cssriggers

What AndyMan said. Sorry man - I can't elaborate, I just know it happened. I certainly don't know HOW it happened ... but it did happen, and did result in a fatality. I'm kind of surprised that this is news. It was pretty well publicized at the time. Please see http://www.skydivingfatalities.com/ Year - 2001 Incident - #30 Also check out the intro to the 2001 report. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

We had a fatality at CSS due to main suspension lines entangling with a ring sight two years ago. I believe there was another fatality in 2001 caused by main lines entangled with camera equipment. Since Rich's death, our DZ has required that all video staff have a single-point helmet cutaway system. As riggers we worked hard + closely with videographers on the system. It works great on the ground, but has not yet been tested in real life. I realize most posts in this thread are about a main riser snagging camera equipment ... be aware that microlines can be even more dangerous. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

We're part of the original Skydive Iowa family, and I instructed Slaphappy Boy as a student and jumpmastered many of his static lines. He was a good friend, although I hadn't spoken with him in a few years. The news was tough to take. The last time I saw him was at nationals in Eloy a couple of years ago ... he looked well, seemed quite happy and was the same old Marc - compassionate, deep, quirky, irreverent and just flat out goofy as all hell. From your post it's evident that you knew him well, and it's evident that he (thankfully) hadn't changed much. Did he ever tell you his famous New Year's Eve story? It made me laugh so hard I pulled some muscles. Marc was a unique individual - once you spent time around him, you could never forget him. He experienced life in a way most of us can't imagine. Goodbye and fly free, Boy. Alpha Mike Foxtrot John Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

What he said. Thanks for continuing to share your wisdom. Note to all - opening in a track can be painful. Be sure to pay attention to body position if you're having problems (hard and/or off-heading openings, line twists, etc.) Make sure you've slowed down and your shoulders are even. I agree with the line stow issue. The original "Berger Bag" - main Dbag with free-stowed lines - has no locking stows at all, just tuck tabs. (The prototype was built in our loft.) I've only seen video of deployments and heard reports from the field, but it seems to work very well. The videos were impressive; the bag almost looks anchored in the sky as lines release cleanly. I also think slider size and PC size/type/ condition are very important. I had a canopy that was really spanking me from time to time. I put it in a rig with an F-111 PC and the openings were immediately softer. We had a spate of problems in the past few years with some new canopies that were designed to have "inherently soft, sweet openings" putting newer jumpers down near Cypres-firing altis if they didn't watch it. After some trial and error smaller sliders solved all these problems. As for pressurization/crossports/line trim: Strong tandem mains don't have crossports and tend to have soft but not snivelly openings when new. Once they get some jumps on them we've found that they tend to snivel and have end cell closure, and it seems directly related to shrinkage of outboard lines. Of course this would seem obvious, and I'm not sure how this would relate to sport canopies. A question - I'd always heard/learned that older, high-jump # canopies - esp. F-111 - are supposed to open more snivelly as they lose porosity. But in experience it seems that old Sharpchuters, Rascals, Raiders, etc. seem to open hardest of all. Does anyone have an explanation for this? Would this be due to canopy design or tired fabric? Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

To add our $0.02 we've always used silicone on cutaway cables in our loft; usually the Prestone brand (worked fine.) We bought some "GUNK" brand silicone on sale at a Home Depot once and it was so tacky/sticky we wouldn't use it. Then on an emergency pre-boogie supply run, we accidentally bought some "Ace" brand silicone. (Why accidentally? Well, we were busy, and it was closer + more expensive ... we're out in the boonies here.) This was a few weeks before "Derek's gear tips" was posted on this site. It's hard to explain, but if you clean a lot of cutaway cables like we do, you'll quickly find that the "Ace" brand of silicone is cleaner, drier, smoother and less tacky than anything else we've found. It was kinda cool seeing our findings backed up by the experts. WD40 is bad because it's so tacky, it attracts a lot of dirt. I've heard that 3-in-1 oil is OK if you wipe the cables really dry. Edited to add: Cables treated with Ace silicone seem to remain cleaner at the next repack cycle as well Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Hello, my friend. I'll suggest adding this: http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/wingload.pdf Not directly about canopy control per se ... but I've seen many new, small people in a hurry to downsize to a 1:1 WL. Scary when they weigh 100 lb and have 50 jumps. VERY cool that you're doing this -- kudos. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Two observations from a rigger who's assembled them - They've added yoke tuck tabs. It's a cosmetic thing, but it makes the G4.1s look quite sharp. These are an extension of the yoke (top back of the rig, where it generally says "Mirage) that tuck down behind the reserve freebag when you get it repacked. On some G3s you can see the top corners of the reserve freebag when the main is out of the container. These tabs gives the whole top of the rig a nice finished look, although it does make it more challenging to see your RSL when you do a reserve pin check. In addition the top reserve flap goes through a Type 4 retaining strap on the pin cover flap. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Just a tiny nitpick. Since the acronym "TSO" appears in almost all of these posts, I'd like to clarify that it actually stands for "Technical Standard Order." That's all - continue your fascinating discussion. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

I meant the latter - which is highlighted in red. This seems to me quite a silly argument in regard to a Cypres, especially in the US (where I live.) The vast majority of people jumping out of planes in the US are doing tandems. Most of them only do that first jump, and never come back. Do they get a choice of whether or not to have a Cypres? Have tandem Cypreses increased their odds of survival? IMO, the number of people jumping out of planes vs. the number getting injured or killed -by your definition, including tandems - is immaterial to any meaningful Cypres debate. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

There are clearly two sides to this debate, and the two sides start out with such different axioms that I'm not sure they can be reconciled by logic and debate. But we're not just wanking off here - it sure doesn't hurt to talk about it, and exchange opinions. And IMO there's nothing in this sport that could EVER be "solved" by logic and debate. The skydiving world is filled with strong personalities and opinions. Just a thought - for all those who think that a lot of current skydivers should never have become skydivers because of a bad attitude towards personal responsibilty for keeping themselves alive, how do you account for the almost monotonic decline in accident rate over the last 15 years? First off, I'd ask you to define this statement - "the almost monotonic decline in accident rate over the last 15 years". I guess maybe you're talking about the dramatic decrease in student fatalities, and the steep decline in "no/low pulls" vs the increase in landing fatalities? Or maybe, the number of people jumping out of airplanes vs. the number getting injured or killed. My answer to both: Better gear, better instruction, tandems, RSLs, and AADs. I don't think there's any question that the sport has gotten safer (low turns/high performance landings excepted.) So you see - even if we fundamentally disagree in theory on the stuff in your original post, there's a lot we can agree on. -John Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Hey, Kallend. This discussion seems to have gotten rather heated and I'm late, but I still wanna join in (and maybe get this more on track??) I'd probably be considered firmly in your first group - an old fart. (?I'm not THAT old.) But, my Cypres is certainly not just a "fancy add-on" and I don't see it as taking away from the "skydiver's ethos." I simply hope it will always remain a personal choice. I do take a HUGE exception to your description of the second group. None of my students - and none of our newer jumpers - consider a Cypres "just another part of their rig - like the toggles or pilot chute." They understand that it's an electronic backup, something that *MIGHT* save their life in a worst-case scenario. They understand this, just like they understand their three pull priorities. They turn it on, check the numbers, and keep it in mind. This idea of equating an AAD with toggles or PC really scares the hell out of me. I also believe there is a greater dichotomy in skydiving theory between "old farts" and newer jumpers aside from AADs. A common refrain amongst older riggers/instructors I've heard is "Tandems and Cypreses have ruined our sport." (!) While attending a 4-way tunnel camp in Orlando 2 years ago, the first words out of the mouth of our esteemed coach (a US 4-way champion) were, "Cypreses take all the sport out of skydiving." I totally don't agree with either of these sentiments ... but ...on the other hand it takes a lot of guts to hang off the strut of a C182 all alone. Not many people do that anymore. This may sound harsh, but I've seen people progress in this sport who really don't need to be here .. who really don't understand what it's all about. I think most of us have. To me, it's not about having a Cypres vs. not having one; growing up with one vs. never having one - I believe this Cypres issue is an overt symptom of a much bigger ideological schism in our sport. I believe it's about the now quite common idea that anyone can do a tandem and anyone can become a skydiver, vs. the idea that some people just aren't meant for this sport. I belive it's about the safety of our sport; the safety of each of us. It's about taking responsibility for ourselves, and for all of the other poor souls in the plane with us, and in the air with us. I know some scary "old farts" that I'd rather not be in the air with. I'd gladly jump with any of our new skydivers. Bottom line - all gear/Cypres issues aside - when you leave that plane, you need to have the personal responsibility to do certain things to keep yourself alive. After you do that, you need to make sure you don't do anything that could cause anyone else to die or get hurt. These Cypres discussions have gotten rather heated. I think a lot of the "old fart" concerns have to do a lot more with personal responsiblity and realizing the gravity (no pun intended) of the sport than they do with using/not using an AAD. -John Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

That's a mistake. It's presence should seriously affect your decision tree in an emergency exit, among other things. Act like it's not there and you can find yourself with 2 out. Amen to this. People do rely on them, and forget they're there to their peril. IMO it should always be in the back of your mind. And not just in low-altitude emergencies - Soooo, comes time for some low hop 'n pops at 3000-3500 ft, with people who have canopies designed to have "inherenty slow and soft openings" ... read 1500 ft + snivels. I suggest they turn off their Cypreses - and they think I'm joking. BAM - here's some real-life experience with 2 canopies out. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Yep reference this thread even. A large number of people have taken up freeflying. I honestly think that people should have a hundred or so jumps of regular RW to delevlop the life saving part of the sport before they start FF....When I bring this up to guy with less than 100 jumps I get "It's OK I have a CYPRES" all the time. And because they don't know better and its always been there, they rely on them. "Its OK I have a CYPRES". Nothing is wrong with having your ass saved...But I hope each of these people had a reality check, and relooked their participation in this sport...But I have seen people have a CYPRES fire and think nothing of it..."Its why I bought it, to save my ass. I got it put back in my rig leave me alone I'm a safe jumper". A safe jumper that had an AAD save them? I don't get that do you? All I have ever said is that if you have a CYPRES fire you need to sit the fuck down and have a serious look at your life, and how you fucked up so bad that you needed a neat toy to save your ass. I see WAY to many people blow off a CYPRES fire using this logic And they don't take it as serious. They treat it like since they bought a CYPRES they are safe skydivers. I don't agree. If you have a CYPRES fire you fucked up bad....And you need to really look at why, not just blow it off like many do now. Bill was this low non-CYPRES fire in MS? If so I knew him....If not I know of another one. I'm quoting this whole post because I agree totally with what Ron said (and also Billvon) and I hope you all have read it carefully. Since I've been a rigger I've seen 12 Cypres fires - NONE due to incapacitation of the jumper. (Those of you who question the Cypres save stats of unconscious/incapacitated jumpers vs. people who lost altitude awareness need to do some of your own research.) Excatly ONE of these 12 people walked into my loft and said, "Man, I really messed up." He was on coached jumps, working on getting his A - was spinning out of control, trying to get stable. He took it very seriously and sat around for a good long while rethinking his involvement with the sport. The rest were all loss of altitude awareness. Most had initiated main deployment before the Cypres fired and ended up in 2 out scenarios. Most had excuses, i.e. "my main snivelled for 1500 ft." or "I KNOW my Cypres fired way higher than 1000 ft." -- and didn't take responsibility for going low. I have no idea what kind of introspection later went on privately in these jumpers's heads .. but the majority kept jumping as if nothing had happened. I jumped for 8 years without an AAD, so take this with under advisement. I have a totally different mindset than those of you who have never jumped without one. I have no quarrel with reasonable people (as most of you posters seem to be) who always jump with an AAD as an extra layer of safety against the unexpected ... especially if you keep up on incident/accident reports and trends in the sport. I'm leery of people who refuse to ever jump without one, no matter what the circumstances (for example a sunset load cross country.) I'm happy for all of the excellent people who have been saved by Cypreses and lived to jump another day. I hate seeing the people who've had their Cypreses fire, get an new cutter and repack and live in oblivion and denial of the seriousness of the situation. IMO some people just don't want to realize that this sport is risky, and no backup device in the world will ever save you if your plane crashes at takeoff, or if you do something stupid under 100 feet. Some of you seem to doubt the levels of complacency out there that Ron and billvon speak of ... believe me, it's there. In spades. I'm glad if this complacency doesn't apply to you. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

No doubt, man ... it's all good. I still listen to Son Volt sometimes when I get home from a hard day of tandems and rigging. Sooooooo soothing and REAL. Here's what's usually on in our loft: Pavement - possibly the most underrated band of all time Phish (live) Tool - lotsa Tool Tori Amos Chris Whitley old Soundgarden Fugazi (live) RANCID OPERATION IVY NOFX Sex Pistols Dead Kennedys (hey, we're old) Bad Religion Ministry Juliana Hatfield NPR Chopin Meat Puppets Green Day Foo Fighters Weezer Ben Folds (plus 5) Buddy Guy Hound Dog Taylor Camper van Beethoven Elvis Costello Cracker the Urge Any young punksters out there? Get to know your roots, and check out Operation Ivy ASAP.

I've had my packers bring incorrectly installed slinks to my attention during boogies (visiting jumpers.) Our packers amaze us... John & Dawn Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

kallend- Good for you. Having your main inspected every repack definitely qualifies as taking care of your gear. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

What rigging65 said. I totally agree. I'm jumping in here because of one of the original posts, about doing a main pin check and looking for a colored indicator window to make sure the PC is cocked. IMO, people take this for granted. They assume that if they look at their pin plus see colored kill line, their PC is absolutely cocked (or conversely if they see no color, their PC is definitely collapsed and someone made a packing error.) We teach people to look at their PCs while packing, look at the kill line length vs. apex tapes, and see how the PC catches air. Many people pay for packing and come to rely on the indicator window. In my opinion this is a bad habit. Kill lines are generally made of Spectra and will shrink over time ... Inspect your PC kill line from time to time. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

My $0.02 as a rigger - We've replaced cracked stiffeners in Infinitys ... and just about every other type of rig on the market as well. Their customer service couldn't be better, in my opinion. Recently called on Wednesday and had a replacement ripcord Friday a.m., in plenty of time to get our customer's rig ready to jump for the weekend. Plus the ripcord was CW03-01 precertified and the paperwork/billing was spot on. Refreshing. We don't see a lot of Infinitys on the east coast, but our customers who have them love them, and they're quite rigger-friendly. Pretty safe for freeflying too. Thanks, Kelly et al. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Per the Dolphin owner's manual, the "official" closing order is bottom, top, right, left. In my experience many people get this wrong and think it should close like a Javelin; i.e. bottom, top, left, right. (Whether the side flap order matters at all is a whole other issue .... but why not go by the manufacturer's directions?) The bridle should exit top right before closing - between the top flap and right side flap. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Thanks for all of the input! From some people in the industry, we'd been led to believe that a main inspection with every I&R was (or should urgently become) common practice -- some have even suggested a free main inspection with every repack. (Maybe for liability? I'm not sure.) We'd never hesitate to help out anyone in need, nor compromise safety - at all, in any way. (Ask me to fully inspect and repack your main; I'll charge you $20. Want to learn? Ask me to spend time with you to show you how to inspect your main, what to look for in the future, and how to check line continuity -- I'll probably do it for free.) However, we believe two things: 1. This is a grown-up sport and there needs to be some personal accountability. Even if you always pay a packer, you need to know & understand your gear and how to take care of it. 2. Riggers are professionals who should be compensated for their time and knowledge. Your posts have confirmed these two beliefs. Thanks. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

We will use it certain situations, like to patch small holes in student or tandem canopies to get them through a busy weekend. We then put them on our "to-do" list for the next week for real patches, where the whole area covered by the ripstop tape will be replaced. I recently used a lot of it when some CRWdogs were here for a POPS record, and needed every guy on every jump. In my opinion it's quite useful when the pace is rockin and a canopy really has to get back in the air, to avoid the damage from spreading (thus making my job harder...) BUT it should always be replaced ASAP with a real patch. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

Thanks, Phree, for your thoughtful review. I've been quite curious about this canopy, and what the targeted market might be. Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

The thread on the I&R checklist got me thinking about this. From the many riggers I know, I've heard every response possible, from "Inspect & repack their main every I&R - if you don't, you're being negligent" to "make them take their main with 'em when they drop off their rig." We discuss this often. On the one hand, we want to make sure everyone's gear is as safe as possible. On the other hand, when we inspect mains (including a full line trim check,) it takes some time, and we do charge for it, and consider it an extra service. When we do an I&R, in addition to the H/C and reserve inspection, we also inspect the main risers, dbag and PC/bridle/kill line. We do not inspect the main canopy unless it's been requested, and we do verbally offer a main inspection with every I&R. I'm interested in input from riggers on your current practices, as well as input from jumpers out there who have an opinion on this. Thanks in advance. -cssriggers Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL

... and here are some pertinent quotes from that thread: and I totally agree. (Regarding the FAA Sr Rigger written test, Hooknswoop informed me that it was modernized/updated in June 2003.) I'm not a pilot, and have only peripherally been involved with a few TSO processes. I have met and worked with several FAA people. In my experience they take their job seriously and care about rules and regs, and airspace usage. They have been decent people who like for us to educate them about skydiving instruction and gear ... if they have any time to spare before returning to their desks and paperwork. The discussion on unrated AFF-Is is interesting - let's compare this to rigging, which the FAA absolutely regulates. There are currently four types of ratings issued by the FAA for senior riggers - back, seat, lap and chest. Lap-type rigs have not been manufactured since the 1940s. Most riggers you'll meet have never repacked a chest rig. Some pilots, including some of our customers, do have emergency seat-type rigs. In order to obtain a Master Rigger rating, a rigger must have 100 repacks logged for two of the four possible types. Most use back (obviously) and chest - because earlier Racers and Vectors can be logged as chests (even though they're really backs.) ... although most of never see actual chests in real life, and seat ratings would be more practical. In actual practice, packing a back vs. a seat emergency rig are not very different. I'm not sure how many practicing riggers have lap ratings, but I'd be very interested to know! Also, an aspiring rigger can pack 20 round reserves and obtain a ticket, with no ram-air reserve experience. This happens often with military riggers, who only have to pass a short written test about FAA regulations. So if you can imagine taking these FAA rigging regulations and applying them to skydiving instruction, you can see why this would not be a good thing. They don't care about skydiving methods, instruction or practices - their jobs just won't allow it. They do care about airspace use and regulations. In my opinion this is a good thing. The USPA may be far from perfect, but they seem to do a good job of allowing airport access, among other things. Don't forget - we ARE the USPA!

BUMP, indeed. (We've been in the wilds of Colorado climbing for the past week, so just read the post - thanks, Hook!) I'd like to add my $.02 - this from the perspective of learning parachute rigging as an apprentice, not having taken any course. Investing in the study guide for the written test is highly recommended. Many of the questions are rather ambiguous, in my opinion. Almost all of the questions on my test were rather antiquated and involved rounds, cones, tools I have never seen in real life, etc. Hint: make sure you understand round line continuity thoroughly, and how to field-dress a cone with a burr (the answer is NOT to use emery cloth, which I thought sounded perfectly logical.) My written test had exactly ONE question involving a square reserve. Oral/practical - if you can sew (i.e. replace worn-out velcro) and patch a canopy, and do an I & R using pertinent manuals, this should be fairly easy. Do try to get experience in untangling lines and restoring continuity. I was in the bad habit of always hanging canopies that had been cut away, and new reserves for installation- it's so much easier. My rigger mentor wisely made me get into the habit of doing all of this on the floor. Evidently the FAA does not allow you to use canopy hanging bars for this portion of the practical ... so get into the habit of untangling/installing on the floor. My oral test was refreshing, with many pertinent, real-life rigger issue questions. This is where you really need to know the difference between minor and major repairs, and alterations. Also types of materials used in H/C systems and reserves and what types of damage you may find in inspections and what constitutes damage sufficient to ground a rig. Do keep in mind that the practical is "open book." Saying "I'm not sure, but I know where to look it up" or "Do you have a manual for this?" are perfectly acceptable. (i.e. if they ask for applications, identifying mark and breaking strength of Type VII webbing, you don't have to have it memorized. But do know where to find the answers.) As far as the whole testing process goes if you are not taking a course, call your local FSDO early and often. In my experience they were very helpful in guiding me though the red tape. When it comes to DPREs, I feel it pays to shop around. As I understand it, they are arranged in districts. A DPRE cannot test outside of his or her loft without a huge exemption process via the FAA, but you can travel outside of your district to a DPRE of your choice (for whatever reason you may have.) So call around. I don't mean to imply that some DPREs are better or worse than others, but it might pay to find one you feel you can develop a rapport with, and learn from in the process. I'd like to second what Derek said about tools. In my experience some of the commercially available tools are worthless. On the other hand, once you get your routine down, you can either make your own tools to suit your methods, or get tools specially made for you from a local tool & die-type guy - usually pretty cheaply. As far as Poynter's Parachute Manuals (the rigger's bibles) go - they will be invaluable to you as you become a rigger. But keep in mind that the newest canopy it contains is the PD Sabre. Once you are a practicing rigger they are good reference for older gear you may experience, but you'll come to rely on the manufacturers for current information. Also understand that you will never stop learning. A riggers ticket can be hard to get, but it is only the first step. You now have the ability to do inspections and repacks, etc. but you still have a lot to learn. We all do! Every time we have manufacturers at our DZ, or we travel for Nationals or whatever, I seek out those riggers from whom I can learn. They are always generous with their time and knowledge. After all, the manufacturers want you to know the latest tips & tricks to make their rigs look good. If you can't travel, use your phone and your e-mail. Seek out other riggers whenever possible - I guarantee you will learn new tips & tricks. Bottom line - the rigger who really believes he knows everything is one that I will not let pack my reserve. Never forget that every time you do an I & R, this person's life is in your hands. If you have doubts never assume - ask for help! John & Dawn Alpha Mike Foxtrot, JHL