Hooknswoop

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=355379;search_string=slowest%20regular%20track;#355379 Someone brought this up. Hook

In the event that the cutaway handle was pulled just far enough to release only one riser and that riser had the RSL on it, there is a good chance for a main-reserve entanglement. Having the cable w/ the RSL a little longer ensures it will release the riser second, preventing the possibility of the RSL deploying the reserve before the main is completely gone. Hook

The measure ment should be taken with the rig being worn and tension on the risers, preferably suspended. The risers w/o the RSL should release before the riser with the RSL. Hook

I've done a few very cold jumps, didn't like it. Nothing below 0F I don't think. I read about it and wanted to see for myself, I like to tinker. Besides it drove Skycat nuts. I've done worse. I intentionally packed a line-ever (had 3 canopys) to see how feasable it would be to cut the line to fix it. It wasn't. Hook

Generally, when a piece of gear get a bad reputation, it is because of accidents it contributed to. Soft housings are no longer offered as an option. I recently was able to pick up a soft-housings-equipped rig by the cutaway handle. The main wasn't in it and the Velcro on the handle had been peeled. It wasn't a small rig either. The jumper was unable to cutaway his main, after landing, in high winds. He is a fire-fighter, and not a small guy. The cables were correctly routed. We removed the soft housings from both his rigs and replaced them with hard housings. Another jumper, after seeing this, ordered the kit for both of his rigs, and we replaced one set, but haven't gotten to the other set yet. He doesn't have a main for the other rig, so it isn't a huge priority. Neither jumper thought their soft housings would be a problem. One discovered it on the ground and only got drug a little for the cost of the lesson and the other learned from the first. Discovering the soft housings are not a good idea at 1,200 feet with a malfunction main above you is going to bring a high cost for the lesson. Take the cheap lesson and learn from others. Get hard housings and capped, metal inserts for your risers. Stack the odds in your favor. "look neater and less bulky" is not a good argument in favor of soft housings. Hook

-20 C!!!!! Are you nuts! That is -4 F. You are right, wind chill plays a major roll in freeze times. I did find some research on the subject: Estimated freezing times of the loop at 28F: Wind speed(MPH) Freeze time(sec) 10% moist, 50% moist 15 460 2300 60 57 290 120 45 223 There are variables though, for example: the warmer the plane, the longer it wil take to cool the 3-rings. I don't think it is a big problem, even in colder climates, just something to be aware of. Hook

I thought about that. I don't think free-fall would be enough to freeze the loop enough. It just isn't exposed to the cold long enough to freeze. It might slow the release a bit, but probably not enough to matter. Also, the more water in the loop/webbing, the longer it takes to freeze. The less water, the quicker it freezes, but the loop/webbing doesn't get as 'stiff'. i think if it was a significant worry, it would have shown up in sport accident reports. The only refernce i found (and it was led me to the experiments in the first place) was 2 smoke jumpers in Alaska. Hook

I know, I know. I'm working on that. Hook

That is normal. You are ont the right track. Knowledge dispels fear. Go to safety day. Review normal and emergency procedures with an Instructor. Inspect your gear, then have your rigger inspect it. Go easy on the dive plans. Think everything through before getting on the airplane. Go look in the airplane, do a practice ingress and climb out and exit. Seat belts, spotting, climb out, gear checks, etc. Plan your canopy flight at least as well as the free fall. the more preperation you do, the more confidence you will have to counter the butterflys. Don't jump wet 3-rings if it is freezing out and have fun. Hook

The locking loop has to freeze enough that it won't bend and release the small ring. For all my tests, I left the riser in the freezer long enough for it to completely freeze. I don't think exposing a soaked 3-ring to freezing conditions for only a few minutes will have much, if any effect on the operation of the 3-ring. It is a fairly specialized set of circumstances that have to occur before it is an issue. Hook

OK, after getting side tracked on some rigging research, and trying to explain to Skycat why I have a riser in the freezer, here is what I found out: If a 3-ring assembly gets wet (soaked), then freezes, the 3-ring won't release in a cutaway situation. 3-Rings have a huge mechanical advantage resulting in very little force being applied to the locking loop (type IIA, 400 lbs. breaking strength). That also means that it requires very little force to hold the locking loop in place, preventing the 3-Ring from operating (releasing). If the locking loop is soaked, then frozen, it will hold the small ring of the 3-ring in place. The 3-rings strength becomes it's weakness. "OK" you say, but ask, "Who cares, how can this possibly apply to me, and why are you putting skydiving gear in your freezer?". The freezer part of the question was actually Skycat's. First off, the 3-Ring works very well. Pond swoopers are the most likely to be affected. Not many people will swoop a pond, in sub-freezing conditions, come up short, get soaked, pack up their gear, let it freeze, and then give it another go. But you never know. Again, figure the odds, but don't jump wet frozen gear. OK, I'm back off to my Laboratory….….I mean loft. Anyone got a cheap Jacob's ladder for sale? Hook

I agree with The Monkey1, that for the vast majority of canopies out there and wing loadings, carving is more efficient. Hook

For me, (exit wt is 187 lbs.) it seems like anything above 80 sq ft seemd to be better to carve. There are variables. Wing loading and type of canopy make a big difference. I have played with carving turns on my VX, but I don't get anywhere near the speed as I do with an aggressive front riser turn to the doubles. The higher the wing loading, the advantages it is to 'tuck up' and reduce drag. Same concept for collapsable PC's, the faster the canopy, the more drag a non-collaspable PC will have. Where is the magical line? How much speed loss is the person willingly to accept for not having to reset their PC every jump? Hook

Don't worry until the black helicopters start hovering outside your window Hook

Extremely tight, if it fits. The largest x-braced I put in my old XRS was an FX-79, and it was tight. The 27 and VX pack up bigger. Hook

You will probably need a new reserve bridle and free-bag to put a square in it and will have to contact the manufacturer to get that stuff anyway. It might require more work to put a square in it also. So you might as well contact them for the manual. Hook

That depends on the canopy & wingloading. Hook

I have been thinking about this issue and have a few questions. Will ALL the Instructors be tested and be subjected to random testing? What would happen in the event of a 'positive' test? Is there a plan to keep results confidential? Will an Instructor have to pass a test prior to taking students at the DZ? Did something change that a testing program is being initiated? Or does the DZO just feel it is time to implement testing? What does not taking the a drug test limit an Instructor to? No contact w/ students, ground schools only, coaching only? How often will the Instructors be tested? Hook

Actually I haven't been in TX since July of last year, moved to CO Hook

For what's it's worth, here is my .02: First, I am not against random, or 100%, drug screening for Instructors. I think a business has the right to require passing a drug screening as a prerequisite for hire and either randomly, periodically, or on an as-needed basis thereafter. The business also has the responsibility of paying for the tests, paying for a second test or more accurate second test in the event of a positive result, if the employee or in this case, independent contractor requests it. On the flip side of the coin, I think a person has the right to not take the test and either not accept the job or quit, as applicable. No stigmatism should follow that person, for they are standing up for what they believe in, i.e., "they won't take the test because they know they won't pass", and I respect that. If they feel it is an invasion of privacy, OK by me. That belief will remove some jobs/careers not a possible choice because they require drug screening. Second, jobs that generally require drug testing require it because the person being tested holds a position of responsibility, in this case, student's lives. These jobs generally have higher pay to attract persons that can qualify for the responsibility and remain drug-free. Third, I have worked at three jobs that required a drug test. I wanted the job, so I took the tests. One was the U.S. Army, where I worked on Attack Helicopters (important that I be sharp and not miss anything), another was working for a grocery store (kinda hard to make a mistake that will injure or take someone's life there), and as a Safety Diver for NASA at the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (had to be very sharp, let one astronaut die on your watch………..). I passed all of them. My new career, as a State Police Officer, I am sure will require drug testing. Imagine what would happen to the state if I was involved in a fatal accident or shooting and they found illegal substances in my body. Fourth, I "self-regulate". I have never done any illegal drugs of any kind, I don't even like Aspirin, and I don't drink much. In 2 years my girlfriend has seen me drunk once. I can't remember the last beer I had. I don't think I have had one this year. I haven't had a drink of hard liquor in years. If I were to do some rigging work, I wouldn't even have a sip of beer, same thing for jumping, whether I am fun jumping or Instructing doesn't matter. I enforce a self-imposed zero-tolerance policy for myself. Fifth, drugs of any kind can impair. The definition of a drug is 'a chemical substance used to alter the state of the body or the mind'. I feel that skydiving Instructors should be at 100% when teaching. Drug testing is a deterrent to drug use. Want to use drugs? Don't Instruct. A drug test doesn't test for alcohol, lack of sleep, etc. I believe a drug test should be used in conjunction with proper supervision. If an Instructor is exhibiting signs of being impaired, the Chief Instructor, DZO, or S & TA, should take them aside, privately, and discuss what they have observed and get the Instructor's explanation. Based on the observations and the explanation, the next step would be decided. If I was ever the Instructor in this situation, I would request a drug test, to remove any doubt about the questions of illegal drugs. A police officer friend of mine requests that any complaints against him be fully investigated. He does not want, "The officer in question has 13 complaints against him, pending investigation.", on his record. He would much rather prefer "The officer had 13 complaints against him. Investigations have cleared him of any misconduct for all of them." Hook

The Cypres and Astra batteries and electronics are stored inside the reserve container, next to the reserve. There has been at least one instance of overdue batteries leaking onto a reserve. Hook

No, she isn't. She is an AFF Instructor and AFF Evalutator, and Regional Director. If she chooses not to subject herself to drug testing, what do you care? That is her right. Hook

No, I just connected the shackle and pulled the riser off the large ring. The times it binded a bit, harder pulling caused it to release. Not very scientific, and definately not recommended to connect anything to the 3-rings. Hook

I just did exactly that, with mini-rings, brass and stainless shackles. The brass shackle is larger than the SS shackle. I was able to pull the SS shackle through when connected to the large, middle AND small rings. I was able to pull the brass shackle through when connected to the large and medium rings, but NOT the small ring. I could see the shackle slowing down the release or even preventing a release in a low-drag malfunction situation. I would definately not recommend hooking up the RSL shackle to any of the 3-rings. It is a testament to the design of the 3-ring that it still worked, in my tests, even witht he RSL shackle connected to the large or middle rings. Hook

PD also says Sabres don't open hard. Hook