mark

A simple collision is unlikely to extract the trigger. Think of how difficult it would be to extract a Cypres control head from its pocket in similar circumstances. You might be able to extract the trigger if the collision involved snagging the RSL. I can't recall any incidents involving snagged RSLs on any system, so we should consider the probability of this happening to be quite low.

In the US, unless a TSO approval states otherwise, a shelf life/service life limitation does not apply to formerly military equipment in civilian use. See AC 105-2E para 13.b.(2).

I'll give it a try. Every rigger has the responsibility of declaring airworthiness or non-airworthiness when asked to pack a rig. But his decision is not binding on any other rigger. The owner is free to find someone else to do the work. Caveat emptor! I don't think this is what you are asking though. I think you are asking who can permanently ground a TSO'd component. And I think the answer is "no one." Everything is repairable or replaceable, including TSO markings. When a manufacturer or other expert says something is unairworthy, they are really saying it is economically unrepairable. How should we convey "economically unrepairable" to the owner? As important, how should we convey it to anyone else who comes into possession? The most concise way is to obliterate the TSO marking, by removing it or by writing "unairworthy" or "condemned" or similar on the label, words that are technically not true because it could be made airworthy if time and money were no object. I'm okay with that, but I'm open to alternatives. It still belongs to the owner, though, and he should get it back in exchange for the agreed compensation for inspection, shipping, etc. --Mark

Glider record is a little over 74K, although pressurized.

I get that. But I don't think it's a lot of money.

I disagree. Harness/container manufacturers may have at most 8 or 9 different freebag sizes, and they can look in their records to see which sizes they have shipped separately from rigs. Ditto main bags. High-demand items should be available for immediate shipment. Some have two reserve pilot chute sizes, most have just one. These should also be available immediately. If you have an exposed pilot chute (e.g. Racer, Javelin, etc.) it might make more sense to wait for orders instead of having some in stock, I'll bet many customers would be okay with basic black if they could get one right away -- the new colors aren't going to match the sun-faded colors anyway. Likewise, they know what riser lengths they have been shipping. Running a few more for spares when you're making a batch anyway shouldn't be an issue. Ripcords and cutaway handles are frequently custom, but most of our customers would be happy to have a metal-handle ripcord and a red cutaway pillow if it would get them back in the air by the weekend. Disclaimer: I am not a manufacturer, just a whiner. Perhaps someone who is can chime in to explain how scheduling and production work, and why having ready-to-ship spares ties up too much capital.

Some things to investigate: Damaged area on bottom skin: along the seam? If so, maybe manufacturing, since these are relatively new canopies. Color of the fabric? If always the same color, maybe a problem with that batch of fabric. Location of the damage: center cell? end cells? right side? left side? Where did the tear start? Adjacent seams with elongated stitch holes show greater stress in that area. Burn or burst to start? Sliders burned or burst? What extra steps have packers taken in response?

Are these examiners FAA employees? If so, how are their travel expenses covered? Or are they DPEs? If so, who is prohibiting them from traveling?

Requests to test outside the supervising FSDO's geographical area must be approved by the FSDO that has appointed the DPRE and the FSDO/IFO (International Field Office) where the test will occur. The test location must be approved, to ensure it is adequate for the test. This may require a site visit. The FSDO/IFO where the test will occur may wish to observe the test, but I don't think such travel would be funded -- the IFO for Canada is in Houston, Texas. I don't know of any DPREs who have tested outside the US. Also, your applicants will need to submit an 8610-2 Rating Application Form to a FSDO, and because of St George, FSDOs are reluctant to accept applications from outside their geographic areas. Pre-Covid, applicants were required to appear in person. And there are a couple extra steps a DPRE must take before testing someone whose application has been approved by a FSDO other than the one supervising the DPRE. Your applicants will likely also have to travel to the US to take their written tests. Discouraged yet? It might be easier to move your course to the US.

I'm looking for contact information for the owner of Lone Star Parachute Company, also known as Parakit, Inc. --Mark

I cannot. The rig is either airworthy, or it is not. Airworthiness is determined by inspection of the rig, not inspection of the data card. What question of airworthiness can be answered by the data card?

When we did testing for the RI MOJO, every jump was an opportunity to lose the prototype device sewn to the reserve bridle. I added a pocket for a Tile, and it came in handy a couple times. No effect on packing or deployment. Of course, on a production freebag/bridle, this would be an alteration requiring FAA or manufacturer approval.

Unfortunately, most rigging courses are focused on reserve packing proficiency, plus the small amount of additional knowledge required to pass the test for an entry-level parachute rigger. If you are interested in how things work, how they are made and how they break, how to fix them when they break, you will need to be an active rigger. The way we learn and get better is by inspecting every rig that comes through the loft, evaluating the work done by the previous rigger and hoping to find something that is different and better than our work, then upping our game. If all you work on is your own rig, you will be just a perpetual entry-level rigger. At best. (Also, you will also always be legally uncurrent, although I don't know anybody who has ever been busted for that.)

No. The descent rates are measured at the maximum operating weight. See AS8015B para 4.3.7.

This is unlikely to be true. As a consumer, I rely on a company's representations as to the performance of their products. If there is a secret waiver, it might allow a company to produce a product, but it will not shield them from liability for failure to meet published standards. PD and others are free to placard their canopies at less than the TSO-limited weight, but this is no different than publishing maximum weights based on experience.