Lindenwood

Excellent thread! I am a teacher by education and trade, so I like this kind of stuff :) . I like the recommendations of taking information in from every source so you can build your own understanding of the sport. I have run into new jumpers who have, in casual conversation, discussed their mistakes and what their instructors told them, and it was very eye-opening. I have also had experienced jumpers give me direct, yet somewhat contradicting advice because their knowledge of the topic was so 2nd-nature they had trouble actually articulating it. Now, you probably shouldnt be asking for packing advice from the guy jumping student gear. But, ask the opinions of everyone you can because they will all have slightly different perspectives. A new jumper might have bad landings over and over, but asking him how and when he flares might help you better evaluate your own rough ones. Asking an experienced jumper how hook turning works could, on the flip side, give you a better understanding of what NOT to do, or what to expect should you accidentally make a low turn or something. You can combine it all to build your understandings of skydiving, as soundly as possible. And especially to us newer jumpers, a sound understanding is a safer understanding, IMO. Weeeee!

Heh, I just bought my own rig and, while Id received packing instruction before, Id never done it without help. Found a video to fill in the gaps so I could pack it before heading to the DZ. Needless to say, my first jump on it I dumped at 6k (planned and approved eith the DZO ans pilot, though) :P . Weeeee!

I am another one of those guys who gets more from numbers than a needle position. Out of a half-second glance, I can get a more complete grasp of my altitude from the two large digits than I can seeing a needle's relative position on a dial. And then, of course, there are the sweet logging features (my standard fallrate is THAT slow? :P ), the backlit face (turned out to be the "post-sunset" load), the straight-forward navigation, and small size and light weight (I never took it off, even while packing). I highly recommend it to my fellow left-brain jumpers out there who feel more at ease with numbers than with pictures. And the logging features a little bits here and there (rate of climb, time to altitude, clock, etc) are a big gob of icing on the cake.

The advice about pretending you are flipping under water is what my AFFI told me and what I do. My first attempt during AFF was bad, but I regained stability like they said I needed to show. I picked it up pretty quick and can do them pretty consistently now (I think :P). Weeeee!

I started doing the same thing. I am jumping old busted f111 canopies so I ofted have to jog a few steps, but they have been notably more consistent, or at least more comfortable. I got the idea from hearing an instructor explain the two-stage flare of the Sabre2 shes been renting. It will definitely run out of steam quickly, but beginning to brake at around 12-15 feet up has helped, at least to my rookie eyes. Weeeee!

That is pretty neat! Both instructors and couches encourages me to go through the nect jump's dive flow over the week so I could be better prepared the that jump. It was lost when I was in the course, but they generally strap a simulated altimeter onto students ehen practicing dive flows during the FJC. As a teacher, I can't imagine thinking too much about something is a bad thing, except when it leads to inaction when there needs to indeed be action!! Weeeee!

Is that approved? What about altitude awareness, tracking and canopy skills, for example? Seems like a helluva shortcut to me. Heh I waa thinking the same thing, but with a high exit and flexible instructors, one probably could indeed display all the basic skills and safety in all three jumps. My instructors told me that progression is about displaying you can be a safe skydiver. First jump: Docked exit, touches, release, a turn or two and forward motion to dock and pull. Second jump: Solo poised exit with some stability checks (flips) and tracking . Third jump: Poised or diving exit, some general manuevers, and tracking. Provided landings are decent, altitude awareness is maintained, and no major mistakes are made with any manuevers, I coukd see an instructor signing off that "this jumper is as safe as any other AFF student I would release." Weeeee!

On I think my 4th jump, I got so excited about remaining stable on my own and doing the motions, I never once looked at my altimeter after the initial COA out ofthe poane. That is, until the instructor looked at me weird and did a subtle "wave-off" to remind me that is what I should be doing, heh. Since then, I have almost religiously checked my altimeter every few seconds. As was stated above, that you are so worried about what many others probably wouldnt even care about shows you have learned a lot from the experience and will likely maintain even more situational awareness than before. And not to worry, that didnt making skydiving any less fun to me :) . Weeeee!

Thank you all for the fantastic advice! Another seller Id been in contact with is going to be sending the rig to ChutingStar tomorrow for me to buy. I was able to talk on the phone with him and he told me all about the rig and its history and was very understanding of my concerns. So, I dont think Id buy (or sell, for that matter) to anyone not willing to have a decent phone conversation about it. The original scammer stopped talking to me after I hinted at some of the sketchy details. Weeeee!

Haha yeah I realized that as soon as I submitted it :P. Thanks for the pointers, everyone. I will probably just go through my local DZ (or just buy new). Weeeee!

I honestly worry someone is trying to scam me. They are requesting a direct wire transfer, to a different name, and have zero profile info or posting history. Is it generally a bad idea to try to buy used skydiving gear sight unseen? Weeeee!

Thank you to everyone who provided useful feedback. It sounds like you guys are saying I was underestimating the responsiveness (and thus inherent risk) of the elliptical canopies, which I totally accept! I have given the same lecture to people starting out on supersport motorcycles (or anyone else talking risks they don't understand), so it is interesting to look up and find myself on the other side of that "you don't know what you don't know" argument, heh. But, I am just starting to look for gear I can piece together for my first rig. I did indeed find what I thought might have been a good deal on an elliptical canopy, which sparked a day of research and ultimately this thread because I couldn't find solid enough answers to my original question. The manufacturers even recommend it for "beginners" at light wing loadings, which is why I thought it might have been okay. I am not going to buy any elliptical now, and even if I were to end up with the one I was looking at, I did go into it knowing I might sell it (probably at a loss) a week later if I learn more that convinces me otherwise. In any case, I am not in a hurry to be jumping my own rig before the next several months. [Sarcasm] Trust me, my feelings aren't hurt a single bit. Asking for a little politeness doesn't mean I'm any less "tough" than the next guy, especially on the internet... Oh, and it's 13 jumps now ;) . [/Sarcasm] Weeeee!

I teach physics and am anal about technical details so I know I can understand the principal elements of canopy flight (and probably already do better than most). In a nutshell, the biggest risks with moderately HP canopies are from being more sensitive to small inputs, because that can amplify small mistakes at low altitudes and during landings, resulting in crashes, no? If there is something I am missing, being condescending is far less educational than just explaining it :/ . I didn't come here as some kid fresh out of the FCJ who really wants to be like the cool swoopers, so there is no need to talk to me like one. I really am just trying to understand better, and am not set in one direction or another (well, aside from definitely leaning toward the common novice canopies). Weeeee!

Aaha, I had read this as a common complaint with many ellipticals! Thanks! Weeeee!

I wasn't looking at any particular elliptical. Just that was one of the ones I'd read collapsed at a low WL (that and a small Cobalt over a small pilot). But you are saying that if I don't intend to do hook turns for swooping, an elliptical canopy won't get me anything? What would be the downside of an elliptical (out of curiosity), other then the risk of low turns (or are you emphasizing this downside?)? Thanks. Weeeee!

I have been gathering info leading to a first-rig purchase. My instructor said I should look into around a 1.0 wing loading (~170 for my skinny self) and find something with decent performance that I could grow into and enjoy for a while. I am just wondering of an elliptical canopy loaded that light is dangerous? I have found a few people saying XFire's and such loaded too light have collapsed under light turbulence, but others saying it is fine to load an elliptical this light. The supposed benefit I'd gain would be more powerful flare and flatter glide, and faster turns. I like playing around up high so that sounds fun. Plus, I don't think I have the risk tolerance to mess with hook turns ANY time in the near future, so I like the idea of having the extra lift to glide in flat on landings ("swoop," even if mild), without doing aggressive maneuvers close to the ground. The obvious downside would be the risk of accidental low turns due to the more responsive nature. However, I intend to get canopy instruction and do several high HopNPops with whatever I get, to get comfortable with the basic handling of the canopy and especially flat turns. So, given it is something over which I do have some degree of control, and I intend to put in some effort to learn it safely, Im not terribly concerned about that. Still, I do keep getting that nagging feeling about loading one too light and having it collapse on me. Being completely out of my control once I am under it, that factor scares me. So, please correct me if I'm wrong about the performance of elliptical at light wing loadings. But, I was just noticing that decent elliptical aren't really more expensive then decent tapered canopies (and understanding that is largely semantics). Thus, unless there is some inherent danger or I am overestimating their performance at light WLs, I figured "why not?" Weeeee!

The later posters did get my intended meaning when I said "appreciate." I thought it would be more clear in the context of the rest of my post, but I can see how it could be taken as "I personally have mastered the breadth" rather than "I can wrap my head around the idea of the breadth," heh :) . [Quote] Quick example about your scenario - don't fly towards a hanger, and you'll never have a problem with hitting a hanger The most common downwind here is toward a row of hangers. We students have to stay a little further back, but many of the staff come back over the top of the hanger during the turn for final (including hook turning) for an upwind landing. I only meant that unexpected things can and will happen, and no one can ever be 100% in control of his environment. I am not affraid, but I understand there is a lot more to real canopy skill than standup landings in ideal conditions. Of course I probably shouldn't say I'll never downsize, but at the very least I do intend to stay somewhat conservative and spend a good while developing canopy skills before allowing myself to get under something smaller. And even then, reading about things like 200' swoops under 230+ sqft canopies loaded < 1:1 really helped me appreciate that most canopies are probably a lot more capable of higher-performance lamdings and manuevers than their pilots! After reading things like that, I imagine a talented pilot could spend a thousand jumps just perfecting hook turns on a mildly loaded sport canopy and end up able to put many pilots under smaller canopies to shame, eh? That is what I meant by wringing out the last bit of performance out of a canopy :D . Weeeee!

Davelepka, sorry I meant to say that I tend to prefer milder equipment and pushing myself to be the best "pilot" of it that I can. Like, I used to ride a Ninja 250R motorcycle, but on winding roads I would almost always run ahead of guys on bikes 3 or 4 times as powerful because I had focused on being a better rider rather than counting on the bike to just go fast on its own :) . And this is exactly what I meant :) . I feel I have begun to appreciate the great breadth of a canopy's performance envelop, that few ever master or even explore. It does seem a decent canopy at 1:1 would have more than enough capability to stay exciting if I ever wanted to get into some mildly aggressive landings, no? I have also been pretty strongly influenced by the "what if" scenarios--landing in light traffic with mild winds in a big field is one thing, but having to dodge a student at 300 feet and then narrowly missing the hanger as I come in for a 15mph crosswind landing on the taxiway is entirely different! I imagine it would take quite a while before Id reached that level of proficiency, so I am in no particular hurry to get ahead of myself! But yes, while I totally intend to start with some well-broken-in canopies, I had been considering a new container just to have a nice personal touch to the setup. However, while the GF and I did play with Mirage's fancy rig designer for a while, I think I am still leaning toward used stuff to start with. However, I'm not sure she'll be able to resist the allure of those custom patterns :P . Thanks for the responses! Weeeee!

I am 11 jumps in and expecting to be licensed in the next 2 months or so. I have been looking into gear, figuring I'd buy my first rig as I approached 50 jumps. I have always been one to enjoy ringing every last bit of personal performance out if machines and equipment, over buying higher-performance stuff to begin with and relying on it to make up for my own lack of skill. Reading through this section, it sounds like a basic sport canopy, even loaded only 1:1 (a ~170 for me) would still likely have a far wider performance envelop than I'd probably even have the guts to explore (I don't see myself getting into major hook turns and stuff, but even if I did, a know such a canopy is more than capable). Long story short, I was thinking I'd buy a rig for 170cc canopies, and would pretty much keep the container indefinitely. Is it unrealistic to expect to enjoy the same size canopy for a long time? Or do most people who say this still end up downsizing past 1:1 in another 50 or 100 jumps? Thanks. Weeeee!

For someone like me to try it. It would be called suicide. For those that actually have the skills? It's their choice to make. They know the risks just as well as we do. Right. Therefore you can't make a blanket statement that pushing the envelope is a good thing. It depends upon who is doing the pushing and whether or not they are properly prepared to do so. Is it a good idea for a 16-year old teenage male to push the envelope by driving 100 mph with his new learner's permit? I guess it depends on how you define "pushing the envelope." I understand it as carefully, incrementally and with a great deal of calculation, doing things at the edge of your current abilities. Or the capabilities of the equipment you are using. It is shaving the error margin thinner one slice at a time. For me it is 90 carving turns to final. A little more input each time to build a little more speed, most of which is bleeding off before I land. Trying to crank out a 270 to a swoop wouldn't be "pushing" the envelope for me, it would be blasting a big hole in it. This! If we imagine the "envelop" as a bubble filled with all a perskn's capabilities, pushing it would indeed be incrimentally expanding it. Your example of a 16yo driving 100mph (well, most people on the road, in fac...) would be leaping all the way outbof the envelop. For me, maybe a downwind landing in a 5-10mph breeze would be as far into the envelop as I could safely lean (by "safel" I mean without broken bones, but perhaps not without a few scrapes and dents in my legs and pride :P ). Trying to do Anything at all to gain speed for the final approach would indeed be, as you say, "dumb." for someone who has successfully performed their last 100 swoops with 360-degree turns, adding another 90 degrees would be pushing their envelop, but I would also think they'd have the experience to know their limits and calculate the risks, which would not make it "dumb." Weeeee!

Haha yeah I knew they would, I just wanted an idea of what to expect :) . Thanks for the info! I understood the theory on general fallrate adjustments and basic horizontal motions (turns and forward / backeard). I was just worried if I didnt learn how to safely make more drastic fallrate adjustments Id waste the whole freefall trying to catch up, heh. Weeeee!

We went to the DZ yesterday and, while we didnt get to jump due to a big group of tandems showing up before us and it being too hot to load a 5th jumper (on the few loads without cameraflyers), we did get to chat with several coaches about diving and quickening ones fall rate for catching up to a lower jumper. Made a lot of sense! Thanks for the responses! Weeeee!

I voted that it is pushing the envelop, but I do NOT think that is necessarily a bad thing. Humans finding ways to do anything we never thought we could is rarely a bad thing, in my opinion. But, even my instructors acknowledged swooping is dangerous (and not in response to me asking how I could start :P ). Weeeee!

Thanks

I just want to thank those of you who provided thoughtful replies explaining the dangers of even strapping along a camera "for the ride." It really changes my perspective on my eagerness to eventually be able to jump with a camera. Teaching physics and working with young people, I kmow,the "don't do it because you are too young and stupid " in rarely effective in getting people to do anything. So, I appreciate you guys laying out all the reasons, using supporting examples and especially testimony to help break down the often-perceived barrier "US old-timers vs you dumb newbies." At 11 jumpmps in, reading this really did remove a lot of the eagerness to eventually jumpmps with a camera, even if it would only be "along for the ride." Weeeee!