seat or chest?

[jumper03 0]

which do you see more of in your loft? It seems I can't find a consensus on this one (imagine that).

Many people say chest because you could log a racer as chest. But not anymore if my understanding of the situation is correct.

So how many chest mounted reserves do you see?
How many seat?

Enquiring minds want to go search ebay and Poynters

Scars remind us that the past is real

[masterrigger1 2]

Steve,
Let's see if I can answer some of your Questions:

First, I see more seat packs from pilots than chest packs.

Second, if you have a early model Racer,you can log it as a chest or back, but not seat.

Why? Because in the early years of sport parachuting all of the reserves were on the front (chest) and that is the rating most riggers had at that time.

Then the "piggyback" system came out. It simply was a chest pack that clipped on the top of the main container on the back. The same chest rated riggers could pack them and be legal.

The H/C later evolved to the "tandem"system of today's style of containers.

Jump Shack and Relative Workshop had allowed (in their FAA approved instructions)for chest rated riggers to be able to pack them.

Again that was the rating that most riggers had and all of the reserves at that time were rounds, not squares.

Bill Booth would be the person to ask if you can log a later version of the Wonderhog as chest.


Third, the most chest packs I see are mine. I have about 8 of different types for my PC's and students to use during rigger training.

Cheers,
MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

[masterrig 1]

I'd have to agree with Mel, on this one. Also, since I deal with a lot of pilots, I get more seats. This may just be a regional thing but, the only chest mounts I've ever seen were those that were packed-up for several years and were no more than topics of conversation. I too, thought long and hard before I went for my second rating. In my area, seats were the 'obvious' choice. What is most 'common' in your area? I never have understood the idea of packing a Racer, to be able to log it as a chest. A Racer is a back! That's just my opinion. Seats and backs are more common. JMO


Chuck

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

I never have understood the idea of packing a Racer, to be able to log it as a chest. A Racer is a back! That's just my opinion. Seats and backs are more common. JMO

Quote

I'm not a rigger...nor have I ever played one on TV...but I'm curious, why WOULD a Racer be considered a chest...what makes it different than any other 'back' type of sport rig?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[jumper03 0]

My understanding is that the racer pop top reserve is just a chest mounted reserve that was moved to the back and could be logged as a chest pack. I know more than a few master riggers that got their 100 chest repacks by logging racers. However (if I'm wrong please correct me) in 2001 - the FAA went to Jumpshack and asked that it no longer be considered a chest pack and they agreed.

The reason I ask this question is I really love the work and would like to one day get a Masters rating - as well as service anyone in the area that comes in with a rig. Being close to Ft. Bragg, I could pack chest mounts all day, but for what? No sport jumpers or pilots use them and I'm not sure the army would have me

I have never laid eyes on a seat pack around here. I would like to do more than just buy a chest or seat rig and pack it 100 times....

Scars remind us that the past is real

[councilman24 37]

I got both chest and back when I got my original rating in 1985. We still had some conventional rigs around and our students were still using belly mounts. I logged some early racers as chest but that's not in the manual anymore IIRC. In about 1995 I got a seat rating. Had a trainee going to a course get a seat so we could cross supervise to each get the third rating. Borrowed a seat from the local war bird museum.

I now pack for most of their pilots and most of them have seats. I do about half as many seats as I do backs, either sport or pilot.

I haven't done a chest since the mid 80's, although I do own one. The ONLY ones you'll see are for historic jumps. I also haven't done a Racer since 1990. Just don't have any around here, although I own an early one.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[riggerrob 643]

I have repacked:
2900+ back type pack jobs
301 seat
46 chest.

Mind you I worked for several factories (Butler, Rigging Innovations and Para-Phernalia) that manufactured pilot emergency parachutes.
I repacked my first 200 seat packs while working for Butler, then did that last hundred while working for Para-Phernalia (Softie).
A few skdivers still used chest reserves when I earned my Rigger A rating back in 1984, but the only reason that I repacked that many chest packs was an obscure contract that Butler had with the United States Coast Guard.

Even these days, I might repack a half-dozen PEP seat packs per year, but only maybe one chest pack for an aspiring tandem instructor who wants to do an intentional cutaway.

As for logging Racer or Wonderhog repacks as "chest" ... it makes sense if you look at Dan Poynter's original patent for the Pop-Top container. The first Pop-Top was a chest-mounted reserve, then Strong Enterprises extrapolated seat, back and chair (long back) PEP versions. Packing a new Strong Para-cushion seat pack and an old Pop-Top reserve - both containing round canopies - is almost identical.

Similarly, when Strong Enterprises licensed their Pop-Top to reserve container to John Sherman (circa) 1975, the first production run of SST reserve containers were almost identical to Pop-Top chest packs, the only difference was that they were worn on the back. It was not until Jump Shack developed the wedge-shaped SST Racer in 1979, that Pop-Top container design diverged. Now Racer reserves have no parts common with the original Pop-Top chest pack. That is why the FAA ended the practice of logging Racers as "chest" or "seat."
The connection was a bit more vague with early Wonderhogs, because packing a Wonderhog reserve had always been significantly different than any preceding chest type container.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

I never have understood the idea of packing a Racer, to be able to log it as a chest. A Racer is a back! That's just my opinion. Seats and backs are more common. JMO

Quote

I'm not a rigger...nor have I ever played one on TV...but I'm curious, why WOULD a Racer be considered a chest...what makes it different than any other 'back' type of sport rig?

____________________________________________

Jumper03 and Councilman24 have answered that. When I was trying to decide whether to get a seat or chest rating, I had several 'older' jumpers tell me to get a chest rating... "you can log Racers as chests!" I was thinking more of the war bird pilots in my area as well as other pilots I knew who used seats. Besides, I see where more manufacturer's offer seats than those offering chests.


Chuck

[skybeergodd 0]

I see more seat by far....there are several seat packs that are used by pilots and the only ones that still use chest mount are the old nostalgic jumps and you only get those maybe once a year or two

[mjosparky 4]

Go for a seat for your second rating. You could go your whole career and not do the 20 repacks required for a senior ticket. jmo

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[CrazyL 0]

What Mel said. I went for the Seat type, packed several kinds of seat packs. You will see many more of them than chest, unless your military. I cring at the thought of riggers getting the Master Rigger ticket by packing Racer rigs logging them as chest. Did they really qaulify?

[mark 107]

Quote

I cringe at the thought of riggers getting the Master Rigger ticket by packing Racer rigs logging them as chest. Did they really qualify?

Yes, but no need to cringe. The pack jobs only make you a Master Packer. A Master Rigger ticket has always been more about repairs and alterations than about packing. Perhaps someone who was around back in the day can tell us the rationale for the 100/100 pack job requirement. Longevity, time in service, exposure perhaps?

Mark

[riggerrob 643]

Master Riggers also need 3 years experience and a letter of recommendation from another Master Rigger.
I had 12 years rigging experience and 3 years experience working in parachute factories before I attempted the Master Rigger test/ By then, the test was breeze!

Similarly, Canadians who want to earn a Rigger B rating (roughly equivalent to FAA Master Rigger) need to be approved to pack both round and square reserves as well as .. different types of containers (1-pin sport, 2-pin sport, Pop-Top, chest and pilot emergency parachutes). Then they need to sew a variety of repairs and submit a bag full of samples to CSPA's Technical Committee.

[CrazyL 0]

Met a Canadian Master Rigger that says his test included making a main parachute and jumping it. Ever heard of a testing in Canada requiring as much. Provided materials and workspace i would'nt have a problem with that. Your experience in factories is one of the greatest assets a rigger could have and time doing rigging /packing. I'd like to know more about Canada's Master Rigger test. Sounds like good proficiency requirements. Similar to U.S.

[CrazyL 0]

Your right about the alterations and repairs. I'd think there are more rigger that are good packers than riggers who also can do good repairs.Have become good at repairing others repairs as well. I'll try and ask around and find out the rationale of 100/100.

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Met a Canadian Master Rigger that says his test included making a main parachute and jumping it.

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

First time I have heard of that!
That process is not mentioned in CSPA's SOLO Program (Rigger B apprenticeship).

I have a copy of the 11 page SOLO Program on my desk. It details of all the tasks required of an aspiring Rigger B (i.e. "replace a load-bearing rib in a ram-air canopy"). This is probably similar to the FAA's guide for practical testing, but CSPA prefers to tell candidates ahead of time what is expected of them. CSPA also differs in that they expect candidates to do 90% of the work - under the supervision of a Rigger B or FAA Master Rigger - then submit a bag of samples to the Technical Committee with a letter of recommendation.
I guess that means that CSPA treats applicants more like adults.

Mind you, I did sew up a couple of kit parachutes back in the 1980s and made a few hundred jumps on them, but did not mention them to the CSPA Technical Committee when I applied for Rigger B. Maybe if I did, they would speed up my application.

Similarly, the British Parachute Association requires (Advanced or whatever they call them) Rigger candidates to make a complete harness and container (to an ancient pattern). Once they pass the test, the rig is cut up because it is outside the normal TSO quality control process.

• Quote