Unstable

I'm getting hits from the same individual, this time he is posting under a different name and in Tysons, VA. =========Shaun ==========

+1, very good point. Along those same lines, I think there are at least 3 methods (2 of which I can think of off the top of my head) of measuring pack volume. I know PD uses one, there is the PIA cylinder method, etc. =========Shaun ==========

I don't think that is going to make the least bit of difference. PD uses the progression [107-120-135-150-170-190-210] (for their most popular 'general purpose' canopies ~ the Pilots come in [111, 124, 132, 140, 150, 168, 188, 210], I just don't think that makes a bit of difference. I just sold my Sabre2 150 and had to go up 8 ft^2 on my next canopy, and in all reality that is not going to affect wing loading enough to affect a potential buyer, even when considering wing performance and pack volume. =========Shaun ==========

If you are Road trippin' and take I-70 through Missouir/Kansas/Colorado, then I would recommend hitting up Skydive KC - Smaller King Air DZ, great vibe. Depends on how you plan on going across country, however. If you are going to be further North, then Skydive Chicago and Chicagoland are definitely places to hit up. =========Shaun ==========

I really like this question, but I think it may be too broad and allow a candidate (any candidate) to answer by saying nothing. Can I make a suggestion? What are some very specific examples where a BOD member would need to choose between the individual members vs the group members, and where specifically, does Fencebuster stand on those issues? So far I have only seen one issue, and that is the TM's and DUI's. Where else could a BOD member have to choose between two masters? =========Shaun ==========

I've jumped a Cherokee 6 - IIRC, once it began jump run, it fell from the sky like a brick. Does. Not. glide. =========Shaun ==========

I can second this. I've put ~900+ jumps on my S2-150, and all my buddies jump Pilots (we have an Aerodyne Dealer at the DZ). Those are my go-to loaner canopies. In general, I prefer the S2 over the Pilot. Those who are better canopy pilots than I may critique my feedback here, but here is my general comparison of the two... a. Pilots tend to have better openings. My S2 has the characteristic end-cell closure ~50% of the time, and will open slightly more abruptly. End cell closures on the S2 tend to be more common once the line trim approaches ~2.00" differential across the A-Group (quick and dirty measurement) and I have been diligent in relining every 400 jumps. Overall I have no complaints with the S2 openings, and it's forgiving enough that I don't have to fly the openings even though I load at ~1.4. b. S2 at comparable wingloading, has much more flare, with the majority of the stopping power existing in the first 30% of the brakes. Pilots, as I have seen, have more power in the lower portion of the flare, with more stopping power in the bottom. The S2 will want to fly, the Pilot will want to stop. c. Pilot recovery arc is much shorter than a Sabre2, almost as short as a Triathlon or even a Silhouette. =========Shaun ==========

Sabre2's are great wings - I put about 900 jumps on mine, recently sold it and bought a Firebolt. Better openings, more aggressive, but it's not going to be as familiar at the DZ for most jumpers. =========Shaun ==========

get a hold of Strong Enterprises - I do rigging for several commemorative airborne members, and Strong Ent. will sell parts and service that type of equipment within reason. =========Shaun ==========

I want to throw something out there - call the manufacturer. If cost is an issue, many (I can speak for some, not all) manufacturers will cut a few hundred dollars off the cost of a new rig if the rig is ordered with no or minimal options and in all black. I can think of 3 (4, if you count the template designs from Aerodyne) that have done this recently. =========Shaun ==========

Request for the Peanut Gallery: I've been following this thread carefully, and it's clear that the issue of the effect of a DUI on a Class-3 medical became center stage, based on an incident or event. Would you DSE, be so kind as to post a link to a thread regarding the original issue or perhaps something to give us a better background regarding the discussion? =========Shaun ==========

I'm shooting from recent estimates of work I have sent to various Manufacturers (UPT, Sunpath, and Jumpshack) and the work you are describing is going to run between $350-$425, depending on things like articulation and manufacturer. Most Master Riggers I know will do the same for $400-range. =========Shaun ==========

Good article!

the Italicized portion is my addition

Interesting! As a former Parachute Club President myself, I'll be very interested in what you have to offer and the direction you are wanting to steer USPA. When does UPSA post the list of candidates for the next round of elections? =========Shaun ==========

Lord and Hodge will sell Mil-20230 compliant insertion dies and punches for ~$45 each, I use their stuff for all sizes (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8), I think they have a leg up on quality compared to CS Osborne but not as good as the SS Stimpson stuff. Just my opinion. I've been a big fan of #4, although I recently helped install a killline PC/bridle assembly that was an absolute bear to fit the end through a #4, and really should have had a #5. I wish I could remember the manufacturer. =========Shaun ==========

Dang, let me see. KS (5x + a few airports just for fun) MO (4x) NE (2x) NV (1x) TX (2x) IA (2x) IL (1x) AZ (1x) = 18 =========Shaun ==========

+1 =========Shaun ==========

The BA-22 is a beautiful system, both ahead of its time and behind its time. Packing one will definitely be an exercise in handtacking. =========Shaun ==========

AH, thank you, I read that and misspoke. So, take another $100 off. =========Shaun ==========

OK OK Chemist - I'm going to ask a question that has been bugging the bajeses out of me about the Epicine canopy. If I am being naive, please, please somebody put me in my place. [rant] I don't get it. The Epicine is a 0-3cfm 9-cell main canopy tailored to the needs of Wingsuiters. It also retails for (?) $2200. Why not call Flight Concepts, and buy a classic 9-cell canopy for $800, and if needs be, modify the slider for the appropriate openings? Are there design features so out-of-this world that it justifies an additional $1000? =========Shaun ==========

I am loving this discussion - I was just on the phone to Nancy @ Jumpshack, picking her brain about recommended starting points for PEP canopies for various pilots, and this thread is going to answer most of my questions. The items above in italics are those I believe a reasonable person could disagree upon. Low Cost - NEW production C-9's are notoriously hard to get ahold of, and would usually require an intermediary as the government contracts they are manufactured to are very specific regarding distribution controls. The Commemorative Air Force wing I rig for has a number of 2013 C-9s in Strong 304s, and Looking through their receipts, they paid about $1500 for the canopies alone. You could get a FFE Preserve or Strong Lopo for ~$800. 4 Line release The C-9s I usually inspect have a more modern assembly, with steering toggles anchored to the outboard 2-lines on the rear riser assemblies. However, without steering vents, I would question their effectiveness. Here is something I debate with myself on a regular basis: Which is more appropriate for an Aerobatic pilot with no jumping experience: Round or square? Are pilots who are experienced enough to fly complicated maneuvers competent to land a gliding PEP without going through a first-jump type training? At what point does the risk of increased decent rate (round) balance that of increased forward speed? =========Shaun ==========

Unfortunately this is quite the opposite of what I have seen. (At least here in the Midwest) Small, municipal airport boards are more concerned with maintaining their private little country clubs. =========Shaun ==========

I think these two statements are the defining points of the discussion and in many ways, have structured the excellent responses from Rob and Lee. When I think 'quality' I usually apply the definition 'fitness for use.' The existence of newer PEPs certified in the standard category does not affect the ability of the C9 to do its job, and do it well. By the logic posted above, could one refuse to pack a Javelin because of the Existence of the newer, and more 'relevant design' Javelin Odyssey. =========Shaun ==========

I'm very active in servicing Pilot rigs for flyers in the Midwest and 2x wings of the Commemorative Air Force. I see quite a few C9s, mostly new (2010+) dates of manufacture.Here is a photo of a system I did just week or so ago. I have no issue with them insomuch as they are in serviceable condition. "because there are better things out there" IMHO is not justification for grounding a rig. I haven't seen anti-inversion netting on a C-9, I have seen a few different configurations for the apex, but that is another discussion. It's very common to see them with quarterbags - I have a 2013 BA-22 that uses that system. That amounts to essentially a 1-locking stow Type-4 system (maybe a DPRE could correct me on that terminology) with military-style retaining loops. Edited to add... Again, not following you. The models I deal with all have the steering toggles anchored to the outermost lines 2 lines on the rear risers, just like a Strong or FFE canopy. I see you have a pretty strong opinion - I'm thinking you are comparing old C9 canopies and peripheral devices with new canopies with peripheral devices. I think the C9, in the appropriate system, is a good choice for those needing something in a Standard category. *Sorry, edited a few times to clarify a few points. =========Shaun ==========