alan

I don't know them, but I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt and not judge them as stupid. I know you didn't mean it literally as well. I would go out on a limb and and say they were careless about altitude awareness and suggest that perhaps, in many similar cases, if not this one, the CYPRES is the root cause. Some jumpers get the mindset that they have a CYPRES and at some level, because of it, they don't attach as much importance to altitude awaress as they should. Sure, they will tell you they don't rely on it and it is only a backup device. Uh huh. And yet seeing jumpers lose altitude awareness seems to have become common place. Maybe it is just me. alan

Had a lot of free instruction and supervision. Bought and made many of the tools. Sewing machine was a big ticket item. DZ got quite a few free "packed under supervision" pack jobs. Now, I'll do them for $15 if they need help. Easily spent over $1000 along with the barter and free help. alan

Not sure, but it can vary widely. Depends on what you mean by "new". For example, is the evolution from a Talon to a Talon2 to a VooDoo involve a "new" design? You may find reference to the same TSO for each, which may indicate a much lower cost for the VooDoo as opposed to the original Talon. Then there is a "new" unit like the Wings. What would it cost compared to a VooDoo? I think you may have to be a bit more specific. As in the Tempo, will the FAA accept the foreign equivalent of the TSO as meeting the requirements? That would reduce the cost as well. I'm not an accountant, but would you include the R&D costs as part of the cost of the TSO? Perhaps accounting practices from one firm to the next may influence the answers you get. It is probably a bit obsolete, but the TSO standards can be found in PPM. This is open to interpretation and as with most things with the FAA will depend on the individual you are talking to at the time. alan

As has become apparent in this thread, this is a little vague. Many of us confuse a diving track with a flat track or don't even know about both. This seems to add some needed information, but does not rectify the fact that we most often are tracking away from other skydivers in our group after breakoff and really should be flat tracking at that time to get the msot horizontal seperation. The implication seems to be that Atair assumes most of us are in a diving track (perhaps correctly) when we track away, or should be. They have already stated that the slower you go, the faster the canopy opens. Conversely, it should then be safe to say that the faster you go, the slower it opens. It would be nice if they would just say what is the optimum speed for 2 stage openings. As someone else in this thread has already stated, we are taught that a hard arch is the best position to open in for a safe, stable, on heading opening. We are also taught that to increase our verticle speed, we should arch harder, so shouldn't that keep your vertical speed at optimum for a slow 2-stage opening as Atair suggests without the need to track? Seems as if what Atair is really saying is that the Cobalt opens best if there is an increased horizontal (vectored)component to the vericle speed. alan

I e-mailed some questions to RI about the riser inserts. I don't think Sandy will mind if I paste his reply in here. alan

Not in reply to any specific post..... Maybe we should get USPA to put a ban on complacency and carelessness in the next SIM/BSR. alan

That is highly unlikely but not impossible. If it is taking 1000' or more to open on every jump, you should contact the manufacturer as there is likely something wrong with it. It could also be in how you define "open". PC pitch until slider is 2/3 down is a common definition and that is usually in the 600' to 800' range by design. If you define it as from when you see your opening altitude on your alti (or hear it) until you get under canopy and check you alti, then 1000' is probably pretty close to right and nothing to worry about. alan

I don't know. When my friend came home from Eloy and showed me the plastic inserts he had purchased at the RI factory, my initial reaction was telling him to throw them away. He said for $10, they were better than nothing. I'm not sure I agree. I was disappointed because I like the inserts that came on my rig. I just visited their website and found no mention of riser inserts. Maybe I just missed it, i didn't go over every word. I would like to know though, so maybe I'll send an e-mail of to Eloy. alan

Why would you perform that test from the top of a step ladder? alan

I thought RI pioneered hard inserts years ago for their CRW rig and quietly had them as an option for all of their rigs. I know my Voodoo made in May of 01 came standard with the small diameter metal inserts and they have the metal cap on the end, pretty much the same as the RWS inserts. Bill? Sandy? Brenda? Anybody? A little history, please. alan

Ha! Man does time fly when you get old! I just looked up my PMP and it is dated Jan. 1, 1997! I could have sworn it was just last year. It is procedure 1243 and even describes it as the "Hybrid" Metal 3-Ring Release Housing Retrofit. Now I have to wonder if that option is even still available. As someone else posted, it was very easy and inexpensive to do at repack time. What does the new kit cost? I can't imagine it is much more work. While we're on the topic, I advised a friend to get the hard riser inserts for his new VooDoo (2002). My earlier version (5/7/01) came standard with the metal inserts. He went to Eloy in Feb and visited RI. They sold him the plastic tube inserts. What happened to the metal inserts? alan

I know that later in this thread you have made a choice to get the conversion, so just for fun, try putting line twists into it so the risers are twisted at least once. Have two friends hang onto you so all three of you are suspended by the risers. Now try to cut away. The two friends should simulate the G forces you may encounter in a spinning mal that gets to the point of twisting up your risers. alan

The hard housing retrofit from RI results in the hybrid housings you already have, it does not replace the soft housing that goes from the mud flap to the retaining loop and grommet...unless they have changed them recently. alan

Just tacking this on at the end of the thread for general information, I treat my mil spec rubber bands with food grade silicon and they last for hundreds of jumps. It is available at most hardware stores in a spray can and is usually located near the WD-40. Spray them, rub it in good until they dry and put them on. Maybe spray a little on your fingers and work it in once or twice a month during use. The small bands seem to hold well on HMA lines, even with a single wrap. What ever works. I also put a little on my pilot chute kill-line to keep it from wearing and to reduce friction heat that will shrink it. CYPRES silicon gel works too, it is the same stuff we use on the CYPRES reserve closing loop. I also use a little on my lower steering lines to reduce the wear induced by the movement through the retaining ring as you steer and brake. A main closing loop made of Spectra will last a long, long time as well, especially if treated with silicon. A word of caution, Spectra is much more sensitive to friction heat than a standard loop made of gutted Type II cord so it is imperative that you remove the pull-up chord under the pin and pull it out slow enough so that if you have a finger on the loop as you remove the chord, you do not feel any heat from the friction. If you routinely use a packer that you don't know well and trust, I would be cautious about using a Spectra loop. If it is damaged by careless removal of the pull-up chord, the damage is hidden on the bottom of the loop between the loop and the pin. Will the pin slide out too easy because of the Spectra and or the silcon? Not if it is tight enough to begin with. Well, at least not in the 1000 or so jumps I have made since doing this. Remember, if you have a CYPRES, your reserve loop is silicon impregnated Spectra. Some manufacturers recommend a CYPRES loop even if you don't have a CYPRES. Standard reserve loops are Spectra, although heavier than the CYPRES loop and not treated with silicon. If your not sure, check with the manufacturer. I got much of my information from Sandy Reid at Rigging Innovations several years ago while I was working towards my riggers certificate. alan

I'm not convinced you see his point. As you said he stated....." they can be safely landed, straight in and low performance style " To some extent, but they are also gaining experience and if they exercise caution and good judgement, they don't have to rely solely on luck. Too some extent, but again,if they are getting good advice and some coaching and use good judgement they get enough experience before they encounter a situation requiring a last minute adjustment due to a landing hazard. No, you are not a total loser, you are just not differentiating between a straight in and low performance style landing and a hook turn and swoop. That would be one example of what I mean by exercising good judgement and caution. Yes, although I don't think he meant to imply that an intentional low turn does not have a slower rate of decent in a turn or is not hazardous, just that a less experienced jumper may be less able to avoid the last minute adjustment or make it correctly. As an aside, don't be confused by wing loading numbers. A 170 Sabre at 1.3 will not have the same flight characteristics as a Sabre 120 at 1.3. The 120 will have a much higher rate of turn and will therefore be less forgiving during a last minute adjustment made due to a landing hazard. alan

I agree with AggieDave, your choice of canopy is well suited for learning the fundmentals of hp canopy control (swooping). You will have the oportunity to practice basic skills on a relatively easy canopy, but and it is a big but, as your skills improve, you should find that the canopy can stay with you for much longer than you might think initially. If you really take the time and effort to advance your skills, you should find that this canopy is a much better performer than you might expect.........it may surprise you, pleasantly. It is more about you than it is the canopy. It will perform if and when you do. Go for it and have fun. alan

He was talking about about links manufactured from Spectra when he referred to the shock loading and failure strentgh, not Rapide links. Rapide link failure is not very common, but when it occurs. it is commonly associated with pilot error. A loose barrel can work its' way open and a resulting failure or an over-tightened barrel can crack and fail. Either condition can be detected by regular inspection. alan

What about a canopy that has a negative recovery arc? alan

Yes, I believe so, as the non-cascaded HMA lines are a major component of the mod. You should e-mail Chris at PA for a current and accurate price, but I think it is $458. I know that sounds very pricey but the mod consists of replacing the stabilizers with the stabilrib as on the Xaos, replacing the slider, and the re-line with HMA. HMA has been shown to last 700 to 800 jumps in the field, both here in the US and Europe. A standard Vectran re-line is $268, I think. At any rate, the added jumps between re-lines alone makes it a reasonable price. Plus, once the mod is done, additional re-lines are at the same cost as a Vectran re-line. I am very pleased with the finished product and feel it was a good value. I know there has been some debate about the durability of HMA. All I can say is that it has been in use much longer than most people realize and on my canopy it has shown no signs of wear in over 100 jumps now. The Xaos 27 is a great canopy and if I didn't have a daughter in college, I would have bought the one I demoed. If you have a VX and want to keep it for a long time, I think the X-mod by Precision Aerodynamics is the way to go. alan

Seems odd to me that there are Slinks for your main and slinks for your reserve and that there is a considerable price difference, $25 as opposed to $30, since the labor costs would be equall and the heavier Spectra for the reserve Slink is only .10 (or less) per yard more expensive. Couldn't/shouldn't you just use the stronger Slink for both canopies? Couldn't they be sold for $25? I can make a set of 4 soft links, for my main, for less than $2.50 at Para Gear's retail prices and do it in about 15 minutes. alan

Look around the FAA site some more. It also has the DPRE handbook which should provide more info on the oral and practical standards. Derek (hooknswoop) may have the link. Check with your DPRE, he or she should tell you what, if any reference materials they will aloow or recommend during the oral. I may be wrong, but I could swear that my examiner encouraged me to use references when answering the orals. alan

When your VX is due for a re-line, I would recommend sending it to PA for the X-mod. I had this done late last summer and the canopy opens as nice as the Xaos 27. Very similar flight charactreistics as I got to jump them both back to back. VX seemed to gain a little speed with the mod, better swoop and glide than before the mod and a better balance between the riser pressures. The fronts are still higher, but a little more manageable than before. One characteristic that stands out is the openings, they have that bowtie shape where the whole thing is out of the bag and kinda square in shape at about 1/3 inflation, then the end cells inflate and force the slider down. It looks like a bowtie at this stage. The center finishes inflating and it stays on heading nicely if you leave it alone........just have good body position . alan

Last year I did a X-country (8 mi from 10,500) under my VX 89 loaded at well over 2.4 along with a big friend (245# before gear) under a Manta. He made the mistake of releasing his brakes. I flew along using rear risers with the brakes still set and stayed with him nicely. Closer to home, I released my brakes and just used rear risers. Very easy to stay up with him but had to work to fly as slow. Caught a few thermals and even gained some altitude. No problems getting back and then some. I have several longer x-country flights under amy Jedei 136 and have never come up short with mixed loads that included Sabres, Tri's, Diablos, Stilettos, etc., all at various wing loadings. A good, efficient canopy is an advantage and all the more with a skilled pilot under it. I'll never sell my Jedei. alan

Not really in reply to any post in particular, just here because of the $ issue raised. How long does it take to do the job? For me it may vary. It varies mostly due to the inspection. If it is a rig that I repacked the last time and am familiar with, it takes me about 1/2 hour to do the complete inspection. If it is a new rig, about 2 hours to inspect and assemble (just talking reserve here, double that when I do the main, which I do). If it is after use, at least an hour for inspection. If it is a rig that I have not seen before, I treat it as a new one and it takes nearly 2 hours. Packing time is pretty consistent, but can vary with pop tops or very tight fits between the canopy and container. Usually 1/2 hour to 1 hour. Changing a loop or other minor maintenance can add a little time. What is a fair rate to charge? I guess it depends on the market you are in and what you feel your time is worth. I also like to feel that by doing a little more for a little less $, I'm helping to keep my friends a little safer......giving back to the sport and all that. alan

I think the DPRE has some discretion in the practical. The FAA does have a handbook with the standards and it can be found on their web-site. My practical was several years ago, but the packing portion only included a square. There were some orals about rounds. alan