mark

Sorry, I'm not buying it... the lines would have to be tangled around the bag to keep it from opening. If the pilot chute is working properly I don't see the lines getting wrapped around the d-bag like that. A more realistic cause of bag lock would be the stows being too tight, or the bight of line being too long. The last bag lock I saw was the result of the left side lines tied up because of a floating toggle. The bag towed by that set of lines; there was enough slack in the right side lines that they stayed in the locking stows. Mark

Thanks, Bob. I stand corrected. Mark

Not quite. The "thumb test" gives you information about strength. There are plenty of fabrics that are stronger than F-111 or ZP, yet much more permeable. Mark

Balloon fabric is usually tested with a differential pressure of 10" H2O. Aerostar makes a nice portable tester, with a carrying case about 1 foot cubed. Fabric permeability tests are a standard maintenance item. Parachute canopy fabric is tested at just 0.5" H2O. I have seen home-built permeability testers that use a variable-speed vacuum cleaner motor to create the differential pressure, but I think that if you want a substitute for sending your canopy back to PD (Icarus, etc.), you'll have to spend big bucks. Frazier Instruments sells a permeability tester: http://frazierinstrument.com/products/fap/fap-lp.html. It doesn't look very portable. "Call for price." I haven't called Frazier Instruments because I don't have room for a bench-mounted tester. Perhaps their price is reasonable. Let us know! MARK

A helicopter pilot should transition to auto-rotation as soon as possible after a power failure, whether there are skydivers on board or not. Otherwise, the blades stop turning and rock-fall ensues. To keep the blades turning during auto-rotation, the ship must maintain some forward speed. The blades continue to produce lift, much more lift than I could produce myself even if I flapped my arms, and even though I've gotten more aerodynamic as I've grown older. So, no, you don't have to worry about floating up into the rotor blades if you exit a helicopter in auto-rotation. Mark

I agree that changing from Part 91 to Part 135 would tighten some maintenance requirements. Could you expand on how it would require improved pilot skills? Would that come with just upping the qualifications from commercial (in as few as 200 hours or so) to VFR Part 135 (500 hours + commercial + instrument)? Or are there other features of air taxi flying that apply to flying jumpers? Some smaller operations, for example, the club at the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople (faculty advisor: Professor Peter Schickele), might not have a pilot qualified to serve as a check pilot. Would there need to be special qualifications for an outside check pilot, or would the local FSDO be able to approve a check pilot whose experience was in flying passengers from A to B, but not flying jumpers? I guess I'm asking how applying every provision of Part 135 would affect a skydiving operation, for better or worse, since I don't think that there is a way that some provisions would apply and others wouldn't. Mark

C23b, c, and d are two-page letters that refer to specifications contained in NAS-804, AS8015A, and AS8015B respectively. Copies of the TSOs and the specifications are in the Parachute Rigger Handbook starting on page A-19. You can download a copy of the PRH from the FAA website, or go to the web site I cited in an earlier post. Or are you asking how the document originated? Mark

They don't trawl dz.com for stolen gear reports, but if you let them know, they'll add the serial number to their watch list: https://www.cypresusa.com/missing.htm. Mark

You know, you're right! I hadn't thought about it that way. Mark

While it is common practice to record maintenance information including repairs and alterations, on the packing data card, the only required informations is: date and place of packing, signature and certificate number of the rigger (seal symbol is not required!), and notation of defects found during the inspection. I have had rigs returned from manufacturers and well-known lofts after alterations, without anything noted on the packing data card, and the it's quite legal. That said, this does not sound like a repair that a manufacturer or better loft would make. Mark

I have a better idea. What if you demanded a parachute in addition to the money! That way, no one would ever be able to trace it back to you! The trail would end with Earl Cossey! Plus, you'd save on expenses! Mark

Writing as a rigger, not as a packer: Most rigging shops are part-time, one-person operations. Very few are full-time operations with two or more riggers. Your proposal would double the cost of a reserve inspection and pack, since most of the QA checks need to be made in the course of the pack and would require the physical presence of a second rigger regardless of the amount of other work available (repack or repairs on a different rig, for example). Also, the requirement to coordinate work schedules for two part-time riggers would greatly increase the time a rig would be out of service waiting for repack. To get to the quantity of work where a CDI would be practical would require consolidation of rigging facilities -- which would have the unintended consequence of consolidation of expertise and fewer equipment experts available for immediate consultation at the many small drop zones across the country. There is a trade-off, and requiring additional rigger checks may paradoxically be more risky than the system we have now. Mark

Yes, I knew that about 727s. However, my speculation (since everybody else gets to speculate) is that Cooper was familiar with NB6 or similar from work as a USAF loadmaster who worked some HALO jumps as the loadmaster, but not as a jumper. If so, he would have expected to find ramp controls at the rear, and would expect the cockpit to also have ramp controls; he would be acquainted with the notion that certain flap/gear/airspeed configurations would be needed for parachute drops; he would comfortable with wearing a bail-out rig; and he would have a poor idea of the preparation required for a successful HALO jump. Mark

Is the ramp on a C-130 controlled from the cockpit, from a station near the ramp, or both? Mark Replying to my own post, a first, but not the first time I'll fail to buy beer: I learned today that on a C-130, the ramp can be lowered from a station near the back as well as from the cockpit. Mark

I have a Capewell rivet kit I could loan. New R-3 releases should come with the rivets. At least, they did the last time I installed a pair, in '81 or '82. Cheers, Mark

I'd go for sequence, bottom to top. If the cover flap is held with Velcro, I'd expect the pilot chute would have enough drag to strip it open. 3-pin pull-out? Would have to be left-handed if the container closes on the diagonal. Unless, of course, you do an over-the-shoulder pull-out. Mark

No, the yellow loop is just there to make snugging the closing loop easier. My guess is that in the process of disassembly, the closing loop got turned inside out. Look for the braid to change (invert) about 2-1/2 to 3 inches from where the cord is knotted at the disk. If this is this case, your closing loop is not usable and you'll have to make a new one. To make a new closing loop: Start with a 36" length of Cypres line. 1. First, secure the end of the Cypres line to the disk. 2. Make a mark 2.5" from the disk. This is where the fingertrap section for the pin (not for snugging) will begin. 2.5" is about the distance between the grommets in the pilot chute cap. 3. Make another mark 1.5" from the first mark (4" from the disk). This is the end of the fingertrap section. This 1.5" length is important. Too short, and the fingertrap may slip. Too long, and the fingertrap may bottom out before the pack is tight enough. 4. Fingertrap the running end of the line, inserting at the second mark and emerging at the first mark. Leave a generous (4" or so) loop. 5. If you want, finish the running end of the line with a loop like the yellow one in your diagram. To install: The Cypres disk goes on the bottom side of the grommet in the edge of the pilot chute crown. The line goes up through the grommet. The generous loop dangles down through the grommet in the pilot chute crown, but the running end stays on top. "Dangles" isn't quite right, since that's the loop that gets pulled through the pack job. You leave it a little long to make it easy to pull through and pin, then shorten the loop by pulling on the running end of the line. Mark

The odd contrast to this interpretation is that a master rigger may supervise repairs and alterations done by student riggers, and that it's okay for the repaired/altered articles to be returned to service. Mark

Three curved pins, finger trapped Dacron line connecting them. Take the cones off, put in grommets, cover the back side of the grommets with elastic: you can now have soft loops. Might need to add additional grommets offset from the ones the cones used. That would kill two birds with one stone: the original grommets are probably too big for standard curved pins, and soft loops would otherwise be too long to allow original closing geometry. Should close a little easier without a pilot chute in there. Take photos, get video. Thanks! Mark

There is only a remote chance a WWII Japanese spy or saboteur used a US military parachute manufactured in 1946. Mark

If you've done the factory course, you're way ahead of me. However: If all you need to do is exceed the FXC scaring speed, you've already done that with the 65 fps test. I would think that the purpose of the 175 fps test is to see if the FXC will fire on time, particularly if the 65 fps fire occurs at -299 feet. Mark

That's not in the manufacturer instructions!

This one I have not seen. Where is that written? The supervision privileges in FAR 65.125 refer to FAR 105.43(a) and 105.45(b)(1): mains and tandem mains. There are no supervision privileges for reserve packs. FAR 105.43(b) and 105.45(b)(2) require the reserve parachute to have been packed by a certificated rigger. They do not provide for reserve packing done under the supervision of a rigger. The regulations are different than the common practice, and I think for the worse. I suspect what happened is that when the regulations were rewritten to incorporate tandem jumps, this was one of the unintended changes. Mark

Is the ramp on a C-130 (C-123, C-124, etc) controlled from the cockpit, from a station near the ramp, or both? Mark

In other words, in turbulence you should fly as close to the stall point as possible. Is that what Mr. Sherman is saying? Mark