KellyF

Bees wax is simply a band-aid type fix that will attract dirt and eventually make them slip more. What kind of webbing? Ty-8 (smooth feel, black stripe down the center), or Ty-7 (rougher feel, yellow stripes down the sides)? I assume this is the two piece legstrap hardware (the kind you can"flip" open)? I would get in contact with Sun Path, I was under the impression that they have a fix for this. Also, it may be a good idea to post this in the Gear and Rigging forum. Good luck!

Looks good to me! (of course!)

I have seen one pair of large ring Ty-17 risers in my life. I don't know if there is a definative answer other than cosmetics, but the construction specs on a set of large ring Ty-17 risers are going to be different than large ring Ty-8 risers due to the fact that the Ty-17 will stretch more than the Ty-8, and the larger the distance between the middle ring, top ring, and grommet, the more the system as a whole can stretch and go out of spec under load. The solution would be to compress the geometry of the system, but how much? And would it be so compressed that it would be easy for people to misroute it (i.e. placing the loop through the middle ring)?

There should be no appreciable structural differences. The harness won't get reconstructed, it will get replaced with new webbing and will have to pass through the same final inspection that it went through when it was new. When I worked at RWS, we had a rig come in where the EMT's tried to cut through the yoke of the rig. They ran into the housings and figured they'd have better luck cutting somewhere else I believe we made a new riser cover, backpad, and harness for that rig and put it back in service

Uh, that should say Stiletto 120. Ooops

That may work fine. Something to keep in mind is that different canopies will pack larger or smaller per square foot due to different construction techniques. For example, a Crossfire will pack a little bit bigger than a Stiletto of the same size partially due to the design of the nose, a Vengeance will pack considerably larger due to the airlocks. A Vengeance 97 packs just a little bit softer than a Stiletto 97, in my experience. So you can put a smaller canopy in a container than it was designed for if the construction method of the canopy is "non standard"

I have a container built for a 150 and a crossfire 119 in there right now and it fits really well. A little soft but snug enough to go full speed in any position. You have an I-33, she has an I-34

We have not changed that yet due to the fact that simply placing the handle between the webbing will require that the velcro be pulled in shear, thereby increasing the force required to unseat the handle. A solution is in the works and on "the list" of future improvements

Main bridles are not TSO'ed, and pretty much any time you have to use your reserve with a wingsuit, the burble created by the suit will be minimal. This isdue to the fact that you will have (unless you have a total) already initiated deployment of your main and "quit flying" the suit. In the event of a total, even if you are coming from a clean flying position, when you reach to pull your reserve handle, you may go a bit head down, which will help the reserve pilot chute get into clean air. As with any new discipline, there are probably several scenarios that have not been realized, or have not occured, so it is good to ask these types of questions, but I don't think the reserve bridle length will be an issue. VSE on Facebook

Hi Joe, The yoke on that model of Infinity is pretty wide. If you are relatively broad shouldered, it will probably be OK, but if you are more of an "average" size, it may not be the best fit. Do you drive a Subaru?

Bill, it seems to me that if something like that can happen so easily and go un-noticed by the rigger, any individuals at Vigil USA that looked over the unit and then only get caught by the manufacturer, that maybe there is something that needs to be looked into. Maybe making an external plug like the Cypres so that the unit doesn't need to be opened in the field (I don't remember the exact layout of the case). Because you know as well, or better, than I that if one rigger can do it, there's at least a dozen more that are waiting for their chance Any info on the apparent mis-fire at about 3000 feet in DeLand recently?

If the sun follows anyone around, it's Andy

Hey, there isn't a cloud in the sky today! VSE on Facebook

Yes, a parachute designed over 15 years ago that was the first true 0-P canopy in the US market. As such, it makes sense that they designed it to have similar packing requirements to other canopies of it's day. F-111 canopies were built to open relatively quickly when they were new for a few reasons. As an F-111 canopy snivels, the fabric is being worn at a pretty high rate. Also, as the canopy gets more jumps on it, the openings become considerably slower. So if an F-111 canopy was made to have 1000 foot openings when it was new, within 200 jumps the jumper would have to make modifications to make it open in a resonable amount of time. The slippery fabric certainly makes it harder for people to control their pack jobs. I think you hear more about Sabres than Monarchs and other similar canopies simply due to the number of Sabres on the market. That should tell you something about how successful the design was. If it really had as big of a problem as you want to make it seem, there's no way it would have been so successful. When I worked for PD, we had a customer send his Sabre 150 in for evaluation because it opened too SLOWLY.

You guys (and gals) all rock!!! I'm glad you're so happy with your Infinity's!

More information and pictures will deffinately be helpful. I can think of a couple of ways that a cutaway housing could possibly prevent a riser from releasing, but it would not be a brand specific "problem", or a likely situation in freefall, but who knows. Tacking the housing to the ring cover would be a bad idea because the housings are designed to "float". This allows the risers and harness to stretch under load without the grommet in the end of the housing placing extra load on the riser loop, making for a much more difficult cutaway. If you look behind the top, inside edge of the wearer's right ring cover, you'll see where both housings are tacked together and tacked to the backpad (on the newer Infinity's with a serial number over 6000). This is the same method that RWS used before they started using Oetiker clamps. I'm looking forward to seeing some pictures.

One of the things that I try to remind of when they complain about openings, is that you are basically taking a bunch of fabric and line and throwing it into turbulent ~120mph wind and expecting it to sort itself out exactly the same way every time. It's a miracle that they open as consistanly as they do!

It may never be replaced in the sport market simply because it is able to handle the loads that it is going to encounter in the sport (and with some modifications the military also). It has also been able to evolve and adapt over the years. A simpler system could be made, but then it has to be accepted by the market. Bill spent lots of time (and I'm sure money) marketing this new device to skydivers, probably far more than what was originally spent in the initial R&D

I think that is why they are elastic, but I could be wrong, as I don't remember the size of the flutes.

I thought a "speed bag" was defined as a bag that was designed so that every line stow was also a locking stow? As far as I know the Icon freebag has elastic flutes inside a line stow pocket, and still uses a bungee safety stow for the locking stows. At least that's what I remember from PIA. BTW, the bickering in these forums over some of the dumbest things (IMO) gets tiring REAL fast

I know Bill, my point wasn't that you haven't worked hard on the Skyhook or took the idea from somewhere else, so much as the marketing of it is what will determine what other manufacturers will do. If there is market demand, other manufacturers will toy with their own designs, and then you will market yours as the superior system. If there isn't much demand, there probably won't be many other variations on the system. Besides, I like to bust your balls sometimes

I wouldn't say it is a reaction to the Skyhook, since there were systems before the Skyhook. There may be a reaction to the marketing of the system, though. I had seen Eric Fradet's system in the past, (maybe '93?) but I never knew that it was available on a skydiving rig. The idea certainly isn't new new either, I thought it would be a good idea to deploy the reserve from the main when I was 12 or 13, but I didn't know HOW to do it I'm sure other people had thought of it before, also.

G force= Final Velocity- Initial Velocity/ Time. Multiply suspended weight by the G force to find out the AVERAGE load over the time period. This will not give any information on load peaks or spikes.

Ryan, you sound bitter

Keep in mind that when an RSL gets used, you will generally be suspended from the main risers (a bag lock would at the most still have you face to earth), so the likelyhood of the RSL pulling more than perpendicular to the path of the pin is pretty slim. Then add in the fact that most reserve pincover flaps have tuck tabs on the side of the flap that will help direct the RSL and you can see that the guide rings may actually be unnecessary. We still install one on our rigs, though