fcajump

QuoteI think it is an issue. You have at least one jumper in the plane without a jumpable rig if there is a problem later in the flight. Depending on who interprets the regs. it may not legal to continue the flight with one jumper not wearing an “approved” parachute.Quote Spark, I tend to agree with your notion here... but I've tried to find this in the regs several times and NEVER found an FAR that requires everyone on board to wear a rig. The only thing I can think of in this situation would be "landing while passenger is not in an approved seat/belt" since s/he is obviously no longer a skydiver... (for myself, I would suggest that everyone on jump aircraft should have a rig - sport or emergency) JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

In the twin Otter... pretty much the same... At my "other home DZ", over the airport means climb-out and look over the leading edge of the (lower) wing... From there I can check the spot, look for traffic and check to see if the ground is signalling for the jumper. GPS/lights... heck, the pilot doesn't even have a radio!! (http://www.flyingcircusairshow.com) BTW - exit count for a 2 or 3 way means arm motion high enough that the other jumpers can see it from thier respective planes!! JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I'll weigh in with a "me too"... strange openning with the PC flopping around, and it can happen (either around the A's or brake lines.) A freind still jumps with a spring loaded PC (>35 years and wont change) and he seems more suseptable to it. As others say: check it, then decide to keep/chop. Avoidance: same as any strange/hard openning issue... pack carefully & deploy stable and it will happen less frequently. First time I had this I became aware of it after deploying my flag, and overtop of a hiway during a demo jump... oops. (kept it and landed "in" just fine). Blue ones and keep questioning things! JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

(I orginally composed this as a PM to someone else concerning a different forum... since you ask the question here, I thought I might paste it in... for what its worth... JW) I do not work for or represent USPA... NOR am I arguing one side of the other... just relating MY understanding of their policy... IF reports are released with all their detail, they would inevitably be used in court. As such, contributions to the reports would be non-existant. No one would be quoted in a report that would cause them to be called into court, even as a witness (a friend had over $10k of expenses as a witness). Therefore, while the COMPLETE/public report based on voluntary information would be more useful, it would never actually happen. So, to get the most complete report to the skydiving community, the information is collected with the assurance of annonymity and that all public disclosure will be made with the information "scrubbed" to the most non-biased that it can be. This way, everyone involved gets to say what they saw without being part of the law suits based on what they contributed to the report, and the community gets a report that (hopefully) contains the best conclusion as to what happened and how to avoid it. This public report is published in the interest of safety. I understand that their position on this has been upheald in court several times. In the (unfortunate) real world, I would have to agree that a scrubbed report is better than everyone clamming up and us learning nothing... Best we can due as long as we have money hungry lawyers ... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

As to experience level, the USPA does address this in the BSR's: USPA SIM 2-1.J.2. Pre-planned breakaway jumps are to be made by only class C- and D-license holders using FAA TSO'ed equipment. [E] --------------- As to using this to simulate the actual emergency procedures, I thought it would do that for me... until I started doing them. The following OPINION is based on my own experiences: My systems: Standard sport rig, REHARNESSED with additional designed for and BUILT-IN base rings for the second set of risers and D-rings to mount the chest container. In MY system, the chest rig IS the first/cutaway canopy. Chest containers: 1 - US mil system modified for throw-out, dual pin, D-bag, 3-ring risers and slider on a 24' round. 2 - Strong Pop-top system with only the risers changed out to standard 3-ring main risers. Pro's: The jumps have taught me a lot about system design, working with/jumping unusual equipment, how the strong pop-top system deploys*, how it feels to swim in 0 airspeed, what it feels like to open/fly a round, how far the harness can shift, etc... The system I use adds steps prior to my normal EP's, but does not change my EP's after the cut-away. It also allows me to stage several malfunctions to allow REAL failures, but again with different procedures than in an actual main 'function. Con's: The system I use does NOT make use of my normal EP's during the cutaway (no practice EPs here...) It introduces new handles and procedures. This system has me deploy on my back (fun but different). Real failures on this system (staged or not) mean new EP's and new potential complications that must be anticipated and practiced for. Overall: This is NOT just another jump. GREAT FUN for me, and most like to watch... but few step up to try it. If I was looking to practice my ACTUAL EP's, a real chest reserve would be the way to go, but then you have the question of a non-releasable second 'chute and making use the handles are not covered. Bottom Line for the question asked: I think Srumpot (and others) are correct... a hanging harness setup with your own rig and an instructor working you through the EP's is probably best. The intentional will let you experience several things that come into play, but I'm not sure all the extra baggage that comes along wouldn't be counter productive to a younger jumper simply practicing his EP's. If you want to do these, get with a rigger who has done them. They can be fun, but they can go very wrong very fast. Blue ones, Jim ~ 2 dozen 'chops on the system described. 2 real reserve rides (not during an intentional jump) Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Ok folks... this one goes out to the old folks (and the few young ones that like old gear... like me ) SE is trying to find the spec's for the ripcord, but I am hoping someone has theirs that could be measured. (Had mine until ~4,000 on Sat.) Looked for it, but didn't find it in the 10 acres where it should have landed. BTW - the Starmaker is a good container for a round-intentional cut-away... but it opens SMARTLY!!! I know the TSO says it must open in 3 seconds, but it didn't seem to need the last 2.5 seconds of that...

A quick check of Paragear: http://www.paragear.com/templates/parachutes.asp?group=32&level=2&parent=193 I don't see a spec on the IIa... but note that it is the sheath of type II. Don't know how different it is from type III sheath (I've also used type V sheath for a different use and noted that it is different.) Did see that Type I is 100lbs... But having used: II sheath, IIa and IIIsheath... they've all worked for me. AND as IIa comes in different colors (red/green/white) I use them for different uses. Blue ones, JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I would recommend caution here... Consider this: 1 - microline provides much less friction on the pin 2 - microline does not stretch like type IIa (550 cord sheath) These two could easily lead to a pin that comes out too easy. Too much can be just as bad as too little. (I don't remember off the top of my head what the minimum bridle tension should be...) Just my $.02 JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Oh my Lord! Would I be able to use the reserve if I needed it? Would I be facing a choice of death or jail? Does the reserve self-destruct a midnight or turn into a pumpkin? Oh, the possibilities. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Many old-school riggers believe that there is a secret clock-work mechanism built into the diaper (free bag for you young pups) which automatically locks 121 days after the repack. They also believe that Cypri frizzle and do weird stuff 12 years plus 3 months plus 1 day after the are manufactured. This confuses me, because a 13 year old Cypres has been quietly sitting on my shelf ... sitting quietly .. doing nothing ... Does the frizzling process only occur inside reserve containers? I am so confused!!!!! Will someone please explain? No... modern systems use a low-pressure activated system that begins a slowly desolving acid container. The acid will be loosed 120 days +/- 1 day from when the rigger crushes the seal on the thread... Unfortunatley in this area my airshow pilots have feds at the briefing at every show... and some of them know what a pack-data card is... Being pilots they don't want to pay for a repack before the HAVE to, but can't afford the fine for getting caught with an out of date rig in the plane that they just arrived in... (rumor is $1000 per flight with the rig since it went out...) Hence the discussion of "is it still good?" on the LAST possible date. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Billvon has the trick... almost did it myself a couple times... If you do not straighten out your risers and ensure things are straight below the links, you can easily leave a step-through in during a packjob. This is one of the reasons I tie my base rings (the biggest ring in the 3-ring set) together with my pull-up cord during packing. This ensures several things: - the yoke is even - the risers are starting out even - I can check to ensure the 3-ring set isn't flipped through the base ring - by starting here, I then ensure there is no twist below the links - finally I have a pullup cord when I need one There is little chance of this being left in as you then use the pullup cord to close the main. Besides, putting on the rig with the base rings tied together is... difficult. (I'm sure SOMEONE will manage it, but I never could.) Just my trick... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

That’s because they could not get the plane certified without it. I was talking with the owner of the company that makes the canopies for the Cirrus and they had 3 saves in one weekend. You mentioned that they are STC'd for Cessna 172 and 182. How many have you seen with a ballistic system installed? Actually an STC has been issued to the Cessna 150, 172 and 182. The Symphony 160 has only produced 15 planes so far and Diamond Jet won't have one to deliver until sometime in 2008. That puts us right back to the “real world”. Ah... but if you look at my email where I brought it up, I (and any other person) only need it on one plane... "ours". However, you are VERY correct on one point... As "our" plane is only a dream for now and we are renting... the typical plane available for rent (or used sale) does not have one CURRENTLY installed. My quickest option to having parachutes for both of us would be to get a second bailout rig. I am simply looking to the future that I see being on-the-way. BTW - I was talking with the Cirrus rep at FFA (week of Dec 16th, 03) and asked if I had heard correctly that the only approved spin recovery was to pull the 'chute... He said "yes, but there really is no reason that a pilot should get into a spin except as an emergency" When asked about intentional spins, he asked why I would want to... The response of "because they're fun" got him somewhat annoyed. I guess they are not over eager to discuss things with pilots who also work at airshows ;-) Fear not, I predict that we will have plenty of work for quite a while, if only 2/3rds as often once the 180 day rulling goes through. Blue ones, Jim Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

BTW - "SLINK" is a brand name (and a darn good brand too)... but be aware that there are other brands of similar "soft - links" available as well. Also, the SLINK is available for both mains and reserves (different models), but I am not sure if any other brand of soft-link is TSO'ed for reserve use... proceed with caution in the TSO use... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

And just how many planes do think there are that carry an STC for a ballistic recovery system? I was discussing things in the real world. Well... over 18,000 installations, 1 entire line of factory production 4 seaters (Cirus), the Symphony 2 seater and currently in development for the Diamond Jet aircraft. O-yea and they are STC'ed for the Cessna 172 and Cessna 182 model lines... (there's a few of those still around...) The primary company lists 190 lives saved to date. Experimental and ultralite communities have been adopting them for years. While I suspect it will be a while before your average Queen, King or Otter are so equipped, it sounds like it is already available in the real world... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

For those traveling, here's one more reference for you... http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1147.shtm Other notes: I have found it usefull to carry with the rig, printed copies of the policies/travel documents from the TSA, FAA, Airline, USPA, Airport, SSK (cypres x-ray card), and anyone else I can. As a rigger, I also carry my license and minimal tools to close the rig, though avoid Cypres temp pins and anything else that could be of concern on its own. With this approach, I have not had any problem carrying on, but have heard of other's given a hard time... Good Luck, Jim Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

For example - A rig packed on Jan 1st... is it good on May 1st (non-leap year) or is it one day out of date? I know what I was taught, what were you? JW

And the average non-jumper pilot will not make the decision to leave until it is to late to do so. It only takes about 1/2 of 1 G and you cannot stand up from a seated position. Understood, but I believe in giving them the best chance if they do their part. Frankly, for myself and my skydiving wife, I consider that a Ballistic might be the better option for aircraft emergencies when one considers the various reasons to bail from a non-jump plane. As to brand, I like most of them. For Ram-Air, I would seriously consider the Aviator. For round, I think Mr. Butler has the most durable system. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[replyI have "demo'd" just about every canopy that has been mentioned in the thread. Trust me you don't want to go there. This is just my opinion so take or leave it. You are flying a C-182. The chances of you needing to get out and then successfully getting out are slim. Unless you are over the Rocky Mountains at night or the plane comes apart in flight you will probably choose to stay with the aircraft. In either case you are going to be low, can’t see the ground and more than likely injured. Get the biggest round that will fit in the seat and fly the airplane like your life depends on it. As to demo'ing systems, you might talk with Sandy and see if he has an Aviator to demo. As to the rest, save your ankles. This is NOT to say I believe in squares over rounds... as a matter of fact, that was the topic of my 2005 PIA Symp talk. When I signed up for it, I figured this was an easy talk to give a diffinitive answer to... Not so. Interviewed Sandy, Dan T, John/Nancy, Gilmore and others who have built BOTH types of systems. Even the EXPERTS who build and test these systems are not sold on square PEP's. Some are, some aren't and some are on the fence. I have one, and like it... but I recognize the limitations as well. As to a pilot getting out of a Cessna, we have a pilot from my (old) home DZ that is still alive due to his PEP. He figured a 26' lopo was a better option that his C-206 that had no tail after an on-step deployment. However, even KNOWING what to do, it still took from 10,500' to ~4,000' for him to simply "get out and pull" due to the gyrations of the airplane. (one experienced jumper was not able to exit at all ) Question for you folks... I am looking for a topic for the 2007 Symp... Of those going, would you guys spend an hour listening to and then open forum on this topic (round/square PEP)?? If so, I'll pull out my notes and update for this year. If not, I'll find something else. Thanks, Jim Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Sparky's got the deal... we had too many years (mid-90's) where "demo" jumpers were pounding themselves, their crew, and the audience. USPA was told that if this was not resolved in-house, the FAA would "fix" the problem... Your choice, USpa or THEM? I got my PRO when it was only 10 jumps, and you are RIGHT that this does NOT qualify me to do demos. Unfortunately at the time, that was all the training I got. I had to learn the FAA paperwork, crew selection, site evaluation, flag systems, smoke systems, crowd control, etc... on my own. And I've not alway gotten it right. When they upped the requirements, the went in the right direction... frankly I would like to see it tougher. As to borrowed rig, I would point out that the PRO is ONLY valid for a canopy the same size or larger than the one used to qualify. Doesn't keep someone from using their rocket, but all insurance and FAA approvals that require the PRO go out the window at that point. (AGAIN, this does not keep it safe, but helps weed out some of the BAD ideas.) I just had to kill a planned demo here that was being setup with one pilot and jumper. The jumper is a safe jumper but has never planned a demo. Upon review, we identified a dozen ways it could go very bad and some that could NOT be safely resolved given the site, plan and sponsor's security plans. I've got a few under my belt (~250) and it was my honor to jump with both of you gents on Dec 16th. (we need to do that again! ) Blue ones, Jim Wine Dpro-15598 Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I would be slightly concerned about pulling the cutaway in this situation. Might be that the main would not leave cleanly (or at all until very low). I am thinking that a fully deployed and flying canopy is to be worked with... seems like most replies address the correct approach, that of pulling at the offending covers. The Vector 3's I have seen all have the notice concerning riser/flap order. Blue ones, Jim Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Not just "No", but "HELL NO!!" Check out what most of the demo jumpers that have LIVED through years of exhibitions use/fly/do... You will find VERY FEW that swoop. Then look into the DEATHS that have occured in stadium and other venue demos. (including jumper, crew and audience!) Then stay on the ground if you are still thinking of it. Oh- and by the way. In the US, the FAA standard boiler-plate jump authorizations forbid low hook-turns. NOT that that is the only way to initiate a swoop, but it is a common method. So, in summary, I would have to recommend against it... Jim Wine USPA Dpro-15598 ~250 demonstration jumps Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Cliff, I guess it would be common knowledge at the very least. If the rigger made a rigging error, the jumper was jumping from an airplane with the 120 pack cycle, and had a problem with it, do you not think the rigger would be responsible??? I think this is at the crux of the issue... I believe that if I make a mistake it may be revisited on me regardless of when it is found (day 1, 119, 121 or 500). However, I believe that my inspection is good only on the day I sign off on it. The airworthyness of the gear is the owner/wearer's responsibility (unfortunately this list also includes the PIC). Part of verifying that it is airworthy includes verifying that it has been "(A)IR'ed" within the last 120, that it hasn't been superglued, torn, shredded or hot-knifed by the ex-wife. Those factors beyond a rigger's control (after the rigger signs off on the inspection) are NOT the rigger's responsibility no matter how many days have past. Having said that, and having heard Cliff's statement, I will still only approve Cypres' with batteries and inspections that will last the length of the repack cycle UNLESS I have direct control over keeping the rig grounded after the unit has expired (until corrected). Too many owners will blindly take that the rig (barring damage) IS good for the entire 120. I also believe that in the last 20 years (especially the last 10), that the average jumper has become ignorant about their own gear. This is something we should work to counter. Just my $.02 Jim Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Ditto... sorry dude... Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Your rigger will have (or will get) the manual in the event your gear does not come with one. Techniques discussed here are mostly "after market" methods not covered in the manuals, and are for MAIN canopies. Your reserve will be packed very precisely to mfg specs. I would HIGHLY recommend that at your experience level you learn packing from the instructors and riggers at home and NOT from DZ.com (where they can show, tell and look over your shoulder). This is a good forum to bounce ideas off of once you have a good foundation. HAVE FUN! Jim

Ah... but the statement "good to jump until..." is something most riggers in the US would avoid with a passion... it would be used (by owners and their lawyers) to claim we are liable for a rig on the 119th day regardless of how it has been treated. Hence the reason we are pushing for wording that states (in essence...) "inspected on _____, and found airworthy at the time... NO guarentee of airworthyness after it leaves my custody." Now if you reworded it to "this gear not airworthy after _______", that might work...? JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

This is one reason why some have been discussing multiple logs (though the discussion at the time was one for canopy and one for H/C.) So, should we be using 2 logs plus a third for AAD equipped rigs? For myself, I will keep to my own policy of not packing AAD's that will expire before the repack. JW JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...