BadDog 0 #1 December 31, 2001 Anybody hear anything more about the "recall"? See page 5 of the January issue of Skydiving.CorporateLawyerDave aka BadDog Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spectrejumper 0 #2 January 1, 2002 Due to crappy weather I don't have the new Skydiving yet. I do have a Dash M though and I'm wondering what this is all about. I checked Precision's website and I couldn't find anything. More info please.Mike D-23312"It's such a shame to spend your time away like this...existing." JMH Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #3 January 1, 2002 I don't have the new Skydiving either, but I haven't heard anything about this at work as of today. I'd think a service bulletin would have been distributed to all dealers...pull and flare,lisa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycat 0 #4 January 1, 2002 QuoteAnybody hear anything more about the "recall"? See page 5 of the January issue of Skydiving.Hey how about a little more info since some of us can't get a hold of a Skydiving due to the holidays?Kelli Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloud9 0 #5 January 1, 2002 From the January issue of SkydivingPrecision Aerodynamics was preparing to issue a service bulletin in mid December that will require the structural reinforcement of hundreds of its early Raven Dash M reserve canopies.The action is a result of a November incident in which several lines of a Raven M reserve pulled off the canopy during deployment. Although the jumper wasn't hurt subsequent factory inspection of his canopy convinced Precision president George Galloway that some line attachment points should be strengthened on some canopies.As Galloway explained it the mandatory service bullentin will apply only to first generaton Raven M reserves, specifically those that use 3/4 inch type 3 attachment poiints that are sewn to the canopy with a single 42 stitch bartack. The canopies were built in 1997 through 1999. Subsequent versions of the Raven M used other attachment methods, such as two bartacks and a different type of tape.In the November incident, several line attachment points pulled free of the canopy, leaving the bartacks behind.The company is compiling a list of serial numbers of affected canopies. Galloway believes perhaps 1500 to 1800 canopies will need to be reworked.The modification involves adding another bartack above the existing bartack on the line attachment points for the A and B lines a total of 16 bartacts. Any rigger with the right sewing machine can do it.Galloway said early Raven-M's have been deployed successfully many hundreds of times in the field, so their integrity is proven. He said the bulletin would require modification at the next routine repack and not before further flight.The same canopy is also used on some of the company's P-124 aircrew emergency parachutes.He said the bulletin would be widely circulated when it is issued and it will be available at the company's website. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tlshealy 0 #6 January 1, 2002 January Skydiving Article: Precision Readies Reserve FiX:Mandatory service bulletin will apply only to "first generation" Raven-M reserves, specifically those that use 3/4 -inch Type 3 attachment points that are sewn to the canopy with a single 42 stitch bartack.The Canopies were built in 1997 thru 1999. This is the result of a November incident in which several lines of a Raven-M reserve pulled off during deployment. The jumper was not injured. The factory is recomending an additional bartack be added to the A and B line attachment points. Just received this today.BSBDTad Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albatross 0 #7 January 1, 2002 Does anyone know where the incident occured because i saw a reserve blow up at ELoy recentlyGod bless us and God Bless AmericaAlbatross Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BadDog 0 #8 January 1, 2002 I'm wondering if the wing loading was a factor.CorporateLawyerDave aka BadDog Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #9 January 2, 2002 "I'm wondering if the wing loading was a factor"I'd bet my paycheck on it. I'm sure Precision is just responding to customer abuse of it's products because they want to avoid law suits by some idiots family and I'm sure they don't want to see anyone get hurt."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weid14 0 #10 January 2, 2002 before betting the ol' paycheck be sure to read the posting from precision Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RemiAndKaren 0 #11 January 2, 2002 Quote"I'm wondering if the wing loading was a factor"I'd bet my paycheck on it.no matter what the wingload is, reserves are TSOed at a certain max weight and airspeed. It should not have been a factor if the weight and airspeed were under the TSO limit. So who will you pay that paycheck to Clay? RemiMuff 914 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #12 January 2, 2002 "It should not have been a factor if the weight and airspeed were under the TSO limit"Most likely....but...How old was this reserve? How many rides did it have on it? Had it been well taken care of? How many repacks? How much over the placarded weight and speed was the jumper? I think with answers to these questions the causes for the failure would be quite clear. Of course, I could very well be wrong and the reserve is just poorly engineered. I doubt that though......"I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RemiAndKaren 0 #13 January 2, 2002 read the darn SB Clay.. it was not over the weight and speed limit.RemiMuff 914 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #14 January 2, 2002 OK....read it....If I had one I would just get rid of it. I don't want a reserve that's going to have "Exceptionally hard openings" Re-enforced attachment points don't do you much good if you have broken bones or internal injuries from a hard opening. I'll keep my PD....thanks. I do find it unusual that these people were within placarded limits. Don't find that too often these days. Within TSO limits yes....placarded no...."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites scottbre 0 #15 January 2, 2002 I'm just glad I have a Firelite... "Can't keep my mind from the circling sky. Tongue-tied & twisted just an earth-bound misfit, I." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggerrob 558 #16 January 2, 2002 I will reinforce the stitching on early Raven-Ms, but will encourage people to keep them only if they weight less than placarded limits.Fuck fashion! Fuck overloading reserves! The smallest F-111, 7-cell I have ever stood up the landing on had 172 square feet. My ankles twinged every time I stood it up in the pea gravel bowl. I will never own a reserve smaller than that!If major manufacturers won't build containers for a 170 reserve and sub-135 main combination, then I will build my own container. Time to quit typing and start sewing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnischalke 0 #17 January 2, 2002 rob,You own an Amigo, correct? How can one get one, if one were so inclined? I can't find shit about them (even on the freeflight website) or find someone who sells them. I am probably gonna replace my Super Raven soon.My last question: what's the best reserve for the money? Swift Plus? PD? Should I wait for the RavenMax? Arrrggggghhh.Thanks in advance,mikeBlack and white are all I see, in my infancy... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Aviatrr 0 #18 January 2, 2002 Quote If major manufacturers won't build containers for a 170 reserve and sub-135 main combination, then I will build my own container. I have a Mirage sized for a PD160R and 120ZP main.. The 160 is not a tight fit, either.. Rumor has it that Sunpath is considering doing something similar.. I've tried to talk Sandy into offering such a combination in the Voodoo(and I would be the first to buy one), but no luck.. Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #19 January 2, 2002 "what's the best reserve for the money?"My vote is for a Tempo or PD. I have a PD....got it used for $500....PD 176R"I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhreeZone 15 #20 January 2, 2002 I think Paragear still sells Amigo's. As for whats the best reserve, thats a very subjective question. Some people still swear by thier 26 foot Phantoms and others will only jump certian squares. Basically, any spanwise reinforced canopy will hold up to most everything you can throw at it as long as you stay under the TSO weight. IMO you can't go wrong with PD, Raven's or the new Tempos. I've never got to inspect the other canopies so I don't have an opinion on them.I want to touch the sky, I want to fly so high ~ Sonique Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #21 January 2, 2002 Oh yeah....I should have clearified a "New" Tempo with the spanwise re-enforcing tapes. Of course.....Chuck and many others I know still swear by their old Tempo's..."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cobaltdan 0 #22 January 2, 2002 rigger rob:assuming your reserve will never have more than say a dozen rides on it, the fabric will fly basically identical to z-po.granted there are many reserve designs that are old tec and fly/land like shit, new material or not, but there are good design reserves, ie atair 'quicks' reserves and pd reserves (give credit where due). a good design reserve reserve will fly and land identical to a modern high performance zp 7 cell main canopy.please do not further any misconceptions that people need grossly bigger reserves than their mains because f111 reserves lack flare power and will land hard. i have test jumped most reserves currently made and again a good design reserve will fly and land exactly the same as a modern performance 7 cell main canopy.if you fly a 135 main and are not comfortable flying a 135 reserve, or even a 150 reserve, imo either your logic is faulty or you should not be flying that 135 main. sincerely,dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnischalke 0 #23 January 2, 2002 "atair 'quicks' reserves"What's this Dan? mikeBlack and white are all I see, in my infancy... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freeflir29 0 #24 January 2, 2002 "if you fly a 135 main and are not comfortable flying a 135 reserve"My only real concern is that I have never flown a 7 cell canopy. Period...ZP or F-111. I don't think I'll die but I will definately be very cautious. I also plan on demoing my reserve as a main when the weather warms up. I was all set to do that right before 9/11. I put off ordering the demo and haven't gotten back around to it......I haven't had a reserve ride yet but I always try to visualize a reserve ride before jumps.....INCLUDING practice flares. I saw a guy face plant on his reserve and asked if he had done any practice flares. He hadn't thought of it. I try to think of that as part of my emergency procedures...."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marcin 0 #25 January 2, 2002 I know that discussion on overloading reserves was on a few times. Somebody had a good point once. A 120 and a 170 sqf. reserves seem to have the same type of reinforcement, material, lines etc. There is actually less material being loaded with the same number of lines and attachments, so it should be more resistant to shock. I have not seen anybody prove that smaller canopies of same design usually open harder than larger ones. What makes the larger canopy stronger? Do you think that overloading a reserve by say a 15 pounds should be an acceptable excuse for reserve failure (it was brought up re previous Raven blow ups)? I'd say such a reserve is crap, although the manufacturer may be legally protected in this case.I try not to overload mine too much (even though the manufacturer told me I easily could) to prevent violent reaction in case of a line twist, I am less concerned with the landing with a F111, which for me is easier in tight conditions (I can sink it in, as with accuracy canopies).I tested a 120, had a stand up landing in perfect conditions and bought a 135 @ 1.6 (definitely not for beginners!)m. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 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
RemiAndKaren 0 #11 January 2, 2002 Quote"I'm wondering if the wing loading was a factor"I'd bet my paycheck on it.no matter what the wingload is, reserves are TSOed at a certain max weight and airspeed. It should not have been a factor if the weight and airspeed were under the TSO limit. So who will you pay that paycheck to Clay? RemiMuff 914 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #12 January 2, 2002 "It should not have been a factor if the weight and airspeed were under the TSO limit"Most likely....but...How old was this reserve? How many rides did it have on it? Had it been well taken care of? How many repacks? How much over the placarded weight and speed was the jumper? I think with answers to these questions the causes for the failure would be quite clear. Of course, I could very well be wrong and the reserve is just poorly engineered. I doubt that though......"I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RemiAndKaren 0 #13 January 2, 2002 read the darn SB Clay.. it was not over the weight and speed limit.RemiMuff 914 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #14 January 2, 2002 OK....read it....If I had one I would just get rid of it. I don't want a reserve that's going to have "Exceptionally hard openings" Re-enforced attachment points don't do you much good if you have broken bones or internal injuries from a hard opening. I'll keep my PD....thanks. I do find it unusual that these people were within placarded limits. Don't find that too often these days. Within TSO limits yes....placarded no...."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scottbre 0 #15 January 2, 2002 I'm just glad I have a Firelite... "Can't keep my mind from the circling sky. Tongue-tied & twisted just an earth-bound misfit, I." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #16 January 2, 2002 I will reinforce the stitching on early Raven-Ms, but will encourage people to keep them only if they weight less than placarded limits.Fuck fashion! Fuck overloading reserves! The smallest F-111, 7-cell I have ever stood up the landing on had 172 square feet. My ankles twinged every time I stood it up in the pea gravel bowl. I will never own a reserve smaller than that!If major manufacturers won't build containers for a 170 reserve and sub-135 main combination, then I will build my own container. Time to quit typing and start sewing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #17 January 2, 2002 rob,You own an Amigo, correct? How can one get one, if one were so inclined? I can't find shit about them (even on the freeflight website) or find someone who sells them. I am probably gonna replace my Super Raven soon.My last question: what's the best reserve for the money? Swift Plus? PD? Should I wait for the RavenMax? Arrrggggghhh.Thanks in advance,mikeBlack and white are all I see, in my infancy... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aviatrr 0 #18 January 2, 2002 Quote If major manufacturers won't build containers for a 170 reserve and sub-135 main combination, then I will build my own container. I have a Mirage sized for a PD160R and 120ZP main.. The 160 is not a tight fit, either.. Rumor has it that Sunpath is considering doing something similar.. I've tried to talk Sandy into offering such a combination in the Voodoo(and I would be the first to buy one), but no luck.. Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #19 January 2, 2002 "what's the best reserve for the money?"My vote is for a Tempo or PD. I have a PD....got it used for $500....PD 176R"I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #20 January 2, 2002 I think Paragear still sells Amigo's. As for whats the best reserve, thats a very subjective question. Some people still swear by thier 26 foot Phantoms and others will only jump certian squares. Basically, any spanwise reinforced canopy will hold up to most everything you can throw at it as long as you stay under the TSO weight. IMO you can't go wrong with PD, Raven's or the new Tempos. I've never got to inspect the other canopies so I don't have an opinion on them.I want to touch the sky, I want to fly so high ~ Sonique Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #21 January 2, 2002 Oh yeah....I should have clearified a "New" Tempo with the spanwise re-enforcing tapes. Of course.....Chuck and many others I know still swear by their old Tempo's..."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cobaltdan 0 #22 January 2, 2002 rigger rob:assuming your reserve will never have more than say a dozen rides on it, the fabric will fly basically identical to z-po.granted there are many reserve designs that are old tec and fly/land like shit, new material or not, but there are good design reserves, ie atair 'quicks' reserves and pd reserves (give credit where due). a good design reserve reserve will fly and land identical to a modern high performance zp 7 cell main canopy.please do not further any misconceptions that people need grossly bigger reserves than their mains because f111 reserves lack flare power and will land hard. i have test jumped most reserves currently made and again a good design reserve will fly and land exactly the same as a modern performance 7 cell main canopy.if you fly a 135 main and are not comfortable flying a 135 reserve, or even a 150 reserve, imo either your logic is faulty or you should not be flying that 135 main. sincerely,dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #23 January 2, 2002 "atair 'quicks' reserves"What's this Dan? mikeBlack and white are all I see, in my infancy... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #24 January 2, 2002 "if you fly a 135 main and are not comfortable flying a 135 reserve"My only real concern is that I have never flown a 7 cell canopy. Period...ZP or F-111. I don't think I'll die but I will definately be very cautious. I also plan on demoing my reserve as a main when the weather warms up. I was all set to do that right before 9/11. I put off ordering the demo and haven't gotten back around to it......I haven't had a reserve ride yet but I always try to visualize a reserve ride before jumps.....INCLUDING practice flares. I saw a guy face plant on his reserve and asked if he had done any practice flares. He hadn't thought of it. I try to think of that as part of my emergency procedures...."I got some beers....Let's Drink em!!!"Clay Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marcin 0 #25 January 2, 2002 I know that discussion on overloading reserves was on a few times. Somebody had a good point once. A 120 and a 170 sqf. reserves seem to have the same type of reinforcement, material, lines etc. There is actually less material being loaded with the same number of lines and attachments, so it should be more resistant to shock. I have not seen anybody prove that smaller canopies of same design usually open harder than larger ones. What makes the larger canopy stronger? Do you think that overloading a reserve by say a 15 pounds should be an acceptable excuse for reserve failure (it was brought up re previous Raven blow ups)? I'd say such a reserve is crap, although the manufacturer may be legally protected in this case.I try not to overload mine too much (even though the manufacturer told me I easily could) to prevent violent reaction in case of a line twist, I am less concerned with the landing with a F111, which for me is easier in tight conditions (I can sink it in, as with accuracy canopies).I tested a 120, had a stand up landing in perfect conditions and bought a 135 @ 1.6 (definitely not for beginners!)m. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
