mcordell

When Optimums first came out and were on tour, I demoed a 143. IIRC, it had about 200 jumps on it. Nice opening and landing. Mark Exactly! and there are plenty of super ravens out there that were used as student canopies and jumped over and over until they were as porous as a paper towel. I personally jumped one that had to have had over 1500 jumps on it. Landed off the dz due to a bad spot and stood it up in between two rows of trees. I wouldn't pack THAT one as a reserve but they most certainly aren't safe as mains but will explode if packed in the top half of the container. Yes reserves open with more opening shock due to the packing method but clearly they work just fine if they aren't bagged out student canopies www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

too long. One of my custom rigs had a cable that was a little longer than that when I got it. I ordered a second rig from the same manufacturer since I love their product. Same measurements, shorter cable. I actually had a master rigger cut the cable and swage a new ball on it so it didn't go past the end of the handle rather than buying a whole new cable/handle. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I really don't think that's the case at all. The whole retirement of a canopy due to age thing is an ongoing debate between people. Many new riggers refuse to pack anything older than 20 years because that's what they have been taught but when asked to support that position they have very weak reasoning or fall back on the fact they have the right to refuse to pack anything they don't want to pack. That is a valid reason not to pack a parachute, but I hate that a lot of riggers seem to think as soon as a parachute is 20 years old it's suddenly dangerous. They will pack it at 19.5 years and be comfortable with it but 6 months later it is unairworthy and will kill you and your family while you sleep. There is at least one master rigger and DPRE that I know of that agrees with me that the 20 year thing is BS. I can go to an old DZ and find a closet full of mantas that have been packed and jumped well over 1000 times as student canopies yet they are still airworthy. They may not be the best landing parachutes out there but they won't explode on a terminal deployment, yet somehow if I have a raven that is 20 years old and has been maintained according to the old 4 month and new 6 month cycle but NEVER deployed, the packjobs alone make it too porous to be airworthy. If that same raven were an F-111 main that had been packed 50-60 times but never jumped it would be considered brand new. The argument to that seems to be that it's your "last chance" and so it is different from a main. I have no problem with certifying a reserve with 60 pack jobs as being airworthy as long as I inspect it fully which is no different than what I would do with a brand new one from the factory. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

......................................................................................... You are braver than I. I refuse to repack any round reserves built during the acid-mesh era. A - Because 25 years of bromocreasol and tensile-testing has damaged the fabric. B - Because no young jumper knows how to land a round canopy. Most have never seen a round canopy in the air and it is increasingly difficult to find an instructor who has jumped rounds. For example, I did 70 jumps on round canopies back during the 1970s, but my last "round" jump was in 1986 ... almost 30 years ago! Because of accumulated injuries, I will never jump a round again. That would be a valid point except there is no requirement to continue to test it once it is certified acid free which this was and the Kevlar reinforcement sb was done so one acid test, Kevlar added, one required pull test.....it's good to go. Ok so somehow that got all messed up. fixed it www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

......................................................................................... You are braver than I. I refuse to repack any round reserves built during the acid-mesh era. A - Because 25 years of bromocreasol and tensile-testing has damaged the fabric. B - Because no young jumper knows how to land a round canopy. Most have never seen a round canopy in the air and it is increasingly difficult to find an instructor who has jumped rounds. For example, I did 70 jumps on round canopies back during the 1970s, but my last "round" jump was in 1986 ... almost 30 years ago! Because of accumulated injuries, I will never jump a round again. That would be a valid point except there is no requirement to continue to test it once it is certified acid free which this was and the Kevlar reinforcement sbca was done so one acid test, Kevlar added, one required pull test.....it's good to go. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

That wasn't a shot at the rigger in question, but rather at a statement that a 25 year old raven isn't airworthy for no reason other than age. I wasn't there for the conversation and haven't seen the reserve so I can't speak to it's condition. That being said, if the OP decides that it's not worth using, I'll happily give them $100 for their "unairworthy" reserve and the liability will be off the shoulders of that loft. I have no problem with my reserves based on age. And btw the one that's not a raven is a phantom from 1986. I trust that one too. There are reserves from the late 90s/early 2000s that I would never trust. I don't see a correlation between age and airworthiness. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

The remark that a raven should be replaced because it is 25 years old is stupid. There are factors that play into degradation of a parachute such as how many deployments it has, how many repacks it has, the climate and other environmental factors it has been exposed to, etc. None of those are the age. If it really hasn't been deployed and it has been in climate controlled storage for 9 years then I'm sure it's fine, but having a rigger do a full inspection is the only way to tell. That is a rigger that isn't biased because of age. I have said before numerous times, I have gear older than that and I still jump it. 2 of my 3 reserves are 29 years old and the third is 20 years old this year. two of my mains are much newer because I prefer ZP for a main but I have zero concerns about my reserves. One of the 29 year old reserves and the 20 year old reserve are both raven I. If you are concerned you can also send the canopy to Precision and have them inspect it. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

They can put all the liability on me if they want. Sue me. You'll get some medical bills, half a border collie, and nice sewing machine. I will rebuild. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I own a sac that failed the test. Was packed once, looks brand new. Can't ever be used. I also have a phantom that is in great condition and is packed in my vector. The phantom, vector, and joule main are all 29 years old but in absolutely pristine condition and I have no problem jumping them. Age is just a number. That being said I agree with your decision on the sac. I would be apprehensive to certify them unless I knew I would be their only rigger. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I was just thinking about this issue and it occurred to me...wouldn't an across the board grounding of a model of equipment at a certain age require an airworthiness directive and not a service bulletin? I think the additional effort required for an AD is why none of the manufacturers have done that just to impose a service life. Either way, I won't buy gear from a manufacturer that imposes a service life...ever. I have 3 rigs all composed of gear from manufacturers that haven't done that. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I called them today about a customer's container. It's an older javelin with a retrofit RSL which was done per the rigger advisory circular from sunpath. During inspection I found the cutaway cable was setup for a lefthand rsl but the rsl is on the right riser. They are sending me a new cable set up for the right riser so I don't have to trim the cables any shorter. Great customer service! www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

A service bulletin would certainly carry more weight than changing the manual after the fact, but in order to deem the equipment unsafe they would have to specify a design problem that makes it unsafe. If they simply say due to degradation of materials they would really have to specify the testing requirements to return to service. I do not believe they can just issue a service bulletin stating "if the gear is 20 years old it's no good". If they could do that then manufacturers could just issue service bulletins any time orders are low and they need income. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

IMO it is not so much that it would need to be in the original manual, is that it would need to be submitted to the FAA as a part of the specifications that must be submitted during the TSO application process. It is at that time ( IMO ) that the mfr has the opportunity to define a service life. While the FAA does really define what the 'specifications' are, most of us would consider them the drawings for the component. It is also where the mfr has the opportunity to list his materials, general notes regarding whatever, etc, etc. Jerry Baumchen The only reason I say "in the manual when the gear was manufactured" is because of the certificate privileges which require me to pack in accordance with the manufacturers instructions. I figure if the original manual at the time of manufacture states it cannot be packed after 20 years then I would be bound by those instructions. I do not agree however that the manufacturer could later alter those instructions to include a service life because those then aren't the instructions for that piece of equipment. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

Not really. If it wasn't in the manual when the gear was manufactured and it's not due to a defect not known at the time of manufacture then I don't give a damn what they have to say about it. In that sense it wouldn't end anything. If the gear can legally be packed and used and it is airworthy then it is within my certificate privileges to inspect and pack it and I would if someone brought it to me. I don't care about some letter they wrote after the fact and wouldn't use that to refuse to inspect and pack airworthy gear. I can sit in court and say I followed the manual provided by the manufacturer as well as all legal requirements. If I am in court due to something other than a mistake on my part and some letter from the manufacturer is brought up that says I can't pack their equipment after some artificial life has expired I can honestly answer that that letter carries no legal authority and I inspected the equipment and packed it in accordance with FAA regulation and the requirements of my certificate. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Now I have some idea of what to do to work toward my goal. It looks like I have a lot of practice to do and hopefully when I hit the course I will be prepared. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

Honestly I don't think students need to wear gloves anyway. You should be able to feel everything without anything impeding that. That is unless it is bitter cold I suppose. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

As I read the FAA's letter on service life post certification, this would not work either. IMO the FAA put the 'new service life' into it's grave when they issued that letter. Each rigger gets to make his/her own decision on whether or not to work on any piece of equipment. Just my $0.02 on this, Jerry Baumchen I agree with you on this. That's how I read it too. Once it is certified and sold without a service life, there is no way to retroactively impose one. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

There you go. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I'm not your instructor so this is just the opinion of some guy on the internet and should be taken as such. I don't think you should "fumble" for the PC handle at all. The reason it is two "reaches" and not 5 seconds of fumbling is because the pilot chute is supposed to be in the same place on every jump prior to deployment. You should be able to reach there without looking and find it. If you reach for it and don't find it, fumbling around just moves your hand away from where it should be. If you go back into a relaxed arch and calmly reach again, you should find it on your second reach. If you don't find it on your second reach then there is something wrong. That something could be with the gear or with you, but either way there's something wrong and you are running out of time. At that point it's time for EPs and learning to occur. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

Or look at the field rigger kits...or buy the tools independently after you figure out what you won't need out of the kit... www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I own and jump a 29 year old vector with the original main from the same year. Probably has 150 jumps on it all together. Reserve is also from 86. They are out there. I have no problem packing any gear that is airworthy. A lot of riggers won't but I still can't figure out a good reason for that. anyone with older gear that can't find a rigger can send it to me. I will gladly I spectacular it and pack it if it is still good. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

It's not a skyhook save if the main doesn't pull the reserve www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I had a pc in tow during student status. It was my fault but when I looked over my shoulder and saw the pc inflated at full bridle extension I knew it was time to quit waiting...it wasn't coming out. I didn't pull the cutaway and went straight to the reserve. At the time the EPs we learned at that DZ included pulling cutaway without respect to which malfunction you had. I went straight to the reserve handle but I think it's because logically there was nothing to chop. I can't say for sure...I just did it. it worked out just fine for me and I landed trailing my pc. pulling the cutaway wouldn't have helped or hurt in my situation but it would have added time for sure. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I do. If you are jumping a throw out pc system and you deploy the pc and don't feel a tug of the main extracting from the d-bag, looking over your shoulder to determine if you have a PC in tow is not a bad thing. In fact in the days of spring loaded PCs looing over your shoulder was a standard way of clearing a hesitating pc from your burble. While a throw out shouldn't be flopping around in the burble, it is possible and looking over your shoulder spills air into that area and may allow for the PC to catch air and function. www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

I just wanted to know, from those who have been through the USPA AFFI course, what are some good ways to prepare for the practical? I'm looking for specific freefall skills that an AFFI candidate should make sure to work on to be prepared for the testing. I have spoken with some AFFIs at my DZ and they have said it was one of the hardest things they did so I wanted to cast a wide net and get answers from more than just local instructors. I plan on hitting a course to get my AFFI rating next summer and want to spend this summer doing some freefall drills to prepare me for whatever they throw at you during the practical test. Thanks! www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging