skydiverek

Yes. See this: http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=41

After how many jumps do you recommend to have them replaced?

Good info in the JumpShack articles. I know I can draw the conclusions myself from these, but can anyone tell me if there is currently some said exit weight limit in the industry, for jumping with Type 17 risers (it used to be 200 lbs)? If so, what is that exit weight limit currently?

Is that still valid for mini risers (Type 17) manufactured by Sunrise Rigging (Wings) in year 2012?

Possibly this tax applies only to packakes above some value (like $100 for example).

For Vigil: yes. For Cypres: no.

My post was about who should be the investigator. That's it.

You overinterpreted my post. It speaks what is says. Nothing "in between the lines".

Please re-read my post, this time with understanding . I realize English is not your first language, but you totally missed the point. Maybe this will help?: http://translate.google.com/#en|fi|

Isn't it strange that in case of 'strange' fatality, where it is crucial to determine whether the AAD fired at the correct OR too low altitude, the AAD is investigated by the manufacturer (only)? We have had approximately 10 fatalities in the last few years where AADs fired, but reserves failed to inflate. I believe in all cases the AAD was sent to the manufacturer to determine if it fired at the altitude it should have fired. The conclusion was that it did (in every case, from what I recall), and that it was a possible reserve PC hesitation, or speculated high freebag extraction force. I am not saying that someone is lying here, but who would want the AAD company to be the judge in their own case? I suspect this situation is probably caused by the proprietary software that the AADs are using, and that only the manufacturer has the ability to read the data. But why no 3rd party observers, for example? Imagine a situation - you are the manufacturer who has invested millions of dollars in your product (AAD). 'All your eggs are in one basket' so to say, you only have one product. The AAD comes back to you after a fatality, to determine whether it fired at a correct altitude, or not. You read it in the privacy of your own company and get a conclusion that it fired at 300 feet AGL, instead of approx 800 feet AGL. You conclude an obvious malfunction. You now have a choice to: a) admit the truth, and potentially loose the business, go bankrupt, and be unable to feed your family, b) release the information that the AAD did its job correctly, firing at approx 800 feet AGL. You know that no one will be able to verify it anyways, the jumper is already dead and nothing can change that, and you can correct the 'bad product' quietly, in the privacy of your own R&D lab. Again, I am not saying that it is happening, but the there is for sure room for such 'temptation', when everything is at stake ($company$ and business survival-wise). Why do we trust partial investigations so much? (I am taking a screenshot of this post now ).

The explenation is in post number 2, in this thread (in JPG attachment).

And what is the reason for this (to prevent unwanted slider movement during packing and line stretch?), and why only on Velos? (if this is the case)?

Are there snaps on new Velocities (so that you can snap/connect the slider to the canopy)? I was told there are four plastic snaps on the Velocity slider now.

Says it is from November, but there has been no mention of it before (on dropzone.com): http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/PDF/Support/Product%20Service%20Bulletins/Sigma-PSB-20111109-November-2011.pdf It affects ALL Sigma rigs (sport tandem systems) - maybe make this post sticky?

First watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsOL4AS5rcE Should he wasted 9,000 ft, which he might have needed in case of reserve malfunction? What would you do if this happened to you, you did have a hook knife, and your exit weight was 200 lbs: - on 100 foot canopy? - on 200 foot canopy?

They do not offer chest rings. See attached JPG.

Good idea to do this once a month: http://www.velocityrigs.com/manual/infinity10.pdf

Advantages and disadnatages of cordura BOC pouch: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=search_results&search_forum=all&search_string=cordura+pouch+-Re%3A&search_type=AND&search_fields=s&search_time=&search_user_username=&sb=score&mh=500 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=search_results&search_forum=all&search_string=cordura+spandex+-Re%3A&search_type=AND&search_fields=s&search_time=&search_user_username=&sb=score&mh=50 SPANDURA: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=search_results&search_forum=all&search_string=spandura&search_type=AND&search_fields=sb&search_time=&search_user_username=billbooth&sb=score&mh=50 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=838289;search_string=spandura%20pouch;#838289

Is Wings still building a freefly handle the way, which promotes the handle-bridle entanglement? See attached.

Over 100 was the biggest, in 1998 I believe.

Bill Booth on reverse risers: "Reversed risers are 3 ring risers where the riser rings face the jumpers body, instead of facing away as they do on normal risers. In a misguided attempt to make type 17 (mini) 3 ring risers stronger, the French eliminated the grommet that passes through the riser, thinking this was a weak point. They then put the "0" grommet for the closing loop to go through on a floppy 1" tab. Then, so that the 3-ring housings wouldn't have to come around to the front, flipped the riser over so that the riser rings faced the jumper's shoulders There are three problems with this approach. 1. Risers don't break at the grommet. They break where they go around the harness ring. 2. The closing loop on reversed risers does not make the 180 degree direction change it does on properly built risers, so the release force is doubled, and the "suck through" or "jamming" force is cut in half. 3. For a 3 rings to release, they must flip through each other. Since a bag lock might not stand you up enough to pull the risers away from your body, reversed risers might not release in that situation, because your body blocks the flip through motion. ------------------------------------------- I don't know about you, but I want my 3-rings to work EVERY time, in ANY malfunction situation. "Most of the time" just doesn't cut it. Reversed risers, soft housings, and all other "improvements" to the 3-ring lower reliability. Emergency systems are simply no place to cut corners. I cry every time I see a poorly made 3-ring, but there is nothing I can do about it, but tell you again, "There is one best way to make a 3-ring release system, and it doesn't cost a dime more to do it right. The plans are available from the Relative Workshop." How much is your life worth? ------------------------------------------- On reversed (Integrity) risers...The scariest stories I've heard about them happen in two canopy out situations. Often, the main risers are held back across the shoulders, preventing the unfortunate jumper from cutting the main away in a "personal downplane" situation. Reversed risers offer no advantages, have lower mechanical advantage, have no published construction or inspection specifications (so you can't tell if they are going to work in a high "G" situation), and can kill you in the above situation (and others). They should be replaced, and you should get very mad at anyone who sold them to you. The same is true for most "soft housing" 3-ring release systems."

They do have open corner mod - check their Facebook page. Main PC can be 27, 30, or 33 inches, ZP or F111. I have not read about the longer bridle, but that is the easiest 'mod' for the manufacturer, so I am sure they can make it.

What is a 'double bag'? How does it look and work?

Can you post this video?

So, now you are ready for this one : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp4TXIwWl3U