rigger_john

When you pulled on the bag the bands neither unstowed or broke? Is the canopy still stuck in the bag or did you manage to get it out. I'm not sure how much force a tandem drogue puts on a stow band but I be very very surprised if it wasn't enough to break a rubber band double stowed or not. I suspect that other factors were involed. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

I think the line management on a reserve is a side issue here. We use a line stow pocket on free bags because when you are at 750 feet doing 120 mph line dump is a lesser evil than line hesitation. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

I've seen quite a few bag locks in my 15 years of rigging and almost every one I've ever seen has been because of asymmetrical line deployment. This results in a set of lines from one riser dragging against the closed flap of the d-bag and the line group that remains stowed is not subject to any pressure from the pilot chute. The bands don't fail to break because they are to strong. They don't break because there is no pressure excerted on them. Another way for a bag lock to occur is if a loop of stowed line from one band manages to loop over a portion of lines in another stow. In this case the band will not break because again the pressure from the pilot chute is either against the tape on that the band is looped onto or because the line has a leaverage advantage against the pilot chute. In either case double stowing is irrelevant. the bands would break if there was pressure on them. I repeat Smilers question. Does anybody have ANY direct evidence of double stowing causing a mal. Just because the bag didn't open does not mean the bands were to strong I have seen a baglock on a bag that had single stow with quite weak bands. I hear a lot of anecdotal evidence but nobody has given a single case where double stowing caused a mal beyoned any doubt. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

I have a customer today ask me to pack his Raven 1 reserve into his 1 pin teardrop classic. When I looked at the pack job I thought it was very bulky. On Inspection I found the container was originaly made for a Swift +, the container doesn't say which one or give it reserve tray volume either. Now a raven has a "listed" pack volume of 375 cu in, assuming that the container was made for a Swift + 145 which has a pack volume of 330 cu in, the reserve is 45 cu in oversize for the tray. even allowing for up to -10% variation in volumes the reserve would still be a little oversize. So Guys here is the question. How far would the riggers here go when it comes to packing an over or undersized reserve into a container, given that it might be over just because of pack volume variation. BTW I'm not asking if I should or shouldn't pack this rig. I have already decided what to do about that. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

Hi Guys, me and my colleague were discussing what winds us up the most, things like, jumpers asking if we can examine thier main closing loop, or questions that start with "Do you have 5 minutes", because we all know that it take about three quarters of an hour to do a five minute job. A rigger we know once got asked to patch a crossport vent. Or how about the time I got a canopy with a note on it saying hole in tail. to find after 20 mins of inspection the hole was in the nose. Over to you guys! _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

Let me get this right, If the equipment is TSOed then it's approved regardless of where it was made or who owns it? And if its approved it has to be packed by an FAA rigger under FAA rules regardless of who jumps it? If thats right I think that almost every person visiting the USA is violating the FAR. I can't think of a reserve that doesn't have TSO approval. I can't remember the last time I worked on a non TSO HC system I think that rule if I understand it right has huge implications. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

Try to reclose a reserve using the same seal. I'll admit it is possible in theory, but I've tried just to see how hard it is and I don't think you can do it. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

There is a word doc here with a drawing of the BPA method of sealing reserves. http://www.bpa.org.uk/forms/docs/Form%20215%20-%20BPA%20Reserve%20Sealing%20Method.doc _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

It happened in Norway some years ago, the seal jammed between the edge of the grommet and the loop, it pinched the loop tight against the grommet so the reserve stayed closed. As a result of this we changed the way we seal in the UK. Our seals are tacked down so they can't move, we also route the sealing thread a diffrent way to FAA riggers, so it doesn't add any poundage to the ripcord. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

They did note on the card that they had fitted the AAD. But my point was as soon as they did so without a full inspection and repack the rig nolonger meet BPA requirments. Therefore using it was a violation of FAR 105. As for sealing of reserves (sombody mentioned that) in the UK it's the riggers choice to seal or not. Most of us choose not to. I don't unless I'm asked. I don't know of a single case of a seal saving anybody, but I know of one case of it killing a jumper. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

I think Terry and others have given well thought out replies to my question(s) Over here in the UK it's a total NO NO to open anybodys eles reserve repack without a full inspection and repack, but we have "grey" areas in our rules too. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

Ok sorry about the USPA rigger statment, here in the UK the BPA issues rigger certificates, because the CAA realised along time ago they didn't know enough about rigging to issue them, in fact all parachuting activities aree controled by the BPA on behalf of the CAA. As for the FAA rigger not doing anything wrong are you saying that it's ok for a FAA rigger to put the AAD in, then release back to the jumper, who then carries the responsibility to ensure that the rigger hasn't broken any rules in doing the work? FAA riggers can allow a parachute to be given back to the jumper packed and "apparently" ready to jump, but in violation of FAR 105.49 (4) (ii) and it's the foreign jumpers responsibility with no combacks on the rigger who did the work? Really? _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba

Hi, at a recent riggers meeting in the UK it was reported that a UK jumper had a USPA rigger fit an AAD into his rig. The rigger opened the reserve fitted the AAD and then reclosed the pack. When the jumper got back to the UK the rigger who packed the reserve told him, that his reserve repack was invalid. Because BPA rule state that only the original packer can open a reserve to add or remove an AAD, change the battery or adjust the loop length ect. If it is done by another packer the reserve must be subject to a full inspection and repack. Those are the rules in the UK, my question is did the USPA rigger break any rules? As I understand it the FAA rules say that foreign equipment can be jumped in the USA as long as it meets the requirments of the country it comes from. As soon as the USPA rigger opened the reserve pack job the equipment no longer meet BPA requirments. Comments and thoughts. _________________________________________ Nullius in Verba