jerm

The issue isn't snagging, it's getting pushed out from below.. this HAS happened, there's a reason why people started making an issue of pointing it up, it wasn't just some wacky theory. Even if it is SLIGHTLY higher (which you have yet to give compelling evidence of), the pull-force of a PC is SEVERAL TIMES the necessary force to extract the closing pin. So even if it IS "slightly higher", the pin is still coming out. Umm.. KellyF IS the bloody manufacturer, and he just said it wasn't an issue. I now consider how i do it to be within the manufacturer's instructions. Is that good enough for you? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

You're kidding, right? turbine DZs seem to teach the "Yeah, i can see the DZ" form of spotting. it just tickles me silly to hear stories of a 150-jump wonder who learned with me at a cessna DZ, spotting experienced otter loads on obscured/windy days cause she's the only one who has a clue. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

fuck you fuck you fuck you fuck you fuck you and your tunnel time! Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Well i sincerely doubt he landed it. People have flown sub-40.. i haven't heard of anyone landing them (and surviving) yet. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

big deal.. show me pictures of him landing it.... well.... so long as he's still alive afterward. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

quote]Then we are apparently, if I reading your answer correctly, in complete agreement. Well, no. You think my pin is upside down, I say that it's fine the way it is. Different doesn't denote wrong. The Manual SHOWs it one way, however never states anywhere that this is the proper/best/etc way to do it. It may have just been good for illustration. Even if that is the "proper" way according to the manufacturer, I'll keep doing it how i do for the reasons stated in previous posts. I'll consider any compelling reasoning you have for why i should not, but without some GOOD reasoning for why i should change, my pin is staying the way it is

This is wrong! In m/s:Expert:fires at 35 m/s or faster at 750 feet Student: fires between 13 m/s and 35 m/s at 1000 feet How exactly was the first post wrong? 35meters/sec = 78.75miles/hour and as for the student version... are you saying that over 35 m/s it won't fire? Here is what Airtec has to say about it: (http://www.pia.com/airtec/SC_eng.pdf) "The Student CYPRES will activate and therefore cut the reserve loop when it detects a rate of descent above 29 mph (13 m/s) at an altitude of approximately 750 ft AGL (225m)." Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

As i recall, falcons were known for opening hard. Have you jumped the PD230 yet? I've heard varying things about their opening characteristics, but I jumped one of these a few weeks ago with some great results. This is what my home DZ uses on tandems, student gear and fast-opening mains to help slow things down (and keeps the nose more on-heading and rolling it in one directino or the other) This was done using a pro-stack type flatpack. I heavily tandem-rolled the nose (Roll the first 4 cells of the nose from each side inward until you reach the middle of the center cell) and did everything else pretty normally and it opened like butter. Make sure the slider is up, blah blah blah... Check the line trim, slider size, fabric condition. Look inside, make sure your seems are all intact, crossports aren't blown out, etc... If you keep getting whacked, might want to think about a bigger slider and/or a slider-pocket. If all else fails, consider a different canopy. However it sounds you haven't even jumped this one yet, so give it a chance and see what happens :) -jerm Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

though on most spectres, you've gotta be pretty frikkin picky to want softer openings Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Don has very accurate records of his jumps... including the bask aircraft manifests for every load on the DZ. He would have to, as Guiness wouldn't have just taken his word for it. And remember, the listings in rising fallers represent people who have sent in for the awards, so Jim may very well be the 3rd person to receive THAT award, but the has no true bearing on him being 3rd in the world for # of jumps. If the PD ads are to be believed, Craig Girard, Eric Fradet and Pete Allum have had over 17,000 for a while. blue skies Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

i think, but also tucking it between the two flaps, not just running down past the center flap.. that's a lot of bridle to be loose. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

This would actually solve much of the problem of deploying on your back.... the whole fear of deploying on one's back is from the idea that the reserve apparatus would have to come out, around you, flip you over and hopefully not entangle you somewhere in the process. The spinning of the spinning mal (belly or back) would actually work to your advantage in this case -- your outward momentum from releasing form the spin would toss you laterally from the broken-away main and you'd reach linestrech nearly horizontally. There would be no flipping around/over/etc involved as you would just pendulum blow the inflating canopy that has already cleared your body. Point being that you wouldn't NEED to get belly-to-earth for this to help in that situation. Same principle as what bill has already shown, just facing up. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Yes it's a harder pull and yes i like it that way I freefly too much and have seen too many prematures to want to risk packing it more loosely. So i'll have to replace my BOC more often -- that's $30 every 2-3 years (had it 1.5 and it's still in great shape) for some piece of mind....... i'll pay it. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Can you please explain why you think having the pin point up would cause any greater chance of having the ping get stuck in the closing loop? Don't you think if it were that impotant either way it would be covered in the owner's manual? With the curved pins of today i don't think it really matters anymore so long as thr bridle isn't locking the pin in place by being stowed too tightly in way or another, and i believe the way the pin is attached basically negate that possability. As for why i do it that way, it's how i was taught.. it's how my rigers do it, how everyone on my DZ does it (and we're talking about some disgustingly experienced people) When i think about WHY would you want to do it that way more than another, i come up with: with all of the bumping/brushing etc that we doing moving aroud the plane, sitting on the floor/seat/etc, you're more likely to, especially if the flap has come open, but even through your flap, create some sort of pressure on that part of the rig from below you -- and if the pin is facing down, it can work its way out. With the pin facing up, the loop will just but up against the wide part of the pin. That scenerio, i believe, is plenty more likely than snagging, and not something i'd like to have happen. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

i like the compromise my home DZ uses -- The student helmets have audibles in them, set very low. So the students must remain as altitude aware as every throughout the normal course of the jump. If they hear that audible they're WAY low and should be pulling immediately. Ideally they never hear thte thing. Using it purely as a backup. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

done

why should they meet? some rigs prefer that they DON'T meet so that the grommets don't rub against eachother and dent/flatten/bend/etc... If it's a newer infinity, the flaps should be numbered.. close them in order, 1-3 are you asking HOW to stow the bridle, or are you saying you're getting the willies from how they say to pack that, too? stuff it under the flap that leads to the BOC pouch and stow the PC. it's pretty standard. Wait, they're freaked at what the owner's manual said? see above about grommets. I my top 2 grommets overlap, but i have a 150 in a container sized for a 170, so it's understandable. it was more in line with specs with the 170 in it, though. I can post pics if you like, but what exactly are you looking to clear up? -jerm Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Did you actually read that post? Perhaps i'm interpreting it differntly than you, but he seems to make an argument AGAINST soft reserve handles: (emphases mine) "However, I do think a pillow makes a better cutaway handle than a reserve handle, simply because, where the pillow is in a cutaway situation, is much different from where it is in a reserve pull situation. Think about it. In almost all situations where a cutaway is needed, you're hanging from your main risers, and your main lift web, where your cutaway pillow sits, is pulled up and away from your body, so your cutaway pillow is literally right in front of your nose. Now think of where your reserve handle is in a total malfunction. It's down below your armpit, tucked tightly against your body, maybe even UNDER the webbing, and more than a little bit hard to see, especially if you're wearing a full face helmet. Now think how much a reserve pillow handle feels like your harness, or a fold in your jumpsuit, especially if you're wearing gloves. Now picture yourself low, out of time, and in desperate need of a reserve handle that you can't see or feel. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

1/3 less pack volume at the same size measured by the same measuring scheme? How is that possible? I'm pretty sure non-xbraced to xbraced is about a 1/3 difference in volume, how is it that yours, WITH bracing, save so much space? are you saying that your xbraces take up no space? is it a much thinner airfoil? thinner fabric? less reinforcement? inquiring minds MUST know. -jerm Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

what size students? As someone who started at a 1.23 winloading(sabre) i can say that with proper training and proper canopy settings this CAN be ok at times. However, should there not be a lower limit? Would you feel comfortable putting a 110lb student on a 113 (exit wt ~135). As an engineer you know quite well that wingloading and performance don't scale equally, especially at the lower end of the spectrum. 1.2 CAN be safe above a certain size, and unless you desagree you may want to qualify that. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Well, the cypres activates at 1500 AGL when the plane takes off (activates as in -- will arm on descent). So first you'd have to increade your elevation above 1500 ft from the airfield in, i think, 20 min. Only after you so that will the cypres ARM at 1200 ft and then fire at 750. Now, with all of the logic that i KNOW about in the cypres, i'd wager actual cash there's some logic in there that lets the cypres know that the sudden pressure decrease from opening the trunk would NOT count at gaining altitude (remamber, that's a fraction of a second of low-pressure, once the seal is broken the pressure goes back to normal. And i would also bet there's something similar for sudden momentary increases. You'd also still have to be above te cypres arming altitude when doing all of this trunk business. I'd call it urban legend. YMMV -jerm Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Samurai 150 love it love it love it... Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

I have a brown 1979 wonderhog that i really wanna get repacked one of these days and go scapre some freely skygods with. Bummer is i wouldn't trust the thing in a headdown (large dirth of riser covers), and taking it to a turbine DZ would be an adventure cause of the normally sucky spots (round reserve), but i think it would be fun. bought it for $600 with a cloud lite and a 26' lopo..... 4 years ago

Are we talking a round with seven cells, or square? I would have guessed round. rounds don,t in my experience, have cells. Now it's probably a round reserve in there, but who knows... Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

that all depends, if you tandem roll the nose and turn it under you get more symtrical openings than rolling it all in one driection -- it's more PRO than side... YMMV, but side packing isn't as simple as pointing it 90 off heading Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time