Changing rig colours

[Mush 0]

I have just seen a rig for sale but hate the colours.

Is there a way to change them I,E with dye's, or can riggers add choice colours on top.

Thanks

[councilman24 37]

In a word, no.

Some flaps can be replaced by the manufacturer. See Sunpath's web site for example costs. But rarely is it worth it just to change color. MIght be for you.

On guy used a laundry marker to complete color his blue rig black. Took me a couple of minutes to realize what he did. One side of the webbing was black and one was blut. This effectively grounded the harness and he was out one rig.

In the old days (60's and 70's) OD green rigs used to be dyed black. This is a major alteration and probably hasn't been done in decades.

Find a rig you like, or close your eys and jump.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[Scoop 0]

You cant see it if its on your back anyway!

[riggerrob 643]

Which flap don't you like?
If it is just the pilot chute cap - on a Racer or Javelin - then your local rigger can quickly change that.
As for changing the colour of flaps, that requires replacing entire flaps and starts at $80 per flap, but is rarely done outside the factory. Fancy center flaps, with stripes and piping, etc. cost more than $100.

Dyeing rigs is a bad idea.
Your question reminds me of the time a local rigger brought an old Talon to Rigging Innovations. The second owner had dyed a red rig black, using shoe dye. The official response from Rigging Innovations was: "Since we don't know what chemicals are in that shoe dye .... We will not do any repairs to this rig. We will not do any updates to this rig. This rig was never here and we never had this conversation."

In other words, if you dye a container, you are on your own, because a lot of riggers won't touch it after that.

[JerryBaumchen 1,436]

Hi Terry,

  Quote

This is a major alteration

Not to argue, but how did you reach this conclusion/opinion?

The whole concept of 'major alteration' of a military surplus rig is vague.

Jerry

[councilman24 37]

Hmmm, good question. Spent about 30 minutes looking for a reference, including some 1944 and 1964 books and couldn't find one. I probably first was told that by the master rigger that trained me in 1982. It seemed to be commonly accepted at that time and I know I heard it from more than one person. Although I also heard stories of guys dying their B-12 containers in college dorm bath tubs.

As a chemist I'll argue that it is. But couldn't find a reference.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[JerryBaumchen 1,436]

Hi Terry,

This 'military rig' thing goes back to '65 when I first became a rigger. I spent a fair amount of time reading virtually anything & everything I could get my hands on.

Military rigs (actually, the whole of DoD) do not come under any control of the Dept. of Transportation (FAA being in that dep't.). It's that whole thing about national security, etc. We wouldn't want some GS-5 stopping the F-15's from rolling would we?

So when they (military surplus gear) get put into the 'sport environment' they become somewhat of a 'vague' item, IMO.

Many FAA documents refer to some military type designation, etc. as being OK to use/mix/match in sport/emergency parachutes. Again, this is where (IMO) things get vague.

Just some thoughts of mine,

Jerry

[councilman24 37]

I guess the way I've always considered that there were two ways for single harness dual parachute equipment to be legal in the civilian world.

Quote 105

Approved parachute means a parachute manufactured under a type certificate or a Technical Standard Order (C-23 series), or a personnel-carrying U.S. military parachute (other than a high altitude, high speed, or ejection type) identified by a Navy Air Facility, an Army Air Field, and Air Force-Navy drawing number, an Army Air Field order number, or any other military designation or specification number.


Actually I didn't realize this had been rewritten to be so specific and have exclusions.

After this definition everything else was equal in the civilian world, no matter whether TSO or military origin.

Obviously the military gets to do what they want with the gear when it's not in civilian use.

The issue back in the day of military surplus was that the manufacturer didn't routinely deal with the civilian world. Poynter's manual counted as packing instructions. Senior and Master riggers were left to perform their respective priviledges, including altering mains for stearability and harnesses for reserves.

Of course nobody checked, riggers and others did what they wanted and skydivers were fringes of society.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE