billbooth

I like the way you think, son...and thanks for the vote of confidence. Bill Booth

The military routinely takes 650 to 950 lb. loads out of C-130's on Tandem Vectors. For you Mormon tandem masters out there, this means that you could take 5 or 6, 100 lb. female passengers (all the wives) at once, if you really wanted to. (With my luck, they'd all have PMS at the same time, so the ride down would be hell.)

It has always amazed me that most SCUBA divers do much more thorough gear checks than most skydivers, when equipment failure SCUBA diving is not nearly as serious as equipment failure skydiving.

Call Relative Workshop @ (386) 736-7589, and order the 3-ring spec book. It has detailed riser construction instructions and costs US$ 10.

I am going to have to defer an answer to this to the cameramen out there. I will say however, that the Skyhook will get your reserve pilot chute away from your head (and cameras) faster and cleaner than deploying after a breakaway without it. For instance, if you breakaway without an RSL, fall till you get stable, and then deploy your reserve, you stand a very good chance of a pilot chute hesitation. (After all, stability is the major cause of pilot chute hesitations.) While your pilot chute is "hesitating", it's actually bouncing and spinning, and throwing its bridle all over the place very near your helmet and camera. The Skyhook will totally prevent pilot chute hesitations, and therefore it might possibly become a device that photographers won't jump without.

Yeah. They're a great idea, especially if you like to skydive under water...like so many pond swoopers I know. Actually, it's about time somebody make a waterproof altimeter.

When you disconnect the RSL, you disconnect the Skyhook, so if you breakaway on the ground (or in the air) with the RSL disconnected, the Skyhook does nothing but sit there awaiting further instructions.

Kelly; You can "what if" anything to death. I think we should ban Cypres because it can cause a two canopy out situation, if you pull a little too low...ban BOC hand deploy pilot chutes because you might mis-route the bridle, and besides, you can't even see the handle...ban 3-rings because you might put the loop through the wrong ring... ban all canopies under 150 sq. ft. because people might be tempted to swoop them...ban RSL's because people might depend on them...and while we're at it, lets ban skydiving because dozens of people get killed each year doing it. This is a dangerous sport. I've spent the last 35 years trying to make it a little safer. I believe the Skyhook, just as it is, furthers that goal.

Bill, this sounds like an amazing invention - just curious, how many times have you tested the final design to determine that it works "every time?" Also, do you have an approximate price determined yet (say, to add it to a Vector III without a RSL already installed, not including shipping)? Thanks, Janet I couldn't get some older designs to work 2 times in a row. The current TSO requires just 4 RSL breakaways to certify a system...obviously not enough. The Skyhook is a brand new type of device, and therefore has no testing regimen yet established. In its current configuration it has dozens of filmed deployments, and it has worked correctly every time, from every kind of malfunction I have thrown at it. The value of filmed deployments (with 3 cameras, 2 video, 1 still) is that you can see not only that something worked, but exactly how well it worked. For example, look at the pictures on my website. Truthfully, I have no idea how many times you need to test anything new before you are absolutely sure that it is "perfect". (Actually, I've never made anything perfect before, and I don't think for a minute that the Skyhook is an exception. All I can say is that I think it works pretty damn well, with a very small risk of "side effects".) It actually depends a lot what the device is you're testing. A canopy cannot be tested on the ground. It must be jumped. However, a canopy release, or friction adapter can be thoroughly tested on the ground before it is jumped the first time. The Skyhook falls somewhere between a new canopy and a new canopy release. After years of failures, I knew I had what I wanted the first time I tinkered the current Skyhook design together...the same as I did when I put the first 3 ring release or Sigma drogue release together. As to price...It will soon be included "FREE" in all new Sigma tandem and student sytems. The will be a charge for it on new solo systems, but, since the Skyhook drastically lessens the chance that you will lose your reserve freebag, I'm having trouble figuring out what to charge for it. If I charge $100 for it, but then don't get to sell you a new freebag and pilot chute for $200, I just shot myself in the foot, didn't I? Retrofit kits will be available for Vector III's without an RSL, but quite honestly I won't know what to charge until I've done some retrofits. Because I knew years ago that I would come out with some sort of Skyhook device, someday, all recent Vector III's are set up for RSL's. So, because you had the foresight to purchase a Vector III, you're already half way there. Vector owners always get "dibs" on safety improvements first, don't they? (Cheap Plug)

Kelly; I went through several designs back then...some with hooks, some with pins and loops and Velcro. All of the loop and pin designs came up short. They were a rigging nightmare, as well as not being very reliable. Some of the hook designs would lift the bag off, only to release it prematurely. Others would not release the reserve pilot chute, in certain body positions, in a main total situation. None of them worked well enough to market. The Collins' lanyard was only one of the missing ingredients I needed. The hook system worked out the best, and although it looks very simple now, it must be designed exactly right. It turns out that the relationship between and end of the hook slot, and the bridle attachment hole, has to be "just so"...as does where the hook is placed on the reserve bridle, and how long the reserve bridle is. It took a lot of testing before I found exactly the right combination. I wanted a device that worked every time, not just some of the time. As I said above, I like where I've placed the Skyhook in the reserve container. I think it is essential to the success of the whole project.

Why haven't I seen this option (Spandura) on any order form for a sport rig, if it is so great??? Just courious...

I tried making hand deploy pouches out of Cordura 20 years ago, but quit because I had so many complaints of hard pulls. They work fine for some people, and are dangerous for others. The reason is that there about a dozen sizes of pilot chutes out there, and even more ways to pack them, and I have no idea which pilot chute the user might try to cram into the pouch or how they might pack it. Spandex pouches almost never cause hard pulls, because they take any size pilot chute, packed any way you can think of (well, almost). It's a simple as that. The real solution would be to combine the toughness of Cordura with the stretchness of Spandex. Luckily, such a material already exists. It's called (no brainer) Spandura, and you'll find it on all my drogue pouches. (A word of caution...There are at least 10 different styles of Spandura. Be sure you choose the right one.)

Kelly; I thought I had answered all of your questions except, "Why don't I put the skyhook where it can be "pin checked" while the rig is packed?" Well for one thing, the Skyhook is on the reserve freebag bridle. As you well know, we pack the reserve bridle UNDER the pilot chute, so that the pilot chute leads the bridle during deployment. And the tension of the reserve pilot chute on the Skyhook assembly is what holds the whole contraption together between pack jobs in the first place. There is no more protected (or proper) spot I could think of to put the Skyhook, than under the reserve pilot chute. Kelly, honestly... I have always put a lot of thought into every innovation I have put on my rigs, and the Skyhook is no exception. However, please keep asking questions. I depend upon designers like you to point out flaws. If there is a better way to do this, I want to find out now...before I have thousands of these things floating around. That's why I waited to introduce the Skyhook, until I had first showed it to all the "great minds" of the parachuting world at the PIA Symposium. If there was anything wrong with it, I'm sure one of my compeditors would have gleefully point it out.

Bill, QUOTE: Nice system, simple and effective. One silly question though. If you had a total and reserve deployment on your back, and the reserve PC got up under your left arm, it looks, especially in the bottom picture, like the reserve PC connection on the cam could rotate around and be pulling directly against the skyhook lanyard, impeding the action of the cam and causing a hesitation/reserve PC in tow. Am I seeing the picture wrong? It seems like this could be solve by extending the cam further on the 'closed' (right) end and placing the attachment point for the PC there. This might lead to the skyhook detaching prematurely, but that would be better than it not detaching when it should. REPLY: Ted; You would make a good parachute systems designer. Not many people pick on on that contingency. This is one of the many problems I had to solve to make the device safe. Actually, the Skyhook cam will release the pilot chute bridle in a main total situation, no matter which way the pilot chute goes. I insure this by the relationship between the end of the hook slot and the bridle attachment hole. Pulling on your back is going to hurt enough. I wouln't want to add to your problems.

You are absolutely right. People almost never buy safety (with the Cypres being the obvious exception) The problem is, I fear I will loose more money not replacing lost free bags than I will make selling Skyhooks. Luckily, (for me at least) the free bag does not always stay hooked to the malfunction all the way to the ground.

Quote: I think that if a system is so critcal to the speed and safety of a reseve deployment, it should be able to be visually checked before jumping, just like your reserve pin and AAD. Reply: There are a lot of things inside your reserve container you can't check from the outside. 1. Are you connector links tight? 2. Are the line bights through the safety stows correctly? 3. Is the closing loop through the Cypress cutter. 4. Have the Cypress batteries leaked acid all over your reserve canopy? 5. Did the rigger remove any packing aids he might have used? The Skyhook is sort of like an AAD. It's a back-up in case you get into bad situation. It does not, however, interfere with the normal functioning of your reserve system.

Quote: I was just thinking about that possibility, I presumme the RSL part after the "pin-puller" has quite alot of slack on it? 1) To prevent de skyhook ever to hang on the RSL part (which on his turn hangs on a reserve flap) 2) To prevent de pin-puller not being able to pull the pin because the skyhook is already being pulled on by the main. The latter would probably still result in a reserve deployment, but it would also destroy the reserve container... Reply: Of course the system is designed so that the container is opened before the Skyhook is loaded

Bill can a Vector 2 modified to accept the skyhook? Bruno Answer - Yes.

Bill: During your tests of the Skyhook, did you manage to cause a situation where the lanyard would get stuck during a normal(non-RSL) reserve-deployment? Can you think of a way that the system could be mis-rigged during a reserve repack, so that the Skyhook would hinder normal reserve deployment? While it is easy to connect the main riser and the reserve bridle, it is much harder to make sure that connection always releases in the event of a total malfunction. The connection must also release in the event of a breakaway from a horse shoe malfunction, where the main risers would initiate the reserve deployment but be unable to complete it. The Skyhook does both of these tasks amazingly well. It is the most "simple" device imaginable, with "no moving parts", so the chance of it not behaving the same way every time is almost non-existant. It is nearly impossible to mis-rig because the Skyhook lanyard is very short, and just barely long enough to get to the Skyhook. One of the main reasons I didn't go with my earlier designs was that they were more complicated and easier to mis-rig.

I honestly don't know when I'll be able to license it. First other manufacturers will pooh-pooh it. Then they'll try to get around the patent with their own versions. Only then they will ask to license it. I know. I went through all this years ago with the hand deploy pilot chute and 3-ring release. I can't sell the Skyhook to the user of another rig, because it's part of the reserve system, and the rig manufacturer would have to test, approve, and install it on their own gear.

Kelly; I first starting playing around with this idea in about 1984. (I thought you saw the videos of early tests at symposium.) The problem I came across then, and which was still not solved before the Skyhook, is the problem of automatic release in the case of a main total malfunction. The Sorcerer system is designed for an external hand deployed reserve pilot chute system, and can only be released by pulling the pilot chute out of the pouch. It's a great system for base jumping, but if you used it on a normal internal spring-loaded pilot chute reserve (like we all jump), you would have a reserve horse shoe malfunction if your Cypres went off, or your reserve closing loop broke. I would not sell this system without the Collin's lanyard because even one broken RSL riser without it (and there have been two this year I have heard about) would probably be fatal. And even one preventable fatality is too many. Besides, risers don't have to break...misrigged risers prematurely release all the time. The main advantage of this system (aside from its speed) is that it gives the average jumper a good reason to use an RSL. And that alone will save lives...24 in the last 10 years in the US alone. As for pin checking...The system is very securely locked when you close your reserve container. This is but one of the problems I had to solve to make it practical. But even if it did come unhooked during the pack cycle, your reserve would still function just like it would if the Skyhook weren't there. As to whether cutting reserve deployment time in half for skydivers is revolutionary...well, I'll let others decide...but personally, I think it's kinda neat.

How do you do that?

Yes. The mud flap protects the 3-ring stitching, and it's a great hook knife pocket.

That part of the container is called the "mud flap".

Sorry. It's too soon to answer when the Skyhook will be available on other rigs. Although I'm sure I will license it to other manufacturers sooner or later.