alan 1 #51 October 21, 2004 QuoteAlan seems to looking for a fight to prove you wrong or stupid or somthing who knows why. I haven't been trying to do either. My initial post in this thread was thought out and relevant, as were several others. JP seemed to pretty much be discounting everything that had been posted with this: "K, forget it. Since no one really want's to anser the question at hand, I guess my attempt at a "discusion" kinda fell apart. Never mind the pro's of a TSO process, or the education to jumpers about what the TSO process actually involves." That was a little provocative and I responded to that. I don't know if it was his intent at the time, but it turned out to ultimately be a very good strategy based on many of the subsequent posts in this thread.alan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #52 October 21, 2004 A few comments: 1. If we eliminated the TSO, people like Bill Booth, Sandy Reid, Bill Coe etc would still be designing gear for us; we wouldn't lose that sort of leadership. 2. Mains are not generally TSOed. They seem to have become better/safer/higher performing over the years. (Of course, you can always buy a tiny canopy and kill yourself - but that's true of tiny TSOed reserves as well.) 3. If anything, the thing that would do us in would be people who don't know anything about gear and buy Roger's Dirt Cheap Death-On-A-Stick rig; I think those people would be rare, but they would exist, and their deaths would bug us. 4. I have little doubt that PIA would rapidly come up with TSO-like standards for rigs to meet, and "PIA approved gear" would become a requirement at many DZ's. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #53 October 21, 2004 QuoteJP, I was gonna come to your defence but now I don't need to. You've stated your case well. Alan seems to looking for a fight to prove you wrong or stupid or somthing who knows why. Mick, I think you are right. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #54 October 21, 2004 QuoteQuoteand we lack a better method of assuring safe equipment. I would say the illusion of safe equipment, or potentially safer equipment. The gear manufactured today, in most cases, is safer then the jumpers using it.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pms07 3 #55 October 22, 2004 we lack a better method of assuring safe equipment. *** Over the years I've seen plenty of TSO'd gear that is best described as "death on a ripcord"... I'm not saying the TSO testing and QC process is bad...it doesn't assure we've got safe equipment though. pms Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #56 October 22, 2004 Quotewe lack a better method of assuring safe equipment. *** Over the years I've seen plenty of TSO'd gear that is best described as "death on a ripcord"... I'm not saying the TSO testing and QC process is bad...it doesn't assure we've got safe equipment though. pms I agree with you, some gear is scary. Most of the scary gear has been changed since it left the manufacture for what ever reason. In the last 10 years or so, there seems to be less and less of "sport death" gear around. It is the only system we have at to moment and no one has said they have a better idea. Skydivers need to take a more active role in assuring they have gear that is safe and in good condition. Throwing your rig at a packer after a jump and at a rigger when needed seems to be the wave of the future. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
