Techno Reserve Canopy

[BKR 0]

I have one question for you Riggers. How can you recognized if the canopy has a TSO under Emergency (non intentional jump) or Sport (intentional jump) classification? It seems to me there is no special marking to differentiate them??

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

Hi Jerome,

I am not completely sure of what you are asking; but I'll make an effort to answer.

Please remember that I do not speak for the US FAA or any canopy mfr.

One of the first modern canopies that was TSO'd and could be used, when purchased new, as either a main or reserve ( or both ) was the Raven series of canopies.

I 'seem to remember' that the mfr said that an owner could make one jump on it and still pack it into a reserve ( of course, it still had to be airworthy, i.e., no damage, etc ).

If a person buys a canopy that is marked as FAA TSO C23(x) and uses it as a main then it becomes a main canopy and is no longer a reserve. Let me clarify that: This would depend upon the limitations that the mfr stipulates. They could say that you can make no more than 100 jumps and still pack it up as a reserve if they wanted to. Or they could say that if it were jumped even one time it could no longer be packed up as a reserve.

At all times ( IMO ) a rigger must make a decision as to the airworthiness of all of the TSO'd products that he is going to assemble and/or pack.

Remember, all of this is just my opinion and the opinion(s) of other people may vary.

So what do you say about your products; can they be jumped as a main & then be packed up as a reserve?

JerryBaumchen

PS) The original concept of a TSO standard was for an emergency parachute only; the FAA never considered that some 'different' thinking people might want to make an intentional jump.

PPS) A few years after it came onto the sport maket, Pioneer obtained a TSO for their ParaCommander canopy.

[pchapman 279]

Quote

PS) The original concept of a TSO standard was for an emergency parachute only; the FAA never considered that some 'different' thinking people might want to make an intentional jump.

I think that sport vs. emergency distinction is what Jerome is getting at.

For example, I've seen an EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) report online about parachute certifications. It lists the certifications of all sorts of emergency rigs that fall under its responsibility. But otherwise:

Quote

Personnel parachutes within the scope of EASA are parachutes designed for wearing or installation on
board of an aircraft within the scope of EASA for use in case of an emergency. All other parachutes are
under the responsibility of the relevant Member States.

Between that and what Jerome wrote, suggests that there's some tendency to split sport and emergency chutes in Europe.

PS - Jerry B. must be right about the Paracommander, because on the EASA list next to various emergency rigs and canopies, 3 different sizes of Paracommander are listed. Not that I'd want one as a reserve!

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

I have one question for you Riggers. How can you recognized if the canopy has a TSO under Emergency (non intentional jump) or Sport (intentional jump) classification? It seems to me there is no special marking to differentiate them??

I am not quite sure what you are asking, but here's what I think you might be talking about.

In the USA, there is no certification of sport main parachutes. There are just a few regulations that address the main parachute at all, such as what sort of rigging certifications are required to do the different sorts of maintenance and repair work on them. But, as far as the manufacture and distribution of sport main parachutes, there are not required to be certified in any way.

Pilot emergency parachutes and sport reserve parachutes are one and the same in the eyes of the FAA. Each is intended for emergency or non-intentional use. Each must meet the certification requirements that were in effect at the time of their certification.

The question of what is meant by "intentional use" is not really clearly defined. Clearly, a sport parachutist intends to use his reserve parachute in the event that he cannot use his main parachute. But, in the eyes of the FAA, it was not the intention of the sport parachutist to use the reserve when he was, for instance, leaving the aircraft, any more than it was the intention of the pilot to use the emergency parachute at the time he boarded the aircraft.

Simply, the FAA does not consider that a sport reserve is for intentional use. In the eyes of the FAA, you intend to use your main parachute, if you have one, and you do not intend to use your emergency or reserve parachute. If you leave the aircraft in flight voluntarily, then you must have at least two parachutes, at least one of which is certified for emergency or non-intentional use.

Does that answer your question?

[sundevil777 102]

I don't remember seeing any US gear dealers selling Techno reserves, are there any?

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

[BKR 0]

Hi all,

thank you for your answers, you all answered different ways. Do not considering the main canopy in my question. Up to the AS8015/B there are 3 approval types, tandem, emergency and sport. Emergency and sport have different testing stage (emergency type has less testing to be done than sport). So, Paul gave a good answer concerning the cutaway because when we leave the airplane we do not want to use the reserve, this means the reserve canopy could be classified as emergency too. So, why do we have 2 classifications and how can you check on the label in which category the canopy has been certified for?
I haven't seen any informations to be sure which one is classified in emergency or in sport. The EASA list is a mess, you even have tandem system classified as emergency, funny..You have canopies like Olympics, Papillon, etc too.
anyway, thank you for your infos.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[pchapman 279]

Thanks Jerome for the little bit of insight on how things work in Europe.

It's bad enough trying to figure out the FAA in the big US market -- you've got to deal with all the different European rules.

[BKR 0]

Quote

Thanks Jerome for the little bit of insight on how things work in Europe.

It's bad enough trying to figure out the FAA in the big US market -- you've got to deal with all the different European rules.

Hi Peter,

EEC is a big mess with EASA but we are not concerned any more (as sport equipement manufacturer) by them. We went back under control of our NAA. If you need more infos concerning EEC rules, feel free.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[ernokaikkonen 0]

Quote

The Techno's manual actually shows that the Techno 98 is not JTSO C23d certified, but only to the French 530 EQ-03 standard (which may be higher or lower in requirements). Nor is the 140 size, for some reason. (Did they simply not have time to get it by the time that my manual was printed?).

I believe this is due to a similar situation as with the smallest and largest PDR; The Techno 98 and 140 came much out later than the other models.

[NovaTTT 2]

Bumping an old post. . . .

Quote

The process is simple, because technical specs are the same (AS8015/B). As soon as you get your J or E-Tso-C23d you send all paperwork application to your local NAA. Then they get in touch with the FAA to obtain the TSO-C23d approval. Then you wait several months to get it.

. . . to discuss this:

Anyone know if a TSO label is how JTSO approval is shown? Meaning - does a foreign JTSO'd rig that has been approved bear a TSO label or is it perhaps just a document issued by the FAA and held by the mfgr?

Anyone have experience with this?

"Even in a world where perfection is unattainable, there's still a difference between excellence and mediocrity." Gary73

[leski 0]

did you get the answer to your question because we have the same problem with our federation in new zealand.

[JohnSherman 1]

This is all handled by Treaty. Any country with which we have an treaty covering aviation includes a resoprosity agreement where Equipment Certified by the government of each country is honored by the other country. Most other countries don't have certification mechanism for parachutes.

Citizens of Countries who are not signatories or who do not have any governmental certification and have National Aero Clubs who approve equipment for local use may use that equipment while visiting other countries but it may not be used by anyone else.

The reason for the Euro TSO -- So they can sell equipment to other countries, like the U.S.

[eladberger 0]

I understand that JTSO C23d and TSO C23d been trough the same testing, how can I prove it?
My federation doesn't allow me to jump a JTSO reserve in a TSO rig.

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

I understand that JTSO C23d and TSO C23d been trough the same testing, how can I prove it?
My federation doesn't allow me to jump a JTSO reserve in a TSO rig.

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

That's just silly/protectionism/bureaucratic cranial-rectal inversion!

Tell them to read both documents. Then they will find that JTSO is almost a photo-copy of the FAA TSO.