Riggers - Max Suspended Weight Reserve

[sabr190 0]

I did a search and really didn't find the info I wanted, so I decided to start a poll. Please don't thrash me too bad if this has come up before.

I'll start with the question.

Would you as a rigger pack a reserve that you knew the jumper was over the maximum suspended weight of that reserve or would you send the jumper on his way to find another rigger?

I only ask after reading an incident report on another string and after witnessing a pretty heated discussion on the subject at the DZ this weekend.

"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa

[bmcd308 0]

Max TSO weight or max recommended weight of the mfg?

Some mfgs claim 254 lbs certification then put a max recommended weight below that.

I searched but could not find the old thread about it.

Brent

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

[sabr190 0]

I guess I would have to go with which one the FAA recognizes as the maximum suspended weight limit.

"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa

[PhreeZone 20]

Not only that, but how about harnesses that are rated for the TSO -C23c 254 lbs limit?

I think its some tiny MircoRavens and tiny PD R's that are rated to 254 pounds but the manufactor says they have a max of less then that.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Hooknswoop 19]

I would pack it. It isn't my responsibility to ensure that the rig is used within limits.

I would like someone to reference an FAR that says reserve parachute TSO limits must be observed or it is a FAR violation. I haven't found one.

I do know that aircraft have a 'demostrated maximum crosswind' which isn't a limit, only the maximum crosswind the manufacturer has been able to demonstrate the aircraft can be safely landed in.

Edit: Or for that matter, what is the maximum suspended weight for a harness/container certified under TSO-C23B? Good luck finding that number

Derek

[sabr190 0]

Exactly what I'm looking for, is there indeed a FAR that states that a reserve must be used within it's stated maximum suspended weight limit? Or is it purely just a recomendation that the manufacture sets for liability reasons?

If you are a rigger, does this manufacture limit push the liability on you or solely on the end user of the equipment?

"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa

[FrogNog 1]

Are riggers required by the FAA to pack reserves in accordance with the reserve canopy and harness manufacturer's recommendations?

-=-=-=-=-
Pull.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Are riggers required by the FAA to pack reserves in accordance with the reserve canopy and harness manufacturer's recommendations?

Yes, manufacturer's instructions.

I can't find an FAR that says a skydiver must observe the TSO limits though.

Derek

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

I can't find an FAR that says a skydiver must observe the TSO limits though.

Well that's good news for freeflying.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Hooknswoop 19]

I think it reflects more of a lack of concern, ignorance and apathy by the FAA, over skydiving again.

The FAR's pertaining the skydiving are very screwed up. No one really seems to care though.

Derek

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

The FAR's pertaining the skydiving are very screwed up. No one really seems to care though.

One the contrary I think most people are happy to have the FAA keep out of skydiving regulation as much as possible.

I'll agree that most people don't think about it, but they would be unhappy with more regulation.

I know that the posibility of people f-ing themselves up without regulation may be higher, but I'm happy to do without the FAA saving me from myself.

With increased FAA regulation and the lack of understanding they will have due to their general lack of interest in our very small corner of GA, how long do you think it would be before the FAA said you couldn't jump a 60 VX because it exceeded maximum alowable limitations. Or a PDR106 for that matter.

I'm not feeling so bad about most of the self regulation we have, I'd like to see a bit more of the good 'ol boy club at our govering body's HQ get broken up, but no one new seems to want to run for office.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

One the contrary I think most people are happy to have the FAA keep out of skydiving regulation as much as possible.

I'll agree that most people don't think about it, but they would be unhappy with more regulation.

I know that the posibility of people f-ing themselves up without regulation may be higher, but I'm happy to do without the FAA saving me from myself.

I wasn't saying that they should make more FAR's, just fix what they have.

Quote

With increased FAA regulation and the lack of understanding they will have due to their general lack of interest in our very small corner of GA, how long do you think it would be before the FAA said you couldn't jump a 60 VX because it exceeded maximum alowable limitations.

Then Icarus would label the max weight as 500 pounds And the FAA doesn't care about mains anyway.

Quote

Or a PDR106 for that matter.

The max exit weight for my old 106 was 220 pounds, so I was good there.

Quote

I'm not feeling so bad about most of the self regulation we have, I'd like to see a bit more of the good 'ol boy club at our govering body's HQ get broken up, but no one new seems to want to run for office.

I think that the USPA is a house of cards. Eventually something high profile will happen, the FAA will investigate and be force to realize and accept that USPA doesn't regulate anything. Thent he FAA will have to step in and regulate skydiving. I think it is in USPA's best interest to enfore their own BSR's before that happens.

Derek

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

I think that the USPA is a house of cards. Eventually something high profile will happen, the FAA will investigate and be force to realize and accept that USPA doesn't regulate anything. Thent he FAA will have to step in and regulate skydiving. I think it is in USPA's best interest to enfore their own BSR's before that happens.

Amen brotha.....

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[rushmc 23]

I pack the reserve. I then add a question to the invoice that states "The manufacturers max recommended weight for your reserve is ________?" After (most of them) can not answer the question I fill in the number and I have them initial the invoice which I keep in my files. I do not ask them what they weigh......but I do get some strange reactions though.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[masterrig 1]

O.K., the FAA says, we 'must follow manufacturer's instructions'. The manufacturer's instructions are approved by the FAA. It is in the FARs that we follow manufacturer's instructions. So, if a manufacturer states that maximum suspended weights are not to be exceeded, and is stated in their instructions, though not a FAR, the FAA has basically agreed with and supports the manufacturer. Just a thought.

Chuck

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

O.K., the FAA says, we 'must follow manufacturer's instructions'

For packing the reserve. The leap from following the manufacturer's instructions for packing the reserve to the rigger must ensure that the end user follows the TSO limits simply isn't there.

Quote

It is in the FARs that we follow manufacturer's instructions.

"We", as in 'us riggers', yes. "We", as in skydivers following TSO limits, no.

Quote

So, if a manufacturer states that maximum suspended weights are not to be exceeded, and is stated in their instructions, though not a FAR, the FAA has basically agreed with and supports the manufacturer. Just a thought.

The FAR's say that Riggers must follow the manufacturer's instructions for packing the reserve, they do not say skydivers must observe the TSO limits of the gear. These are two very different things.

Derek

[masterrig 1]

Thanks Hook, for your response. It's clear as mud! Seriously, I understand what you are saying. Seems like, there is some room for improvement somewhere.

Chuck

[riggerrob 643]

I think that the USPA is a house of cards. Eventually something high profile will happen, the FAA will investigate and be force to realize and accept that USPA doesn't regulate anything. Then the FAA will have to step in and regulate skydiving. I think it is in USPA's best interest to enforce their own BSR's before that happens.

Derek

[riggerrob 643]

I burnt out on this question a decade ago, specifically over pilot emergency parachutes.

I just got tired of owners of high speed airplanes (i.e. $1.5 million P-51 Mustangs and jet trainers) bringing low speed parachutes to me for repack. I tried explaining the regulations and engineering limitations to the first few dozen, but after it became clear that they were not listening, I quit wasting my breath. Most of those pilots have already decided that they will go down in flames before bailing out of their precious warbird.

In an effort to preserve my own sanity, I quit lecturing.

An analogy would be an aircraft mechanic who is legally obliged to maintain an airplane in accordance with manufacturer's manuals, airworthiness directives, service bulletins, FARS, etc. But his liability stops at the hangar door.
If a pilot decides to overload an airplane, there is nothing the mechanic can do.

While working at Square One, I packed hundreds of tiny reserves, rarely knowing the size of the customer.

To clarify a point in the TSO process: under TSO C23C and D, a manufacturer must drop test until he has proven that his equipment will survive opening at 150 knots with 254 pounds suspended weight. After that, smart manufacturers placard smaller canopies at lighter weights, because no one expects the fat boy's ankles to survive landing a 97 reserve.

[bmcd308 0]

>>TSO C23C and D<<

I thought that to be certified under D, the drop test was at a higher speed than under C. Can anyone enlighten me?

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

>>TSO C23C and D<<

I thought that to be certified under D, the drop test was at a higher speed than under C. Can anyone enlighten me?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Under TSO C23C and D, the manufaturer must prove that the rig will survive opening at 150 knots with 254 pounds.
However, under TSO C23D, they have the OPTION of certifying a rig to heavier weights or higher air speeds.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Under TSO C23C and D, the manufaturer must prove that the rig will survive opening at 150 knots with 254 pounds.
However, under TSO C23D, they have the OPTION of certifying a rig to heavier weights or higher air speeds.

w/ TSO C23-D they can go as low as 220 pounds, like the PD-106R

Derek

[sabr190 0]

Thanks guys, I know a large percent of jumpers today overload their reserves and it looks like another assumed risk we take. I personally overload my reserve by about 15 pounds, but only because the size of my main dictates the size of my reserve, because harness/containers are built the way they are. Which brings up another question.

When do you think manufactures will try to engineer a harness/container system to cater to the growing number of jumpers who fly small parachutes, but would like a reserve that is more suited to their weight or personal preference? Lets face it, a 220lb jumper landing unconcious under a PD106 reserve is a real possibility, and that jumper becoming a fatality report due to that landing is a real scary thought.

"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

When do you think manufactures will try to engineer a harness/container system to cater to the growing number of jumpers who fly small parachutes, but would like a reserve that is more suited to their weight or personal preference?

When there is enough of a market to make a profit off of the new sizes.

Derek

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Quote

Under TSO C23C and D, the manufaturer must prove that the rig will survive opening at 150 knots with 254 pounds.
However, under TSO C23D, they have the OPTION of certifying a rig to heavier weights or higher air speeds.

w/ TSO C23-D they can go as low as 220 pounds, like the PD-106R

Derek

The test weight must not be less then 264 pounds, and the test weight is maximum operating weight limit(220pounds) x 1.2, that equals 264 pounds. The test speed must be not less than 180 KEAS, maximum operating speed x 1.2 or 150 KEAS. All tests under 4.3.4 (strength test) must be done with the same canopy, harness, components.
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals