your answer was 100% exactly why they have made the rule......
tim


"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
news:4039b164$1@darkstar...
In article ,
Tim Mara wrote:
now, I am not going to try to justify the cycle period, and in fact this
can
vary from country to country, and even most manufacturers will probably
say
the 120 day cycle is too frequent for our typical use, but I can
understand the FAA rule on this, and anyone who doesn't see the reasoning
is
why they have the rule...
plain and simple, if it were legal to wear an out of date parachute,
would
you, or anyone else bother to have it inspected or repacked?? I rather
doubt
it....in fact you're already suggested you wouldn't...

There's no rule requiring me to change my tidy-whities every week
either,
but I DO IT! :P For health reasons, you know... Same for a chute.
I wouldn't just sit on the thing for 12 years and drip jelly on it
and drag it through the dirt all day and think it would open. But
if it's my own G*****n chute in a G*****n single-seat glider,
whose business is it anyway?

Rules are never a simple matter or what's right for the masses, but made
because some one or a few people have done something that was
questionable,
or wrong. If we were all perfect, and always right we'd have far fewer
rules, regulations and restrictions....
tim

A coupla guys weighing in heavy on an expired reserve on
a tandem skydiving jump is a hell of a long way from me
in my itsy-bitsy glider wearing an emergency chute I don't even
intend to use. Who'll convince me that the extra safety
of having the more frequent repack outweighs the lack of safety
when I fly twice without the chute each year (while I wait for
the packer to send it back)?