RMURRAY

hybrid canopy makes so much sense. hybrid means easy to pack even brand new, lower pack volume. I would go for it.

yes, have seen this. most important thing for a h/c system is the reserve deployment. whatever this is should be off your list until addressed - not sure if it has.

between those 2 I would get the vector. available with mag riser covers. me....racer classic..

exactly so don't need to change the way I close mine...but I pack for others so will look to close this way if they are OK with it. thanks Brian excellent post as usual.

should be magnets on a brand new design.

what size is tha safire2 and what type/size line. I know of a couple that don't open so nice and am trying to get to the bottom of it. thanks..

nice this weekend....good luck!

yes, drop by Parachute School of Toronto and ask for Rick - if he does not have it he does put in orders to Paragear (or wherever) quite often. Also at manifest there are some items like altimeters

we are talking about BOC type? I don't think so.... it is line type, slider size, slider position maybe braked length? What will help openings of a 'problem' Safire2?

a dome slider from MEL at skyworks rigging will solve the problem.

The STL SuperVan (900HP Grand Caravan) arrived today at PST for the 2012 season. Nice new paint since the last time it was here!

I like the 'outside the box" thinking. I am sure it has been tried. Also sure the manufacturers will not comment but maybe someone like MEL (Skyworks Rigging) can comment?

get back to masterrigger1. he is the man!

JumpShack will also modify and older racer to add magnetic riser covers - if you ask about it. I don't think others will do that...

"All well and good until it's packed up (by packer maybe) and somebody does a pin check for you. No indication of collapsible or non...so the checker assumes non...ooooooops, the packer didn't cock it or something else happened. "no shit....there I was...." to the OP. I do not have any window but I only pack for myself - so I know it is done. However, if you use a packer cock the PC when you drop off. Then it gets done twice (or if he/she overlooked, once).

you need to have a rigger trained, experienced and talented enough to pack them well....so that the PC sits nested down and is not a snag hazard. The most important aspect of a container is the reserve deployment. The fewer flaps that the PC needs to push out of the way the better. Zero is best. I will jump nothing else.

agree 100%. get some help from someone who has been around a wihile, better if a rigger.

a good canopy but I would spend extra and get rid of the standard slider and get a dome slider from Skyworks....

agreed. awards like that are just stupid. win, place or even just participate in (say) 4 way open at your Nats....that is something to be proud of.

here is an interesting (and seems balanced) point of view from an aviation forum. will need to dig up the link.... Ahh yes...Pratt vs. Garrett (well, Honeywell now, but most people still call them Garretts) - one of the great debates of general aviation. I've seen several reasonable people resort to shouting at one another over this topic. Thing is, both these engines are so good at what they do that it really comes down to which characteristics are preferred by the aircraft operator. The Pratt is a very good engine - it's biggest advantages, in a nutshell, largely stem from it's unique design. Because the airflow reverses itself several times within the engine, it makes the gas generator and power sections into compact, self-contained units. This allows them to be broken apart for easy inspections and maintenance. Secondly, the design makes the PT6 a very smooth (there aren't any long driveshafts in the PT6), compact and lightweight engine when compared to it's competitors - a PT6A-135A (a new variant that is quickly becoming the standard install in many aircraft) weighs in at only 338 pounds (153 kg), yet produces 750 shaft horsepower. Finally, as mentioned above, the PT6 is, by nature of it's design, a very durable engine. It is not very susceptible to FOD ingestion (the air enters the engine at the far end and even then it makes a very tight turn from the duct to the inlet), and if the propeller were to strike the ground, the inspections and repairs would be substantially less expensive than comparable engines. However, the PT6 has a number of drawbacks. First of all, the PT6 doesn't respond quickly to power setting changes; all turbine engines have some lag as we know, but the PT6 has a LOT of lag, whereas the Garrett will respond virtually instantaneously to power changes. Secondly, the PT6 has a fuel burn penalty as mentioned above (it isn't huge - maybe a few percent overall), mostly due to the losses associated with turning the airflow through 720 degrees within the engine. Also, due to the long intake duct, the PT6 is very sensitive to intake icing - even small amounts of ice and frost can have dramatic effects on performance with this engine. As such, all PT6 installations I've ever seen continuously route some engine exhaust around the inlet lip for ice protection. Finally, the PT6 seems to be fairly susceptible to hot starts. Again, this has to do with the airflow reversing several times, which makes the job of cooling parts of the engine much more difficult under certain conditions. As for the Garrett, it's advantages lie mostly in the performance department. From a pilot's perspective, the Garrett is vastly superior - better power response, more fuel efficient and much easier to handle overall. However, the Garrett is not a particularly compact engine (especially in the high-power versions) when compared with the PT6, and maintenance is a royal pain in the ass on them. What's worse is that the Garrett sucks anything and everything into it's air inlet, which in turn attempts to make it's way through the gas generator - and as we all know, FOD can ruin a gas turbine engine. The Garrett also requires a huge amount of battery power to start - because the propeller is connected directly to the engine, you're spinning that on start as well, unlike the PT6 - so starting a Garrett without ground power can be a bit iffy if the aircraft has cold-soaked on a ramp at -30 all night. Finally, the Garrett is not a "good neighbour" engine - it's always running at 98% RPM (unless it's in ground fine - 70% or so), and as such it is tremendously noisy inside and outside the aircraft, making it unpleasant to work around (or in, for that matter) and unpleasant for people living near an airport or under the approaches to an airport. http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/260832/

the STL Skyvan is at Parachute School of Toronto for the 2011 season. if you find yourself visiting stuck in downtown Toronto and want to get to the DZ, take the GO bus from Front/Bay to the town of Sutton. best to call beforehand to make sure we can pick you up.

as far as I know, if anything the thin blue 350 hma (technora) is more suseptible to tension knots than larger dia vectran.......but MEL is the expert.

here are some pictures of jumpshack snap toggles. they are great... http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1019933#1019933

how does that big main handle? did you think about the 298?

I have not noticed this but wonder if it is the slider not moving off the stops "cleanly". I have had a bunch of wild rides which seem to start right at that point. Maybe MEL could comment?