skytribe

Jerry Thanks, I think your right. After more hunting around it looks like it is a "Rods Rebel 1". It does look interesting from the fact that the main container does not have a closure loop like we see now but is velcro closed. (Obviously wouldnt class as freefly friendly these days.) Looking for any info on closing this up as it would be nice to close it up in correct manner - even if it wasnt with canopies inside - rather foam for demo purposes.

I tend to agree - people use the 500 (which is a minimum) as a target. A lot of the time tandem instructors make things look pretty straightforward BUT every single jump is different. Different people, different wingloadings, different considerations for student (stiff old people , oversized people). The students do not always help. You are jumping in conditions such as winds, turbulence etc. with a canopy that has less manoueveribility (think school bus not sports car) and you dont have front risers. Landing safely is critical for both yourself and the student. I would like to see people have more quality jumps and I'm not talking about simply doing hop/pop or solos in order to get the total to 500. I

I have acquired an old rodriguez parachute container and I know nothing about it except it had a round reserve and a stratostar main in it. It has R2 as release mechanism and the main pilot chute was mounted on a belly band with the main container was closed with a velcro flap. I dont even know the name of the container let alone finding a manual to find more info out on the container. At no point is this container going back in service but I'd like to clean it up and fill the containers with some foam to make it look like it has canopies in as a nice "historical" piece. At the moment the container is taking a bath and cleaning up the years of dirt / grim that had accumulated. Any hints on a manual with pictures or what I may even have here. Spotty

You should try calling them on the phone - that way you get to speak to someone immediately during the week.

Its a shame they can't sort there squabbles out and avoid confusion - Icarus , Xfire/Crossfire, SFire. Safire. Both NZA and Icarus World both make modern canopies of good quality - both of decent products/Customer service and I suspect that you are correct in that NZA does not manufacture the reserve. The designs for a lot of these canopies was done by NZA and licensed however I'm not sure about the reserve's whether than was the case - but certainly wasnt manufactured or marketed by NZA so this may well have been an Icarus only product. The whole Icarus story is too long to tell here - but even the original Icarus partnership/agreement involved Precision. I believe the split between the NZA/Icarus was what prompted the same name confusions.

I would take a PD reserve or Optimum over both. I've packed both and both would do the job. I would say Precision has more experience of reserve parachutes over the years with many models and this being the latest incarnation. That said try contacting them and ask them a question or look at their web site and see how responsive and up to date they are. Icarus is much more engaged in current designs and much more responsive. They have the Icarus reserve and the Nano which uses a low bulk material. I don't see as many of these as say a PD reserve/optimum but have packed all of them. (Rmax, Icarus, Nano, PDR, Optimum). The PD quality, reputation and sheer numbers in use are testaments that it is a solid product.

If your asking which reserve would i prefer then thats a different question and has nothing to do with confidence in their ability to work correctly in a scenario you have specified. Both will do that job. Precision customer service is very weak these days bordering on the “are they still in business ?”. Icarus much more there developing new canopies and innovating. Customer service are responsive.

In simple terms the MARD has to work in two ways - to be connected using the departing main as a sort of reserve pilot chute equivalent in the event of a cutaway instead of the reserve pilot chute in order to extract the freebag/reserve canopy. OR disconnect the MARD in the event of a total malfunction when the reserve pilot chute is being used to deploy the freebag/reserve. If you have a slow speed malfunction and chose to deploy the reserve without cutting away the main then your are depending upon the reserve pilot chute to create enough drag in order to extract the freebag/reserve. There is a great difference in the amount of drag that can be created by a pilot chute at 120 mph and at 15 mph. At 15mph the pilot chute may simply not be generating enough drag to do the job and may simply trail behind you and not have enough force to extract the freebag/reserve. If you would have cut away at a correct higher altitude then your main would be acting as the big high drag pilot chute equivalent. This creates a whole lot more drag than a reserve pilot chute even at slow speed. Even without a MARD and just an RSL cutting away would result in you accelerating to a higher airspeed which would result in more drag on the pilot chute and a successful deployment - albiet with a loss of a lot more altitude. So yes there are scenarios when not cutting away and pulling the reserve may not result in a reserve being extracted from the freebag and inflating. The best action is to avoid this scenario in the first place. Pull at the correct altitudes, know your emergency procedures and be confident in execution at appropriate decision altitudes. Not cutting away and pulling reserve under 1000ft is probably the culmination of a number of bad decisions.

Speak to your instructors 1st. The will be able to advise.

Well that's the 1st issue - The airworthiness of the rig is certified at that time only. Even if he says 120 days then he is out of date with current regulations for modern sport rigs in the US. With is now 180 days. Well, that's really not my concern about how the DZ records things or their software works. My (as a rigger) responsibility is to pack according to the manufacturer and regulations. Perhaps if a dropzone can't notice the special notation on the card - then they need someone else who can notice it when checking gear. The owner is clearly notified of the date for servicing (in fact I let them know the repack before and let them know that scheduling in the window (+-6months) over the winter months when they are probably not using it). A month or two is probably not going to make a huge difference - considering the +-6month window. However the regulations in the US don't stop me from packing an AAD that will require maintenance or expire within the cycle - but it does (or should) prevent people from jumping such gear. That responsibility falls on the DZ/Owner.

The rig certainly is not presumed airworthy for 180 days. It is presumed airworthy at the time it is inspected/packed. If the owner goes out and spills battery acid on it 10 minutes after he leaves my loft then it is unairworthy. Clearly marking the packing data card that an AAD expires on a given date and should not be considered compliant/airworthy at that point I don't consider as unreasonable. If the owner is having card inspected at DZ and this is marked clearly - then the DZ employee can record this date as expiry. When that date arrives they can check to see if the AAD has been removed or replaced.

Wasnt there something last you that Shoobie was goingt to start producing containers again. I seem to recall a piece in Parachutist.

I shall

A 20 year limit has nothing to do with their experience. Its about liability.

Ive been around 30 years in the sport and the only rig ive seen personal reports of this occuring and met a couple of people who its happened to jumped a wings. 14 cutaways personally and never experienced anything like this. Ive had cutaways on 5 different container types. All except 1 were subterminal. You just cant appreciate the different view and confuse it with hate for wings.

I am as i think unstable cutaways do happen quite a lot. Cutaways will very commonly be subterminal and pilot chutes fully inflated the fact that a manual tug pulls it out of container and subsequent deployment proceeds leads me to believe it is more than just the rpc design. And you forgot to say im hung up on customer support. Yes i am and Sunrise were sadly lacking in my dealings with them.

You did call it a "blatant" misrepresentation. That was summarizing a whole host of posts but I think we just differ. I think people often support the gear manufacturers they purchase from. It's natural that you want to think you made a good decision. All products have issues at some point but that doesn't mean that because you have not experienced the problem it is not real. Disregarding the issue that the problem still exists and has been fixed when clearly older equipment is still out there with the older RPC in my book doesn't mean its fixed. For you with a newer rig with later design may mean that it is fixed. The fact it may happen on other rigs, doesn't negate it has happened a number of times on Wings that have been brought up in public forums. I don;t think their are more wings containers out there than UPT or Sunpath rigs but don't hear many stories of manually deploying freebag out the container. The fact a MARD may reduce down the risk is good - but introduces a different set of problems and Sunrise don't even equip their containers with RSL as standard like almost every other manufacturer. A Mard would probably help in most circumstances but an RSL would also help in many and hence this is why it has become standard equipment on almost every other container. I think there is more to this than the RPC - albiet the redesign probably does help. As to the company's way of handling this. I still feel they are being opaque in terms of getting the information out there which is to the detriment of there customers. Do they legally have to do it ? No. But I think that letting customers know of the problem and product improvement is definitely a good thing to do morally. Is there even a link somewhere on their website even letting you know that there is a product Improvement. My personal dealings with them have been less than stellar and nowhere near as good as those dealing with UPT, Sunpath, Infinity, and RI who have been super responsive to issues.

And how so.... So I merely condensed what you had said. Its fine that is your opinion and the OP asked for opinion. It just mine differs from yours and my experience with the manufacturer was sadly lacking. Ive dealt with them a couple of times on issue and had similar experiences. That said, I repack Wings just as I do with any rig brought to me. If the customer likes them then that is down to them.

I haven't seen the stories of this occurring on other rigs as you state. And these stories have not been widely distributed as the wings ones. I have spoken with the jumper who had personally had the experience and discussed it with him - and then had a discussion with a manufacturer who would not give me a straight answer. Getting a MARD certainly does deal with some problems but not all of them. Mard's add an additional level of complexity and introduces new scenarios and do not always work. If you were at PIA symposium there was an entire presentation on this and it was not specific to any MARD device but made you think a bit more and not simply drink the Kool-aid. That is your opinion. Please let me know the other rigs and incidents that have had jumpers manually extracting the reserve free bag by hand and been towing a fully inflated pilot chute I think we would all like to be informed of this. The discussion is nuanced and the previous discussions have also turned to the boxing of the reserve container being an issue and the two combined may be factors. The fact still remains that I would not personally recommend a Wings, that's my opinion. The OP asked and I provided and gave some reasons why. I don't sell rigs so don't have anything to gain from influencing people elsewhere. If you bring me a Wings to repack, I'll do it just as I do with any other rig someone brings me - each to their own personal choice. But there are 3 questions Have these incidents occurred? Has the reserve pilot chute design been changed? Where existing customers notified of the problem and correction by the manufacturer ? I have detailed my issues with the container and the manufacturer for each of these. Your responses are simply deflecting say they happened ages ago and one other rigs, the RPC was changed and they don't need to tell customers as both are OK and they should get a MARD to fix the problem. That's fine and is your opinion and the way you feel - we can agree to disagree on this.

Did he actually check the card matched the canopy in the container when he was inspecting the canopy? Numbers may be accidentally transposed or written down incorrectly on a card however this should probably be caught during the inspection when confirming this card matches the equipment being inspected. This ensures any service bulletins against the gear are complied with.

Other rigs have jumpers deploying unstable and do not seem to attract the same result as both of these incidents with Wings containers. I had seen another video in the past with a similar result but it was before 2017. As for the RPC design - nothing had been put out to inform owners or riggers of the change in design. The info was distributed out via some forums and social media discussions as a result of some incidents such as the two shown. I stand by my opinion that the problem has not been fixed. It MAY have been resolved in a new container with a new design but that does not constitute fixed to all the existing owners. The fact that it has happened a number of times and the way that the problem was "fixed" by NOT being transparent and letting owners know of the potential problem and the updated design but rather redesigning and keeping quiet about the problem in the 1st place and simply including on new rigs makes me question the manufacturers customer support. Even looking at Sunrise' web site for any information about a change in design reveals nothing. How are owners meant to know there is even an update to the design? As I also stated, when discussing the matter with them directly they would not say that the new design was better (or recommend it) but merely that both were acceptable. That didn't exude confidence that this was the fix to the problem.

I like the MARD system on the Wings. No need to tie with a bit of thread or tack something. The design I believe is based upon something created by Eric Fradet. However, it can be misrouted on the Wings which can cause a big problem. When retrofitting an older wings rig with the MARD I had to contact Sunrise because their instructions although clear didn't really make it clear how to distinguish between an Older and Newer version of the Wings. When they responded the difference was subtle, I suggested that they should include this on the documentation to make things clearer for others as the routing is important. The response was that is a good idea, however, the documentation has never been changed to include what I consider a piece of important information to determine which instructions are applicable. A 5-minute job to update 2 documents to make things "Crystal Clear". This is just another part of my experience with Sunrise customer service.

Upt and sunpath run around 500 for a complete new harness. Other harness adjustments are quoted on their web sites under rigging repairs.

Is it a articulated harness ?. Does it have 4 or 2 rings ?. Does the rig have the right size yoke for you ? All will come into play when making a used harness fit you. The yoke size cannot be adjusted. As the person is a similar size and build then this will probably be OK. If the harness is a 4 ringed articulated harness then the adjustment is probably a cheaper and simpler fix that a master rigger could do - however it may work out easier and cheaper to just send it back to the manufacturer. Lengthening the MLW on an articulated harness can also create another issue if the lateral attachments are also not adjusted. (Personal experience on one of my containers). If the fix is more detailed - ie. its not an articulated harness and the laterals also need resizing then you may as well just send it back to the manufacturer with your measurements and let them rebuild a harness exactly for your dimensions. You may also want to take a look at some things like the legstraps/legpads as sometimes these may not be right as some people have big thighs and others not so big. Shortening is not too difficult but if they are too short then that can be a problem. a container re-harnessed may work out viable based upon the cost of the used container. The container is sized for the canopies and the harness is sized for the person who is wearing it.

August 2017 - Subterminal 150 ft Spectre. As a result of the incident, the jumper in question replaced the pilot chute with a new one and installed the MARD system and opened a discussion on the incident. https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/24307-wings-reserve-pc-in-tow/ This may be back from 2012 but seems to show a similar issue And the issue has been discussed. https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/24149-what's-wrong-with-wings-containers%3F/ So feel free to say its fixed a long time ago, but clearly there are rigs still out there that are not fixed, and clearly it has not been established that these parts should be replaced or even that they existed until the discussion started to happen. I understand that the rig was tested with the original design but if later the design is determined to be insufficient should the customer not be informed so that rectifying action can take place or should we just ignore the fact and install the new part on new rigs and forget about the older ones. Even making it known as a potential issue would be transparent. If the original design was good, then why the need to redesign it. I was talking to another jumper last year that was an S&TA at a DZ and witnessed similar issues on Wings containers and contacted Sunrise but got a poor response, it doesn't leave me with an impression of a manufacturer that is responsive to customer problems. Which again leads me to believe that the problem still exists in the field. The choice is down to the jumper what gear they want to jump. As I said, I will pack them in the manner that the manufacturer approves but don't personally recommend them.