Cambalectri

If you have some concerns, uneasiness or worries , at this time, concerning Canadian senior riggers, in the field, A1 riggers or whatever they are called nowadays, you must have seen some of them doing or repairing some skydiving parts, being somewhat unusual or odd ...in various regions of the province or elsewhere... ....would you please, elaborate on the subject, maybe giving some examples ! In many years, I have seen a few riggers doing new stuff and repair works and even though its not, sometimes, at the level in quality of the original manufacturers, its seems quite fine ! Naturally, I do not know what is the quality of work in the West or in the East of the country ! I assume they know what they are doing !

Thanks for the link, with the images and the videos, from Pgasus. Much appreciated. And, you are right, once the bag is closed, the magnets are sitting at the bottom of the container ! Also, I believe the secret in having a good all magnetic stowless bag is to have the right combination , the right size and the right strength of all these magnets. Research is certainly the key ! Thanks for you time .

So what are you afraid of? Witchcraft of something? I like your sense of humour !

I believe this is exactly what Greg Rau, from UPT is trying to explain in his video from VASST training, at PIA 2011 . Also, this may make no sense, to many, however, personally, I didn't want to have all these magnets near my Cypres2, which is really sitting beside the main d-bag !!! And, naturally, with a semi-stowless, verifying often the two locking stows is most crucial; to be in top shape at all times...

A semi-stowless main bag has usually two or three rubberbands and the remaining suspension lines are folded in a pocket on the side of the bag...similar to a reserve d-bag, however without the velcro. A stowless bag has usually no rubberbands, typically, it's an all magnetic bag, mentioned by Hellis. www.Compal.be ( Lazy bag ) is a good example of a magnetic stowless bag ... Please see images below. UPT has a few nice videos how to pack a main canopy into a semi-stowless bag.. You Tube = semistowless bag ( UPT with Greg Rau ) . Also, about the semi-stowless bag; You tube = Greg Rau talks about UPT@PIA 2011. Hopes this help !

Thanks for the info concerning your all magnetic main bag ! This is interesting. You had this specific bag for a while or it's fairly new ? And, would you mind to tell us the manufacturer of that particular bag, many could possibly be interested .

Are you asking me why Jerry calls his bag "NoStoBag"? I can't answer that. But the only thing I can think of is that Jerry means no line stows (not locking stows). The name of a product may sometimes be missleading, keep that in mind. Walk in to any low cost store and you will find batteries called "Super extra heavy duty max 2000 exxxtreme". They are not as good as they sound. I'm not saying Jerry is missleading with the name of his bag, anyone can see that it has rubberbands. Stowless and semi-stowless are not names, it's categories of bags in my opinion. Just as sportscars, smartphones etc. As an example, a Renault clio sport is not really a sportscar is it? My intention, here, is not to have a debate with you about '' wording '' . What I said, is that generally speaking, when someone mentioned that he or she has bought a new '' stowless main bag '' , we assume it's a ''similar'' device to a reserve deployment bag...and that' about it !... ...whatever they have magnets, rubberbands or not ! Should they wish to provide more details concerning their particular D-bag, especially with magnets, this his is fine, also. However, I understand your point, precision in describing a piece of equipment is important ! No debate here ! Still , I would be a lot more interested to know what are your experience with an all magnet main deployment bag, the comments from Greg Rau from UPT concerning their ''semi-stowless '' bag and the Wolmari packing method....if you wish to come back to the original topics.

UPT makes stowless bags now too? I only knew of the semi-stowless Particular on words ! Yes, most are ''semi-stowless'' and also the one, from UPT ! However, I believe, a few manufacturers might still used an all magnet D-bag ! Please have a look at the VASST Training videos, a very nice collection of videos at the PIA 2013...showing various manufacturers and their products.... especially UPT and Gerry Baumchen ( No Sto Bag ) giving a useful description of their '' semi-stowless '' bag ..... I'm not nitpicking, but different things have different names. Some people choose semi stowless because they really want semi stowless. And some choose stowless because they don't like the rubberbands. I choosed a stowless with only magnets because I don't like rubberbands and I don't like the tuktabs some stowless bags have. Fine ! Fair enough ! Gerry Baumchen is calling his D-bag a " No Sto Bag '' and it has two rubberbands! ( a nice bag ) As you said, different things has different names ! Please explain that one ! Personally, I do not like all magnets bags; many had issues with them. However, possibly, it's a question of construction, technique and the chosen magnets ? Perhaps, an all magnet bag is more popular in Europe. Naturally, it's a question of choice and opinion !... If you take the time to view the UPT video, with Greg Rau , he provide a good explanation why ! Also, who said that you have to use rubberbands ! I don't !

UPT makes stowless bags now too? I only knew of the semi-stowless Particular on words ! Yes, most are ''semi-stowless'' and also the one, from UPT ! However, I believe, a few manufacturers might still used an all magnet D-bag ! Please have a look at the VASST Training videos, a very nice collection of videos at the PIA 2013...showing various manufacturers and their products.... especially UPT and Gerry Baumchen ( No Sto Bag ) giving a useful description of their '' semi-stowless '' bag .....

If you are happy with you present main canopy d-bag, as for fit, you could contact your container manufacturer, they could provide you, maybe, with a stowless d-bag ! For example, you can get for the Vector III a very nice stowless d-bag ! Usually, a stowless main canopy bag is the same size as the original cotton or nylon d-bag which came with your rig ... If you container manufacturer doesn't provide a stowless bag, Jerry Baumchem, for example, has a very nice one ! It can be found on ChutingStar ! They will provide you with all the fine details. Make sure you turn your present d-bag inside out for the measurements, including the tape on the side of the bag in your calculation ! Hoping this help...

If you open the Wolmari address, given by Strife, above, you follow exactly all the images showed, from #1 to 13 . For me, the important procedure, is to have right amount of roll, before putting the canopy on the floor; therefore, having the desired opening ! Usually, I roll the tail 3 to 4 times only, trying not to disturb the suspension lines... However, from what I have seen in Europe, many are rolling the tail a lot more , when using the Wolmari packing method! Therefore, at this time, I feel that is why I had faster openings using the Wolmari packing technique ! Hence, using it only for Hop,n Pops ! Also, Image # 9, on the site, is what you want ! This packing method makes sense, having the the tail away from the front of the canopy ! As I said before , I had the best openings with this packing method, however, I still need to know the right amount of roll for the tail for my canopy.... As well, a particular size of a canopy may play a role in the opening !?! Possibly, the Wolmari website doesn't exist anymore ? I know, a few years ago, you could even asked questions on the website !

Cancer is now the leading cause of death in the world ! I believe, in North America, heart diseases is slightly higher at the moment, mainly because of poor diet and lack of exercice ! Cancer has been with humanity since the Pharaohs and the Egyptians ....

I have tried the Wolmari packing....many times.... better openings for sure ; however in my case, the deployment was a lot faster ! I should maybe try again and perfect the technique ! Perfect for hop 'n pops ! Easier to do and similar concerning placing the canopy into the bag as with the standard pro-packing !

KAP-3 was developed in Russia , in the '50 ! It was a main AAD, a mechanical pin-puller... and fairly reliable, tough and loud, you could easily hear the mechanism ! I believe ( ? ) that they were also called PPK 3 !

I am in the same area as you ! I feel that '' dumped '' is a strong word ! I still have my Cypres2 as many other skydivers in that same area ! It's a choice. I have to agree with you that it did cost me a lot more money to have my 4th year inspection, from Airtec ! However, I was ready to pay that particular amount to have one of the best ADD on the market. Why Cypres2 ? Software and hardware upgrades and info coming all over the world, every year, to have a better unit in the future. I still believe that certain electronic units should be verified at a certain interval...especially a life saving unit. Would you fly in an aircraft without its annual inspection ? They used to compare AAD's with automobile airbag electronic sensors... we knew that 10 years ago, 10 % of most airbags were defective, yet today we know the number is a lot higher ! Also, I know that Vigil is coming or already sending their new Vigil 2 + ! Four years ago, I didn't want to have an electronic ''machine'' in my back trying to figure out what is going on at 43 meters from the ground, especially with an engine failure and someone trying to open the door to the C-206 at 1000 ft... !!! Vigil is getting smarter... the new Vigil will now armed itself at 1000 ft ! Smart. Nonetheless, both Vigil and Cypres2 units are saving lives ! This is what is important...

I agree the Javelin Odyssey is a very well made, strong and '' fit well '' rig... you have a sensation to have on your back a very well made rig at all times...with top quality material... however, I am not a fan of the top flaps reserve design and especially their reserve p.c... nevertheless, your particular and personal experience might be different !

Thanks, that makes sense ! I also had the opportunity changing the main bridle width and length on the same canopy and I had some interesting openings, however, some were not so nice, even with line twists !!!

Before Larry's main p.c. I tried two different main pilot chutes from various serious manufacturers; and one coming with the rig, I bought in 2014... I reduced the p.c. size as suggested by Larry and also the manufacturer of my main and I had suddenly, the best openings since many years.... I do not know why ! I can't explained why ! Size of a main p.c. may play an important role concerning the opening of a main !?!?!? At the moment, I am extremely happy with my Chernis Collapsible Pilot chutes...

my short list.... C-152 C-170 C-172 C-180 C-182 C-185 C-205 C-206 Tri-Pacer Norseman Dornier Seneca Chieftain Queen Air Beech-18 Casa Bell Navajo Pilatus Porter Caravan Twin Otter Hot Air Balloon

What was concluded? The thread was rather long and thus on quick examination it wasn't clear what the issue was with the HMA lines Stiletto. Reference: Truffer fatality thread http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4490938; I assumed that after reading the entire Truffer fatality thread, that the problem was not with the choice of the suspension lines, but mainly with the packing of the canopy and the stows !?!?.... This was in response to Chuckakers , referring to Mike Truffer and to Bealio, both having a different approach to flawlessly packed canopies !

If it's perfectly packed, it won't kill you. If it does kill you, it's not perfect. Tell that to Mike Truffer (RIP). Parachutes can and do occasionally behave bizarrely despite being in perfect condition and packed flawlessly. You may have just been doing a bit of word play with your reply, but it's important for us to not send the younger jumpers incorrect messages, even if by accident. Yes, ANY parachute can open in such a way that it injures or even kills EVEN when properly packed. I have to agree with Bealio; '' ... if I does kill you, it's not perfect...'' , however, I understand what you are trying to say... I would rather use the term a ''good canopy'' could and will play tricks on you, here and there. As for your example concerning the fatal accident of Mike Truffer ( a great guy, RIP ) this may not be the best illustration ! In the Incidents Forum it is well explained why he had a very hard opening ; so hard, he never released his brakes. The Stilleto 107 may not have been packed ''flawlessly '' ! As for the young generation of skydivers, I agree we should alert them...nevertheless, I doubt they will listen !

I have a 24 '' Chernis Collapsible p.c. for a 120 main canopy, since early Spring, this year ! Excellent quality and construction. Just great !

I agree the difference wouldn't be drastic from a Pilot 168 to a Sabre2-150 ! Yet, there would be a difference ! Generally, Pilots opens better than Sabre2, a Sabre2 is not famed for its openings, nevertheless the Sabre2 has a much more powerful bottom end, a longer recovery arc, trimmed steeper and will provide more speed. It will provide a better aggressive piloting experience ! If Chris has in his distant future plans, to practice swooping, the Sabre2 would be a good choice/start ! If not, for example, to come back from a long spot is important to him, there would be better choices... Pilots are short recovery arc canopies. Concerning the real size of a PDSabre2-150 this is complex, since many manufacturers are using various methods for sizing their canopies ! If you say a Sabre2 is probably a 160, therefore a Pilot 168 could be, for example, also be a 178 !!! Then, this would be a difference. However, for now a Pilot 168 is 20.53 X 8.42/7.16 a Sabre2-150 is 19.67 X 7.28/6.69

I agree that both the Pilot and the Nitron are flat glide canopies and the Nitron/Nitro even more... ( why not get the real thing, the Nitro ? ) However, the Nitron/Nitro needs to be loaded, and I believe this is not what chriscchristoph is looking for at this time ! The Nitro/Nitron is slightly more elliptical than the Pilot therefore, approx. a foot on both side, surely more sporty ! Both Pilots and Nitrons are short recovery arc canopies. I still believe that a Pilot 150 would be the best, since the subject knows about Pilots ! A Pilot 168 is 20.53 X 8.42 X 7.16 and a Pilot 150 is 19.40 X 7.95 X 6.77 More sporty, a bit more speed, more flare ! And the openings on Pilots are great !

I once had a Spectre 170 for two years and at least to me, I found out that a 9-cell canopy was easier to land....however, I am quite certain someone else will have an opposite opinion !!! Since, you already know about Pilots, why not downsize to a Pilot 150...seems more logical to me than to look at a variety of different canopy types and a lot less confusing. Then, once you have mastered the 150, you would be able to make you own decision , trying various canopies of your own choice... Surely riggers have knowledge on a variety of skydiving' subjects and topics...in spite of that, skydivers with experience on a multitude of canopies, are usually the best !