Beatnik

That is one way of doing it. I personally prefer keeping it authentic. I believe it comes down to what you are trying to get out of your jump. There is nothing wrong with older cutaway systems if you know the gear you're using. I have done over 500 retro jumps in the last 10 years and all but one jump (borrowed a friend's rig) was done with complete retro gear. It can be done safely. To each their own.

I think most of the issues now with jumping Paracommander's nowadays is that there are only a few people that are really current with them. If it is your first jump on one don't do anything fancy like trying to flare and that sort of thing. It is much easier to screw something up not knowing what you are doing than getting it right. Landing a PC is not a big deal and it will look worse to others than it actually is. Make sure you have your feet and knees together and PLF. It will happen faster than you realize. Do you know what kind of cutaway system it has? All of them have things to be aware of. Without knowing the cutaway system, I can't really give you any tips. There are a lot of different types but shot and halfs are probably the most common. If they are properly maintained they work ok. Your profile shows that you are in Florida. I can recommend a few people you can see or talk to there that will give you information on them and many other retro parachutes. Later this fall when I am back in Florida I would be happy to jump a round or two with you and show you all about them. You don't have to be old to know about these systems.

Sandy Reid, owner of Rigging Innovations was on the Beechnuts. It might be worth a try emailing his company and see if he remembers anything. http://www.rigginginnovations.com/Pages/ContactUs/ContactUs.aspx

Just a guess on the system from watching the video but it looks like a heavier version of a hesitater loop. My guess from listening to the wind in the video is that the pilot chute comes out and creates drag to slow down his forward speed and then deploys the main. Considering the speed he is going, it makes sense that he would want to slow down a tad before having his chute open.

A history tidbit, I believe the first canopy to have cross ports from the factory was the Jalbert Para-Sled. The cross ports had cotton binding. Like most things of that era, they were over built.

Might be the first time it is intentionally planned but not the first time this has been done. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Alkemade

I am glad I brought my balloon suits. Bill grabbed it after I took it off after the first jump and was going all over the place in it. It was a good time.

You can access UPT's Facebook page without registering. Many of the photos are there but not all. There are a lot of photos and video of the event that haven't surfaced yet. They will in time. https://www.facebook.com/UPTVector

I discussed this issue in person in December when I was at the factory for a week. There is a lot more to it than the technical bulletin described. I emailed the chair of the TSC along with my BoD member and the CSPA office giving more information regarding the issue since I have a close relationship with UPT and was told by the TSC chair that it was good enough and it was their information that was distributed. I know for a fact that is completely inaccurate and am disappointed to see the direction things are going with the CSPA rigger program and TSC. But I won't get into that here. The other issue discussed during this is that the main system is uncertified and doesn't have the same control that the reserve system has so they can really only state with the components that are approved with their system. They know as well as a lot of us here that there are many rigs out there that don't have Sigma main canopies. At the end of the day if people want to use soft links on their tandem main and damage the main risers, it just creates more revenue for UPT. The technical bulletin should be amended as it fails to capture the real issue and gives inappropriately rated riggers the ability to repair issues that they aren't able to do. Talking only in regards to the issues with reserve risers I mentioned previously and not the issue with the main parachute components.

The technical bulletin is slightly misleading and this has been an issue with UPT tandem systems for a while. It mentions soft links on reserves as well in the main line. On the Sigma system if one was going to install soft links they would have to pick out stitching from the reserve risers as they are sewn to accept L-bars. This issue was brought up when I was on the tandem examiner course several months again. According to CSPA's technical bulletin, they claim Rigger A's can do the repair. The issue is greater than damage to main risers or soft links and there should be a bulletin reflecting accurate information and address the larger issue of the reserve risers. On a personal note I don't care about the mains as they aren't certified anyways and if people want to do unapproved things to that part of the system it is pretty hard to stop them. Plus while it does state it is for UPT canopies, meaning Sigma canopies, I think it was overlooked. The bulletin doesn't apply if there are Icarus or Aerodyne mains used on the Sigma system.

I owned one before I got my Pfaff 542. It was a nice needle feed machine and didn't have any complaints about it. I love my split bar machine but kind of wish I still had it. It was really smooth.

Well unfortunately, you won't get a hold of Dick anymore. He passed away. I have plans for the Slots 3 that Dick sent me. PM me with your email and I will send them to you.

I remember buying some RW-6 rings years ago. I bought them from a person that was selling them in groups of 5 along with some other stuff. I traded two of them for some vintage gear and kept the other three. Do you want to buy or sell one?

I have about 3 dozen jumps on a deployable paraglider system that I have developed. I never took any formal paragliding classes but it does do things differently than a typical parachute. The first several jumps with it I was very cautious. But that might have been because of the whole system more than the paraglider. There is a lot of very interesting things in skydiving history. I have spent the last ten years diving into it as much as I could. In doing that I got a lot of opportunities that I would never have had if I didn't. I still love the history of the sport and the vintage gear. I don't know what I will do with all the gear I have collected when I am no longer able to jump it. There is still a lot to be learned from the history books.

You can find a lot of machines for a really good price if you have some patience. I have seven industrial sewing machines and a ripcord press in my loft. Here is what I paid for them, all complete with tables, motors and heads. Bernina 217 (with cam reader) - $500 Pfaff 542 (double needle split bar w/ big bobbins) - $380 Singer 269W - $200 Brother B791 - $250 Ripcord press and tester - $275 My loft is done, now I am working on my machine shop

The last few years it seems like the vintage gear scene has really increased and the price to acquire such items have gone with it. I have seemed to got lucky and got in the ground floor about ten years ago and acquired some great gems for not a lot of money and much of it for the cost of shipping. In regards to the Barish sailwing; there is not many of them out there mainly because they never went into production. I have spent a great deal of time researching this unicorn of the parachute world and the photos of the ones you see were prototypes that people produced and made changes to. There are a lot of small inconsistencies in the parachutes if you really look close at the photos. Some time in the coming months if I have time to do so, I will do a post and share some information on this parachute. Not going to say much on it now but I have something pretty special to share.

Jumpshack did a study on type 17 risers that might be an interesting read considering for some. http://www.jumpshack.com/default.asp?CategoryID=TECH&PageID=T17STUDY&SortBy=DATE_D

I agree you can find a 138 or 217 for under $650. Not a terribly difficult thing to do for the 138. 217's are a little rarer but I picked one up last month complete with a cam reader for $500. Both my 138 and 217 are fantastic machines and I can only recommend to people buy the best machine that you can afford. Don't skimp and buy something cheap to learn on. If the machine is difficult to work, it will make it harder to learn. The last thing you need to do is try to keep looking for the next machine to replace the one you. Just my $0.02.

I worked for the company that did the developments on the MARD, it wasn't Mirage. I can't say much about it (and won't so no prodding) but there was a nasty legal battle about the MARD Mirage wanted to use. Not sure if Mirage decided to use the same one in the end but the system is by far less complex than others out there and could be used in any rig. It didn't use a Collin's lanyard and watching many, many drops with one riser attached, it was deemed not needed. No more out of me on this.

Hi Bill: Sure thing. When you get it back, let me know and I would be happy to check it out for you. I have a few other Delta II's that we can use as a comparison for. Cheers!

The spreading of the canopy is what causes the tubular nylon attached to the hook velcro to peel back from the OSI. Some manuals have the centre nose line outside of the OSI and some have it inside. I personally don't believe that either configuration really makes a difference to if the canopy will malfunction. I know someone that jumped his Delta II with the centre nose line wrapped up for years without any issues. Now this is an extremely small sample size and really can't be considered as fact to the canopy opening without a malfunction or not. But if you look at the mechanics, design, slope of the Delta II it really wouldn't seem to cause a malfunction. Even with the centre line wrapped, it there is such a great opening for an air channel to start inflation of the parachute. The velcro lanyard is attached to the line after the centre line nose line. So the nose inflating in itself really has little effect on the lanyard tightening. I can simulate this on the ground by pulling up on the nose and the OSI won't release until the next section of canopy starts to spread. Leaving the nose line outside of the OSI wrap tends to produce more on heading openings as it can inflate a little less restricted and the nose is straighter.

Thanks everyone for the kind remarks to this thread. Like the Volplane thread generated this one on the Delta II, this one gave me the idea of another topic. Bill Booth mentioned his old Para-Plane. I just happen to have a Para-Plane that I saved a few years ago. The previous owner did some strange short lining work and really butchered the deployment bag. With the help of a couple of people on here (one of which was the man that designed the deployment bag) and some pretty heavy geometry on every photo of the Para-Plane I could find, I was able to restore the parachute. The deployment staging on the Para-Plane is really something else. All you can think of is bag lock when you see it. I will try to get some photos, video, writeup, etc. together for sometime next week but no promises. Thanks again everyone and I am glad you are all enjoying the threads as much as I am sharing them with all of you.

Those ads are interesting. Both of them have inaccuracies. The Eagle Hawk ad has an eagle that has been modified with the back section removed. There should be five sections and the nose. If you compare it to the other photo of the Eagle you will understand what I mean. They may have been already starting to experiment with it. The Eagle ad actually has a Hawk in the photo.

More pictures for the post.

With the nice responses to the Volplane hydraulic reefing device thread, I decided to do another on the Delta II Opening Shock Inhibitor (OSI). In addition to the OSI, I will give a brief history of the Delta II which will help to later describe the differences between the American and Canadian versions of the parachute. The Delta II came about life through development from another parachute known as the Irvin Eagle and Steve Snyder. The Irvin Eagle came before the Delta II and to my knowledge wasn't fully released to the public. It was a slightly different parachute but similar in many ways. Both were parawings and had a very similar layout. The front sections of the parachutes are the same. There were three main changes that occurred to transform the Eagle into the Delta II: the addition of stall panels for steering, removing of the back section of panels to reduce the parachute's size and the addition of the OSI to stage the openings. With this the Delta II was born. This background on the development of the Delta II will distinguish a Canadian Delta II and an American Delta II. The American Delta II was a parachute that was produced as a Delta II. A Canadian Delta II was actually a conversion from the Eagle parachutes that Irvin Industries still had to the Delta II design. You can see the data panel restamped on the Canadian Delta II in the picture. While the Canadian and American Delta II’s are similar, they are also slightly different. Most notably is the reinforcing that the Canadian Delta II had which lead to a little bit different shape in the nose panels. This reinforcing was necessary on the Irvin Eagle because it had no way to stage the opening. So as a result the parachute was reinforced to take the stronger openings. Since the American version was actually designed as a Delta II with the OSI in mind, it didn’t require as much reinforcing and was never added to the parachute. The parachute in the pictures and video describing the OSI is a Canadian version. I have posted a two ads of the two parachutes and a couple of photos of the Canadian Delta II’s front and side section (sorry I don’t have any in flight photos yet) and two in flight photos of an American Delta II. From these photos you should be able to see the difference in reinforcing and even though the Eagle ad is drawn, you can count that it had one additional section that the Delta II doesn’t have. How the OSI operates is quite simple, it wraps around the lines of the parachute from back to front and separates different line groups of the parachute. The first set of the lines to be wrapped in the OSI is the three tail lines, the next set is the six lines from the next two sections and control lines, then the next three and so forth. The OSI is closed by a piece of Velcro that is peeled back off it when the parachute inflates. The Velcro lanyard is attached to a piece of tubular nylon that runs through a couple of rings along the center rib or keel of the parachute. When the Parachute starts to inflate, the tubular nylon gets pulled through the rings and peeled off the OSI. Once the Velcro lanyard is free from the OSI, it will start to unravel and allow the parachute to fully inflate from front to back. A cross sectional diagram from the Delta II manual should help form a better picture of how the lines are wrapped in the OSI. I made a brief video on the OSI and how it works. Unfortunately, I didn’t realize that I had the mic blocked so I had to raise the volume via software. You can still hear it but it is not as clear as it could have been. http://youtu.be/kdwnUWIu_VQ I am still thinking of topics for a seminar at the PIA next year. If there are any thoughts or suggestions let me know. I am still a little stumped what to focus on. It is over a year away but I would like to figure out a direction to go fairly soon.