dpreguy

Members
  • Content

    881
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by dpreguy


  1. I have seen the presentation at the PIA Symposium. My takeaway is thus:
    The military static line parachutist is in a limited time situation. And, the lower the exit, the shorter the time. (Stating the obvious) Because of this limited time, and especially at night, the soldier may be unable to determine the need to manually pull the reserve ripcord quickly enough. Not enough time to look at the situation and make that decision to pull his reserve handle. As mentioned, jumps at night make the visual recognition even harder, or even impossible. (I guess what the paratrooper would sense is that there was no opening shock within the usual time he would have felt it, based upon previous jumps?) And, by then it may be too late - time wise. Probably about 4 seconds?

    It is my understanding that this device senses the absence of an opening ( the absence of the deceleration) within a predetermined time and cuts the reserve loop(s). And it is designed to operate only after the paratrooper exits the plane, and it knows when the exit occurred.

    Possible example: The first second he falls 32 feet. The second second 64, Third 128 and the fourth 256, Add these together and he has fallen 480 feet. Four seconds. Assuming a night jump, with no visual ability to see what is wrong, the paratrooper realizes something is amiss and then makes the decision to deploy by pulling his reserve handle. Time is passing.
    That makes him too low and he dies. He is simply too low to react in time. This device goes quicker and it's brain is more accurate and reliable than a human. Even a well trained one.
    I don't know that 4 seconds is the test for this device. I just made that up based upon my static line jumps, mostly from a C -130. Since we jumped (or were supposed to) at 1250 feet, no opening in 5 seconds was the mark for for pulling the reserve handle. In SF all of our jumps were at night on T-10's. Once from a C-123 at 750 at night. Modern paratroopers probably have less time as their exit altitude is lower. This device probably uses a different elapsed time.

    It gives the paratrooper a chance to live.

    This is my understanding of it. I know the inventor can be more accurate and explanatory of what it does and how it does it. As I said, this is my takeaway. I hope I got it right. Only the inventor can actually and accurately explain it.

  2. " ..only difference"...."goes between two sections of housings...". Not that I have seen. I believe you are incorrect. I think you are leaving something out. I have not actually seen a Racer housing setup with the single sided RSL, (I doubt many riggers have), ( would love to have seen one at PIA), but I have seen a staged video of one deploying in their loft, posted by the company, showing the necessity of the housing to be pulled up in a big loop, and then break apart. Also, in the video I saw, the actual pulling on the cable was by a nylon loop, (as distinguished by a nearly frictionless steel ring around the cable. ) The video I saw showed a continuous housing which must first must somehow break apart first. That is the function problem and what distinguishes the Racer RSL from all other rigs, both domestic and foreign. This discussion has been ongoing for years and despite requests to see a picture(s) of this one-sided RSL none have been posted. Not in the manual either. If my assumptions from the staged loft deploy video are incorrect then I will stand corrected.

    Reflex did it right. They had two sections of housings, which were secured at the ends and separated by a space. In addition, they used a frictionless ring on the end of the lanyard, not a nylon loop. Adopting the Reflex invention, which operates like every other RSL off one riser only, would solve Racer's objectors' criticisms. The necessity of a break apart housing, a nylon loop instead of a steel ring around the cable and the housing not being tacked at both ends distinguishes.

  3. Racer one sided RSL:
    Careful about characterizing or assuming the Racer one sided RSL as "just an option", as though one would blithely assume the Racer design would be like all of the other one sided RSL's available in the industry. It is not. It has little resemblance to the rest of the industry standard designs of one sided RSL's. The purchaser should look at it carefully and see what has to happen to eventually extract the reserve pin. Then decide.

  4. DUI's - convictions for alcohol offenses are specifically exempted
    from the list of rigger applicant disqualifiers.

    I doubt anyone who had multiple drug convictions, and revealed them, was ever issued a rigger license. The FAA considers a parachute rigger as an "Airman". I have no specific info about whether a rigger applicant or a pilot applicant with drug convictions (including marijuana convictions) would be issued an airman certificate. I guess the FAA can do as they please when they get the application. In the examiner course we were told that the applicant should consider the expense and effort to go through an O&P to be a futility, as the FAA won't issue them the certificate even if they pass. That is what we were told.

  5. The policy of the transplant agency:"...Does not transplant organs in patients with active alcohol, tobacco or illicit drug use or dependencies..."
    Makes no difference whether the mja use is legal illegal, or medical. Nor should it. The policy, in my opinion, is pretty sound, as they want the transplant to go into a body that has a longer chance for a healthy existence. Their rule. If you don't like these rues/standards buy your own transplant business and abolish them. Just don't ask for taxpayer money to fund your transplant operation.

    The kid who was initially rejected had a drug in his system - mja/THC- whatever. Rejection. Whatever caused them to reverse their decision is not covered in the article.

    Some fail to realize that actions have consequences. The weak whine that "it is legal" or "it is medical" is of no consequence if have mja in your preemployment drug screen. You won't be hired. If you are already working and fail you will be fired. And, if you have a marijuana conviction you have disclose that in the 8610-2 parachute rigger application. No reason to enter into a rigger training program if you do, as this is a disqualifier. When you pass the Oral and Practical you must sign again, under penalty of perjury that you have no mja convictions. If you do, I am assuming you won't be issued a rigger rating from Oklahoma City/FAA. Social acceptance has no bearing on the transplant criteria, the employment world or the application for a government license to become a rigger. Although I don't have any references, I would assume you can't be a commercial airline pilot and test positive for mja. Is anyone advocating for all of these bars to be lifted? Want to fly in an airliner after observing your pilot smoking mja in the smoking lounge just before he gets into the pic seat? Yur airline pilot is eating a mja candy bar while flying? Want your parachute rigger to do the same before, or as, he packs your reserve? Want dopers to have equal status to get transplants? Want marijuana smokers/consumers to be in the astronaut program? In nuclear submarines? In missile silos? In semi trucks going 75 mph on a two lane road? Flying your twin otter? Your surgeon? The list goes on.
    Consume away, legally - illegally - medically, whatever but don't expect the real world to give you an excuse or relieve you of the consequences.

  6. I read the article and fail to see the problem. The kid was a pothead so he gets no transplant. The transplant then goes to someone who is clean. Sounds like the policy of the organ donor program was correctly followed.

    His dad says ,"He smoked some over Thanksgiving...". Yeah right. As if his dad knows how much or how often. And, what difference does it make if it was a lot or a trace? That is the policy (and it sounds like a good policy to me) of the transplant program. Some actions have consequences.

  7. Well put.
    In our "activist" age there are:
    NIMBY'S - CAVES - and BANANAS.

    NIMBYS "Not in my back yard"
    CAVES Citizens against virtually everything
    BANANAS "Don't build anything anywhere near anything"

    Whenever there is a "cause", no matter how silly, these attention-starved "activists" just love to join with any complainer. Guess it makes them feel wanted. They feel they are noble because they are seeking what they feel is justice for some cause. They join because someone is tooting a horn and they just want to be part of it.

    The airport we use hired an extermination company to get rid of the gophers. Suddenly the university community became alive with protesters who wrote "save the gophers" letters to the editor, lit up social media, etc. and in general just joined because of this mentality of being part of a group that had a cause. The dumbshit newspaper gave them a boost by floating pictures of one or two of them holding protest signs. I understand the tiny group who protested because they actually believed in the cause but I don't give credit to those who join the bandwagon because they just love a protest party. I doubt many actually gave a shit about these rats that live in underground burrows/rodents, but I think most were self-gratified simply because they had joined a protest group. Coffee shop heroes I guess. I'm guessing a lot of people who are not even affected join the various "Citizens for Quiet Skies" movements for the same reasons.

  8. As I recall, an active military parachute rigger may make the application for the civilian senior rating at any time; however the applicant/military parachute rigger has only a time period of one year from discharge to make that application for the civilian senior parachute rigger rating.

    There is a special written test in the CATS system for military riggers applicants to take and pass prior to being issued the civilian certificate. It is a 25 q test.

  9. Somewhere I have a full page cartoon - something like the New Yorker cartoons - where the is a golf announcer is hanging on the old classic small tree branch 50 feet below the edge of a cliff. He is saying "help" "help", but his voice is depicted in very very small print.

    There is a large gathering of people on the lawn and near the edge, sipping their drinks, etc. oblivious to his plight. For no good reason, other than this is a cartoon, there is a large coil of rope laying right there.

    Caption is, "Melvin, golf announcer falls to his death, unable to shake his golf announcer voice."

    I wish I could find it to copy and post. Have looked and just can't locate it.

  10. Sounds like someone just made that idea up.

    Not that it makes much diff but the Cypres loop isn't nylon. It's Dyneema. I'm sure the mfg must be consulted before venturing into unknown territory such as adding a chemical-based substance on their product.

  11. I'd listen to Terry on the machine of choice for sewing multiple layers such as toggle tips. Once again, I don't think the Adler 98 short arm pictured is the machine for that. In my experience, it isn't a thick material machine.
    And yes, my 98 longarm cost about $5500 10 years ago. Plus a hefty shipping fee to get it (900 miles away).

  12. I have had a longarm Adler 98 and it for sail repair.
    Used constantly for 10ears. It is a GREAT machine for doing long runs of zigzag. Not sure it is particularly heavy duty for punching thru heavy stuff. Pretty heavy stuff, but not a barn burner for multiple layers. Doubt it is the machine for toggle tips. I'd go with a programmable short throat machine.
    Plus side: It is a trouble free and great machine for sail repair. I love mine.
    If it is a long arm, sell it to Councilman so he can start repairing sails.
    If it is a long arm, and councilman doesn't want it I might buy it. Can you PM me if you or Urban don't buy it? (only interested in longarm)

  13. I appreciate the picture of the Gopro built in. Yes a step in the right direction.
    But, what I am envisioning is a helmet without protrusions and bumps and warpy looking top bulges like the one pictured. That the observer couldn't tell any difference between a helmet with or without the camera inside it.

  14. One obvious improvement, sorely needed, is to design a helmet with the camera inside of it. Cameras are small enough now to do that. One guy (saw it on dz.com) took a smartphone apart and put the camera part inside with the lens being just behind a small hole.. Can you do that with a new small camera? (Without taking the camera apart)

  15. Not here to give my opinion whether the commutation was justified. Or not. Make up your own mind; but all should know Bradley Manning's release of the emails to WikiLeaks had consequences. He violated his oath to his country, an oath given and taken by all members of our uniformed services. An oath administered for good reasons. I get it that he is sorry for what he did. Or at least he, now she, says so.
    Manning, through his lawyer, insisted that at the time of the theft of over 92,000 communications, (some sources say 150,000) that Manning had, in his own mind a lofty moral motivation. To wit: same as Assange's statement: "...any risk to informants’ lives was outweighed by the overall importance of publishing the information." What follows is a criticism of Julian Assange, (And by implication, of course, Manning.)

    Reprint of the article follows:
    Mr Assange said: “No one has been harmed, but should anyone come to harm of course that would be a matter of deep regret — our goal is justice to innocents, not to harm them. That said, if we were forced into a position of publishing all of the archives or none of the archives we would publish all of the archives because it’s extremely important to the history of this war.”

    ...Assange is giving us a wonderful lesson in why things are classified during war. His cavalier attitude toward the safety of the people he exposes to mortal danger, as if a really terrible context like a war provides justification for adding further risk to their lives (and his repeated, and thus far unsupported, accusations that Afghans who help us are criminals), is beyond immaturity and callousness, though—it is monstrous.

    Julian Assange is the worst sort of moralist, one whose sense of justice is so selective (secrecy is of utmost concern for Wikileaks’ sources and employees, but not the government), and his comprehension of consequences so short-sighted and defined by ideology rather than fact, that he doesn’t care who he has to offer up to murderous bastards to satisfy his sense of moral outrage. ...

    Anyway, so the Taliban are doing exactly what I said they would do, in my pieces for PBS and CJR: they are vowing to hunt down and murder anyone who is identified in the Wikileaks archive as having worked for the U.S.

    Exclusive: The Taliban has issued a chilling warning to Afghans, alleged in secret US military files leaked on the internet to have worked as informers for the Nato-led coalition, telling Channel 4 News “US spies” will be hunted down and punished.

    Speaking by telephone from an undisclosed location, Zabihullah Mujahid told Channel 4 News that the insurgent group will investigate the named individuals before deciding on their fate.

    “We are studying the report,” he said, confirming that the insurgent group already has access to the 92,000 intelligence documents and field reports.

    I hope Julian Assange sleeps well at night. His victims certainly won’t.
    End of article.

    If one googles this subject it is revealed that the Al Queda zealots actually did read these emails/communications and did in fact ,"Go on a killing spree" and cold bloodedly murdered, in fantastically cruel ways many many Afghans who they believe cooperated with the Americans/coalition forces, or even anyone who they suspected-justified or not.

    A few days ago I recall Manning's lawyer said that no one was harmed, and that other then embarrassing some US Embassy officials what he did was harmless, or words to that effect.

    We will never know how many Afghans were tortured and butchered by Al Queda, and will continue to be hunted down, for but know that Manning has Afghan blood on his hands. Probably a lot of it.