RSL routing question

[The111 1]

This is a quick/easy question, and I *do* plan on asking a rigger at the DZ, but I won't be there for a while and I'm curious now, so if you feel like answering, please do. :)

Which of these two pics is the preferred way to route my RSL? I've thought it through and it seems it would function fine both ways, but the first one seems like a "better" choice... it sits better there.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Hazarrd 1]

im no rigger, but the second picture just looks like you are making the RSL go out its way and wrap around the cable housing. my guess would be the first one looks better. no idea which one is safer.

.-.

[The111 1]

Those were my thoughts...

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Which of these two pics is the preferred way to route my RSL?

RSL1, definately.

Derek

[Gadget 0]

The same here
RSL1

If people from Poland are called Poles, why aren't people from Holland called Holes???
My logbook

[mr2mk1g 10]

Mine came set from the factory like #1. Whilst I can't realy determin any problem with the second set up, why mess with the way it was intended.... althogh I'd hazzard a guess that Bill Booth would say that about a lot of things we see on the market.

[ZigZag 0]

And most likely the way the mfg intended. Looks cleaner too.

[meatbomb 0]

I'll add my vote for No. 1. You should be able to run your finger all the way along your RSL to the connection point without coming across any obstructions (other than the guide ring on the reserve flap). No 2 clearly routes the RSL under the Cutaway housing (not a hideous offence, but not ideal!)

---
Swoopert, CS-Aiiiiiii!
Piccies

[rigging65 0]

I agree that fig.1 is the more correct of the two, but also ask yourself this: Does it really matter?

With the exception of the riser breaking (when was the last time you heard of a properly maintained Super Mini-Riser breaking?), by definition the cable must be removed from the amp fitting before the RSL takes effect. This, of course, means that cable housing will no longer be attached to the riser, and thus won't be an obstacle when the RSL reaches stretch. So, in theory, it doesn't matter which way you route the RSL, because the cable housing won't be there when it actuates.

The reason why figure 1 is more correct, IMO, is that figure 2 could (very remote, but possible) cause a problem if a riser were to break (also very remote, but possible)...

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

[FrogNog 1]

> No 2 clearly routes the RSL under the Cutaway housing ...

While I agree with most/all the other posts I have seen so far here saying that #1 looks / is better, I have to disagree that No 2 routes the RSL under the cutaway housing.

When the riser is under any normal load, it will be standing straight up off the main lift webbing. At that point the cutaway cable and housing are also sticking mostly up away from the main lift, and the RSL is too. To me this makes the routing a question not of "over/under the cutaway housing" but "around the inside or around the outside". This may be nothing but a semantic difference stemming from geometry, or it could be something that changes peoples' minds.

I looked at both these routing methods on a rig I was jumping for the first time Saturday to conclude my student status (woo-hoo!, beer!, etc.) and I decided that it didn't matter whether the RSL went inside or outside the cutaway cable, because the RSL wouldn't be loaded until a cutaway had been performed, at which point the cutaway housing stops being a factor because it's a smooth, semi-rigid line that is anchored at only one end.

I thus found myself concerned only with whether the RSL could interfere with operation (or non-operation
So, I pick picture #1 because it places the RSL bits in a place (leisurely wrapping half around the "outside"* of the cutaway housing) they are less likely to get into the 3-rings when you find a BBOS overhead.

* outside using the perspective "side further from the 3-rings".

-=-=-=-=-
Pull.

[Rookeskydiver 0]

just wondering, but how much does it cost to install an RSL on your rig?

PCSS # 1 Rookeskydiver
"Its a Wonka Bar"....."Go ahead Charlie open it, lets see that golden ticket"

[rigging65 0]

The cost for a factory retrofit varies, depending on Manufacturer. I've seen them anywhere from $60 to $140.

Certified field retro-fit kits generally cost somewhere around $75 (parts and labor included). Keep in mind that you'll also need to send the rig to the loft to have the work done. You'll also need a reserve repack when the work is done, so you might wait until your next cycle is up.

Also, if you're doing a field-installed kit, be sure whomever does the modification is licensed to do so. They must have specific approval from the FAA (with paperwork on file) to do this sort of a mod, or it's illegal. This isn't as simple as "My rigger will do it", it's a Modification and therefore other rules apply!

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

[sducoach 0]

Please call the manufacturer and ask the same question. However, #1 for me.

Blues,

J.E.

James 4:8