Cambalectri

Since I am also a friend of audet40, I asked him if we could try to replicate this peculiar and unusual circumstance, with the Caravan PVC strip which is outside the door frame ! ( naturally, on the ground ! ) His reserve metal handle had to be at an exact angle from his body to the PVC strip, to be dislodged from the velcro pocket ! I also saw the video from one of the skydivers still inside the aircraft and it was quite a sight, when we saw the metal handle and part of the cable, back inside the door of the Caravan ! Possibly, if the metal reserve handle had caught on the door hinge, as assumed earlier, metal cable or spectra/bungee cable, the result would have been the same, surely a reserve ride at 14000 feet. And, hoping for the best ! However, this may not be possible to replicate on the ground! How to avoid this kind of incident ! Bent away from the aircraft door frame or the aircraft body ! Also, a fabric reserve handle may have helped in this particular situation, it may have only flipped, turned on itself, to the left ! This year, I have a fabric reserve handle. In the past, I always had a metal D-handle, thinking it was faster to grip, even with the thumb and as easy with the left or the right hand, especially should your left arm be incapacitated in freefall ! I practiced often, to remove my fabric reserve handle, from the velcro strip, with my left and also with my right hand. However, it is not as fast with my right hand ! What is the best, a metal reserve D-handle or a fabric reserve handle, I do not know the answer....I assume it would be a personal choice or your own personal evolution with the sport .... Lastly, with a metal reserve D-handle you can see the entire unit; with the fabric handle, it's partly an act of faith...

I have no data to offer & I have done any specific testing for this. Occasionally, we do hear of a baglock, but those are few & far between. IMO, the currently available rubber bands seem to work quite nicely in both lo-speed & hi-speed conditions. I would use what you are currently using until such time as they do not work; then go to Plan B. Let's not re-invent the wheel. JerryBaumchen PS) If you would like to get your hands on a demo NoStoBag, send me an email to: jerrybaumchen(at)gmail(dot)com Thanks Jerry, sending you an email later tonight...

During the R & D process on the MagBag, I spent a lot of time just thinking about the whole concept of keeping the canopy and lines in their respective locations until wanted during the various deployment processes, i.e., the lines in the line pouch & the canopy in the canopy pouch; these are two different concerns. Holding the lines in a line pouch with magnets is quite easy. IMO this system ( keeping the lines in the line pouch ) works quite well based upon the results that I received from the 5 prototype MagBags that I built and sent out to people to test jump. No one mentioned any problems with line dump & and Andre' LeMaire's videos of jumps on a prototype MagBag did not show any line dump at terminal. The last that I knew, Andre' was still using his prototype MagBag and was quite satisfied with it. IMO the biggest problem with "a magnetic system on a main stowless bag" lies with balancing the magnetic forces during two different deployment scenarios: 1. Allowing the canopy to get out of the canopy pouch of the d-bag during hop & pops ( much slower deployment speeds and resultant lower pilot chute pulling forces ) 2. Keeping the canopy in the canopy pouch of the d-bag at terminal ( much higher deployment speeds and resultant higher pilot chute pulling forces ). You need low magnetic forces at #1 because the main pilot chute does not have the pulling power at low speeds as it does at #2, where you need high magnetic forces to ensure that the canopy does not come out during 'snatch'. From what I have read, the LazyBag folks in Belguim seem to have overcome this problem with their design(s). Quite often here on dz.com we have some very interesting discussions on 'line dump' ( when lines 'dump' out of the line pouch or out of the rubber bands at snatch ) and when canopies dump out of the canopy pouch at the wrong time ( which is not 'line dump' ). IMO these are two completely different problems. Does this help? And just for the record: I do not pretend to know all that there is to know about any type of deployment bag(s). I hope to keep on learning as time goes by. That is why I no longer make a MagBag, the NoStoBag is a superior product; but I am biased. JerryBaumchen PS) And I am not concerned about magnets effecting the function of any AAD located inside of the reserve container. Magnetic bags have been used in Europe for a number of years & I have never heard of such a problem. Great help, Jerry, many thanks again, quite detailed and thorough ! What would be the ideal tension in pounds for the the two closing stows on the NoStoBag ? For example, would a hop n pop or terminal opening alter the way you select the size / strength of the rubber bands ? Coming back to the concern regarding some strong magnets on a stowless bag in the container main tray, I understand that surely the Cypres and Vigil cutters are shielded against electromagnetic and electrostatic disturbances ! As for the Control Units, I do not know, at this time ! I am also aware of the all magnets Compal Lazy Bag... ... great, if it's working for them. And, with the thousand of jumps made on that particular Lazy Bag, it seems effective ! Yet, in 2011 at the PIA, UPT Greg Rau stated that he was not a supporter of a stowless bag with magnets, he seems to prefer a more simple method... in other words, keep it simple ! I suppose, different folks, different viewpoints ! Nonetheless, the stowless bag is without doubt, making headway.

Sure. 1. I think all main canopy d-bags should be slightly larger than the container that that are going to go into. This will allow easier packing of the canopy into the d-bag, it will not have any negative effect on placing the d-bag into the container, it will allow the canopy-in-the-bag to move around ever-so slightly, filling up all those nooks and crannies in the container. Then when you close the container flaps everything will fit just perfectly. 2. The MagBag was just too much work to make any money on. And those magnets were 'somewhat' expensive. Also, magnets can wear through the bag fabric and fall out ( this has happened to someone else's mag-bag ). When I visited Sandy Reid back in Feb, I tried to talk him out of using magnets, but it looks like he didn't agree with that idea. I guess you can't win them all. And those magnets can d*** well hurt if you ever were to get your fingers in between them. Ask me how I know this. 3. The NoStoBag is built to the customer's dimensions; each one is custom-made. I keep the info & the patterns in the event something gets wrong/incorrect in the process. That enough comment for you? JerryBaumchen PS) Dealers for the NoStoBag: Nicholas Cronin Place Tarnaiae 1 1869 Massongex, Switzerland niccronin@yahoo.com ChutingStar 1349 Old U.S. 41 NW, Suite 105 Marietta, GA 30060-7929 RockSkyMarket 1207 W. Gurler Road Rochelle, IL 61068 Flying High Mfg. Box 2320 Claresholm, AB T0L 0T0 CANADA RockSkyMarket 1207 W. Gurler Road Rochelle, IL 61068 Square One 25819 Jefferson Ave. #140 Murrieta, California 92562 Aero Store 120 North Charlotte Street Pottstown, PA 19464 Thanks again Jerry, this is exactly the info which I needed, to surely solve my dilemma ! Likewise, I quite agree with your comment that perhaps a magnetic system on a main stowless bag could be possibly, problematic, after a while ! For example, as the main bag is been lift up by the p.c. it may possilby deformed slightly, naturally depending of its size and weight and I believe, magnets are maybe perpendicularly weak !?! Furthermore, do we know the long term effect of a few strong magnets in closed proximately to the AAD inside the container ? I do not have the answer ! Thanks for you time and for the list of dealers for the NoStoBag. Most useful.

I think that any difference is rather insignificant. For the NoStoBag, you eliminate a number of rubber bands ( two are still req'd ) but you do add the two tuck tabs and the pockets that they tuck into. I had my hands on a UPT stowless bag for a number of weeks a year or so ago and I think the same for them. I would think that any 'difference' would be less than the packing technique/ability of the packer. Differences in packing can add or delete more 'bulk' IMO. JerryBaumchen Hi Jerry, Because of the pockets and tuck tabs of the NoStoBag, I thought, at first, it would have help me to add, to augment, a bit the volume inside my container, which has a standard UPT bag ! ( Naturally, I reduced the closing loop ! ) Previously, you designed another stowless bag, I believe, the MagBag ? A nice design which had magnets! Same volume compare to the more recent NoStoBag ? Would you comment to the motive you did away with the magnets...thanks.

Same question as ''Pnuwin'' ! Does the UPT or other similar semi-stowless bag (Jerry's ) add more bulk ? However, I have a slightly loose fitting main, will it add volume to the container ? In my case, it would be beneficial. Thanks !

While, this has nothing to do with your original question, I glanced at the image of the PD Coloring program for your Pulse 150 ... unless I am totally wrong, the rendition of your canopy in real life could be fairly different ! Having a nearly all black top panel and black ribs, your bottom logo would certainly be weaken ! Furthermore, there is a possibility that the black cells ribs would show through your logo ! However, what is relevant is that you are content ; what do I know !

Looking forward to your results and a few more images, especially your new slider attached to your canopy...

I like your sense of humor, Boogers !

Thanks, Jerry and taking the time !

Thanks for the info. However, using brass grommets #8 at the corners for the ParaGear split slider, surely not the best, especially with newer lines like HMA, Technora or Vectran ?!? Yet, they could offer stainless or chrome #5 grommets for a custom split slider ... !

Sounds overly compicated for what you want to do, to me. Just get a split slider. That's a slider that comes in two halves, left and right. When packed, the two halves are joined together by a cord. After your canopy opens you yank on that cord and the two halves come apart, allowing your lines to spread out, and the halves stay attached to your line groups by the grommets so you don't lose them, and they just dangle behind you. Quick and easy to pack, quick and easy to split. Just like pulling on a line to collapse a regular slider so it doesn't flap in the wind. But in this case the cord separates the two halves. Doh!

Isn't will a bit of a strong word? As others have said the skyhook doesn't always work and a standard RSL is pretty quick to get a reserve out too. During my second reserve ride the reserve's slider was coming down as I pulled the reserve handle and that was with a normal RSL. There are pros and cons to every system. If you can't pull your reserve and the AAD fires, the pilot chute has a whole lot more fabric to move out of the way on a Vector compared to a Wings which eats time and altitude. I think more people have hit the ground after an AAD fire than have been saved by a skyhook. Correct reserve sizes helps a lot for that though. To the original poster. If you have not had a malfunction yet, buy an RSL system of some kind. Way too many people have bounced after pulling the cut away and not finding or pulling the reserve handle. I would not compare a standard RSL with the Skyhook, to me, these are two different animals... even though, the goal is similar, to put a canopy above our head, asap ! As for your statement, that the Vector has to move out a lot more fabric compared to a Wings, hence eating time & altitude... I believe it's true, there are more flaps, however, do this test... put on the floor, a similar sized Wing and Vector3, side by side, and pull both the reserve handles, at the same time... and, tell me, what you see !

You're right! Manufacturers should ban Vigils until Vigil starts Xray'ing all cutters befored assembly. Oh, wait.... They started doing that in 2008... Never mind. Do we know why, Vigil started to X-ray all cutters before assembly, in 2008 ??? Was this procedure also done by Aviacom Argus and is it done, now, by Airtec ???

The Airtec Cypres2 and the Argus cutters are not the same, they are very different ! However, the cutters from AAD Vigil2 and the Argus are similar... The Airtec cutter is a wedge-shaped knife and the one from Argus is a cylindrical bullet-type knife ! The Airtec cutter is made by Nobel (Germany) ; Argus is using the Nobel Energetics Metron, from Scotland. As for AAD Vigil, I believe, their cutter comes from Richard Stresau Laboratory, Inc... What is similar with both, the Cypres and the Argus, the cutter is treaded, but the Vigil is made by crimpling.

At Skydive Expo, in Deland, I saw Jupp Veltman' demonstration at the Airtec stand, where a Cypres2 cutter, on the cement floor, is cutting through a ripcord cable. No bang, no noise, no smoke...just a click ! Another neat demonstration, on Airtec website, is where a Reissdorf Kolsch beer truck goes over a Cypres2 casing ! Effective !

I was at the Skydive Expo, in Deland, on Saturday, March the 13th, and I saw the SEVEN, by Basik Air Concept. I had the opportunity to talk with everyone at the stand and with Jerome Bunker . What can I say! The SEVEN, double-thick spacer foam padding, cordura freebag which is part of the reserve container, the low number of flaps, the attention to detail , the quality of workmanship , etc .... ... an awesome rig ! Kudos.

First you say you don't want a wing load of more than 1:1. At 50 jumps what size canopy are you jump. That would put you under a fairly small canopy already. I am not a big advocate of wearing weights. I would suggest you work with a coach on several jumps who can really vary their fall rate and who can teach you various techniques to fall faster. I am a female instructor and I am the one instructor than call fall with one of our 240 pound students who may as well be an anvil. I also fall with our skinny, tall and lanky students. I dress a little differently depending on who I jump with, but I learned early on how to vary my fall rate out of necessity. You will hear this from any skydiver - faster is better!! I agree with Kmills... unless your are in very good shape, do weights and you are very agile, try to avoid all that lead, especially in a belt ! On the long run, it could put some strain on your spinal column and hurt your back, especially, when your canopy opens ! Also, a 12-pound belt, around your waist, as you land that ''new'' canopy with a rotation, will do ''magic'' to your knees ! For now, experiment flying your body otherwise and learn different techniques from others. It will take time. Then, in a year or two, it will be your own decision !

I'm uncertain why we are having a discussion in relation to the strength of various AAD's casings, since I believe, there are no serious issues which were presented on this forum. However, concerning your aboved statement, in reference to the Argus unit, I still believe a solid block of metal is stronger than your typical straight wall design box, mainly because when you bore into the metal, the inner wall and outside walls of the casing becomes arch-shaped or vaulted, adding significant strength to the case. And, should it be true that an AAD made from a solid block of metal is cheaper to make, than a molded design type, then, lets hopes the savings are passed to the Argus byers. On a similar note, the Vigil2 is 40% thinner that the Vigil1 ; surely also, still strong enough not to put in peril the various components inside the unit. I agree that the Vigil2 with its German Tadiran lithium battery lasts a long time but as you said, adding extra weight of the Vigil2. Regarding the Airtec Cypres, which I still have, at this time, I have no issues with the casing...modern plastics are everywhere, very light yet, certainly very strong. ***

Both the Vigil and the Argus has similar modes, as you mentioned, in your post, however, the Argus has one extra mode, the Swoop mode. Concerning the battery, the Vigil2 uses a battery from Tadiran Lithium battery GmbH, from Germany, formely Sonnenschein Lithium. I'm not certain about the Vigil2 being the champion of '' energy saving '' however, the Vigil battery will last a long time, mainly because it's a high energy cell, but also adding extra weight to the unit. Yet, I am in agreement, it's a nice choice to power the Vigil2.

I also like this idea of a solid block of aluminium for the casing of an AAD. It's a simple and intelligent concept, from Aviacom Argus. You bore two holes and voila ! It could be stronger than your normal box design ! Now, concerning the two separate instances of a cracked Cypres, that you mentioned, I don't think we should get all agitated about this.. do we know the exact circumtances or the situation ?... On their website, Airtec mentioned that , since 1991, they produced 80,000 Cypres1 and 50,000 Cypres2; if there were issues with their plastic casing, we would certainly know by now. However, let see if someone else do have more info ...

I met Beatnik, last summer, in Ontario; he has this great and amazing passion for vintage skydiving gear and he writes excellent articles, for Canpara.

I would be very suspicious with this kind of a story, where would-be riggers, trying to remove an Argus from a Javelin container, ripped-out the cables from the unit ... Later on, I asked some questions concerning the incident , however no other serious facts were provided ! I believe the Argus has M8 connectors.

Surely erdnarob neglected to mention the Advance and Seven reserve pilot chute mainly because the equipment is not readily at hand in his area... however, it will be a pleasure to see the equipment at Skydive EXPO 2010, in Deland!

I agree with erdnarob concerning the Vector3 and the Quasar II pilot chute travelling vertically 5 feet+, but, I noticed , the Quasar was slightly better. However, I believe they both used the same spring, but not in the same configuration, one with the wide end of the spring, sitting on the inside flaps of the reserve, the other, with the wide end near the top !