riggermick

Hi Dougie H, WTF is a lower tier manufacturer? I've been in this business (on and off) for nearly 30 years, every one of them has to conform (in the US) to the TSO standard, which basicly makes them all equal under law (and in actuallity the real world as well) . How does this question come about? The reason I say this is; The market will weed them out over time if they produce an inferior product. I don't see your beef w/ Aerodine. Your thoughts? Mick.

Bill, If, I understand it correctly, Bill (the other one) Has always stated that the load on the the T2-a loop will remain constant regardless of the load under which it is subject to at any given time. What say you? Mick.

Whoo, slow down big boy. I am glad you find me amusing. I wouldn't dream of "throw'n down" on a bull ride'n, scuba dive'n rock climb'n macho man like you. I just sit here quietly and watch as you master one more "cool" sport.

You can't blame the rigger for different design process of the original manufacturer. Racers and Talons are different animals. ........................................................... No, but the rigger is obviously NOT quialfied to make a judgement call on how to shorten a single ring (hip ring only) harness. His/ her interpretation of harness design is woefully lacking in the basic understanding of the term "structural integrety". All single occupant use harnesses in current use have a "single point load path" which occurs at the main canopy release attachment point. From the reserve risers (dual point load path) to the MLW (single point load path) and back to the leg straps (another dual point load path). It is bad practice to "chop and change" one continiuous length of webbing to "adjust" it, continuity is the key factor in maintaining the original design spec. It is NOT evidenced here. .......................................................... What is in question is not the rigger's desire to do take short cuts but his/her lack of understanding of design and the basic rigging concept of joint efficiency. ........................................................... Exactly!!!!! Would YOU want this person "adjusting your rig? I sure wouldn't!! This person SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO PERFORM MAJOR ALTERATIONS. PERIOD !!! He / she needs to be properly trained and certified. .......................................................... The lack of understanding could be the route of the failure on the student gear. ............................................................ I rest my case!! This "rigger" is a HACK and should not be allowed within 50' of a class 7 machine. The harness is now a potential "death trap" and should be completely removed and rebuilt from scratch by the manufacturer. When a single ring harness needed "adjusting" at my factory the old one was CUT OFF and a new one installed!! there are NO short cuts with harnesses, especially ones with articulation rings. To do otherwise brings discredit to the profession, and a possible lawsuit or two. Just my (former) professional opinion. Mick.

QuoteQuoteThe weak point is the single layer Shit, you're right it is T 13!! It's early here on the west coast, gimmie a break. But the weak point is still there when compared to the overall design. Harness webbing has a tendency to fail at the ends of stitch patterns when loaded to destruction. My bad about the T7/ T13 thing, yawn. Mick

I've been hearing this statement quite a bit over the last couple of years for some reason. While MANY rigs on the market have a "kink" in the MLW, the only way it will weaken the MLW is if it is loaded in a fashion that harness/container systems don't get loaded. That "kink" will not be there when the jumper is under canopy. Rigs have been built this way for over 25 years, yet I've never heard of a MLW failing because of a "kink". We have had prototypes in the field for over a year and over 1000 jumps on a couple of rigs, but we've never had any reports of a durability issue. If no one reports an issue, we can't fix it. The rigs with rigid stabilizers did sometimes have problems with the bottom corners of the backpad coming unstitched, but that has been fixed because people let us know. Look closer at that pocket- the velcro is sewn on in a fashion so that it peels automatically no matter which direction the handle is pulled. The ones with type 8 rear risers are non-articualted harnesses- pretty standard procedure throughout the industry. Airtec approved our Cypres installation before the Infinity went into production. We asked for the cutter to be placed on the kicker flap due to the metal top of our reserve pilot chute. They asked us to make some changes in order for them to approve the install, the changes were made, and the install was approved. You are right that it is more of a rigging issue than a design issue though- you should never be able to rock a reserve PC back and forth, and if you can see the edges of it under the flaps of the rig, there's probably a less than ideal situation there (i.e. loop too long, reserve too big for container, or too much bulk in the center). The angled tab is not what makes our pin cover special- it's simply a feature to help preserve the tab from rough packers that try to force the tab into place past the bottom flap grommet when the bottom flap was not pulled completely closed. What makes our pin cover special is as Slurp stated- the location of the closing loop and the construction of the center flap. If the closing loop is located on or near the reserve container, it will change the geometry of the tuck tab system depending on the length of the closing loop and the size of the parachute in the container. In order for a tuck tab system to work properly, several points need to be aligned properly, consistently, and that's what the Infinity does. This is simply not true either. In order for a riser cover to lock, the riser needs to pull from under the tuck tab pocket. If it is putting pressure on the underside of the pocket, it increases the bite the pocket has on the tab. With some rigs (esp. those with large pockets) this is a true concern since there isn't much to keep a riser from getting deep under the pocket in a situation such as having a shoulder low on deployment, so it's recommended to place the risers on top of the pocket. The design of the Infintiy secondary riser covers and reserve top flap (that also has the riser cover tuck tab pockets) directs the risers to the outside of the rig, where the risers pull on the covers themselves to open them. The "looseness" that you refer to is a required part of the system to prevent the tuck tabs from having too much pressure on them and getting a bend in them, rendering them all but useless. As I remember it, it was not a full 1/4", and I asked you to show me or send me some video of the riser cover opening, which I have yet to see four months later. As you may recall, I was quite surprised to hear about Dave having a problem with our riser covers opening before deployment, because we had never heard of it in the six years of manufacturing the currrent version. If I left you with the impression that I wouldn't fix it, I'm sorry. We always stand behind our products and make right what's wrong. But sometimes, without actually SEEING what's causing the problem, it's hard to FIX the problem. All I can really think is that it can't be that much of a problem if someone with three rigs doesn't feel it necessary to be without one for a week or so to fix the issue. What kind of flaw is this? Is it a safety issue, or durability? I think an explanation is due since you've just announced to the world that we have a "flawed" design with no other description, and it's certainly never been brought to VSE's attention as far as I remember. Often, it doesn't matter who takes the measurements, but accurate measurements are always the best place to start. There are still things to interpret and educated guesses to be made. Sometimes we don't get it right the first time, as is the case with everything ever built by man. If the harness is too big and the rig has already been assembled, we will resize the harness and repack the reserve for free if the job requires it, but that also requires the rig to be returned to us so we can do the work on it. If it's never returned to us to be fixed, it can only be assumed that the fit isn't that bad. Dave should be able to tell you that we have worked with him to keep him as happy as we can since we built a completely new rig for him after his second rig was made out of a new batch of cordura that had a different shade that he wasn't happy with. We have all order forms on file dating back to 1991, so I have no explanation for the legpads being taped in the wrong color. I'm sorry if this was a bit long winded, but explanations often take longer than observations

Couldn't DISSagree more, see my post to Rob one post back. I't explains my reasoning. Mick.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Those stitch patterns look cute - sort of like old Soviet military surplus harnesses - and "busy", but the chest and hip joints are so small that they don't have enough stitches to be very strong.Good thing that chest strap is wrapped around the MLW. I am not quite sure why they bothered with that bottom confluence wrap ... Rigging Innovations just uses a row of E-thread zig-zag stitching. Rob, Looking at the pic's it's a good thing that the lower confluence is there. If I'm seeing it correctly, all of the structural stitching on the main lift webs amounts to two small three points and 3/8 " of the upper 4 points that catch the very tip of the MLW turn back. It would tear the webbing to shreads if heavily loaded with out the two three points below it. Excluding the afore mentioned 3/8 " of stitching catching the MLW turn back (useless under load), the two three points (30 spi x 40 lb = 1200 + 40 spi x 40 lb = 1600 lb) =2800 lb total. Below the webbing strength, but above the hardware limit although, not by much it is not a good scenario, there is ZERO over build in this harness!! The weak point is the single layer of T 7 left below the upper 4 point. One can only hope this "rigger" got his thread from a different scource than the stuff used in the other harness we have been discussing. Yikes!! Mick.

How did you do it? Oh, the humanity!!!!!!!!! Mick.

Reflex. Cuz it's my baby and it works as advertized

Just like insurance policies it expires at midnight on the 120th day. Mick.

Even if they were done together it still validates the point about the "box" pattern. All things being equal the load would have been shared by both joints, this is scary as it means aprox 1/2 the force used was required to seperate the joint. Mick.

Some where I have a picture of about 50 skydivers picking it to move it off the runway.

Why do you suspect that I can not pulse dial a phone by hand? I'm an engineer . Yep, It can be. I was taught to pack square mains toggles/reserve risers facing against reserve containers. I have not seen or read about counter example, but original question has some sense. Yeah, there was a time that I could pack a round main too. I rest my case. I was talking about a rotorary phone. Mick.

Anyway... the King Air... isn't that "JJ" that went on to fame and fortune with a camio in the movie Point Break???? That would be the same 50 jj. It also had a gear up landing at Perris in the 90's. I believe it's still flying, somewhere. Mick.

I thought that was Nancy Sardella!! did not know her then but she worked for me in the late 90's building harnesses for the Reflex. hope she is doing well. Mick.

Is that so? Never thought of that!! I'm kinda new around here. Shit, what do I know? Mick.

No sure what you mean by that response but the use of common sense has got me this far. And yes I read the manual on everything I get. Haven’t you heard riggers are anal that way? Have you read the manual on your resever?

Yup, I agree with Mick, in spite of the jumpers assertion otherwise. It is the simplest explanation, and the most (by far, I think) common cause consistent with event like this. I always try to apply "occams razor" to any incident/ occurence. Occams razor basicly states: Of all possible answers the simpleist is most likely true (para phrased). Mick.

Mick, That was my first thoughts as well. I have seen it a couple of times in the past also. BS, MEL One of there guys was a TI and it still caught him off guard!! Overall it is a BAD PRACTICE to temporally hook up a main to check for continuity without passing the loop through the housing grommet. Haste makes waste, in this case human lives........... Fortunately everyone lived. Mick.

A gold star for you!! Mick.

For anyone interested, MDS stands for Molibdinum Di-Sulfide. Molibdinum being one of the strongest and most flexable substances out there. When coupled with nylon it's pretty fricken cool and can be used in a variety of different applications. At least that's the way John Sherman described it to me (many moons ago). Mick.

Just missing the bowl now and then!! Actually I had to go to work 1/2 way through the discussion What Sparky said basiclly sums it up, it all comes under the heading of "joint efficency". I do find it interesting that the 4 point had no box around it (if I read the photo's correctly), the box not only adds additional stiching and thus joint strength it also provides another barrier to runaway shearing action by retarding/ impeding the inital load force during deceleration. A full confluence wrap of T4 3" and a 4 point box stitch is the best way to construct an upper harness junction involving canopy release hardware. All bets are off if the thread is substandard. I'm going to go out on a limb here but I am willing to bet the thread used in the harness construction is going to be untraceable as no TSO/ ISO process was in place (I'm guessing here based on what I saw in Russia in 1996). Mick.

I'm actually pretty confident that it was hooked up correctly. My rigger was the one who hooked it up, and I was very through checking the rig on this jump, like I said I triple checked everything just because I had a bad feeling about it. Did you pull on the housing to make sure it was assembled correctly? If not this should become a part of your gear check. Mick.

But it can land like shit for those with little 7 cell experience. True, practice practice practice. Mick.