Slightly bent reserve closing pin

[RiggerLee 61]

Very cool. Waiting with baited breath. It's nice to have threads that are more interesting then "look at the color of my new rig."

Lee

Lee
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com

[x46255 0]

Quote

Very cool. Waiting with baited breath. It's nice to have threads that are more interesting then "look at the color of my new rig."

Lee

Damn...I was just about to throw up a pic of my new rig...

[jimthefireman 0]

I will be interested to see the article too. It is nice that people are interested and aware enough to share their experiences and pass on hard information rather than just opinion so the photos and discussion are much appreciated.
I simply cannot see how (unless there is a significant initial defect in manufacturing as occurred with capewell pins from November 01 to July 03) a slight bend as pictured could cause any significant change to required pull force or liklihood of breakage. Poynters in part six details manufacture, inspection and testing of pins and suggests "As a practical matter, pins may be tested with the fingers prior to packing". The CW03-01 service bulletin will give you an idea of just how much leverage a safe pin will withstand without any bend at all for comparison and you would need impressive fingers to make an impression on a good pin. I was told by one of those who initially found the problem that the pins which failed CW03-01 broke with very little force indeed.
Having said all that, in aviation generally, you will never get in trouble by being overly cautious and simply replacing anything which is not 100% right. If the rigger bent it, then he (or she) should replace it.

[jimthefireman 0]

Forgot the link to CW03-01 here it is
http://www.softieparachutes.com/PDF/PIA%20PIN%20TechBulletinnical%2071003Rev3.pdf

[sundevil777 102]

This is a subject that gets me a little worked up.

I think the std reserve pin design, and the strength standard is terribly inadequate. I make that conclusion because I think it should not be possible to bend a pin while packing it, or when leaning against the airplane on the way to altitude, or when getting shoved into the door frame during the door jam-up or when diving out late (yes, I realize racers aren't vulnerable to that).

To pass this type of abuse I think it might mean that the pin should be about 3 to 5 times stronger/stiffer than is currently the case.

The reserve pin of the Vector is a significant departure from the standard (larger diameter). I think they would do well to advertise the benefit of their reserve pin. If would push the other mfgs to step it up.

I think it is very likely that the top grommet/bearing surface which the pin rides against might also be worthy of beefing up, or completely redesigning.

I am not a rigger, but I am a mech engineer, done mechanical component design for Boeing and Honda for 18 years.

More thoughts on this subject:
http://www.dropzone.com/...i?post=575109#575109

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[RiggerLee 61]

Ya, you got a point. Keep in mind where those pins came from. That's a capewell pin. It's designed to go through a cone. If you don't know what I'm talking about look it up. Old Millitary shit. I will say this for it, it's all metal, but even that didn't keep it from haveing problems. We're useing something for a purpouse in a way that it was never designed for. Some things they're stuck with. If you need a metal that can be forged, drawn out, and swedged then there's a limit to how hard it can be. And would you really want it to break? Better that it bend. But there is no reason that it should be the diamiter that it is. It's high time we designed a pin of our own for our own needs. And yes I think it should be fatter. I remember setting around and lissening to Booth and... I think it was Cliff museing about this very thing during an accedent investigation, unrelated. I will say that I don't like Booths new "Peg" pin. Too big, too fat, too square, and for God sake could you sharpen the end just a little. Let's be honest. He usses those damn things and he's going the spector becose he's too cheep to pay capewell to swedge his ripcords. Don't blame him theywant too much money and his shit works fine other then the pin. Just as a side note you know there was a manufactor doing that thirty years ago right?

Lee

Lee
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com

[klingeme 1]

Quote

Too big, too fat, too square, and for God sake could you sharpen the end just a little.

I guess you have not seen the new ones. They now have a point to them.

Mark Klingelhoefer

[JohnDeere 0]

Quote

Too big, too fat, too square,

I have a V3 and would much rather have one that is big, fat, and square than one that is too thin and weak! I know it would take alot more to bend or break my pin than some other manufactors chicken shit weak pins! Just my opinion but that is how i feal about reserve pins.

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!

[sundevil777 102]

Oh yes, I remember cones. Of course it was MUCH more important that you not bend the pin, as I'm sure you know. Several years after the pin strength testing in the field crap and still only the Vector has an alternative. Really pathetic considering how the mfgs spend lots of resources on trivial design changes.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[JerryBaumchen 1,359]

Hi Cliff,

I'm an M.E. also and I agree completely with you on the antiquated pin design.

Currently, we are using pins that were designed for a different application ( cones ) and grommets that were never, originally, designed for parachute use.

This industry has taken two items that were never designed for each other and combined them into a system that has a potential for failure, i.e., bent pins.

It really would not take much in the way of die design change to produce a pin(s) that is just as they are dimensionally except for having a larger pin diameter; everything else could be left the same so that all current swaging dies would work.

Now I may be completely wrong and the changes might just require a substantial change in the swaging dies, but I don't think so.

Maybe a little pressure onto the pins makers ( Capewell, Jump Shack & Metal Flex ) might get them to change things.

One obstacle will be that they all want their pins to be on the DOD Qualified Products List; I am thinking that this is what is really the driving force on current pin design.

Just my old $0.02,

JerryBaumchen

[sundevil777 102]

Do you think there is anything that prevents any of the existing mfgs from just using the Vector reserve pin/line attachment method? Perhaps no change at all would be required, or maybe just a different distance from the grommet to the end of the housing. Doesn't the military already buy the Vector with that configuration? I would think the design does meet the target I mentioned of not being able to be screwed up by leaning/hitting something, or extremely tight closing loops.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[RiggerLee 61]

A point that's sooo cool! Can't wait to pack one.

As I was told the story, once opon a time the millatary precurment system was a real over spected nightmare. Now it seems they buy every thing off the shelf. I doubt it would be as big a problem now. You'd have to have a qc and testing program for the mido but I don't see the big deal. Booth obveously did it. The bottom line is new colors, cool fabrics, freefly friendly flaps, and embroidery sell rigs not safety features. Your best bet is to get a ground swell of support going here on dz. but you can't go telling people that it will make them safer. You got to come up with another line. Tell them... it will make it harder for the pin to be pushed out and there rig will be more free fly friendly. Try telling them they can use a soft houseing through the yoke with the spector rip cord and it will make there rig more comfertable. The reserve flap will lay flatter without that nasty cable and there rig will look smaller. Come on if we all brainstorm here I'm sure we can come up with a good compelling argument on which to base a campaine.

Lee

Lee
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com

[jimthefireman 0]

The thing about the existing ripcord pins is that there are a heck of a lot of them and that they have been used for a heck of a long time. This is what gives you a track record to allow for the "one in a million" problem to become "one hundred in one hundred million" and become noticed and fixed.
The big change with pins was when cones (which could have gromments lock on them in some circumstances) gave way to loops which were much less likely to give problems and in turn allowed for cutting devices to deploy reserves which incidently meant even a seriously bent pin would not stop the deployment.
A group of people "brain storming" a new solution can never compare with a track record. I believe that people have died because of a bent pin, but never heard of a single instance where it happend or seen a fatality report from that cause in three decades of reading them. I would be very reluctant to jump into an apparent "improvement" until I knew the present system really was a problem, and the proposed change did not cause some new and unknown problem to appear.