Deyan

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    798

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by Deyan

  1. I have so many questions....

    Why is weight important to you? For BASE jumping I kinda understand since you will have to hike with it (sometimes for hours). For skydiving though...?!

    If you want to cut weight from you future rig, forget about stuff like spacer foam, hip/chest rings, Cordura and you'll probably save about 6-700 grams. 

    If the weight is the only factor you are looking at, the undisputed world champion of light weight rigs is a Power Racer. I believe the smallest I ever saw was 275/275 and it was like 6.5 kg with canopies...

  2. 5 hours ago, BasicOne said:

    In fact, the blade in it is good, but very capricious in terms of manufacturing accuracy. The gap between the blade and the body must be strictly observed. If it is too small and the blade may jam. Too large and the blade will warp when the loop-locking charge is activated. I can understand them, I had to spin around while the patent from Airteс was valid, but now you can install a standard A-shaped knife. True, you can eat crap here too.... basically, Mars started this indecent dinner.

    I was referring to Vigil's PSB-8

    Vigil R&D has confirmed that the electronics worked correctly and fired the cutter, but
    because of the absence of the knife blade, the closing loop could not be cut.

     

    • Like 1

  4. 5 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

    I agree. Just wondering if the issue is container bulk or size of the reserve PC Cap. In other words, is this a flaw with the recommended canopy sizes or is this a container design flaw?

    IMO, it's a combination between the cap size, the side flaps being sewn too far in the corner, the pin cover stiffener too thick and tucked too far in. I've measured 70 mm being tucked in on one of the NexGen sizes. It's ridiculous! Being "freefly friendly" is important, but "reserve deployment friendly" is importanter. Pardon my French 

    Interesting fact is that Aerodyne has 2 cap size  RPCs (I believe 5 and 6 inches) and 2 types of cap shapes (flat one and concave), but unlike UPT they haven't published (to my knowledge) a guide which cap size goes into which container size. 

    • Like 2

  5. On 1/21/2024 at 4:00 AM, BMAC615 said:

    Is there any information whether or not the reserve and main were “full fit?”

    Even if they were "full fit", but inside the allowed sizes, that's not supposed to happen.I know the rigger who packed it and I'm willing to bet that the canopies are the correct size, the loop was the correct length and treated with silicon.

    Now, you can say that the picture doesn't represent "a real life scenario" because the person on the picture doesn't wear the legstraps. To which I would answer, I'll never jump a rig where the reserve deployment depends on how tight you have your legstraps.

    • Like 4

  6. 8 hours ago, shadeland said:

    Their reserves are approved under c23d

    Yes. Because they were designed, tested and certified before Sept 2012. OM-7 is 4 years old canopy. If it was TSO tested it would have been C23f. The label says C23d which makes me believe it was a labeling error rather than the canopy actually being TSO certified.

  10. On 1/2/2023 at 5:36 PM, prescription_surgeon said:

    Hi, 

    I've ordered a complete setup and the rigger suggested a main bigger than the manufacture says will fit.

    I'm not sure how to approach this as I am the least experienced.

    Any advice on how to proceed would be appreciated as I don't want to be struggling to pack my main every time, thanks guys  

    As much as I would like to agree with Jerry and BIGUN, the reality is sometimes manufacturer's rigger gets it wrong. 

    For example, the manufacturer is located in a place where the humidity is very low. Low humidity could drastically increase the packing volume. You are jumping in very high humidity. Or, the manufacturer doesn't have hands on experience with certain model/size canopy and their advice is based on "we guess" rather than "we know for sure". And yes, this have happened to me on several occasions with different manufacturers.

    If I were you, I'd listen to your dealer. That's the person you've chosen to spend your money with and he/or she will be dealing with you if you end up not being happy at the end. With other words, your dealer is more interested in you being happy than the manufacturer. For that manufacturer, you are just a name on a .pdf file.

    Now I'm curious what rig/canopy combo you are interested in?!

  11. Here are some questions for you.

    What model was the rig? Does it have a free fly tuck tab on the handle? If yes, was it tucked in? Did you get a proper briefing when you rented it?

    The reason I'm asking is, most modern rigs will come with some kind of freefly secure handle. Sometimes that handle will require a slightly different angle to be pulled out, or just more force. If you were not aware of it, I can see why you thought you were having a hard pull. Packing the PC in the pocket could also make a difference in the pull force.

    If I have to make a guess based on your story, I'd say there's nothing wrong with the gear. I spend about 20-30 min briefing people how to check and use the gear they rent from me. I explicitly tell them about the free fly tab and how to avoid a hard pull. 

  13. 29 minutes ago, sfzombie13 said:

    so you're saying that the tso applies even after changing equipment?  i thought they had to get a new tso if they change something.  interesting. 

    TSO is useless for that exact reason. You could certify something, then change it as many times as you wish as long as you log it as a "minor change". Vector Micron from February 2022 is exact same rig like 2 pinned Wonderhog from 1977 ..... In the eyes of the FAA

    • Like 2

  14. On 2/18/2022 at 12:27 PM, Quagmirian said:

    Something here that no one seems to be mentioning so I will. On the floor, the jumper will rotate upwards pulled by the risers with their feet as a fulcrum and their entire weight resisting the rotation. In freefall, the risers will rotate the jumper around their centre of mass with very little resistance, increasing the bend in the risers and increasing the peeling force on the riser covers. Also, so what if you land with closed riser covers?

    How about you are unconscious and your AAD fires..... because of your body position only ONE raiser cover opens.... How would you like a spinning line twist under your reserve?

  15. 33 minutes ago, lazdog23 said:

    We would like to inform you that Aerodyne Research has issued a technical bulletin regarding the AAD cutter placement. It can be found on the Aerodyne support pages here:

    http://www.flyaerodyne.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/TB-250122-Bulletin-AAD-Cutter-placement.pdf

    Thank you,

     

    Aerodyne Research

    What about the lockups after the ripcord pull? How is the cutter relocating going to fix those?

    Are you planing on changing the RPC cap to concave in order to accommodate for the extra thickness of the cutter? The rigs after the modification look like shit by the way.

    IMG_20220126_121944.jpg

  16. · Edited by Deyan

    On 12/7/2021 at 11:22 AM, eric.fradet said:

    The first day, we proceed to 17 tests and got 3 failed by manually deployment and 5 total malfunction by firing AAD located underneath the reserve PC, which makes a total of 8 on 17..

    I cannot tell you more, since it is still under investigation....

    Hi Eric,

    I've received a statement from Pal Bergan saying :" All ground tests by pulling the reserve ripcord were successful."

    So which one is it?

    I find it strange that almost 2 months later they haven't identify the problem and came up with a solution.

  18. 2 hours ago, Binary93 said:

    My current favorite is FORS (by Avalon). Extremely simple design, yet it isn't affected by the pull direction (only by force).

    Infinity's MARD is also pretty nice design in my opinion. Trap by Mirage is also pretty great in my opinion as it provides zero force on total malfunction reserve deployment. You have to replace parts after several deployments IIRC, but that's what you pay for more security I guess.

     

    So I just checked that FORS you are talking about and it looks like they took the design of Eric Fradet and made it more complicated. (maybe to avoid paying royalties).

  19. 2 hours ago, riggerrob said:

    Try asking another factory (e.g. Performance Designs) to re-certify your old Decelerator reserve. Alternately, ask one of the Strong Tandem re-certification facilities to test your old reserve. Both manufacturers test for tensile strength and porosity.

    PD won't do that. One, because of liability and second because every company has their own standards for acceptable permeability and measuring procedures. I doubt PS has shared their standards with PD.

  22. 23 hours ago, 20kN said:

    That issue has also been addressed with the placement of the RSL. When risers fail due to excessive loading they typically fail at the grommet stamp since that process removes about 25% of the material from the riser making it thinner there. Manufacturers started placing the RSL connection below the grommet, basically as low as they can go, so that any failure that does occur likely occurs above the RSL placement.

    Properly manufactured risers don't fail at the grommet. They fail between the middle and the small ring. Most manufacturers have the RSL ring integrated in the confluence wrap

    • Like 2

  23. 2 hours ago, outdoort said:

    Again, what sold me on the Cypress wasn't only the track record, but the fact their website hypes their product up with multiple high quality photos of the manufacturing process and how their "attention to detail" is impeccable etc.  They really try their best to show and tell the quality of the manufacturing / quality control.  

    You think the site is impressive...? You should visit their factory in Germany if you have the chance..... That's impressive!!

    • Like 2

  24. There we go.....another brand war.

    For me there's one AAD brand. CYPRES!!! It's very simple. Get the number of units made, divide it by the number of Service Bulletins. That number should give you an idea of how likely is that the "maintenance free" will turn into "I can't jump in the middle of the season" maintenance. By the way, my CYPRES just came back from voluntarily maintenance.

    Just as a side note: Can anyone show me a 20 years old Vigil or 15 years old M2? The expected lifetime, doesn't always match the real lifetime.

    • Like 1