riggerpaul

You've got something mixed up. You say "diameter 100 meters", which doesn't seem right to me. Should be diameter 200 m. But you also say 600' x 600', which is about the correct size for 200 m diameter. I believe the correct diameter is 200 m.

Your method represents a law that say "within 180 days INCLUDING the date of its use". The actual law says "within 180 days BEFORE the date of its use". There is no mention of time-of-day in any of these laws. So you can only say that anytime of the day prior to the jump is "1 day before the date of its use". Try it this way, there is no time ON the DATE of the jump that is "BEFORE the DATE of its use", is there? You jump on Sunday. Sunday is the "DATE of its use". Saturday is the first day "BEFORE the DATE of its use". Saturday is day 1 of the count. Just look at a calendar and find the 180 days BEFORE the DATE of the jump. That's what's called for by the law as it is written.

Wow! Things move fast on this thread. I just deleted the post you quoted. During the time I was writing, the question was already answered. By the way, there was at least a generation of sport student gear that had ripcords on the MLW. It isn't necessarily ancient military surplus. With proper care, some of those rigs might very well still be airworthy. But that still begs the question of why they haven't been upgraded to a BOC ripcord, which would far better prepare the jumper for gear he will purchase.

I apologize if I jumped on you without cause. I thought you disagreed with the way I am counting. I guess you are just playing the devil's advocate. Anyway, back to the discussion - So, you are saying you know a DPRE who says you need to consider the time-of-day of the jump and/or the repack? Please tell us who that is. I'll be happy to take the issue directly to whoever it is.

Is that the best you can do? I've shown you, and backed it up with law, that time-of-day cannot be a factor. Are you finally admitting that the time-of-day is irrelevant?

FAR 105.43, the law that tells us the currency requirement for a reserve repack, doesn't mention the time of the jump. The law regarding logging the repacks is FAR 65.131. It states: (a) Each certificated parachute rigger shall keep a record of the packing, maintenance, and alteration of parachutes performed or supervised by him. He shall keep in that record, with respect to each parachute worked on, a statement of— (1) Its type and make; (2) Its serial number; (3) The name and address of its owner; (4) The kind and extent of the work performed; (5) The date when and place where the work was performed; and (6) The results of any drop tests made with it. (b) Each person who makes a record under paragraph (a) of this section shall keep it for at least 2 years after the date it is made. (c) Each certificated parachute rigger who packs a parachute shall write, on the parachute packing record attached to the parachute, the date and place of the packing and a notation of any defects he finds on inspection. He shall sign that record with his name and the number of his certificate. There is no mention of the time of the repack. We are not required to record it. How is that DPRE going to tell us that the time-of-day matters when FAR 65.131 does not require logging the time of the repack, and FAR 105.143 does not mention the time of the jump? Sorry, Bill, that DPRE is hallucinating. The only thing that matters are the dates.

I do want to thank you for your consideration of this question, and your willingness to continue the discussion. You force me to find the simplest terms to describe my logic, and simple is just about always better. You are still trying to talk about hours. There is no mention of hours. Don't try to add the notion of hours to the problem. In aviation, the limitations on maintenance and service are defined by the calendar, not by the clock. In the absence of further definition, a "day" is a day on the calendar. That's the way that aviation maintenance logs are evaluated. The law says "within 180 days before the date of its use". So just ask, "Which are the 180 days before the date of the jump?" That's the question to ask as the law is written. We know what a date is. We know which day is the day before any date. Just look on the calendar and you can see which is the day before the jump. No extra definition of "day" is needed. No mention of hours or time-of-day is needed. Look at a calendar and count the 180 days before the date of the jump. If you are repacked within those days and your jump, you are good. Interestingly, there remains a possible ambiguity concerning if you are allowed to jump on the actual day of the repack. One might argue that today is not "within 180 days before today". But the idea of the law is to say that an inspection and repack is done no more than some period before the actual jump, so I think it is not necessary to argue that jumping on the day of the repack is allowed.

Keyword "within" missing. 181 days is outside the 180-day limit. No. The day of repack, Nov 26, counts as Day 1. Using your count and the idea that re-pack day is Day 1, May 25 is 1 day outside the 180-day limit. One step further....since "within" is in there, maybe the 180th day does not qualify because it is ON the 180-day limit and not WITHIN the 180-day limit. The rule does not state anywhere that the repack is good for 180 days. It describes a way to count the days to see if a repack meets the law. Yes, "within" is used. But "before" is also used. "Within 180 days BEFORE the date of its use" is the exact phrase. It does not say "Within 180 days INCLUDING the date of its use". If it said that, I would agree with your notion of the 180 being the max usable days. But with the word "before", you need to start the count with the day BEFORE the jump.

Thanks for posting that! I wonder, do you think people will consider believing my logic now that they know that a big DZ uses the same logic? Or do you think they'll all start calling Skydive AZ to tell them what a big mistake they are making? (Okay, I apologize for my sarcasm.)

When all they tell us to record is a date, yesterday is always "within 1 day before the date of its use". There is no definition in the FARs of "a day". There is no place that I have found in the FARs where maintenance or service is recorded with a time-of-day, only by a date. There is no distinction in FAR 105 between 00:00 and 23:59. They only mention knowing the date of the jump. The FARs contain the notion of "night", but that is defined a the time between " the end of evening civil twilight and the beginning of morning civil twilight...". This has no bearing on how to determine when a service or maintenance was required or performed. If the jump is made on Monday at 23:59, it is still "Monday", and Sunday is 1 day before that jump. 23:59 might as well be 00:00 as far as the law, as stated, is concerned. Sunday is 1 day before Monday, no matter when in Monday you are talking about. Don't make this more complicated than it needs to be. There is no mention anywhere of recording either the time of the repack or the time of the jump. Anytime yesterday is "within 1 day" of anytime today, because we only have the dates for reference. Trying to add a time-of-day issue here is just inventing law that doesn't exist.

What I am getting from your post is that you think it is not possible to get a clear answer from anyone, and in the absence of a clear answer, you don't want to risk it. That being the case, I still think we should try to get a clear answer from the FAA. As we speak, there are people working on a new revision of AC-105. This would be a great place to ask and answer that question. I'll ask them if they can get something in there.

As I said before, I am not arguing with the practical notion that an early repack can help avoid certain problems. Neither am I arguing that people who don't understand can keep you from jumping. But we have no hope of making things better if we don't try to understand the law ourselves. This is not, as someone claimed, a tough problem. This law is really quite clear compared to some of the others that govern us. There is a correct answer that can be reached by carefully reading and applying the law. If we don't take the time to know what the answer is, who is to blame that the problem persists. I have presented my method and reasoning for applying the law. That results in a clear answer. There was one argument that said that we must know the time of the repack to answer the question, and I showed that there is nothing in the law that supports that notion. Wendy, you are a rigger. Don't you want to know what the right answer is? I hope you are not really trying to tell me that we are not intelligent enough to interpret this law. Are you? If someone comes to you and asks "when is another repack needed to keep jumping the rig?", what do you tell them?

Check your calendar. If 26 Nov 2008 is day 1, 25 May 2009 is day 181. If day 1 is 26 Nov 2008 there are: 5 days (including day 1) in November, 31 days in December 31 days in January 28 days in February 31 days in March 30 days in April 25 days in May (to 25 May 2009) 181 days total

+100%......My repack was not due untill i came back from Belize! But should I try and get a few extra days/weeks out of it? NO I dont need to try and save $3-$7 to not have my researve repacked before i came back I'm not arguing with your practical approach to the problem. It is absolutely true that not everybody understands what the law says, and that sometimes people who don't understand can keep you from jumping. But that does not change the fact that there actually is a day that is the last legal day. As a rigger, I want to know what that day is, so that when my customer asks me, I can give him an answer. I don't want to say it is somewhere around a particular date. I want to tell him which date it is. Again, I don't at all disagree with the practical notion that an early repack might avoid a hassle. But I still want to know the correct answer. Don't you want and expect your rigger to know too?

I'm not sure I understand your point here. We both agree that it would absolutely be legal to jump that rig on the 24th. Are you saying that it is not legal on the 25th, but that you think a confused jury might think it is? Please explain that, and explain how the written law leads you to think this. I have tried to explain as clearly why I believe it is legal on the 25th. If you don't agree, please tell me which part of what I said is in error. You said it is tied to the time of the repack, and I responded by showing why the time of the repack is not relevant. Do you have some other objection? The law is pretty clear, you follow the written law and you get an answer. If you mean to say that it is not legal to jump on the 25th, please explain how you came to that conclusion.

First off, thank you for taking the time to reply. I appreciate that you are willing to put some thought into the question, and post it for all to see. For your reference, FAR 105.43 contains: (b) The reserve parachute must have been packed by a certificated parachute rigger— (1) Within 180 days before the date of its use, if its canopy, shroud, and harness are composed ... I don't see where the time of the repack is relevant. The requirement is that the repack is "within 180 days before the date of its use". It doesn't say "within 180 days before the time of its use". The requirement is bound to dates, not to times within a date. So, we're back to the question, "Is yesterday 1 day before the date of its use"? If yesterday is "1 day before the date of its use", then it is an easy thing to count back to the 180th day before the date of its use. The repack must have been done on or after that day. Using the concrete example from the OP, he wants to use the rig on 25 May 2009. If you count back 180 days from there, with 24 May 2009 being "day 1" of that counting, you get to 26 Nov 2008. If the rig was packed on or after 26 Nov 2008, it is legal to jump that rig on 25 May 2009. Do you agree? If not, which is the last legal day to jump the rig.

Not meaining to pick only on you, Hackish, but once again, a non-answer to a simple question. He asked how long his repack is legal. He didn't quite reveal all his needs. Another part of the problem is working a CYPRES maintenance into the mix while avoiding unnecessary down time. Anyway, the question of when the repack expires is not a new one. If the people who are doing the checking don't know the right answer, then we all bear the brunt of it. So, please, somebody tell me if my answer was right or wrong. If you think the answer is wrong, please explain why.

This question is not about the difference between 180 days and 6 months. It is about the interpretation of the regulation, in other words, how to count the 180 days. FAR 105.43 contains: The crux of the matter is the meaning of "180 days before the date of its use". Here's the way I read and interpret it. If you are using the parachute today, then "yesterday" is "1 day before the date of its use". Had the regulation said "within 1 day before the date of its use" it would be legal to jump today if it was repacked yesterday. Do we agree so far? If not, please explain. The actual rule says "180 days before the date of its use". By my interpretation, the repack may have been done today or on any of the 180 "yesterdays". This means a repack is actually good on a total of 181 days. Given a repack date of 26 Nov 2008, you have that day and 180 more days to use that parachute before another inspection is required. 25 May 2009 is the last of the "180 more days", so it is legal to jump the rig on that day. (To the people involved in the update of AC105 - I would love to see this topic covered in the new version.)

My understanding is that if your rig was inspected and repacked on 26 Nov 2008, you are allowed to jump it up to and including 25 May 2009. Some might not agree with the way I interpret the regulation and/or count the days.

Yes, you must take care to get the holes through the center of the lines, evenly splitting the bundles of fibers on either side of the hole. Also good to go between the bundles and not through them. Just like most things in rigging, it takes some attention to detail to do it properly.

I find it also depends on what I am sewing. When I am repairing leather jumpsuit booties, I may use a 110/18 with a needle point. For lighter work I will usually use 90/14 or 100/16. As Gary said, ball point needles seem best for most fabrics.

Hello Eric, Thanks for letting us know how widely used this technique has been. As I said, I reverse-engineered the technique when I found it on a parachute. It certainly seemed to me to be an extremely elegant solution to the problem. But I'd never seen it in any text or manual, so I have been cautious in its application. I am not sure from your post, has PdF used it for line attachments to the canopy as well as loops on steering toggles? Again, thanks! -paul

It is not a new thing that sealing a parachute requires that we certify airworthiness. FAR 65.125(b) states that a parachute rigger may not "Pack a parachute that is not safe for emergency use;" Now, I suppose we can argue about what is or is not "packing a parachute". For me, if I seal that parachute, I am taking on the taking on the responsibility for its airworthiness at that moment. To this end, I prefer not to do a mid-cycle maintenance on a parachute that I was not the last person to give a full inspection. I will also check that nothing heinous has happened to the rig. Since I knew at the prior inspection that the mid-cycle work would be needed, I also prefer to keep in close contact with the owner so that I will be aware of any unusual events concerning the rig. Yes, all this means that I am quite restrictive when I choose to do mid-cycle maintenance. None of my customers seem to mind my keeping close watch for this purpose. None have objected when I sometimes say that I prefer to do a full I&R. This is especially true when the mid-cycle maintenance is nearer the end of the inspection cycle, when they often prefer to do the maintenance now rather than have an additional disruption shortly later.

So, I'm learning something here. When I was taught to use a zig-zag, I think we were talking about sewing loops on steering lines. I never imagined that it would be different for a loop in a different place. I know that I've taken apart a lot of zig-zag stitches from loops on lines attached to a canopy, but again, this isn't a closing loop on a pilot rig either. (Also, I am sure they were simple zig-zags and not bar-tacks that would have had straight stitching underneath the zig-zag.) Thanks, all, for taking the time to explain.

Interesting. I'm not very familiar with pilot rigs, so I certainly don't mean to argue. But could you explain a bit more? You say the straight stitch will damage the canopy less. Is this closing loop stitched to the canopy?