masterrigger1

Actually, the Neos is. The center three cells are cross-braced. It is also considered a hybrid between a Crossfire and a higher performance, fully cross-braced canopy. Attached are pictures ofthe first three prototypes. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Terry, I myself compressed 5 vertebrae and blew 3 cells out of my Sabre 1-210 in 1990 and am surprised I did not break my neck several times after that. Danny Smith of Skydive Carolina shattered his C5 and was lucky that he did not end up like Mike Truffer. There are numerous other incidents out there that required hospitalization or a coroner. A opening issue with these canopies absolutely exists and is widely known though out the industry. Telling a younger jumper the opposite is like telling him/her that a sharp knife won't cut you. If you play with it long enough it will! MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

There's nothing quite like reading a guy who's screen name is Masterrigger telling everyone that the regs say only he can do something that quite obviously anyone can do. Even as other highly qualified riggers try to tell him he is wrong. A little like having Pat Robertson interpret the Bible for you. *** Ken, First is it is not something only I can do. Second, the other "qualified" riggers ar the ones that are wrong. Obviously you can't read! Third, you are Canadian and your vote doesn't really count MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

I looked at it closely and see no conflict. It was not a rule change; it was a correction. The original rule (before May 09,2001) reflected the same intent as the now current version. They simply corrected the mistake of the language in the 2001 version. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

If you download Part 65 from the FAA website, you will note that the language that you posted has been removed. On May 09, 2001, the regulations had some changes made to them. This was to allow: 1. Tandem instructors to pack the main parachute for both themselves and the tandem passenger. 2. Riggers to supervise main pack jobs for anyone. Before this change,the rule was that the main had to be packed by the person jumping it next or a certified rigger The language of the rule got skewed and the result was that it took a long time to get it fixed. The word "alter" was removed along with a couple of other little changes. The attached document is the addendum Pre-Amble to 65.111. It basically reads that: 1.You need to be a rigger to maintain parachutes 2.You need to be appropriated rated to do the work at hand. (Senior for minor repairs, Master for both minor and major repairs, alterations, and modifications as per Part 65) ....and (for Jerry), it did come though the federal legal system. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Selling sewing machines and associated parts to someone is one thing; them using the same said products either within their certificate privileges or outside is another. It is just like PD selling anyone line sets to just anyone.... Also, I thought you where working under Moe. I think my principal stands! If you want to send it back, go ahead. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

So, I will ask you also. You ever see a main that you advised someone not to jump??? ...and if you did, what standard did you use? MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Mark, You need to be in the relining business then. I see/repair a lot of canopies come though here that have ill repairs done to them. These "repairs" makes them not safe to jump. I beg to differ.... Well I guess one first needs to know the definition of "airworthiness". This is general definition that both the FAA and Military use. Also remember that all of the civilian parachuting regulations were basically brought over from the military when Part 65 was administered. "The ability of an aircraft or other airborne equipment or system to operate without significant hazard to aircrew, ground crew, passengers (where relevant) or to the general public over which such airborne systems are flown This definition applies equally to civil and military aircraft." So when you inspect a main, set of main risers, or pilot chute what are you doing? I find it very hard to believe that in all of your years of rigging, that you have not found some main that was not airworthy and thus grounded it or at least advised the owner that it was not airworthy. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Absolutely. There are just two types or repairs according to the FAA regulations; Major and Minor. The official definition of a major repair is one that may affect airworthiness if done improperly. Only a Master Rigger or someone under his/her supervision can do a major repair whether it be a main or reserve. The big difference here is that work completed on main canopies do not need documentation, whereas reserves do require documentation. So do you think following the FAA regulations would be a good reason? MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Rob, Koji's accident was due to the fact that he was re-using his slinks after ever canopy reline. He had two Crossfires that he alternated in and out of the shop about every 3-4 months. Yes, That is right. He was doing some serious jump numbers with those canopies. He would send them in with the lines cut just above the risers. We would then reline them and send them back to him where evidently he was re-using the same worn out slinks. This is what bit him; lack of slink inspection, not canopy inspection! Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

You guys are still missing one thing.... Either you need to hold a Master Rigger's certificate or be under the direct supervision of one for doing major repairs like replacing lines. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

John, I am really surprised that they have put it back up on the website in the first place. There is pending litigation with regards to some of it's content (conflicting statements with regulations) and a couple of fatalities/lawsuits. The AAD stuff is mostly the target, but there are still some other issues. Leave it to the liberals and the manufacturer's puppets to screw something so simple up! ...and I was just reminded that the AC is recommendations only. Not regulatory... MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

...and it is scheduled to disappear again very soon. They still have statements that conflict regulation in it. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

...and the "pulls" had type IV pucks to lock the ring loops with. Looking back, I have to ask myself what the heck were we thinking! Anyway they did work though. Yeah, Joe and I worked together making the first say about 50 or so sliders. I would blank out the sliders, he would tape them up for the pulls, then he and I would install the pulls. Rings were (and still are) a problem to get someone to make for cheap. ..Well cheap enough to sell them anyway. This is the main reason we really don't manufacture them much anymore. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

It was the Fall of 2001 when we built the first ones. If you remember, we built them just in time for the money Swoop meet at the New Jersey beach. Those first ones were pretty crude!!! BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Peter, If you will look at the pilot chute deployment a little closer, you will notice that there is one moment when the bridle goes slack. It is due to the reserve PC being momentarily trapped in the main lines in my opinion. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

I have no idea expect that it was a few meets after the Petra showed up! MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

No, I covered it .... '...that was patented for use in skydiving canopies earlier by Bill Coe of PD)"..... The only thing similar from the Excaliber to the new cross braced canopies is the x-bracing... MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Icarus did not invent the idea of an elliptical leading edge, it's been around since the 80's since it was conceived by Mr Schuman and gets used lots on paragliders and speed wings. Did Icarus copy the Velo when they made JVX? *** No, it was the other way around actually. Icarus used used x-bracing (that was patented for use in skydiving canopies earlier by Bill Coe of PD) to design the FX in 1996. The Icarus FX basically lead PD to the design of the Velo that came out; circa 1999.... MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Well since it is merely a copy of the Petra,... I believe you to be spot on!!! MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Jerry, Sorry for the late reply but at least irt will be fresh on everyone's memory for the next few days at the symposium. I will be coming down today BTW. The FAA actually. If the item in question is to be "approved" then it needs to be listed in the specs/manual. This would not be any different than say hardware that is used in a H/C. I was told this exact statement as a result of my letter of Interpretation from legal. Exactly! ..and not one manufacturer that I can find has ever committed to including it in the documentation on their own accord. The other side of the coin is the fact that anything changed or added to the system outside of the manufacturer needs to be done as an approved alteration. This includes changes to the original configuration, method of operation, or anything that effects the overall performance of the approved device. In other words, an approved alteration could/should be completed to be truly legal as per the regulations. With that said, I have never seen either of the above. See ya in a few hours, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

We had an excellent turnout for Bill's memorial. His family brought a lot of his memorabilia to display at the DZ;photos, old magazines, awards and the like. Everyone including me was digging though the stuff and going down memory lane. It was great. We did an 18 way ( 19 with Bill...) Ashe dive just the way Bill would have done it himself. Thanks to everyone for their efforts and especially Steve Vaughan for putting this together in short notice. Blue Skies my friend! MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Most, if not all, container manufacturers have never written AADs into their ACO's manual in the first place. They only did a somewhat verbal authorization... So part of that statement probably is very moot. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Correct! There are two different makes of Singer machines with the 457 numbers. The household version and the industrial version. Just to be clear I still was speaking of the industrial version. The industrial versions came from about five different plants. Here are three examples them: 457G from Germany 457W from West Germany 457U from the UK MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Martin, The 457 machines were designed for lingerie and other lightweight products. It has a rotary take-up instead of the arm type which is a limiting factor with regards to heavier materials. It does come in both a 304 and 308 stitch pattern which is changed by a simple cam BTW. I do have a new stock 308 cam at the shop if you or anyone else needs one. Overall they work for general purpose needs in the loft, but I would rather have a Singer 143W over the 457. Hope this helps, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com