Hooknswoop

I agree, but I didn't make the determination the Mirages have a design issue and need to be modified. In fact I disagree with that stance. I don't think they have a problem and the SB shouldn't have been issued or at least been optional and not mandatory. Of course, technically, unless the FAA makes it an AD, it isn't mandatory. Then there is the issue of what is too poor of rigging? Where is the line? Exactly how bad were the reserves that locked up? I have seen a lot of poor rigging, but I haven't seen a closing loop that was a bit too long and poor bulk distribution cause a reserve total. If the tolerances are that tight, then the manual should be more precise, i.e. for a specific Mirage size and specific reserve type and size, there should be xx% of the material in the ears and xx% near the bad opening, south of the grommets and the closing loop should be xx mm long, from the knot to the end of the loop, etc. Sun Path’s Javelin manual used to have a picture of the 2 side flaps closed with the bridle coming out the top, while the text says to route the bridle under the flaps out the bottom. The new manual doesn’t say how to route the bridle for a square reserve, but says to route it out the side of the 2 side flaps for packing a round. Derek

The FAA should pay for SB's? What do you think of my idea of Mirage Sys reimburing riggers at a set rate for applying the SB, eliminating down time and shipping? Derek

It looks like the design of that #2 flap makes it too easy for a line to snag on it. It has happened from "free stowing" the lines. It is rare though. How did this jumper stow their lines? I don't know for sure. It had more to do with the stiffener in the end of the flap where the grommet is and free-stowing the lines. It looks like the #2 flap in this case has a snag point exactly where the other pictures show the line hooked on. Flaps shouldn't get any wider towards the grommet. Not as far as I know. Again, the only way I've ever heard of this happening was with old gear and free-stowed lines. Clearly not impossible. People are still jumping the rigs, right? This needs to be addressed before it happens again. The video didn't show an unstable deployment. What is the change? From what to what? Derek

That's just it, the original design has a problem. Sometimes the reserve doesn't deploy. So they have a change to the original design to eliminate that problem. The Mustang's intake manifold worked for a while and not all of them broke. But there was still a problem with the original design that cased some of them to crack and the engine to stop running. The new manifold didn't make the vehicle run any better, it made it run as it was supposed to. We aren't talking an improvement, just bringing it up to where it is supposed to be, i.e. the reserve PC launches when the AAD fires. If it was just an unecessary improvement over the original design, then why not make it optional? Derek

The manufacturer’s budget doesn’t change the analogy. It cost Ford a lot more to replace all those intake manifolds on all those Mustangs that it will cost Mirage to apply the SB to every Mirage. The income AND expense numbers are smaller. They are willing to do them for free, which costs them money. Why can't they offer to reimburse riggers for rig they apply the SB to? That would save Mirage and the owner shipping costs. That shipping cost would probably off set the higher cost of reimbursing riggers to do the SB. If it cost Mirage any more than doing it themselves, it wouldn’t be much. Say it costs Mirage $15.00 + shipping (say another $20.00) to do the SB. If they offer $20.00 to each rigger that does the SB (using S/N’s to prevent abuse), that would actually save Mirage $15.00 and eliminate the time spent in shipping that the owner is without their rig. Derek

It's not a new, safer design though. It is a fix so that the reserve will work as it is supposed to. It doesn't make the rig safer, it makes it work as it was originally supposed to. Derek

I haven't seen it either, but I know the british Venom jet trainer is started with a blank shotgun shell. The pressure winds up the turbine to start it. I have heard of radials being started that way. Derek

And I'm sure Ford built in recalls into the cost of Kelli;s old Mustang. I'm OK with that. I think of it as insurance. If it never needs a design fix, then the manufacturer comes out ahead. If it does, then I don't have to pay for that design fix. If a Cypres upgrade requires more than $160 to apply, Airtec wouldn't/doesn't increase the cost of the maintenance check to reflect that. What I am not OK with is a manufacturer discovering a design problem and expecting the customer to pay for the fix. Again, I think Mirage Sys shouldn't have issued the SB and instead issue a notice to pack the Mirage the way it is supposed to be packed. I don't think I'll mod Kelli's rig. Her reserve works fine and the mod won't improve anything, only makes things worse. Derek

Absolutely true. Techncally speaking this SB doesn't have to be performed, same as the Capewell SB, the Javelin adjustable harness SB, or eventhe Raven-M SB. Even though the SB says the SB must be done, they don't have the authority to ground their containers, only the FAA does (in the U.S.). I have been considering not doing it to Kelli's rig and only doing it if she ever sells it. Just pack it as it should be packed and it works fine. As for the red label, I accept that a rig may not work even though I do everything right. What I don't accept that if there is a design problem, I have to pay to get it fixed. Again, there can be more money at stake than just shipping and a re-pack. If the jumper needs it to make their living, or if the DZ uses them for student rigs, etc. That can add up to a lot more than shipping + $60. When I was jumping full time, being without my rig for a week could have cost me $1000+. Because Airtec absorbs the costs of any upgrades. The 4 and 8 year checks cost what they cost. I could see if they charged the owner to replace a component that needed replacing. That's maintenance. They didn't charge for the electromatic shields or shielding upgrades. I don't mind paying for maintenance (my Mustang alternator example) I do mind paying to fix design flaws (my Mustang intake manifold example). Derek

Not incorrect packing, sloppy, poor packing. Too long of a closing loop and too much bulk in the ears, as I understand it. No rig should be expected to open if it was incorrectly packed. Again, I think Mirage Sys should have issued a bulletin clarifying packing the Mirage reserve and skipped the SB. Derek

I dunno, the list I found puts it as KX53. Are there 2 airportw in Clewiston? Derek

That is a whole other issue altogether. I can't think of a single DZ that follows all the BSR's. Look at the poll in the Instructors forum. The vast majority feel DZO's put $ ahead of safety. The problem is USPA gets it's $ from jumpers that are required to have membership by the DZO's. This puts USPA's purse strings in the hands of DZO's. So if USPA does something that DZO's don't like, they can pull the strings and cut off USPA. So you have the orgasnization that is making and enforcing the rules being control by the people they are supposed to be regulating. IOW, the fox is guarding the henhouse. Derek

I think that like car manufacturers, they should take the cost of future SB's into account in the selling price. SB's aren't issues on orphaned rigs since SB's are issued by the manufacturer. an AD for skydiving gear hasn't been issued in a long time. The FAA doesn't want to spend the time or money to issue an AD for skydiving gear. I think it has been 15+ years since the last skydiving gear AD was issued. If you are jumping orphaned gear, junk it and get new gear. If not, if something does happen, you are stuck w/ the AD cost. Not likely to happen though. I have said several times that I think they should have issued a bulletin emphasizing how to properly pack a Mirage and what can happen if it isn't properly packed and skip the SB altogether. Again, in the case of Kelli's Mustang, do you think she should have paid for towing, parts and labor for a part that Ford knew was defective? Imagine of Ford came out and said all Ford Explorers need a new airbags within the next 4 month and the owners are paying for it. If you don't replace them you will not be allowed to drive the vehicle on public roads. How well do you think that would go over? Derek

So the reserve PC not launching when the AAD fires isn't defective? You can't have it both ways. If it is such a cheap fix, they won't go broke. They should stand behind their product and not expect the owner to pay to fix their design issue. Derek

KX53 Clewiston FL USA http://www.geocities.com/euroair_UK/icao.html Derek

I think so, yes. Packing them then cutting the loop. I haven't packed one with the SB applied yet, but I understand it makes it harder to close, especially the smaller containers. Derek

http://adds.aviationweather.gov/winds/ Derek

There are several aircraft flying today w/o vertical stabilzers, the B-2bomber for one. Now if they are supposed to have one and it falls off, that's different. It may or may not crash. With some airplanes, differential thrust could compensate for lack of a vertical stab. Derek

The poll is OK, it will/does reflect what owners think. We already know what some of the manufacturers think. Derek

Only 21 votes, but I'm seeing a trend. Derek

Apparently if the loop is way too long and too much of the bulk is packed into the earts, the reserve container can lock up if the AAD fires. I find it hard to believe with how strong the reserve PC spring is, but it happened, so........ Derek

If they sat on the info and some went on with this problem, they would negligent. That is not true. The rig had this 'issue' when new. The standard of the reserve deploying when the AAD fires has not moved up. The reserve has always been expected to deploy when the AAD fires. If you had a Ford Explorer with Firestone tires that were prone to come apart, causing the vehicle to loose control and roll over, would you suck it up and replace the tires out of pocket? Or would you expect Ford to sell you tires that didn't fall apart before they needed replacing and expect them to replace the tires? This isn't a maintanence issue, it's a design issue. Derek

By moving the cutter, the loop has to be made longer since the cutter can't 'burrow into a flap, making it harder to sink in the pilot chute. Yes, they are. I'm sure it is being looked at. Remember, the reserve has to be packed very poorly for this to occur. I am sill a bit fuzzy on how a bit of extra closing that has been cut can lock up a Mirage reserve container. But, apparently, combined with poor rigging, it can. Hence the reason I would be happier if Mirage posted a bulltine explaining the issue and skip the SB. Derek

I knew riggers would get a good laugh out of that. Derek

What if your manifold cracked and left you stranded? Would you expect the manufacturer to pay for the towing, parts, and labor (assuming it was a recall)? With the Mirage SB, there is a problem with the reserve system that could cause it to lock up. Even though it doesn't have to be done until the next re-pack, I don't think waiting and jumping it with a possible reserve total mal is such a good idea. I know Kelli won’t be jumping her Mirage until after it is fixed. What if you are on a team and have paid for a competition and now will have to rent gear to attend to competition or forfeit your entry fees along with missing the event? What if you make your living skydiving and need your container to earn money? How much money are you going to be out after paying to ship it back? What about a DZ that has Mirage student rigs and their loss of income from having them down for the SB? What if you are trying to sell your rig and have someone interested? Who pays for the SB then since the rig will be out of service and it will cost $ to get it fixed, it is worth less by whatever the amount it costs to fix it? They are other issues besides shipping and a re-assembly and re-pack. I draw the line very simply and clearly; my fault or fair wear and tear, I pay. Their fault, they pay. Derek