Islander Jock
Just a few points
I agree with you if there is a problem with reverse risers and apparently that is the case the APF should have issued a Rigging Advisory Circular (RAC)
1/ The woman was reported to be a class “B” packer the APF RAC No 215rev C states mating of components from different manufactures may be made by a packer “A” and any question of strength, operation or compatibility must be resolved by a packer “A”.
One must ask was this the case here?
2/ AS for the rubber bands this is on the APF web site
by John Sherman
It has become apparent to me that despite the problems in the past with out-of-sequence openings among other things, that people haven't learned that rubber bands break for a reason. The U.S. Government spent a lot of money developing a specification for parachute stow bands. In my 35 years in the sport I have never found an acceptable substitute.
You might find a product which will work most of the time and which might seem to solve your breakage problem. But don't count on it working every time in every situation. If you think about it, you might ask why someone hasn't previously come up with a more durable product. It's such a simple matter, a stronger rubber band, and there are a lot of smart people who have come before us ...
I remember the “red” rubber band that was popular for a while in the 70's. They ended up melting and sticking to the grommets. I remember the Buna "N" "O" rings. They “spit” lines. I remember the Type 17 riser problem that was traced to a non-Mil. Spec stow band. If you haven’t had a bag lock due to one of these “unbreakable” stow bands – you probably will. I have witnessed three baglock/cutaways that are directly attributable to “bands that would not break.”
Consider this; parachute system designers develop components based upon the characteristics of the stow band. This is a fact. I know, as that is what I do for a living, and have been doing it for over 30 years. I strongly advise all parachutists to use only Mil Spec. rubber stow bands. To use anything else can and will compromise your system.
The really good aspect of all of this is that Mil. Spec. rubber bands cost considerably less than all of the new-fangled substitutes.
Who supplied the mismatched rubber bands of varying age and condition, with one at least being an unsuitable type being very large and strong?
3/ Why would the operator state the equipment was inspected if it was not required?
4/ Unfortunately sometimes it takes a tragedy to highlight the downfalls of ignoring safety and the following excerpt from the INTERIM FATALITY REPORT is wise advice.
Safety officers should try to reinforce to all jumpers the lessons from this to try to prevent this kind of sequence recurring. This could be illustrated through the use of the “Reason Model” (available as an APF safety poster and from our web site) which illustrates how numerous safety layers concerning training and equipment can be put in place that can break such a chain of events.
The only agenda is SAFETY
rs480