion needs to be as accurate as possible, the next and subsequent meetings should immediately, 1) reinforce the initial conclusions, or 2) correct the first conclusion and give a 'why' as to that conclusion's inaccuracy. Subsequent meetings at regularly scheduled intervals... each a building block (yep same lingo) towards "Trust and Truth."
Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

That's true for some people; I guess that when things linger, I think that some information is better than none.

Looking back at some epic Incidents threads, I can see what you're saying.

I just also remember so many Powerpoint pitches (or similar) where there is clearly a conclusion we're being lead to, rather than a desire to share information so that we can evaluate it and come to a conclusion.

Wendy P.



Agreed. About a year ago I went to the USCG On-Scene Coordinator's Course (Advanced PIO) in Yorktown. One thing I did learn was, "This is the information we currently have... We will let you know more at xx/xx/xx at 18:00 hrs." The initial report need be swift and transparent, the initial conclusion needs to be as accurate as possible, the next and subsequent meetings should immediately, 1) reinforce the initial conclusions, or 2) correct the first conclusion and give a 'why' as to that conclusion's inaccuracy. Subsequent meetings at regularly scheduled intervals... each a building block (yep same lingo) towards "Trust and Truth."



“We don’t know yet……that is something we are looking into” is so much better than a little white lie. I found out many years ago that I shouldn’t tell lies; I am not smart enough to remember what I said.

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

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.

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