riggerrob

Yes. During an exchange program between Soviet and Alaska smoke-jumpers (early 1980s) the Alaska smoke-jumpers tried and liked the Soviet drogues, so contracted with Strong to manufacture similar drogues for US smoke-jumpers. Butler also built a few drogues for US gov't contracts. Fast forward to 1983 and both Ted Strong and Bill Booth were test-jumping prototype tandem rigs. Since tandems fall stable at 160 to 200 mph. they tore up a lot of mains. Consider that first generation tandems used the same canopies for main and reserve. Ted Strong attached a Russian-pattern drogue to his Dual Hawk tandem to tame opening speeds down to 100 mph. Since Strong's first-pattern tandem drogues fell too slowly for outside video-graphers to follow, his second pattern drogues were a bit smaller and fell at more like the 120 mph that is comfortable for solo jumpers. Strong also tried installing a drogue on a solo student Combination Tandem (piggyback harness/container). it fell stable at less than 100 mph. That worked well until a solo freefall student at Hinckley, Illinois was spinning violently when he scared the FXC 1200 attached to his main ripcord. During the ensuing deployment, the main twisted up with the drogue and never opened. End of that experiment. At one of the PIA Symposia, some wag suggested that if tandem had been invented 4 years earlier, USPA would never have approved AFF.

yes and the latest US Army At-11 static-line rig also has a sleeve to improve deployments from faster airplanes like C-17. The AT-11 canopy is also sort-of-square ... more like a cross parachute with the arms sewn together than the Russian pattern.

Where is the "Skydive 024" dropzone. Rules in that country may be radically different than the USA. It might be that 100 octane low-lead gasoline is becoming scarce in your country. Last week I was looking at an electric-powered Pipistrel trainer that works at a flying school in Campbell River, B.C. Canada. If I were you, I would start by talking with Pipistrels' engineers. Another source would be the engineers at Harbour Air (Vancouver, B.C. Canada) who test-flew an electric-powered DHC-2 Beaver a couple of years ago and are hoping to convert a fleet of Cessna 208 Caravans to electric power. Harbour Air's short scheduled flights best match the mission profile of jump-planes. Most of Harbour Air's scheduled flights from Vancouver, Nanaimo, Victoria, Seattle, etc. are last less than and hour. Their chief advantage is landing their floatplanes (Cessna 208 Caravans, DHC-2 Beavers, DHC-3 turbine Otters and DHC-6 Twin Otters) in the inner harbour, close to major businesses, tourist attractions, courts, provincial legislature, etc.

One rumour has it that the FAA issued that waiver ONCE. They later quietly admitted their error and will never issue another similar waiver.

Which BASE canopies have similar pack volume )560 cubic inches on the PIA chart) to an old Para-Flite Strato-Cloud Delta 240 canopy? I have an old skydiving piggyback container that currently has a Strato-Cloud Delta 240 main. I used to jump reefing-line Strato-Clouds and Cloud Lites back in the day. With my current weight (195 pounds) I would prefer a canopy in the 300 square foot range. How many BASE canopies - made of LPV fabric would fit?

We should get Terry Urban's opinion on this matter since he sat on the PIA Technical Committee when the Optimum was certified. Terry and I have discussed this a couple of times. The old FAA TSO standard was that all reserves had to structurally survive high-speed openings at 254 pounds. The second problem was descent rate with 254 pounds suspended. The smallest reserves have a steady (brakes still set at opening configuration) rate of descent too fast to meet the FAA standard, so Performance Designs asked the FAA for an exemption.

To remove the foam, you need to remove the binding tape from one edge and vacuum out the deteriorated foam. Then you need a master rigger to sew it back together. Best to get the same rigger to do the disassembly. It is a complex sewing task best left to riggers with many years of factory sewing experience.

This whole fiasco sounds like poor gun control. Some of those good-old boys from the National Rifle Association should coach the shooter on how to focus his front sight on the target and breath out slowly while he take sup the slack in the trigger. Sarcasm alert!

Wow! Another thing that Ron and I agree on. North American citizens are afraid that Third World political violence is coming to North America.

Not bright enough to duck when someone is shooting at him!

Drifting away from the British theme of this thread. Canada has 4 major federal political parties: Conservative, Liberal, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecouis. Conservatives are - as the name implies - resistant to change and only want to see slow change and only if it benefits big business. Mind you the federal Conservative party over-laps the center aisle of the House of Commons. Conservatives won fewer than half the seats during the last federal election, so got punted to become the "loyal opposition." Similarly, the federal Liberals over-lap the center aisle but are more open to change. Currently, Liberals have the most seats in parliament, but they still need NDP support - in a coalition - to hold power. The New Democrats are slightly to the left/socialist, but the only way the main stream parties can keep the NDP out of power is by adopting their most popular policies like socialized medicine. The Bloc Quebecouis vote for whatever federal policy will send the most money to Quebec. They really do not care what happens outside of Quebec.

Why is showing photo ID a fuss? The last half-dozen Canadian elections (municipal, provincial and federal) have all required me to show gov't issued photo ID at the polling station.

The story that I heard was that her boyfriend convinced her to get her breasts augmented. They were still swollen and painful, so she left her chest strap undone during the airplane ride. She forgot to connect her chest strap before exit.

Thanks for showing us the connection between Marxism and "woke." Woke people are trying to destabilize and destroy the old patriarchy/capitalist/democratic/ free speech/ etc. society without bothering to explain to us the virtues of their idyllic new society. There is a fine line between political politeness and dogmatism. I do not understand the new dogmatism. I am from a generation of old soldiers who had it POUNDED into them that Russian Marxists were evil and nasty. In recent years I have not seen anything to dispel that idea. I challenge "woke" people to explain to me the advantages of their new society.

His biggest problem was wasting waaaaay too much time with his malfunctioning main.

Hi Jerry, Good point about the exposed reserve pilot-chute. The most complex reserve deployments involve internal pilot-chutes which look pretty and are difficult to snag accidentally. A Vector loop needs to clear 5 grommets before the pilot-chute can launch. If the AAD gets scared, it still needs to clear the 5 grommets, plus one more in the inner bottom flap. To launch the free-bag requires clearing a total of 9 grommets plus a cutter. A single-pin Mirage requires the pilot-chute to push 5 grommets aside before it can a launch. Launching the freebag requires clearing a total of 7 or 8 grommets plus a cutter. A Racer pilot-chute needs its loops to clear 12 grommets plus a pair of cutters. Yikes! A single-pin Teardrop may look the same as a Racer - from a distance - but it only has 7 grommets plus a cutter. If the AAD gets scared, the loop still needs to clear 7 grommets to launch the pilot-chute. Reflex has an exposed, single-pin pilot-chute, but the loop still needs to clear 6 grommets plus a cutter to launch the pilot chute. If the AAD gets scared, the loop still needs to clear 5 grommets. To summarize: most Pop-Tops fit your criteria of fewer grommets above the pilot-chute, but loop(s) still need to clear ALL of the grommets before the pilot-chute can launch. The semi-exposed pilot-chutes found on Javelin, Dolphin and Wings only require pushing 3 grommets aside to launch a pilot chute and 6 to launch the free-bag. Even a dud cutter cannot interfere with deploying a Javelin reserve because the cutter is mounted below the free-bag. The ADVANCE container was basically a simplified Javelin minus the reserve side flaps. Launching an ADVANCE reserve pilot-chute only required pushing aside 3 grommets. Launching the free-bag require clearing a total of 4 grommets. The basic problem is that most piggyback containers were designed back when bulky, 26' Navy conical reserves were the height of fashion. Since then they have just built smaller and smaller versions. Not all the components scale down gracefully. For example, most reserve pilot-chutes are still based upon the MIL SPEC MA-1 pilot-chute with a 6 inch crown. That 6 inch crown does not scale down graceful to the narrower containers that are fashionable today. After a few Mirages suffered reserve pilot-chute hesitations, I concluded that the fewer grommets the better. So I challenged myself to build a container with the fewest grommets possible. My first prototype had only 2 reserve flaps and 2 main flaps. It had an exposed, single-pin pilot-chute. There has no hard (aluminum or composite) cap and no grommets set in the pilot-chute. The reserve ripcord cable laid against the jumper's spine (ala. Racer Reflex and Teardrop). During ripcord deployment, the closing loop only had to clear 2 or 3 grommets plus slide through a sleeve. Then the loop still had to clear one more grommet plus the cutter to launch the free-bag. If the AAD got scared, then the loop had to clear a single grommet and slide through a sleeve to launch the pilot-chute. An AAD deployment still required the loop to clear all 3 or 4 grommets. My main container only had 2 side flaps.

Just don’t plan on doing more than 70 jumps on a set of Kevlar suspension lines. After 60 hard openings Kevlar lines start to snap in an unpredictable manner. Back during the 1990s, after a Strong Tandem reserve had 20 or 25 deployments, we re-lined them with Dacron and put another 600 to 900 jumps on them as mains. Nobody expected a main to last much more than 1,000 jumps in the gritty Southern California desert.

If you want to talk about vortex lift, look at delta-winged jet fighters, Concorde and the swept-wing gliders built by Withold Kasper. This is an obscure corner of aerodynamics that is not relevant to Ram-air parachutes with straight leading edges. At steep angles-of-arrack the entire leading edge acts like a giant wing-tip and generates large wing-tip vortices. Those WTV generate a bit of lift and massive amounts of drag. Yes, it is possible to fly on only vortex lift, but VL is massively “draggy.” Only high-powered jets can do it and they can only do it for a few minutes. Simply VLis so draggy that un-powered you develop horrendous rates of descent. Only the most powerful jet fighters can climb while in VL. It was possible to fly the Concorde so low and so slow that it could not climb out of the VL corner. That is why Concorde carried plenty of power during approach and noise complaints were one of the reasons that Concorde retired. Boeing’s 727 had similar drag problems when leading edge flaps were lowered. Yes LE flaps generated plenty of lift, but they also generated LOTS OR Drag, hence the need to carry so much power (to reduce rate-of-descent) during landing approaches. Those LOUD straight jet engines generated too much NOISE which prompted many noise complaints. One of 727 hush-kits reduced LE flap angles to reduce drag and reduce rate-of-descent.

The notion of multiple different rigs reminds me of an old “Rambo” … the second or third. Rambo was jumping out of a business jet into a SE Asia jungle. He was wearing a sport-sized Vector 3 … waaaaay smaller than the tandem-sized containers worn by military freefall, special forces guys who like to jump with rucksack, rifle and snowshoes. At one of the PIA Symposia Bill bough shared an amusing side-story. While that Vector 3 was goi grown the production line of the ladies sniffed it and said: “Ah! This led pad will lay against Silvester Stallone’s thigh!” Hah! Hah!

You have an “independent” understanding of aerobatic airplanes. While we encourage independent thought, your own theories are so far from fonventional wisdom that’s e have difficulty understanding them. We also u d’état and that English is your second language. My understanding is based upon my private pilot license, many years maintains Canadian Air Force aircraft, etc. I would encourage you to read some of the textbooks used in private pilot ground school (e.g. “From the Ground Up” for Canadian pilots). Aerobatic airplanes are not radically different than conventional airplanes. Aerobatic airplanes fly based upon the same principles as non-aerobatic airplanes. Any airplane can do a few aerobatic maneuvers (simple loops, rolls and spins) but will only remain structurally intact if flown by a gentle pilot. Many airplanes are placarded against intentional spins because of sluggish recoveries from spins.Any “mere mortal” pilot who attempts aerobatics - in an airplane not approved for aerobatics - is an idiot. See the accident in Belgium where a bored jump-pilot pulled a wing off of a Pilatus Porter because he got bored flying skydivers. Pilatus responded by issuing a Special Inspection to check for cracks in wing strut fittings. Returning the the notion of conventional airplanes. Let’s start with the aerobatic version of the Blanik glider. It has shorter wings than to reduce loads on the spars in the wing roots. Otherwise it is built from mostly the same parts as the long-wing Blaniks that are popular with gliding students. Blaniks can do most of the gentle aerobatic maneuvers like loops, rolls, stalls and spins. When they fly inverted, Blanik wings work the same way - by deflecting air downwards - the only difference is that their positively cambered wings are less efficient while inverted. When I say “inverted” I mean stable, 1 G flight almost horizontal. Gliders cannot fly perfectly horizontal for more than a few seconds because they are always trading altitude for forward speed … the same way as the Jalbert’s Para-Foil, square, Ram-air parachutes that are currently fashionable among skydivers. Next let’s look at Cessna’s 150 Aerobat which is a slightly modified version of the 2-seat trainer that many pilots started on. Modifications are limited by to a few local reinforcements (e.g. rudder control horns) windows in the ceiling, quick-release doors and quick-removable seat-cushions. The quick-removable seat-cushions make room for pilot emergency parachutes. Cessna 150 can do all the basic aerobatic maneuvers and is only limited when flying inverted until the engine quits for lack of oil and gasoline. Cessna engines depend upon gravity to flow gasoline from fuel tanks - above the engine/in the wings - to the engine. Cessna builds 150s using the same materials, tooling and techniques as the 182 and 206 models that are popular with skydivers. The dedicated competition aerobatic planes built by Extra, Sukhoi and Zlin differ by stronger airframes, symmetric wings, larger control surfaces, more powerful engines and inverted systems in engines. Stronger airframes allow pulling more age in tighter turns and last longer during violent maneuvering. Symmetric wings are less efficient in cruise, but have the advantage of lifting equally as well upright or inverted. Aerobatic wings tend to be thicker for strength. Larger control surfaces applied ore yaw, pitch, roll for tighter maneuvers. On this issue, you are confusing stability with engine power. Aerobatic airplanes are designed for neutral stability to provide the same handling whether upright or inverted. A disadvantage is that constantly try to wander during cruise flight, so constantly require pilot inputs to keep them upright. More powerful engines improve climbing back up start the next maneuver. A typical competition aerobat has the same 6-cylinder, 300 horsepower Continental or Lycoming engine as installed in a Cessna 206 jump-plane hauling 6 skydivers. Inverted systems in engines include extra fuel and oil pumps to keep the engine running during extended inverted flight. The only part of aerobatic flight - that does not involve conventional aerodynamics - is knife-edge flight where wings are vertical (90 degrees from cruise) but the airplane somehow flies horizontal … on its side. If you look closely, you will notice that the propeller is pointed 30 degrees above the horizon and the airplane is trying to constantly climb, but the fuselage makes for a loosy lifting body/wing.

Muscle cramps can slow the healing process. May I suggest a physiotherapist, chiropractor or accupuncturist to help relieve muscle cramps? I have used all three to deal with my old knee, shoulder and spinal injuries. My accupuncturist is a former drop zone operator who jokes that he used to run a DZ to build up his future clientele. Ha ha!

A container sized for a modern 280 may not be big enough. Back when I jumped a Delta II I borrowed an container big enough for a full-sized Para-Commander.

The OP asked a valid question. The answer is that many container manufacturers have tried double-sided RSLs but most found them too complex to be practical. The first attempt was the cross-connector seen on Racers and EZ-Flyers. In the worst possible scenario - releasing the main after the reserve reaches line-stretch - the departing main might choke off the reserve. The Racer factory’s solution was to offer a single-sided RSL. Parachutes de France developed a two-pin reserve closing system with each pin connected to an RSL. One main riser leaving would not open the reserve because you needed to pull both pins to open the reserve container. OTOH pulling the reserve rip-cord would pull both pins. The dilemma kept coming back to the problem of broken main risers. The two most popular reasons for broken risers were mini-Rings and tandems. Back around 1990 we suffered a perfect-storm of zero-P fabric, zero-stretch suspension lines, mini-risers and mini-rings. After a few skydivers suffered painfully hard openings, bent hip rings, broken risers, etc. PIA and 3-Ring Incorporated published new standards for reinforcing mini-rings. The problem of broken mini-risers disappearred 30 years ago. The second most likely cause of broken risers is tandem flip-through which are mostly prevented by better work-habits of packers and tandem instructors. Relative Workshop/United Parachute Technologies noticed a third pattern with broken risers: the right riser is the most likely to break because we toss our pilot-chutes with our right hands and are likely to be right-shoulder-low during deployment. So RWS installed RSLs on right risers only and added the Collins lanyard to strip the left (3-Ring) release cable as the broken right riser departed. RWS later licensed Collins Lanyards to half a dozen other manufacturers as part of the Skyhook MARD. Main Assisted Reserve Deployment is a fancy version of an RSL.

Patent Foramen Ovale is a hole between the two upper chambers of the heart that normally closes during infancy. This is a question for medical professionals. Did you ask your cardiologist? Another option is to review the list of heart anomolies that might prevent you from passing a medical exam by a Federal Aviation Aministration approved Flight Medical Examiner. They screen for medical problems that might prevent you from passing a pilot medical. Pilots are subjected to many of the same stresses as skydivers.

The Epoch Times is handed out free in Vancouver. Yes, we recognize it’s right-wing editorial slant, but still respect it as being more accurate than the propaganda published by Bejing. Along similar lines, casinos - owned and operated by the Province of British Columbia - have been laundering drug money for decades and it only recently came to light. Why is the provincial gov’t involved inselling addictive substances like alcohol, marijuana and lottery tickets?????