jpriestley

I just want to take a quick second to say 'Thank You' to all of you who are sharing your knowledge. The great advice is REALLY appreciated but the logic and explanation behind it really drive the points home. I wish I could buy you all a beer. Also, it gave me some good information to start with and sent me down the path of reading more. With this foundation, I've contacted a respected rigger about 90 miles away and arranged to spend some time learning the basics of linesets. Blue Skies!

I'm curious what the feelings are on doing linesets with a classic zig zag machine versus a purpose-built bartacker. Obviously, the speed and quality of a purpose-built bartacker is ideal but for someone not doing the work often, how is the quality and appearance of line set work with a jig? Do many riggers out there do the work without a bartack machine? I've seen nice jigs that straddle the line and allow the feed dogs to pull the work cleanly. I've been looking at bartack machines and wondered about this... Without a lot of work on lines, I question the need to spend a lot of money on a machine. Any opinions would be appreciated. Thanks!

I have a situation and I'm interested in hearing both the ethical and safety angles from some of the more seasoned riggers here. I purchased a main on DZ.com which was sold as a Triathlon 160. I had OBSCENELY painful openings and contacted Aerodyne to ask about sending it in for them to check. They reviewed the serial number and informed me that the main is a CRW wing and may not be taken to terminal velocity as it may cause severe injury noting that a jumper recently was "broken" as a result. Nothing on the canopy designates it is CRW. It does not have red lines, only states that the model number is TR-160 and the placard states that the maximum deployment speed is 130 knots (translating to 150MPH). Aerodyne was very helpful in communicating until I pointed this out then stopped talking to me. When I check their webpage, the description of the Tri CRW states: "It is important to note that he Triathlon Competition CRW Series is designed for sub-terminal competition exits. It cannot be comfortably deployed at free-fall speeds--and may cause serious injury if used for traditional free-fall purposes." So here's the question - Should they mark these somehow differently? Should the maximum deployment speed be correctly documented on the placard? I spent a few days in bed with a compressed back on the last opening prior to contacting the manufacturer and if another jumper was "Broken", I'm concerned that someone is going to get hurt or the manufacturer will be sued out of business. When I brought this up to the Aerodyne, the communication ceased. Isn't this type of response why container manufacturers banned Argus? I know, buyer beware and the seller omitted some important information in order to dump a main but am I wrong here in assuming the manufacturer has an obligation to correctly document something that may cause serious injury as stated by their own product description? Thanks for any feedback or helping me to see the other side of this!

+1 A very professional and reputable company. He has built his reputation the hard/right way - consistent excellence in performance.

Has there been any news on this?

I had to dredge this thread up. I've used L&B Jumptrack software for a few years and recently replaced my PC with a Windows7 64bit system. The download unit for my Altitrack no longer worked but they have a replacement program. My only complaint about L&B's customer service is that they wouldn't even let me pay for shipping and I felt the situation was unfair to them! What an amazing company... I felt like the Altitrack, download unit, and Jumptrack software was a pricey purchase a few years ago but worth it. Now, I realize that this company cares more about its customers than any I've ever seen and the purchase was a bargain. Thanks, Steffen! I hope I run into you someday and can buy you a beer.

Yeah, impressive, only 3 years to react, amazing.... Well, you could choose to look at it that way. I would rather take the view that they have done something, rather than just ignore the problem or deny that it exists. Additionally, Icarus have made the modification available free of charge, which they did not have to do. Secondly, from my limited understanding of these things, changing the opening characteristics of a canopy and thoroughly testing the results is not an overnight process. True That! Rather than throwing rocks at Icarus, I wish we could spend more time recognizing the complexities of their industry. This takes a lot of research and testing as well as enough input from their customers to determine an issue may actually exist before any of this work begins. For the company to provide a free fix and post it in locations where its obvious they're really trying to reach their customers is admirable. I am not an Icarus customer today but seeing things like this makes me want to be one. I'll seriously look at your products at my next canopy decision. Good work and thanks!

I took initial training and became licensed at IVPC. The DZ is full of great people who absolutely love jumping and sharing a wealth of skydiving knowledge. This was the most inexpensive place I've seen - they love skydiving and bringing new people into the sport.