ZigZag

Z.

since "Technora" has great dimensional stability in regards to shrinkage and stretch. "Technora" also does not display the abrasive characteristics of "Vectran"(tm), which in turn allows the mfg to use brass grommets for the slider.
A broken line on a noncascaded lineset will not impact performance as much as on a cascaded lineset, since you are only loosing one attachment point under the canopy. It can make a difference.

Since a "Technora" lineset will not go out of trim, similar to "Vectran", care must be taken to monitor the wear and tear of the lines, as the end of useful life of the lineset does not manifest itself as with "Spectra".

Cascaded linesets made of "Technora" are used in competition swooping, but linesets are usually replaced within 100 jumps, as the cascade wears dramatically. The stitching of the cascade also influences the longevity of the lineset, ie., the use of a bartack versus a straight stitch.

The Nitro(n) and Blade are excellent high performance canopies, like to be loaded, but then again that is dependant on the skills and experience of the jumper. Try one...you just might like it; maybe the excellent and forgiving stall characteristics might win you over, not to mention the great openings.

I have built these softlinks for customers with excellent results. But in the end, if you do not understand the physics and caveats of softlinks, get the commercial version and an expert opinion.

Think about your reserve and the system it uses.
The lines are stowed very much in the same way as some of the newer 'd-bags' in circulation. They are still in an experimental stage, but it stands to reason that more people will end up using this system, if only because they have seen it and want it!!!

The thought behind it is that the lines reach line-stretch without the d-bag oscillating side to side due to line bights having to overcome the tension of rubber bands. This, in theory, helps prevent line-twist
and provides for an increased probability of an on- heading opening.

For reserves it also means less forces to overcome in order to provide a rapid deployment of the canopy!!! In a sense you could call it line dump, but far more important is the line tension within the canopy as it is folded and placed into the bag. The tension should be proportional to the line attachment points and the overall exposure to the wind stream the canopy is exposed to during deployment. In theory.
Then shit happens and you start at the beginning.

In other words, if you pack and place your canopy into the d-bag with slack lines, brace your self. It is about creating a load path without slack. The same can be said for lines that have been stowed assymetrically between the left and right side of the Main Lift Web, or your risers not being even during deployment.
Does any of this make sense?

They were used extensively with military rigs, some pilot rigs and on the Atom free-bags as well. If you take the migration of personel that used to work at P.d.F. to Aerodyne into account, then it is not difficult to entertain the idea that similar designs would be used on the 'Icon'. So there is nothing new.
It is merely a design philosophy that has been repackaged and re-introduced in the overall sceme of marketing. The conventional system of free-stowing reserve lines into a seperate pocket works just fine and has proven itself over many jumps and years. That is not to say that the retention band system is bad. It works and serves to control the bights as they are stowed, but to categorically say that they are responsible for controlling reserve deployments and then to equate the system as a feature for controlling high speed deployments is farfetched in light of the absence of definitive data.
Otherwise I would like to see such data published.

The instructions that come with the Ozzie version of the Talon are especially good. They address issues in regards to packing a small reserve. Small reserves
have a short cord, so therefore you might end up with not enough "ear" in the molar free-bag, if you
do the conventional s-fold to begin with, contrary to rigs like the Vector and Mirage that require the wedge shape, in other words, less volume at the ears. Keep in mind that the packing instructions for the Talon II and Talon FS differ, by virtue of design differences in regards to the absence of the top cover flap in the Talon FS and Voodoo. The latter two rigs also do without the riser covers in the reserve packtray.
Are you sure no one was rated, or no one had the packing instructions? You can always see if they are on the web!

I am aware of the revised FAR and will make an effort to refer to current and up to date FAR's.
My apologies.
Ziggy

I included reference to the FAR in order to demonstrate that there is a relationship between the rigger and packing the main. The revised FAR upholds that relationship.
I made no reference to the situation where the main was not hooked up or packed.What this thread is about, is leaving the main packed in the packtray, while doing an I&R!



Neither was my post intended to write new rules or regulations, but rather to comment on a procedure, that I do not agree with, and to explain why.

[Edit]I incorrectly applied the term 'certify' to the main.
It was my intent to treat the entire assembly with the respect and scrutiny it deserves.

Baffles...a la Conquest from PISA...basically a method to choke or throttle the nose ( inlets ) of a given cell. Without them, the design would inflate rather fast. My Swift Plus 113 is something else though....

( FAR Part No. 65 Subpart F 65.111(b) )
It becomes a numbers game, often in your favor, but it is the few times when you are not aware of a problem ( wear and tear on the main ), that you might get bitten, or better yet, the owner.

As riggers we can do more than just re-certify the reserve and container. We can and should take a look at the main. First of all, this is where many problems begin, a bad packjob, misrigging, worn lines, worn pilot chutes, tears or holes, etc., so numerous is the list of things that can cause a malfunction, why would you want to subject yourself
to such uncertainty. The economical benefits to you as a rigger are far greater, by providing good maintenance services to your customers, ensuring that they are jumping with gear that is airworthy. You are in the position to monitor the degradation of the main and associated components,
and advising your customers when it might be time to do something about it.
Riggers should "not" !!! absolve themselves of this responsibility. If you do not have adequate facilities to do the job, then take the main out and have the person intending to use the main assume responsibilty for the pack job!!!
As mentioned above, it is a 'numbers game', but someone will loose. Cosmetics have little to do with airworthiness..................

Now I never thought of that scenario.
Seems to be a timing issue, but nevertheless
another thing that 'can' go wrong. Glad I clicked on this thread.

Get Dan Poynters Parachute Manual, Para-gears' annual catalogue, and you should be on your way in
learning about the common materials used on skydiving equipment. Read as much as you can.
You sound like rigger material. Hopefully the jumpers you pack for will forgive the occasional "hard opening".

Another case in point were a mfg on the leading edge of innovation reacts correctly!
Every change or innovation has to account for human error, or in some cases unforeseen consequences that where not discovered during the testing phase. The industry rocks because of its ability to react to problems. It is also a testament to the built in accountability of TSO procedures when mfg's adhere to them!!!

Nice start to your question, right.
One would think that you'd get some decent answers
from your instructors, so do ask them, but here goes:
Most reserve canopies these days are seven cell
canopies built of low porosity fabric with a permeability of 0-3 CFM ( cubic feet per minute ), which is the fabrics qualility to pass air through its weave (simplified). Most people refer to this fabric as F-111, which was a trade name given to a fabric mfg'd by the Harris Mill some years ago. At this time there are still some 5-cell reserves in use, such as the Swift
by Paraflite, and also some 9-cell designs like the Predator (Chute Shop, South Africa). Most 9-cell designs used in the U.S. are tandem reserves.
You certainly can jump a reserve as a main, as was big fashion with the Raven series canopies by Precision Aerodynamics during the 80's and 90's. Some folks still do. Bear in mind that the Ravens, back then, were supplied with a bridle attachment point.
Tempo (PISA) reserves also were sold as mains for some time, the bridle attachment being custom added.
There is however the question of what kind of performance you are looking for. You can still buy low porosity (F-111) canopies, that are optimized as
mains, as the PD 9-Cell or even 7-Cell. But are you really going to get the most bang for your buck?
Enter Z-P fabric and designs on the cutting edge of technology (not to say that reserves haven't gotten better). Zero-P or Z-PO refers to fabric that is coated with urethane or other substances to make it impermeable. This improves pressurization of the airfoil, which results in better dynamics, especially when flaring in the landing phase. Z-Po will also last considerably longer, since the coating helps to inhibit UV degradation; nylon is the base material in both main and reserves, which is susceptible to UV. Generally you can buy 7-Cell or 9-Cell main canopies, of which there are crossbraced variants that enable designers to create stiffer and flatter airfoils with better performance characteristics,
kinda like a Formula 1 racing car.
You may want to consider buying a used Z-P canopy
that has been thoroughly checked by a rigger.
Often the used canopy may require a new line-set, depending on the number of jumps put on the canopy, but it would still represent a good investment
if the fabric and related components are in good nick.
Hope that gets you started.
Ziggy

Are the risers compatible with the container, ie. the sidewalls and main packtray? Can you reach your toggles? Can you reach the drawstring of your slider?
How long are your arms? Somewhere, there is a proper riser length. Most mfg's will supply 18" to 22"
long risers, but will accommodate special requests
within reason and functionality.
As for the amount of flare that risers will afford you, the longest riser set-up that still allows you to comfortably collapse your slider and is compatible with your container would be optimal. If you control lines are excessively long, ie. detuned, you can always forshorten the brake to toggle length. The lower control line, from the cascade to the brake setting, should remain at the mfg's spec, since it affects deployment characteristics. As Vectran and Technora don't shrink, you'll end up replacing them as wear and tear dictates, but Spectra can shrink an appreciable amount and you may want to replace your control lines once or twice before a complete lineset replacement. Should you forshorten your brake to toggle segments in order to increase responsiveness and change the flare characteristics of your canopy, keep the shrinking properties of Spectra in mind. Always do some tests in the air and know your canopy before you change the length of your control lines.
This reply drifted a bit, but remember that changing one component may affect other components or parameters and their characteristics.
Ziggy

cutting some fibers. The length off the fuzz would
put the cause of fiber damage in the approximate area of the rim, so it wouldn't hurt to check for that.
Best is to check all grommets for proper seating, and like that you'll have eliminated one probable cause.
There are two types of stainless steel 0-grommets, short and long shank grommets, depending on the thickness of the material that is to receive the grommet. Sometimes the wrong grommet gets used or mixed up in the bin of grommet setting machines.
Also, the grommet may just not have been set enough, by hand or machine. If you should find this to be the case, then please call the manufacturer. I'm sure they would appreciate your input.

to many wraps. But occasionally some jumper will experience a bag-lock even with a properly packed d-bag, good line-stows and the correct rubberbands.

It helps to look at the entire deployment process and the components involved, especially the pilot chute. A p/c that is old and worn or simply too small
for the size canopy and its weight, may not be able to produce the snatch force required to overcome the tension of a rubberband. A shrunken kill-line
can dramatically affect the efficiency ( the drag it develops ) of a p/c . This also holds true for p/c's
that use shock cord ( bungee ), that is improperly calibrated, ie. the p/c cannot inflate completely due to excessive tension.
By using the incorrect rubberband and stowing technique, pilot chute related issues can easily aggravate the deployment process.
Just another two cents in the bucket.

And most likely the way the mfg intended. Looks cleaner too.

But we really have not much to go on. A good picture of the line in question, especially of the area were it broke, would provide more clues of its type and condition. Suspension lines overall often brake in the area of the fingertrap were the running end inside the line terminates, so usually a few inches above the connector links, at the cascades or below
the attachment points of the canopy.
It would be a good idea to also inspect the slider grommets and for the presence of slider bumpers.
The slider grommets may have small nicks that abraid the lines. These nicks are most often the result of the grommets impacting onto metal connector links.
We know from experience that the type of suspension lines used on canopies are quite reliable, but in the absence of good maintenance, the chance of failure increases dramatically.

Some years ago there was concern that the snatch force of the reserve P/C might cause bag strip, in other words the two locking stows on the reserve free-bag might break, resulting in an out of sequence deployment.
At that time rubber o-rings were used, instead of the shock-cord (safety-stow ) now found on reserve free-bags. This was also known as the
"table cloth trick effect".
Paraflite Corp. conducted some tests which alleviated
many of the concerns. The o-rings held.
As with base canopies and some CRW configurations,
the d-bag is absent. In this case the canopy is extracted from the container first with subsequent deployment of the suspension lines, hence the tail-pocket.( Very similar to the deployment of sleeveless round canopies). And there have been many jumpers that place the main canopy into the d-bag, apply the locking stows, and then free-stow the lines into the main packtray, with good results.

There are some main d-bags based on the design of the reserve free-bag in circulation. They are being jumped by experienced jumpers, and it is more of an evaluation at this time. Their use is believed to enhance on-heading openings.
This particular design does raise the issue of an out of sequence deployment and partial but not complete bag strip, as the main d-bag is affixed to the main canopy in contrast to a freebag.
My main concern is the combination of snatch force and weak or worn rubber bands on locking stows, commonly used for main packing. Many of us have seen that rubber bands only get replaced when they brake, rather at signs of wear and tear. Other issues may be incompatible pack volume of the canopy in relation to the d-bag, ie., too small a d-bag, stretching the rubber bands to their limits...using stronger bands or shockcord may cause other problems,(baglock?), and the use of the safety-stow
method may be impractical, since one would loose it frequently on deployment.
Evaluations take time, and often problems don't manifest themselves until a large and varied data base is available.

But I have observed it with psycho-packing as well, jumpers inadvertently pulling the steering lines in front of the nose!
Maybe the recent experience of a jumper with almost
back to back mals as a result of errors during psycho-packing triggered my itching fingertips.
Packing in general sucks...but it is part and parcel to jumping.

If you know the the underlying principle...
what is the dfference...

I spend the time to lay the canopy flat and squeeze out all the air, from tail to nose. I return to the risers and pick up the lines, low, and run them up to the canopy.
So, from the flat pack, I transpose to a pro-pack. I flake accordingly, and lay the result onto the ground.
I re-dress the entire packjob twice, flaking the steering lines and their associated fabric first, the A-B, B-C, C-D partitions, and then re-dressing them in reverse order. A matter of minutes! Once again there
is a check for line continuity, and some re-dressing,
but rather minor. ( A built in redundency ). Folding of the entire canopy is either in accordance with the mfg or accepted practices. There is some lee-way, but constructs a rather limited gray-zone for riggers.
A good foundation for rigging can be obtained via Dave deWolf's Rigging course and the Rigging University via Rigging Innovations. Many packers and jumpers obtain a basic understanding of rigging skills through their involvement in the sport, by their presence and continued exposure to the state of the art;. A basic understanding of packing can only be generally obtained by this very aspect of their involvement. A jumper that follows some of these guidelines should in general become selfsufficient, but does not absolve said jumper from the responsibilities he/she accepted. Learn how to pack well. Take your instructor to task. Make them do what they said they would do. Packing lessons are part of the requirements of any ground schooling.!!! If you do not understand packing, then it is not an issue of it being pawned off to someone else. If you shall be charged extra for packing, make sure that you understand this. Generally it is part and parcel of your jump course. Why, because it is required by the USPA. It is part of your entitlement to a fully qualified instructional course.

Psycho packers suck... or you could teach us all about the "true" benefits of psycho-packing..
No, there is some merit, but it stretches the imagination if it wasn't for the fact that psycho-
packing was a response to some packers or even "riggers" not being able to come to terms
with z-p fabric in the mid nineties.
But as with as any new (old) innovation, you have to keep re-inventing.
Psycho packing works, but you have to follow some of the old conventions. Namely, you have to make sure that the stabilizers are flaked outwards, or their components thereof, and that you "do not" pull or place the steering lines in front of the nose. The old style of flat packing and the convention of "pro packing" are based on experience. Certainly the folks that have come up with the 'alternate' method of psycho-packing know how to pro- or flat pack.I hope.
Any jumper that is curious about packing, will take a cue; there are many different ways to skin a cat.
But the ways taught by hands on any given DZ often outway the new innovations. Keep an open mind, stick with what works, read and learn, observe, think, and then apply. But foremost, assume responsibility
for what you do. I myself never trusted a packjob, until I did it myself.