On Saturday, June 2, 2018 at 1:31:56 AM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Friday, June 1, 2018 at 4:23:50 PM UTC-7, wrote:
I was not aware of Para-Phernalia's 20-year life (which seems to check out based on quick research). I don't believe it's common knowledge. If I had known about it, I would not have bought mine. At age 67, saying I won't buy another one is probably not that threatening. But I won't.

You can talk all you want about the per-year cost over 20 years, but it's still $2,000+. Knowing it's a wasting asset regardless of how well you care for it is discouraging.

Chip Bearden

I am on my third chute, would love to buy another in seventeen years, when this one times out. It is not a "wasting asset", it is a depreciating asset used as a/the safety device. I have never had a car for twenty years, a couch, a bed, a pillow, a climbing rope, boat.... Put aside $100 per year, or cut one Starbuck's trip a week for a year and you are move than covered (I assume you will invest your $100). It is really not a big burden if you plan for it. And it is your butt! I have had a few classes in material sciences. Anyone remember the acid wash thingy?
Acid mesh problem was a manufacturing error that took a lot less than 20 years to show up. Replacing parachutes every 20 years wouldn't have avoided anything. Do you throw out your glass gliders when they are 21 years old? Parachutes and glass gliders are both made out of petroleum if one can't be determined to be safe after 20 years neither can the other. It's funny we fly 50+ plus year old Schweizers that have spent their lives tied down outside yet some try to convince us that a parachute that spends most of its life in a bag stored in a closet is unairworthy at 21 years old.