pchapman

Although straying from the original topic, there are indeed various DZ marketing opportunities, for, uh, souvenirs. Edit: slightly NSFW

Packing the reserve sucks. The freebag shape is the least like the container shape of any container I've packed. Takes a lot of pounding and kneading to get the freebag fully into place to not waste closing loop length going through the freebag grommet. And the flap and bag design make it difficult to close the container to look neat. There's a very narrow range of closing loop sizes between "can't close this, too tight" and "looks ugly with pilot chute fabric visible". So there's more work involved in getting the flaps and pilot chute worked down to be able to close the rig. More fun when one packs the same rig in humid summer vs. dry winter. Jumpers sometimes apologize when they bring a Wings to their rigger. "Sorry, it's a Wings..." Even if they loved buying the Wings because the price was good. Some also think the 'pocketing' of the freebag is excessive, that the freebag is held into place both at the bottom and top of the container more than it needs to, leading to higher extraction forces if the pilot chute is pulling less directly away from the rig. And there's the pilot chute, which is one with relatively little mesh, and is considered to be relatively low drag (unless in a burble on its side, where it may be better). The latest pilot chutes from the company apparently have more mesh, but its not something they have mentioned publicly. But lots of people have Wings and they're fine with that.

I've used good quality disposable foam earplugs with an open face helmet for most of my jumps, for the ride up and ride down. As markharju says, one's ears still adjust for pressure. Maybe a little more slowly, I dunno, but I've never had an issue. Hearing under canopy is reduced (so plugs are out for CRW), but I'm ok with the slight added risk. Same I suppose right after landing. But in either case, vision & head-swivelling is the more important tool. (One could argue similar issues about having ear plugs in a noisy machine shop...) Besides these days with all the full face helmets (which I only occasionally wear), hearing is going to be somewhat restricted anyway.

You've got a nice adventure going. Launching off a float is an interesting change. It made for a nice big step when launching a 4-way. I was once at a DZ that operated a short while using a float plane off a river, before the new runway was ready. It made for a poor climb rate. Weirdest part was stepping over water from the dock to the float to climb on board, while wearing a rig and 12 lbs of lead weights. Don't slip!

Detestable as she is, I'd serve her, or put words on a cake for her. I'd be encouraging keeping society a little bit civil as well as functioning smoothly. (Not like there have never been divisions in society, even if Trumpworld is unique. In the '60's, some were considered long haired hippies who wouldn't conform to the normal laws of society, while others were seen as child-napalming killers...) I suppose if the payment-for-services for Sarah would involve a lot of personalized service, where the ties are seen to be closer between her and me, then I would feel I could refuse. I could choose not to become her lawyer, or not be her ad agency to promote a small business if she had one. I think I could also refuse if she wanted to have a Sarah Hucky Sanders Charity Event at my dining establishment. Society probably can accept any of the above, but I'm not sure of the legal justification. "I'll do business with her, but don't want to be ASSOCIATED with her." Grey areas are always interesting, about where lines get drawn. Even if someone were a murderer, I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to refuse service. (Depending on they are believed to be one, are charged, are convicted, or have done their time.)

And I'd like to know how she and other drivers were briefed, and how they all actually behaved -- in the real world, not just what was on a long form she signed. I haven't gone back to check on how long she was driving, but if drivers were driving around a couple hours at night in boring areas, were they all keeping eyes on road or were a large proportion also playing with their phones a bunch of the time? Interesting that "distracted driving" can apparently apply when someone else fails to observe right-of-way rules. (Yeah I know one has some duty to not run over peds who step out onto the road but still.)

This thread has some info on the difference between Rodriguez R-2's and R-3's: http://www.dropzone.com/forum/Skydiving_C1/Skydiving_History_%26_Trivia_F21/What_is_this_canopy_release_2_P3130743/ Edit: and R-3 instructions added to compare the look Rodriguez R-3 Release System.pdf

That's a very good point. Although to be fair, even reserve PC/freebag changes get made without big announcements. Hopefully they are at least in the manual. E.g.: --Javelin reserve PC's didn't have support tapes on the fabric portion, but later they did. (From the Odyssey version onwards? Not sure. Maybe related to that old torn-PC-lawsuit. Most but not 100% of other RPC's have the tape.) Not announced in any manual that I recall, but only the latest version is available as spare parts. -- Aerodyne Icon freebags had tape buffers added around the velcro of the openable line stow pouch. That was for example meantioned in a document when they announced their model upgrade to the Nexgen line of Icons. [Edit: Although the Wings issue is more significant in that it is an aerodynamic change to the deployment system.] I'm just putting things in context, although I still tend towards wanting companies to announce changes clearly and openly as you do. Companies don't like to make it seem like a prior product was 'bad', even if the latest product is 'better than ever!'. Presumably if there's no SB, or warning in the manual, either the older version or newer version is perfectly legal in a newer or older rig.

I never put much faith in the whole soccer thing. It's a sport where scores of 1 or 2 are common, so I'd think that statistically, luck plays a much greater role than in a sport where there are scores of 5 or 10 per side, per game. If I'm 10% better than the next guy, out of large number of goals, I'm likely to be ahead on goals. But with very few goals, it's a bit more random who will win any particular game. Nevertheless, may the top scorer in a game win the game!

The problem is always that the words a politician uses in the news for domestic consumption may be different than those directed face to face to the politician they are meeting -- yet what is said in the news will make it to that other politician. So Trump wants to play nice a little with Kim, and not always insult him, while the public also want reassurance that he doesn't actually look up to the brutal dictator as a role model in good governance. It's hard to find the happy medium. Acting nicely to nasty people is part of diplomacy. I'll leave it to others to debate whether Trump was sucking up too much, and whether that tendency of his towards dictators (despite earlier twitter attacks) actually achieved something useful in the world (even if the promises are all relatively vague).

I have no beef with that, but note that good cloud services will provide better backup, tracking, and security than poorly managed, underfunded internal servers and systems that are getting out of date. Thus even some governments are trying to put data (including some classified material) in the cloud -- although within their own borders to prevent legal issues about foreign access to data.

In this side topic of skydiving memberships & ratings: I have found it interesting how different organizations deal with people who have run afoul of the law. Some organizations may have some morals clause, some may not, and to what degree it can be applied can vary. Some types of status can be considered earned and can never be taken away, or is it an ongoing thing which may be maintained only with the favour of the organization? Is the status with the organization considered some sort of right that is independent of criminal status or not? To what degree is the organization a 'professional' one or one concerned with an individual's status? If someone turns out to be a murderer (convicted with appeals exhausted), can they still have the Medal of Honor? Keep their civil engineering license? Keep their Six Sigma accreditation? Keep their Masters Degree and be a summa cum laude graduate of whatever? Keep their Olympic medal? Be in the list of world records of an FAI or International Association of Athletics Federations sport? Stay in the baseball hall of fame? Maintain certification for as a state-recognized hair stylist? Hold a small business license? Remain an FAA rigger? Be a member of the USPA, or hold their instructor rating? Maintain a New York City library card? I'm not looking for answers here; just wanted to point out issues, as CPoxon has already done.

No properly functioning parachute has ever malfunctioned! (Although some formerly properly functioning parachutes have failed to properly function.)

As others have said, the chance of a bag lock not clearing the risers is small for a non-tandem rig. The pilot chute should normally still have plenty of drag. But yes, there can be cases where risers might not easily clear. Was your instructor's case for a 'normal' bag lock with inflated pilot chute? There might be situations with a collapsed pilot chute where the bag would come off the jumper's back, leaving stuff floating around the jumper's back without a lot of drag to pull risers off and past the riser covers. So I don't mind the idea of waiting a moment to confirm risers have departed, between pulling the cutaway and the reserve. One may already be planning to wait a moment to confirm that one was able to pull the cutaway handle fully, before pulling the other handle. (Although the specific situations differ, where it is more likely for a cutaway to be difficult, vs. risers having difficulty clearing.)

A search will turn up various BASE web pages. Basically a tailgate holds the brake lines together temporarily, for a better controlled opening with less lineover potential, holding them up near the canopy, by using an elastic band and a dacron tab mounted to a line. Normally used without a slider but can be used with one, and can be mounted on the slider too (hence the connection to to the 'holding the slider in place' stuff in this thread). One video that shows some of the variations fairly clearly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz_2hjEyUGM

Maybe so, but where's the data? Unless one has high speed video of the opening, one often has no clue what happened. If you have a slammer, do you blame the canopy or blame your packing? Even if you're not sure you did anything wrong? Not saying you are wrong. Maybe sometimes the spreading forces just happen to be higher than usual, given the way the bottom skin & nose inflates, and pushes the slider down suddenly despite the upward forces on the slider. Maybe it would make no difference if the slider slipped down 1" vs. being physically restrained all the way up by some mechanical connection with light force. Or would it?

Thumbs up to that. Snaps (as on a couple canopies), elastics, elastics on slider mounted tailgates, whatever .....? Currently we basically follow the method of "Pack it well, wrap the tail, don't lose control sticking the canopy in the bag....and hope the slider stays in place. "

Check out http://www.chutingstar.com/upt-reserve-pilot-chutes That has all the details on the red cap / small cap pilot chutes: Can use the small cap 5" (vs. regular 6") on any Vector 3 or Sigma. Same spring, etc. Not for Vector II and earlier -- not tested. V300 size rigs are the only ones that MUST use it.

I find the stuff on here useful, even if the wider world doesn't care. I usually just lurk on SC for the latest summaries and news about the formerly unimaginable events of the Trumpworld "Presidential" Reality Show. Compiled by people who clearly follow events closely and have good memories & data sources, and clear reasoning, I find the info the most concise and useful around. Unfortunately only rarely are there right wingers around who have reasoned arguments that actually encourage one to see things from another viewpoint or highlight issues that might otherwise get glossed over.

Jeez, you're nosy, it's like you want actual scientific design, testing, and application of life saving gear. Reserve pilot chutes aren't made that way. If you have a Vector PC, you have the same PC for a 375 reserve or a 99*, despite maybe a 3.7 weight ratio (Ref: PD manual for OP-99 vs TR-375). If you have a Javelin, you are using an MA-1 spring dating back to the '50s or something. And major companies produce reserve pilot chutes with maybe 10%, 25%, or 50% mesh/open space. Lots of variation... Pressures on the PC 'canopy' won't be directly in line with the spring, but also outward around the whole surface of the canopy. That will keep some shape to the canopy, making things less dire than if one just pulls on the PC spring on the ground until it stretches to the full length of the fabric seams. I don't recall who has actually done wind tunnel (or in air) tests at full terminal speeds. Jump Shack posted a graph of pilot chute drag vs. speed for various pilot chutes but the lines are perfectly straight so it is likely extrapolations based lower speed tunnel tests to establish drag coefficients -- where there would be less distortion. You'll also want to look at PIA-TR-401 Low Reserve Opening Investigation Report. Jump Shack's likely extrapolated data shows (expected) 75-175 lbs forces at some terminal speed, while the PIA report shows sustained (rather than peak) forces at terminal of only 34 to 57 lb on average. This seems however to be including the effect of being in the wake of the jumper in actual freefall - despite presumably being at the end of a full length reserve bridle when tested. It wasn't a wind tunnel test of PCs alone. Some of those values are rather low when one hears about how much drag there is supposed to be on main pilot chutes, e.g, "A 36" pilot chute, at 120 mph, pulls at about 120 lbs. A 27" pilot chute, at 120 mph, pulls only at about 56 lbs., if it is properly made, and in still in "trim". " [Bill Booth, DZ.com, 2004] Even the worst pilot chute (brands not show), at 34 lb sustained, would accelerate a canopy away from a rig fairly fast -- say 3.8+ g acceleration for a PD-253. (Data: PD-253 is 8.3 lbs in the manual, let's be conservative and say 9 lb inc. bag, bridle, etc) I'm not sure that I have any conclusion, other than that a wide variety of pilot chutes vs. reserve canopies have been used, without a lot of fine tuning of drag requirements. (* They have the small cap Vector PC's for small rigs now, but that's the only variation.)

To assist the thread in understanding the bungee stuff, see the attached photo for an example of how recent Wings bags have been built to use bungees. (Their thinking is clearly different than that of the many manufacturers that say to use, or imply the use of, double stowed elastics.)

The Safire 3 hard opening thread has ended up having a lot of discussion about line stows. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4884594; So I want to ask, what do manufacturers actually say about how to stow lines? Which ones recommend double wrapping? Which actually discourage single wrapping? Are they talking about the locking stows, or the other stows in general? If anyone wants to contribute info, that's great. Sometimes it is hard to find out what a company thinks, as something might not be in their official manual ... but be in a blog post, video, or whatever. I'll start with the limited info I have on hand: -- PD has an old document on hard openings (hrdopn.pdf) dated 2004, that is still on their web site. It doesn't say how to use elastics but gets into the tension issue: One can argue about the tension issue since many manufacturers have also been producing semi-stowless bags, where the tension may be relatively low. That document is also in their "Main User's Manual", which is just a scan of their 1990's printed manual. -- The current PD manual on "Packing Instructions" says this: Their photo shows a Spectra lined canopy, with double wrap stows for regular and locking stows. Note that it doesn't say "double wrap" -- it says it recommends it if using large rubber bands. I haven't reviewed the video lately. -- PD's FAQ section states things a little more emphatically: What do other companies say?

(For no-one in particular:) The standard chest adapter, the PS70101-1, is often looked down on because the only strength usually listed relative to it is 500 lbs. Unlike leg strap hardware which often is stated as 2500 lbs or something. The numbers are important but a little deceptive on their own. Leg hardware is much heavier, but the numbers above apply to different things. Leg hardware, much of it is proof tested to 2500 lbs and has an ultimate strength of 4000 lbs minimum. And even the chest strap hardware actually has an ultimate strength of 4000 lbs minimum, being subject to the same MIL or PIA specs. At the ultimate strength an item can have bent and deformed but not break. It is toast for reuse, but has held together. (A secondary effect of deforming might be to change the loading pattern on attached webbing, so it is still a bad situation, but the hardware hasn't actually broken apart.) I long wondered what the actual strength of the chest strap adapters was, and had only ever heard that 500 lbs proof load, which is something which must be achieved without damage. So I contacted Bourdon Forge, which makes such stuff. I got an email back from their VP of Engineering, Cas Manczuk, and he confirmed that that PS70101-1 adapter has to meet the same 4000 lb minimum ultimate strength as other adapters do under the original MILSPECS. I think this puts a different light on 20+ years of debate that I've seen about how wimpy and non-load bearing chest strap hardware is. This doesn't say anything about the harness design any particular company uses for their chest strap, or how the harness and stitching is loaded in non-normal ways when doing hybrids or Mr. Bills. But it does make me feel a little bit better about chest hardware compared to the numbers usually seen.

Note that starting to untwist the risers doesn't automatically make one's body start rotating to undo the twist. After you twisted the risers/lines to bring the twisted part down onto the risers -- as you stated -- in this case you were able to REACH ABOVE THE TWISTS. Which made it easy to grab spread out lines to quickly get the torque to spin yourself out of the twists. One can also note the directions used in this technique: Similar to what was mentioned in the first post in the whole thread, the twisting action one takes is a rapid twisting the 'twisting MORE' direction, rather than trying to slowly get some momentum going to untwist one's body in the other direction. Two opposite directions! The fast twisting action here didn't turn the jumper, but 'added' to the twists at the bottom, allowing the twists to in effect move down the lines/risers.

As Deyan figured out, sounds like the Mirage design of the 2000's. Pics attached.