masterrigger1

USPA membership is totally different than being a PIA member. The $290.00 fee is for PIA members. The $320.00 fee applies to Non-PIA members. Hope that helps, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

A Singer 143W2 or W3 is what you need then! They are fairly inexpensive and are built like a tank. One of my all around favorite all around machines. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Terry, Thanks for the plug there.. Like Terry aksed, what exactly are you trying to do with the machine? If for general purpose rigging stuff and you want portable, a singer 401A is the answer. It is the machine that the 20U is taken from. It is a all metal machine that has patterns built into the machine. It will do staright stitch, Zig-Zag, and also has a 3 step Zig-Zag(1 more stitch than a 308, double throw Zig-Zag. It will sew through 4 layers of Type IV easily. The Sail-Rite is a good machine , but if you want to do canopy work, the 401A is a better option. That's my opinion for a portable, although I would be looking just above that level for very serious rigging work. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Well... I had a 50/50 chance of getting this in the right forum My thoughts were that this was more related to Gear and Rigging info than a skydiving event, ...I guess it just is not my week...again! Hope to see all of you guys there...and if you catch me there, 'beer's on me". Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

N/A

So who's going? It is always a blast - I can't wait! BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

You mean like the one that I have listed in the classifieds now?? The blue ones are the better machines (early to mid 70's made) MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

It has to done by a master rigger or someone under his supervision, main or reserve. TSO'd stuff needs either the manufacturer's approval, the FAA's approval, or both. Things related to a main needs no formal approval, but still needs to be documented only if it effects the operation of the reserve---(RiggerPaul corrected me on this) I also think that it being connected to the RSL makes it a TSO issue. From "Parachute Alterations" B. Any change to the configuration, method of operation, or method of packing the main parachute, up to and including the main canopy attachment links or the male end of the quick release fittings, is a main pack alteration. Any main parachute alteration that affects the strength or operation of the auxiliary parachute , including the harness, must be regarded as an alteration of the auxiliary parachute and handled accordingly. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Looks like I need to move back to Antwerpen!!! Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Actually, they never asked any questions regarding issues pertaining to opening and closing reserves.This is according to Ed Averman at AFS-350. 1. USPA never stated that it was OK to open and close reserves. 2. PIA stated that is it was. But remember this, Cliff Schmucker is President of PIA and most likely wrote the notice that is posted on their web site. 3.Cliff Schmucker is part owner of SSK. SSK is a service center for Airtec. If one were to connect the dots....well there you are! Dave, I can assure you that these are not just my conclusions. There are a lot of people involved in these readings. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

+1 MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

$280.00 plus S/H installed ...we have them in stock. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Ok...you pack it earlier...sealed it ....then you maintained it....and then sealed it again. therefore you sealed after you maintained it, not after you packed it. Pretty clear to me! The intent of the rule is what gets you, think about it! BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

That's simple. It would have been sealed after maintenance, not packing! MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Dave Dewolf has always had the opinion, "broken seal, New pack job"! And who here on DZ, has been rigging longer than him? And the FAR's have to be taken literally. Federal law and regulations are written to be that way. Merry Christmas, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Mike, Do you repack the parachute if you service the AAD? The below regulation states that a seal is to be placed on the parachute only after packing it . This is Reg is cut and dry/black and white. It also is one of the main reasons the FAA is srambling to fix it., if it needs fixed. § 65.133 Seal. top Each certificated parachute rigger must have a seal with an identifying mark prescribed by the Administrator, and a seal press. After packing a parachute he shall seal the pack with his seal in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation for that type of parachute. This reg is cut and dry/black and white and leaves no doubt that you must pack a parachute to seal it. This is also the reason that the FAA is scrambling around. Here's the reason, 65.111 states that you cannot pack an unairworthy parachute. The intent used to be for the entire pack cycle or that's what most of us think. I have asked for a ruling on this to come out in AC-105. They could define it either way. 1.If it is for the entire pack cycle, they have to do nothing to the rest of Part 65. 2.If the intent is for the day that the rigger packs it only, then several parts of 65 has to be changed. The above rule is one of them. It will have to be changed; 1. To allow a seal to be placed after maintenance and packing. 2. 65.131 (records) will have to be changed to include a place or paragraph for the AAD maintenance issues. 3. Several changes to rigger privileges throughout 65 would also have to be made. So, for right now, what is known by Legal is that if you open the parachute, it has to be repacked to seal it! Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Paul, I have pointed out the FAR's from where I get my theories. Just go back and read them.They are in black and white.. There are enough people in agreement within the FAA that they are "issues". You and a handful of other just do not agree. It is that simple. End of Story! MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Paul, Back in the day, most riggers pretty much did what they wanted. They even built non-TSO'd rigs for jumping. It seemed no one really cared at that time. Also,the AAD's first were installed on the outside and the FAA did not really care since there were not inside the container. Then field approvals came along. ... And now, we are here debating what needs to be done with them. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Do you not think I discussed the matter with people of the same or higher creditials? Laws and regulations differ for the most part. Laws state what you cannot do. Regulations mostly state what is allowed. Regulations are governed by laws. I.e. ..you violate a regulation, you break a law that states you have to follow FAR regulation. Yes I do. There will be a meeting just before the offical start of the PIA. Several people including myself will be there to try and define what should be done.Several items are on the agenda as I hear. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

So Travis, How do I interpret the rules? I personally think with the 30 plus years of working with Federal regulations (NRC and CFR's) and almost 20 years of FAA regs puts me in a pretty good light of understanding them. Travis, The difference in regards to aircraft is that there are rules within Part 91 that states the operator of that aircraft shall comply with airwothiness directives. There are no such rules within 65,105, or AC-105-2C for the jumper to maintain airworthiness directives. If you care to read the FAR's again knowing this, I believe you may have another opinion. BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

That is not what I said..you need to re-read the post! It was before that as the Sentinals and FXCs were being installed in the Early 70's. At least the Sentinal Pin Pullers were being installed then. MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

By then there will be a six year battery available.... MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Sure, I did! It is the same one that you posted above. 65 says I cannot pack a rig that is not airworthy Again, 65 was written when all that you had to pack was a container, a canopy, and sometimes a pilot chute. They were no batteries and AAD's to contend with. The pack cycle was ony a few days instead of several months. So I believe (and this is what is being looked at this very moment) that the intent when the rule was written, was to be airworthy for the entire pack cycle. So that will be determined by the FAA sooner or later. Airtec cannot dictate changes to FAR's period. End of story. You must follow their instructions for maintenance though. But, if there is a conflict with the manufacturer instructions and the FARs, the FAR's are to be followed not the manufacturer's instructions. That would be correct. 1. The canopy would be good for the entire 180 days of the repack cycle. 2.The batteries would not be. 3. If you had a reserve ride the day after packing the PD canopy it also would not be airworthy. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Because there is not a FAR that states jumping a wet reserve is illegal for one. One more time....show us in black and white in either the FAR's or an AC that states your theory. The part that I did not like is the fact that: 1.It is not an offical Document from the FAA 2. The last two questions were answered by the PIA, not the FAA. At least it was not answered by the legal counsel assigned to the new rule. Ed Averman, is that person. He is listed as the legal contact for the new rule on the Federal Register. I spoke directly with him a few days ago. In that conversation, he explained that the only thing that he was asked to look at was pack dates. The question of opening and re-closing of containers was never mentioned to him, nor was the legallity of appliances (AADs)and their service dates. Cheers, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Amen! BS, MEL Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com