Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site trwrba.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cisneros From: cisneros@trwrba.UUCP (Robert D. Cisneros) Newsgroups: net.rec.skydive Subject: Deployment Devices Message-ID: <1385@trwrba.UUCP> Date: Thu, 25-Apr-85 20:11:36 EDT Article-I.D.: trwrba.1385 Posted: Thu Apr 25 20:11:36 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 28-Apr-85 06:46:28 EDT Organization: TRW EDS, Redondo Beach, CA Lines: 42 This article is my contribution to the recent series of articles on the location of throw out deployment devices. I can't fully agree with this type of deployment in the first place. The idea of letting a mechanical device pull the pin to my container is not my idea of comforting. Instead, a pullout device seems to be much more positive in deployment. I recently purchased a VECTOR container and had it converted to a pullout, (it comes from the factory as a throw out) and only have a few jumps on it. This brings up another subject..... THROW-OUT Vs. PULL-OUT... which is better? Prior to making my choice I asked several experienced skydivers which was better. I found that even though throw-outs are possibly more popular, they present some new problems : 1) If the bridle has been routed incorrectly it is possible to end up with a pilot chute in tow, and firing a reserve into that may result in serious consequence. 2) Premature deployment may occur when doing RW due to the location of the throw-out. 3) LOOOOONG Pilot chute hesitation (as compared to a pull-out device). I would appreciate any input anyone could give as the only draw- back I can think of for a pull-out is that you can't see it. Thanks, Robert Cisneros @ TRW ps: I'm sorry if this is an old subject, but I'm new to the net, so please NO FLAMES !!!!