Basejumper.com - archive

I have a uploaded a document to google drive detailing various closed container malfunctions we have documented in ground tests in the past two days.

I cannot post the document here (it exceeds the allowed attachment size). The link is here.

Please do not distribute this material. I will post it in several other (public) places.

This testing was initiated by the recent fatal accident here, but I would like to stress that there is no evidence that any of these specific malfunctions occurred in that case.

I have used a Gargoyle with a floating pin for most of the testing, because that was the system we were mostly interested in. This does not mean that the Gargoyle is any more or less susceptible to these malfunctions than any other container.


It is my personal recommendation that all jumpers discontinue use of floating pin bridles. I know of many cases in which these bridles have been used successfully for hundreds of jumps, but having found two malfunction modes unique to them I have chosen to discontinue their use at the school. Be aware that this is my personal recommendation. Several SRBA instructors are still using floating pin bridles on their own gear.

Nice article Tom, thanks for posting.

From what I can see, of the 8 malfunctions you have described, only #4 and #5 are specific to a floating pin bridle.

I think this should be made clear to readers.

Greg..

Firstly, it looks like that bridle was built by a hack. Tip: If you can not sew neatly then avoid contrasting thread.
Secondly, Do you truly believe #4 and #5 to be possible? It would have to be a seriously unlucky day for your pins to end up in that orientation.

Mile Daisher has shared this on FB earlier today. Seems relevent

https://www.youtube.com/...oYpk&app=desktop

If you look closely, see how the bridle is exiting from under the pin on the curve rather then on the hollow side of the pin. It's trying to rotate the pin down wards rather then up. It's the same kind of problem that I was talking about here on page 11 see the picture "pin 2"

http://www.basejumper.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2964578;page=11;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

By putting the pin in with the bridle exiting from the bottom you make it easy for the bridle to pull from the wrong side of the pin. You exaggerate the distance to the out side of the axis of rotation. I'm had pressed to imagine a worse arrangement. In the second linked video where he is pulling it by hand it would be even worse with a tighter loop and the pin on the bridle the other way so that it faced to the inside, stiffened, part of the flap. It was releasing because the tip of the pin could turn past the edge of the flap.

That is not a good scenario.

Lee

While this testing is beneficial and presents some clear problems in the mechanics of a floating bridle, the force that is tested is pretty irrelevant. There are rubber bands used, softening the force, and in some cases the weight hits the ground at bridle stretch.

I'm not directing this at any individuals, and I'm glad you posted this video to make it part of the discussion. However, any personal attacks (and I realize you weren't making one, but others are) in the context of a floating bridle are pretty unfounded. It's easy to say "look at this video, how could you have let someone use this obviously substandard gear" or "you are telling people to use gear that isn't mainstream, putting them in danger". However, a major BASE manufacturer produced and sold this design (and I'm certainly not trying to attack them either). If people really had a problem with it before hand, they should have tested it themselves and found the possible malfunctions. This is, however very challenging, especially when you can't fathom what the malfunction would be. To reiterate, this isn't directed at you in any way, but some people are using this video, which, once again, has some problems, as a mechanism to defame people.

If something in BASE was introduced to have a failure rate as high as 1:100,000 or even 1:10,000 you'd likely never see it in testing, or maybe even in the wild. The probability of encountering the failure isn't 100% if you do 10,000 jumps it's only a 63% chance you'll see it and if you do 20,000 jumps there is still a 13% chance you won't see it.

Math:
(outcome you want / total possible outcome )^ number of jumps = ( 9999 / 10000 ) ^ 10000 = ~63%

Most manufacturers in parachuting introduce designs that could be worse, but will never present in a small set of jumpers using it.

so this is what i wrote in a different thread and the answer i got


Re: [alonadelson] 9 March 2015 Twin Falls, Idaho [In reply to] Quote | Reply


I think it should transfer the tension to the top pin in case that the bottom (floating) pin is lock, because the floating pin is not sewn to the bridle the tension could transfer to the other pin


(This post was edited by MXRider on Mar 13, 2015, 9:03 AM)

so then i asked a second question which if someone has an answer i would appreciate

but wont that cause a horse shoe mel?
or supposedly the lock will be cleared by the canopy coming out of the container?

Alon, the idea is that the removal of the top pin will relax the tension on the bottom loop and allow it to clear.

It's roughly akin to when a skydiving rig has a 2 out because firing the reserve relaxes the tension on the main pin and allows it to escape.

I have to agree with this.

We also don't know how many test drops were filmed to edit into the video.

Basically, it seems like it was staged and edited for dramatic effect, to give an excuse for repeating "you're dead again" as often and forcefully as possible. It doesn't seem like a terribly objective or scientific way to conduct an experiment, and it's a long way from "dynamic" as the rubber bands are used to absorb the dynamic force.

Thanks tom

In theory it sounds good. And you said you can create a barrier between the top and bottom pin to prevent mods #4,#5 in you doc.
Yet you recommend not to use a floating pin at all .
Can you elaborate why you recommend that

If there is sufficient slack between the pins and appropriate pin tension I don't really think it's necessary. Given that there are a couple of very improbably malfunction modes and no real advantage, I can't see a strong argument for an average jumper to use them. Plenty of people who are good, thinking, experienced jumpers use them. I just choose not to and don't recommend them for beginners.

So the answer is simple:

"Just jump shit high enough, and deploying high enough, so you got time to yank on your bridle if shit hits the fan!"

I know some people who installed blocks in their floating pin bridles yesterday, actually.

do you have a photo of that by any chance?

Seems like a bad idea inviting another unforeseen problem.

It seems like the stopper would be just as likely to lock the bottom pin as the fold holding the top pin on (as seen in that weight drop test video) for what its worth.

Spoke with the jumper that made that video and he said he included all tests, that was not 1/10 drops locked and edited creatively. If the pin was packed sad face it worked 10/10 times, if it was happy face it locked 10/10 times.

I think you'll find that it's not a sad vs happy face thing. It's a which way is it torked thing. It was caused by the bridle exiting from underneath the pin on the curved side causing the pin to turn down wards rather then up. I bet that if the bridle exited out the top of the pin it would work fine happy face. The test would be even more dramatic if you slipped the pin on the other way so that it torked down wards into the hard part of the flap. In other words exiting out the bottom happy face to the other side.

This is some thing that can be built and packed wrong and can exacerbate the potential failure modes of the curved pins we are using.

Lee

This doesn't make any sense to me. What you are describing is a result of separate containers exerting pressure on each other to increase pin tension. When one independently releases, the bulk removal results in the reduction of container pressure/pin tension. With a BASE rig the bulk of the canopy (folds/tail pocket) in the bottom of the rig and the tightening of the leg straps adds pin tension. Releasing the top pin is going to have next to no effect on the pin tension of the bottom pin as all the tension factors are still in place.

In practice I've seen the opposite--the bottom pin always has less tension if you pop the top. I understood why people would want a floating pin, but never personally used it.

I totally agree with the point you're getting at. I was thinking the same thing when someone told me about the pin locks video with these bridles... which way is the head oriented, and will it flip up to stand the pin up easily? And the answer is, it depends on the orientation relative to the bridle leaving/entering the pin hole. I really again think the major issue with these bridles is and always will be careful rigging and the understanding of how and why certain pieces of the gear work the way they do.

I think we're saying the same thing. The bottom pin works fine when it's frowning, it's only when it's a smile that it can get jammed up. And it'll either be a right smile or left smile based on how the pin was inserted when creating the bridle. This is critical when evaluating whether your pin can jam against your top flap.

As you can see from the Vertex that came with a floating pin (http://www.basejumper.com/...9-large_vertex2b.jpg), their pin's failure orientation is a smiley facing the left, which means that it cannot jam against their top flap. I had never been informed of or considered the ramifications of choosing which direction to install the pin towards when I made my bridle.

I've added a photo of all eight possible configurations for anyone who doesn't have a floating bridle to play with.

I'm working on a test rig using multiple staged weights to better simulate the initial pull force of a 1.5 second delay and the corresponding increase in pull force after several seconds of PCIT. If anyone genuinely believes that I'm running drop tests all day and just getting lucky once in a while, here is the complete unedited video with two pin locks in a row when I moved to the garage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plRIrKHPJ9I

It's hard to verbalize some of this. Love your picture. Wish you had numbered it. The four on the right are from one pin orientation on the bridle and the four on the left are from the pin reversed so in a since they are mirror images of each other. Their only difference is their relation to the flaps and the pin cover. So in truth there are really only four choices in relation to the pin it self.

Let's number the four on the right 1-4 from left to right, top to bottom and I'll call them A in relation to the flap. If we look at the pin as it sets vertically 90 to the bridle, the cup can face up or it can face down. 1A and 3A have the cup facing upwards. 2A and 4A have the cup facing down. Cup down is a very unnatural orientation. It's with cup down that you have the potential to have problems. 2A is clearly bad but I'd like to put a scale on 4A. It may pull but I'll bet it has a harder time rotating then 3A which is basically it's compliment in cup upwards. We are playing in a range where even a small delay or inconsistency in pin extraction force could be an issue. Low go and throws don't have that much snatch force to work with.

I'd like to number the opposite pin orientation B using the same numbers for clarity. That would actually mean numbering your picture from right to left top to bottom for the left four pictures. Their essentially the same just facing the other way. It's still important in relation to the flaps. Here for example 2A and 2B, the two inner top row with the red dots, are the same but I'll bet 2B jams harder due to the hard face of the flap. 2A can almost rotate downwards by pushing past the soft edge of the flap which is quite close to the grommet. There was a lot of very good discussion following that other PC in tow indecent at perrion concerning cover flap design. And there are good reasons why you might want the loop to be pinned from one direction or the other depending on the cover flap design.

My thoughts are these. If you are going to build a bridle like this, and there is some slight advantage, the pin sort of acts like a pulley magnifying the force to some degree depending on the angle, then the pin should be orientated cup upwards on the bridle in the direction that you wish to pin it from. If you build a traditional bridle the tape should loop around the pin on the top side of the ring as the pin is inserted in the loop, cup upwards, in the direction that you wish to pin it from based upon cover flap design. That probable means a frown when the bridle and pin lay flat.

As to the whole idea of a sliding pin and any mechanical advantage it might give. If you are head high in theory it could double the force pulling the pin. Head down there would be no force at all on the bottom pin all load would go to the top pin and if the bridle caught on the top flap, say to the outside of the plastic stiffener, with out enough slack to allow the top pin or stopped to travel all the way to the bottom pin in theory you would not load or pull it. There are several if's in that but do they really need to be there at all? How much advantage are we buying our selves. What about with a tight cover flap? Where you are head high and must compress the flap upwards before the sliding bridle can act through the bottom pin as a pulley. Look back at some of the jamming and failure modes that were examined on containers following that last tow. I think the sliding bridle could exacerbate some of those issues.

I like playing with cool new golly gee whiz ideas like this but this is kind of an unforgiving environment and it behooves us to put some thought into a new design idea be fore we go and chunk our selves off some thing with it.

Cool discussion. I just wish we weren't having it over some ones grave.

Lee

Here's the same image with numbers on it.

I'll try to get a scale to do a proper pull test on a few of these. Or if anyone who has a scale wants to run some tests, that'd be great.

The other factor I haven't seen mentioned is that if the pin is in an unnatural position, the first 8-10'' of bridle being pulled acts as a shock absorber for the bottom pin. (I have plenty of slow-mo footage of this if anyone's interested)

When you combine that with a "normal" amount of PC hesitation or pre-inflation pull force, you end up with the bottom pin already in its torqued "locked and ready" position by the time the pull force ramps up. This is one the major contributing causes to regular SD pin locks, such as the famous Bad Seed incident that sparked a lot of pin lock discussion (http://www.basejumper.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;).

I'm sorry but I'm confused. In that photo I see a frown face.

And here's another thought. Two pin rigs are the norm now, correct?

I'm wondering if a one pin rig would have less chance of a pin lock-up than a two pin rig? I'm thinking 50 per cent less chance? One pin versus two.

Frank.

Look at the last pin lock image I uploaded. The Vertex is shown with 3B. The lock would happen with 2B, which would not lock up against the pin flap like it would if the pin was flipped during construction (which would result in the "A" configurations). It's a subtle but critical difference.

Yes, I see that your photos 2A and 2B are smiley faces. Death trap smiley faces due to the way the bridle has been threaded through the eyelet.

Thanks, Frank.

Whatever helps them feel warm and fuzzy. In reality if your pin locks you are fucked (1 pin, 2 pin, floating pin). This floating pin "theory" is exactly that, a "theory" that may appear sound but in reality will help you in no way at all. Here's a rather old link that already questions this bullshit proving that yet again BASE jumpers don't seem to want to learn: http://www.basejumper.com/...ating%20pin;#1278265

Edit: I also think it's interesting that some jumpers in the old thread questioned the floating pin, then appear to at some point start advocating it's use, and now seem to be questioning it's use again.

I doubt it. I only have a few 1 pin jumps and they were my earliest jumps so I was too scared to pay much attention. But I believe it is harder to get consistent pin tensions on a 1 pin rig vs a 2 pin rig. I also think the 1 pin would be most comparable to the bottom pin of a 2 pin rig in regards to locking issues. So I think your 50% theory is out. Tom would have a better idea though.

the idea of the floating pin it to transfer pulling force to the other pin in the event of a pin lock, possibly relieving pack pressure and allowing the locked pin to come free... im curious if anyones ever tested something similar to the artistic masterpiece here http://imgur.com/PztB5x9 , should in theory do the same thing, but im also fairly sure its been tested and shot down for one reason or another, just curious why.

also, has anyone played around with the idea of using a cable rather than a pin? maybe the same cable that a tandem rig uses?
crude drawing here --> http://imgur.com/GNjVECs

http://www.basejumper.com/...xible_pins_P2938473/

Thank you Gharrop and Tom for your detailed analysis on this issue. My condolences for those of you who are friends to Bryan. During my object avoidance course with Tom, I fabricated and have been jumping a floating pin bridal system. I now have about 25 jumps on it, with only 2 being slider-up and the remainder being static-line/PCA or handheld. Firstly, I have not had any issues of any sort and found comfort in creating a bridal which in combination with my Menace container has practically eliminated all forms of the pinlock detailed in other vids and threads. Also, in review of Tom's .pdf, I found that failure #4 & #5 are extremely unlikely, because not only do you have to be "unluckly" enough to thread the eye of the pin but upon repacking after each jump i've made, i have NOT seen a case where my bottom pin has shifted at all- meaning, it functioned as designed (possibly due to not having incredibly tight bottom closing loop tension and top half of container opening first). HOWEVER, after fiddling with the bridal with both static and dynamic varying amounts of pull force and varying amounts of closing loop tension, i WAS able to replicate the pin-lock scenario which mimics Gharrp's 2b photo, due to the choice i made in which direction to thread on the eye of the bottom pin during construction. The videos i recorded were pretty much senseless as the results were simply not replicable consistently and resulted in me mumbling and trying other options- however, the possibility exists: I detailed the specific order of events which must happen for this lock to occur on my container/ bridal combo starting with top left and going clockwise. Topleft, how my pins are always set. Topright, somehow, the pin is rotated counterclockwise to produce smiley-up pointing left. Bottomright, some (undeterminable and inconsistent) combination of pull force and closing loop tension presses pin into face of material. Bottomleft, once seized in place, the bridal pulls through the eye of bottom pin until stopped by material and creates a truly 100% pin lock scenario that would likely not be remedied by changing body position or pulling bridal by hand in freefall. That said, I was only able to achieve this scenario when i set the pin to smiley up and artificially created extra tight bottom pin closing loop tension by folding canopy in ways i normally dont. My lessons learned: 1. (off-topic slightly) my closing loops eyes are too large and can let my pin eye slip through. 2. the floating pin bridal lock on my container is very unlikely if i follow my normal procedures, however it IS within the realm of possibility if for one reason or another the pin is rotated, bottom closing loop tension is VERY scary tight, and i was going handheld on short delay and the real-life dynamic forces didnt aid in the pin extraction. 3. the jury is still out for me on using floating pin on my container versus fixed (as the typical fixed pinlock becomes a problem again) 4. Gharrop's 2a photo can not be achieved with the way I constructed my bridal, however, I cut another duplicate bridal i made, threaded the pin on reversed and the 2a scenario became apparent-and slightly more likely than the 2b which is possible on my setup, but again, "inconsistent yet possible" to the point where i have driven myself crazy.

photo of pinlock sequence- apologies, original image size was too large

ok , i think i need to start socializing more with jumpers in real life and at the same time start reading these forums again a little more.... because i don't get it?? what was wrong with the "regular" bridals??????


And when did the "floating" bridals become the new thing and why.

so are the bridals just put threw the "eye" of the Pin? or what? and is it threw both pins or just the top pin????

and why.... i never really notice this before? i don't get it?
what was wrong with the "normal" bridals to make people want to do this....

thanks

It's my understanding that you shouldn't do this....

Im not sure if one guy deciding to do it makes it the new thing

Not so certain it was "one guy deciding to do it". I'm pretty certain it was being taught for a period of time--at least through last summer and fall.

By who?

To be clear, Tom never took a stance of "floating pin bridles are better, smarter, safer...etc." At least not in my personal experience and I've been around the past couple of years (the period in question).

He simply introduced them to students, educating by saying "Hey guys...these things exist. Here are the reasons why SOME people like them. Like everything there are pros and cons to the design."

Any decision to jump floating pin bridles would be made by the jumper. But I'm not sure you can fault someone for the education about an already-existing design.

There are probably a handful of incidents in which a FPB would have saved someone from death/harm. There are others (like the recent one here in TF) where the FPB likely contributed to the incident. Like all gear...there is always an Achilles heel somewhere.

From the "Custom floating pin bridle" thread: http://www.basejumper.com/...post=2977313#2977313


Personally, I take issue with introducing floating pins to rigs not designed to use them. And I doubt this was a fleet of Vertex rigs. I know they were used on Gargoyles, PPros, and at least one Helium.

like bluhdow said

He simply introduced them to students, educating by saying "Hey guys...these things exist. Here are the reasons why SOME people like them. Like everything there are pros and cons to the design."

is this a bad idea?

For any of the rigs I listed above (Gargoyle, Helium, PPro), I'd say "yes". They weren't designed for floating-pin bridles and I think adding them to and jumping those rigs represents questionable judgement. I'm only aware of one rig--the Vertex--that was designed with this type of bridle. I may be wrong in that, but I know the ones listed above certainly weren't.

Based on your experiences? Who are you and how long have you been around?

that doesn't really matter.

i know 100% that these are not certified to be used on any morpheus rig.
if you want a statement from the manufacturer to prove this I can probably get you one.

there is no reason to re-invent the wheel.

Just to play Devils advocate. - most everyone uses a static line, is there a single system recommended by Morpheus, or do jumpers use what they are comfortable with. If their is a fatality on a SL is everyone going to attack them?

I would argue that he "re-introduced" a design that has already been discontinued by manufacturers.
While I believe his intent was to merely educate jumpers about gear that exists what he has actually imparted to people is that floating pins are a viable option if you so choose, even though no manufacturers (to my knowledge) build them any more.
I personally don't like his reasoning either. If students are freaked by the appearance of a random floating pin bridle on your rental rig then maybe you should have uniformal bridles on your rental equipment. Uniformal 2 pin bridles that are standard and commonly manufactured items. And then keep the floating pin bridles in the class room to educate the students with.

i would say that is apples and oranges...

a SL is like adding a different PC to the system. the bridle for a particular rig is inherent in the system itself.

but, i think all above are fair points... i just don't think you should ever arbitrarily decide well let's just make this new bridle a floating one so people will see them. just my opinion of course, but you could just as easily show someone a floating pin bridle that's stapled to a wall. it's not a difficult concept.

im still trying to visualize the floating bridle theory in my head and for me i donnt think im comfortable with a pin able to slide around... if im getting this right?

ive been jumping since the Basic Research was around..... it joined with
Vertigo BASE (Marta and Jimmy P) and i've owned a Prism and Vertex and only remember using a sewn in pin..

I just don't remember Todd S. ever pushing a non sewn/tackd in pin???

i don't know that a bridle being able to move threw the eye makes me comfortable...The only thing i want that floats is my Slider ...

I'm probably too dense to figure out the merits of a floating bridle..

but it kinda seems to me to complicate things in the sense of not being simple to me,, as a BASE rig should be as simple as possible....stationary for the most part... i.e. sewn in risers....no articulation..no snag points...no cargo pouches... etc......SIMPLE...and yes i realize the merits of a cutaway system.. but to me i like a direct connection//not a reconnection that can fail by human errror.... this is my opinion of course..but a Simple one.
Keep it simple and standard.

its the same reason i dont jump a velcro rig anymore ( my first 40-50 jumps were on a Reactor) .... i dont like the double attachment on the flap... I believe a well known jumper parrished in MOAB because he wasnt paying attention whilst assembling and well the flap came off and the Tarp stayed on his back..
******Nothing wrong w/velcro-- it has its merits- Just not for me********
I like my bridle to go from Point A to Point B ... SIMPLE............

point being is i don't see the upside of a floating pin....pardon my ignorance if i'm just uncomfortable with a pin that allows the bridle to slide....

i mean doesn't everybody have "idiot" Velcro mods standard on the bridle with enough room also between pins to fold the excess and then fold a little just down off to the right under the second pin etc...i mean doesn't that DO the job?
i don't know? that's all i know how to do???
I pack bridle the same for WS.. 4sec delay, 7 sec delay etc...

don't know??? possibly don't understand never said i was smart.......I'm just amazed i've never seen or heard of this til' now...?? weird??

each their own i guess? Just have a good time and don't die as they say!! cuz dieing sux..........


So it a Nutshell.....What's the upside to the floating pin? to allow the top pin to pop first then the bottom.. and the start of extraction??

instead of bottom. top. extraction???

Sorry if this got Epic........

This (and a few others) thread is slowly devolving into two camps arguing back and forth. One side is emphasizing the pros, and the other side emphasizing the cons of a floating bridle. It is probably going to turn into a shouting match. But there is obviously a lot more on everybody's mind.

I actually wrote a lot more than this, but decided it would be better to just watch things play out from the sidelines. The bottom line is: make your own decisions, but you're not going to convince anybody of anything here. Anyone posting has already made their decision, and anybody taking advice from an internet forum is probably going to make bad choices anyway.

Yea its cool...... its just new to me and im feeling kinda dumb not ever noticing it being done before and at the same time cant quite see the upside compared to the way i thought was the "way"....

it's cool ..... maybe i learn something new and think on it awhile

later

As I stated much earlier in this thread, I removed the floating pins from use on the systems at the school. In one case, this required modification of the rig _away from_ the manufacturers specifications.

To be clear, we do not rent gear to students, nor do we have "rental equipment." Gear use is included in the courses, and the gear is moved around between students to educate them on a variety of systems. No student is forced to jump any particular system, nor do students pay rental fees for gear use.

The floating pin bridle was introduced by Basic Research on their Vertex rig around 2000.

They are not in widespread use, although I do know several jumpers who are either still using them on Vertex's or who have retrofitted other rigs with them. I know people who have made hundreds of jumps on them successfully. Some of those people were first exposed to them in one of our courses, and others were not.


During courses, I discuss them when time and opportunity permit, usually in response to a student asking a question about the floating pin we had (I sewed it down after Bryan's accident) on an original Vertex we use as a student rig.

I believe that it's important that jumpers be familiar with a wide variety of gear from various periods, because they may encounter a wide variety of gear during their jumping careers. It is inadequate to teach students about only one system, and I believe it is important to expose them to as many ideas as possible.

I have never "taught" or "told" anyone to build or install a floating pin bridle.

I find it sad that people who have never taken a course taught by me are commenting on what I "taught" and having to be corrected by people who have actually taken such a course.

It is unfortunately the nature of internet discourse that someone can claim they know what another person is teaching without ever having met that person, without ever having taken a course from that person, without ever having stepped foot inside their training facility, and without ever disclosing their own name or their own interests (commercial or personal) in competing training courses.

unrelated but thats the weirdest reason ive heard for not liking or jumping velcro rigs....if assembly of a bridle on a velcro rig is an issue for someone then attaching a pilot chute is gonna take just as much rocket science to understand....i would have thought 2pin rigs getting routed incorrectly etc killing people being way more common...velcro rigs definitely have cons...just never heard that one before

hahah "certified for use"-- this is base jumping! anyone who has ever modded their deep brake settings has done something that at least one major manufacturer advises against. ever make your own tailgate? your own bridle? your own d-bag? there are many examples of common practices that a manufacturer would not approve of. manufacturers declare the optimal conditions for using their gear, to be helpful, safe, and to cover their own asses.

One of the reasons we even have a technical forum, is because it is in the spirit of BASE from the beginning, to improvise equipment, share new ideas, and sometimes even do things that make the manufacturers and fellow jumpers cringe. Those who don't like it, can go back to skydiving with BSRs and FARs and S&TAs telling us how to have fun.

Personally, i would love to have seen an example of a floating pin bridle at my FJC with the teaching that it is not recommended. (That being said, i think the concept is dumb and I would never use one. ) Maybe the time came to phase them out as they became less and less common. But for some people to not let it go, and persistently use this as a basis to attack Tom, who has clearly and rationally stated the facts, is just ignorant internet stupidity at its worst.

i doubt i am the only one who is just sitting on the sidelines for weeks now, just shaking his head at all the stupidity that has engulfed various threads, whether it is flame wars over bridge day, personal disputes with various individuals, or the content of what is probably the world's best FJC, I think I need a break from these forums until tempers have thinned out. It's distracting from the true tragedies and learning opportunities out there.

/rant

PS nothing against roostnureye, i am not criticizing preferring to stick to the mfr recs. I am criticizing if you are implying that everyone needs to--instructors included-- which may or may not be what you meant.

no offense taken.
we all are our own individuals and make our own choices.
I'm a Florida guy and know Kathy very well. I know her rigs very well also
when the whole "watch thy bridle" videos came out, I was the first person in her shop working on a solution.
it really might Surprise you at how much thought goes into the dynamics of a proper functioning bridle. we played around with multiple ideas, pin spacing, pin direction, stiffners, etc.
a small change does have a big effect in some scenarios.
after seeing this I understand why there are manufacturer recommendations, they designed the gear and test it to work worth their setup.
if you want to build and test your own gear then by all means do so.
but know that you are a test jumper that is going outside of what the manufacturer recommends, and in turn are putting yourself at a higher risk than someone with non modified gear.

I hope students, new jumpers, and older jumpers alike will read and remember this. For all gear. Make sure there's a good reason before you make a change and you fully understand what that is. And it wouldn't hurt to get a second or third Opinion while you're at it.

How so? What did you need to do to the rig? Or do you mean the bridle?

This is semantics. Call it whatever you want but if someone is paying and you and you provide the gear it's a rental. Not that it even matters.

Just so ya know im not sayin anything towards u the moderator or your teaching methods..... it was more about the idea itself....thats it......thats all......

Well it actually happened talk to Jimmy p. and marta..... i believe they literallly looked him in the eye/face as he was freefalling from above and saw that HE knew it was over..... i know these things seem like no brainers nowadays or whatever.... i've also seen somebody almost do it once right in front of me while packing so anyways ......Velcro aint all that bad but it's not as straight forward and simple as i like it...i guess if you saw me rig and how simple it is compared to most..... doesnt matter though....
was jjust using as an example of keeping it basic and/or simple............

and again never said i was smart or whatever....and im sometimes a hypocrite in that i DO use WLO toggles (terminal/WS) which can fail if u dont inspect and the pin slips out so that is not as basic or simple i guess... never had a problem though...still cant quite Figure the floating pin thing in my head aas far as switching over to that instead of the basic bridle i've come to know and love..........

peace fellow jumpers ........it's Just BASEfalling/flying...........

yeh i suppose but at the end of the day people are always going to forget to do things or fuck any rig up (probably gonna be me lol), theres even been someone that forgot there pilot chute, and as for the floating bridle i have one and i never plan to use it ever, anyone want it??

is a PPro, a DP, and several others like Warlock, etc. not almost exactly the same design as a VERTEX? I'm pretty sure it's 4 flaps and a wrap around tuck tab... so saying the FPB's aren't "designed" for non-vertex systems that are exactly the same design is kind of generally false IMO.

Now I can maybe see that logic for a Gargoyle/He/Badseed, etc. But even then, I'm not 100% convinced that it really matters so much that the gear is used, but rather it matters that (as is the case with all gear configurations, as "designed" or not) you must properly and carefully rig the gear for each jump... ultimately being careful means it should be fine even with those rigs IMO. I know people with floating pin bridles on these that are doing just fine. But I will say that I don't personally use one. Careful gear management is the most important thing to any BASE system is my biggest point...