Hooknswoop

It is the actual TSO weight and was drop tested at higher weights. Diablopilot- You are absolutely right and make a point worth repeating. TSO weight is not necessarily a safe weight to actually load the canopy with. An older, worn reserve may not pass drop tests at the original drop test weight. Derek

Possible? Yes, but for the cost of removing the aft baggage door on a X, it wouldn't be worth it. You would have to get FAA approval to fly w/ the door removed, which may not be possible. I know several DZ's that ioffer high altitude jumps. Last I heard Skydance charged $100 for one. Derek

The general, generic, reality. I would put on my web site a statement that explains that GM DZ status means nothing more than the DZO sent USPA a check. It does not mean the DZ has been inspected and approved, is regulated any more or less than any other DZ. I would explain that it is nothing more than a marketin gimmic. I would explain that 'my' DZ follows USPA's recommendations for safety as well as or better than competing DZ's. I would explain that I spent the money to be listed as a GM DZ on repairs to student equipment, where it has an impact on safety. I would explain that a DZ that doesn't follow the BSR's does not have it's GM status revoked. Spin off the GM program as a seperate entity to eliminate the conflict of interest and require an inspection of the DZ before awarding GM status. Also conduct random inspections. If a DZ fails an inspection, give it 30 days to correct the deficiencies or revoce GM status. Also revoke GM status if a GM DZ blantently fails to adhere to the BSR's. Then the program would have merit. This is how the GM program appears to the un-educated. But that isn't the truth. The truth is a DZ can send in a check, continue to disregard the BSR's without penalty. USPA GM status does not mean the DZ is any safer than a non-GM DZ. Derek

Oops, I meant TSO C23 C. Derek

Part 105 states: "(c) If installed, the automatic activation device must be maintained in accordance with manufacturer instructions for that automatic activation device." Your rigger could remove the AAD and re-pack it or replace the batteries and re-pack it. They cannot re-pack it w/ out-of-date batteries. Since you didn't tell him to remove it, they assumed you wanted the batteries replaced. Derek

No, you didn't. If I had asked, "What are USPA's currency requirments for a Parachutist in Command?", then yes, you would have answered my question. But that is not what I asked. I asked, "Can you show me which FAR specifies Parachutist in Command currency requirements?" I don't think you can. I still contend that under the FAR's, I am can still act as a Parachutist in Command. The FAR says, "has been certified". Are you saying I haven't been certified? I even have a TI card from Stunts w/ no expiriation date on it. I'm not saying it is right, only legal. I think the USPA tells DZO"s, "OK, the FAA is serious, you have to start doing xxxx, or they will step in." So the DZO's start doing xxxx. Why didn't the USPA figure out that seat belts are a good idea before the crash? Why did it take fatalities for the USPA to act? Day late and a dollar short. I had proof of a serious BSR violation and the RD, now a ND did nothing. I wasn't impressed w/ USPA's abilty to 'self-regulate'. Exactly why the GM program is a conflict of interest and should be a seperate entiity. If USPA can't inspect a DZ because of a conflict of interest, how can they enforce the BSR's, represent skydivers AND represent DZO's? The fox is guarding the henhouse. You don't have to say it is safe, only that XYZ DZ has been inspected, passed and meets the minimum standards as set forth by the USPA. Currently for $600.00 and a signature a DZ gets that. The problem is they don't actually meet the standards USPA has set. And when they don't, nothing happens. It's a joke. And I have seen a DZO tell a jumper that wa just grounded by the S & TA for pulling very low to get on the next load. Wouldn't want to miss out on the $. So what we have is an organization that appears to the general public to be giving DZ's a stamp of approval, "USPA GM DZ" and listing them on their web page. DZ's use this as a marketing tool against non-GM DZ's. In reality GM status means absolutely nothing. Derek

No worries. I agree it's not a big issue, but given that it is the jumper's last chance, why not 6 metal stops? Why 4 plastic ones? Will a Smart's slider stop ever break? Maybe, maybe not. OK probably not. I do know that spreading the force over 6 and using metal basically takes the odds to zero, which for reserves is (or should be) the goal. Derek

The weight and speeds reserves have been drop tested at and what they are TSO'd to are different. The testing information can be found in NAS 804 (TSO C23B), AS 8015A (TSO C-23C), and AS 8015B (TSO C-23D). They make for an interesting read. There is no specified limit for weight or speed for TSO C-23B (try to find the max weight for a Vector). For TSO C23 B, there is 3 catagories, A, B, and C. For cat A, they are tested to 300 pounds at 150 kts and TSO'd to 198 pounds and 130 kts. For cat B, they are tested to 300 pounds at 175 kts and TSO'd to 254 pounds and 150 kts. For cat C, they are tested to 300 pounds at 230 kts and TSO'd to 254 pounds and 175 kts. For TSO C-23D, the minimum TSO is 220 pounds at 150 kts. Test weight must be at least 264 pounds and 180 kts. In addition the drop test must be 1.2 times the maximum operatiing weight or speed that the gear is being TSO'd to. Also, for reserves with a maximum operating weight of 250 pounds or less, it must open in 3 seconds or less. For every pound over 250 pounds, the reserve is given an additional .01 seconds to open. It must also open in 300 feet or less with an additional foot allowed for every pound over 250 pounds TSO weight. They must also have not more than a 24 FPS descent rate and the total velocity can't exceed 36 FPS. So the PD-106R was tested to 264 pounds at 210 kts. There is a lot more details in the standards. Derek

Yes. Metal slider stops wearing out the webbing they are senw into hasn't been a problem. That's OK. I have my opinion of them and have expressed it and defended why I feel that way. If you or someone else disagrees/has a different opinion, that's OK.

Because if it breaks (a little space between the grommet and disk and the grommet hits it on deployment) the slider grommet can go up into the stabilzer and create a streamer. I don't see any reason not use use 6 metal slider stops. Derek

It only takes one terminal (+) opening. Derek

And when they do, you have a reserve. If it happens on your reserve........ PD-R's have 6 metal slider stops. They never break. Derek

But, but it TSO'd to 220 pounds. Derek

When there is enough of a market to make a profit off of the new sizes. Derek

Correct me if I am wrong, going off of memory, but I though the Tri had the tape running to the steering line attachment points too. If one of those plastic slider stops breaks............... Derek

Good point, but I wanted the best on my back. PD proved to me that it is the best. He can do what I did w/ my -M, throw it away. That's OK

w/ TSO C23-D they can go as low as 220 pounds, like the PD-106R Derek

Can you show me which FAR specifies Parachutist in Command currency requirements? As for the USPA, it would best serve skydivers by working to enforce it's own BSR's to prevent an incident that the FAA won;t be able to ignore and take action and regulate skydiving. Too many bad demos, aircraft crashes w/ engines past TBO or lack of maint, etc and the FAA will be forced to step in. They don't want to and skydivers don't want them to. If no one regulates skydiving then enough incidents will cause the FAA to regulate skydiving. Why did the volunteer DZ inspection program inspect only one DZ, which failed, then flop? A mandatory DZ inspection program with a list of DZ's that pass an annual inspection and any surprise inspection would make the USPA GM program actually worth something. If the USPA doesn't do it, the FAA will. Derek

The one I sw was within limits and if, for a similar cost you can get a reserve with a great flare, why not? LOL- I understand Derek

I don't like that it has plastic slider stops and only 4 instead of 6 of those. I also don't like that it is simply a F-111 Triatholon. I don't think (from watching landings) that it has a good flare. Derek

PD-R. Derek

You can call Sun Path and they will 'OK' 'right-left'. I wouldn't want a mal because I followed the manufacturer's instructions and dis-regarded common sense. It is considered an alteration to change how the canopy is packed, but a rigger, someone under the supervision of a rigger, or the next person to jump it may alter a main canopy, so it is legal to close it right-left. Derek

I think he means a helmet for the student, like a frap hat. Derek

For packing the reserve. The leap from following the manufacturer's instructions for packing the reserve to the rigger must ensure that the end user follows the TSO limits simply isn't there. "We", as in 'us riggers', yes. "We", as in skydivers following TSO limits, no. The FAR's say that Riggers must follow the manufacturer's instructions for packing the reserve, they do not say skydivers must observe the TSO limits of the gear. These are two very different things. Derek

Right. By closing the right flap before the left, it hides the right flap under the left. Closing it the other way puts the right flap on top which can snag the PC bridle causing a delay or PC in tow. Derek