Who Modified My rig IS THAT LEGAL?

[DiverStump 0]

I sent my rig in(I wont say where for now) for some work to be done on the cypress cable housing and when it came back from the manufacturer the main tray had been modified without my permission or prior knowledge before the work was done.
They basicly cut off the closing loop grommet inside the packing tray so that now I can only use the one on the #1 flap.
Can any manufacturer cut up my rig just because they made it or do they have to get my permission first? There wasn't an FAA Airworthyness Directive released saying to do this. So why would they and is it "Their right" as the maker of the rig?
What can I or should I do?

[SkydiveMonkey 0]

the rig is your property - they can't do jack without your consent. Would a mechanic do work on your car without permission?
When you participate in sporting events, its not whether you win or loose, its how drunk you get.

[PhreeZone 15]

If the design of the rig was updated becasue of problems with the old design, then the company might have done it as a saftey measure. The FAA might not have had anything to say about it, but was there a service bullitn out from the company?
Sunpath had to do some mods to my attachment point to get it so that it was safe from snag points. I was happy when they did it for free since it would have cost me money to have a non-required, but highly recommended mod done to my container. Mirage might have done it to bring the rig up to its current specs and ensure that it is as safe as it could be.
Did you try and talk to the company to see why they did it?
Personally I'm thinking of modifing my Javelin to have a 3 point closure system instead of its normal 4 after this season.
I wish you would step back from that ledge my friend... ~3EB

[Slowfaller 0]

Quote

Would a mechanic do work on your car without permission?

Bad Example

[SkydiveMonkey 0]

I know. Thought what the hell and put it in
When you participate in sporting events, its not whether you win or loose, its how drunk you get.

[Craig 0]

I am guessing your rig is a Mirage from your profile. In any event I would have called them and asked why the removed the other closing loop attachment point. I have a Mirage DOM 10/01 and it only has the closing loop attachment on the #1 flap. They must have decided to do away with the secondary attachment point (inside the container) at some point in time. The manual that shipped with my container says nothing about the secondary attachment. OTOH the PDF manual that I downloaded last October or November did mention the secondary attachment point but also noted "deactivate the primary attachment by stowing the tuck-tab holding the short closing loop in the #1 flap, to allow clear access to the grommet in flap #1." Sooo, maybe it is a safety related issue that isn't large enough to send out a bulletin, but they "upgrade" it if the rigs are sent in for any maintenance. The Rig manufacturer is the best source of info IMHO. If your rig is not a Mirage sorry about my taking it for granted it is. If it is I would be intererested in hearing Why they decided to get rid of the other attachment point.

[skybytch 259]

If there was a service bulletin out on this, they can do it, and yes, it is legal for them to do it, even without your permission. Gear manufacturers don't issue service bulletins without a very good reason.
Did you call them and ask why it was done? That would really be the place to start...
pull & flare,
lisa

[SkydiveMonkey 0]

They should still phone / email you and say what they intend to do though.
When you participate in sporting events, its not whether you win or loose, its how drunk you get.

[billvon 2,400]

>If there was a service bulletin out on this, they can do it . . .
They can do it anyway. From an FAA legality standpoint, as long as the rig still matches the drawings sent to the FAA during certification, they can do whatever they want to it.
From a customer service standpoint, they should have told you what they're doing. I think if they did that to me I'd send it back and say "Hey, something accidentally got removed . . ."
-bill von

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Phree...Drew a blank on the slink evidence, sawree man
"Personally I'm thinking of modifing my Javelin to have a 3 point closure system instead of its normal 4 after this season."
Whassa one of them then?
Why would you do it? pros/cons?
Cya
D

[PhreeZone 15]

I'm looking at doing it because I'm really not liking having the attachment point inside the container. I think its just one more thing that stuff can catch on and replacing the closing loop when its frayed with the setup they did to mine is a pain in the rear.
I wish you would step back from that ledge my friend... ~3EB

[riggerrob 558]

This string reminds me of when I worked for Rigging Innovations.
We frequently did free updates on customers' gear without bothering to call them.
Time spent talking to their answering machine was better spent on a sewing machine.
Most of the updates did not change packing procedures, they just made it slightly easier to pack their Talon.
Other mods - like RSL or Cypres updates - were done to reduce long-term wear and tear problems.
Some of the modifications - like reserve toggle hoods - were done for free because I thought the earlier design "sucked the big one" and it took me as long to do the update as it took me to hand tack a pair fo reserve toggles.
None of our customers complained as loudly as the first poster on this string.
Come to think of it, I never heard a Rigging Innovations customer complain about free updates.

[flyingferret 0]

Rigging Innovation is AWESOME! I love my Talon2. A few months back, my pc bridle started fraying. I think it was due to a premature opening. I talked with Rose at RI, and shortly she said to send it in, they would work on it under warranty. I expressed that I was not absolutely certain it was a warranty issue, it might have been my premature. She responded, "We are offering you a freefix. Take it!" I have always had excellent response from them. For my next rig, I will seriously put them at the top of the list, and I have already decided if I ever get into more serious CREW, I will get a CREW Talon.
Oh, on the actual topic. It sounds to me like the did you a favor for free! And if you don't think so, you should call them before asking/complaining to us. They know your rig better than anyone, you included.
Malachi

[bhale 0]

For the really important question: Did they charge you for the unapproved mod?

[weid14 0]

unapproved by who's decision? Technically I think the container manufacture can say what an approved modification is, not the owner (unless they carry a master's ticket or happen to work there)

[Remster 24]

I think bhale meant unaproved as far as the owner is concerned...
Remster
Muff 914

[Unisyn 0]

Diverstump,
Check you personal email. Not your Dropzone.com account.

[billvon 2,400]

>Technically I think the container manufacture can say what an approved modification is . . .
Any modification a manufacturer makes is, by definition, a manufacturer-approved modification, and is legal provided the rig still matches the drawings sent to the FAA during certification.
-bill von

[DiverStump 0]

Well I'm not complaining about free updates. It wasn't an update it was a removal of an atattchment point/grommet in the main packing tray. My rig does not close properly with the closing loop at the #1 flap the fix on thier web site says to change to the secondary closing loop atatchment point to fix this problem. However I can't do that since they cut it off. And when they cut it off they didn't even bother to hot knife it so now there is loose fraying nylon in the bottom of my main packing tray. Not like it was an improvement they did it was a mistake they did. As the owner of said equipment they should have gotten my permission first. Also the response i got from them was....... 95% of our customers don't use that so when they come in we just cut them off...... well where did they get this 95% they are talking about? do they work on all the rigs they make or are they talking about the 95% out of the ones they work on?

[DiverStump 0]

OK maybe i need to explain a little more.
It was not an update. and to my understanding Service bulitens do not have to be complied with unless you want to. to my knowledge there is no service bulitin on this rig anyway. Airworthyness Directives from the FAA have to be complied with. I should know a little about this I am a certified Arplane Mechanic. It was not complying with any AD they cut off the closing loop in the main packing tray because of the 2 fatalities when lines got caught on the grometts in the main packing tray on two different types of rigs (Reflex and Javlin I believe) If I am working on an airplane and the owner does not want me to comply with a service bulliten I don't and if he or she doesn't want me to comply with an FAA airworthyness directive (because he is cheap or doesn't have the money) I don't but i write in the log book that the aircraft is un-airworthy and why its un-airworthy. If I want to use that gromett to close my rig and there isn't an FAA AD that says it needs to be removed then what gives Them the right to chop it out without my knowledge? Not only that but they didn't even hot knife it so there is loose fraying nylon in the bottom of my packing tray where they cut it. Does Rigger know what FAR governs rigs and who can do what to who's rig?

[DiverStump 0]

Yes a car mechanic would. However an AIRFRAME or POWERPLANT MECHANIC would not work on your plane without talking to the pilot/owner first and that is a little more like a rigger with a rig

[DiverStump 0]

service bullitens are not manditory to my knowledge. at least they are not on aircraft. AD's are however. and the service bulletin that most people received a few years ago was to cover the gromet not cut it out of the packing tray completely.
I have contacted the company and they don't seem to want to talk to me. I asked them to call me when it was convieniant for them and gave them nine hour window to do so and they responded with an email instead. I am still trying but I'm looking for advice from other people so I can make a good decission after a have some advice from some other skydivers and riggers

[DiverStump 0]

i believe they did away with that attachment point because of the 2 fatalities when lines were caught on the closing loop gromet on two different brands of rigs.

[DiverStump 0]

Responding to this.........
>Technically I think the container manufacture can say what an approved modification is . . .
Any modification a manufacturer makes is, by definition, a manufacturer-approved modification, and is legal provided the rig still matches the drawings sent to the FAA during certification.
-bill von
After they cut off the secondary closing loop attachment point I don't think it would match the original drawing anymore. Also I believe that a manufacturer must get FAA approval before they build or modify anything.

[billvon 2,400]

>After they cut off the secondary closing loop attachment point I don't think it
>would match the original drawing anymore.
Generally the drawings don't even show the main container area, since it is not part of the certificated system. Even if it did, most manufacturers add notes to the drawing that this or that feature is optional, which allows them the option of doing it either way.
>Also I believe that a manufacturer
>must get FAA approval before they build or modify anything.
Nope, not as long as it matches the drawing. As an extreme example, Rigging Innovations didn't even need any new FAA approvals for the Voodoo, because it is similar enough to the Talon (same harness and reserve system) that it was covered under the same TSO.
Like I said before, it's 100% legal. It's very poor customer service, though, and at the very least I'd want to find out why they did it - was it a safety issue, or were they just cranky that day?
-bill von