pchapman

"I'm not writing this because I think megamalfunction is a total doofus and because I'm celebrating 4/20, Hitler's birthday. " As you can see, ambiguities and poor use of English can obscure the meaning. It isn't clear from that wording whether I think those two things about the OP and Hitler (for that's the simplest interpretation), or whether I'm presenting them as hypotheticals that do not apply in my case. In this case, they don't. I guess that Dause, not known for his touchy feely side apparently, just shot his mouth off to reporters in a dumb way that can be be badly misinterpreted.

Aw, come on, if you're going to criticize him, at least do it on the basis of the actual content of his argument. Let's not quibble too much about minor issues of language. "The balloon turned back" can easily be a simplistic abbreviation for "a map trace of the balloon's track over the ground showed it eventually turned back to the opposite direction".

Good points you made. Front to back does swing the tab out to make it more accessible rather than having it sometimes pressing inwards against the body. Thus both RSL orientations have their advantages. To repeat what we have basically said, we still don't know whether RSL orientation had any effect on this incident, nor what the manufacturers really think about RSL orientation.

Hooking up RSL back to front: I think that was something I just did because it seemed better, without thinking of it as an explicit rule. (For it to swing facing the wrong way, it is easy if hooked up front to back. If back to front, it would have to lift up and over the top of the riser ring to do so, and more easily fall back into the normal position. Hard to describe but easy to see if one plays with an RSL.) I checked some manuals: For Vector, Wings, Javelin, Icon, Mirage, and Infinity, none mention which direction to hook up the RSL. So there's no written guidance on that. However in photos, Vector, Javelin, Mirage, and Infinity all show it back to front. (Icon didn't show it, and Wings is unclear in the photo) [Edit: added Mirage info too] Interesting. (Of course I still don't know how the RSL actually did disconnect, whether from facing the wrong way, or whether it just wasn't quite closed.) Have others out there been told to hook up an RSL in a particular way?

Just a total wild guess on the RSL getting opened: Pics show RSL sitting with the pull tab facing outboard. As the risers are cutaway, the larger ring on the riser flips down, and smacks the pull tab ring, disconnecting the RSL. It is at least a newer looking RSL, not like an old all brass one that could be a little sticky and not closed entirely. One could have hooked up the RSL facing the other way. Yet I've never seen this ever mentioned as an issue to watch for. But RSLs can flop around, and including moving around facing 'the wrong way', even if hooked up facing the right direction. However: It seems that hooking the RSL in from back to front in the riser ring, keeps it from rotating around easily and makes it harder for the tab to end up facing outboard. I think that method of hooking up the RSL may be superior? In general RSLs aren't well restrained and finding the pull tab could be tricky if one expects it to be in the same place all the time.

Whuffos often ask "Do you still get scared?" and that gets at a point I make to them. It's a different kind of fear or apprehension, as it's more about performing well rather than fear of death. Once one gets past the challenge of staying alive, one tends to take on new challenges in skydiving. As they say, 'Oh lord, don't let me be the one, to fuck this up!'.

Ok, so RiggerLee makes the point that the energy absorbed in stretchier lines is going to be miniscule compared to the total amount of energy dissipated during the opening process. Or one might say that if the canopy inflation takes a few hundred feet and a couple seconds, having an extra inch of line stretch or springiness isn't going to make a difference. So I'll agree that for that aspect of the opening process, line type won't make a huge difference. Where I suggest line stretch can make a difference is smoothing out all the little shocks and changes in acceleration that can happen given that a canopy doesn't open in some ideal smooth fashion. The G load on the jumper doesn't smoothly curve up to say 4g and smoothly reduce again. The big question is, to what extent does line stretch actually make a difference for that sort of thing? That's what's hard to quantify. So the jumper may need to get to a few g of deceleration for a few seconds, ramping up somewhat gradually to avoid a sudden jolt. But during that deceleration time, as the canopy is buffeting and fighting to open up -- as one sees in slow motion videos -- to what degree do stretchier lines reduce the shock load on the jumper? That's where it may be nice to have a little give in the lines; better to have Dacron than lines made of steel cables. That doesn't change whether the canopy snaps open or snivels, but for a given style of opening, the type of line can moderate sudden shocks during the process. The analogy can be debated, but I'd say it's a bit like braking a bicycle on a cobblestone street. You're still going to need 50 ft or whatever to come to a stop, depending on the design of your brakes. But how you feel during the process will depend on whether it's a traditional bike with no suspension and skinny tires, or a mountain bike with suspension and fatter tires, to absorb the shocks along the way. Summarizing the situation, we still have the various factors involved in how hard an opening feels. This isn't necessarily exhaustive: 1. Canopy design. (Those smaller aspect ratio ZP canopies like Spectres and Triathlons do seem to be over-represented among rogue openings? Although as has sort of been noted, a rogue opening on a 90 ft sq canopy could easier on you and not get discussed on dz.com, compared to the same bad opening on a 180 sq ft canopy with twice the drag area.) 1a. Going out of trim (Spectra canopies near end of line life, the cupping effect of lines shortening.) 2. Slider size and drag (Plenty of cases of slider size being increased by the factory compared to a canopy's original slider size) 3. Line friction on the slider (Clearly Spectra is slippery and can allow the slider to shoot down the lines sooner and more quickly.) 4. Line stretch effect on overall opening energy absorption (A miniscule amount, RiggerLee argued.) 5. Line stretch effect on shock loads superimposed on the overall opening G loads (The aspect I wanted to mention.) So I'm kind of thinking -- and I don't have anything like the experience MEL has -- that if a canopy is well behaved in general, having a more or less stretchy line isn't going to make a huge difference. But if it is prone to snappy behaviour during the opening, a stretchier line may be useful. We're still debating that tradeoff -- like slick but stretchier Spectra vs. HMA/Vectran/etc. on a Sabre 1.

Cool, never heard that as an option from any factory. Over the years I had hand tacked or sewn a few 'pillows' into main containers to reduce their volume. An acceptable technique, at least in old-school thinking. (Although known as a pillow, one would use stiff but compressible foam. The foam went either against the backpad or up against the reserve container, depending on shape considerations.)

For most people, the story tends to be that when it came time to cutaway... they cutaway. In most cases, they're spinning around or otherwise looking at something clearly unlandable, and the decision is really easy at that point. Sure the adrenaline may be going and heart rate up, but mentally there's little choice to be made. Afterwards they're really glad to have gotten it out of the way, and performed well enough when the time came to deal with an emergency. A big confidence boost, given that mals are such a big part of training and whuffo imaginings about skydiving. There may be some minor regrets about performance after the chop, but usually it's a good overall feeling to have performed well enough. ("Whoohoo! That was scary but cool..... Oops, it wouldn't have twisted up had I set the toggle properly... And I should have remembered to arch before chopping.") Occasionally one gets weird reactions. I recall two newbies, girlfriend and boyfriend. She had a mal and performed OK, and went back to jumping. He got freaked out about it and decided to quit the sport. End of relationship. As for my first? I had it a bit easy, as my first chop was an intentional while testing student gear, followed the next year by a CRW chop from a fairly stable position. (Still had a round reserve in that rig, so going backwards on landing in the rising wind added to the excitement.) The emotions were pretty typical -- Some good excitement at the time, no problems making the decision, and feeling pretty good and pumped up after.

Good use of a sandwich bag clamp -- to keep the risers organized when off the rig!

Although the Canadian authorities chose not to speculate, the article notes: Also, to be precise, it isn't actually more Americans in terms of actual numbers, but the percentage change from 2015 to 2016 Unfortunately the article doesn't get at why things hadn't changed much at the US border. Perhaps the US systems were more strict and integrated already -- picking up people from the other country who have any sort of criminal record and denying them entry. It would also be interesting to see not just total numbers rejected but also what percentage that is of attempts to cross. Whatever the politics, it is good to see what's actually happening.

I think because there's a lot of debate about whether it is better or worse. It depends on the circumstances. Manufacturers have a variety of styles of pilot chutes out there, to some degree because there is no one dominant best style, and whatever each company has is "good enough", without changing their whole rig design. Short PC and weaker spring? Like Racer and Javelin. True, but with an exposed or semi exposed PC, with many fewer flaps to push through, they apparently work just fine. Super long skinny PC spring like Rigging Innovations? Fits with their rig design nicely, but whether better or worse, other companies don't happen to do it like that. The standard PC is about half fabric, half mesh. Companies like Wings and VSE try PC's that are closer to the Vector design, more like 3/4 fabric, 1/4 mesh. They're also trying for that idea of "more fabric to catch air in case it is being hit by airflow from the side", but maintaining traditional mesh. But then you get a case like that Wings reserve pilot chute in tow video from Quebec. Although a very rare case, and that case involved dragging the freebag around the jumper's shoulder, people then wonder if the reduced mesh design makes the reserve PC too low drag. Hard to know how often the design helped vs. hindered things compared to a traditional design. Then there's a European company (Next? I don't recall offhand) which has a reserve PC where the bottom half has both strips of fabric and strips of mesh -- Also thus trying to get a compromise of SOME fabric on the bottom to catch air if sideways to the airflow, but still have enough mesh area for when the airflow is straight. Then we move on to the Vector design. This had been debated too. How often will that design be better vs worse? No pilot chute is immune to all burbles. (I posted a video once of a Vector PC, used on a main, bounce around in the burble a couple times before taking off. But would another PC have taken any more time?) And some studies have shown the Vector PC to be one of the lowest drag reserve pilot chutes, especially at low airspeeds. (Not just from tests by competitor John Sherman of Jump Shack, but but also in a military study after a military accident.) Yet at the same time, what Bill Booth says about the PC catching air better when at the edge of a burble makes sense. And Vectors of all types have been some of the most built rigs ever. So the debates continues. No common rig out there can easily be shown to be "bad", so everyone keeps going with their own designs. As for gripes about manufacturers' web sites, I hear you on that. It can be very hard to find out design details unless you actually meet someone who bought one of their rigs recently.

Well the question is, to what degree would the industry sustain it? Longer passes, more go arounds. Maybe you could start a thread about the DZ's who do the 'reverse order -- but with larger gaps'. I mean, you're right in a sense. If the Otters and Caravans of this world dropped 5 jumpers max per pass, 2 minutes between passes, we'd have all the separation we had back when we only jumped C-182s. And everyone could swoop every jump without restriction. Not sure about the fuel burn though.... [EDIT : Ok, this chunk of the thead did get moved to S&T!]

While this topic could derail the thread: Had a case about 3 years back at my local DZ. A friend snagged his cutaway handle during a C-182 exit. One riser departed on deployment. When he found and pulled the handle the rest of the way, for whatever reason the departing riser & RSL somehow snagged and hung on to the Bonehead Optik helmet, with I think stills camera on top and video side mounted. I don't recall his helmet being any snaggier than any other traditional stills & video setup, so it was unexpected but it happened. He was fast to pull the helmet cutaway. (Which was the simple chin strap pin / spring / cotter pin system Bonehead sells. Edit: attached to a coated wire loop handle.)

Airtec does claim "Superior cutter design, has always cut the loop cleanly, even with no tension on the loop". I never actually tested that configuration with one loop as I figured they were being truthful about that! (I know there was more concern about that for the Argus, in particular for the earlier less hardened cutter designs.)

Hang on. Jerry mentioned 2 turns, not the normal 1 turn either on a Skyhook or reserve seal. So if it is about 5 lb thread (at least), then when it is in a loop one will expect 10 lbs (at least) too. [Edited a couple hours later: forces depend on the geometry too for the Skyhook, where the angle of the thread will change depending on the slack in it.] So the numbers don't sound totally out of place. For a reserve seal, it is normally slack so the reserve pin is already moving when the seal thread "is hit". Bill Booth I'm sure you mentioned such stuff before -- you get some momentum going with your fist on the handle so it becomes easier than the static pull numbers would suggest. Also, nobody tests reserves with seal thread do they? Just dashing this off quickly; I'll let others debate pull test standards.

I posted some pics of a Cypres cutter in 2011, when I opened one up to test fire it: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4099034; (The video I made of firing a "sawed-off Cypres" cutter at plywood isn't up on the web any more. But I still have a bunch of Cypres 1 cutters sitting around...)

Billy brought up a 2nd ghost plane case in the US. I can add a third ghost plane, also in Ontario, with a skydiving connection: In 2013, a commercial C-208 Caravan was flown by a pilot out from Sault Ste Marie in Ontario on what was supposed to be a short local flight according to the flight plan. It presumably tracked northwest hundreds of miles over or around Lake Superior to a point north of Sioux Lookout (so they say), at which time the ELT was turned on. This was tracked hundreds of miles northish far out over Hudson bay, where the signal stopped and some debris was found. Nobody knows what happened to the young commercial pilot. He supposedly arrived at the airport in a cab and his car wasn't found, but that's totally unverified info. The pilot, Brandon J., was a company pilot, and a skydiver with, who knows, on the order of 100 jumps. I had coached him a couple times when he was a novice a couple years before, and had repacked his reserve too. It was all very mysterious and little more has become public that I know. I think his parents didn't want much publicity. The parachuting angle came up in speculation, but there was never anything public about any back story that could have involved wanting to disappear but live -- nor to go off and end it all.

That's for their airshow demonstrations by selected freefall jumpers, not for going into combat with static line drops...

Nice. I had seen that in a 1977 French book called "Le Parachute" by Jacque Borge and Nicolas Viasnoff. The book has plenty of good early jump photos, including quite a few I hadn't seen in English language books. It certainly captures more of the European goings on, while still including the various North American pioneers. Off in Europe you might have a better chance of getting a copy. Edit: I see from the article that this was a direct bag jump, so to speak, with the canopy fastened initially under the aircraft. So tandem freefalls were still a later thing. The jumpers did go on to do some more two person jumps at air displays before WWII, so it wasn't a one time thing.

Not much info but Calvin19 had posted about it in 2015: www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4741516; As one Canadian jumper wrote in the thread: (The jumper himself claimed 30 jumps. Whatever.)

I dunno if other riggers disagree, but I think the Wings is just about my least favourite rig to pack a reserve into, especially smaller ones. It's sort of a "square peg into a round hole" issue. While there are plenty of Wings rigs around because of the price, and the build quality seems like any other rig, they aren't the easiest to get the reserve and pilot chute compressed into the container so that the pilot chute fabric doesn't get exposed.

Ok, so there's a question is about the permanent firing altitude offset on the Cypres 2, the "User-selected activation altitude" in the manual. The current one says: (Note that this is about the firing altitude offset A1 to A9, not the one jump at a time landing altitude offset - the "Dropzone offset" in the manual. Presumably that offset would bump up the no-fire zone close to the ground, as the expected ground level is moved up. But at one jump at a time, that's inconvenient.)

The Parachutist story is in this Howard White post: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2944217#2944217 A photo of the jumpers on the Ju-52 is in the first post of his thread. I assume that it is the record but didn't check the details of the thread.

Add on: Mike Truffer (Mr. Skydiving Magazine) 2013 From the thread on it: Stiletto 107 with HMA lines broken neck, paralysis, landing injuries, death a month or so later