BrianM

Cutaway the canopy and hook it back up with the right riser on the left side, and the left riser on the right side. Easy to do unintentionally if you are not paying attention. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Last I heard they had orders for more than 40, and that was several months ago. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I think the "count your tools" statement in most if not all manuals might cover that Some manuals don't say to count your tools, so I guess that is optional. The manuals that do say to count your tools don't say to remove them from the rig - it just says to count them - so I guess removing them is still optional. Yes, I'm being silly. That's my point. At some point the manual has to assume that the rigger has a clue. No matter how much detail you put in the manual, I could still sit here and pick out little details that weren't spelled out. Just how pedantic do we really need to be? By the way, putting your reply inline with the quoted text makes it difficult to see what you've added. The reply tags make it a lot easier. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

They've already sold more than they expected to - and a lot more than the conservative number their business case was based on. I hope they continue to sell lots, of course, but so far they are doing quite well. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

That's how I felt reading your last post! BS. If I have two rocks, and I add two more rocks, I will never end up with six rocks. I can define 2 + 2 = 6 but I will still only have four rocks. Your instructor was full of it. Really? Your really asking that? You really think that something as basic as "don't put something sharp inside the line" needs to be spelled out in writing? You really think a canopy manual should have to explain how to perform a very basic rigging technique, or that the FAA should mandate it? I don't recall any manual ever telling me how to do a finger trap at all. They just say to do it, and expect that I know how to do it in one way or another. The canopy manual is not there to teach me how to be a rigger! If you really want to take the tack that everything needs to be spelled out, then lets look at it this way: the canopy came with ends that were not melted, and they did not tell me to melt them, so I either shouldn't melt them, or if I do I should put them back the way they were. I don't recall a manual telling me to remove my molar strap after bagging the reserve, so I guess that is optional too? I can just go ahead and leave it in place, since they didn't say otherwise, right? Exactly! They expect us, as riggers, to know how to perform basic rigging techniques! I really have no idea what the point of this discussion is. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

When finger-trapping using a fid, the end of the line is normally melted before screwing it into the fid. This gives the threads in the fid something to bite into. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Jerry, I haven't looked through all those manuals. I did just take a look at the PD reserve manual, they recommend finger trapping the excess line but don't say how to finger trap it. I suspect the other manuals are similar. There are more than one technique to finger trap lines. It is up to us as riggers to know the proper way to do whichever technique we choose to use. I don't expect a canopy or container manual to teach me basic rigging techniques. I was taught the same as Paul - no melted end to be left inside the line, end should be cut at an angle so there is no lump. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

You can't do that 6 way because it isn't a 6 way - it is an 8 way!!! "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

CSV is not an Excel format. CSV has been around forever and is supported by just about every spreadsheet out there (not to mention lots of databases and programming languages). Shouldn't be a problem for non-Excel users. For example, I use OpenOffice on Linux, it will read CSV files just fine. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

The OP is in Canada. The FBI definitely won't be interested! I have no idea if we have something similar in Canada - but skydiving gear is not regulated here like it is in the U.S., so I don't think it would apply even if such a law does exist here. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/190 "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

The CYPRES manual says that landing off by more than 30 feet vertically requires resetting the CYPRES. If the offset was set incorrectly by more than 30 feet, obviously that would have the same effect. It also says that the 1500 foot arming altitude is also relative to the landing area. Some points I had not considered before - thanks riggerpaul! "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

You should most definitely be turning your AAD on at the airport! I can think of a couple incidents in the last few years where this was a factor - at least one was a fatality. I can't remember if the other one was a fatality, and can't find the thread about it. Here's the first one: http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/98.shtml Here's what the CYPRES manual says: Vigil manual: Argus manual: There is lots of other important information in those manuals - go read whichever one applies to you from cover to cover. I said it earlier in this thread, and I'll say it again: Read your manuals! Know how your gear operates! Your life depends on it! (That's aimed at everyone, not just BillyVance). "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Like you, I find offsetting an altimeter to be intuitive, but lots of people don't. I don't know how much AADs are to blame for this - I hear even people who don't have AADs saying "the landing area is x feet higher, so I want to set my alti x feet higher." Doesn't make sense to be - but I guess the human brain is not always logical! Gotta remember that offsetting altimeters and AADs is something most jumpers seldom or never have to do. I'm not convinced that no one would get confused if AADs worked the other way. I think some people would get confused no matter what! I find that a lot of jumpers don't have a very good understanding of how their gear works, and that worries me. I try to keep a close eye on others, especially visitors and junior jumpers, to make sure they don't get either device set wrong. At least most will ask, which is a good thing. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I'd say the two are different, but have the same result. But as an engineer with a background in writing firmware for microcontrollers like the ones used in modern AADs, I no doubt look at it differently than most. For all practical purposes as end users, you are, of course, correct. As an engineer, I would also add that engineers are often not the best people to design user interfaces. Interesting - I've noticed the opposite. My experience, from 14 years of jumping at a DZ with an off-airport landing area, is that everyone seems to intuitively know which way to offset their AAD, but a lot of people want to offset their altimeters the wrong way. People tend to use wherever they are as the frame of reference, and think of other locations as being higher or lower - not the other way around. It can take a surprising amount of explaining to get people to understand why an altimeter offset works the way it does. I don't remember having to ever go through that explanation for an AAD - not once. Glad to have helped!

As I posted earlier, they are different because you are changing different things. One is changing the zero point, the other is changing the activation altitude. It is quite intuitive to me. That was me. I was referring to the FXC 12000, in which case you are changing the activation altitude directly. That doesn't leave an option about which way the offset should work. Later AADs did the same thing - offset the activation altitude - which we were already familiar with doing. Seems like not a bad way to go. I haven't seen one like that. There was some talk about changing our DZ to work that way. It doesn't introduce any problems - just wait until you are at the airport to turn on the AAD, then don your rig (who wants to wear a rig for a 15 minute van ride anyway?). Turning it on at the LZ then driving to the airport introduces some variables that would be very difficult to deal with even if you were trying to design an AAD that worked that way. Imagine this scenario: small elevation changes during the drive cause the AAD to keep re-zeroing itself to random elevations (because there is no way for the AAD to know the difference between small elevation changes and changes in barometric pressure). You then drive up a big steep hill, the AAD thinks it is a take off and enters jump mode (because there is no way for the AAD to know the difference between driving up a big hill and a take off). You now have an AAD that is zeroed to some random and unknown elevation. No, the way they work now is best. Just wait until getting to the airport before turning it on! "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

I know - that's what I've been saying all along. I'm still not sure what, specifically, virgin-burner is asking about. What is the "it" in "how would YOU do it"? It could refer to a number of things in the post he was replying to. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

That's the plane that our jump plane taxies past all the time. A real beauty! Not one of the new ones, by the way, it's one of the DHC ones that has been upgraded. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

The Victoria, BC Viking facility is right beside our DZ, and a few of the local jumpers work there. They already know how much jumpers like the Otter!

Do what? I'm not sure what you are asking. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Here's one from a few years ago (a friend of mine), also a BoneHead. Edit: His healed without leaving any scars or other marks. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

That would be my new, patented, anti-gravity helmet, coming soon to a gear store near you! "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Andre, Great idea to discuss it at safety day. My home DZ has a landing area off the DZ, we have a sign telling jumpers what their AAD should be set to. Still find lots of visiting jumpers who don't know how to set it, though. By the way, this isn't an analog vs digital issue - you would offset an analog FXC 12000 the same way as a CYPRES/Vigil/Argus. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Nope, looks fine to me. Probably just an optical illusion. Yeah, looks like the top skin of the white cell is blending in with the white cloud. Looks normal once the canopy gets close enough to see it properly. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

Yes, I'm with you. You are correct for an altimeter. I think of it as adjusting the firing altitude up or down instead of offsetting the zero point. If I'm landing higher, I want it to fire higher. Landing lower, I want it to fire lower. That eliminates the confusion for me. An altimeter doesn't have a firing altitude, and it makes more sense to adjust the zero point than to try to remember different break-off/pull/hard deck/etc altitudes. That results in the offset being opposite from an AAD. "It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg