encinoadam

Just to add.... I never mentioned Democrats or Republicans in my post. In fact, I am neither. I'm interested in who I think will do the best job as governor. That is my right as a voter. You brought the party system into this. It's a good thing Clinton isn't black, for I fear I'd be labeled a racist, as well. Why can't I just prefer one candidate over another, without you resorting to name calling? Granted, I called Clinton a liar. But, this is rather factual since he DID run on family values and he DID cheat on his wife. I actually think Clinton did a great job as president, but you're too quick to cast judgment to find that out. I was just trying to show that the wholesome values that many politicians run on are disingenuous. So Arnold's past is not so squeaky clean. That doesn't mean he'll do any worse in office than Clinton did. Anxiously awaiting to see what name I'll be called next... ac

Actually, I'm wondering why, if he is SOOOOO dumb... that so many people are voting for him. Typical name calling: I argue like a child (actually, not even as well as one)... and Arnold is dumb. Guess you have it all figured out, dude. And as far as debate tactics... I never said Clinton was worse. I don't know quite where you are getting your information from, but it ain't me. Keep sailing, Bob. ac

Well, Clinton ran on good old fashioned family values. Some people are just better liars.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm..... "At a news conference Allred presented Rhonda Miller, who she said the actor had forcibly lifted her shirt, photographed her bare breasts and then sucked on them in a make-up trailer on the set of "Terminator 2" in 1991. The Schwarzenegger campaign also produced statements by two crew members on "Terminator 2" who disputed Miller's account. Hair stylist Peter Tothpal said he was the one who took the photograph, while she was "giggling and having a good time." Make-up supervisor Jeff Dawn said six people were in the trailer when the picture was taken, with Miller's consent, and that Schwarzenegger was not present." Since I am providing selected paragraphs, feel free to read the full story: LINK It's a tough economy right now, especially in Hollywood. People will say whatever they can to make a buck. Arnold has been famous for years. If he had a habit of "attacking" women, we would have heard about it before now.... governor race or not. People would have sued his ass off. Arnold is a good man. Go Arnold, Go. ac

Spoken more eloquently than I could have. Good job.

Okay, so Arnold is not an angel. So what? Neither was Gary Condit. And yet, isn't he still in office? To contrast, Condit lied. (By the way, I don't LIKE Gary Condit). Clinton lied plenty, too. Wasn't he the one who said he "didn't inhale," and "never touched that woman, Miss Lewinsky." (is that quote correct... I'm not sure... but you get the idea) My point is that at least Arnold is honest. I don't know him, so I can't vouch for what he did or did not do. But he acknowledges his errors. Many of these situations involve allegations from 25 years ago. You wouldn't believe some of the things I did just ten years ago. I don't believe that should disqualify me from office. I agree that he has not led a perfect life. He would agree, also. The point is, many of our elected officials have not led exemplary lives. I'm okay with that. Honesty goes a long way with me. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens. For the record, I still find it strange that all of this surfaced just days ago. I still don't buy most of it. But, ultimately, the voters will speak. ac

Okay, maybe I am out of the loop here, but WHAT videotapes? They have videotapes of him assaulting women? Can you be a little more specific as to the date and content of these tapes? Are there any testimonials from women prior to this year? Are there interviews where people are talking about what a bastard he is? I'd like to see some kind of evidence of this. I'm not saying they don't exist... I would just like this claim substantiated. Can you name a single instance where the Arnold campaign tried to supress a single fact, story, or "videotape"????? Well, let's see. Since I have never heard of him getting arrested, cheating on his wife, or getting arrested, that goes a long way with me. Sure, the fact that he has never been arrested for anything just means he was never caught, which doesn't make him a good guy in and of itself. But he is active in the community, passing measures to help with after school programs (the fact that they were not enacted is not his fault). Look, the guy was like Kobe Bryant to me. Prior to now, I had never heard anything bad about either one of them. Along those lines, FREE KOBE! WHAT VIDEOS?? There are videos of people bad mouthing Arnold? I watch the news constantly... and have seen NOTHING!

Um, not really. Didn't we hear about Pee-Wee Herman playing with himself in a theater? He wasn't running for office. Neither was Gary Coleman (at the time) when he was is trouble for hitting a fan. Dennis Rodman never ran for office... we hear plenty about him. Stories are not held back from us just because someone is not running for office. Ok, um, first, when did he say this, and second, when did he connect that with Huffington? In other words, I don't remember him saying anything about toilets during the debate (I may have missed it). But, I was watching when he mentioned that he had a role for Huffington in T4. To show how poor the logic is.... how often do they kill people the same way in a sequel as they do the previous film? In other words, if he slammed someone in a toilet in T3, there is no way he would do it it T4. If this is what he had wanted, he would have said that he "wished" he had cast her in T3. But, he did not say that. That's not what I said. However, since you mention it, ya, I do believe many politicians are very self-serving. Personally, I am astonished that someone with Arnold's fame and fortune wants to run for public office. It doesn't pay much and couldn't possibly be very worthwhile when people spend their time attacking you and blaming you for the states ills. If I were Arnold, I'd be spending my spare time at Club Med. Speaking of stretches... who says we will get "the leadership we deserve" out of an action hero, just because he was an actor? Ronald Reagan did a fine job. Nixon, on the other hand, didn't have much of an acting career, but wow, he stunk as president. Someone's previous career often has little to do with the job they will do in office. He won't be running the show by himself. Obviously, this is how Bush gets by. And, Arnold won't just get by. But, time will surely tell.

Despite ANY actual facts or evidence, that is all the anti-Arnold campaign can do; name call, make up "facts," and in general, say anything they have to in order to prevent him from winning. Facts: 1) Arnold had a good name before this campaign. 2) People are suddenly "surfacing" to bad-mouth Arnold. 3) There have been no reports of Arnold being power-hungry. 4) If Arnold was power hungry, surely he would have plenty of it on any movie set he worked on. He's rich and he is famous. That IS power around here. He doesn't need to run for office to get it. Opinions: 1) People must be pretty frightened that Arnold is going to win, in that they are going to such great lengths to ensure it does not happen. 2) All the press will simply help Arnold. People like me are just that much more determined to help him win. 3) If people would just give him a chance, he could do some really amazing things with California.

Funny how all these years, no one ever had anything bad to say about Arnold. Now, all of a sudden, the democrats who were so disgruntled about the "fairness" of the Clinton probe are now going to be critical? If Arnold did anything, he did it 25 years ago. Clinton did what he did while IN OFFICE. How many of you have nothing to be ashamed of as you were growing up? And, the story breaks just DAYS before the election? Interesting. Well, he has my vote. He's a good man. If he were a creep, we would have heard about it WAY before now. We hear way less severe allegations against way lesser known people all the time. If there were any substance to this, we'd have known about it before now. People ought to feel ashamed for dragging a good man's name through the mud. Perfect example of taking stuff out of context. During the debate, Arnold said he had the perfect role for Huffington in T4. She takes that comment and publicly interprets it to mean that he wanted to slam her, a female, into a toilet. Um, ok. Can you say INSANITY?? Arnold is already worth tens, if not hundred of millions of dollars. The only reason he is running, and dealing with all of this BS, is to help improve California. And for that, we attack him. That's just great.

I've had just one reserve ride, and it was on a Rascal 202. The upside is that it flew great. The downside is... it is just plain old. Your reserve is the least expensive part of your gear. It's also your last chance. Personally, I didn't like having a reserve that was over ten years old (yours would be 14). It was difficult for me to have confidence in older gear (other people will tell you age doesn't mean so much). I would buy something newer, if you could afford to do so. If not, take comfort in the fact that mine worked great. There is much newer gear that has had recalls that I wouldn't jump even AFTER the fix. I'd rather jump the Rascal. But at the end of the day, I'd go to Call Ralph and get a nice, new, PD reserve. In fact, I did.

Don't do it. 1.7 is pretty high even for an experienced birdman. Find something closer to a 1.0. Personally, I wouldn't use anything over 1.2... or anything that has a greater than usual tendency to cause spins, like a Stiletto. I know it is a hassle, but find something bigger. Adam

Jesus Christ. Okay. I give up. Go land a birdman suit.

My 100 mph estimate comes from reading other posts. I don't know what my forward speed is when I fly (except that I can go faster than the cars on the ground). Even at conservative estimates, you're going to be going at least 70. Let's say you're just doing 50. My point is that the physics seem to say it isn't possible, which is why I mentioned the estimated speed and wingloadings. Your reply was that you just "thought" it was possible but without any facts or opinions on why it might be. It's not like we have any shortage of daredevils that wouldn't try it if they thought they wouldn't break their necks. And, there are actually several examples of people falling out of planes and surviving, not all of which include being in the tail section of the plane. But, being in the tail section just goes to prove that you would have to have *some* degree of protection in order to pull it off. And, that woman suffered spine and head injuries. And, I'm a big fan of the Wright brothers, but people doubted them without knowing *anything* about flight. 100 years later, we know quite a bit about it. I'm no aviation expert, but... look, prove me wrong... PLEASE. Like I said, I'll gladly eat my words. In my opinion, you need bigger wings... something akin to a hang-glider.

Kevin - like I said... feel free to make me eat my words... and feel free to try it yourself. You might "think" it is possible, but, respectfully, try giving a single logical reason why it might work. Presumably, you would need wings as large as a hang-glider, which I am guessing is why they are able to land without assistance. You can't take away 95% of the wing and expect a survivable landing. It is similar to the space shuttle. Large, heavy vehicle with hardly any wing. The reason it can fly is powerful engines give plenty of forward speed. You don't have engines, so you'll have to get your forward speed by falling fast enough. Look, it is an awesome idea... but it is nothing more than a fantasy to think anyone could land one. More importantly... even if it *could* be done once, what would it prove? Look, Vesna Vulovic fell from an airliner in 1972 from 33,000 feet and survived, but so what? 99.999% of anyone else that tried it would die. Anyway, that is proof that you can fall from high altitude with no parachute and no wings, and still survive. The significance just isn't that great because by and large, it is not repeatable.

It can't be done with today's suits. Here is why. Let's say you are able to get your fall rate down to 40 mph consistently (I can only get mine down to 70). In order to do that, you're going to be travelling about 100 mph horizontally. Try stepping off of a speedboat at 100 mph. And, that is without any vertical speed. You'll kill yourself. If you look at animals that can fly, their "wingloading" is not nearly as high as we are loading our birdman suits. My opinion is that anyone that has ever flown birdman knows that it is not possible to land one. If someone pulls it off, I'll gladly eat my words. Some people think water is a cushion. If you hit it at a high enough speed, it is like hitting concrete. To those who don't like it when people (i.e., me) post on dropzone.com... it's STILL too bad. Get over it. What are you gonna do? Tell on me AGAIN??

So, I probably sound like a broken record here... but any news on the jump?? I've been waiting for this for a really long time.

So long as people don't post "blue skies." It does nothing to further the discussion or to educate people. It also does nothing to make anyone feel any better about it. Just my cent and a half.

Any update on this? Isn't the jump supposed to happen this month in Saskatchewan??

Is this what you are looking for? The translation is bad, but you'll get the idea: http://216.239.37.120/translate_c?hl=en&u=http://para-net.org/paramag/archives/n188/article/article.html

Try running the old URL through this: http://www.archive.org/ And let me know what the URL is. I'd like to check it out.

I'm 6 feet tall... 160 pounds...

Dayle, This is an interesting post you have here. I believe the February issue of Parachutist has a very in-depth article about hard openings (someone please feel free to correct me on this) and how to avoid them. Personally, I have experienced two slammers. Frankly, they suck. I'm sure people here will have twenty reasons why this happens. For me, I am pretty sure both times it was due to line dump. I used to stow my lines pretty loose for fear of ending up with bag-lock. Quite honestly, I'd rather have an occasional bag-lock than just one more slammer opening. If you look elsewhere in this forum, another jumper is considering not jumping anymore because his doctor advised him against it after a bad opening. I see a lot of people discouraging him from quitting, but I wouldn't blame him if he did. I'm not so sure that I haven't done some permanent damage to my neck from my two hard openings... and that is a constant consideration for me each time I jump. Since these two incidents of mine, I have double-stowed all or most of my lines (I use tube stows). I don't know or pretend to know exactly how loose or tight I should stow my lines, but I have been told that a good general rule of thumb is that you should be able to pick up your d-bag by your lines without having them coming undone. Worried about bag-lock? I don't know how much pull-force is generated by tossing your pilot chute, but my guess is a lot more than you think. And, here is something else about bag-lock. Generally speaking, I don't think bag-lock occurs from stowing your lines too tight. While I am sure you *could* get bag-lock from this, I think it is more common from: 1) one line group passing through the loop of another line group, essentially creating a "lock" 2) worn out pilot-chute 3) uncocked pilot-chute Anyway, I am sure some of the seasoned veterans here could add a lot more to this than I can. But, I have been wondering if there are not a series of injuries like this that most people never talk about. You feel like a retard afterwards, and there isn't really an injury to "show" anyone, so you kind of just suck it up and deal with it. After reading your post and the post from the camera-jumper who experienced a similar situation (which was probably made worse by the fact that he had a camera on his head), I am going to scrape together the cash to get myself x-rayed. It's easy to take a little time off in order to heal a minor injury. It's a little more difficult to mend a severe spinal cord injury. My 200-someodd jumps doesn't qualify me to give you much advice in the air. But I don't need 10,000 jumps to have common sense on the ground (um, not that I have any). But, here is my personal advice. Do what you gotta do to continue to jump safe. If that means not jumping for the season, deal with it and get back in the air when you can. When you do resume jumping, it wouldn't hurt to get a packing lesson or two from someone who really knows what they are doing in order to minimize the chances of this happening again (it might cost you the price a jump-ticket). Going from 120 to almost zero in just a second or two... is not the way it is supposed to be. Keep those lines stowed tightly! Just my humble opinion.

Um, how does pressure relate to GPS accuracy? GPS uses satellites... ProTrack uses pressure. No?