chuckakers

I jump a Curv and sell them too. One of the first ones I sold was to a lady who is exclusively a sit flyer. Her reserve pin cover was coming loose and the fix was simple. Sandy Reid (Rigging Innovations owner and all around design genius) spoke to her rigger and had him transfer more reserve canopy bulk to the top of the container. It hasn't been a problem since - and the reserve pack job looks better too. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

And? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Happens all the time. Plaintiffs typically sue claiming negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, or breach of contract. Not just for being shit though? ;) That depends on who you're asking? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I have 11 reserve rides and have never once followed my chopped gear and do not recommend it to others. Our first responsibility is to land safely and the odds of doing that - especially under a reserve canopy that we seldom if ever fly - are much better if we land on the DZ where we are familiar with obstacles, have wind direction indicators, etc. Following a cutaway main/free bag to an off DZ landing increases the likelihood of landing problems. I suggest people try to maintain visual contact with the chopped gear while landing at the DZ or in the best possible alternate area if a DZ landing isn't an option. Safety over possible monetary loss. The beer tastes better when we survive the jump. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Without respect to the title of your post, that video shows very nicely how pulling one's knees/legs to the rear and arching before and during a chop promotes stability, or maybe more accurately how failing to promotes instability. It also demonstrates how trying to get stable before deploying a reserve costs valuable altitude. The jumper took 4 seconds +/- from the time he chopped to the time he pulled the reserve ripcord and pretty much all of it was because he was flailing in an effort to go belly-to-earth. Much less drama with an RSL. No disagreement there, but falling away from a chop belly-to-earth is better with or without an RSL. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Without respect to the title of your post, that video shows very nicely how pulling one's knees/legs to the rear and arching before and during a chop promotes stability, or maybe more accurately how failing to promotes instability. It also demonstrates how trying to get stable before deploying a reserve costs valuable altitude. The jumper took 4 seconds +/- from the time he chopped to the time he pulled the reserve ripcord and pretty much all of it was because he was flailing in an effort to go belly-to-earth. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Happens all the time. Plaintiffs typically sue claiming negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, or breach of contract. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Finance and accounting maybe, but the skydiving business is one that requires a pretty deep knowledge of the sport itself to manage well. Many DZO's have discovered the expensive way that management skills without a thorough understanding of how the gears turn don't usually work out. Beyond that, only the very largest drop zones have layers of management. The vast majority are owner operated. Of course if by DZ "management" you mean sweeping floors and scrubbing toilets I can teach you everything you need to know from my time in the biz. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Wisdom has no argument against ignorance. Good luck. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

This is not a discussion about routine jumps. If it was I would agree with you on the likelihood of going in because of a low pull/no pull after a chop vs the risk of a snag. This discussion is specifically about using a secondary reserve deployment system while conducting activities in which a snag after chopping is increased such as the mentioned use of large cameras. Under those circumstances it is widely accepted that the risk of a snag is increased to the point that it is prudent to disengage any such system. I don't know about other countries, but in the U.S. this has been a long-standing best practice as recommended by USPA and an accepted practice by nearly every large format camera flyer. For most skydivers there isn't much debate on this. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I wasn't comparing the initial causes of the problems. As I pointed pointed out, the INITIAL cause in the riser breaks WAS different. What WAS the same was the fact that for WHATEVER REASON the main failed to separate from the jumper (as in a snag) and that combined with an engaged RSL resulted in an entanglement. BTW dragging us down the comparison of a user error as the cause and AAD fire is irrelevant. Your assertion that problems can be handled before they become reality is also irrelevant in the context of this conversation. The point of this conversation isn't how to keep things from happening, it is about what happens when a jumper follows best practices -"proper gear maintenance, making a helmet as snag resistant as possible, or simply thinking worst case scenario before you might try something questionable", to use your words - and the sh*t hits the fan anyway. I appreciate that you do all you can to avoid the situation, but that's not the debate. This conversation is about whether or not an RSL is appropriate for use in an environment of added entanglement risk when all our best practices fail and plain bad luck puts us in the situation. That said, I do not see your posts as argumentative or trolling. I see them as an honest conversation between skydivers who want the best for one another and the sport. I believe we learn a lot from such practical debates and while I take issue with some of your logic I truly appreciate hearing your position. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

There were several RSL related entanglements from riser breaks years back. I believe at least one tandem was fatal after a riser break if memory serves me correctly. The riser breaks were a different initial problem, but the entanglement due to an active RSL was the same - a main that didn't leave combined with an RSL-activated reserve. Do what makes you comfortable, I guess. Maybe your out-of-the-box approach is the way to go, but it's certainly contrary to known best practices. All the best. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Ok I think we are all considering different scenarios here. My biggest fear is deploying my main, and having it entangle my helmet. I jump a velo loaded at 2.2-2.3. If my canopy isnt symmetrical I am going on a ride quickly. If my helmet is tied up, I know I have to cut the helmet away before cutting away the main. Having your head pinned by entanglement sucks cause I have been through it before (I caused the snag kicking out of line twists on a crossfire and it hooked my ring sight). What I am not concerned with is entangling my main risers or lines with my helmet when I am already experiencing a problem. With my last 2 cutaways I had line twists pretty far down bringing the risers very close to my ears. By simply looking at my feet spinning on the horizon, I bring my chin down towards my chest bringing the helmet clear of the risers. With the centrifugal force building, when you cutaway you launch a decent distance from the main, which clears the risers very quickly. With the reserve being extracted away from you, the odds of the 2" reserve risers or the lines entangling are not something I am concerning myself with. For a point of reference, I have 2,000+ video jumps on heavily loaded Velo's with full-size camera gear. I also have 10 chops, 8 of them on spinning Velos, with and without cameras on. Two points. First, I think you are over-thinking the "snag during deployment" thing. I'm sure it's happened, but I don't personally know a of a single incident in which a camera flyer was in a stable position and had a snag caused from line twists, asymmetrical opening, or any other unusual occurrence. I know many camera flyers who have experienced line twists to the point of having their heads pinned down, and while that sucks it doesn't present much of a snag hazard because typically there's nothing on the back corners of the helmet where the risers would be for them to snag on. I personally minimized the possibility of a helmet snag in that scenario by simply watching my deployments with my head up rather than forward or down. That way when my canopy spun up my head was behind the risers prohibiting the twist from forcing my head down. Not that it matters, but I also got great video of my mal and chop that way. Second, you are correct that we have been discussing two different scenarios, so now let's just talk about the "RSL during a cutaway" issue. Without respect to any other risks of snags, a snag after a chop with a secondary reserve deployment system engaged has a good chance of killing you. A chopped, snagged main will likely be partially inflated, probably spinning, may be rocking and stalling, and if only one riser snagged there be a riser set and a crap-load of lines above you flailing around as well. That will give the reserve p/c, bag, and lines a big target. If the reserve interacts with a mess like that the results will likely not be pretty. Bottom line - an increased snag risk during a cutaway should dictate that a secondary reserve deployment system not be engaged, but an increased snag risk at any other point in the skydive for any reason should dictate the same thing. Regardless of why or when the risk of a snag exists, IMO the correct procedure is to disengage any secondary reserve deployment system. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Which is what didn't make sense to me in your earlier post and still doesn't. The whole point behind leaving a secondary reserve deployment system disconnected while jumping full-size camera gear is that the main can snag the gear during a cutaway, causing a reserve deployment with the main still attached to the jumper. The possibility of a main/reserve entanglement under those circumstances is precisely why camera flyers don't typical use MARD's or RSL's. Either we (myself and the others here who are questioning your comments) don't correctly understand your point, or we do understand you correctly and you don't comprehend the risk we are pointing out. To be fair to you, can you again try to explain in such a way that we can all be clear about your position? Maybe you could describe a scenario that would exemplify your point. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I tend to think the rapid cycles of Hot & Cold have more of an effect...IIRC - Many if not most manufacturers of plastics seem to address the UV factor for products that will be exposed to a lot of it. How much sunlight does one on a helmet really see? Like all MY gear, I try to keep it in the shade as much as possible...OTOH - not much you can do about going from 99 degrees F to 40 then back to 99 in relatives quick cycle times. Interesting takes from both of you guys - or "Y'all" as we like to say. Gotta say, I really appreciate both of your inputs on so many topics. I learn from Y'all's posts and they are always food for thought. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

As a camera/video flyer for a vast majority of my time in this sport, there is no reason why you don't want a MARD or RSL. My last 2 reserve rides were spinning velos on rigs with skyhooks. Cutaway and reserve opened with no line twists at all. Make no mistake, snag points are a much larger threat than a RSL. I don't understand your comment. It sounds like you first say it's ok to use a MARD or RSL with video gear on, then you say snags are a bigger threat than the use of an RSL. On the latter, the statement doesn't even seem to make sense. I'm not sure if those are conflicting statements, complimenting statements, or I simply don't get what you're saying. Please explain. Thanks. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I don't like this video, it seems suspect to me. A GoPro is going to break at the mount. I know a lot of low time belly fliers who've already had to replace GoPro's knocked off their heads in freefall due to simply bumping each other. If you find the video suspect (I don't), why not borrow a pull-test scale from a rigger, gather up a few mounts, and see what you can come up with. You can also see my Vimeo channel where there are two bridle entanglements during wingsuit rodeos. In neither case did the camera break off at the mount. If there are "a lot of people that have had theirs knocked off in freefall", how is it that we're not hearing about those people from anyone? Helmet surfaces vary. Mounting skills vary. Air temperature may play a role. VRB that isn't mounted correctly can give way. VRB that is mounted correctly won't give much at all. Are you prepared to gamble on the variables? I lost a Go Pro from a broken mount. One of the rails on the helmet side of the system - the part that the squeeze clip slides into - gave way. I think the normal bumps we put them through probably weaken the plastic until just a minor bump causes it to fail. In my case I barely tapped it during climb-out and away it went. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I suggest you look at problems with that specific canopy or possibly your technique in packing or deployment. I have over 2,000 jumps on Stiletto's with wing loadings ranging from 1.3 to 1.8 with canopies from brand new to 2,000 jumps. Beyond a 90 degree turn caused by one side or the other opening first (once every 30 or 40 jumps), I have never had a problem with the canopy. You didn't define what you meant by "rotating". Any elliptical can turn somewhat during deployment so if you are talking about a 90 or so, that's pretty common. Stiletto's do open quicker than most elliptical canopies, but I personally like that. I like that I can pitch out at a lower altitude and not have an 800 to 1,000 foot opening. Stiletto openings are predictable and that scores high on my list of favorable attributes. I also suggest you contact PD and ask them about this. They are - by far - the most responsive and pro-active canopy manufacturer in the world and will gladly work through this with you. You can even send them the canopy and they will test jump it to see what's really going on with it. I too like the flight characteristics of the Stiletto. It has the flattest glide of any elliptical in the world to bring me home or hang above the crowd when I need to, yet if I want to rip it up and swoop the beer line I can make it happen. It also has one of the shortest recovery arcs in the sport, making performance turn altitude variations most easy to handle. Contact PD and let them guide you. Whether you stay with the Stiletto or go with something else, I assure you they will make you happy. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

That's a very good point John. Nobody ever taught me that, I read that here on DZ.com. Luckily when I did my first cutaway it was almost instinct and allowed for a perfect on heading opening of the reserve following a spinning line-twist malfunction.Quote Never taught to arch after a chop? That's pretty mind boggling. Gotta say, I would really question the quality of training on that one. Trying to maintain or regain stability after cutting away is one of the most basic and important techniques to promote a good reserve deployment. In fact, this is the first I have ever heard of it being omitted from the FJC or ongoing training. I know I'm old school and haven't been part of the student training process in more than a decade, but I would really be surprised if the practice of teaching arching with a chop is being omitted on a wide-scale basis. Of course there's always the SIM. From Section 4 - First Jump Course.... PARTIAL MALFUNCTION Note: On single-operation systems, pulling the reserve ripcord releases the main canopy first before deploying the reserve. Partial malfunction procedures for a single-operation system (SOS) are the same as for a total malfunction. 1. Check altitude. 2. Return to the arch position. 3. Ripcord systems only: Discard the main ripcord. 4. Locate and grasp the cutaway handle. 5. Locate the reserve ripcord handle. 6. Pull the cutaway handle until no lower than 1,000 feet. 7. Pull the reserve ripcord handle immediately after cutting away or by 1,000 feet, regardless of stability, to initiate reserve deployment. 8. Arch and check over the right shoulder for reserve pilot chute deployment. 9. Cut away above 1,000 feet. a. If a malfunction procedure has not resolved the problem by then, deploy the reserve (requires a cutaway with an SOS system). b. In the event of any malfunction and regardless of the planned procedure or equipment, the reserve ripcord must be pulled by no lower than 1,000 feet. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Seriously? Someone is going to sit in front of a copier for hours to copy something like the IRM? Yes, accessible everywhere except where you need it, which is during ratings courses and while working with students. Not everyone has an iPad they can whip out at the DZ. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Cost of designing/manufacturing a helmet that locks the user into a single camera when there are so many choices comes to mind? It's one thing to print/rapid proto a small part that might be snag resistant, and quite another to develop molds for a helmet that might be outdated in September. I'd not want to take the risk. Access to the very small camera/buttons is another consideration; the wireless remotes frequently fail, so having hands-on access is necessary. That might be tough in a "built in" system. Back to the original point of RSL or not, most of my rigs do not have an RSL; I'm slowly getting them converted (3 now have RSL). I've changed my opinion as my gear selection for camera jumps has changed. Other than demos and specialty camera jumps, I can't see a viable reason to not have an RSL. You're certainly right on the camera box. It's tough to justify the cost of R&D selling to such a small market. One might think the guys at Go Pro would work on something that would do the job across many applications. Couldn't agree more on the RSL, bro. My new Curv is RSL equipped. It's the first rig in my 29 years of jumping to have one and I've become an advocate. I also find it interesting that there are holdouts on the RSL thing. The stats clearly demonstrate over and over that history is against them. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

All true, although I don't know that my experience would help as much as my adrenaline in a snag scenario. I'm about to install the cookie mount that minimizes the snag hazard so I can get rid of the aftermarket aluminum screw attached mount that is a true death trap. Kind of wonder why no one has made a specialty box of even a helmet that incorporates the Go Pro directly into it. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Chuck, I couldn't quickly find the thread in Photo where there are two relevant links, but both show the GoPro mount under stress is not at all easy to break. It was shown (IIRC) that around 60lbs of force was required. Imagine needing that force while snagged, spinning, and under stress. It was also shown than the tear factor of VRB at the point of contact via a line, was greater than the Hanson archery scale's limit of 100lbs. This is a relevant video. I'll second the suggestion for a third-party GoPro snag-resistant mount such as those that Cookie, Chutingstar, and Square 1 sell. I would like to test this real-world and my guess is you would too. I agree that under duress things can be radically different but that is an aside in context. Plastic Go Pro mounts are less than a dime a dozen. Let's see what happens if we actually try it. BTW, 60 pounds isn't all that much force when being applied under the circumstances we can imagine in a snag situation. I'm pretty sure I could muster up 60 pounds without a problem to save my ass. Let's try it. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Or both. BTW, a stock Go Pro mount with the plastic base can be easily snapped by hand as the rails that the unit slides into are very easy to break with a sideways motion. Of course a snag would likely cause a mal anyway but it would be worth a try. There are a couple different commercial mounts available now that make a Go Pro much less snag-worthy. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario. I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with exploring/learning/mastering all that a canopy is capable of, but the use of risers is not a necessary component of safe flight. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX