ELAN tandem rig - any news?

[skydiverek 63]

Strong Enterprises has been working on the new ELAN tandem rig for some time now. I am very curious about it's look, functionality, etc. Anyone has news on it?

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

I was incredibly surprised when, at the PIA symposium in 2003, Strong did NOT introduce a tandem rig based on the stylish Quasar II sport rig. Instead, their "fantastic breakthrough" was their "per jump" lease program. Ugh.

It fascinates me that Strong sells any of their butt-ugly tandem rigs at all. Some companies are just so resistant to change that they simply lose sight of what the jumping (and professional skyding instructor) really wants. I think a Quasar-based tandem rig would sell like hot-cakes. This, of course, assuming they also incorporate some, what I consider to be mandatory, things like retractable drogue releases. Just my thoughts.

Chuck
"not a moderator in this forum"

[riggerrob 643]

Chuck,
I agree with you.
I was surprized when Strong did not introduce a Quasar-based tandem rig at the 1995 PIA Symposium!
I tried suggesting that for a decade, but eventually tired of being ignored.
To understand why Strong Enterprises does not build Quasar-based tandem rigs, you have to understand how the Quasar was developed.
Back in the spring of 1993, Strong Hawk containers were selling at a dismal rate. Ted Strong was the only person in-house who still liked them. All the senior staff thought differently, so when Ted announced that he was going to hike the Long Trail, senior staff started plotting.
As soon as Ted hit the trail, they locked their best young designer in a room and told him not to come out until he had completed a one-pin reserve container.
By the time Ted returned in mid-July, they had completed all the drop tests and had FAA approval.
Bu the end of July 2003, Tom Fowler brought a sleek Quasar pre-production model to Oshkosh.
Ted was not amused!
Granted, there were a few rough edges on the first few Quasars, but the Quasar 2 competes directly with most other 1990s vintage containers.

Just before the 2005 PIA Symposium, I chatted with Strong's production manager, who had not seen the Elan prototype. That means a minimum of a 6-month delay while he figures out how to sew the new design. Truthfully, it usually takes Strong Enterprises a couple of years to productionize a new design (i.e. Jump-o-meter)

P.S. a retractable drogue release is available as an add-on kit from Strong Enterprises. I have installed them on all 12 of our Strong Dual Hawk tandem rigs.

The other impedement to replacing the Dual Hawk design is large DZs (i.e. Pitt Meadows) that operate a dozen or more tandem rigs - plus 6 at Niagara Skydvie Center and three more at Beiseker, Alberta. The cost of replacing a dozen rigs at a time is prohibitive. The only way my boss would could afford Elans, would be if he could stuff old canopies, drogues, d-bags, etc. into new Elans.

[neandertal 0]

All right, two years have past since Mike last post. Any news about this SKUNK WORK?

No Drogue, no JUMP!!

[DualHawk 0]

I can't give you a specific date, but it is on it's way. I'm not sure if the name will still be Elan, but I think when it's done, you will be very pleased with the results.

Best Regards,

Tom Noonan
Tandem Director
Strong Enterprises

[stevene78 0]

So is this design still based on the quasar II ? And will additional ratings be required ?

[VikingXtreme 0]

2 more years have passed now.... is there any news about this system?

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

2 more years have passed now.... is there any news about this system?

....................................................................

No, and I doubt if we will hear anything in the near future.
I saw a prototype of an experimental tandem rig when I visited Strong Enterprises back in the spring of 2008. That prototype had a one-pin Pop-Top reserve container, but was a ways away from being complete enough to jump.

The last time I spoke with (sales reps) at Strong Enterprises, they were bemoaning the lack of R&D dollars to complete TSO C23D certification of a 30 foot diameter LOPO round canopy for pilot emergency parachutes, despite having dropped thousands of them with tandem bundles.
I even watched them drop a pair of 30 foot LOPOs - with tandem bundles - in the spring of 2007.

It also looks like they have laid off Tom Noonan (Head of Tandem Program), so dollars must really be tight at Strong Ent.

CAUTION, most of the above is from me reading between the lines, so if anyone has inside information, please share.

[TaylorC 0]

Will be really suprised if i see another rig from strong in the next few years. Doubt they have the finances with the law case. Be nice to see something from strong thats modern and safer

[riggerrob 643]

This is not the first time Strong has been dragged into court.
Nor is it the first time that an American parachute manufacturer has been dragged into court.

Most parachute accidents are found at the end of a string of mistakes. Judges typically assign blaim 40% to one party, 20% to another party etc. but the argument quickly devolves into an argument over who is going to pay the victim's medical bills.

The American medical system is a separate debate.

So court debates devolve into a debate over which party has the deepest pockets. Parachute manufacturers - with large military contracts - (like Storng Enterprises) are perceived as having "deep pockets."

Defense tactics vary from one manufacturer to the next. Few parahcute manufacturers carry liability insurance because it is a: very expenisve and b: makes it look like they have deep pockets.

George Galloway (of Precision Aerodynamics) simply refuses to appear in court.

The Relative Workshop changed their corporate name to include the term "Uninsured."

I remember a case in the mid-1990s, when a lawyer phoned Sandy Reid (owner of Rigging Innovations) to ask "Who is your insurance company?"
Sandy replied "we don't have any liability insurance."
The lawyer phoned back a few days later to say "Come on, just give me the name of your insurance company and we can settle this out of court."
When it became clear that R.I. had no liability insurance, he dropped the case.

Meanwhile, Strong Enterprises has chosen the opposite course: standing up in court to all challenges. Strong ends up paying frightful legal fees to prove their innocence, or neglible contribution to the accident.
I heard another defendant's story from Milt Burton. Strong Enterprises was exonerated in that case, but Milt ended up paying (large dollars) for his mistakes for the rest of his life.

[JerryBaumchen 1,354]

Hi Rob,

Quote

lawyer phoned Sandy Reid (owner of Rigging Innovations) to ask "Who is your insurance company?"
Sandy replied "we don't have any liability insurance."
The lawyer phoned back a few days later to say "Come on, just give me the name of your insurance company and we can settle this out of court."

John Stanford, who used to build rigs in the DFW area, had the same thing happen. He told me that it took him a long time to finally convince the attorney that he had no insurance. It all went away then.

JerryBaumchen

PS) Plus, any insurance you can get will have so many disclaimers as it will end up being worthless. IMO much better to just go naked and tell them that there is really nothing to get.

[jumpwally 0]

Whats the Milt Burton story ?

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Whats the Milt Burton story ?

................................................................................................

Milt Burton used to (circa 1990) operate a DZ North-West of Los Angeles, California (Santa Ynes?).
He loaned a Strong tandem rig to an instructor who had never jumped with a Strong Examiner.
IOW Strong Enterprises had no record of that instructor training on Strong Dual Hawk Tandems.

The instructor pulled low, just before impact.
The student died and the instructor fractured both legs.

Strong spent lots of money defending themselves against that law suit.

In the end, the judge told Milt Burton to pay many thousands of dollars damages to the family of the deceased student.