skydiverek

From Bill Booth's post in 2003: "...the tuck under flap on the Vector will not move upward in response to a door strike (or a foot) like the tuck down flaps on the other rigs. If your reserve pin protector flap can move upward, your pin can be pushed out, even if the flap stays "closed". This fact makes the Vector reserve flap much more secure. Also, the tuck under design on the Vector is just as snag proof as the tuck down design, maybe even more so, because it is much harder to accidentally dislodge. But there is another, even more important reason. When you tuck the top reserve flap down into a pouch on the reserve bottom flap, the top flap must come out of the pouch for the container to open. When you tuck under, as I do on the Vector III, nothing has to come out of anything for the reserve container to open. Airtec tests every new rig design before they OK it for a Cypres. They have had several rigs with tuck-down flaps total when bench tested with a Cypres cutter. These same rigs would open fine when the ripcord was pulled, but the Cypres doesn't release the closing loop on top of the last flap like a ripcord does (on most rigs). It releases (cuts) it many layers down. The drag of the top flap coming out of the pocket, coupled with the added drag of the cut loop unlacing through several grommets while both are being "pinched" by the pilot chute spring, was enough to total the rigs. Tuck down rigs work fine most of the time, but a Cypres firing, with a bad pack job, an old, weak pilot chute spring, sand or mud in the pocket, or a too long reserve closing loop, might add up to disaster. I tried tuck down flaps years ago. They just didn't work as well in all the worst cane scenarios my wicked little mind could come up with. I don't know about you, but I want my reserve container to open every time, not just most of the time. But then again, perhaps I worry too much." Looks like Bill even foresaw a potential Mirage problem that we have right now ... You can read this short thread in whole (lots of good info on reserve flap design and AAD cutter location) HERE: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=542700#542700 Blue Skies

I think that's the one made in Poland: http://www.air-pol.com.pl/english/parachutes/ad-2000.html Plus, Poland is not communits anymore - that has changed 15 years ago ! About new Sigma - RWS had a ripcord prototype that included ripcord cable made of 1000lb. Spectra, rather than metal. Sigma will also incorporate larger transparent reserve flap window and a large transparent main flap window. The latter will include a drawn diagram that you can use to check if the loop is routed correctly. Kind of like putting a template on top and making sure everything follows a template.

I heard that jumpres switched from spring loaded to throw-outs because of large number of PC hesitations on BAGGY suites (70's and early 80's). After that, baggy suites disappeared (and the need for throw-outs), but jumpers stayed with throw-outs since they alrady had them.

PIA is in a full swing. Come over here

Hi, It would be cool if we wore small self adhesive stickers on a T-Shirt or jacket with a "dropzone.com" user name and a real name below, so that we can connect faces with names/user names

Great

It would be cool if we wore small self adhesive stickers on a T-Shirt or jacket with a "dropzone.com" user name and a real name below, so that we can connect faces with names/user names

I can't wait to go to the PIA meetings and Symposium! The seminars are what I am waiting for

In this case the more slipery PC might be more beneficial: http://bigairsportz.com/art-pilotchute.php A more slippery PC is more likely to be pulled out by a flapping bridle and so less likely to result in a horseshoe mal. I'd prefer a premature to a horseshoe...

"Well over 90% of all reserve uses on a Vector Tandem follow a cutaway. On the Sigma it's closer to 99.9%. So you really want to be sure that your canopy release system is as reliable as possible, don't you. When you add a third (drogue release) cable to the cutaway handle, you, at best, increase the force necessary to cutaway. (Due to increased housing friction) And at worst, you lower the reliability of your cutaway system. (If that third cable jams for any reason, you can't cutaway at all.) Increased complexity almost always leads to more malfunctions, and these three cable systems prove that point quite well. That's why Relative Workshop won't put a three cable system on any of our tandem rigs." Source: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=428014#428014

Why not instally SRC (Slink Riser Covers) on main and reserve?

Hi Josh, Psycho packing is different than trash packing. With trash packing you don't flake and dress the canopy, just shake it, fold it and shove it into deployment bag. Precision Aerodynamics came up with Psycho packing (also called Precision packing). Here is lots of info with instructions, pictures and movies on how to pack this way: http://www.precision.aero/information.htm As you know Spectre is manufactured by PD, and their opinion of psychopacking is as follows: "The psycho pack is not really an entirely different packing method, it’s just a different bagging method. The first part of a “psycho pack,” the part that is done standing up, is identical to a regular PRO pack. The only difference is the technique used to fold the canopy and put it in the deployment bag. For this reason, “psycho packing,” which we could perhaps call “psycho bagging,” may or may not make a difference in the way your canopy opens. If the first part of the pack job is sloppy, then the opening may not be very good no matter how the canopy is put in the bag. Let’s suppose, however, that you do a good basic PRO pack but tend to lose control while bagging the canopy, and end with a mess by the time you make the first line stows. If “psycho bagging” helps keep your neat PRO pack under control while you put it in the bag, your openings may improve using this technique. We don't recommend the “psycho bagging” technique for a couple of reasons. For one thing, we feel there are easier ways to put the canopy in the bag that work just as well. We also do not think a canopy should be packed with a lot of material in front of the nose, which happens when you psycho pack. We’ve made test jumps on a number of our main canopies using a psycho pack, and the openings were acceptable. We also know of some customers using this method with our canopies who are happy with the results. So, you can use the “psycho bagging” technique with your PD main if you want, but it is not the method we recommend." You can check the first three FAQs here for info about PRO, flat and Psycho packing: http://performancedesigns.com/faq.htm If you need more info or Psychopacking, just click here

Hi there, Yeah, Spectre would be perfect. Also, opt for Dacron lines, which strech more than Microline and have more friction when the slider grommets slide on them. Here is Performance Designs' opinion on them (from their website): "Why would anyone want to use Dacron line on their canopy? Though most people prefer the lower bulk and drag of Microline or Vectran, Dacron is often the best choice for some applications. Dacron is a fairly elastic line, so it gives a little when there is a sharp "spike" to the opening force. This elasticity won't change the really good openings very much, but it can take the edge off those occasional abrupt openings where your packing was a little off or your airspeed was a little high at opening time. Dacron may be preferable in a student operation, where unusual body positions can compound opening issues. Some camera flyers with very heavy helmets also prefer Dacron lines. Older jumpers, who may not want to subject their bodies to hard openings, may want Dacron to help reduce the impact should something get a little out of control at opening time." Also, Bill Booth made some comments on that issue, too: "Spectra (or micro-line) is strong and tiny, so it reduces both pack volume and drag , which means you get a smaller rig and a faster canopy. Unfortunately, It has a couple of "design characteristics" (this is manufacturer talk for "problems") It is very slippery (less friction to slow the slider), and stretches less than stainless steel. This is why it hurt people and broke so many mini risers when it was first introduced. Now, I must say that the canopy manufacturers did a wonderful job handling these "characteristics" by designing new canopies that opened much slower than their predecessors. However, the fact still remains, that if you do have a rare fast opening on a microlined canopy, Spectra (or Vectran) will transmit that force to you (and your rig) much, much faster, resulting in an opening shock up to 300% higher than if you have Dacron lines. (It's sort of like doing a bungee jump with a stainless steel cable. At the bottom of your fall, your body applies the same force to the steel cable as it would to a rubber bungee cord, but because steel doesn't stretch, your legs tears off.)" Moreover, you can opt for lighter, brass slider groomets, instead of heavier, stainless steel slider groommets. Lighter mass equals less momentum (speed) down the lines. BTW, Precision Aerodynamics favors them, saying they contribute to softer openings. Also, on their website Performance Designs says that "larger Spectres open slower than the smaller models". So, to sum up, if I were you my choice would be large Spectre, Dacron lines, and brass slider grommets. Careful packing and deploying at no faster than 120mph (and not while tracking, especially steep tracking) will help, too. Some people also say that Psychopacking helps, but I am not sure about this. Good luck and welcome back

I see this option on almost every order form, but out of hundreds of rigs I have seen, all seemed to have the same wide leg pads. Would this be one of the examples?: http://www.jumpshack.com/Gallery/Redad.jpg Can anyone post a picture of "narrow leg pads"?

Also, touch them under the canopy, since they will be in a different place than in freefall or on the ground (since you will be hanging from the harness, they will be higher). 95% of reserve procedures are done while hanging in the harness.

Does any manufacturer offer quick ejector option???

slotperfect chutingstar NightJumper Mark Baur jlmiracle bbarnhouse councilman24 fields Rigger53 USSkydiver SkymonkeyONE Kim Griffin Sangiro riggerrob Andrew Whyte The Anvil (?) CSpenceFLY beezyshaw Skymama (Saturday) tspillers sid Freeflir29 Paige Raefordite TonyT hajnalka cssriggers crutch IMGR2 freeflynNicki deadwood skydiverek

It's snowing in North Dakota now, too! Oh wait, that's normal, even in May ...

"Freefalling" song!!! Am I really the first one to say this

I checked it and there are no re-runs this year... . (Their schedule does not go into 2005 yet, but still ).

Please do upload it

Damn, I missed it . The historychannel.com websites shows no reruns ... Could or anyone upload this half an hour show to skydivingmovies.com?

Damn, I missed it . The historychannel.com websites shows no reruns ... Could you (or anyone) upload this half an hour show to skydivingmovies.com?

Here is the quote

I think 2,500 pounds refers to NOT reinforced Type 17 risers. As Bill Booth states, the the reinforced Type 17 risers have a breaking strenght of around 3,500 pounds. "Reinforced type-17 webbing risers rarely break. They have a new breaking strength of around 3,500 lbs. This is not that much less than type-8 risers breaking strength of 4,000 lbs. The real difference is whether you have mini rings or large rings...and the difference here is in cutaway forces, not breaking strength. While properly designed mini-ring risers can easily release even a 250 lb. jumper in a 3 or 4 "G" spin, the problem is that it is harder to manufacture mini-ring risers correctly. What causes any riser to break is usually a combination of a heavy jumper, a hard opening canopy, and no stretch (Spectra, Vectran, or HTML) line. Broken risers on Dacron lined canopies are very rare indeed." Source: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1301836#1301836