riggermick

Used to live in Lancaster, CA, USA. What happened to him, where did he go? Just curious I used to hang out with him in the early eighties. Just wondering what he's up to these days. Hope he is doing well. Mick.

For the most part, I think that is a late barroom story. I never actually heard of this occuring. They were used on the reserve ripcord housing and only if you did not have an RSL, ala the one on the original X-BO. It was possible to pull the ripcord all of the way out but it did take some 'extra' effort when the pin hit the plug. They were needed more 'back in the day' because of all the downwind pea gravel landings. This is where the gravel would come from. This I do know about first-hand. However, unless you are using a military surplus type of ripcord housing (or they are making the gravel ban plug smaller) they will not fit the modern ripcord housing which are of a much smaller diameter than a mil surplus housing. Hope this helps, Jerry The modern day housing has been supplied from Metal Flex Hosing of Philladelphia PA. For many years. It is TCA S/S (telephone cable armor, stainless steel) and is produced in two sizes for the skydiving industry .172" ID (inside diameter) (for cut away housings, the kind found on most pay phones, are there any still out there?) and the .260" ID Diameter most commonly found on ripcord housings. That being said the old Mill Spec housing plugs will definitely not fit. Unless someone is making a new "mouse trap" they are for all intents and purposes worthless for the gear used for the last twenty five years. As an aside, when was the last time you heard of someone going in with a rock wedged between his/her cable and housing? I'll bet not in the last decade or so!! Mick.

That's how I did it, and guess what? That's how everyone else does it and have always done it. There is really no other way to do it, as there are so many variables with components and materials that are inconsistant in their nature. If you build many containers out of sheet metal you will always get a consistant result, if you build many containers (and canopies) out of different types fabrics your results will vary a small amount from product to product. That's the nature of the beast, always has been, always will be. Mick. BIG EDIT!!!! OOOOHH. Did not read the post well enough (got it backwards)!!!!! Manufacturers create a container size based on the most popular models and sizes, they do all of their refinements based on that data. Most other canopies of that ilk will generally fit into the space provided, that's how it's done. Sorry for any confusion. Mick.

Not a new idea. Three reasons why it's not a good idea. 1) Pushing the bag out under spring pressure could cause an out of seqence opening damaging or destroying the reserve. 2) A spring is a major snag point weather it's attached to the pack tray or not. 3) Falling debris made of steel. There are a few more reasons but they mainly deal with asthetics, comfort and packing. Mick. Almost forgot, friction staging used on most reserve containers would either have to be eliminated or degraded to the point of being usless.

I understand what he's trying to say. The idea of the wing being a rigid model is valid since it is intended to fly according to its aerodynamic design. Just lopping off 50cm instead of changing line lengths that would maintain that intended airfoil will result in the airfoil being distorted. Let's say you had a canopy with only a front set and back set, both cascaded. The line length is designed according to the proper airfoil. If you just start lopping off a foot at a time the inner cascade becomes more slack and the outer gains tension and your canopy bends into an arc. As for application to the real world? Sounds like these guys with the tri's aren't having any problems, but I doubt Aerodyne just chops lines on their canopies without accounting for canopy aerodynamics. OK, I think you are missing the central theme here, it's not about messing with the cascade points and angles of attack it's about shortening the overall line lengths. The foremost change will be side to side!!!!!!!! That is the point where the wing will stop/ start providing lift and become less efficiant. Do the math with a piece of string and ruler, it's pretty basic! Mick.

I hear ya Bill, but I don't see a difference when it comes down to pilot chute hesitations. What you have created (I think it's incredible) and what I have created can suffer from the same improbable scenario you have always expuosed. Either way it's occurence is infinitesimal, so what's the beef? That's skydiving / life deal with it, you know how it goes, it's all a trade off. Mick. Ps: Reign your kids (Pablito et:al)in before they do your company/ image some harm, there already starting to piss off some people with clout and prestige in the sport. I know they are the future of the sport and have grand designs, but try to temper their enthusiasom somewhat in the political arena. They are too young to know the implicatons of their outbursts. Mick.

Since the SkyHook pulls the reserve bridle at some point below the reserve pilot chute, is the placement of the SkyHook hook such that it is impossible for the reserve pilot chute to do as you stated regarding two pilot chutes? Just a request for information. Thanks, I rest my case Jerry!!!!! Really good point. All other arguements about time intervels between hesitations and launches are redundent at this time. Mick. Jerry

Hi PC, I see what you are trying to say (and it makes sense on paper), but your arguement presupposes that these devices (canopies) are rigid in nature. Canopies by their very nature are flexable and they will always accomodate the forces of gravity/ mass distribution on any given load path. So while the arguement makes sense in the mathmatical world it doesn't hold true for the real world, but I like the fact that you are THINKING!! About such things. Well done for even theorising about it. It gives me hope for equipment in the future!! I'm glad you didn't take this as a personal attack but rather as a well reasoned discussion, well done!! Mick.

I think you just called me "old". If the cap fits......... Mick.

No your'e right it doesn't say RWS employee in your profile but you have represented yourself as an employee in this and many other dicussions on this forum. As for waving "Pablito's flag", that puts you in a bit of a bind. ANY TIME you open your mouth in person or on a forum on any subject relating to the industry you are in you are the public face of the company you represent, like it or not. I know this from personal experience as the co-owner of Fliteline and having to feild many postings on the rec dot (long before your time in the sport), anything you say WILL reflect on the company you represent either in a posative or negative light. look at any company spokesperson either famous or not THEY represent whom they are working for and as such reflect the values of the company. As you grow older you will see the value of tempering your statements especially in a public forum. Mick.

Now that I will have to agree with!! Look I'm not trying to bust your balls here but I think you need to do a little more research in to ram air canopy design before posting your personal view points as fact, there are impressional newer jumpers that read this stuff and hold it as gospel. Sorry for sounding so harsh, I'm not out to pick a fight just trying to set the facts straight. Mick.

Ya know as an employee of RWS, you are a piss poor ambassador for them. You should either take a public relations/ marketing course and continue to shill for them or change your screen name and profile. I'm sure english is a second language for you and it may be difficult for you to articulate your position at times, that's OK but your public condemnation of other people and their ideas/ beliefs does not exactly shine a positive light on RWS and it's employees. Think about that next time you give your opinion under the RWS flag. Mick.

Very good point - however, wouldn't the safety placard on the canopy, much like the DZ waiver, provide at least SOME protection to the manufacturer, in the sense of "informed consent"? Doesn't stop anyone from sueing you though. It costs a small fortune just to successfully defend yourself, even if the suit never goes to trial. Plus "informed consent" doesn't stop next of kin from sueing on behalf of the "victim", either way it all costs money, lot's of money. Mick.

Different manufacturers of machines have their own ways of accomplishing the same result, it's the same in most businesses. No technical reason really just a different way of "skinning the same cat". Mick.

When I last spoke with Mike a couple of weeks ago he mentioned that his web site was about to undergo a revamp and some things would not be available for a while. This should be resolved when the work is completed. Mick.

I think that maybe a liability issue is also driving this policy change. Are there any lawsuits out there saying 'you sold me a canopy that I hurt/killed myself on. The dealer did not warn me.'? . Very good point Jan!! Mick.

Bills arguement is that the primary (spring loaded) pilot chute could somehow hang up the locking stows on the free bag if the catapult inflated and lifted the bag off while the primary is bouncing around in the burble. During all of the testing, both on the ground and in the air we could not get this to happen (locking up that is). Video of SOME Catapult horse shoe test deployments show the bridle wrapped around the lines as they pay out (remember this is a horse shoed primary pilot chute deployment not a normal clean one). It did not affect the the opening in any way, in each case it happened a normally inflated reserve was the end result thus valadating the system. Mick.

Dear John, Sorry, A dear John letter (anyone?) is sad/comedic. Aside form millatary apps no one in the civy world uses anything other than compression housings. Haven't done for years! Mainly because most jumps that occuer in this day and age are civilian (IE: non combat), so the the "stretch" angle is/ has not been an issue (unless the R/C cable is too short). So, yes my statement still stands as correct. You will always find inconsistencies in current configurations, but that's how it goes (for ANY ) business. Remember "It's not rocket science!!) Mick.

We drop tested the Reflex with and without the Catapult, there were no noticable differences in opening times. The primary pilot chute is 31" in diameter when cut and the Catapult is 28" when cut. The Catapult is connected 1/3 rd the of the way up the bridle from the free bag (4'6") the overall length of the bridle is 16'. It is held in place by a small loop of bridle material so that the base of the Catapult is flush with the bridle. I hope this helps your understanding of how it is configured. Mick.

A bigger canopy in a small container would stretch the fabric more leaving less spare on the cable Not exactly, for many years the use of compression only housings and fixed hard point attachments won't allow this to happen. If the housing becomes seperated from it's hard point at either end then all bet's are off. We had three different length cables for the Reflex, 26, 27 and 28 inches respectivly, these were nessessary for the different sizes of rigs we produced. As Rob stated earlier the cable should stop inside the the lower half of the trapazoid handle. This arrangement allows for plenty of slack in the cable and a cable that is not too long, allowing for pin extrection. Anyone remember the Pigmee SOS handles and their length issus? We (collectivly) learned the hard way on that one. Mick.

with this line of thought, why dont they add more pockets to the bridle then to make sure that the freebag CAN leave the container? with the pockets facing the way they are they shouldnt make a normal deployment any different, right? now, if they don't need to make the bridle longer so that these pockets work (i dont know the length of a reserve bridle) then why dont manufacturers have this modification? it seems like a no brainer to me (unless someone can explain a negative side to having these). edit to add: seriously, manufacturers out there. why dont you have this modification? Because it dosn't work, there is not enough drag to extract a free bag containg a 5 lb (or more) reserve. That's why I developed the Catapult because it does work. Mick.

I've just spoken to Thomas Sports and they said about 200 pounds for a new custom-measured harness with addtional chest rings. Hey, how much is that in US dollars? Couldn't resist!! Mick.

I believe you are correct. The Navy conicals I saw had (or were supposed to have) SOLID vent caps. During my master rigger practical I had to replace one that the owner had removed. SOLID is a reiative term here (I do seem to remember them too) the canopy had the porosity of cheese cloth so it self vented. Continious suspension lines woukd keep it together in the event of an apex failure. I believe that's the only round canopy like that. Mick.

Except for the rig that sounds like him. Mick.

What ever became of Geno (Walten Eguine) Johnson? He dissapeared twenty years ago and has not been heard of since. I've heard various rumors over the years but no confermation. I never really liked him much but am still curious as to what happend to him after he split the scene. He was one of those guys @ Perris during the 80's that allways stood out (know what I mean, Sniff, Sniff) I met his brother once (name escapes me) and he was 180 deg from Geno, did one or two jumps and that was it! Geno hailed from Oklahoma if I recall correctly. Just curious. Mick. PS: I really hope he managed to work ot his issues and is doing fine, who knows maybe I'll like him this time around, He certanly was a smart guy (very high IQ)and had a lot of positive things to offer. Mick.