masterrigger1

Matt, You are correct. The sentence refering to that clearly spells out that there are differences in what rating is required by the word "appropriate" with regards to a main parachute. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

You are right. I will have to dig up the documents that they used for the word "appropriate" in that definition. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Here it is. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Well, First off I am a proponet more of the regs since that's what we have to teach. In learning the regs, basically going through the first published in the CAA days to the ones of today, I have found most of the basis for them. Basically why they are written.... To start off there was only one rigger rating, Parachute Rigger. With that rating you had to work in the Parachute Loft(which was certified by the way) under the direct supervision of a Parachute Rigger whcich was a long drawn out process. There was an outcry to have a rating easier to get because all that most people wanted was to "just pack my own reserve" kind of deal. So the two ratings came about: Master and Senior. The senior rigger rating was generated to do just what people said they wanted, pack reserves and do simple repair work. Emphasis on simple. But what happened over the years, was not the intent of the regs. Lack of oversight, among other things, led most senior riggers to believe that they could do anything they wanted. In fact, most built their own rigs, modified their own reserves to steerable ones, etc. With the 65.111 Interp, it basically backs my belief that the Senior Rigger can only do simple patches, reserve repacks, assemblies, and velcro replacement kind of stuff. Of note, only Master Riggers could legally assemble parachute componets until about 18-20 years ago. That was changed to allow the senior riggers also. The senior rigger is basically an entry level rigger. That rating is just a stepping stone to the Master rating. With the legal interp of 65.111 , the draft is in conflict with law. Legal is on top of it now. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Depends...The FSDO here thinks otherwise! But we do know if the Batteries or service will expire before the 180 days...old battle and will resume in Reno I guess.. *** PIA still has that statement on its website. You just have to look for it. *** I still did not find it. What I do have are the first document and what is on the website now. See Attached. I do find it kind of funny that with the first publication, it was announced loudly that any rigger could change out the batteries. Now after a double fatality in Ohio that was attributed to a battery change mid-pack cycle, it seems to be quitely removed. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Negative. The Law is the regulations on the Federal Register. The 65.111 Defined spells it out clearly that you have to be a master rigger to install lines. AC's do not trump the Regs and is the reason that a LOI will have to be issued before this can be pulished as active. The paragraphs refering to the handbooks probably will be removed is my guess from the conversations I have had. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/afs_ac/ You will have to scroll to the bottom of the page..... Yes, January 15 is the cutoff for comments. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Mark, As you know that is still in AFS-100 (Legal) for an interpretation. With that said, it is not definite either way. By the way,when did PIA remove the statement saying it was OK for other riggers to open/close a reserve to change batteries? BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Mike, I actually have a 120 for myself. I am loading it at about 2.0-2.1 out of the door. At that wingloading it is a pretty forgiving canopy for a Xbrace. I first would suggest staying with the Xfire until you have at least 500-600 jumps on that canopy. If you are already at that point, and have a level head, then yes it could be the next step up. This canopy needs to be loaded at least 1.8 to work as designed.Just keep that in mind. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

I never said they were the exact same canopy. I have and did say they are BASICALLY the same canopy. .....the quote was in generally speaking terms. Like I have already told you, when you take the same basic canopy, add the same basic trim, you get the same basic performance. Adding a link is a standard practice with regards to trying new line sets, trims and the like. You correct that there are side effects, but on a canopy with a shallow trim like the Crossfire, the effects are minimal. Please note that I only said you could do it with a Crossfire also. No other canopies were recommended. You mean the side discussion that you pulled me into??? Anyway I am through with it also. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

My link was for Ian speaking of hearing about the JFX earlier in the year. It did have anything to do with anything else. The link that I posted was off by two posts. I believe that if you look at my earlier post on that thread you will see what I meant to show. I think we are already covered that point. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

You said that, I did not. I will not turn this into a debate about the Katana vs Crossfire.... Sure, They are different designs, but how different is the answer. I have taken both apart, cut new pieces/parts, and put them both back together. ...and I build line sets for both canopies. So I would say I have a better reference than most, including you. They are closer than you think and I also was speaking in general terms when I made that statement. I believe it was here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3870107;search_string=jfx;#3870107 BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Negative. Disclaimer here.....IMHO: The Katana is merely a Crossfire with a Higher angle of attack. In other words, if you own a Crossfire and install a #6 link in between the standard link or soft link and the rear riser, you will get Katana like performance . The JFX is a notch just above that type of performance. Think both faster and also slower than the Katana and Crossfire. The openings and slow flight performance sold me right off of the bat. You can always make a canopy go fast, but it is hard to get one to do basically fast and slow flight well. The NZ boys did it right with this one. True story... one guy jumped my canopy one time and ordered two identical canopies at the same time. You just have to jump one to understand the differences. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Crazy Larry is jumping one, as is Luigi, Tony U. and myself. This canopy had been in development for quite sometime before it was offically released. Just some quick points about the canopy: 1. It has a more controlled opening than any canopy I have ever jumped. Period. 2. The canopy has a larger range than a Crossfire II. 3. It can be swoop machine if you want or can be the everyday, all purpose canopy for someone wanting to step up a little over a Crossfire II. 4. For people worrying about cost, the canopy can (like mine) be lined with 600 lb Technora for a longer lasting line set. I have attached a photo of a JFX-99. It belongs to Pete Langehans and is a copy of my canopy. If someone needs more info and/or pricing, just contact me directly. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Bill, You missed the point that Mark made. The intent of the paragraph was for the owner(non-rigger) to be able to remove the reserve container from the harness for transport in the normal manner. It was not meaning removing the parachute from the risers. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Terry, Actually you and Billare both wrong. According to AC 105-2C, Section 11, paragraph "F", AC 105-2C l/2/91 f The user of a single harness, dual pack parachute system, which is a sport asembly consisting of a main and auxiliary /reserve parachute, may perform simple assembly and disassembly operations necessary for transportation, handling, or storage between periods of-use if the parachute is designed to simplify such assembly and disassembly without the use of complex operations. . The intent here seems pretty obvious, but we all know it has never been complied with though. There is also verbage in one of the earlier TSO requirements that the cutaway system is part of the TSO standards. With that said,when you buy a new system, the manufacturer supplies a set of risers with the H/C. Ask any manufacturer if they will sell you a new system WITHOUT the risers. My guess is probably not, but you never know. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Shlomo, The ones that I have repaired using 3 chord have never had an issue or been returned for more repair. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

The problem is the bartacks and the thread that is used. The Bartacks getting ripped apart is a recurring issue. If you simply re-install tha same type bartacks and thread, they are going to fail in the same manner. If you look that is basically no damage to the base material, so only the bartack is failing. My sugestion is to use either FF thread or 3 cord and install a four point WW pattern with a box around it. Then either Zig-zag or bartack a couple of patterns parallel to the load over the top of the previous work. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

PSA There are a couple of slots now open if you are/were thinking of coming. Contact Dave Dewolf for more info. paraloft@aol.com Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Exactly my thoughts. I spoke with Mike G. a couple of days ago. He informed me that he had around 4 to fracture and they all were during pre-tensioning. What bothers me is the slight amount of tension needed to yield those washers vs the amount of pressure applied closing the container. It would seem that the washers that yielded @ pre-tension had a stress fracture(s) from manufacturing BEFORE the pre-tensioning. If that is true, then it is entirely possible to have washers in service with stress fractures not as severe as the ones that yielded @ pre-tension. Installing washers with possible cracks in them IMHO, is not packing something that is legally airworthy. Now that this issue has been brought public, it would seem that USPA, APF, etc would respond in a more positive manner. My recommendation to Airtec would be to enlarge the washer by at least 1/8" and also add 1/16" to the hole spacing. This would do two things. 1. Make the washer stronger than even the original. 2. It would provide a means to easily identify the "new" washer. You, me, and a lot of other riggers here in the States! BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

They are basically alot like a Icarus tandem with a few changes here and there. The Rage tandem has a better opening sequence and I attribute that to the Brake setting on both the primary and secondary control lines. The Rage also is trimmed at a steeper angle of attack which seems to give it a little more flare than the Icarus. I have Set 400's, Set 366's, Icarus 365's, and one Rage canopy in my systems. I usually pickup the Rage when I have a heavy load for both the opening and landing. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

I have 12 Strong Systems that I do contract work with time to time. My rate is $75.00 per jump which includes the instructor fee. My rate is $45.00 for the instructor and $30.00 for the rig. Packing is not included in the above rate. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Call Skydive PA and ask for Moe Viletto. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

I didn't think so. The stronger,harder material makes sense with regards to stress fractures from manufacturing. BUT, if it is really harder, stronger material WITHOUT stress fractures, the yield should be higher. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

If it was going to be heat treated, yes. Sharp corners and heat treating do not mix. The holes look to be punched as the surrounding metal is raised. If you look closely you can see a "mound" around the holes. The force of a dull punch can tear the metal alot like cookie dough tears. The way I would inspect it would be UT.(Ultrasonic Testing) Or I would float a pancake probe (Eddy Current Testing) over it. This is my "real" job field. Nondestructive Testing(NDE) in the Nuclear Industry. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com