parachutist

The hammer force I was mentioning referred to assembly/disassembly action, not damage. Grommets start out as 2 pieces and they get pressed or hammered together into 1. If they get knocked the other direction, they can come apart. Lines could get caught in the new gap, which wouldn't be good. Bumpers are there to prevent dings, gashes, and dents in the grommets. It's a different sort of damage. Soft links are relatively new. Many canopies still use metal links, and most sliders were not designed to be used specifically with them. Some evidence that current canopy designs were not engineered for soft links: [inline 20150417_163313s.jpg] Metal links have a small diameter, so small finger trap loops were designed to fit onto those metal links. Along came soft links which are bulkier: they need to pass through those same small loops twice. Sometimes maybe these fat soft links didn't go through the small loops easily because the gear wasn't designed for them.

Especially during early stages of opening (slider up high), I would think the lines are wrapped around more of the radius of the grommet that faces the canopy, so that would be more critical to have the "smooth" side. That would match what I think is shown in the latest PDR manual. That is just me doing easychair thinkin', it will be interesting to hear from more authoritative sources. I heard another explanation years back. It went something like this: === foggy memory recollection === When sliders come down hard during terminal openings, they slam into the links at the bottom with a lot of force, even if bumpers are installed. The link acts as a hammer, just like when the grommets are getting set at the factory. So you want the grommet parts to get hammered together instead of apart, and that's why the smooth side is up. === /fog ====

If there were some way to harness a Tom Noonan UPT seminar from a PIA convention, including all the Q&A afterwards, I think most any scenario would be covered. The videos accompanying his presentation make it feel so real, as if you were experiencing the mal yourself. But now there's a pause button and a narrator. Like this? (some videos redacted though) That's a start, but it doesn't compare to being there with a big screen view of the situations being described.

1CM difference if they're all the same amount and direction (all longer or all shorter) will not matter on that canopy. That CM could be a different link used for your measurements vs their

What size is the canopy?

If there were some way to harness a Tom Noonan UPT seminar from a PIA convention, including all the Q&A afterwards, I think most any scenario would be covered. The videos accompanying his presentation make it feel so real, as if you were experiencing the mal yourself. But now there's a pause button and a narrator.

I opened the FAA Rigger Handbook PDF file and did a search for endorse. There's only one instance: "The FAA neither endorses nor recommends any specific trademark item in this handbook." Would some interpret that statement to indicate that no trademarked items found within the handbook are allowed by the FAA? That wouldn't make sense. To me an endorsement or lack thereof only shows favor or not toward certain products, but it has nothing to do with allow or disallow. How about a twist on the subject though... suppose there had been a MARS M2 instead of a Cypres in that pouch? I was just now looking through UPT's page and noticed the latest Sigma manual rev has no mention of any specific model AAD. No Cypres and no Vigil names are indicated. Has UPT now taken a position similar to Velocity Sports on this subject? ie: Not having any input for or against any particular AAD? In any case I'm glad UPT finally went back to a single PDF file, instead of the wacky file-for-every-chapter version of their Sigma manual

yvw. good liuck!

I haven't tried that combination, so I don't know if it would make the 188 ZPX fit, or if it would still be too tight (even if it does fit, I expect it'll be really tight). I'd say you have a couple good options at this stage: 1) You can completely scrap the current configuration and start over fresh. Put your new ideal container together using canopies listed on the Mirage sizing chart, picking a soft reserve with an optimal main. 2) Or you could stick with the current container that you have on order and sub in a low volume reserve such as the Optimum 160 or SMART LPV 160, get some direct canopy coaching from a good coach or entity such as Flight-1, and change the main canopy to one that's in the Mirage list, like a Pilot 168 when the coach clears you for that size

Frank, Let's start off with layman definitions of words that Mirage uses to describe parachute fit: Optimal - tighter than most people would be happy with Soft - ideal because the seams are not stressed, your closing loops aren't crazy long, and your pins aren't standing out proud Suppose you take the typical line of thought, "I'm a brand new jumper who's going to start with a big canopy, but I'll be jumping something smaller next year, and I want it all to fit in this same rig." For this strategy you can go with an Optimal main, but you'll want to pair that with a Soft reserve. An Optimal main + Optimal reserve is too much crap going into a Mirage container. However if you take a Soft reserve (in this case maybe a PD Optimum 160) and pair it with some main that's listed as Optimal in Mirage's M4 list, the reserve tray won't be bulging/pushing into the main tray quite as much. So it will all fit better. I think calling the manufacturer is usually a good idea, but in my experience Mirage gives poor advice on fitment of canopies into new containers. They usually lean toward the way-too-tight end of the scale.

Unless your lines are different from ours, the brakes don't get stowed on those canopies, so the snaps shouldn't be used. We just push the toggle grommet up against the guide ring and tuck the toggle nose under the hood. If we were to snap them down then opening shock would yank on the snaps

One answer to your question: Buy Icarus mains and you'll forget about those snaps. I was certain your sentence would end in "clunky L-bars on their reserves". Or maybe "noncascaded fat uncoated reserve lines that catch everything". Or "stitching they put through the AAD window that cuts right through the clear plastic over time". Or... "links on the adjustable harness that have sharp edges moulded into them". Or "disc covers that are so weak". Or "RSL tab that flaps against the 3-ring loop causing damage". Sigma is still the best tandem system on the market IMO. I just pack and fix them often enough to be annoyed by some details :-)

I'm interested in hearing the answers because it'll probably happen to someone in my neighborhood. I think someone local uses a vape tool as a packing tool. It's a brass cylinder, looks easy to grip. =o

Not bad!

Curiosity seekers are potential customers. Seems like they'd want to draw in customers. Then again, Butler's site says "last updated 2004" . We have a Softie square setup here, but it's not very recent and it uses a full range toggle setup just like we have on sport rigs.

Is there any info about these systems on Softies and Butlers? There doesn't seem to be much about squares on either web page.

There are a lot of valid possibilities right now. The 2016 standard depends completely on where you are jumping. I'd go talk to the DZO where you want to work. Maybe you'll get some direct input about what they expect their paid videographers to be using, or maybe they'll point you to a head video person for that info. Some places would be happy with you using two GoPro 2s for photo and video, while other DZs would require a DSLR plus a camcorder with image stabilization. That's why I say talk to the local DZO first. Whatever you decide, welcome to the world of video in the sky :)

Call Precision directly to resolve this. Your analysis looks valid about the brake lines being installed in the wrong order

I'd like to go.. depends on how much piled-up rigging work I can finish before the weekend. There's a typo on the flyer card btw, indicating Jan 19 & 20

One way to make it universally snag-free... Imagining a few razor blades embedded around the outside perimeter, vertical orientation. Snags would be dealt with swiftly. Kevlar gloves required tho

Hard links for the drogue attachment seem to eat away at the tube webbing on the d-bag. Slinks seem to not cause that wear. Packers probably had plenty of warning seeing fraying at that area before it finally broke.

There are a few new models available now. The Sony mini action cam and the Hero Session are now supported.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. There are a few factors that need to match up. It depends on things like size of the rings on your harness, location of RSL ring(s) on the risers, and what type of RSL system you have or don't have. Your rigger can help you determine the compatibility.

Every time for me. They're weak and I like tight pack jobs. It sucks to pin the top flap and notice the previously-used loop is now showing fraying. The trick to making this a painless proposition: Get a stock of 50-100 Cypres discs for your loft. Then you spend a rainy afternoon watching Netflix while making new loops on those discs. Every pack job after that: you just grab one from a bin and size it. Fast and easy. There's no extra charge for a new loop in my loft.. it's part of the pack job.

That looks like 2" binding tape. It's handy to have in the shop, but hard to find from typical suppliers. I bought a roll from PD