rigging65

And a 190 is probably a fine canopy for you. It's just a bit of bad luck to have a problem after only 4 jumps on a new canopy size, but it sounds like you handled it fine. Now is as good at time as any to start working with your risers and such up high, especially now that you've gotten a taste of what can happen with that canopy. Practice ALL of your canopy skills as if your life depends on it...because it might! And keep getting advise from your Instructors, they know you best and will be a great source of information on "higher end" canopy skills. Good luck! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

That's not it at all. But ask yourself this: Why are you downsizing? If your answer is "to get more performance"; have you actually gotten all you're going to get out of the canopy you're on? With bigger student canopies this might not take many jumps simply because there just isn't that much performance to be had...BUT, you should have practiced with rear risers (as well as other controls) up high, and be comfortable with making them work for you before you "ask for more canopy". Note- "Wanting more performance" doesn't have to mean you want to swoop or do radical carving 540s. It could simply mean you want a bit more speed to create more lift on landing. But with this slight increase in speed comes an increase in rate of turn, length of dive, etc... You can't get only one aspect of "more" performance, you get them all...and you have to be ready for them all. Once you're jumping canopies as a licensed sport jumper, you really should be flying the canopy hard and wanting more out of it IN ALL AREAS before you move on... Does the ground become softer because you're a new jumper? Being "new" doesn't make a damn bit of difference. You'll be just as injured or dead as anyone else will be if you mess up on a canopy that you can't control. Take your time, you'll have a much longer career to enjoy that way. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

IMO, if you're not comfortable landing your canopy on rear risers in the event of an emergency (ie- too low to chop) than you are flying the wrong canopy. Period. You don't have the skills and need to be on something bigger...for all of our sakes. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

The Collin's Layard was (originally) a piece of Dacron that ran from the RSL (right) side riser, down to the cutaway handle. There was a small loop at the cutaway handle end that you threaded the off-side (left) riser release cable through. In the event the RSL (right) riser leave the rig, it drags the lanyard with it, thus cutting away the left side as well. In this manner, you shouldn't be able to get an RSL fire without both risers being released. If the lengths of the Collin's lanyard and RSL lanyard are figured right, a snagged riser release shouldn't allow the RSL to fire until both risers are clear of the rings. In the newer rendition, the Dacron lanyard is replaced with a loop built into the RSL lanyard and a split housing leading to the off-side (left) riser. You thread the left side cable through the loop in the RSL at the split and it has the same effect, while being more "hidden" than the original Collin's Lanyard set up. All in all, a beautiful little job of rigging by the Relative Workshop. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Yes, dragging the rig does hurt it. No, most packers aren't going to take the time to put on a packing mat on for you. Why not hook the packing mat up yourself and lay it under the rig as you lay it out for the packer? That way, it's already in place and doesn't slow them down...and your rig gets protected to boot! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Well, if you have a left side mounted RSL, you pretty much can't make a Collin's Lanyard work on a rig. For right sided RSLs, there isn't much excuse IMO. To really do it right, you need to put in a split housing (a la Sigma), but you certainly could do it with the original Dacron style lanyard. Why don't people do it? My guess is that they can't see the forrest for the tress. It looks scary to have a big chunk of Dacron hand tacked to your riser and associated assembly. You'd also have to figure a good way to secure it under (or over) the chest strap. Unlike Tandem rigs where the handles are above the chest strap, sport rigs are a bit more challenging in that regard. At the end of the day, most jumpers don't want something they have to check on and maintain...they just want it there, and they want it to work. The split-housing-style lanyard does this, but the Dacron style doesn't. Laziness over safety, go figure.... "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Yes. And, as I understand it, the Collin's style lanyard would have to be integrated into any rig by any mfg. before you can use a SkyHook. But there will be other systems like SkyHook out there at some point, and they may not include that sort of system...although they will increase RSL use. Patents are wonderful things for the creator, but there is always more than one way to skin a cat. The SkyHook "idea" can be replicated in at least a few different ways without violating the patent, it's just going to take time, money and drive to do it... I guess that was clear in my head, but I never did say anything about it in my post! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

While I know it's not what you're looking for, any reserve deployment on video has line-dump going on...its somewhat ordered, but it is non-restrained line deployment. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

I think there is some validity to this point, but here's the problem: How do you build a frangible piece of equipment (a riser that will break at a given stress) but also build something that won't break over time? If you replace your risers every 400 jumps or so, it's probably not such a big deal...but since most people don't, you're probably better off building something bulletproof for the masses. Also, since lots of people are using RSL's (and more surely will when/if the SkyHook becomes available to the "rest" of the public), you've also got the problem of premature reserve deployments on a broken riser. Now, there are some ways to secure the RSL ring below the grommet (and even one certified way that I'm aware of that lets the ring slip loose of the riser if it were to break lower than the grommet), but most mfgs. put the RSL attachment ring above the grommet. That's bad juju if you're not using a reinforced system, or a system designed to break at the grommet. Add to this that pretty much every canopy that's come into the market place in the past 5 years has some design parameters for soft openings built into them (and most are working!!), I think the propensity for a "riser breaking" opening are probably very few and far between these days. Yes, if you were to have a wickedly hard opening with old-skool risers, they may break...keeping you from absorbing the shock, but then what? Now you're dazed and confused, with a streaming canopy over your head. Are you with-it enough to cutaway? Are you traveling fast enough to activate your Cypres (that's a double edged question if I've ever heard one...)? If you do get it together to cutaway, do you do it in a timely enough manner to save your ass? If you get rocked by an opening with "new" risers, odds are they aren't going to break. Odds are also pretty good that the canopy is going to remain mostly intact as well. They're being built with more reinforcements and with better opening characteristics all the time. So, possible worse case, you blow a few lines, get knocked silly, and land under a turning canopy. Could be fatal, most likely just breaks you up...but you've got most all the canopy above you, not just a streamer. I think you kind of have to chalk this up to user intervention. If you're a good little jumper and change out the gear you're supposed to change out, when you're supposed to change it out...all this is most likely not an issue. If you're like most jumpers and have NO CLUE about this sort of stuff, well, the mfgs. are doing their best to keep you safe. Some mfgs. have made better strides than others when it comes to this sort of safety (hats off to RWS, great job guys...), the rest are catching up though and thats a really good thing for all of us! Knowledge is power folks, and not having it can be dangerous to your health!! Ask questions... "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

As Phree stated, no, the same base rings are not used with Large and Small rings. BUT, if you order Large rings, you can put small ringed risers on them...doesn't work the other way around though.

PM sent. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Generally speaking, the rule of thumb is that if you're over about 225lbs, you "probably should be on Type 8 risers..." With that said, they can be loaded much more heavily than that...and often are! The "Super" Type-17 risers still have the grommet punched through them (more on that in a minute), but they have layers of reinforcing tape in there as well. This tape, albeit small, gives a pretty significant strength advantage. Like I said, pretty much every type-17 riser made today is built this way. Something that many people don't realize about risers is that they should be changed out after an extended period of time. I've heard the number "400 jumps" thrown around a bit, and that seems about right to me, based on my experiences. Same as your P/C and bridle and line set. All this gear gets beat up over time, and it needs to be retired and replaced from time to time...all the more so if you're loading it up heavy. Back to the "grommet hole" thing. There are risers, usually referred to as Reverse Risers, that don't have a grommet in them. They lay "backwards" on your shoulders...that is, with the rings against you as opposed to outboard facing. They were originally designed as a way to eliminate that grommet hole (which reduced the overall strength of the riser). They did that, creating a stronger, Type-17 riser. Big Problem though: By removing the grommet, you end up placing the loop through a small tab and then pinning it in place with the cable. Since the loop doesn't go up and over the last ring (which creates a pulley), you loose the mechanical advantage that pulley action creates. Anyone who knows physics will tell you that a pulley give you a 2-to-1 advantage. Now, this isn't a perfect pulley, but there are some friction points in there that counter balance it not being perfect...from what I understand, you still end up with close to the 2-to-1 advantage in the end. Think about what this means: Mechanical advantage in your 3-ring system is multiplicative. That means that by getting rid of the 2-to-1 pulley, you're basically doubling the pull forces involved. For this reason, Reverse Risers are, IMO, a very bad idea. There used to be a cool chart floating around (I think RWS published it) that showed the different cutaway pull forces, based on loading, for different risers types. It was amazing how much higher the Reverse Riser numbers were! Add to this that in a high speed mal (bag lock, etc.), the rings may remain pinned against you, rendering them useless when you cutaway. Since the rings are in contact with the harness, they aren't able to flip through themselves and release. YOU HAVE TO DO IT MANUALLY. Not a cool thing, IMO... In the end, as has been said, the most important thing about your risers is that they are constructed within the approved tolerances. If they're not, they don't have the correct angles needed to make those little levers and pulley do what they do so well. So, in the end, you're probably better off having almost anything made correctly, as opposed to even the burliest risers made outside of spec. So, good people, think about where you're buying your after-market risers from. Make sure it's a shop with a good reputation for production, or go straight to the mfg. Be aware and ask questions!! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Bag Strip (or dump) is almost always accompanied by line dump (I've never heard of it not being there), but line dump does not have to result in a hard opening...as is seen with stowless bags. I think the root of the problem is that if the canopy gets out of the bag, and the lines aren't at equal tension, the canopy kind of "does what it wants" while opening...usually causing much nastiness. I'm not sure where you're coming from with: How is bag strip a function of line tension? Slack lines don't cause a canopy to come out of the bag, locking loops coming open prematurely cause bag strip. Did you mean loop tension? "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Risers and 3-rings are an interesting argument... Here's the basic scoop: Type-8's with large rings are the safest setup out there. They have the best mechanical advantage, the least chance of breaking, etc. BUT. For a pretty long time now, Type-17 risers with mini rings have been the "standard" for a lot of people. See, everything that we build in this sport is overbuilt. Because of that, you can often get away with not using the "beefiest" stuff. New Type-17 risers are called "Super" mini risers. This is because they are reinforced at the grommet (the only real threat area for breakage). In fact, I'm not aware of anywhere that you can get non-super mini risers any more. So, we've greatly reduced the possibility of riser breakage...what's next? The 3-ring assembly is basically a series of levers that work to increase mechanical advantage on the loop that holds your ring assembly closed. Larger rings mean that you have longer lever arms...which means more mechanical advantage and less pressure on the cable. This all means that it's easier to cutaway. Now we're talking about a difference of about 4-8 lbs or so on mini rings vs. large rings. If you do a search on this site you'll get the exact numbers and difference between mini rings and large rings. So, while the large rings are, strictly speaking, "better", mini rings treat you just fine as well. The last area is the bling-bling. Stainless Steel. Your 3-ring assembly is partially based off friction. The more friction (between the metal rings and the webbing) the more force needed to "un-lock" them. So, a bit more friction is "better" than less friction. With this in mind, why on earth would you want SS rings?? You're actually reducing the effectiveness of your ring system by having SS rings in the mix. Of course, many, many people like the bling-bling, so it's become a (costly) popular option. BUT, once again, the differences between Cadmium plated hardware and Stainless Steel hardware is relatively small...and most likely will never play into the "safety" equation for you... What does all this junk mean? The safest set-up you can get is Type-8 risers with large, Cadmium, rings. Are there people dying while using Type-17, mini, SS, set-ups? No...at least not because of the riser set-up. The long and the short of it is that 99.99999% of the time, it just doesn't matter...it's up to you, jump what you like. All things being even (and I hate to say this because it goes against everything I stand for) recent history has shown that you don't really need to go with Type-8 risers to be safe. It's been proven "ok" not to have the safest riser configuration available. A real world advantage to Type-17, mini's? Better re-sale value. So there it is. For what it's worth... "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

The problem with pictures and stories is that you have to imagine the screaming, the blood, the confusion, the pain and the silence that goes along with it. Now, that's not too hard to do once you've been to a few of these, but it's nearly impossible if you haven't. You want people to be aware? They need to see the carnage for themselves. Short of that, you're never going to convince folks it can happen to them, and how bad it really is. Unfortunately, if you hang around the sport long enough, you will have the opportunity to see the carnage first hand...sigh... "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Yeah, you'd think that...but you're forgetting the cool factor. A smaller reserve lets you get a smaller container...and everyone knows that the smaller rig you jump the cooler/better you are! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Don't be too scared by the dates. If equipment is taken care of well, it can last for many, many years. I've seen a bunch of stuff form the 80's that is still in great shape...doesn't have all the features that newer gear does, but it's certainly airworthy. Have a rigger check it out to be sure. Utah, huh? What's the field elevation where you jump? What's you're experience like? Ever jumped a 190 before? Higher field elevations result in quicker descents (ie- you need a bigger canopy to slow you down more). Depending on your experience level, field elevation, etc., that 190 might be a bit on the small side. Some more info might help a bit...you talking to your instructors about the gear would help the most! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Or maybe even A, B and C!!!! "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

I'd get rid of line stows and stow bands all together. Oh wait, I already did that. Figure-8's and Tuck tabs , that's the way to go. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Figure out the length you want, then have a loop trapped in and sewn down after you've test jumped it and done a full stall test on it...ask someone if you don't understand what I just said. That way you never have to worry about knots.

With absolutely no insult intended, this is the reason why experienced jumpers are able to say the sport isn't safe...because they're experienced. There is no "Newbie" point of view...there is only reality. The fact that when you're new, you don't know everything that goes on, or have a frame of reference to compare events to, doesn't change reality. The sport isn't safe. It's not safe for Newbies, it's not safe for the 300-500 jump "teenagers" and it's not safe for the more experienced folks. Its OK to admit that you do things that aren't safe. Society seems to have this stigma about that. I think it's one of the reasons why people try to justify having a small reserve instead of just standing up and saying "yes, I know its not as safe as it should be, but its cool and I like it, and I accept the risk (and ridicule) that comes with having it." But see, we don't do that. Do we not want to hear the shit from others? Probably. Do we not want to admit that we're being vain? Probably. Do we not want to take personal responsibility? Most likely. Grow a spine and say it like it is. "I skydive even though I know its not safe and I might be killed doing it...even if I do it perfectly. I take these risks freely and accept any abuse I might take from my family and friends about it BECAUSE WHAT I THINK ABOUT ME IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT ME." "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

Not true...especially in today's vehicles. I'm a Volunteer Firefighter/EMT and you'd be amazed at how many people walk away (or would if we'd let them) from head on, high speed auto accidents. For the comparison to be valid, it would need to be something that basically is impossible to live through...like stepping in front of a big rig going 75 mph...something most people would consider "suicide". Again, loose the emotional baggage and look at the meaning of the word. That's the last I'll say on (not because I don't like the debate, but because I don't want this thread to get any more derailed that it already is!!)

Not at all. "Attempting suicide" would imply you're trying to kill yourself. "Committing suicide" implies you've put into motion an action that will kill you. The fact is, if you exit an airplane and do nothing from that point on YOU WILL DIE (cypres use excluded to prove the point). Committing suicide doesn't mean you like the idea of death, it means you're performing an action that is going to kill you. IMO, the action of exiting a plane is the same as pointing and firing a gun at your head. If you just sit there, you're going to die. Now, if you could move fast enough, catch the bullet, whatever...that would constitute opening your canopy. BUT, exiting the plane is starting a path that will end in death without you're intervention, the same as shooting a bullet at your head is. You just have more time to get the canopy out than you do to stop the bullet.

If you think about it, it's not a straight forward deal. Moving the chest strap down means that you change everything around it as well. That is: Cable housings, ripcord cable length, and cutaway cable lengths. Reserve ripcords are TSO'd parts...built to a certain length. They can't just be made to any length and be called "good". Add to it that if you're working on a short MLW, you might run out of places to put regular size handles...resulting in non-standard handles, etc. There might also be issue with how the chest strap ties in with the MLW. Maybe it's placed where it is to cover tag ends of the MLW? Who knows. I think what it mostly comes down to is that there are a bunch of potential changes that could go on...and those changes would be done outside the factory setting. Meaning, RWS wouldn't have control of them and wouldn't be able to ensure they didn't result in some sort of negative synergistic relationship or something funky like that. From what experience we (I) have in dealing with customers wanting to make modifications to existing rigs, I can tell you it's always a bit scary. From a mfgs. perspective, you really don't know exactly what the changes are going to be, or how those changes may force other changes. You also may not know the history and abilities of the rigger who wants to make the changes. IMO, It's just too many things happening out of your control. "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

I think you should pop it back open...just to be sure you did it right. Congrats! Welcome to the world of back aches and "sewers fingers." "...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward. For there you have been, and there you long to return..."