seal_S49

Your post begs several questions: 1) Are you sure you're measuring in cm units? I'm a little slow with using the metric system (it's an American problem) but I think you might have meant mm. 2) Have you found tears on your slider or are these actually burns? Burns are identified by melted edges--tears have fuzzy edges. Line burns across the slider are often caused by poor packing methods--tears are far less common. 3) As for trying a different slider, are you ready to become a test pilot? If the sizes of your two sliders are as close as I think they are (again, cm or mm?), I'd personally be willing to try the substitution. When I experiment with a new slider design, I often pull high or deploy sub-terminally if it seems appropriate. But you'll have to decide if you can tolerate the additional risk of unknown performance.

Yeah. We compete against Murphy & the Grim Reaper every day on the job. Could there be a better prize than the satisfaction of kicking their asses?

This is another generalization. Not all reserves are created equally. While a PD 160r fills out a J-3 quite well, I commonly pack a Raven I (181sf) reserve into a J-3 with room to spare. As a matter of fact, I have owned a Raven II (218sf) that fit successfully and safely into this same size container. Yeah, OK--you might have a strong case for or against a particular mfr's canopy, but this example just illustrates how much variation you can expect in actual pack volume & published info.

I'm glad to read that I'm not the only one who still knows how to pack. I like the J-3/Tri 190 combination well enough that I custom-ordered both these components to assemble a demo rig for flag jumps. I packed it 250+ times and found it easy enough. When my former student bought a used J3 rig, he asked me what canopy to put in it, because the original main was too small for his experience. Aerodyne was offering 1/2 price on new Tri's at that time, so I suggested a 190. With only about 50 pack jobs under his belt, he found it manageable. IMO, the Tri-190 is about the biggest canopy that fits nicely in a J3. I've seen bigger canopies packed, but they don't fit that well. Interesting to note that my former student called Sunpath & was told that the Tri-190 is too big for the J3. On paper, maybe it is. But this SP rep. probably never actually tried it. Many jumpers don't realize how much smaller a 7-cell packs when compared to 9-cells. My answer to the OP is in these two questions: 1) Are you willing to learn good packing skills if needed? 2) Are you willing to compromise the size of your main to get an easier pack-job?

I've used "Goop" brand waterless hand cleaner for years. Also works on tar, grass, & many other stains. First you need to blot away all the excess oil you can with a clean rag. Isolate the stain--unpack rig as needed. Dip a toothbrush in the Goop & brush it vigorously into the stain. Let the Goop soak in for about 15 mins., maybe longer depending on the stain. Then flush thoroughly with cold water while brushing with a stiff-bristle brush. You'll be amazed.

A friend of mine just showed up at the DZ with one of these: http://hardheadedsports.stores.yahoo.net/treibrskhefo.html He bought it at the local shop for skateboarding and rollerblading. I'm really impressed with the light weight, quality, comfort, style, and price.

The preface to the PRH reads: "The discussion and explanations reflect commonly used practices and principles. This handbook provides a basic knowledge that can serve as a foundation on which to build further knowledge. Occasionally the word “must” or similar language is used where the desired action is deemed critical." (my emphasis added) I think the difference between "should" and "must" is clear to most of us. I've seen at least one good reason to deviate from the "prescribed" method of Rapide link assembly, and I'm reading that the FAA doesn't intend to take away the rigger's discretion. Of course individual mfrs. can establish thier own requirements.

This would be a good time to point out that a master rigger, senior rigger, or the owner will all get the same answer when contacting the H/C mfr. In the USA, FAA gives the H/C mfr. the final word on what components can be used used with their approved system. Even a master rigger can't authorize a combination disapproved by the mfr., and even a senior rigger can assemble and pack non-original components if they are approved by the mfr. Having said that, it is certainly prudent for an owner to consult a rigger before making a purchase of any non-original replacement components for either the reserve or main system. Of course an owner can also contact the mfr.

When I teach the first jump course, I mention the 3-Ring only briefly*** Amen! I've never asked my FJ students to do their own gear check. Plenty of time to teach that later if they continue with training. When we're dealing with short term memory that's already maxed-out, we need to be selective about what we teach and avoid overloading a student. I'm happy if FJs remember when & how to pull handles.

yep yep These types of contamination have been my only source of knot slippage if the loops have been fingertrapped & tied properly. For that matter, any source of any lubricant can lead to knot slippage. That's why I take these precautions when making loops: 1) Clean all used "smiley" washers with solvent and dry w/ compressed air before re-use. 2) De-grease my hands (& tools) before making/handling loops to remove any possible: CYPRES lube, sewing-machine oil, cut-away cable lube, body oil or sweat, cooking oil from those greasy fries I ate for lunch--you get the idea. 3) Apply a just-adequate amount of silicone lube only after the loop is installed, prior to feeding thru cutter or closing any flaps of course.

"In my experience," from a person with no experience (regarding these particular products) means "I don't know." It might to you, but the OP asked "has anyone had any experience with their canopys [sic]" The posts from those with experience seem to contradict your "valid point." ??? Not nearly that dramatic. Yea, that's me. I'm the guy who thinks that real-world experience trumps assumptive folk-wisdom every time, and that people who "don't know" aren't in a position to give a credible answer. Is that all you got? Did Ironmanjay put you up to this? Never mind--that's enough flaming for this thread. Send me a PM if ya got more...

I think that says more about your ability than your attire. But then maybe that was your point.

With 45 jumps you're ready to give advice on a canopy purchase? If you can open your mind you might learn something from others who actually have experience with these products. I'm impresses with what I've read here.

I prefer not to break them at all--ever. The most casual inspection of these during every pack-job can result in replacement of these before they are worn to the point of danger. IMHO if a loop breaks during packing, it has already been used beyond it's safe wear limit. Is that so expensive?

HHi! Crew chuts rae for doing crew. Good luck on oyur 1st rig! BTW, do you have an nistructor to ehlp explain htings?

That's the only way to get the answer you want Most licensed skydivers don't find that nearly as exciting Different strokes... Maybe you've found a new home.

The lack of enthusiastic replies is your first red flag. This DZ has been the topic of some other threads, so you can do your own research & decide for yourself. I'd suggest trying key-words like "internet scam" and "plane crash." IMO, if you're not going to become part of the money-making tandem pipeline (packer?), then there's probably little reason to go there. Good luck!

My experience is limited to companies that supply small quantities of specialty materials. I've gotten hard-to-find fabrics for jumpsuits from Seattle Fabrics, and I see they also carry a variety of mesh. Go to http://seattlefabrics.com/mesh.html and have a look. If you need a closer look at their materials, they can send you a very nice sample pack so you can actually see it and test it for strength and elasticity if necessary. If none of their material is satisfactory, I'd suggest searching the web for companies that supply outdoor material for tents and backpacks. Of course if you are buying large quantities, there are industrial suppliers that will give you greater options.

We're doing a lot of speculating on a specific canopy we havn't seen. I have 50 jumps on a Fury, but not this one. Obviously, any job can be done incorrectly. All the more reason to verify that it's within mfr's specs.

Why do you advise against taking a simple measurement that could remove this doubt? At least one mfr has issued a SB because of insufficient stab slack built into a canopy and I have personally needed to re-trim the stabs on a main canopy that was poorly re-lined. If this is just a matter of the viewer's perception of the canopy in flight, then at least there's something to be learned in the process of inspection.

That a slightly bent pin won't affect the pull force requred for deployment?

My local DZ just created a separate landing area for jumpers w/ pins bent >90 degrees.

"Stabilizer slack" is the mfr's dimensional difference between (1) the height of the stab and (2) the point at which it is attached to it's respective line. These two measurements are taken from the line- attachment at the bottom skin to the bottom edge of the stabilizer. Kinda hard to measure after the lines are installed; you can't pull the stabilizer tight because the line will draw tight first (hopefully!). With enough patience, you can get an accurate measurement. Anyway, you need to have the mfr's spec on these dimension to know if the lines have been attached correctly. A mfr defect or sloppy reline could result in too much (or too little) stablizer slack. Contact the mfr for the correct slack dimension for each line attachment and see if that's the problem. If it's outa trim, a rigger can carefully cut the stitching at the bottom edge of the stab (near the slider stop) and re-attach the line at the proper point. Keep in mind that a big-ass 7-cell canopy is gonna have much bigger stabs than a more modern design of higher aspect ratio. By comparison, these are gonna look a lot more "sloppy" in the air.

Yes. Define "hard." BTW: The mfr is probably gonna be the best source of info. And the least biased because they're both made by PD. Pay particular attention to experience vs. wing-loading Note to self: I bet I'm gonna here the term "ground hungry" before this thread is over. I think people just like to say that.

FAR wording is that it must have been packed "Within 120 days before the date of its use." So counting the day it was packed, the cycle is actually 121 days. But to get that kind of mileage, you'd have to get your rigger up early in the morning to pack for you--not recommended