relyon

Sure if you didn't mind them occasionally jamming up. They were never intended to be used in mid-air, but only to attach/detach the harness from a packed canopy which stayed with the plane. OT - I didn't mention anything about where a given release is used. Bob

I don't know for certain, but I'll guess it may be just the opposite. I have a friend who did parachute work on the X-38 and currently works on Space Shuttle booster parachute recovery. I'm curious and will ask. Things not needing fixed because they aren't broken is a poor excuse for not innovating. Capewells worked fine as releases before three rings; caves worked fine as shelter before houses. I doubt anyone wants to return to using either. Bob

I purchased my first rig directly from the container manufacturer in the fall of 1995. Not only was I able to take part in the rig assembly but I was also involved to a minor degree with the container being built. I had something like 35 jumps at the time and determined that assembling it myself was probably not a good idea. IIRC, it cost something like $3500 which included the price of assembly. The assembly charge was non-discountable and if I'd chosen to have it assembled elsewhere it would have cost me even more. I've since assembled dosens of rigs. What am I missing? Bob

I don't understand where anyone is getting the idea that assembly should be free. The OP didn't say that and I went to what I thought was sufficient length to state that it was a service that should be compensated for, only differing as to how the cost was accounted for. The first mention of the word free is in billvon's second reply. After that the concept of assembly being free took on a life of it's own. What has become abundantly clear to me is that people (at least the majority responding here) want to receive their gear unassembled. That leads me to believe I should completely disassemble my packed and in-date rig when I sell it. That should save the buyer some time and money not having paying a rigger a disassembly charge in addition the assembly and I & R charges they will already incur. Perhaps I could help them understand their purchase better by letting them assist with the disassembly. I don't think I need to be certified to disassemble, but perhaps I'm mistaken. My personal experience when buying a rig has been that assembly was included in the total purchase price. I watched and helped with the actual assembly of my first rig. Since then I've assembled a plethora of gear, so much so that riggers have come to me to show them some items relative to CRW gear. Bob

I find it objectionable that the cost of assembling and packing new gear is not included in the puchase price. While I agree that it is a service for which compensation is due, the manner in which the customer pays for it is somewhat unique. I've bought new automobiles on several occasions. Not once did I buy a pile of parts and incur the assembly of those parts as a separate charge. It was included in the purchase price for sure, just not listed as a separate line item. There are numerous other examples. Bob

Do you apply the same logic to every piece of "gear" you use in any capacity in all aspects of your life? Your car for example. Do you do a complete inspection of every component - the tires, brakes, steering, and suspension notable among them - before you drive? If not, don't you think you should? Not doing so is ignoring the "correct installation and function of all components prior to use" that "ultimately belongs to the gear user." Physics ultimately wins all arguments. Good design in the first place can avoid complications in actual use. Bob

This topic is specifically about a safety issue resulting from the lack of being able to see the ground on an AFF Level 1 skydive, not spotting in general. I'm extremely well aquainted with opening high and landing in non-optimal places/conditions, far in excess of what my profile may indicate (I'm thumbs up in this photograph). I go to great lengths to avoid such possibilities myself and point out them out to others. I apologize if you considered my reply a challenge or insult in some way; that was not my intent and I could have chosen better words. Bob

In my opinion this borders on a personal attack, is entirely inappropriate in this forum, and says more about you than perhaps you intend it to. Bob

Shit happens? Read the original post again. Seeing the spot to begin with goes a long way but it has to be able to be seen to begin with. Maybe dense brush and airport runways look the same to you from 13,000 ft; I notice a difference between the two. Bob

Never. Once I leave the plane the only time I touch them is when I intend to use them, and think of them like a loaded revolver with the safety off and hammer cocked. Bob

Both of my parents died years before I took my first jump. I have an uncle who hasn't been particularly fond of my jumping, although his one an only skydive occurred during WWII when the B-17 he was piloting was shot down over what was then Czechoslovakia, so I can't said say I blame him. Bob

Interesting topic and responses. I'll let a couple of shots from the 2004 Nationals CF 8-way speed event (courtesy Pat Lindner) speak for me. The first shows me moments after exit and the next a few moments later. My right hand was on the inside bar at the time of exit and it was poised for all practical purposes; the main had a tail pocket and the deployment setup was a pull-out. For those who don't know, time in CF 8-way speed is calculated from the time the first person exits until the last person docks and legal grips presented. Exit times are typically under ten seconds for all eight competitors and one video. I question if an emergency bailout could occur faster for the same number of people. In no way am I suggesting the average jumper could or should attempt such a thing under duress, only that for some such an exit is quite common and altitude losses are very often less than 100 feet. Bob PS - While I didn't intend it, I do remember that particular 160-ish deployment and used it to my advantage.

On a helicopter the string has additional uses beyond those listed here (eg. dropping below ETL). A very simple and useful instrument - IIRC the U-2 had one. Bob

Sounds like a CRW load. All jokes aside, this is an excellent discussion topic for Safety Day. On the very first Safety Day, Kapowsin pilot Dave Kaiser feathered the left engine on the Otter to simulate an engine out, followed immediately by a bailout order and everyone on the load (except him, of course) performed an orderly exit. Even though everyone knew it was coming, I don't beleive it would have been radically different in an actual emergency. There was an actual high altitude bailout from an Otter at the WFFC a few years back. Perhaps billvon could speak about that one; IIRC he was on the load. Bob

I'm looking for Chuck Smith. He was a photographer/videographer at the 2002 Americas CF Record. IIRC, he lived in GA or SC at that time. If you're out there Chuck, or if anyone else knows how to reach him, I'd appreciate a PM or email contact. Thanks Bob Lyon Austin, TX

When I was a junior is high school, my German class went on a trip to Germany. The day before we left, a classmate was was injured on mini trampoline and missed the trip. I never forgot that. In late 1999, my team was selected to represent the US at the 8th world champsionship in CF in the 8-way speed event. I became almost obsessive about risk avoidance; I wasn't going to miss a world championship due to an injury if I could avoid it. It sounds to me that you need to make a decision about how important competetive rowing means to you. Bob

I'm looked at the pictures shown on the web page I get following the link in the original post. The plugs are called closing caps in the photo and appear to be raised ~1/4" above the metal base ring. The rectangular-looking base where the rings are and the camera box attaches also caught my attention. I've found that which seemed like no problem on the ground was quite different in the air with heavily tensioned suspension line going against it. As I mentioned, I've never even donned a camera helmet on the ground much less deployed with one one. I have been involved in numerous entanglements with snags resulting, the Protec incident I mentioned being one of the worst. Other than that, it looks like a very nice helmet with nice features. I defer to those who know what they're talking about (such as yourself) as to how good it is. Bob

I've never even donned a camera and inadvertently clicked on this topic. The usual disclaimers apply, free advice being worth what it is. I'm a real big on avoiding entanglements (go figure ) and choose a helmet with that in mind. I had a regular full shell Protec ripped off my head once; thankfully the clasp broke before my neck did. This helmet is pretty good, but it could be better (*). Things I look for in all helmets are sharp edges or other discontinuities that could catch a line. Even if the line eventually slips, one's neck is often sore at a minimum. Why the plugs on this one aren't flat or curved I'm not sure, and any ridges for structural stiffness or "styling" (?) should have minimal protruberance. Other than those things, I'll guess it's a nice camera helmet. Bob * - I know all about "better" being at odds with "good" engineering wise. While the point is well taken, I don't completely accept that either or we'd still be living in caves.

I'll relate a funny story and typical Jerry. My apologies if it offends. One day our 8-way CRW team (the late Team Infinity) was practicing at Perris for the 2000 nationals with Jerry being #3. While packing on the grass near the school, a gal I didn't recognize said something or other to Jerry. He asked "What are you good for?" to which she replied "I give good head." I looked at Jerry and said "Don't f*** up now Jerry. Think of the team." All of us, including this gal, laughed hysterically. You had to be there. Bob

I'm totally in shock. Jerry was a teammate, friend, and true patriot. I don't read, much less post here. -This sucks. RIP Jerry. Hug your loved ones. Bob

"Sluggo" should protect their handles and "Mr Bill" should watch them. I've seen the result of not taking those precautions. Bob

As I said, I jumped 18 lbs at for over a 1.6 wingloading total and never noticed anything. I doubt there would be any noticeably additional stress on the body at the weight range being contemplated, but you may react differently. Bob

Sure, but unless you drop and leave the weight in the water you still can't swim very well with it. Landing in water with any significant amout of lead has always been a concern of mine. I think it's better and easier to carry a floatation device, though dicey all the same. One of my ideas was to have releasable water ballast. Once under canopy just empty and land without it. I abandoned the idea because of the unnecessarily complicated container modifications, packing issues, etc., and since water is far less denser than lead it would require too much volume and bulk for a given weight. Bob

A weight pocket in the container is even better. The weight is supported by the harness under canopy, not the jumper. Bob

I've worn as much as 18 lbs to come up to team wingloading (205 out-the-door) and never noticed any difference. Chris Gay wore 90 lbs (not a typo) to do the same thing for the recent CF world record. I guessing he'd be a good person to ask. YMMV Bob