obelixtim

Give your punters credit for having some intelligence. Why would they even be thinking about the landing during the FF phase?. There is a complete disconnect between the two phases, which is quite an easy concept to grasp. What is difficult about simply adding during your briefing that on landing you would like them to position their legs as if the were sitting in a chair, and you will remind them and practise that high up under canopy. Very simple. Don't overcomplicate things and there is much less for them to misunderstand. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

We are all psychopaths here. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

As I recall there was....all the students got to jump it. Until of course they started making pigs and squares for students. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

New Zealand. Once the SSE 2000 came out they became compulsory on student reserves in NZ, not quite sure when that was exactly, but prolly not long before I started. They also came into the picture when EP's changed from hand deploying reserves to cutting away and having reserves with a pilot chute on them. I was the first student in NZ to do a first jump on a PC which prompted quite a lot of controversy, because at the time a PC was considered too hot to handle for a student, especially if it malled. The hotshots on the DZ were very leery about AAD's, as students we were told in no uncertain terms to stay the hell out of their way. My impression of the Sentinel and FXC's was that they were actuallly very good AAD's if used and maintained properly. I saw quite a few saves by them, and not one misfire..... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

The first AADs were prolly KAP3's a Russian AAD from the 60's, a lot were fitted to the main rather than the reserve. On a time system you had to turn them off under canopy or they would fire regardless. Then came the SSE Sentinel 2000, I had one when I first jumped in 1974. We also had a lanyard (RSL) to the reserve handle back then, with a front mounted centre pull reserve and a heavy duty power handle for the Sentinel you had to keep your head back when you chopped or risk a smack in the mouth and loss of teeth from it. The FXC 8000 (?) and FXC 12000 replaced the Sentinels when Snyder stopped production. BOC for student gear prolly dates from the mid to late 80's when student gear started to change to piggybacks and squares, although ripcords were still in use for a long time because they were easier to see and grab while maintaining a good arch. I've prolly missed a few bits out, but there'll be another fossil out there who can prolly fill in the gaps. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Start early in the morning (0530) when its cooler and the traffic is lighter. Do a 10 hour shift then stop around 1500 or so, get a beer and a feed, soak your aching arse and relax. Repeat the next day. Watch out for drivers on their phones.....they'll nail you if you give them the chance. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Yeah I've seen a few of those broken handles. The W/hog would have had the belly band, all the early ones did. I had one of them it was the best thing since sliced bread....biffing the pilot chute and not having to hold onto a ripcord was just the best. As for the 3 ring, cutaways got a whole lot simpler and easier. Booth did the skydiving world a huge favour with that system, I'd venture to say there were quite a few lives that weren't lost because of that change in technology. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

By deleting my reply to this post the mods have proven my point completely. Reasonable debate?. Forget it. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Thanks, but its not the jerks and the bozos that bother me. Its the mods who wield the axe, destroying any context on a completely selective and random basis, citing "off topic", or "speculation", and failing to recognise the value of what is posted intentionally to create discussion and analysis to get people to start thinking about things. Some of the mods appear to have an agenda of their own, and are not really as impartial as they should be. That may be down to the short time and limited experience some of them have in the sport. What is the point of a discussion forum if valid discussion is prohibited?. I have better things to do than profer information to the wilfully deaf and blind, Who don't seem to realise that a lot of viewers on here do in fact take a lot of value from the different points of view expressed. I'm pretty pissed off right now. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

There was no wild speculation on the other thread, just a discussion that involved the bigger picture, that the mods decided (after some whingeing from a couple of posters) to edit by arbitrary use of the axe, which destroyed the context of what was being discussed. The incidents forum is obviously NOT there for learning or discussion purposes. I see no point in posting anything in the incidents thread ever again, because apart from an initial post where a fatality is announced, if no information is avaliable, then it is a waste of time and energy posting anything that may be of value to living jumpers. I think carefully about what I post, because I am interested in skydiving, as I have been for nearly 40 years. But I think I'm done with dz.com..... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Seems to me you are finding that as a student you are at the bottom of the dung pile. Get used to it.......its always been the way. Back in my student days we were lucky to have a dung pile..... Of course we were useful as wind drift indicators and holding tension on harnesses during packing. Save your bucks and hammer it when you get home. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

The plane has me stumped. Military paint scheme. Square fuselage and stubby wings....the one in the background is similar....8 jumpers ready to go.Too small for a Porter??. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Judging be the mixture of gear I'd say 1979 as a wild guess. Blast handle, capewells and tapewells, plastic handles.Not sure about the who and where. Thats not Fronk at the back is it?. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Its true that nothing beats practical experience, and many instructors improve as they gain experience. and never stop questioning and learning. But there is a danger, especially at small DZ's that things become very insular. and things are done the same way over and over, which is good in some ways, but when methods and ideas go past their sell by date, its time to change things a little. This sometimes doesn't happen. On the other hand, at big DZ's things become a bit like a factory, and the individual becomes "the product" and things can be a bit too impersonal, and small things can be overlooked. I would suggest a course/seminar where to retain your I rating you would be required to attend, maybe a long weekend every 3, 4, or 5 years. A meeting of instructors can be a great place for getting differing viewpoints and cross pollination of ideas. If time and money are the issue, a weekend every 5 years shouldn't really be a problem especially if its a condition of retaining a rating. Failing that a travelling I/E that visits DZ's to assess, observe and offer advice could be organised. If it is approached in a positive waythen it would be of benefit to DZO's and rated personnel alike. Prolly this would fall into the "too hard" basket for some of the egos out there, but it would have benefits, because despite what a few people think, learning never stops. I'm pretty sure the best instructors would agree with me and would be happy to demonstrate their skills to an observer (who can also learn new tricks). My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

I've been around for a long time, and I tend to take an interest in what is going on at any new DZ I visit. Back in the day we set up a system of courses to overcome these very problems on a national basis. After a horrendous few years of carnage we had to do something about it. Standardising training and equipment was the only way to go, although its easier to do with a relatively small skydiving population. The student incident/fatality rate fell to zero, and has remained that way for many years. Difficult as it may be to implement in bigger countries, the principle remains valid, and Robins' ideas are very much the way to go. Training has not evolved at the same pace as equipment/ new disciplines. I've forgotten a whole lot more examples of bad practise that I've seen over the years. I think it might be alz...alz...you know what I mean!!!. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Briefly: An experienced instructor gear checking a student and failing to notice the hooks on the shoes which snag lines during deployment. (I've seen this one many times. demonstrates an alarming lack of awareness) Arriving at a first jump training session with no equipment to show the students, then continuing the training using skydiving jargon with out explaining what these words meant, then abusing the students who failed to pick up things that he omitted from his training (this was a DZO and Chief Instructor). I've never seen such a bewildered group of students. Another who regularly low dumped, thus setting an example for his students. Operators who still put students out on military surplus equipment, or who use ragged out gear. Operators using non rated jumpers to supervise low timers. Operators who knowingly use aircraft with timeex components. Those are just a couple off the top of my head. And most were in countries that I was visiting. I have advised quite a lot of intending jumpers where NOT to go. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

The best method involves both...people do their apprenticeship time, then attend a course to polish their skills and fill in any gaps. It also is a great way to increase standardised methods of instruction, which leads to clearer understanding, and safety, across the board. Sometimes the apprentice does not get everything needed because the mentor is also deficient in some areas, and occasionally teaches some things badly or completely incorrectly. Many times I've observed very experienced instructors do things in such a way, that if they attended a course I would fail them. I agree with Robins ideas completely, I've never thought AFF catered properly for thorough first jump training, and have always been uncomfortable with that. I think the number of open canopy fatalities is directly related to the quality of training the jumper received in their initial training. The comparison with initial pilot and scuba training is completely apt. Methods of instruction should always be a process of continuous evolution, AFF is definitely deficient in important areas, and initial training needs to be re evaluated and changed. Changing ingrained mindsets is the bigger problem however. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

A premature opening, HD, drogueless, will most likely kill both of you. Hubbys 1500 jumps as a TM does not make him an expert or authority on safety. Owning the rig does not ensure immunity from death or injury. Tandem terminal is a no go area for good, proven reasons, gear failure being amongst them. Its not the drogue blowing up, its the humans not tolerating the opening shock of a premature opening thats the real problem. I know a tandem pair who very likely were killed by excessive opening shock. But of course physics are different this century, so its all OK. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Bloody hell it doesn't seem that long ago. I can still hear her voice in my head. RIP Helen. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

There's a word........rhymes with "banker". Such a poor effort to troll....give yourself an uppercut. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Prepare to dodge some flak!!!. I got shot full of holes when I suggested transiting to a head high position after pitching. May be an idea to look at your packing if you are getting snappy openings. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Agree. A case of beer is a good sweetener. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Fair enough, but as someone else already pointed out, the way you phrased it could have been misinterpreted by many. Its important to point out to lower time jumpers especially, that the best idea is to not mess with a mal. In my own case, messing with a tension knot resulted in a very close call one time....stupidly I ignored my own advice, and ended up too low to chop, with a one cell main after turbulence collapsed my canopy near the ground. I walked away luckily....lesson relearned. Having previously dealt with several high speed mals I got a bit cocky, but found out the most benign problems are most likely to kill you, because its easy to get sucked into messing with them. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Its a bad idea when the canopy is stable. Its an even worse idea if you have a spinner. (Billvons scenario is very valid) As to you getting out of twists twice with this technique, I think you got lucky. Advocating a change based on that is a little premature....your data base of two is far too small. With highly loaded, spinning canopies, chopping is prolly one of the best options. Altitude gets eaten way too fast to mess around. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Where did you get the notion that pulling on a toggle (releasing one brake) when you have line twists, and the canopy is stable is a good idea?. Or that riding a problem canopy is a good idea. All that can do is make a small problem into something bigger. My "WTF" was posted to indicate to others (especially less experienced) that there might be more to these scenarios than you have considered. Your procedures do not follow accepted safe practice at all. But you know better, right?. Far from "internet chat room discussion" being bad, the idea of chopping a mal is not based on a whim, it is based on the blood and bones of a lot of injured/dead skydivers who thought they knew better. Accepted good practice is based on trial and error and often bitter experience, gleaned over many many years, by many many skydivers. Internet chat is in fact no different from chats around the bar/bonfire after jumping, except you have the advantage of input from a wide range of experienced jumpers in all disciplines, from around the world. I wish we'd had access to such instant input back in the early days, it would have saved many lives and limbs, as it does now. Don't knock the internet, or what you can learn here.. Consenses amongst such a varied group would usually suggest the message means something, and luckily there are many inexperienced jumpers who take the time to listen and learn. If you think you have nothing to learn from this combined wisdom, then I don't think you will be skydiving in your twilight years, as some of us still are. We've seen many new "experts" come and go over the years. Its quite a long line. With a few exceptions, your odds of survival increase greatly if you follow tried and tested methods of dealing with problems. Riding or trying to re rerig malfunctions in the air is definitely straight from the book of stupid ideas. People who have been there, done that, usually have valid views. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....