miller

Orbit and Echo

From having packed both of the reserves mentioned, I'd say volume wise, they're pretty darn close. Depending on your rigger, and the specific rig, I'd say that you can fit a tempo 150 into most rigs that are made for a pd126.

If you're goal is to have the smallest rig with the biggest reserve, be careful because two things may happen: You may start getting outside of the manufacturer's recommendations, and it may not necssarily look good or be safe.

Also, if possible, demo both a Tempo 150 and a PD126, and then make the decision. Buy your container size based on what reserve you feel best about. Don't buy a small container and then try to shoe-horn a big reserve into it. It will get ugly, and probably uncomfortable.

I've personally owned two different rigs made for pd113's and 107 mains, and yes they're very small. However, the last rig that I purchased was a size bigger, even though I was still using a pd113 and a 107. I did this just because it was thinner off my back, much softer, and a tad easier to pack my main.

Mike

I'm attempting to post a few pictures.

As far as older versions of the flat-top being upgraded, I am going to go out on a limb and assume you can purchase a new "bone" equipped with the cut-away system and replace the old one. It may take a little fooling around with, but I don't think it would be that difficult.

Also, check out the left side ratchet mechanism attachment point. The helmet is actually contoured around it now, and there's a shield (red piece) to prevent accidentally releasing the ladder strap.

I'll post additional pictures of the helmet when it's all put together.

Mike

sorry about the giant size that comes up when you click on the attachments. I mistakenly posted the wrong ones. But at least you get to see the damn thing up close.

I received my flat-top pro from bonehead a few days back, and to my suprise it came standard with an emergency cut-away system. I bring this up because there was a thread regarding this very subject a few weeks ago.

Anyway, without too much detail, the system is basically a "one-ring release." Pull the handle (attached near the right jaw line on the helmet), extract the yellow cable through a loop routed around a single ring, and then the loop releases the plastic ladder strap from the "bone."

Both sides of the actual closing mechanism stay attached to the helmet after cutting away (ie the bone stays attached to the hinge on the right side of the helmet, and the ladder strap stays clicked into the retention mechanism on the left side of the helmet). The release actually separates the ladder strap from the bone. It's very simple and clean. I'll post pictures eventually.

Once again, thumbs up to the wonderful folks at Bonehead for a great product.

Mike

That system that you saw on the wings container, it's called a "pull out" system. It is an alternative to the "throw out" system. It's not unsafe by any means. Ask your rigger to explain the difference between the two to you.

There was a pretty good thread about this very topic a while back.

Anyway, WD-40 is bad. Something about being hydrocarbon based... It actually attracts more dirt and debris, and that's exactly what you don't want.

Maintenance of the cutaway cables actually entails more cleaning than lubricating. A silicone based spray is probably one of your better bets. After applying, always wipe very dry. Don't leave any residual spray on the cables thinking it will slicken things up. Over time, it will just attract more crap

Graphite (like the kind that comes in the little cylinders that you squirt in your locks) would also be bad. That stuff is actually made up of very tiny graphite particles, which is not what you want working their way into your webbing and three ring loops.

Mike

For a respected person's opinion, check our Robbie Culver's website or series of articles for Skydiving, and see what he has to say about these types cameras.

Also, still pictures of tandem students are one of your dropzone's biggest advertising and PR assets. Think about it: the student is paying for the dropzone for pictures, and is then essentially promoting our sport (and your DZ) for free by carrying them around showing them to anyone who will look, hanging them from the fridge, and on their cube walls at work. If your major motivation in buying a still camera is how economical it is and the fact that you can just bolt it on, start shooting, and start making your money back right away, then chances are you're probably not going to take the time to run 10 or 20 rolls of film through it to make sure you're turning out a good consistent presentable product.

We've had people come to our dropzone who aren't interested in video/stills because their roommate or whoever jumped down the road and their video/stills sucked, so in their mind your video/stills are going to suck, too. Don't be that shitty photographer down the street. Take pride in your work. Spend a little extra, learn all about whatever it is you buy, and most importantly get criticism from many differnt sources. Still photography is very very different from video...blah blah blah...

Mike

(Could this be a technique issue or related more to wing size? )

Probably a little of both. With a normal wing I've found that I need to fly really flat on my back to achieve slower speeds, and when I do this I sacrafice a little bit of mobility, but having that big wing attached over the front of the arm ("c" wing or equivalent) really helps the effort when in a normal sit.

(I hate to rely on equipment to resolve an issue that can / should be solved with flying skills.)

This is a great statement. I wish more people would think like this. I've seen people run right out and get cameras and camera suits at the same time, and never learn to fly their body before putting on the wings. A camera suit should be a tool, not a crutch. You definitely have the right attitude.

I may get severly flamed for this, but it's way to easy to become a camera person anymore, and as one jumper at my dropzone said just last weekend, people go out and spend a few grand on equipment then want to start filming tandems and getting paid because they think the sport owes them their investment back. I'm not going to rant, because I can get on a soapbox and not quit, so I won't even start.

Mike

I own two different camera suits from Tony. The first is a "d" wing suit, with a very large wing that attaches with a velcro sandwich and a fastex clip. I have around 800 jumps on this suit, so I'm pretty used to it. That being the case, I thought I would mix things up a little bit and order the "c" wing jacket to just fool around with.

My experience sounds a little different than Quade's. Here goes: The wing (which is supplex lined nylon) runs almost all the way to my wrist, and down my side to just above the lateral strap of my rig. It came with an extended piece of binding tape running off the end of the wing doubled over, with a quick release shackle on the end. The intent is to route the whole thing under your leg strap and connect the shackle back over the binding tape extension (read: hard to release and fish under your leg strap when under canopy). I cut this whole mess right off, reattached the shackle right at the end of the wing, and I sewed rings (small rings from 3-ring release system) on the inside of my leg straps directly to my leg strap hardward to attach the shackles to. This made it much easier to release the shackles once I was open, and it seems to make the wing behave a little better

Quade's right about the swoop cords acting as a turniquette (sp) on your hand, so I got them comfortable around my hand, and then sewed those so they won't bind or pinch when load is applied. I've found that for the wing to work properly while you're sitting, the swoop cords need to be relatively tight, thus limiting arm movement towards risers and toggles while you're opening. But you eventually get to the point that you can just pop the shackles while you're snivelling.

Performance: I also had a sit wing installed on the back of the arm ($35 I think). Let me tell you, with proper technique, you will be able to sit with just about the slowest falling groups. That front wing is huge when inflated, and the back wing just helps out the effort. I've found that a nice straight up sit works out much better than flying all the way on my back. I weight about 190lbs with gear, and I can comfortably sit at about 110-115mph.

Disclaimer: I DO NOT like this wing while I'm on my belly. Maybe I just suck, maybe I'm just used to many jumps on the "d" wing suit. I don't know. I don't think this wing is all that cut out for flat flying. Because of the attachment to the front of the arm, and the bagginess of the wing, it's hard to make the wing really tight while you're on your belly. Maybe it's just me.

There's my long-winded two cents.

Mike

I personally use a positive tension device to close most reserves (MOST). However, when I was learning to become a rigger I never used one, so I can respect just how much tension can be produced with one of these little gizmos. I definitely think they can be used safely. The maximum pull force allowed for a reserve ripcord is 22lbs (see the Poynter's manual for the exact test). I personally think (from experience) that if you can close a rig, either by pulling or by using a positive tension device and you're exceeding the 22lb limit without damaging the loop or the pull-up cord, something is wrong.

Also, if you measure pull force right after closing a rig verses waiting a day or two, the pull force almost always decreases with time. Things stretch, fabric moves around a little, etc. Have you ever gotten your rig back from getting repacked and it looks all nice, and then a month or two into the repack cycle you start to see the ring of your pilot chute top through all of the flaps, or in the case of a javelin the pop top starts to rock a little?

Anyway, as a rigger it's my job to follow manufacturer's instructions, so if RI says not to use one, I won't use one. Why do they recommend this? Probably a lot of reasons, but it's their right, their system.

Are there any downfalls to a 1-inch length....?

From a safety standpoint, probably not. As long as there's enough room to fit the pin through once the loop passes through the final grommet. I may be opening myself up to some abuse with this next statement, but if you can get the pin through the loop, the loop can never be too tight. You won't get a pilot chute in tow with a properly maintained and routed throw-out system because the closing loop is too tight. There, I said it. Let the beating begin.

However, with a Vector III, if the loop is extremely short (three grommet thickeness plus pin diameter), then the grommets will end up stacked on top of each other when the container is closed. Is this unsafe? Not really, but with the cut of the Vector III, it will leave a little lump under the main pin flap. I think the intent of the slightly longer closing loop is to allow the grommets to lay right next to each other, not on top. This allows for a little bit more pleasing appearance once the rig is closed.

Rigger Rob, any comments? Maybe I'm way off the mark.


Rigger Mike

Your best bet is to call craig hanson. I haven't seen his ads in Parachutist in a while, but find an issue a few years old, and there will be a 1/2 or 1/4 page b/w ad. He's a really pleasant and helpful guy.
When you buy the helmet kits new, they come with the expansion foam (also available at any hardware store), the padded felt lining, and a video of how to put the whole mess together. It's a fairly time consuming and messy process, but well worth it if done correctly. I must warn you though, ripping the old foam out from the fiberglass shell is not much fun.
The key to making one of those helmets fit right is the initial shimming process, oh yeah, and a lot of patience.
If all else fails, call up Sunshine Factory. They still sell the Hanson Low Profile. Maybe they can put you in contact with Mr. Hanson.
Good Luck

Sorry to bring up an old topic, but I've not seen a definitive answer yet, so here goes...
I currently have a Hanson Low-Profile Foam Fit helmet. I've had it for a little over four years, and I've got about 1000 jumps with it. As it sits on my head, the mounting plate has a slight pitch back (up). I also have a Bat-Rak, which sits much flatter, resulting in a flatter camera angle. I know this angle can be adjusted slightly depending upon how I secured the helmet when I baked the liner,but it's still relatively flat.
I'm very partial to the pitch of the Hanson Helmet, as I've grown very used to it, and I don't want to change. But, it's time to replace this helmet, and a flat-top pro is the obvious replacement (only other option is a Gibson Helmet, but I can't afford to fly to Florida to be fitted). Anyway, for those of you who have had similar experiences with helmets, does the flat-top pro pitch up, or will it sit flat similar to the bat-rak?
I've seen both opinions on this forum, and I know jeanie checks in here ocassionally, so all opinions are welcome.
Also, if you're out there Jeanie, does Bonehead have any plans to construct a Flat-top Flat-side Pro?...(no "Bat-Rak" replies necessary, I already own one).
Thanks everyone,
Mike

I have a Hanson "low-profile" full face helmet. It's been a really good helmet except for a few minor things. First of all, constructing it was not all that fun, and is definitely a two person operation (the whole foam injection liner process). However, it fits great because it was molded directly to my head. It's fairly light weight, and comes with an extended top plate for mounting your still upside down on front, as well as an "l" bracket for mounting your still normally on the front. The helmet also comes with a sight post already attached, as well as a sight holder and basic plastic sight. The helmet is rear entry (no smart ass comments necessary) and the closure system is a ratchet type system (ie ski boot binding). It is a very secure helmet. The downside is that there is no quick release. The aluminum top plate is attached to the helmet with four machine screws that connect to anchors that are molded directly into the fiberglass shell. This makes is easy to have multiple top plates for different camera configurations. I should also mention that the angle of the top plate is somewhat steep. It's not like a typical side mount or a Bat-Rak that has a very flat camera angle.
One of the drawbacks to the helmet is accessing the underside of the top plate(while it's attached to the helmet) if you're inclined to attach your camera with a screw. It's not like the Bonehead Flat-top Pro where you take out the pad and the plate is right there. There's a layer of fiberglass shell, and foam lining under the plate. It's never been that big of an issue though, because I use Bonehead D-boxes for both of my Sony camcorders, and I've also fooled around with Bogen quick release plates for top mounting my still camera.
The helmet seems to be holding up well. I've got about 700 jumps on it. It's pretty comfortable once it wears in. You can also get creative with the foaming process and mold pockets for you audibles and whatever cables you have right into the lining. Overall it's a good helmet. Also, Craig Hanson is also pretty helpful. Everytime I've called him he's been very courteous.
If you're willing to take your time to make it correctly, for $350 or whatever he's charging now, it's a great helmet.
Mike

Go Wings!

Troy Harman broke his neck during a video shoot that he was attempting for the opening sequence of the show. He was flying his airplane directly below a helicopter. The down force from the helicopter caused his plane to have a very fast, very dramatic loss of altitude. When the plane dropped, he hit his head on the cockpit canopy, breaking his neck. Luckily, the bones broke outward (ie not paralyzing him), and he was able to land safely. This actually happened quite a while ago. FYI, this month's Playboy magazine has an article and interview with Troy, and he explains the whole incident.
Hope this helps,
Mike

I'm from Napoleon.
You can contact me at [email protected]
Mike