fcajump

Thanks for that... Yes its slider control (concept not necessarily industry term... yet...) we're after. For me (having not used either technique) of a slider attached tail gate is it would seem less likely prone to hangup on subterm h&p. Also concerned about wear on the slider fabric of constant rubberband stowage.... Any problems w either of these issues using slider control bands? Jw Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Yep, my Set400 did that, but I think it was only to ensure the excess brakeline on the inner line didn't do anything of concern during the chaos of deployment. Though maybe a tailgate would have helped ensure that both sides released at the same time. (not that I ever noted an issue with that, just noted the potential) JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I numbered your questions to make it easier. 1. No not really. Snappy openings are part of BASE. 2. People have gotten them that didn't release/took too long to release. This has only really been seen on slider off objects with static line or pilot chute assist. 3. No, unless you were rapping the rubber band 1,000,000 times. 4. I use mine on hop and pops when I take my BASE canopy out of the plane. 5. umm, how you would install it on a slider? I dono, ask your rigger. Tailgates are designed to control your control lines. The inner C-D lines and the break lines go inside the tailgate. I suggested it in the other thread as a way to prevent the slider from coming out before the canopy is expanding. In my opinion snaps would work better and be more simple. 1. understood... my main is a spectre (800' snivel is normal) my motivation is rooted in thinking of how to minimize the chance of a slider induced hard opening (whether you argue that they get loose/lower during packing, or due to the random chaos of opening) Spectres, despite their normal opening reputation are included in the canopies that have hurt jumpers on opening. 2-4 OK, thanks for that. 5 For me, not a problem after refering to the video provided above. For readers who are not riggers, consult a rigger. Anyone else work with these things want to add more data-points? JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Wanted to break this out to fish for feedback... Background (for those reading along, like me...) I would be interested in adding one of these to my main attached to the slider, but having never used one and not connected to the BASE community, I'm curious to know what unintended consequences users might be aware of... Do they add to the snivel? Has anyone gotten one that didn't release? If you were looking over my shoulder when I'm stowing one where you'd say "wait a sec... you really don't want to do that... here, lemme show ya" When would you never think of using it? (planned low hop-n-pop?) What question did I miss? Tell me your stories please... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Thanks for the tailgate vide reference... makes the discussion clear. Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Ok... you lost me on that one... anyone got a good description (pics would be best), not sure I've run across a tailgate before (insert pickup truck joke here). Or maybe its just too early in my day... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Second concept: Noting that we already have a device that is primmed and ready to fire the reserve, lets see what you all think of this: Add to the cypres: - accelerometer - two additional cutters integrated into the cut-away cable housings at the riser end grommets - logic: if (above 1500'* and g-load above 6G's*) then fire cutaway releases, wait 2* seconds, fire reserve release. *numbers used in the logic portion are abitrary and made up, testing needed to refine what "appropriate" values would be... that's what R&D is for... With the speed that the current generation of AAD's can process, I think a G/load value could be found that would be high enough to cause us to want the system to immediately (3ms*?) "break" (release) and go to reserve. As to concerns over mis-fire releasing you under the wrong/bad conditions... well, most people have cypres' now and how often do we have misfires? And yet, by limiting this action to above 1500' it couldn't release the main "too low" Even if a high performance flier were able to exceed the G load limit (which we'd try to make high enough to keep from happening) the activation above 1500' should result in their being under reserve in plenty of time for landing. Anyone know if Helmut Cloth or SSK follows this forum? Personal comment - as someone who wishes to keep jumping long after earlier generations did, I know that we face new geriatric-jumper issues. There is a reason POP's focused on 40, that was an "old" jumper in 1966. Old round jumpers discuss openings hard enough to kick their own helmets, knock them out and do other damage... and that was when they were young and fit enough to jump that gear. As our skydiving population extends the "retirement" age, it is very important that we anticipate and address this type of issue. Even the most fit of us (and I'm not) can't continually take the occasional pounding we could at a younger age. Finally, while the 20-somethings know that they are imortal and immune from all things fragile, even the youngest/fittest of us won't survive the worst this gear can dish out. Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Bilvon - First comment: there are already some in the parachute industry using this type of load limiting... Butler uses a similar design in higher-speed PEP bridles to reduce snatch loading. But as you would correctly point out, this is a single attach point load, not multi-point as the canopy is on the risers... And yet, to me and barring a better solution, I'd buy into this concept for this reason... Lets assume you will have an openning hard enough to engage the safety on this type designed riser. I'll even assume that part of the problem leading to the unusually hard openning is that we are loading the risers unevenly. So freeze-frame at the point that the shock load is about to hit the harness, here's the three primary scenarios I see coming next: - shock loading causes a busted harness - OK, we're not having problems with this (currently), but it is an option to acknowledge. Outcome if this happens VERY Critical. - shock loading transfers to the jumper - this is where we are having the (admittedly rare) problem. And this is what we're wanting to avoid... broken neck, broken internals, or simply incapacitated long enough to not deal with the other aspects of the situation (i.e. broken lines, torn canopy, or simply landing a higher performance main) - shock load disipated through a weak link such that the jumper can deal with the emergency. Focusing on this weak link option... best case, all four risers "unzip" and you end up with risers 2-3 times normal... cutaway and use reserve since you would not be able to reach the steering toggles (as I envision the risers). Worst case scenario would be that one or two risers are longer than the others... canopy spins up, but the jumper having been spared the shock load is able to deal with the emergency. Best solution, no... but better than what we have now... so smart people, what else would you do... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Or we can cycle back around to trying heavy duty solid rubber stow bands (i.e. 'O' rings or castration bands)... They have been proven before to out last rubber bands... including and especially when the lines are caught up on the bag. Trust them to keep the lines stowed all the way to the ground with little or now wear. Bands are supposed to break. With that, and use, they will wear out. They're a consumable item. And we've proven that trying to overcome that is at our own peril. With that in mind, several things to make life easier: - good quality natural rubber seems to work best and last - uniform bands (thickness, width) will last better - new bands last better (dry-rot/cracked should be avoided) - gear storage in hot conditions (trunk) will cause the bands to age - replace cracked/torn bands to avoid an out-of-sequence release - pre-stretched bands (before installation) will last better on the first few deployments - washing them (as someone else suggested... dunno... haven't tried it yet) - PD has MANY more packjobs/deployments than I have on a very wide range of lines/bags/band-types. They seem to feel double wrapped works best... I'm not against innovation, but a review of what has been tried and lessons learned should not be overlooked. Just my personal thoughts from a couple years in the sport. JW PS - used spectra and dacron (prefer dacron) and always double wrap my non-locking stowes... After PD's video, I'm considering double wrapping my locking stowes as well. FWIW - I also split-stow and keep the container slack to less than 1 bag width. Haven't historically had any issue with bag-spin during deployment. Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Thanks for that. To continue additional related threads: If memory serves, the "-1" was added to the PS70101, when the original spec was updated to deal with sharp edges in the stamping process that could cut the webbing. Thread 1 - With that in mind, I'd be curious if the PS70101-1 would deform enough to pop the slid out before or after the sheer strength of the webbing as it goes around the (relatively) thin metal... (anyone have the equipment to test this?) Thread 2 - Is the 1" version of the PS70101-1 is a MIL/PIA spec? What is its proof tested load? Especially important since I'm guessing this is more common than the Mil Spec'ed PS70101-1. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

CONGRATS to all involved!! JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Maybe its time for a rethink from the mfg's on the construction of the chest strap... It wouldn't be hard to design it as load bearing for such a formation. Chest rings make that easier for this design/intent/use change. Fail-safe routing design of the webbing at the main lift web would be an easy change from the old sandwich design. With that, I'd guess that the weak point is the PS70101-1 friction adapter (or its 1" little brother) . But if people are willing to have the heavier PS22019-1, that weak link could be removed from the picture (not sure if there is a 1" heavy duty). I'd be curious to have the mfg's chime in here to discuss their current chest strap options and their strength to handle a second jumper hanging from it during say an inadvertant deployment... (worst? case scenario?) Anyone? JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Intentional - - first to make it more generic for the sake of a lively discussion that would encompase more than just the DZ's I go to. - second because it was a point of confusion during the safety day, even among the staff. So I am not yet clear on what that particular DZ's policy is... I have e-mailed the S&TA for clarification and have yet to get a response... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

The reason I limited the question to having no acceptable 'outs' is that I have been to dropzones that had limited/no good outs (at least not by the time you are near pattern alt. Sometimes you really do want to land 'in' if at all possible, though certainly head-to-head is a bad thing. I find it interesting that the votes are fairly split on this, which would back up the individual who suggested that in such a situation we would get some following #1 down and others following the LDI... Which is what I heard in the confusion at Safety Day. PLEASE take this question to YOUR S&TA. Get your DZ to POST the landing direction policy and the S&TA/DZO's to enforce it. Not to say a solo jumper in the air by themselves can't do a down-winder, but when there are multiple jumpers, we've gotta know what is expected. Finally, remember that stuff happens. Low reserve opening near the landing area, student can't make their field and turns to the main, brain lock, visitor... stuff happens and there will occasionally be someone coming at you (or, was it your brain lock and you're coming at THEM??) I'm going to try to make it part of my scan on final, to check for oncoming traffic. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I respectfully disagree... We plan for main canopies that don't follow the plan... And we see once again in Mexico (RIP) that there will be those who fly contrary to the plan... (or was one following the wind-sock and the other following the planned direction, each of whom were following their home DZ's plan?) No argument on the surface of it, but how many people ask (and remember) the local policy vs follow what they were taught at home? JW PS - edited to add: AND it reenforces the notion that ALL DZ staff at a particular location MUST agree and promote the same policy. Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Good approach, IF everyone (including visitors) know and follow the local policy. Agreed, which is why the DZ I was at decided to "set" their indicator rather than have it free to spin. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

(skipping over some GOOD talking points for a second...) And the first two responses (taken a bit out of context) shows me that we (collectively) need to talk this out more... Both are good concepts, but may cause problems if implemented by two different jumpers on the same jump. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

At a DZ where I chose to attend Safety Day this year (unnamed, don't ask), there was a question asked that seemed to be unresolved even among the staff. Here's a mock-up of the situation being discussed: - Bi-directional landing area (ONLY North-to-South or South-to-North) - Winds are/have been light and variable, with occasional light-steady swings favoring either direction. - Tetrahedron (weighted so as to not swing in the light winds) indicating North-to-South landing direction - Lets say you are #2 to land with many others on level and just above you and #1 is already setting up to with the land OPPOSITE to the tetrahedron. Forget WHY #1 is going against policy, lets assume we can all agree that he busted the rule to land with the tetrahedron and we can yell at them later... if we all live... The question is what do YOU do now?? Because the ONLY way all of us looking to land stay safe is to answer the question the same way. For the sake of discussion, lets assume you don't have other good out fields.* *personally I don't like the idea that 1 person busting the rule means everyone else is to bale to the alternative field, because a large number of people all bailing from random positions in pattern seems like it would be a bad idea too... but we can discuss that separately... for this discussion, you don't have any. Let the jousting begin... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Now see... (newbies pay attention here*) if I hadn't asked, I'd remain ignorant of that part of design history. Thanks for the new (old) information. *newbies note: there will be a test... its called "life". Pop-quizes are conducted weekly at the local DZ bonfire. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Interesting... I'm definately not an expert on the pullouts (only used them a few times and they were on a... lets say "non-standard system"). I've only ever seen pullouts using puds at the bottom of the pilot chute (with a short direct-to-pin bridle). As I understand it they are normally designed that way to allow (virtually) instant inflation/tension since the pullout design has the container open as the PC is being handled. As I say, I don't know everything of every design, so its certainly possible to have a crown mounted pud on a pullout... if I may ask, who makes them that way? Certainly clear slo-mo video of either/both/any/all deployment methods would be interesting to have for demonstration/explaination to the community, especially the newbies. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

With the various discussions (past and current) I was wondering if anyone has 2nd person video of container opening/deployments of pullout rigs. Anyone care to post them? Obviously high quality with slow-mo would be most helpful. It would be useful to have side-by-side pullout and throwout videos to show those not familiar with them. Would also be useful in looking at the possible issues currently being discussed as to how the dynamics look as the deployment progresses. Just askin... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

F... it doesn't get much worse without being an incident. Can't say I blame him for his frustration level, but he did keep fighting every problem until he succeeded. Have one on me Andy. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

And in that, you are correct. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Good question... I don't have the "too small one" anymore, and don't see the "just right one" currently (its in a box... somewhere...) I did find an old reference that said he made 24" and 28"dia PC's... so lacking any other information, I'd have to say that the too small was one of the 24". Recollection was that the sizing card that appeared after my PIT said that the small one was good for main canopies up to 170SqFt JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

True, but pull-outs do have their own issues. In general a floating handle on a throw-out doesn't have to be found... (for better or worse ;-) It is possible to route the handle/bridle such that you can't pull it, and just try to find someone at most DZ's that can properly pin check you (or maybe even pack it). I've jumped both (thugh admittedly only a few on the pullout), and both are good in their own way. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...