ZigZagMarquis

Why doesn't he just purchase a main D-Bag with 2 gromets/stowes and a "pouch" in it (or have someone make one for him) to stow the remaining suspension line?? Works just fine.

Unfortunately... my home DZ has had a rash of cat pee incidents here as of late because one of the DZ Bumbs has taken to feeding the stray cats that live around the airport... anyway... rinse with lots and lots of fresh water... repeat... hang-up and let dry thuroughly seems to work the best. Also, introduce Mr Cat to Mr Remington 870 Express Shotgun... 12ga, #4 shot should work nicely.

Head down speeds can be outside of TSO limits for new reserves too...

Possibly. Rather then the toggles not stowed properly, it may be more like the "hook" portion of the Velco wasn't completely covered by the "pile", thus leaving some of the hook exposed to wear against what ever it touched. It won't be cheap, but I don't think we're talking $1000s of dollars either. Contact the manufacturer or have your rigger contact them. If you have a decent camera, take some pics and post them here and send them to the manufacturer to see what they come back with. What has your rigger recommended other then alerting you to the issue??

Sssooooo... what did he say????

Here's the PRELIM NTSB report from the Sullivan, MO crash: --------------------- NTSB Identification: CHI06FA210 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Saturday, July 29, 2006 in Sullivan, MO Aircraft: de Havilland DHC-6-100, registration: N203E Injuries: 6 Fatal, 2 Serious. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On July 29, 2006, about 1345 central day light time, a de Havilland DHC-6-100, N203E, piloted by an airline transport pilot, sustained substantial damage on impact with trees and terrain during takeoff from runway 24 (4,500 feet by 75 feet, dry concrete) at the Sullivan Regional Airport (KUUV), near Sullivan, Missouri. Witnesses observed flame emitting from the right engine during the takeoff. The skydiving flight was operating under 14 CFR Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. No flight plan was on file. The pilot and five passengers sustained fatal injuries. Two passengers sustained serious injuries. The local flight was originating from KUUV at the time of the accident. A witness on the road at the end of the takeoff runway, in part, stated: I was riding my bike on AF Highway approximately 1:30 or 1:45 pm on the afternoon of July 29, 2006. I was at the end of the runway and heard the sky diver plane, and as I always do, I stopped and watched it take off. It was about 150 feet in the air and just about at the end of the runway when all of a sudden, there was (Poof) sound and the right engine was engulfed in fire. The plane kept going and was turning to the right. It was not gaining any altitude but staying about the same height, the right engine was just barely turning at that time and then the trees blocked my vision. ... I listened for about fifteen seconds and heard a crunching sound and I looked for smoke but there was none. Another witness, who was in her backyard pool area adjacent to the accident site, stated that the airplane was low and flying straight and level towards her. She said that the plane nosed over. She and her father were the first on-scene and placed the 911 call. She reported that local emergency medical service arrived within minutes. The airplane impacted trees and terrain behind a residence and came to rest vertically nose down against a tree about a half mile north west of the end of runway 24. The empennage separated from the fuselage and remained connected to the fuselage through the control cables. The right wing was separated from the fuselage at the wing root. The right flap was extended. The left wing was separated from the fuselage at its rear spar. The left wing's forward spar remained attached. The left wing's flap was retracted. The outboard section of both wings exhibited rearward crushing. A wooden pole that supported the electrical service to the residence was found on the ground. The electrical wires from the pole were found resting on the left wing. The airplane's nose and cabin were crushed rearward. The left engine and propeller separated from its wing and were found resting on the ground under the left wing engine nacelle. The right engine separated from its wing. The right engine's exhaust section separated. The forward exhaust section, propeller gear box, and propeller were found about three feet west of the right engine nacelle. The remainder of the right engine was found about ten feet west of the right engine nacelle. The smell of fuel was present at the site. An on-scene investigation was conducted. Flight control cables were traced from the flight controls in the cockpit to each flight control surface. All breaks in cables were in overload. Flight control continuity was established. Engine control cables were traced from the cockpit engine controls to each engine. All breaks were in overload. Engine control continuity was established. The forward fuel cell was torn. Fuel was found in forward and aft fuel cells. The engine and propellers are being retained for further examination. At 1253, the recorded weather at the Rolla National Airport, near Rolla, Missouri, was: Wind 290 degrees at 9 knots; visibility 10 statute miles; sky condition few clouds 5,000 feet; temperature 35 degrees C; dew point 20 degrees C; altimeter 30.04 inches of mercury.

Rob, never try to stand-up a bag lock.

Interesting thought. Years ago I seem to remember hearing the story of a Raven that some rigger came across. It either went like this... John Doe Rigger opens a rig for a reserve I&R that someone gave to him... on inspection he feels that the Raven installed as a reserve was at some time jumped as a main for awhile given the amount of wear and repairs that were done to it, but then at some point the canopy was returned to service a reserve.... OR... the story went something like someone was advertising a Raven for sale as a reserve, but when inspected by Jane Doe Rigger she felt that the canopy had been jumped a number of times as a main... I can't remember exactly how the story went, maybe it was two seperate insances that both involved a Raven since, up until recently, Ravens were the only remaining reserves around with a main D-Bag/bridle attach point "standard"... and going back a little further, there were some folks still jumping them as mains... so, at least the potential existed for a Raven to be jumped as a main and somehow put back into service as a reserve. Its an interesting question JohnM brings up. The reserves in both of my rigs (a Raven in the Talon94, and a PDR in the Jav) both have 1 hit each on them and I have no problem with them being there as a reserve... so... what would be different then if that 1 hit had been a "test jump" as a main when I first got the canopy? Probabaly not much difference... although my first blush would be to NOT make that "test jump" / "first hit" a terminal one... however... at what point would you say "no" I'm not going to put this canopy TSO'd as a reserve into service as a reserve after its been jumped as main for 100 jumps... 50 jumps... 25 jumps... 15 jumps... 10 jumps... 5 jumps... ????... you see where I'm going. Their is no rule of manufacturer guid-line I know of... doesn't mean there isn't, I'd like to know if there is... but seems its in the "grey area" of a judgement call on the riggers part. ... but, as it relates back to the original topic of this thread... going out and putting a "test jump" on a new reserve as a main would find something like a built in turn...

Yes, I think its okay, but you have to be C-Licensed, but don't EVER skydive with scissors. Anyway, kidding aside, if the TM had started choking on his gum... where would that have left the student?

GUNS!!! YOU LEFT OUT GUNS!!!

Who knows what goes through most lawyer's heads... probably resembles what comes out their arse... Anyway, unfortunately, the "sympathy factor" with most jurys runs pretty high in such cases. Especially when there a large, faceless, corporation named in the case. Wasn't there an article in Parachutist or was it Skydiving??? ... awhiles back about how a DZO managed to successfully defend himself in court... basically citing... she signed the waiver... after a student landed off DZ in a set of power lines which then caused a fire which destroyed a neighbor's property? ... something like that. Thing was, it was the insurance companies that were suing everyone left and right trying to get money. Bottom line was the waiver held up... which, when you think about it, its kinda sad that we have to have waivers... its cause of lawyers... even so the DZO spent, I want to say, between $5000 & $10,000 defending himself that he never saw back. One reason I quit being a SL Jumpmaster and think better of getting my AFF rate.

Chris... divenswoop said basically what I'm going to say... "did you practice flare the canopy"... you said "yes", but not deeply. Okay, let me say this too first, you're walking, so you dealt with it good enough and don't let anyone get on you otherwise. Thing is though, for future reference, if presented with a similar situation, when you do your controlability checks, include a flare like you would on landing. That's obvious to you now, so enough said. Personally, none of my mals have been due to broken lines, but my plan if presented with broken lines post opening is the first controlability check I'd do is to flare the canopy like I would for landing. As you've experienced now, if we're talking broken A-Lines there's a high likelyhood that the nose will tuck under / collapse. If my controllablity checks showed anything like that, with broken A-Lines, I'd be going reserve... just my 2 cents. Also, higher performance canopies will be less forgiving to being flown/landed with broken lines, IMO. Per your profile, you were on a canopy loaded at about 0.9:1... you may not experience as good an outcome on something more highly loaded is my opinion. Good luck and good on you for still being here.

I don't doubt that's possible... or even likely... but do you know for sure that a lawyer contacted the family and got them to file suit... or are you speculating? Anyway, the problem I have with such lawsuits is the "Sue Everyone in Sight" formula. Example from this case... "... brought suit against the engine manufacturer, skydiving club and others claiming they are responsible ..." I mean, how in God's Green Earth with how many hours there are on how many PT6 varriants could the manufacturer be in any way responsible even IF it is determined engine problems were involved!??! This is the kind of thing I have problems with in such lawsuits. In my mind, its an obvious ploy to get MONEY from a party named in the case... one that may likely "blink" and settle out of court for a smaller fee then it would for them to fight it... thus bringing those who filed the case "money" (read pay the lawerys) to continue the case vs. the balance of those named responsible. Its sad, but this doesn't surprise me that a case was filed. It probably won't be the only one. It will likely sink Quantum Leap. I'm currious to see what the NTSB Preliminary report comes out with... that should hit the streets tomorrow or in a few days or week or two... the final won't be out for 6 months to a year... maybe longer since there's a lawsuit involved now.

Well... obviously it worked, mod or no-mod... was just wondering what Precision would say...

Awhile back, a friend of mine, already a jumper with a few hundred jumps under her belt, wanted to go up and have us help dump her Grandad's ashes in freefall... thing is, at the time she was the better part of 6 months pregnant. The jump was made and it was one of the better ash dives I was on with her dumping out of the middle after letting go of the ashes. Problem is she broke her leg on landing. Scared the crap out of her, her mom, her dad (also a jumper that was also on the load), friends and family that were also there... and didn't impress her husband much when he got the call... he wasn't there. *sigh* Us up-jumpers that went up on the ash load with her caught a lot of flak for letting her go up. Good thing is it didn't go any worse then it did. Hindsight is always 20/20, I wish we would have stepped up and said that this wasn't a good idea and that she should wait a few months until after he little one had been born. Grandpa wasn't in any rush and he didn't like flying and didn't think much of skydiving as she had explained to us before the jump. Same thing, different words, if ever faced with a similar situation in the future, I'd advise against gals jumping while pregnant... just my 2 cents on women jumping while pregnant... bad plan.

No, its a Static Line jump for the kid... or is that the birth... but only if she gives birth in a jump plane... Ah, nevermind. ----------------- Anyway, awhile back, a friend of mine, already a jumper with a few hundred jumps under her belt, wanted to go up and have us help dump her Grandad's ashes in freefall... thing is, at the time she was the better part of 6 months pregnant. The jump was made and it was one of the better ash dives I was on with her dumping out of the middle after letting go of the ashes. Problem is she broke her leg on landing. Scared the crap out of her, her mom, her dad (also a jumper that was also on the load), friends and family that were also there... and didn't impress her husband much when he got the call... he wasn't there. *sigh* Us up-jumpers that went up on the ash load with her caught a lot of flak for letting her go up. Good thing is it didn't go any worse then it did. Hindsight is always 20/20, I wish we would have stepped up and said that this wasn't a good idea and that she should wait a few months until after he little one had been born. Grandpa wasn't in any rush and he didn't like flying and didn't think much of skydiving as she had explained to us before the jump. Same thing, different words, if ever faced with a similar situation in the future, I'd advise against gals jumping while pregnant... just my 2 cents on women jumping while pregnant... bad plan.

BEER BOOGIE BLOWOUT September 22-24 Register Now and SAVE!!!! 5-way Speedsatar (with a dive pool easier than last year) Whether you have 2500 jumps or 25 this is the boogie for you! PD Seminar Friday, September 22 at 6 p.m. We hope to see you there! Skydive California City 5999 Curtiss Place California City, CA 93505 1-888-373-4007

Not to speculate too wildly... I'd be concerned what the manufacturer would say IF the SB hadn't been done, but should have, and now the canopy has been jumped...

Hmmm... interesting "fact-oid" in relation to the Otter, N203E, that crashed in Sullivan... not the first time it was involved in a major mishap... ... and here all this time I thought it was N121PM that had the mid-air with the helicopter while filming scenes for Point Break at Cal City. As I reall hearing the stories, sevearl folks still on-board got out low on that one... including 4 (???) observers that made their first Skydive as the pilot managed to wrestle the aircraft back under control and land it.

Its probably not important that you answer all of those questions to me... other then I and I'm sure others on the board would be curious to know and how things turn out... I was just trying to share some info with you and maybe give you some thoughts/questions to go over with when talking to your rigger and/or Precision. As for my 1:1 loading of older style reserves... you say you're out the door at 200, and, correct, a Raven II is a 218, so, you're right about at 1:1 / slightly under... please take my comment as a "rule of thumb" that older style reserves don't like to loaded over 1:1... I'm sure we could come up with info to contradict that, its just a "generality", but seems to hold true... doesn't mean they're "bad", just means they don't like to be flown there. Anyway, since you mention it was a Dash-M... one other thing you may wish to check on is whether or not the Dash-M you have (s/n) is affected by Mandatory Service Bulletin SB1221 or not... if "yes"... has it been complied with (i.e. was the work done)... if the answer is "yes" your canopy is affected, but "no" the work hasn't been done... you may want to, again, get with your rigger and contact Precision and ask them what to do next now that the canopy has been jumped. I'd be really interested to hear what you find out about the built-in-turn from your rigger / Precision. Yes, the harness / leg-strap slip-age theory could be a contributor. Again, good luck and heal up.

What make/model/serial number/DOM is your Raven Reserve? Not sure if its good gouge or not, so I'll caviate this... but older Ravens had a "rep" for what you describe (a bulit in turn)... although, one toggle in full flight and one down to your waist, as you describe, sounds a bit "much". Also, what are / were you loading the canopy at? Older style / generation reserves don't like to be loaded a much more the 1:1. I've got a Raven IIG DOM circa 94 or 95 with one ride on it, but I'm loading it less that 1:1. It opened great and stood me up on landing. I don't recall it having a built in turn... or it was so slight, I don't remember... the ride I had on it was over 1000 jumps ago. Your best source of information as to "what happened"... "what to do"... with respect to the built in turn, would be to talk to your local rigger and would be to contact Precision. Good luck. Glad you're okay and heal up quick. http://www.precision.aero/about-precision.htm Precision Aerodynamics Shipping Address: Mailing Address: 5876 SR 28 P.O. Box 2388 Dunlap, TN 37327 USA Dunlap, TN 37327 USA General Telephone: 423-949-9499 Fax: 423-370-1213 General e-mail: information@precision.aero

Ya know, reading on Spectra, Dacron, Vectran, Kevlar and HMAs at places like... http://www.fibersource.com/f-tutor/prods.htm I have a tough time understanding the difference between an HMA and Kevlar... they both seem to be "Aramids", but not quite the same thing? Anyway, I didn't think the problem with Kevlar was that it is abrasive, but rather that it is suseptable to abrasives? ... i.e. when used as suspension lines on parachutes, Kevlar doesn't play nice with the sand and grit it encouters on "landing", "packing", etc.

Ah... the old "wax on... wax off" ritual... Anyway, what's in Poynters (sp?) about this? ... and has anyone ever digitized that manual, yet??

Okay... who here has actually used a hook-knife?... not just has one ... and I mean actually used one under canopy to deal with a malfunction or wrap... not as in used one to cut the odd piece of 550 from the spool to make a new closing loop... not as in used one to trim some unstylish looking loose thread from your jumpsuit on the way to altitude... not as in used one to gutt a bass... but no shit had to use one for its intended purpose? ----- Some entertaining hook-knife stores ------ 1. An old CRW dog once told me the reason he carried two hook-knives is because when you need one, you pull the first one out and throw it away... cause you were going to drop it anyways... then you pull the second one out and go to work. 2. Once, while waiting to get on the plane at AV, I saw a guy who, since he had converted his rig to a BOC, had stowed one of those "Jack-the-Ripper" hook-knives in the old pilot chute pouch on his right leg strap. I was still a relative low timer then... and he was more "experienced"... I asked him if he ever was worried he'd reach back and grab his hook-knife in his old pilot chute pouch and "toss it" at pull time? He jokingly berated me about "son, I've got hundreds more jumps then you, have had it there for a long time, its been awhile since I went BOC... I'd never do something so silly!" Well... no shit... he did it on that very load... got to pull time, reached back to his old ROL pouch and tossed his "hook-knife-hacky-chute" ... ah, the power of suggestion...

A H&P is deploying just as you pass the tail. Any longer and it would be a stable delay.