kimemerson

Tommy Piras asked me on a loose sunset load twenty way back in DeLand when I had all of about 100 jumps. I thought he had made a mistake so I actually scratched at first but he made it clear he meant me. He gave me a "slack slot" and throughout the dirt dive explained it all to me in front of the more experienced folk who didn't have to hear any of it. After the jump everyone was high fiving Tommy and he was cordial to a fault but he sought me out and high fived me and asked me along again. I've never forgotten that and I've used it as a story to preach the gospel of keeping your nose closer to ground level and looking out for the tyros and jumping with them. It's amazing what one small gesture like that can do for confidence, camaraderie, and staying power in the sport. When we get into the discussions of why people leave the sport, this might be one thing to look into. Exceptional post. Makes me want to run out right now and grab a sub-50 jump wonder and make them smile and shine. Or just have a good time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mother-daughter-campaign/a-mothers-day-for-peace_b_47840.html I have no clue how to do a clicky. If anyone else is so inclined...

me too.

I'm not at all sure about this, and right now I'm too damned lazy to double check. So take this for what it's worth. But I am under the impression that for a license a "skydive" might mean contolled freefall, which just might exclude tandems as they are technically "drogue fall" and there is no real contribution to control. So I doubt a tandem can count toward a total number of jumps when discussing a license. Of course, this doesn't address the SL question, especially those first, short (nearly non-existent) delays. But don't take my word for it.

Just a quick note with no details: Saturday, August 25 will be the Ranch's second annual Film Festival. (This is the Saturday night of our world famous Pond Swoop Nationals.) We will have multiple categories: Fiction, Non-Fiction, "Mindless Music Driven Eye Candy" and the inspired "LLama Mama Drama 24 Hour Shooting Spree". Every entry must have skydiving represented in some fashion, somehow (it's up to you as to how). The bigger trophies go to the original story, original everything fiction film. But everything is welcome. We will allow documentary, vintage, drama, comedy... Everyone wins something. The "Mindless Music Driven Eye Candy" is self explanatory, I hope. It's the kind of music video we see everywhere anyway. (Shoot footage. Add music. Fire up a blunt. Rock out. Walk away feeling good and self satisfied.) The "LLama Mama Drama 24 Hour Shooting Spree" is for those who cannot possibly do anything on time and need the final 24 hours before deadline to shoot. Don't begin the camera rolling til 24 hours before the deadline for submission. Ideally, films in this category are conceived, shot, edited and submitted all on the go, usually modifying the script - if there is one - at time code speed, and running over to the screening area while other timely submissions are being viewed and turn that sucker in under the wire. Details will follow sometime, and there will be more on the Ranch web site - http://theblueskyranch.com but it's not there yet. Thanks. Hope to see you there.

I don't know who she is in #1, but she sure isn't Tara McGuire.

Wow! Times certainly have changed when someone finds this "odd". The change to much smaller main canopies - thereby making the reserves bigger in comparison - isn't that old. It also indicates how few people actually know the history of the sport.

It's a tad old. The driveway is no longer where it's shown. The landing area is about double now. The pond is not shown. Also, the main building ("The Great Hall" is now gone and is replaced with the new hangar. New as of this season.) But the surrounding area is all the same. So, in general, what you're looking at is a smaller DZ than the one we now have.

Can someone who's only been jumping a mere twenty years go, or is it an invitation only?

To the AFF student: "Get on the floor and show me your box"

You're right to a degree. I hate garpes... . Not big on garpes myself. Grapes, on the other hand...

Sour garpes. It's not like the money turned the points for her.

I THINK that legally you could jump a bed sheet as a main. The legal (TSO) bit applies to the reserve and harness. So, sure you could jump a reserve as main. But, as others have said, each canopy has different purposes and different characteristics - such as the flight and flare - so you'd have to weigh your reasons for doing so and how to accommodate for the differences (i.e. bridle attachment). Many people test jump reserves connected and deployed as a main. But that's just for testing, usually when they are considering what to buy, but rarely (I've never seen it) as a primary main canopy.

Is Friday Haiku a regular weekly thing? Occasional whim? ------------------ Have I been missing a great opportunity? Ah, well. Life goes on.

"Slicing through turbulence... " oops, I shouldn't have used such colloquial language here. I just don't have the technical language skills required. However, I stand by the gist of my statement that speed will penetrate turbulence when slow will not. And no, I cannot prove it by providing "basis in fact' the way a scientist might. I don't know anything about an "increase of speed through a turbulent area increasing the turbulence we see." Especially because I don't see any turbulence, I see it's effects. And the effects on a fast canopy are not as troublesome as they are on a slow canopy. I also don't know a whit about a) or b) because I have never relied on either to make my point. I just spent a lot of time taking notice and actually experiencing exactly what I'm talking about. At the Ranch it's almost a daily thing. But, for our esteemed readers, please offer some basis in fact for the opposite arguement. I'm just talking about what I've observed and experienced over 18 years, many of which were full time. year round. Maybe someone - anyone? - could offer some technical input, some diagrams and charts, facts, figures, testimonials. Anything but this paying attention and taking notice shit.

We're talking winds here. And it is absolutely true that SOMETIMES a hook, thereby generating speed and followed by (maybe) a swoop, will indeed slice through turbulence when others doing standard straight in approaches are much more vulnerable to those same winds. It's the speed more than the hook. But it is the hook that gets you the speed. A straight in approach is not as effective under turbulent conditions. Granted, if a jumper cannot do a straight in approach... But we're not talking doing straight in approaches in good conditions. We're not talking about one's overall ability to do a straight in approach. We're talking about the nature of the approach under certain conditions. ANYONE doing a straight in approach in turbulent winds is far more vulnerable to unfavorable wind conditions than that same person would be with enough speed to slice through the winds. In this instance I'm talking about the type of approach - speed vs sloth. No straight in approach will generate speed in and of itself. Some input is required to get speed beyond that which the canopy creates in full flight. And speed deals with turbulence when slow will not. So, I repeat, SOMETIMES a good hook and swoop IS the only thing that will get you through winds on landing. Seen it a million times. But I only needed to see it the first several thousand times over almost twenty years to convince me. But you know, I haven't been jumping very long. I'm a newbie, so what do I know? Could be wrong. And I can accept that.

There are definitely times when no one should go up regardless of skill level. Agreed. But there are times when only the highly skilled should consider it and indeed, they prove it load after load. I have mentioned to beginners, "When you have a question (about the wind) you have your answer." In other words, if you have to ask, you can't afford it. And I refer not exclusively to cross-braced swoopistos as I've seen it happen back when Sabres were considered the highest performing canopy available. While so much succeses in turbulent winds is attributable to the canopy construction, solid canopy control and skill level can puill more performance out of 'standard' cell canopy than a lack of skill will ever do under a cross-braced canopy.

JP: You never saw a hooked canopy make it through turbulence when others snapped and waffled? A good swoop, by a knowledeable swoopist ("swoopist?") can absolutely be the one way to cut through garbage or strong winds, while the straight in approach is far more succeptible to them if for no other reason than the fact that they are spending more time in the troublesome winds. I've been watching this since Excaliubur days. True then. Holds true now - even more so. Do you disagree with the comment 100% or with the "sometimes"? I mean, "sometimes" implies not always and I used the word very intentionally, to allow that buffer, to separate skill from luck and skill from nature.

I haven't read everything here... but has anyone mentioned that a good hook and swoop is sometimes the only thing that will get you through winds on landing? That a straight-in approach sometimes won't cut it? And did anyone mention that a good swoop requires good canopy control? That canopy control is controlling the canopy regardless of the meneuver? That CRW, while easily the most education anyone gets on all around canopy control, is mostly (not entirely) about controlling a canopy in association with other canopies in the air, well above the ground, but not always or necessarily about what to do in winds on landing? That that's what we all have in common? Or that the competition swoopers might not agree with the opening suggestion that swooping is not control? So, actually, while "canopy control by definition..." may not be swooping, swooping, by definition, should damn well mean canopy control. Just asking...

Back before there was such a thing as packers, a team had to wait till everyone had packed regardless of their skill level. Doing a ton of training jumps was affected by - among other things - how much time a team spent not skydiving. Then when packing for pay began in the early eighties, Billy Weber (packing for the French team Tag, coached by Tommy Piras) suggested that if each team member stowed his/her brakes the team could shave time off the down time and get back up in the air sooner and as a result get more jumping in and be done with the training day earlier. He was right and it worked, He was a team packer and considered an essential part of the team. So it hasn't always been a matter of labor division but of time efficiency. So there's the origin of it. Nowadays your averrage packer probably has more pack jobs than jumps and more than the jumper has jumps or pack jobs of their own. Chances are better that the average packer is better at their job than the critic who owns the rig. Part of the reason for this is that the packer is usually not packing for one person, but for half the damn dz and therefor does not have the luxury of time to spare. So would it hurt the jumper to accept a tad of responsibility for their own stuff and actually assure that some safety measures are taken? Keep in mind, the packer is not packing you your next deployment. They are cleaning up the mess you leave on the floor. You are not obliged to jump a pack job as you could conceivably sell the packed rig if you wish and not actually experience the opening yourself. The notion of a packer has gone from that of a team member working WITH a team as part OF the team, and moved on to become a consumer commodity whereby the customer expects satisfaction without accepting a role in the outcome. A packer ought to be considered your partner on a jump and it cerainly wouldn't hurt to be a team player. The packer has enough to do and if you cannot do small things like set your brakes and re-cock the pilot chute maybe a slot in the opera will do as they are always looking for prima donnas. And frankly, anyone who hires a packer because they cannot pack themselves (as opposed to doing so for the convenience alone) shouldn't be allowed near manifest in the first place. It behooves us all to actually strive to know more than the packer. It's a shame when you can't spot whether the packer has done it right. But I digress...

who's anna and what did she do?

Just curious: As a full disclosure statement, let me say that I'm one who's looking for Max but because he's a friend and I can't make contact. He doesn't owe me anything and I'm not looking for anything. So, if someone could please tell me, where and when has he been posting here. I'd like to see something recent, as in since November or later. And, where was he dragged through the mud? I've read speculation and guesses but little actual slamming of the guy. It may be that I've simply missed these posts. So would someone please be kind enough to direct me to the Max mud fest? Now, veering off slightly, I'd like to say that I've known Max since his earliest days in the sport. I think I was one of his AFF instructors and I'm damn certain I was his first sit-fly coach. And I consider him a friend. I believe that if Max is in hiding, not responding... whatever, that he's probably going through something we don't know about. But he's not a dishonest and devious person. He does not wish to hurt anyone. If anyone has felt slighted in any way by Max, it's possible you don't know something and are simply reacting to your own dillema. If Max isn't dead or incapacitated somehow, we'll all hear from him again in some manner. I believe that. And if he owes you anything I feel he'll make good on it eventually. But, please, if there is any mud dragging of Max here. please alow that the mud draggers probably don't know what they're talking about when to comes to Max's character. Meanwhile, Max? If you're out there, you know the number. Pick up the phone, pal.

Can you direct me to that lasy post? I can't find it. (I admit that it could be right in front of me. My not finding it is more a comment on myself than anything else.) And wouldn't a PM just send it to his email address? I've been emailing him already. I have that address. What would a PM do that a common email wouldn't? Thanks

This number and web site won't help. I'm a friend of MAx's,was even his instructor and coach a while ago. I am not a customer. I can't get hold of him at all. One thread here suggests he is "heavily medicated." How so? How do you know? What's that mean? I also notice that all the posts in the link are about dealing with Max and Royal Lens, but no one seems to be of the personal sort - only business. So, Max, if you're reading this, get in touch. This is a friend calling. THanks, all.

Anyone know where he is? Anyone heard from him lately?