BillyVance 34
dorbie 0
Quote
You don't have to contend with any of that when you miss the track completely.
You gotta be shittn' me! You must never have been to a race.....There are an equal amount if not more hazards outside the track,,,,50,000 cars , vendor semi's, hude tents, people, delivery carts, television production trucks,,,,,,
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
And none of those things would be cause to make you miss the track in the first place.
And none of those things would be cause to make you miss the track in the first place.
Quote
There ya go with that damn logic again!
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
Pulse 0
Quotenever bothered to qualify for a PRO ticket under a proper demo main.***
If the guy gained his pro rating with his stilletto - 10 predeclared jumps, not the bullshit 10 with a huge canopy - then 3 with the smaller to gain the pro rating, would you still consider the stilletto a not so proper demo canopy?
to me, smaller/eliptical doesnt always mean less safe....
*shrug* - donning nomex suit at this time....
Roy
It's all about appropriateness (if that's a word). I'm currently getting my PRO rating with my Velocity. That's not to say I'm going to be using that canopy for many demos.
A Piper Cub can be landed on the numbers. An F-15 can be landed on the numbers. Is that to say they are of equal use in a given situation?
"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."
D22369 0
Is that to say they are of equal use in a given situation?
***
My whole point was to merely to point out that a traditional large canopy wasnt always the correct tool for the job. they carry thier own risks to use *(lack of drive for the most part)
I know of a whole group from the same dz qualified on accuracy canopies then did thier 3 (as I see it)* BULLSHIT * qual jumps on smaller canopies.
I have gotten to 8 pro jumps on my old 120 stiletto before missing a jump and starting over twice...
I have no interest in gaining my pro rating with my FX, it woudnt be the appropriate tool for the job.
Roy
***
My whole point was to merely to point out that a traditional large canopy wasnt always the correct tool for the job. they carry thier own risks to use *(lack of drive for the most part)
I know of a whole group from the same dz qualified on accuracy canopies then did thier 3 (as I see it)* BULLSHIT * qual jumps on smaller canopies.
I have gotten to 8 pro jumps on my old 120 stiletto before missing a jump and starting over twice...
I have no interest in gaining my pro rating with my FX, it woudnt be the appropriate tool for the job.
Roy
They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.
billvon 3,085
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>I'm currently getting my PRO rating with my Velocity. That's not to
>say I'm going to be using that canopy for many demos.
Nothing wrong with that approach - but - I think it can be a bad idea to have one "regular" canopy that you jump 99% of the time, and a "demo" canopy that you jump once or twice a year. Demos require currency under the canopy you're using. It can be a tricky balance to strike when your 'primary' canopy is not a good demo canopy.
>say I'm going to be using that canopy for many demos.
Nothing wrong with that approach - but - I think it can be a bad idea to have one "regular" canopy that you jump 99% of the time, and a "demo" canopy that you jump once or twice a year. Demos require currency under the canopy you're using. It can be a tricky balance to strike when your 'primary' canopy is not a good demo canopy.
Pulse 0
Quote>I'm currently getting my PRO rating with my Velocity. That's not to
>say I'm going to be using that canopy for many demos.
Nothing wrong with that approach - but - I think it can be a bad idea to have one "regular" canopy that you jump 99% of the time, and a "demo" canopy that you jump once or twice a year. Demos require currency under the canopy you're using. It can be a tricky balance to strike when your 'primary' canopy is not a good demo canopy.
Agreed whole-heartedly
"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."
An F-15 can be landed on the numbers...
Quote
Not to drift from the topic...but...
"Landed on the numbers" means just that, landing from a touch down to full stop...ON THE NUMBERS.
I know it can be done in a J-3....I've done it.
Watched a few 182's and a 206 do it.
But an F-15??
That's an A-F Eagle bird so no tail hook, the only way an F-15 can 'land' on the numbers, is nose dive vertical straight in.
Which kinda 'disproves' the point about a fast 'canopy' being appropriate.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
would you still consider the stiletto a not so proper demo canopy?
to me, smaller/elliptical doesn't always mean less safe....
to me, smaller/elliptical doesn't always mean less safe....
Quote
Had a guy I occasionally do demos with complain that he got his PRO with a stiletto and couldn't use the big 260 Triathlons that particular sponsored demo team used.
I called Bullshit, and told him I would paint the circle out on a blacktop parking lot, 10 jumps...I would give him 100.00 for every one he made if he would give me 100.00 for every one he missed.
"Not on a parking lot, and there has to be wind."
'Demo' jumper...
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
Pulse 0
QuoteAn F-15 can be landed on the numbers...
Quote
Not to drift from the topic...but...
"Landed on the numbers" means just that, landing from a touch down to full stop...ON THE NUMBERS.
I know it can be done in a J-3....I've done it.
Watched a few 182's and a 206 do it.
But an F-15??
That's an A-F Eagle bird so no tail hook, the only way an F-15 can 'land' on the numbers, is nose dive vertical straight in.
Which kinda 'disproves' the point about a fast 'canopy' being appropriate.
I believe you mean that it 'proves' my point about both aircraft NOT being ideal in a given situation. You have reiterated my point.....we're basically in agreement. I'm not saying the fast canopy is appropriate for everything.
For the record. F-15's DO have tailhooks, like any other USAF fighter. Wouldn't last through a carrier landing though."Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."
>>>I'd always heard them refered to as an emergency arresting hook
I believe you mean that it 'proves' my point about both aircraft NOT being ideal in a given situation.
>>>It's late, I'm tired...but how does an F-15 'land on the numbers' then??
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
I believe you mean that it 'proves' my point about both aircraft NOT being ideal in a given situation.
>>>It's late, I'm tired...but how does an F-15 'land on the numbers' then??
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
Pulse 0
I'll use simpler terms so that everyone can follow along.
A J-3 can land 'on target'. An F-15 can land 'on target'. Yes, they're going to have different requirements for landing. This is what would make one NOT appropriate.
Is it possible to qualify for a PRO rating with a fast canopy? Yes. Is a fast canopy the ideal demo canopy? No
As for landing 'on the numbers'. I think you know I'm talking in the more generic terms of putting it down on the numbers. Otherwise I would not have used such a wide range in aircraft?
A J-3 can land 'on target'. An F-15 can land 'on target'. Yes, they're going to have different requirements for landing. This is what would make one NOT appropriate.
Is it possible to qualify for a PRO rating with a fast canopy? Yes. Is a fast canopy the ideal demo canopy? No
As for landing 'on the numbers'. I think you know I'm talking in the more generic terms of putting it down on the numbers. Otherwise I would not have used such a wide range in aircraft?
"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."
As for landing 'on the numbers'. I think you know I'm talking in the more generic terms of putting it down on the numbers. Otherwise I would not have used such a wide range in aircraft?
Quote
I know..I'm 'nit-picking' and we're drifing from the topic...
But...
An f-15 'can't land on the numbers, and under 'most' curcomstances neither can a fast canopy.
Many demos call for the jumper to be "on time, on target, & stand up"
Running it out is fine if you have the 'runway', but if you don't, and sometimes even if you do but make an error...the chance for injury is much greater with a small fast canopy.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
Pulse 0
Quote
An f-15 'can't land on the numbers, and under 'most' curcomstances neither can a fast canopy.
How do you figure? How are people able to pass PRO qualification jumps on fast canopies then?
As for running it out....you're right. And once again, WE ARE AGREEING ON THIS POINT! This is why you look at demo sights before jumping into them. If you have the 'runway' and reasonable outs, you could actually jump a faster canopy into it. But this would be a rarity. For tight demos and ones with 'questionable' outs, DON'T TAKE THE FAST CANOPY.
I guess it comes down to the pilot to make these judgements and fly well. Sounds like all we're talking about here is how much space it takes to land different types of canopies. You can hit the target with both types of canopies. How much ground it takes and what kind of approach is required all goes into the canopy/demo relationship decision.
For what it's worth. If someone can't put a high-performance canopy down where they want to, they probably shouldn't be jumping high-performance canopies. Simple as that. Demo or no demo.
"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."
For what it's worth. If someone can't put a high-performance canopy down where they want to, they probably shouldn't be jumping high-performance canopies. Simple as that. Demo or no demo.
Quote
Agreed...(told ya I was tired, gotta re-re-read everything)
And as to people getting their PRO on fast canopies, if it's 'real' and 'legal', more power to 'em.
I just kind of wonder about a few of the folks I know that have the rating on an elliptical, but can seem to land on target consistently at the DZ where there is NO pressure.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
marks 0
QuoteHow do you figure? How are people able to pass PRO qualification jumps on fast canopies then?
It just takes a different approach. also, of course, you have to understand what your flying.
You don't have to contend with any of that when you miss the track completely.
You gotta be shittn' me! You must never have been to a race.....There are an equal amount if not more hazards outside the track,,,,50,000 cars , vendor semi's, hude tents, people, delivery carts, television production trucks,,,,,,
There was a demo I did a few years ago at an amusement/water park. The landing site was the sand beach of the wave pool. There was just about NOTHING else that you could land on as an alternative, except go into the pool itself.