This site contains all British Skydiving Approved Tandem parachute equipment modifications that have been approved, recorded in the minutes and subsequently ratified at Riggers or Safety and Training Committee meetings. The modifications may be selected and viewed using three criteria; Type, Search, and Sort. Individual modifications have a brief description and may be expanded to show full details. Modifications may also have attached files including text, image and video as appropriate.
‘Type’ refers to a tandem system container and comprises all modifications for that equipment type that have appeared in the British Skydiving Riggers or Safety and Training Committee minutes since 1993. Each modification is as quoted in the applicable minute and sometimes, where necessary, there are references to other items to facilitate a fuller understanding of the modification The ‘Search’ and ‘Sort’ criteria are self-explanatory.
RIGGERS 29th Mar 07
Minutes and matters arising from the Riggers meeting of the 1st February 2007.
MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING FROM THE RIGGERS MEETING OF THE 1 FEBRUARY 2007
The Chairman of STC advised those present that Bill Sharp also had asked the Committee for a number of clarifications from previous meetings: Bill Sharp’s second issue concerned an item from the Riggers Committee Meeting Minutes of 28 September 2006. This item concerned Item 6 of the meeting: ‘To discuss the packing method of Tandem reserves’. The second and third paragraphs of this item as reported in the Minutes stated:
“A good deal of discussion ensued on this issue. It was generally felt by those present that as the subject of pro-packing is being taught on Advanced Packing Courses and some manufactures state that pro-packing is permitted, then the BPA should permit the pro-packing of Tandem reserves.
Following further discussion, it was proposed by Pete Sizer and seconded by Ray Armstrong that Tandem reserves can be packed as per the manufacturers instruction.”
This proposal had been Carried Unanimously.
The clarification Bill had requested for the website was, what exactly was meant by part of the last paragraph ‘as per the manufacturers instructions’.
Bill stated that he believed this should mean that the Tandem reserve has to be packed as per the manufacturer’s instructions as shown in their manual, (according to SI 1/05, Packing Manuals).
Bill was concerned that the wording in the Minutes was a little vague as to what exactly a manufacturer’s instruction could be. He asked if an unsubstantiated phone call or unsubstantiated face-to-face conversation with the owner or an employee of the company, constituted a manufacturer’s instruction, thereby supposedly giving a reserve packer their ‘authority’ to Pro-Pack?
Following some discussion on this matter, it was proposed by Phill Elston and seconded by Rick Boardman that the wording relating the packing of Tandem reserves, be amended to read:
“Tandem reserves can be packed as per the manufacturers written instructions”.
Carried Unanimously
The Chairman of STC advised those present that Bill Sharp had also asked for clarification with regard to the pro-packing of Tandem reserves. Bill had asked that if pro-packing was not stipulated in the particular Tandem Reserve manual, could Tandem reserves still be pro-packed.
Following some discussion on this matter, the Committee agreed that unless the manufacturer stipulated in their particular Tandem Reserve Manual that Tandem reserves can be pro-packed, then the pro-packing of Tandem reserves was not permitted.
RIGGERS 29th Mar 07
Further information on RIGGERS 23rd Nov 06.
1. MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING FROM THE RIGGERS MEETING OF THE 1 FEBRUARY 2007
The Chairman of STC advised those present that Bill Sharp also had asked the Committee for a number of clarifications from previous meetings:
-
Bill had asked for clarification on an equipment clearance issue from the Riggers Committee Meeting of the 23 November 06. At this meeting the Committee had accepted a modification to the Performance Variable TD400 Tandem Parachute system.
Bill had asked that in order for the accuracy of the BPA Approved Tandem Modification Website, for the Committee to confirm that the main and reserve combination presented with this Tandem container, was still as published in the original Form 258 (Contrail 390 main, Quick 400 reserve). This information was required so that any modifications to this original setup could be accurately recorded for the future.
The Committee was advised that the above combination of equipment as quoted by Bill Sharp was correct.
RIGGERS 6th Aug 09
Acceptance of PD Phoenix 400 Tandem Main Canopy.
8. A.O.B
-
A Student Parachutist Equipment Change Proposal Application Request had been received from Jason Thompson, a copy of which had been previously circulated. Jason had stated that PD manufactures a Sigma 395 for the civilian market. They also manufacture a Phoenix 400 for the military market, which was exactly the same canopy spec, the only difference being the name change to Phoenix. Jason had provided a spec for the 400, which had also been circulated in advance of the meeting.
Following some discussion on this request, it was pointed out by those present that this canopy did not require the Committee’s acceptance, as it already fulfilled the required criteria for Tandem main canopies.
RIGGERS 6th Aug 09 (& STC 6th Aug 09)
Changes made to Tandem Strong in Vector configuration (see RIGGERS 5th May 94) with additional changes to cutaway pad and RSL area (NOT CLEARED for general use).
8. A.O.B.
- John Page asked for some guidance on an equipment related issue. Following some discussion by those present, it was felt that this matter be referred to STC that evening for consideration.
(STC 6th Aug 09)
3. MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING FROM THE RIGGERS SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE 11th JUNE 2009
The Chairman of STC then continued with matters arising from that evenings Riggers meeting. He stated that the meeting had discussed an equipment issue raised by John Page, which the meeting had agreed be referred to STC for consideration.
John Page reported that the issue surrounded a Strong Tandem system in a Vector configuration that had been accepted as a Tandem mod in the past, but not for general use.
He stated that of the several rigs he had seen, all had a loop from the cutaway pad around the secondary drogue release (the system as per the Next, not the Vector). He stated that he believed it should still not be given a general clearance for use as it required specific user briefings as the RSL was not on the same side as Next and Vector. He stated that Skydive London had been using the equipment in this configuration for some time and that an Advanced Rigger had also signed it off.
The meeting was also advised that Hinton and UKPS had also been using equipment in same configuration .
Following further discussion, John Page proposed, seconded by Stuart Meacock that Skydive London, UKPS and Hinton Skydiving be permitted to continue using equipment in this configuration, until the next Riggers meeting when he would submit a proposal including the necessary paperwork and Emergency Drills for the acceptance of these rigs.
For: 11 – Against: 0 – Abstentions: 1
Carried
NOTE: Please see RIGGERS 1st OCT 09 (continuation)
RIGGERS 1st Oct 09 (continuation)
Changes made to Tandem Strong in Vector configuration (see RIGGERS 5th May 94) with additional changes to cutaway pad and RSL area (NOT CLEARED for general use).
2. MINUTES AND MATTERS ARISING FROM THE RIGGERS MEETING OF THE 6 AUGUST 2009
Page 4, Item 8 ― AOB (vii). A Student Parachutist Equipment Change Proposal application had been received from John Page together with a set of Emergency Drills, copies of which had been circulated with the Additions to the Agenda.
Mr Page presented the equipment in question to the Committee and gave further details of his request, which was a move of handles on a Strong system to a similar configuration as the Next Tandem system including a ring around the secondary drogue release. Because of the location of the RSL he proposed that only Tandem Instructors (qualified on Next) who had been briefed and had their log book endorsed by a CCI from Skydive London, UKPC or Skydive Hinton were permitted to jump the equipment. The serial numbers of which were: 601537, 009178, 203028, 102032, 402728, 310284 and 704122.
Following some discussion, it was proposed by Pete Sizer and seconded by Kim Newton that the above equipment with the stated serial numbers be accepted for use at the listed Centres.
Carried Unanimously
NOTE: Please see RIGGERS 6th Aug 09 (& STC 6th Aug 09)
RIGGERS 26th Nov 09
Acceptance of ‘small’ version of Tandem Next (c/w Paratec 373 reserve), with differences to the RSL and Collins Lanyard area.
8. A.O.B
-
Kim Newton reported that she recently had in a brand new set of Next Tandem kit, which was one of the smaller ones fitted with a 373 reserves. She pointed out that there were a number of differences to the equipment, in particular to the RSL and that it had also been fitted with a new type of Collins Lanyard. She stated that she had made sure the equipment owner was aware of the differences for their reserve drills.
Kim stated that this may be a one off because of its smaller size, but felt that jumpers should be aware that there may be slight variations to the equipment in relation to its size.
NOTE: See RIGGERS 5th Aug 10 For further information about this item.
Summary
Last Update: From Riggers and Safety and Training Committee meetings 1st Feb 2018.
Download
Form-212 Approved Tandem Parachute Equipment Modifications
Detail
To ascertain which canopies are cleared for use with a specific container, reference must be made to the modifications for that container type. A type of ‘Canopies Only’ has been included for any individual canopies, main or reserve, which have been approved for Tandem use by STC/Riggers but have no formal Tandem container system associated with them. These have been included for information only as the canopies have not had any modification applied to them.
Officially, any British Skydiving Tandem Modification that is cleared for use at any particular Riggers or STC Committee meeting must be formally ratified at the following Riggers or STC Meeting. These meetings are normally eight weeks apart and ‘officially’, any such Tandem Modification item will not be formally cleared until that ratification.
Important
Some previously recorded clearances have been removed. For the full wording see the item ‘RIGGERS 15th Feb 01’ under type ‘General’.
No reference is made to any formal Safety Notice, Safety Information or Update, that has been issued by an individual manufacturer, unless they require the Riggers or STC to intervene. This is because a manufacturer’s update is not part of the British Skydiving modification programme. Safety Notices and Safety Information sheets may be issued by British Skydiving but these have their own recommendations and/or instructions.