Basejumper.com - archive

 

I haven't seen the ad but I don't see what is fundamentally ridicules about it. I've bee thinking very seriously about designs for a dual canopy rig.

Lee

agreed, i like the idea of a mard for the reserve extraction

A friend of mine was testing a slightly modified (by him) Vector container with skyhook (and reserve packed slider off) in the valley like 2 years ago... It worked for him just fine for WS Base (although his plan was to pull high enough to have a chance at using his reserve if necessary, I believe he said deploying around 500-600ft but I may be wrong)
He got some shit from some jumpers, but in general got decent feedback.
Not that I would buy this mirage rig, but I'm curious about it and what's different (just my curious mind)

 

What are your thoughts about the new ultralight fabric mitigating the complications of weight/bulk? A 150 sq ft reserve ultralight fabric would be extremely compact/lightweight. Not that it would be fun to land all the time but for an emergency you'd probably be pretty stoked.

Tree,
There have been fatalities from knotted PC and no canopy out. In a situation that a jumper is fast enough to respond and pull reserve, the system could possibly save those.
Is it worth extra weight, rig complication, less freefall (opening higher) to have that possible backup? Don't know, but I bet those that went in would have wanted a reserve on their backs to have one last try at life.

I think the main appeal is to make helicopter jumps for proximity flight legal in the US.

 

only if they had the altitude. there have been skydivers who went in with the same situations.
do we need aad's on base rigs too?

 

I thought that 2000, now 2500, thing was a BSR. Is there any thing in the FAR's regarding opening height?

There are a couple of pilot chute/container type fatalities that some thing like this might have prevented but there are also a number of really nasty friction knot/partial malls on mains that people were just really fucking lucky to have survived. There have been enough of them that I'm surprised we haven't had one on the list yet. I think it's just a mater of time.

And what do you mean, the sorcerer never caught on? Mines setting over in the corner.

With some of the more modern Mard systems, sky hook not being my favorite, I think we could do a much cleaner system then the shoulder activated system on the sorcerer. As an example I'd like to see a reserve rip cord in the left side BOC position. You could run it under the back pad and do a reflex style pop top. It would make a much more convenient location for a low wind suit pull then even the normal left main lift web.

With the low bulk fabrics we have now I don't think the weight would be as bad. The reserve tray could be relatively short and high on your back leaving room for an extra long main tray especially if the rig extended all the way down to the bottom of your butt giving you a better pull location with a wing suit for both boc positions. I think it could be relatively thin. And the main tray could be designed to open down wards. Like a reserve tray facing downwards, with a through loop, designed for downwards wing suit deployments.

Lee

I want two reserves on my skydiving rig. 3>2 ! Wait, what about the dreaded triple mal? Maybe a quadpack?

which mard do you prefer? What are your issues with a skyhook? You can pm to not derail the thread. And thank you!

http://up-paragliders.com/en/profile-light

The guy who had a vector and a reserve packed slider down would only be able to use it for low speed malfunctions anyway, so why bother cutting away and deploying a whole new canopy (with a spring loaded pilot chute, no less) when you can just toss a paragliding reserve at a much lower altitude.

They're pretty small too (1.5 kg) so there are probably a lot of creative ways to include it into a rig without really changing the normal functionality and simplicity of a standard base container. RiggerLee, cough cough - what do you think?

As for the mirage - if I had too much money on my hands and mad proxy flying skills, I'd probably buy it so that I could fly some rad new lines in the rocky mountains or something. Imagine a four minute terrain flight from the top of Mt. Mckinley to the valley floor about 18000 feet below.

But alas, my bank account is about as impressive as are my proxy flying skills so I'll have to defer to Jeb on that one.

Sorry, Tree, that is not the case. Opening altitude is an FAA concern only when it has to sign off on demos because its waivers stipulate that the demo jumpers must abide by USPA rules, regulations and BSRs. Otherwise, the FAA is silent about and uninterested in opening altitudes; it cares only that a person making a deliberate parachute jump has a 2-parachute system and, IIRC, a TSOed harness and reserve container and canopy.

Actually, there was a bit of a kerfuffle back about 2008 when some Red Bull demo jumpers tried to get the USPA board of directors to waive the altitude restrictions so they could do low-altitude openings on some of their demos. That particular Red Bull proposal did not have wings.

As for the rig itself, it is designed to accommodate large mains and tiny reserves so BASE jumpers can legally jump their BASE canopies from American aircraft. The reserve may save your life but its principal purpose is to save your pocketbook by making it possible to have one rig for both BASE and legal airplane jumping. The rig is also somewhat unique because, in most cases, large main containers are mated to large reserve containers and, IIRC, this rig required some extra engineering to mate a large main container and tiny reserve container.

Certainly, the market segment is small compared to general purpose rigs; at the same time, other threads have noted the increasing numbers of skydivers doing proxy and terrain flying from aircraft, so Mirage has apparently decided that it's worth their while to service that segment.


44

More likely they are aiming at the next round of up and coming rad you tube dudes that are too cheap to buy two rigs.

Mard's are actually pretty darn tricky to try to make work. And honestly I think you could find failure modes in any of them so in the end I really kind of see it as a trade off. A lot of problems in their function relate to timing issues in the systems. This can affect bridle lengths.

I don't claim to be an expert on this. The only three that I've really worked with are, the old sorcerer, sky hooks, and the new strong system. Sky hooks are what we see around here a lot.

The strong thing is new but we've been working with them on some other projects. I had a chance to look at their system and I've been kind of playing around with the idea of using it on some thing. The strong system or variations of it have the potential for being a very strong and secure system. Some of the things we play with here are heavy and have some pretty high forces involved. 2000+ lb snatch forces on deployment. I'm really interested in the strong system.

My problem with the sky hook is that it fails a bit two easy. There has been a whole slue of problem with people learning to use it and even with it's production but even when every thing is right it tends to fail, prerelease. watched it happen. Booth would argue with this being erring on the side of caution and that's some what acceptable when 99% of the time it's really not necessary. Most of the time skydiving you don't need and are not reling on it. My personal attitude is that if that's the case what's the point in having it? In a base scenario the odds of being low and really needing it are much higher and I don't think the skyhook is waited far enough in that direction. I think it needs a more secure and reliable connection.

I haven't had the chance to play with the RAX system. It really intrigues me. I might just have to build one from the pictures just so I can finger fuck it. Again I think I can come up with malfunction modes where it like any thing else could kill you but that's no different from any other system. It looks like a secure connection, maybe too much so. I'm intrigued by it I just don't have any experience with it.

I won a wings cupon at PIA. It was burning a hole in my pocket so I actually orderd a wings with a mard. I had the chance to play with there system there but I haven't delt with any of them in the field. I will soon have one of my very own to fuck with and probable leave off, but that's just me. You know as fucked up as it seems. After 20+ years this will be my first brand new custom rig. I've always been too fucking cheap to buy new gear. Hell I might have to start skydiving more.

Lee

There was always a slider up/slider down debate with the sorcerer. Slider down performance with it's mard was impressive to say the least. You lose a little bit of performance when you put a mesh slider on the reserve but not that much. It makes it practical to deploy it in response to a total and we've seen a couple of those. With out a slider the only thing it is good for is a partial mal.

There has been a lot of thought put into what we could do to remove some of the malfunction modes we have seen for the gear we are using right now. Alternate means of opening the container. Cables to the back side of double loops. Releasing or opening the container it self. Hand deployed reserves. Small rounds built into the wing suit.

I guess a lot of it hinges on what you're trying to do. As an example if you're only worried about partial mals then a belly mounted hand deployed reserve like that might be a choice. Damn that thing looks small. most of the hang glider and paraglider reserves I've seen were larger and loser then that. Truth be told I'm not exactly wild about the hand deploy systems. They seem to work. I even built my self one once but it doesn't seem like the most reliable means of deployment to me. But I don't see that as being practical for terminal free fall depoyments in the event of a total. Canopies like to be extracted not tumbled. If nothing else it would be rather violent deploying a belly mounted reserve in wing suit flight into a brutal front loop.

Where you can place a parachute is primarily a question of the means of deployment. I see it coming down to questions of geometry with crossing bridles and risers. It's all about your deployment method and the routing. Mards, hand deploy, PC, ripcords, space has played with rockets. It gets kind of complicated as you try to mix them. Some don't play well together. I think the driving factor should be ergonomics. As an example the shoulder mard of the sorcerer is not the easiest thing to reach especially in wing suit flight.

I think it needs a reliable mard. I think you need to be able to reach both deployment handles with minimal disruption of flight in a wing suit. I think that means a BOC stile position for both handles. I see those two things arguing for a fairly conventional design with a rip cord going to a pin on the back pad ala reflex. There are other ways this could be done but it causes problems for one of the above.

A spring loaded reserve pilot chute for base? It sound insane but I'm talking about a wing suit specific rig. It's closer to skydiving then base. And I can build a pretty damn big PC if I know it's not going to see super high speed deployments. There is better air flow the burble of some one flat and stable on there belly and the spring loaded PC would really only be used at wing suit terminal. Cut aways you should have the mard. I know it goes against the conventional wisdom but I think it could be made to work.

Lee

Please define "Mards" so the rest of us can follow.

Thank you and yes I did Google search the word.

Main
Activated
Reserve
Deployment.

If skyhook is klenex the MARD is facial tissue.

Lee

I thought it was Assisted.

uhh, yes. But you've seen what happens when I get close to a key board.

Lee

It is assisted. I'm sure that is what he meant. We grow accustomed to the word activated because of AADs.

Main
Assisted
Reserve
Deployment

Is correct.

It would be interesting to see how you would get the MARD to pull the reserve pin if the handle is mounted on the bottom of the container with the cable and pin running upwards.

Say you had a vector style RSL with some slack in the RSL. The ripcord is specter with a loop on the end. The pin goes in the closing loop horizontally so it can be pulled downwards by the ripcord. It only needs 1.5 inches worth of movement to clear the loop. or it can be pulled upwards to slide out of the closing loop and spector ripcord.

Lee

Could work. Still sounds like a straight pin needing to be rotated in a confined area though. Could be problematic, either by design or user error.

Edit: I think the RSL would work fine as the cut away would provide plenty of pull force. But I think you could easily end up with a hard pull on the ripcord. Would take some thinking to make it slick and fool proof (and remember idiots are still over tightening Reflexes and Racers).

It's one of the things I've been thinking about that I'd like to play with. Any system can be miss rigged if you apply your self hard enough. Rotating a pin or rip cord is generally not that hard. It's three points of contact in a flat plane. Friction is the only thing fighting you. The friction points are two points of metal on metal which slide relitivly easy. Most of the force from a straight pull comes from the loop and any bend in the pin. It's a very classic error to over tighten a racer or reflex and put a small bend in the pin. Then all of a sudden the pull force goes way up. I also thing the heavy vector rsl pins would be more resistant to that.

Lee

What it makes me curious about, is the range of new issues/problems you could get with a setup like this.

Where normally you'd work to clear a PC in burble, or issue with a canopy, a setup like this may lead to 'panic cutaway/reserve' chops, in situations where you really wouldnt have needed to. When faced with a spinning canopy, heading towards a wall, a cutaway isnt going to make the situation a whole lot better.

Is it really a needed piece of gear?

It's needed to legally exit an aircraft in the USA and increase the chances of a stable low altitude deployment without having to resort to a belly wart reserve. That's it, end of story.

Unless you have 4000 foot walls and 1000 foot deployments far from the object it does very little for you as a usable reserve in base. But if you want to hike around with a 25# rig you could avoid spending another 3grand on a base rig.

I bet more Jeb fanboys buy it than flyers that will be using it for wingsuit/heli/base/skybase or whatever people call it. Does it have a MARD? If not a used rig is way cheaper.

i think a good base reserve sysem would be just to deploy a round without cutting away just like paragliders and handgliders. The quest for tiptoe landings after a malfunction is what keeps us from having something that could really save lives. ditch the idea of having to cut away and deploy a perfectly open square (far to complicated and height consuming) and concerntrate on slowing decents to a survivable rate asap imo.

with a system like that i probably would be comfortable jumping a sub 200 main w/s so might not even add that much bulk to my current gear.

You pretty much just described the BASEr.

 Was thinking more along the lines of integrated maybe behind the packtray and a spring or inflatable airbag behind its packtray to deploy it. I dont know but was definately not thinking bellymount.

Except that, IIRC, the idea behind the BASEr is to have properly TSOed components for US aircraft jumps, then you leave the reserve in the gear bag for the BASE jump.


44

No need to scan, I'll provide a copy, as I both shot the photos with Jeb and designed it the Advertisement to the customers specifications. (They were very pleased with my work, I might ad)

I've been hands on with the rig. It's not a new idea, but it seems well thought out and built. It's certainly not for everyone, and it's not even for sale to the general public.

If you have any specific qualms or questions about their marketing style I'm sure you could call Dawn, the owner of Mirage, and tell her how you really feel.
She's who dictates the tone and copy of each ad to me before we put them together.

Or did you just want to come out of the closet to play internet tough guy/jeb-basher for a little bit?

It's okay, we've all done it before.




In other news, buy a bridge day video! http://www.bridgeday2013video.com

I'm still not clear on what it is.

I see a black rig.
I see a slightly extended main tray.
Beyond that????

I mean, I think you could build some thing really interesting for this but I'm not seeing it there.

Lee

 

Hmmm, looks like youd probably have a smaller canopy than normal in base, and weve all seen Jeb have problems landing a normal size one. Should be interesting ;)

Actually the rig has a ultra light Flik 266 with 3 color redbull logos top and bottom. It also has a 106 optimum reserve and the rig is built for proximity flying wing-suits from aircraft. The rig is just a bit larger then my G4 built for a specter 150 with a 140 reserve.

Getting wavers for pull altitude can be done with a little work but getting permission to jump from aircraft legally without a reserve is very very very difficult to say the least. This rig is going to change the proximity flying movement in the USA and open it up to more European style proxy from aircraft legally. In Europe pilots do not seem to care about people jumping without a reserve as much as they do here in the USA.

If you do proximity flying professionally then this rig needed to happen in order to work in the USA. I have been dreaming about this rig for 15 years for many reasons and now it exists.

Thank you Mirage for looking into the future and seeing what's coming :) The legal events in the USA have only just begun and the only people that will be able to participate in the proximity events from aircraft will need a rig like this :)

BaseR ? So wasn't this just re-inventing the wheel ?

See my post above: The BASEr was designed to meet FAA requirements for aircraft operations in the US, but for BASE the reserve was meant to be detached and left in the gear bag. In contrast, the Mirage allows for hybrid aircraft-proxy jumping with the reserve and without compromising your flight profile with the drag of the belly-mounted BASEr reserve.

Pretty BASEic, really: two rigs; two separate primary purposes.


44

Jump the baser with a wing-suit and you will quickly realize what the difference is :) I have both and have jumped both with wing-suits :) The mirage is hands down the best option for jumping out of aircraft with a wing-suit and proximity flying legally in the USA period :) Belly mount reserves are a total pain in the butt to deal with...

Pull altitude waivers? Unless it's for a demo the FAA doesn't give a fuck.

Does it have a MARD?

I actually do see the practicality of this, but to market it as a BASE rig is silly, its a ***SKYDIVING*** rig designed for wingsuit proximity flying and low altitude deployments. You could do this with any skydiving rig, (and I have before, I have put base canopies, free packed with a base packjob and a 32" PC, into a sky rig and pulled at 500 feet) This main difference here seems to be that normally you would have a huge student size rig, as normally a rig that fits a 200-300 would have an equivalent size reserve. I imagine it likely also has dynamic corners, reverse facing risers, no dbag (just a bridle with a pin) and probably a slightly oversize BOC)

It does hit a different market than the baser, as the baser is a ***BASE*** rig, that *can* be skydived but the chest reserve is a huge impedance. And the reserve is meant to be detached and only used when skydiving. It would be extremely impractical to actually go base jump with, i mean, you could, but why bother with the extra weight, more difficult packing (smaller pack tray with a reserve to route risers around) and much larger profile rig on your back.

This is just a skydiving rig with a huge main tray and tiny reserve tray, and the reserve is there purely just to make the FAA happy. If it was me I'd just stuff a $200 roundie in it and call it good.

So, basically to sum all of that up, its cool, I like it, it has its niche, but stop calling it a base rig.

All valid points :) But if you were traveling for a base/skydiving trip you could also travel with only one rig :) Sometimes that is nice too :) It can be used for base jumping and I have. Lot's of big hikes have lovely cable car access these days and as long as you are flying a wing-suit or tracking pants then this rig will work like any other base rig does. Also just so you know, it's easier to pack then any 2 pin rig I have ever used :)

This rig is for a very specific type of jumper but I am happy it was built because of my work environment and now I can work on a whole new continent :) I was having to take all my work to Europe and now I have the USA as an option when production companies contact me. People who understand the movie industry are already lining up to buy them ;) Not a lot of us work in that industry but for the people that do guess what they want for Xmass :)

One more thing, some people are getting sick and tired of cutting away on skydives from there little canopies getting line twists when jumping the bigger suits. How often do you think you will be cutting away from wing-suit flights under a 266 Flik because of line twists :) How about never :) Now you can jump your 266 ultra light Flik on all skydives and the rig is no bigger then your regular G4 with a 170 in it :)

This would also make you super current on your base canopy which lets face it is the important canopy to be current on :) That is the canopy you are going to have to land in hell...

So.....many....smiley....faces.

Cheers man, I was expecting a little bit of backlash from my post. This rig is exactly for what you are describing, opens up all the us to legal heli/aircraft launched WS flights.

How heavy, and I guess another interesting question, will you be having your handles on the outside?

its NOT AT ALL a good rig/idea for everyday wingsuit skydiving and shouldnt be advertised as such.

that reserve is there for legal reasons only, honestly, whats going to be the malfunction rate of that reserve while jumper is in a big suit? (to put this in some relation, the main bridle on that rig is most likely longer than the lines of that reserve...)


perfectly fine!
so its a very-special-purpose rig and there maybe is a small market for it, but it should not be advertised as anything more/different than that.

I wonder if it's any smaller or lighter then my javelin J2 with a trango 225 and raven 1 (181)

It's a tight pack job but works great.

I don't understand why people are down on this. I think the execution could be better but I see nothing wrong with the fundamental concept.

Lee

I have friends jumping specter 120s with 106 reserves with wing-suits right now. The Mirage W rig would be a much better choice for them without a doubt. The chances of them needing a cut away on a specter 120 because of line twists is much higher then on a Flik 266 and they would still be under the same sized reserve in both scenarios. Like I said, this rig is for a very special group of very experienced pilots but for these kinds of people it's a dream rig :) I prefer being under a 266 Flik with heavy line twists then I do my 150 specter...

I am in agreement, I just don't want to see it called a base rig is all.

Yep. And I'm pretty sure those are called "Accuracy" rigs

That's awesome. Can you please elaborate on what particular features the Mirage W has that will open up skydiving into National Parks?

Yes, since all of the possible proximity flights in the USA are within National Parks

No, they aren't :)

He was kidding.

I know :)

I'll take one for skydiving. Can I get a bro deal?

I wasn't knocking it, I don't WS base jump yet so just curious about the difference.

Will this not prompt more WS proxy related fatalities given that anyone with the rig can and WS can fly close to mountain walls? or does this mean that USPA will have a handle on the flying of WS within certain areas?

What will be the legalities of it all?

1. People will start exiting aircraft and flying proximity lines more frequently in the USA.

2. Some of these people will die from it.

3. Someone will come up with some rules to try and stop this behavior.

4. People will find a way around the rules.

5. Repeat.

I doubt it will change much on the larger scale.

It will make it easier for jumpers to convince a pilot to drop them off for a proximity flight above a mountain (this was an issue in at least one aircraft-proximity flight accident I know of), because the pilot will have some protection from the FAA after an accident.

But no one is policing those things in advance now, and I can't see that changing.

I do see it making thing much easier for a large media event with FAA attention. It makes possible larger sponsored china style circus events like what Jeb promotes so I'm not surprised that he's stoked about it. What I don't get is that why there should be any attention placed on this rig. It's not like we haven't been building rigs exactly like this for... at least 15 years. Accuracy rigs with big main trays and small reserves to give them decent size containers. What's new? Other then the fact that it's from mirage? Then again I suppose he could never have brought him self to jump any of those other rigs. They just were not cool enough and they probable were not black. I suppose that would have been a deal killer. It is nice and relatively narrow.

Lee

Is the FAA really going to let people pull at BASE-like altitudes?

If memory serves, the last time I looked at those rules the only exception the FAA was allowed to make was for the "Department of Defense Parachute Demonstration Team."

If people have to peel off and fly out in time to dump at 2000 feet AGL, the number of potential sites drops by quite a large number. I can only think of a handful of good proximity flights in the USA where that's really feasible without limiting the competitors to something like a 25 second proximity run before they have to fly out to deploy.

I dont think that the FAA has a harddeck for opening. Maybe it has changed since I left 20yrs ago. Correct me. 500ft comes to mind about flying or falling over populated areas.
take care,
space

Pretty sure the only FAA imposed pull altitudes are for demo jumps, and I believe those can even be waived. If it isn't a demo, the FAA doesn't care if you want to pull at 300' try to land the wingsuit for that matter.

Tom,

As I said above to Tree, the FARs are silent on parachute opening altitude. They speak only to TSOed harness/reserve container/ reserve canopy requirements.

FAA demonstration jump waivers, which are not FARs, usually do impose altitude restrictions because those waivers routinely stipulate that the approved jumpers must follow all USPA rules, regulations and BSRs -- which of course include 2,000-2,500-foot "minimum pack opening altitude."

Moreover, for many of the potential US jumps Jeb & Co. may have in mind, the more appropriate FAA paperwork may be a film production waiver. Even 1-parachute rigs can be accommodated under this paperwork, but having an FAR-compliant 2-parachute rig makes a film production submission simpler because it doesn't require TSO and 2-parachute exemptions along with whatever other out-of-the-ordinary requests are being made.

Bottom line:

1) The Mirage "Jeb" meets all FAA requirements for intentional parachute jumps from aircraft in the United States.

2) There are no FAA rules or regulations regarding pack opening altitude.

3) FAA demonstration jump and film production waivers may or may not be necessary depending on the nature of the jumps being made.

4) If FAA demonstration jump and film production waivers are required for a given jump or event, their requirements are adjustable.


44

What's the difference between this and a regular sky rig? Just the size of the main tray?

Where exactly does the requirement to follow USPA rules come from? By that I mean how does it find it's way in to the demo aplications? It's not a government agentcy. Does it show up in regards to the USPA insurance? Is that insurance some thing required for jumps over conjested crowds? Would equivalent insurance, as part of a film permit as an example, meet that requirement if there is such a thing.

I'm just confused. If the USPA is private and not regulatory how does it wind up in a demo requirement from the FAA?

I've never been into the demo thing so I'm not clear on how this works.

Lee

yes. now post a funny picture to demean and mock the original poster please

When Handbury built the first few Velcro BASE specific rigs in about 1985 or so, they had connections for a tertiary reserve above your waist, and I believe that they were similar or identical to the reserves that hang gliders were using.

I don't know of anyone needing to use one, but there was no reason NOT to have it on. I used it on big building jumps.

We quickly learned how to modify our skydiving rigs for BASE as well. Line stows in the packing tray, long bridles and massive pilot chutes. Since these canopies were our skydiving canopies, we had great confidence in them. For some reason you can get a goofy main that doesn't open on heading. We would pick a main that would always open straight.

For big objects we always used our skydiving rigs. In deployment bags. Our thoughts were that they were essentially skydive anyway off of the terminal objects.

That wasn't a problem. Ever. The real fear was line overs and on heading openings. Mark Hewitt solved that problem with the tail pocket and the line release mod.

I'm not saying to use a skydiving rig, but come on. Some of these things are skydives anyway. Jumping your BASE main at the DZ every weekend also gave you great confidence in on heading openings. We would even skydive slider down. Slow a Cessna down big time and pull right away. It is comparable to a three second delay or so. I never did it because I didn't want to blow up my precious Cruiselite.

The FAA considers USPA's BSR's as industry standards and uses them as guidelines for their inspectors. You actually don't need a PRO rating to do a stadium demo, for instance. You will have to prove to your local Flight Safety District Office Inspectors that you can perform to the level of a PRO rated skydiver, but you can legally do it.
The FAA considers any jump made outside of a drop zone a demo. Their restrictions depend upon the size of the landing area and proximity to spectators. I don't suppose they would care to much about opening altitudes if you were deploying over a wildlife area and weren't going to bounce on the taxpaying general public. Airshows and other public events are a different situation, and that's why they get picky about that stuff.

This is way outside my area of expertise, but my understanding was that the FAA delegated some authority to the USPA under a generic "determined by the national parachuting club" sort of language.

Today there is, though. Tracking or flying a wing suit with a front mount reserve is somewhere between difficult and ridiculous.


The deployment altitude is vastly different. The reason skydiving rigs aren't used is not because of the container (what's being discussed here) but because of the canopy. No one wants a spinning, snivelly opening when they've pitched at 300 feet.

Tom,

The key word here is DID. We did wear the tertiary belly reserve (which was quite small) on slider down jumps, albeit rarely. Of course that won't work for wingsuits, but we did use our skydiving rigs on terminal jumps with low pulls all of the time. There was a flurry of changes during that time. We would put on a mesh slider to jump the super big buildings, all that stuff. Slider down was always a base rig (there were maybe a dozen of them around).

I have noticed unreal wicked line twists on wingsuit deployments. I know that everybody will say it is body position, but I don't buy it. Wingsuits trail a burble that is huge, and the canopy is deploying in the wake.

We pulled really low as well. Basically we were modifying the canopy and container for terminal BASE. I don't think a bag has a damn thing to do with it. Just proper pilot chute, bridle length, and slider. This all happened very quickly in the mid to late eighties.

The BEST thing was that we skydived our mains all of the time, and some are just different. No line twists, no snivels, etc. The canopies are now much larger, which is a good thing. Nobody made it to 100 without spending time in plaster. A lot of it was hard landings or lineovers.

Plus the mains of today are vastly different than BASE canopies.
While the mains of yesteryear were very similar to an unvented
BASE canopy, as in square not elliptical, F-1-11 material not ZP,
dacron lines instead of vectran or spectra, etc.

Buzjob got it partly right:

The FAA does consider USPA's BSRs to be industry standards and uses them as guidelines for their inspectors. It's Bureaucracy 101; never stick your neck out and deviate from established guidelines if you want to keep your govmint job.

Quick tangent for a classic if reverse example:

Felix was going to jump a building in Denver for an IMAX movie. This movie also included a scene of cars racing down a street. For that scene they needed a helicopter camera platform. For that helicopter they needed FAA approval to fly down the skyscraper canyon at 20 feet. The FAA guy decided that Felix needed a PRO rating to jump from the building.

I was the "jump tech" on the project. I called the FAA guy and left a message on his voicemail: "Confused about your requirement: FAR 105 defines parachute jumps under its jurisdiction as being from aircraft. If you insist on a PRO rating for a building jump, you will be the first person in the FAA in 20+ year to require it. Please advise."

Never heard from him, but the location manager called and said: "It's a go. The FAA guy said to please forget he ever asked for a PRO rating for the building jump."

So that is the answer; FAA just follows established precedent.

And, as Buzjob also rightly said, you actually do not need a PRO rating to do demos that have landing area sizes equal to or bigger than your license allows, but it's become pretty much FAA standard to require PRO ratings regardless because then the bureaucrat doesn't have to think or make a decision.

Buzjob is not right about the FAA considering any jump made outside of a drop zone to be a demo. That notion more or less applies to non-DZ jumps made in urban and suburban areas, and within control zones and certain other airspace, but for most airspace in the US, all you need to do is file a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) stating the date, time and duration for your jump activity and that's it.

Which circles us back to the Mira-Jeb; it does in fact make it possible for people to legally jump from aircraft and do proxy/terrain flights with their BASE canopies.


44

Sorry, Tom, no.

If the FAA "delegated some authority" to USPA, it would still be responsible -- and liable -- for anything that occurred in the "delegated authority" area.

This was a continuing issue with NPS-jumper relations until the ABP sorta kinda got the jumpers to leave it alone. The problem was that all these city-geek/aviation-focused jumpers kept proposing a licensing and qualifications system for jumping in national parks, which of course freaked out the NPS because, by definition, the NPS must approve such a plan, which means it signs off on it, which means it's liable for its consequences.

That is precisely why climbing and other such extreme sports are not regulated in national parks in terms of licensing and qualifications -- it would expose the "regulating authority" giver to liability for stuff over which it ceded control.

Thus both NPS and FAA "law" is silent in these areas. That is also why there are periodic debates within the USPA community about increasing self-regulation because, the argument goes, "if we don't do it to ourselves, the FAA will do it for us."


44

What sucks is basically all really steep mountains in the U.S. are in the hands of the National Park Service. You could do some wild proxy stuff in Grand Teton NP. I climbed there a lot.

I know about modern BASE canopies and their mods.

All I am saying is that discounting skydiving containers for EVERYTHING, might have been a mistake.

What freaks me out are the wicked line twists I see on Wingsuit videos. That should never happen, and you can be kicking out of your twists all the way to an object strike.

Is BASE illegal in Grand Teton NP/Wyoming in general?

BASE is de facto illegal in all US NPs except for one day a year at New River Gorge NP.


44

Yep. Even the National Recreation areas are under NPS policy.

Glacier National Park would be another bitchin proxy spot, but it too is in a national park.

Maybe something in the cascades.

I feel very comfortable that my country goes to so much trouble to prevent me from injuring myself. Not.

Just my 2 Euro C worth from over here, just as in the US in most of Europe if jumping from a legit DZ then reserve is required.
Whether in US or EU where enforced, this rig does satisfy the legal requirements and, apart from allowing proxy flights from planes, also allows you to safely test your BASE canopy from a plane without being forced to borrow a ropy old student rig that will fit your canopy, inclusive of a MASSIVE and (most likely) un-necesarily huge reserve. Bye-bye massive, uncomfortable potato. Hello decent 2nd skydiving / BASE test rig / 2nd or 3rd BASE rig.
Also, this would be great for balloon jumps, where the pilot IS trying to comply...
If money was NO object, who wouldn't want one?
I'd add that, if using this, I'd be far more scared of flying a reserve that size than any proxy line I flew so far.....

It begins: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX2wQJD7EgU

Thin styrofoam walls, 20 feet by 20 feet, with a 9 feet diameter circle cut out from them.

We can call it the Red Bull Proxi Race. I saw a geat instructional video the other day and I think Le Brevent would make a great location for the first venue.