BrianM

Yes, I am familiar with that ripcord/RSL setup. What I was asking was why the requirement for that setup? "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Yes, but the Collins lanyard could probably be retrofitted to most existing rigs that cannot have a Skyhook retrofitted. I can't see too many people replacing perfectly good rigs just to get a Skyhook. Actually, the Integrated Collins' Lanyard can be a harder retrofit than the Skyhook itself. It requires the RSL be moved to the right side, split breakaway housings be installed, with a new ripcord and ripcord cable housing installation. For rigs without the open yoke design of the Vector, this can be very difficult. I quess the old, external retrofit that we did on our tandem rigs could be done, but that was a rather ugly patch-job that most sport jumpers wouldn't want on the sleek new rigs. Replacing housings is no big deal - but yeah, I forgot about the closed yoke. Why the requirement for a new ripcord and ripcord housing? "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Yes, but the Collins lanyard could probably be retrofitted to most existing rigs that cannot have a Skyhook retrofitted. I can't see too many people replacing perfectly good rigs just to get a Skyhook. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Same here. My bonehead helmet has velcro that is in perfect condition but came unglued not very long after I got it. Not too impressed. I glued them back on a few days ago with whatever superglue I had lying around. I haven't used it yet - time will tell if it works better than the adhesive velcro. BTW the top liner in my All-Sport has unfinished edges which started de-laminating the first day I used it. They sent me a new pad which had the same problem. I understand they've since addressed the problem by sewing the edges. I just sewed a bit of fabric over the edges myself, it is much better now. Nice helmet, but they could really stand to make some improvements to the padding. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

A couple years ago I had someone bring me a brand new container and reserve he had just bought. He had assembled it himself and asked me to check it. I thought it showed commendable interest in learning about his gear. He'd even done everything correctly - saved me some assembly time! "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

No. UV will not penetrate very far through fabric, certainly not through a gear bag. Same reason you don't get a sunburn through clothing. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Yep, I'm aware of that, this one is good... "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I'm looking for a manual for the Excaliber harness/container made by Flying High Manufacturing. Does anyone have one they could scan? I really only need the reserve packing instructions. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Glass filters out some UV, but not all. Poynter Volume 1, 9.3.8.15 has information about UV damage, including this table: Percent breaking strength in pounds lost for Tybe 1 Fabric exposed to the summer sun. First column is without glass, second column is with glass. 1 week 52% 40% 2 weeks 71% 61% 3 weeks 94% 85% "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

This particular case was an assembly error, but packing errors do happen. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I once had someone bring me a brand new container and reserve that he had just bought. He said "I assembled it myself, can you double check my work then pack it?". I thought that was pretty cool. He learned a lot about his gear, and he'd even done everything correctly. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Because it could save your life. I think it started when people started threatening physical harm to the rigger at fault, and not realizing that nothing is 100%, there are no guarantees. You jump out of a plane, you might die for any one of a number of reasons, including rigging errors. That is the nature of skydiving. You pays your money, you takes your chances. I would certainly have words with the rigger, but physical harm??? Wow. Learning is always relevant. I agree. The owner of the rig had no way of knowing, and no reason to suspect, that anything was wrong with his gear. It's impossible for any licencing system to be 100%. Even if it was, skills and attitudes can change over time. The only way to know for sure what is on your back is to get your ticket and do it yourself, as diablopilot said. Of course, rigging errors are the exception, not the rule, and you should be able to find a decent rigger and trust them. If you are comfortable trusting any rigger, that is your choice, and that is fine. Others aren't, that is their choice, and it is also fine. Mainly by talking to experienced jumpers who've been around a while. I think that the vast majority of riggers are fine. There will always be some who aren't, and the experienced jumpers on the DZ probably know who they are. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

No, that is not the same thing. That would be a fitting analogy for a tandem passenger. A better analogy for the licenced jumper/rigger relationship would be the pilot/aircraft mechanic relationship. The pilot trusts that the certified mechanic has done his job properly, but he still has quite a bit of knowledge of how the aircraft systems work and does a thorough pre-flight inspection. So by all means, trust your rigger, but also learn about your gear and how it works. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Was this, perchance, a Wings? "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Yes. Three times as many repacks also means three times the likelihood of rigging errors being made. It's a wash. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Yeah, Mark is right, the yellow end is the "loose" end, the fingertrapped loop for the pin would have been in the middle somewhere and got pulled out. I stand corrected (thanks Mark!). I did a forum search for "Reflex loop" and found this thread: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=976422;search_string=reflex%20loop;#976422 which contains a link to this site: http://www.tridenthc.com/closingloop.htm which will give you a diagram to go with Mark's instructions. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

You are right, that is not correct. The big loop formed by the CYPRES disc shouldn't be there. No big deal, just pull on the long (yellow) end with one hand, and the disc with the other, until there is no loop there. Yes, the yellow end is where the pin goes. The end that has been fingertrapped inside should come back out at some point to provide the third end - the end that is used to tighten the loop. You should be able to pull the fingertrap right out and redo it. I think the fingertrapped end should come back out at the point where the loop goes through the center grommet, but I'm not 100% sure - I haven't packed one of those in two or three years. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

The loop in the picture has three ends: one end has a CYPRES disc, one has the actual loop that the ripcord pin will go through, the third is a loose end that will be used to tighten the loop after the container is closed. The CYPRES disc is on the end that is on the left side of the picture (by the person's right index finger). The loop passes up through the grommet on the edge of the PC cap, so the CYPRES disc will end up on the underside of the edge of the cap. The loop end then goes down through the grommet in the end of the PC cap (that is the end that is held in the person's left hand, the person is just about to insert that end into the center of the PC). The loose end will continue across the PC cap to the side opposite the CYPRES disc. Edited to add attachment: This is a side view of the PC cap. The cap is in black (with gaps for the grommets), the CYPRES disc is red, the loop is blue. Hopefully this helps. Sorry for the poor artistic abilities, I'm at work and only have MS Paint available. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

http://www.parachutemanuals.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=0&func=fileinfo&id=23 "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Don't you mean bromocresol? "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I didn't know that. I assumed it would be possible to ask for anything on a custom order, but didn't know it was actually offered as an option. ... but I still don't understand the point of getting a hybrid Tri and getting some/all spectra on it. Someone ordering a hybrid is obviously getting it with the intention of doing some CRW with it. No one ever said market forces always do the wise thing! My hybrid Tri 135 (loaded about 1.45) has all dacron (with red non-cascaded A lines), retractable PC, CRW toggles - and still works great as an all-around canopy in my second rig. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I've always wondered why Aerodyne uses mostly spectra lines on the hybrid, instead of all dacron. My hybrid Triathlon has all-dacron lines, and I think that is a much better idea for even casual CRW. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

[replyCommon sense would indicate to any skydiver that the pilot chute pulling on the attachment point during canopy flight is quite small compared to the force of extracting the canopy from the container. Extracting the canopy from the container doesn't apply any force at all to the bridle attachment point on the canopy. Extracting the canopy from the bag, however, does... "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I assume the DZ is closed due to the fires? I will be in San Diego for the weekend and was planning to do some jumping there, I guess that's no longer an option. Hopefully they (and everyone else) come through ok. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

That description of their algorithm is very vague, and doesn't tell us much about what the AAD is doing or why - we can only guess about that. That description has never made a lot of sense to me anyway. What's the difference from firing based on time and firing based on altitude, when the time is simply calculated from the altitude measurement anyway? Seems like the same thing to me. AAD's description states that the purpose of this algorithm is to achieve a more accurate firing altitude. I don't really buy that. How is: if ((altitude - firing_altitude) / speed = 0) then fire which will fire when (altitude = firing_altitude), more accurate than if (altitude = firing_altitude) then fire ??? I realize that this is almost certainly much simpler than the actual algorithm, but I really don't see the difference. In fact, if anything, I think using time remaining (and hence speed) could only be less accurate (except in cases like my example above, where the firing decision doesn't actually depend on the value of the speed variable). The pressure transducer gives a direct reading of pressure (altitude), but there is no direct reading of speed. Speed must be calculated from at least two consecutive readings. The AAD can't know how fast it is falling right now, only how fast it was falling, on average. Variations in speed will cause inaccuracies. It also seems unreasonable that a modern AAD would fire in a moving vehicle or when a trunk or door is closed. There is no way a car is going to descend fast enough to meet the firing parameters (remember, only vertical speed counts - you would need to be driving at 1000 km/h on an 8% grade to achieve the 35 m/s firing speed). Further, any good digital AAD ought to have some awareness of not only altitude and speed, but of where it is in the climb to altitude or in the skydive. A sudden pressure spike caused by closing a trunk shouldn't cause a fire when the AAD knows that it is sitting on the ground. Otherwise it is not much more than a glorified analog AAD. So what is really going on inside the Vigil? I don't know, but I'm not convinced of quality of the algorithm. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg