HPC

It's not just the canopy differences to consider, it's also the H/C. Do your H/Cs have different setups or options?

Just talked to Chris - the factory's address is still being used. Presumably he checked on the legality since technically the factory is closed.

I spoke with Chris Dales (Parachute Systems owner) yesterday afternoon for over half an hour, and here is the latest on Parachute Systems and their product line and service. The factory in South Africa is closed. Negotiations are ongoing with a possible new manufacturer for the Vortex harness/container that would be made here in the US (thus removing one of the bigger reasons given by US jumpers for not buying the Vortex). However, COVID-19 has greatly slowed the negotiating process. Chris hopes to have Vortex production resumed in the US by year's end but nothing is certain due to the uncertainties of COVID-19 and the negotiating process. There are no current plans to resume Volt and Hurricane main canopy production, at least not in the US. There's a slight chance of production resuming in South Africa at some point in the future but those plans have a lower chance of panning out compared to the resumption of Vortex production. If canopy manufacturing does resume, odds are that the Parachute Systems Decelerator reserve canopy will not be produced - only the Volt and Hurricane main canopies. Their crossbraced canopy was discontinued a couple of years ago according to Chris. Some good news - regarding support for the Vortex and canopies, Chris still has the equipment and materials needed to support spare parts which include but are not limited to reserve free bag and pilot chute, main cutaway, reserve ripcord, and line sets for the main canopies. Presumably this is why their website is still up despite the factory being closed. Later this year I'll try to get an update and if so will post the latest info. Hope this helps.

Hi Rob, Just off the top of my head, the Vector doesn't offer chest rings (i.e. fully articulated harness), cut-in laterals, and the reserve pin cover flap uses a tuck tab instead of sliding into a slot at the top of the midflap. I would imagine the tuck tab has a plastic sheet in it, and over time and when flexed repeatedly eventually it will crack. I had that happen to the top of my RPC over the course of a few years. Also, the reserve pin cover flap seems excessively long, at least on many rigs I've seen. Cosmetically, it would be nice to have harness stitching covers on the main lift web above the hip rings and where the chest strap is sewn onto the main lift web. On a positive note, I like the magnetic riser covers vs. tuck tab riser covers. Another good point are the secondary riser covers. I'm not saying the Vector is a bad rig, it certainly isn't and that's supported by the fact that UPT is the largest producer of H/Cs in the world. Having said that, I just think there are a few options/features that, when compared to the competition, need updating. Just my personal opinion/preference.

Hi Rob, I would agree with your assessment of the Javelin. I would also add that its main competitor, the Vector, is overdue for an overhaul and in need of the fourth generation variant as well. It also has dated features that could use an update, including some cosmetic ones. As noted in one of my previous posts, perhaps the impetus for SP buying/merging with RI is to acquire and later on incorporate some or perhaps all of the features unique to the Curv rig into the next generation Javelin rig. Even the Mirage is already on its fourth generation but it would appear (and I could be wrong) that the two H/C leaders (UPT and SP, respectively) seem to be resting on their laurels and continuing to produce rigs that haven't had any significant updates in too many years. Just a personal observation. Mike

It's Rigging Innovations' name for their MARD device. What's a MARD? It stands for main-assisted reserve deployment. If you cut away a malfunctioned main canopy the main, as it's being cut away, acts like a reserve deployment system and deploys the reserve. Usually it's faster than the jumper and can make the difference during low-altitude cutaways. Very popular option these days. I'm sure I will be corrected if needed but the MARD is coupled with an RSL (reserve static line) in which a lanyard attached to the main risers will pull the reserve container pin (almost always quicker than the jumper can) to open the reserve container, and the cutaway main will then act as a reserve pilot chute and extract the reserve free-bag from the reserve container, usually faster than the reserve pilot chute can since the malfunctioned main is already creating (usually more) drag and separating from the jumper. Corrections welcomed.

Yeeeee - ah, baby!! Maybe Sun Path wants to steal RI's mojo!

The two biggest questions I have are: 1. What is the long-term future for the Curv rig, RI's flagship product? Will it still be produced five years down? Ten years? Fifteen? 2. What is Sun Path's motivation behind purchasing or merging with RI? Is it to eliminate a competitor over time? Or is it to acquire some of the innovative features that are currently exclusive to the Curv, such as the bio-yoke, bio-curv, and grommetless main flap closure system (among other features)? Perhaps this is a precursor to a new generation Javelin rig that may incorporate some or all of the unique features currently available only on the Curv. It may take some years before the truth comes out.

So it looks like we're in agreement about the Curv's long-term prospects.

Sale, merger - call it what you wish. My point (and feeling) is that in ten years the Curv won't be in production. Of course, I'm not privy to the contract details so I can't say for certain. No doubt the "merger" contract will specify continued spare parts and support for the Curv for years to come (I would guess at least twenty). It may even specify continued Curv production for a period of time. But after that - who knows. The Q&A gave the same answer to most of the questions: everything will remain the same for the foreseeable future. Very little was actually answered but no surprise there as it's much too early for SP to show its cards. I see this "merger" as a long-term win-win-lose proposition. A win for Sandy and Brenda who get a well-deserved retirement, a win for SP who will get whatever it is they want out of RI, and a long-term loss for anyone who was looking at buying a Curv down the road. That's just my gut feeling. Hopefully I'm wrong, in part because the Curv is in my top three list of favorite rigs. BTW, I think UPT is number one, followed by SP in rig production. I think UPT has around 150 employees to SP's 70-75. Since both companies only produce H/Cs it would stand to reason that UPT produces more rigs. If not then either UPT is very inefficient or SP is very efficient, or both. Just curious - how difficult was it for you to keep this secret?

Sale, merger - call it what you wish. My point (and feeling) is that in ten years the Curv won't be in production. Of course, I'm not privy to the contract details so I can't say for certain. No doubt the "merger" contract will specify continued spare parts and support for the Curv for years to come (I would guess at least twenty). It may even specify continued Curv production for a period of time. But after that - who knows. The Q&A gave the same answer to most of the questions: everything will remain the same for the foreseeable future. Very little was actually answered but no surprise there as it's much too early for SP to show its cards. I see this "merger" as a long-term win-win-lose proposition. A win for Sandy and Brenda who get a well-deserved retirement, a win for SP who will get whatever it is they want out of RI, and a long-term loss for anyone who was looking at buying a Curv down the road. That's just my gut feeling. Hopefully I'm wrong, in part because the Curv is in my top three list of favorite rigs. BTW, I think UPT is number one, followed by SP in rig production. I think UPT has around 150 employees to SP's 70-75. Since both companies only produce H/Cs it would stand to reason that UPT produces more rigs. If not then either UPT is very inefficient or SP is very efficient, or both. Just curious - how difficult was it for you to keep this secret?

As you said, the Curv and Javelin are quite different in their design philosophies which makes me wonder why Sandy decided to sell to SP. Perhaps he felt that the basic differences between the two systems is what might keep both rigs in production. After all, it wouldn't make sense for SP to continue producing two similarly-designed rigs. What remains to be seen is whether or not SP will advertise the Curv and if so to what extent compared to Javelin advertising. And if Curv sales remain low compared to Javelin sales will they continue to market the Curv? I wonder if Sandy would have done more to ensure the Curv's long-time survival in the rig market had he first tried to sell the company and keeping it alive as its own entity instead of going for the merger (I.e. sale) with the second largest manufacturer of H/Cs. Maybe they bought out RI so that they could incorporate some of the Curvs many design features and innovations into a future Javelin update without having to pay royalties. I guess only the SP owners know the true motivation behind their decision to buy out RI. As you said, they didn't have to do it. I guess ultimately only time will reveal that.

I'm skeptical about the continued production of one of the products (hint coming up). Usually when one company takes over another, the products and/or service, and subsequently most of the employees, of the company being taken over are phased out over the course of several years. Not trying to start anything here, but this has been my observation and has been proven time and time again, and in many different industries.

The 500D may be softer but it doesn't wear as well. Wear spots will appear sooner. My first rig was made from 500D cordura.

I understand what you're saying and agree, but most of the ideas and suggestions I've mentioned in this thread really only apply to the Racer, since that rig deviates more from the rest of the rig manufacturers. However, if I come up with an idea that I don't see on any rigs then I would definitely approach the other manufacturers first, as I feel that my idea would at least be given some thought and examined to determine its viability by almost all other manufacturers - except PL. As has been mentioned in other threads regarding the management at PL, it seems that only those ideas that are generated internally are taken seriously. Just my impression, anyway. What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.