Basejumper.com - archive

A fellow baser has been trying to convince me of the logic of buying a BASE container without a cutaway system. He's got a Zak container, which I must say I absolutely love. Well built, lightweight, comfortable. However, I'd never buy myself a Zak for one simple reason - the risers are built into the container, just like reserve risers on a skydiving rig. There's no cutaway system whatsoever.

It makes gear checks a breeze, and removes one failure point from the rig (after all, 3-rings do fail, albeit VERY rarely. They can also be assembled incorrectly). However, the downside I see involves water landings. If jumping a bridge over fast-moving water, if you land in the water and can't cutaway, you're significantly increasing your risk of drowning. Your options are:

a) Climb out of harness (difficult)
b) Use hook knife (difficult)
c) Swim with canopy (damn near impossible)

I would never want to land in fast-moving water without 3-rings.

What are your opinions on the matter? If faced with the option of buying a container with 3-rings vs. a container with no cutaway, what would you choose and why? Does the easy gear check and removed failure point make up for the greatly increased risk of drowning?

Another few benefits of cutaways are:

- if you are stuck in a tree and need to free urself. (Providing you can see a safeish route down).
- escaping from high profile objects. For example, you run to your car with canopy in hand. Dump the canopy in the back, pull the cutaway and drive off quickly while still in harness. I have done this a few times.

you can have L-Bars or 3 rings on the Zak.. But it's heavier

This point often gets unnoticed but is very valid. I have two treelandings in BASE enviroment and in both of those occasions it was very handy to be able to cut away the canopy. Also having three rings gives you the option to go for the water if necessary. In popular big wall in Norway or in popular bridge in the States water should always be an option (you dry quicker than you heal) and having a gear that might make you think otherwise is a bad choice of gear for those spots.

Will, you got me a little wrong on that one. I was showing you a used Zak ad and said that it would be a damn good choice even though it had integrity risers, because Zak is hands-down the most comfortable rig I've ever jumped (of the 4 I jumped so far), and even with a 305 canopy it's still lighter than Anton's Gargoyle with a 265.

If you were ordering new, 3-rings are an option at no charge, and you could get them, but on that particular used container you'd have to make do with integrity risers.

Other than the two mysterious cases of 3-rings premature release at Perrine on the same rig, are there any more documented cases?

Disclaimer: I only have 7 BASE jumps, have jumped only 3 BASE rigs, and still have 2 reserve packs and some sewing skills between me and my rigger's ticket.

Inspite of the inexperience and ignorance disclosed in the above statement I will nonetheless throw in my 2 cents If/when I buy my next BASE rig, it will be a new, custom fit rig with integrated risers. I also plan to pack it without a slider for low jumps (versus slider down). I know from listening and reading that neither of these choices are the most popular...

3 RINGS: As the more experienced guys already said there are benefits to having 3 rings for the serious BASE jumper who may need to escape authorities or hazards, plus the ease of switching canopies.

SLIDER --- I bugged several experienced guys about this topic and was given good input. The general thinking was that to save time and to provide some backup protection (cross riser support in the case of riser failure) leave the slider on but down for low jumps.

However, I personally would feel better jumping the simplest and strongest configuration possible. Of course the jumps I plan to do will hopefully be done from a tethered balloon on private land, hence the bust factor would be close to zero, chance of tree landings slim, and water landing next to impossible.

Lastly, I thought "Integrity" risers had 3 rings but no hole through them while "Integrated" riser were like a reserve in that they are non-datchable. Anyone know for sure?

So what do you experienced guys think of my gear choice? A Volvo with water weenies?

Hi,
There is also the hybrid aerodynamic container aimed for more experienced jumpers? both containers Zak and Hybrid made by Adrenalin are available with L-bar or 3ring cutaway which is a free option with little added weight.
Personally, years ago i used to have a 3 ring cutaway. Today i choose to have direct risers for its advantages and try to not put myself in a situation where I would need to cut away, if I did have to, I wouldn't hesitate cutting directly the risers as it is an easy operation putting new ones on.
Alastair Marsh

I have a Perigee Pro without 3-rings. Most of my jumps are in the mountains, so water isn't a problem.

I've jumped this rig at the popular bridge in the US, including one landing in the middle of the river. On the water landing, I first tried to swim to shore without getting rid of the gear. By the time I tried to get out of the rig, I was getting tired, but getting out was nevertheless pretty easy. I remember thinking, when I was in the river, that if the water was moving fast it would have been a desperate situation.

Obviously 3-rings would make it easier to get out of the rig even in slow-moving water. I'm not sure if they would be a lot of help, for example, if the canopy landed on top of me. In that case, it seems like lines snagging with my body is a much bigger concern. Still, if the option was available to me, I would seriously consider jumping with 3-rings at the bridge in the future, since it would make at least one part of the extraction process much easier.

When I jump over fast moving water, I have always used a rig with 3-rings.

I've never had to land in trees, but my feeling is that if I can't extract myself without cutting away, I might be better to wait for help, anyway.

I don't do many urban jumps, but if a quick getaway was required, I would probably consider jumping with 3-rings.

As far as the advantages, I really like the simplicity. It eliminates one mode of failure by eliminating what is generally a non-critical system for me. This is a bit like eliminating the reserve in BASE rigs--sure, you might use it some day, but in the mean time it's also a potential source of problems. The 3-rings can fail (although it seems unlikely). The cutaway handle presents another snag point for branches, fences, etc., and it's a very dangerous bit to snag. My other rig has a "hidden" cutaway loop which tucks behind the main lift web, but even that loop sneaks out from time to time and could snag on something.

I also like the intellectual honesty of removing the cutaway system. We all know we can't cut away a BASE canopy if it malfunctions, but I think there's a part of every one of us that likes to see the 3-rings on there just because it's something familiar from skydiving. By eliminating that familiarity, I force myself to think of the equipment in a different way.

If I had just one rig, I would probably rather it was a rig with 3-rings. The rings really are unlikely to fail, and you will almost certainly jump objects where you would rather have them. If you're buying a second rig, consider one with integrated risers.

Michael

Perhaps, but with a cut-away you can swim deeper before you swim away.

For jumps not over fast river, is there any reason not to 'shut down' the 3-rings by tying off the small ring to the grommet with a piece of line? (in case of tree landing, that line can be cut with the hook knife, then cutaway)

On skydivingmovies.com a long time ago, at the end of a video (i think southside base something?) there was a set of risers with a set of red handles above the cutaway system on each riser with additional cables feeding backwards through the loop.

That seems like a really good idea, since you have to pull the cutaway handle AND those red handles to actually release a riser (assuming nothing breaks)

The only problem is, you might confuse them for your toggles if you have a funky opening with linetwists at night and you're groping for your toggles while staring down a big steel monster that's about to chew you up and spit you out...

edit: found the video

Now that's an idea...anybody see any potential reason NOT to do this? I'm a BASE newbie, so I'd like to hear the opinions of some more experienced jumpers.

Potential problems I can see:

1) Depending on the material used to tie off the 3-rings, it could abrade the loop already in place holding the 3-rings closed.
2) Some knots don't hold very well. I wouldn't want to trust my life to something "tied" closed*. Still, the loop built into the 3-rings would still be there, in case the tied knot failed.
3) Would have to remember to remove the tie-off before jumping over water or for city jumps. Forgetting to do so would defeat the purpose of having 3-rings.
4) This solution borders on paranoia...there are SO many other things likely to kill you other than catastrophic 3-ring failure. It would be better to focus on other, more dangerous issues.

Benefits:

1) Acts as a "backup" for the 3-ring system, in case the 3-ring's built-in loop fails.
2) Safeguards against accidentally misassembling the 3-rings
3) Safeguards against accidentally releasing the 3-rings early (out of stupidity, snagging the cutaway handle, or other reason)

The above said, I will probably do exactly this, if nobody else can mention a serious reason not to. It's probably completely anal to worry about such a minor issue, but I like to eliminate or insure even the remotest of dangers when possible.

* And yes, I realize there are many knots that are 100% or almost 100% reliable. Hell, the PC is attached to the bridle with a simple knot that is for all practical purposes nearly fail-proof. However, there are also a lot of knots that are prone to slippage over time, and some that are downright unreliable.

I'm not sure how it is with the standard/large 3-rings that are used in base, but with the mini-rings on most skydiving rigs, the loop must be a certain length... too tight or too loose and the system will be weaker. You might want to look into that before tying anything to your 3-rings, lest you make it too tight.

Not that i'm an expert or anything, just my 2 pesos

Were they jumping slider down or slider off?

Do you have details on "why" the 3-rings failed? Were the incorrectly assembled, or did the actual hardware break?

How did the two jumpers land? Did they go in with a streaming wad of shit overhead, or were they jumping slider down and that kept at least some sort of an inflated canopy overhead?

The Pick blew a mini-riser (Type-17) off a piece of granite in California and the slider saved him by not allowing the riser to totally depart the area.

Although he did say later the last few seconds were, "Wall, Valley, Wall, Valley, Wall, Valley, Trees, Boulders . . . "

NickD
BASE 194

If you have direct risers/harness, consider using PD tandem slinks,then you can simply cut them with a hook knife! instead of hacking though your risers.

AK

Good idea....gives one the peace of mind of intergrated risers with the potential for emergency escape if necessary.