Beatnik

I made a quick 3 minute video today on the hydraulic reefing device. Hopefully it will illustrate how it works and how simple of a device it really is. But the slider is so far the simplest of any device. Hope you enjoy the short video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwoOtTTebW4 The comment from dgw on the opening shock inhibitor (OSI) on the Delta II has got me thinking about starting a thread on it. I have one of my four Delta II's currently unpacked and it would be a good time to take some photos and explain how the OSI works. I may also unpack one of the American Delta II's and show a few differences between it and the Canadian Delta II.

Here are some photos of my Volplane being packed. The description given in the original post should make things a little more clear how the device is attached to the parachute and how it works during inflation. The last photo, shows the Volplane during inflation. You can see how it inflates and bulges out. This is right before the device releases the lanyard. I will see if I can put together a very small video of how the device I reconditioned works. It will just be the device and me pulling on the lanyard, which would simulate span wise forces pulling on it, compressing the piston and releasing the latch.

It has been a while since I did a post. A couple of months ago, I was given a hydraulic reefing device off a Pioneer Volplane. It wasn't in the greatest of shape. Pretty dirty, some stripped screws, warn lanyard, etc. Since I have a Volplane complete with a hydraulic reefing device that is pretty much in new shape, I decided to recondition this one as a museum piece. It is still airworthy but without another Volplane, it won't see the sky again. I had to drill out some of the screw heads which was a little bit of a nerve wracking process. It was a success and the rest of the screw shafts came out fine. This device must of got wet and some of the screws started to rust. I had to use penetrating oil to loosen most of them. Once I took it all apart I replaced the screws that were damaged, replaced the lanyard, changed the oil and cleaned every part. There is a lot of misinformation I find about this device. Mainly to do with changing the weight of oil in it depending on the temperatures. While I guess that is one way you delay the staging but it rely isn't necessary. There is a set screw on the top of the piston that can speed up to slow down the release of the lanyard. Which is really all that is needed. A bit on how the device works. It is mounted on a flare on one side of the parachute and has grommets running on each flare. The lanyard goes through each grommet and then goes around them and into the latch on the device. When the parachute starts inflating the span wise forces start pulling on the lanyard, which compresses the piston. When the forces are great enough to compress the piston enough so that the set screw releases the latch, the lanyard is released and the parachute can continue to inflate uninhibited. It seems like such a complicated device compared to the slider. Having jumped my Volplane with the hydraulic reefing device installed, I can say it actually works quite well in any season when setup right. I can see about posting a video if there is interest in seeing it work. As a bit of an aside to the thread, at the PIA Symposium there was a suggestion that that I should put together a seminar on vintage gear for the next symposium. This is something that I would love to do but given the small time frame (presentation wise), I am a little stumped on what to focus on and would like to work on something during this year. So if any of you have any ideas, let me know.

I have two Thunderbows in my collection. They are nice chutes but they are real dogs compared to a PC. Packing is slightly larger than a PC but not much. They are one of those chutes that are great to bring out and jump because the arrow is always an eye catcher.

Is it a French or American Pap? They are slightly different. If I knew which you had I could go and measure mine. There are a couple in my collection.

The slider was invented in 1948 long before ramair canopies were on the market. It was originally used on rounds and later adapted for use on square canopies. They weren't invented for ramairs, they were adapted to them. Just wanted to make sure the correct historical information is presented.

I have been jumping a paraglider for several years out of plane with a system I developed. So it can be done. I have had hang time of just under an hour from altitude. I am not going to go into great detail of my system or post photos of it. But it can be used for hop and pops or freefall, even going terminal. I have used quite a few times out of the king air. I have about 40-50 jumps on my system with never any damage or indication of damage to the canopy. One of the things I think is the best part about my system is it doesn't require any modification to your harness or a special harness. You can use a regular H/C and just attach a few things that are removable. Using an actual paraglider has made it possible to achieve distances far surpassing anything that a regular skydiving canopy could achieve. Your 10-15 mile cross country goal in reality is nothing. I was doing that to start and finding myself over top of the dropzone at 6000'. There are a lot of other complications with using a system like this because of having someone hang around for some time. Last year I got out of the plane at 3500' everyone else went up to 13500'. I watched them jump, open and land then I landed. Without coordinating this well and knowing the traffic in the area, it can be quite dangerous. Anyways, it can be done and has been done.

Well Ken you are entitled to your opinion even if you have nothing to substantiate it. Stating an opinion once is hardly complaining or whining. However, starting a thread to do so and repeatedly posting against those that don't share your view might constitute such a thing. Just a thought

I completely agree. The whole idea of this thread that everyone who attended the PIA should confront a company and complain to them because one person in not satisfied with a simple solution to an odd problem is idiotic. I am not associated with the company in any form but a pretty standard business practice is usually to analyze the problem and come up with an acceptable solution that won't hinder the user to a great extent and allow the company to apply a permanent solution. They did do that. So this really comes down to complainer/whiner trying to get more people to complain/whine with him. I heard of a possible upgrade to the site when I was t the PIA symposium that would allow users to flag garbage posts. With enough people flagging them the post would be minimized unless you want to read it. At least there is hope to minimize this sort of thing.

I own a Volplane that is complete with the hydraulic reefing device. I have jumped it a few times. If the device is set properly it works great! Very comparable to a chute with a slider. If it is not set properly, it will open up quite hard. Because the tail of the Volplane is single skin, there is a lot of span wise distortion from it and it flies like a real slug. Landing wise, it doesn't really have a problem. It lands fine. I am 210 lbs without gear and I can standup the landings fine with it. I have never had a problem with the hydraulic device leaking oil. I filled mine with sewing machine oil so that if it does leak it won't stain or damage anything. I personally think that if it was slammed around and not taken care of it would leak. My volplane has less than 100 jumps on it and it is in fantastic shape without any problems.

The Green Star Express is the rig that everyone knows about. They confuse it a lot with the Trac II. There is nothing wrong with a Trac II. It is built the same way a modern rig is built like with respect to the reserve risers. If there is a problem with it I would like know what it is cause I can't pick it out and inevitably I have many other rigs built like that. I will gladly take photos of any part of the rig and post them to find out this flaw in it. My understanding the rig that had the real problems was the Green Star Express and that was only because of people picking stitches and moving pads. I have never seen a Green Star Express so I don't know of the exact details. But I really would like to know if there is an issue with the Trac II as I can't see anything that is an issue or different construction wise to a modern rig. One thing I should add is that I am not the original owner of the rig so it may have been modified. Please let me know what the problem is and I will post photos of areas of interest.

Not necessarily. What if he is near a USPA dropzone and decides to go that route or what if it is at the end of the season and not able to complete his A in time? Giving him a proper answer is much better than trying to rush them through something and put pressure on instructors to do things. I have put a personal policy to administer CoP's one day a month and I know of a few other SSEs that are going to do the same. Jumpers might not be able to get everything done in time. Additionally, depending on the type of jumping they want to do an A CoP might not allow them the additional privileges required. These are possible scenarios and without knowing all the details of his, I can't see your advice as being productive.

The answer your are looking for depends on the drop zone. Since I have no affiliation with them I am not going try to comment for them. But some drop zones in the US require a USPA membership and some don't it is really up to the drop zone. If you do require a USPA membership, you can by a temporary USPA membership which should cover you for the duration of your visit. Some Canadian drop zones are USPA drop zones and not CSPA drop zones. They are trying to promote the organization that they belong to and it is easier for them with insurance coverage. One thing that you should note is that the CSPA SOLO CoP is not a recognized FAI CoP. So some drop zones might not recognize it and allow you to jump by yourself as they would here in Canada. You are best to check with the drop zone before making the trip as you might be disappointed if you require someone to jump with you. This is entirely up to the drop zone and how they want to run their business, so answers may vary from drop zone to drop zone. IMO the SOLO is more of a money grab by CSPA as it used to be an endorsement and not cost any money from the jumper. Because of how our CoP system works and requires you to get and process every CoP, the organization is able to know receive one more level of additional processing fees from new jumpers that it wasn't able to previously. Some people feel differently on this subject and there are many that share the same opinion. So take it for what it is.

The Volplane just needs it release screw adjusted and it will operate fine in the winter. I know some people say that the oil had to be changed to a different weight but it really isn't necessary as you could get it to release sooner. I have jumped mine plenty of times in the winter and it always works great with the right adjustment.

Sounds like the rig my Para-Plane is in, except the blast handle. I jump it and there is nothing wrong with it. I still don't like the way the Para-Plane packs. Too many straps and ropes strangling other things. The canopy once out of the bag isn't so bad.

With out seeing any photos it is hard to say exactly what you have. But it does sound like a Jumpshack pilot chute. With theirs the pilot chute is sewn down to the bag leaving only a kill line to go through a grommet. However, there is another piece of tape. limiting line, that is also sewn to the inside of the bag that is connected to the canopy with the kill line. There are two things that get connected to the canopy and it sounds like if you are going to use this pilot chute you will have to get a small amount of sewing done. I can take a picture sometime of what I tried to describe above but I don't really want to pull out a packjob to do it.

It all depends on the airport that you are at. If I wore a transponder it wouldn't do a whole lot of good. The only traffic at the dropzone is our aircraft mainly there are a few others but everyone knows what goes on. Some drop zones, I would be a lot more cautious of doing this sort of thing but I don't really see it much different than doing cross countries or high hop and pops. You should still be operating in the drop zones NOTAM which should alert pilots passing by that there is activity in the area.

It isn't so bad. A canopy system I have been designing and testing is having greater results than the raider. The last test jump I did on it two weeks ago, I got out at 3500' while everyone else went to 13500'. I watched all everyone open up and I was still at 3000'. I just stayed away from the general direction of jump run and away from the active runway. As long as you are far enough away from what the danger zones, there is no problem. Plus it is pretty neat being the first one out of the plane and watching everyone else jump, open, and land while under canopy.

No you don't have to list every rig. The reason for the original reply is because you said this: I just wanted to let people know that it wasn't only the Crossbow rig that had them. If that wasn't in there I wouldn't have responded and cite another example of a rig that had them. I will have to work on the clarity of my responses as they are apparently being taken in a way not intended.

In the 70s there were two canopy designs that had a a dual layer in the front and later went to a single skin design in the rear. The canopies were called the Volplane and the Hornet. Both made by Pioneer. I have jumped and own both models of canopies and they aren't the greatest of chutes. The front of the canopy some rigidity but there is a lot of span wise distortion in them and they act like larger size parachutes. Looking at the webpage of this glider: http://www.adrenaline.com.es/Adrenaline_Paragliders/HOME_BATLITE.html The gallery shows some better photos of the glider. The basics of this design are nothing new. A parachute and glider from the 1960's had a similar idea and this seems to be a more modern take on it. The parachute I am referring to is the Barish Sailwing. The front of the sailwing was the skin of the parachute rolled over just like this Batlite 1.8 and the rest is a single skin. The design is different but there are concepts that are very similar. The additional suspension line points and smaller gores, with the addition of stiffer material will reduce much of the span wise distortion that is typical associated with this style of design. It is still there but it is greatly reduced. It is nice to see a more modern take on this old design.

They also came on Security's other rig the Short Bow, which was the conventional version of the Crossbow piggyback rig. I have a few rigs with One-Shots. They seem to work great.

I just want to throw in that not all flights are VFR and some can't. For instance, high altitude jumps when you get into Class A airspace. No VFR there just IFR. Now for the most part that is not that common and most flights are VFR but that shouldn't rule out the importance of instruments.

Andrew already posted the information for those that doubt. The second post in this thread has an attachment called pc slots. The middle one, the Mark II, has panels that are exactly the same as the photos that Paul posted. You can't really get any closer than that. My guess also comes from the 20+ PCs that I have owned and the 8 I currently own. It might be something else but I am pretty confident that it is a Mark II. Removing the middle panel was a common mod done on PCs to give them more forward drive. This wasn't unique to Mark II's. Mark I's had them done as well. I have a slider that someone made from a PC data panel.

I would say it is a Mark II with the data panel removed to give a little more forward drive which could be the reason you can't find it. THe panels match up so does the general look and construction from what I can tell.

The same goes in Canada for operational requirements. Training has its own set of regulations that aren't regulated by the Transport Canada (Canada's FAA) but by the military itself. Which is what I was leading to and the limits I was talking about. I believe this is the same in the US military at least the people I have worked with from the US have said it is the same.