seal_S49

That has been my experience also. That was the cause of the only failure I had (F-111 PC). I pay particular attention to this area now. I had a good deployment also, which make me worry a lot less about any main PC blowout. Regards, S49

I'd call that a very valid opinion and a good case for this type of bag. Interesting to note that the ZP wobble factor didn't enter into the picture as was one of the original questions of this thread. I'd still haven't heard any input on the slippery-pouch-freeflying theory I suggested earlier, but I'm too lazy to contact any mfrs. S49

Now this sound like useful information! Do you mean that this type of bag doesn't cause line twist or off-heading openings, or that it has no affect (either way) on the probability of these? Thanks, S49

Don't need to, I'll take your word for it. Have the skydiving equipment mfrs adopted this same rational for solo rig main PCs? S49

Are either or both of you using ZP or F-111 PCs and what is the conclusion of this experience?

You know, if anybody really cares, they could always contact the mfr. I've had nothing but good experience doing so. These folks are usually very helpful with technical information. I'm having too much fun with this thread to spoil it now. S49

I vote for that to be the theory-of-the-week. Stowless D-bags can be next week. I nominate you to make 500 jumps with each type of system & log line twists and opening headings. Thanks for sharing, I hadn't heard about the wobble hazzard. S49

Then why is the blurb in your reference entitled "Why does PD not build reserves from zero-p fabric?" (see PD website) Evidently, PD still thinks ZP is good enough to use in the construction of main canopies, and I agree. S49

Interesting, and informative reference as to why reserves are F-111 const. Maybe I ought to also get rid of my dangerous ZP main canopy along with the ZP main PC. But wait, If the PC has encountered enough stress to blow out, I gotta think that it's probably already done it's job and I'll replace it when I land, like I did when my first F-111 main PC failed. If ZP is good enough for my main canopy, I trust it for my main PC. But hey, that's just me. Call me a skeptic, but I'm gonna wait until I read the incident reports that show a higher rate of blown-out ZP PCs before concluding that these are inferior. S49

If I thought I had "too much snatch force," I'd rather use a smaller PC than give up the durability of ZP. Using adequate bands/tube stoes will control line dump. S49

What? ZP is not made by coating ripstop F-111 with silicone? Then what are all those mysterious gridlines that you see when holding ZP up to a light source? I thought that mfrs were backing away from ZP PCs because the fabric is slippry enough to cause premature extraction from the pouch by higher freeflying airspeeds. I mfr my own pull-out PCs from ZP because I don't need no stinkin' pouch. If there's a reason that this fabric is inferior, I need to know this because it contradicts many, many safe jumps on ZP PCs. S49

Congratulations, you meet the definition of a "follower."

For a motivated individual like yourself, the time is now. You'll need these books to get started: Poynter's Parachute Manuals I & II, Study Guide for the FAA written, and Parachute Riggers Course Study Guide. You'll collect many more manuals along the way but these first few are must-haves. There is an "art" to interpreting and understanding instruction manuals. Everyday access to a sewing machine is a luxury. The folks who only get sewing experience on the weekend at the DZ are at a disadvantage. One of the best investments I made was a cheap used portable machine to use at home. I spent hours on my own learning how to use it. I still have it (along with several others now) and even used it the other day to patch a big student canopy. Most any household machine will handle E-thread and F-111 doesn't require much torque. If you're like most of us who pro-pack our mains, learn how to flat pack. Before anybody jumps on this comment, I don't advocate flat packing exclusively. I'm only saying that this knowledge will help you. I personally like doing line continuity checks & assembly with the canopy stacked on it's side. There are some mfrs that specify flat packing and my favorite method is a flat pro pack for reserves. This experience will help you, especially if the DPRE hands you an owners manual that specifies flat packing. Your most important asset will be a rigger who is committed to help you. You'll never be able to repay him/her, but try anyway. The skydiving community will thank you someday. S49

To quote Chris Rock, "What the F#@K did he just say?"

That works for me. I'm not responsible for enforcing FARs, only complying with them. I'm not going on record advising jumpers to do any of their own maintenance, but I'd never assume that any equipment is airworthy. I'm not gonna stake my certificate on anybody elses work, whether they're a rigger or not. I'm not sure that disassembling an approved system can be considered maintenance, or even putting the lines back on the links, until the links are actually attached to the harness. As long as I do my job, it doesn't really matter. I'll let the FAA worry about violations. S49

I agree with this, but it's the brushing, scrubbing, and/or agitating during the cleaning process that can increase the permeability (not porosity) of uncoated F-111. I think using a brush (as mentioned earlier) on this fabric is a particularly bad idea. BTW, the calendaring process is a type of heat-setting, not a coating. This "set" will degrade with rough-handling of fabric and lead to greater permeability. S49

Too strong of a detergent can harm the fabric and any agitating or brushing will increase the permeability even if you cant see this result. Blood will not harm the fabric and who's gonna see it? If you must have a pretty reserve canopy, clear cold water will probably get blood out OK, and I have had good results with Woolite on occasion. But manipulating the fabric during this process is gonna disturb both the fiber placement and calendaring, which will lead to an increase in permeability. This is the same reason that repeated packing and deploying of an F-111 canopy will slowly degrade it's performance. Be gentle. S49

Clipped from my post a few day ago: Throwing any hand deployed pilot chute is like throwing a feather in a hurricane. Either of these objects will go with the relative wind no matter how hard you throw them in any other direction. Pulling the pud to full arm extension insures its exposure to good air, and releasing it promptly insures that the bag won't escape ahead of the bridle. Many years ago I was incorrectly taught to forcefully throw the pud away from my body and found that most people tend to let go if it at the half-way point (bent elbow) as they follow through to arm extension with an empty hand. Like the feather analogy, the PC will never get any farther horizontally from your body than the release point, and it can get sucked into your burble. ...whether it's a pull-out or throw out. S49

Thanks MB and well spoken. Somebody needed to point this out. S49

I hope your rigger has a good sense of humor. Personally, I think this whole thread is hilarious. I'd hook the reserve back up for you for a few extra bucks. That's a small cost for a lesson learned. BTW: I'd rather start this job from scratch than straighten out someone else's mistakes. S49

Do you lay in bed at night & think up this shit? If an incident report of this even exists, it's certainly not as common as a PC in tow or a horseshoe. But I know somebody will post that they swear they have seen it happen. Anyway, if indeed it was to happen, no PC/bridle/bag combination could be immune from this rarity. Not even your sacred throw-out. Although this is uncommon, plain old idiotic packing or gear-up mistakes are not uncommon and that's how most PCs in tow are caused. Pack a total with a pull-out or have a floating pud & you still have a decent shot at a clean reserve deployment. S49

Yeah, but you might have a hard time finding an FAA rigger willing to inspect, repack & put his seal on it. S49

Then maybe you ought to read more carefully. Since I didn't start that misconception, I'm not responsible for your "understanding." The metalurgy of plated carbon steel hasn't changed significantly in the past 35 years. What has changed is our confidence in the 3-ring system that has proven itself over time. I'm not convinced that there ever was a good reason for a daily habit of spinning the rings, regardless of what you were "taught." You're using up a lot of brainpower trying to unlearn a habit you don't even have. You'll become a better skydiver if you can equally consider all the available information and give credibility based on some logic, rather than dogmatically pursuing the first thing you're taught. S49

You can keep them as clean as you want, but the metal-to-metal contact of the rings sliding against each other is what wears off the plating, and BTW, a small amount of dirt/dust will adhere to silicone-damp webbing and accumulate over a long period of time. S49

I think there's an echo in here.