USPA downsizing guidelines proposal

[HydroGuy 0]

I haven't seen any massive debates about this...did no one else get this chart emailed to them yesterday?

Was this some sort of sign to me?

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[PhreeZone 20]

Have'nt seen it yet. PM it or post it if you could...

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[FrEaK_aCcIdEnT 0]

i wanna see.

ExPeCt ThE uNeXpEcTeD!
DoNt MiNd ThE tYpOs, Im LaZy On CoRrEcTiOnS!

[NWFlyer 2]

I got the message. I'm assuming it went out to anyone on Brian Germain's mailing list.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[HydroGuy 0]

Ask and yee shall receive...

Word doc. attached

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[HydroGuy 0]

  Quote

I got the message. I'm assuming it went out to anyone on Brian Germain's mailing list.

I figured that too. Then I saw that there were no threads about it...

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[NWFlyer 2]

Is this the latest of the three versions that Brian has sent out?

[CSpenceFLY 1]

***Was this some sort of sign to me?


I don't know.Are you that guy?That guy that everyone talks about.


.

[Remster 30]

What do the brackets mean?

Remster

[labrys 0]

  Quote

What do the brackets mean?

b) Bottom Number: “Minimum Size Allowed” (In Brackets)
*The size of the reserve canopy is dictated by recommendations from the manufacturer.

Owned by Remi #?

[Darius11 12]

It looks like a fair chart.

However I would never think of someone with an exit weight 265 jumping a 260 on there 1st jump.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[HydroGuy 0]

From looking at this chart , I don't believe this is pertaining to AFF levels.

It also says these are minimums...any size larger is allowed and sometimes mandated.

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[justinb138 0]

Is the chart officially recommended by the USPA now or something?

[NWFlyer 2]

  Quote

Is the chart officially recommended by the USPA now or something?

Brian is proposing it to USPA. The email said "Here is the new Downsizing Chart that I am proposing to the USPA Board of Directors. What do you think?"

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[justinb138 0]

  Quote

  Quote

Is the chart officially recommended by the USPA now or something?

Brian is proposing it to USPA. The email said "Here is the new Downsizing Chart that I am proposing to the USPA Board of Directors. What do you think?"

Ah, ok.

It's a little different than what's in his book (recommended wingloadings seem lower, but I may not be reading it right)

[HydroGuy 0]

The email actually appeared to be an exchange between John LeBlanc of PD and Brian Germain...almost like Brians address book got BCC'd to the final reply.

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[Praetorian 1]

I'd vote for it, though I doubt it will decrease the blood spilt... might reduce the deaths though.

Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad
judgment.

[justinb138 0]

  Quote

I'd vote for it, though I doubt it will decrease the blood spilt... might reduce the deaths though.

I'd like to think so, but I don't know if it would or not.

I think doing something to make canopy coaching more available would be better (some sort of rating, etc..), but that's just my noob opinion.

I'm planning on taking the next Scott Miller course, but I wish I could get coaching from someone on a more regular basis.

• Quote

[BrianSGermain 1]

Hi Folks,

Here is the current Chart. This is still evolving, but we are getting closer.

Brian

Instructional Videos:www.AdventureWisdom.com
Keynote Speaking:www.TranscendingFEAR.com
Canopies and Courses:www.BIGAIRSPORTZ.com

[Silverchic 0]

I don't like to say it...but I'm glad I don't live in the USA. I'm 7 square feet smaller than the minimum for my jumps and exit weight.

How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?

[BlindBrick 0]

I think the high weight/large size end is off. I jump a 269 loaded at 1.25 and I can tell you that while it's not as twitchy as smaller canopies, you can still put a tremendous amount of energy into the system. It takes a bit to get them going, but more importantly, it also takes correspondingly more effort to shut them down.

We tell really small people to be careful that at somepoint below 140 sf, performance quits scaling with canopy sizes and instead surges ahead. I think that a similar situation occurs at the higher end when you begin really loading these big canopies up. It may not be turning as hard a a 210 loaded at an identical WL, but it is a lot more technical of a flight.

-Blind

"If you end up in an alligator's jaws, naked, you probably did something to deserve it."

[skycat 0]

Brian my only concern is that you are leaving small people (mostly women) at a disadvantage by them not getting to a WL of 1:1 within 500 jumps. Being a small woman I know all about short lines and that I can get more performance out of a 120 than some one at 1:1 on a 170, but stopping the ability to progress canopy wise after 200 jumps worries me. I've flow a 135 at .9 and you are very limited on things you can do with the canopy especially with the risers presure. On the other hand most women are not agressive and I know very few that have gone below a 120 so it's probably a mute point, but it's something I'd like you to think about. Because no matter what size you are if you are doing the right things to learn how to fly a canopy (like I did) you should have the ability to move on to the next level.

Fly it like you stole it!

[BenHall 0]

I'm gonna have to say that the 1st jump minimum is way too low--plenty of students would totally eat it on those.......shoot enough eat it already on a 290, they need to start out on a canopy big enough for them to land somewhat okay in the far too common 'zero input freaked out no flare landing'.

[skycat 0]

  Quote

I'm gonna have to say that the 1st jump minimum is way too low--plenty of students would totally eat it on those.......shoot enough eat it already on a 290, they need to start out on a canopy big enough for them to land somewhat okay in the far too common 'zero input freaked out no flare landing'.

Did you read the stuff about the adjustments for altitude? There is a big difference between someone at sea level and someone in CO. So basically add 30sq feet to those numbers for you and anyone else that jumps here in CO.

Fly it like you stole it!

[billvon 3,085]

>I'm gonna have to say that the 1st jump minimum is way too low

Looks like this chart is for experienced jumpers, not AFF-I's. Schools will have their own standards for their students.