DB Cooper

[olemisscub 552]

43 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Don't think so..

There are military bailout rigs aka back reserves like Cooper got.

 

I've seen you use this term "back reserve" over the years and I've always scratched my head over your use of it because I've never seen that term used elsewhere in a mid 20th century context. By definition to be a reserve chute you have to be a "reserve" of something i.e. a secondary chute to a main. A bailout rig like an NB-6 or B-4 would not be called a reserve because it isn't a reserve to anything. It IS a main. 

When guys like Braden competed in competitions, as seen in this photo here, he's just wearing a "sporterized" B-4 with D-rings specially added to it. I'll let Mark know to join this conversation. 

Edited Friday at 03:32 AM by olemisscub

[Kamkisky 13]

4 hours ago, olemisscub said:

Probably not enough to have a true paratrooper drag bag. When I was "modeling" for my AI animations, I had the chance to actually wrap the money bag and wrap cord around myself and all that and make it to where it could drag around behind me like Tosaw described. I had about 6 to 8 feet of line between the money and my waist, which is what Tina said. I used 80 feet of shroud line for this experiment, which is what Tom has on CitizenSleuths webpage. 

 

After watching this video clip to many times, three thoughts come to mind:

1) Didn’t he cut several cords? He didn’t have a single piece that’s 80 feet, right? If he had multiple sections I’d want more than one end tied to me. I’d want two ends from the bag tied to my body. I’m an old farm kid, you tie something down in back of the truck with two points of failure (minimum), not one.

2) I would not tie it the way you have. The bag is tied east to west. I’d want some wraps going north to south too. I’d be worried about racking. Which is what it sounds like happened with McCoy. 

3) Maybe it’s the angle of the video and/or my total lack of parachuting knowledge but I’d be tempted to sit on the block and tie it to myself through the straps at your waist (both sides) and around my upper thighs like the harness. A butt bag if you will. Of course I’d be one of the skyjackers drinking heavily. 

Edited Friday at 03:53 AM by Kamkisky

[olemisscub 552]

1 hour ago, Kamkisky said:

After watching this video clip to many times, three thoughts come to mind:

1) Didn’t he cut several cords? He didn’t have a single piece that’s 80 feet, right? If he had multiple sections I’d want more than one end tied to me. I’d want two ends from the bag tied to my body. I’m an old farm kid, you tie something down in back of the truck with two points of failure (minimum), not one.

2) I would not tie it the way you have. The bag is tied east to west. I’d want some wraps going north to south too. I’d be worried about racking. Which is what it sounds like happened with McCoy. 

 

Yes, he was working with shroud lines, so he cut cord from 5 of the shroud lines. I was just using a single 100 foot piece of paracord that I cut to 80 feet. 

I tied it the way as described by Tina. I also would have gone east to west on it as well as north to south. When I was wrapping it all of my instincts were telling me to go side to side and top to bottom. Perhaps Cooper also covered all directions but Tina was just describing it in her own way from her memory. 

 

 

[Kamkisky 13]

53 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Yes, he was working with shroud lines, so he cut cord from 5 of the shroud lines. I was just using a single 100 foot piece of paracord that I cut to 80 feet. 

I tied it the way as described by Tina. I also would have gone east to west on it as well as north to south. When I was wrapping it all of my instincts were telling me to go side to side and top to bottom. Perhaps Cooper also covered all directions but Tina was just describing it in her own way from her memory. 

 

 

This quote always gets to me. Cooper complains about no D-rings on the first back chute. Yet, he doesn’t wait for the second back chute before popping open his only working reserve. So much for bitching about d-rings. He didn’t even know if he’d be given d-rings before he destroys his only real reserve. 

[olemisscub 552]

37 minutes ago, Kamkisky said:

This quote always gets to me. Cooper complains about no D-rings on the first back chute. Yet, he doesn’t wait for the second back chute before popping open his only working reserve. So much for bitching about d-rings. He didn’t even know if he’d be given d-rings before he destroys his only real reserve. 

Always have to be a little wary when it comes to 302’s because it’s somewhat of a game of telephone. Witness speaks to the FBI agent who handwrites notes and then a day or two later dictates a narrative derived from those notes to a secretary who then types it up. 

This is definitely an example of telephone at work. 

The 302 says “when she returned to the plane when the last chute, she saw he had one chute cut open and nylon cords out.”

that just can’t be accurate because she only made three trips to get the parachutes: each of the backpacks required a separate trip, but on her last trip she was able to bring both the chest packs. So if the last “chute” she brought aboard were the two chest packs, then he couldn’t possibly have had one of them open at that point.

My guess is that it was meant to read something like this before the telephone game jacked it up: “after she delivered the last chute, she saw him open one of the chutes.”

Edited Friday at 06:31 AM by olemisscub

[Kamkisky 13]

5 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Always have to be a little wary when it comes to 302’s because it’s somewhat of a game of telephone. Witness speaks to the FBI agent who handwrites notes and then a day or two later dictates a narrative derived from those notes to a secretary who then types it up. 

This is definitely an example of telephone at work. 

The 302 says “when she returned to the plane when the last chute, she saw he had one chute cut open and nylon cords out.”

that just can’t be accurate because she only made three trips to get the parachutes: each of the backpacks required a separate trip, but on her last trip she was able to bring both the chest packs. So if the last “chute” she brought aboard with the two chest bags then he couldn’t possibly have had one of them open at that point.

My guess is that it was meant to read something like this before the telephone game jacked it up: “after she delivered the last chute, she saw him open one of the chutes.”

Are you sure it goes back/back/fronts? I feel like I’ve seen back/fronts/back before. 

The singular and plural are interesting here, last “chute.” As is the tense “when she returned” then “she saw he had.” 

[FLYJACK 774]

9 hours ago, olemisscub said:

I've seen you use this term "back reserve" over the years and I've always scratched my head over your use of it because I've never seen that term used elsewhere in a mid 20th century context. By definition to be a reserve chute you have to be a "reserve" of something i.e. a secondary chute to a main. A bailout rig like an NB-6 or B-4 would not be called a reserve because it isn't a reserve to anything. It IS a main. 

When guys like Braden competed in competitions, as seen in this photo here, he's just wearing a "sporterized" B-4 with D-rings specially added to it. I'll let Mark know to join this conversation. 

A pilot bailout rig is not a main...

You are caught in semantics.. a reserve is an emergency chute..

A back bailout rig is an emergency reserve.

Asking for a "front and back" is old school military jargon for main and reserve..

Cooper did not get a main.

Edited Friday at 12:28 PM by FLYJACK

[FLYJACK 774]

Why didn't Cooper talk?

He probably did...

[olemisscub 552]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

A pilot bailout rig is not a main...

You are caught in semantics.. a reserve is an emergency chute..

A back bailout rig is an emergency reserve.

Asking for a "front and back" is old school military jargon for main and reserve..

Cooper did not get a main.

Still waiting on Mark. I really do think you’re the one confused on semantics here and I believe it’s semantics of your creation. If you could provide evidence of the military or personnel ever calling a military backpack of any sort a “reserve”, I’d be interested to see it.

We all understand what Cooper meant and the people on the ground understood what he meant as well. He did indeed get two front packs and two backpacks, but because they came from two different places they weren’t coordinated enough to realize that these fronts and backs couldn’t work together. Nothing too complicated. He could have said “two mains and two fronts” instead and the same result likely would have ensued. 

Cooper likely didn’t feel the need to specify any further (or maybe didn’t know enough about parachutes to do so) because his demand implied that he needed D-rings on the backs for the sets to work. I’ve likened it to someone calling a rental car place requesting to rent a truck and a trailer, yet when they get there they are given a truck and trailer but the truck doesn’t have a trailer hitch. It’s like, duh, my request should have implied that you rent me a truck with a trailer. 

[FLYJACK 774]

4 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

Still waiting on Mark. I really do think you’re the one confused on semantics here and I believe it’s semantics of your creation. If you could provide evidence of the military or personnel ever calling a military backpack of any sort a “reserve”, I’d be interested to see it.

We all understand what Cooper meant and the people on the ground understood what he meant as well. He did indeed get two front packs and two backpacks, but because they came from two different places they weren’t coordinated enough to realize that these fronts and backs couldn’t work together. Nothing too complicated. He could have said “two mains and two fronts” instead and the same result likely would have ensued. 

Cooper likely didn’t feel the need to specify any further (or maybe didn’t know enough about parachutes to do so) because his demand implied that he needed D-rings on the backs for the sets to work. I’ve likened it to someone calling a rental car place requesting to rent a truck and a trailer, yet when they get there they are given a truck and trailer but the truck doesn’t have a trailer hitch. It’s like, duh, my request should have implied that you rent me a truck with a trailer. 

You have to stop accusing me of things until you know for sure... you assume too much.

My research indicates that emergency bailout rigs are not mains, they are constructed differently and have a different purpose. I am not well versed enough to understand the technical differences.. but a bailout rig is an emergency reserve worn on the back..

Cooper did not ask for or expect a bailout rig.. 

Asking for fronts and backs is early military speak for reserves and mains.

 

Riggers handbook explains the differences for "pilot emergency" rigs.. it is above my pay grade to understand those differences.. but it is clear they are NOT the same as mains.

https://www.nanaimoflyingclub.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Parachute-Rigger-Handbook.pdf

 

 

[olemisscub 552]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

You have to stop accusing me of things until you know for sure... you assume too much.

My research indicates that emergency bailout rigs are not mains, they are constructed differently and have a different purpose. I am not well versed enough to understand the technical differences.. but a bailout rig is an emergency reserve worn on the back..

Cooper did not ask for or expect a bailout rig.. 

Asking for fronts and backs is early military speak for reserves and mains.

 

Riggers handbook explains the differences for "pilot emergency" rigs.. it is above my pay grade to understand those differences.. but it is clear they are NOT the same as mains.

https://www.nanaimoflyingclub.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Parachute-Rigger-Handbook.pdf

 

 

Respectfully, describing a backpack bailout rig as a “reserve” is almost certainly a term of art of your creation. You’d have posted an example of the military using this term in your last post if it wasn’t your term of art. 

I’m also unsure if you can definitively state that this is “early military speak” because the ONLY military backpacks from the 40’s and 60’s that came standard with D-rings were T-5 type paratrooper static line packs. 

While I do believe that Cooper’s parachute knowledge came from the military at some point in his life, I don’t think that experience was informing his demand for “two backs and two fronts”. He was a conscious human being in 1971, so he was obviously aware that freefall skydivers wore back chutes as well as chest reserves. It’s unlikely he felt the need to specify further because, like my analogy of ordering a truck with a trailer, he assumed that they would give him the proper equipment to have a functional set, just as you’d assume the rental car place would give you a truck with a trailer hitch so you can actually use the trailer.  
 

Did H jump with a chest and a back? My reading of his file makes it sound like they just gave him six backpacks. Plus they mention finding his chute in Honduras, but are only using that in the singular.

Edited Friday at 04:04 PM by olemisscub

[Nicholas Broughton 79]

@dudeman17 care to weigh in on this?

[olemisscub 552]

1 hour ago, FLYJACK said:

Riggers handbook explains the differences for "pilot emergency" rigs.. it is above my pay grade to understand those differences.. but it is clear they are NOT the same as mains.

https://www.nanaimoflyingclub.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Parachute-Rigger-Handbook.pdf

 

 

This isn't helpful to our discussion at all. This is a 2005 handbook. Parachutes are night and day different in the 21st century than they were in the 20th century. This is sorta like posting a handbook on the proper cleaning of an M-16 when we're talking about 1940's firearms. Bit outdated. 

[FLYJACK 774]

Just now, olemisscub said:

This isn't helpful to our discussion at all. This is a 2005 handbook. Parachutes are night and day different in the 21st century than they were in the 20th century. This is sorta like posting a handbook on the proper cleaning of an M-16 when we're talking about 1940's firearms. Bit outdated. 

It isn't helpful because it proves you are wrong.

Bailout rigs and mains are constructed differently... they were in 1971.

[olemisscub 552]

5 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

It isn't helpful because it proves you are wrong.

Bailout rigs and mains are constructed differently... they were in 1971.

But I'm not arguing that bailout rigs are the same as other parachutes. Seatpacks, chest packs, static line chutes, emergency rigs....of course they're all designed differently. I'm arguing that you've created a term of art by calling a bailout rig a "reserve". You've yet to provide an example of people saying that bailout rigs are "reserves". 

I'd also like you to post an example of a "main" backpack from the 40's and 50's that isn't a seatpack or a static line chute, yet is somehow different from a standard B-4 or NB-6. What "main" are you suggesting that Cooper was thinking of when using "old military speak"? As I said, the only backpacks that came standard with D-rings were static line rigs for paratroopers.  

[Robert99 61]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

But I'm not arguing that bailout rigs are the same as other parachutes. Seatpacks, chest packs, static line chutes, emergency rigs....of course they're all designed differently. I'm arguing that you've created a term of art by calling a bailout rig a "reserve". You've yet to provide an example of people saying that bailout rigs are "reserves". 

I'd also like you to post an example of a "main" backpack from the 40's and 50's that isn't a seatpack or a static line chute, yet is somehow different from a standard B-4 or NB-6. What "main" are you suggesting that Cooper was thinking of when using "old military speak"? As I said, the only backpacks that came standard with D-rings were static line rigs for paratroopers.  

Everyone needs to pay attention to what Olemiss is saying.

First, on the matter of the 302's.  The agent doing the interview may not have any experience in the specific subject that is being discussed.  And the person being interviewed may have only very limited knowledge of the subject.  The terminology they use will probably not be the terminology that an expert in the subject would use.

So don't try to make a Federal case out of the semantics.  Just try to understand what they are talking about.  An experienced interviewer will probably approach a vital point from several different directions to make sure he understands what the subject is saying.

Second, Olemiss is certainly correct in saying that the present day parachute terminology is not the same as the 1971 or prior terminology.

Finally, it appears that Cooper did have some parachute experience but not necessarily as a skydiver.  There is no evidence that Tina had ever seen a parachute before much less touched one.  

[FLYJACK 774]

2 hours ago, olemisscub said:

But I'm not arguing that bailout rigs are the same as other parachutes. Seatpacks, chest packs, static line chutes, emergency rigs....of course they're all designed differently. I'm arguing that you've created a term of art by calling a bailout rig a "reserve". You've yet to provide an example of people saying that bailout rigs are "reserves". 

I'd also like you to post an example of a "main" backpack from the 40's and 50's that isn't a seatpack or a static line chute, yet is somehow different from a standard B-4 or NB-6. What "main" are you suggesting that Cooper was thinking of when using "old military speak"? As I said, the only backpacks that came standard with D-rings were static line rigs for paratroopers.  

You are..  that is the point..

Cooper asked for fronts and backs in 1971 not 1940,,, the term is military for reserve and mains..

As for reserve,, the technical term is "emergency parachute assembly" it is not a main and is constructed like a reserve.. I got "reserve" here long ago,, I think Larry said that and others.. It is a reserve type..  but that isn't the point.

Fact is in 1971 Cooper effectively asked for a front reserve and main,, he got an "emergency parachute assembly" which is not the same.

[olemisscub 552]

13 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

You are..  that is the point..

Cooper asked for fronts and backs in 1971 not 1940,,, the term is military for reserve and mains..

As for reserve,, the technical term is "emergency parachute assembly" it is not a main and is constructed like a reserve.. I got "reserve" here long ago,, I think Larry said that and others.. It is a reserve type..  but that isn't the point.

Fact is in 1971 Cooper effectively asked for a front reserve and main,, he got an "emergency parachute assembly" which is not the same.

This is a real word salad here. 

 I don't buy that him saying "front and back" was exclusive to military terminology because the only people in his era in the military who used "front and back" chutes were paratroopers and clearly he didn't have that type of rig in mind. When Cooper said "front and back" he was probably envisioning that they'd give him something that skydivers of his time were using. 

You keep saying that something like an NB-6 is a "reserve type". Perhaps now it could be classified as such, but modern classifications are irrelevant. What other military backpacks in the 40's-60's existed that would qualify as a "main" to you aside from a T-5 type paratrooper rig? 

[FLYJACK 774]

48 minutes ago, olemisscub said:

This is a real word salad here. 

 I don't buy that him saying "front and back" was exclusive to military terminology because the only people in his era in the military who used "front and back" chutes were paratroopers and clearly he didn't have that type of rig in mind. When Cooper said "front and back" he was probably envisioning that they'd give him something that skydivers of his time were using. 

You keep saying that something like an NB-6 is a "reserve type". Perhaps now it could be classified as such, but modern classifications are irrelevant. What other military backpacks in the 40's-60's existed that would qualify as a "main" to you aside from a T-5 type paratrooper rig? 

He asked in 1971 not 1940...He did not ask for 25 year old rigs..

The military was doing non static jumps in the 60's.

Again,, Hahneman asked for "fronts and backs" as well, in 1972, he got military front reserves and mains,, not an "emergency parachute assembly"...

Edited Friday at 08:41 PM by FLYJACK

[dudeman17 353]

Geez, ya miss a few days...

 

Quote

mains v reserves v bailout rigs...

 

The semantics may be of my doing. Flyjack has this right, though. Though they are not normally called 'reserves', I have called bailout rigs reserves here in describing the difference between them and mains. Mains are considered 'sporting equipment' and are not regulated by the FAA. Reserves and bailout rigs are considered 'emergency use' and are regulated. Mains are designed for constant use and better flight performance, differences that might increase the malfunction rate. Emergency use chutes are designed for opening reliability, they are tested to standards, and they are required to be packed by a licensed rigger, thus having packing cards and seals. Mains do not have packing cards or seals. Mains have the D-rings to attach the reserve. Bailout rigs do not have D-rings because they are the 'reserve',  the 'main' being the aircraft.

In any jumping or 'potential' jumping situation, the idea is that you want to have an emergency chute that you do not intend to use. For intentional jumps, whether sport or military, you have a main that gives you better control and landings, and a reserve in case it malfunctions. In an 'aircrew' situation, where you don't intend to jump, you have the bailout rig. For civilian use, that might be aerobatics or experimental aircraft. For military, you might have to bail if your aircraft gets shot.

Does that help?

 

Quote

would Cooper have known the difference?

 

I thought I answered this the other day. It depends. If Cooper was familiar with gear, he would have. If he wasn't, he might not have.

Edited Friday at 11:54 PM by dudeman17

[olemisscub 552]

31 minutes ago, dudeman17 said:

 

Does that help?

Ultimately I think we're probably all just being petty with the semantics. 

Cooper asking for "two fronts and two backs" clearly indicated that he just wanted a set including a main backpack and a front reserve chest pack. I don't think the fault is with Cooper for not specifying. The fact that he asked for a set implied that the backpack and the chest pack needed to be compatible, but because the fronts and the backs came from different places, there was no coordination to ensure that the components were compatible. 

Go back to my analogy of renting a truck and a trailer. The NWA guys called Hayden and said "we need your truck" and called Sky Sports and said "we need a trailer". In such an instance, it wouldn't be too surprising if the truck that shows up doesn't have a trailer hitch. So it shouldn't be much of a surprise that NWA supplied Cooper with an incompatible set of equipment. If they had only called Sky Sports and never Hayden and said "we need two fronts and two backs", then presumably Cooper's backpacks would have had D-rings. 

I'm honestly not sure the result would have been any different if Cooper had said "I want two mains and two reserves." The NWA guys were scrambling and likely would have scrambled the exact same way regardless of whatever generic nomenclature Cooper used. Obviously if he had been very specific like McCoy demanding Para Commanders, that would have been different. 

[FLYJACK 774]

1 hour ago, dudeman17 said:

I thought I answered this the other day. It depends. If Cooper was familiar with gear, he would have. If he wasn't, he might not have.

I still don't know he would know,,, mains don't need a card but does that mean they never have a card.

[FLYJACK 774]

1 hour ago, olemisscub said:

Ultimately I think we're probably all just being petty with the semantics. 

Cooper asking for "two fronts and two backs" clearly indicated that he just wanted a set including a main backpack and a front reserve chest pack. I don't think the fault is with Cooper for not specifying. The fact that he asked for a set implied that the backpack and the chest pack needed to be compatible, but because the fronts and the backs came from different places, there was no coordination to ensure that the components were compatible. 

Go back to my analogy of renting a truck and a trailer. The NWA guys called Hayden and said "we need your truck" and called Sky Sports and said "we need a trailer". In such an instance, it wouldn't be too surprising if the truck that shows up doesn't have a trailer hitch. So it shouldn't be much of a surprise that NWA supplied Cooper with an incompatible set of equipment. If they had only called Sky Sports and never Hayden and said "we need two fronts and two backs", then presumably Cooper's backpacks would have had D-rings. 

I'm honestly not sure the result would have been any different if Cooper had said "I want two mains and two reserves." The NWA guys were scrambling and likely would have scrambled the exact same way regardless of whatever generic nomenclature Cooper used. Obviously if he had been very specific like McCoy demanding Para Commanders, that would have been different. 

They did contact Skysports and ask for fronts and backs..  They obtained Hayden's before they could be gathered and told Emerich they only needed the fronts.

But Cooper initially asked for two chutes,, that meant two sets including a back and front.. he clarified to say 2 of each for 4 total. He didn't change his demand he just clarified. 

It would not have been different because he effectively did ask for mains and a front reserve..

The same thing happened with Hahneman, he demanded 6 chutes and got six military sets of front and back or 12 total.. the sets were in bags. 1 parachute = front reserve and main.

So, apparently one "parachute" refers to a set, front and back.. that means front reserve and main.

Point is Cooper expected for a main and got a bailout rig.. 

Did he notice? Does that tell us anything? His experience?

and if he noticed why wouldn't he just demand mains.

Does it change how he would jump if he knew they were bailout rigs.

 

and for the jumpers would you do his jump at night with a bailout rig vs main.

 

Edited yesterday at 01:26 AM by FLYJACK

[dudeman17 353]

45 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

I still don't know he would know,,, mains don't need a card but does that mean they never have a card.

 

For that type of gear, separated mains and reserves, no the mains would not have a card. Sport gear today, they all do have cards because the mains and reserves are part of the same rig, the cards are pertinent to the reserves.

I don't think it can be known whether he knew the difference or not, because we don't know his experience, how much he knew. He did seem to know something about them, he said he didn't need the instructions and appeared to know how to put it on. That would lean towards him knowing. Why didn't he ask for more? Hadn't he already complained about time, wanted to 'get the show on the road'? So does he want to wait an hour or two (?) while they looked for more? Or just make do with what he's got.

 

31 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

Does it change how he would jump if he knew they were bailout rigs.

 

Since he can't be planning on landing in a specific field, I don't think so.

 

33 minutes ago, FLYJACK said:

would you do his jump at night with a bailout rig vs main

 

I'd rather not, but as opposed to spending significant time in prison or being killed in a raid, I probably would.

[FLYJACK 774]

Summary..

Cooper expected a main/front reserve set. Received emergency bailout rigs.

Cooper either did not notice and jumped anyway, not demanding mains or he didn't notice they were bailout rigs.

Reserves and bailout rigs are emergency chutes and require a licensed rigger and packing card. They are considered unpremeditated aka not expected to be used.. Mains can be packed by the owner and are premeditated,, expected to be used. Bailout rigs are more robust and reliable than mains, harder opening and unsteerable they are designed just to get you to the ground hard. So, a bailout rig gets you to the ground more reliably but with a higher chance of injury. If Cooper pulled he landed alive.

My understanding is that a reserve or bailout rig requires a licensed rigger and card but since a main can be packed by the owner it does nor require a card. However, a main could be packed by a rigger and have a card.. So, having a packing card isn't proof that it is not a main.

Interestingly,, DUDEMAN17 claimed Gryder's chute was a main,, Ryan debunked the Gryder chute by proving it was NOT and NB6,, He is right it is not,, However, I am convinced that Cooper did not use an NB6.. if the Gryder chute is a main then that actually proves it is not Cooper's chute,, proving it is not an NB6 does not.

If Cooper jumped at 8:11 he could have drifted up to 6 miles in any direction from his perspective. That is a 113 sq miles potential landing zone.. 

This plus not knowing the path.. THERE IS NO WAY HE TARGETED AN LZ... looking down picking a "dark" spot and jumping in two minutes is irrelevant.. 

There are only two possibilities,,

Cooper did not realize he was using a bailout rig.. (My guess)

or, he knew it and didn't care...

 

So, I am trying to get a sense from jumpers.. what would it take to knowingly make that jump with a bailout rig vs main/reserve.. it is just like jumping with a single reserve.

Not a big deal or crazy? Would you do that jump in a bailout rig? 

Edited 20 hours ago by FLYJACK