winsor

Let's see, 6356 days, 8 hours and 39 minutes, give or take. The consumptive part of the deal is the easy part. Living life on life's terms is where it can get dicey. Accepting reality can be tough when you face nasty realities - and some of them truly are. The bottom line is, however, that it is reality. Whenever things seem particularly bleak, I need but recall the words of Gandhi: "fuck you if you can't take a joke." That may have been Mick Jagger; it was one witty foreigner or another. Blue skies, Winsor

I don't drink it (or anything else), either. Since the last thing I DID drink was Mezcal (down to the worm on 12:15 PM, 15 July 1987), I got a bye on RB initiation. Blue skies, Gonzo

Not to worry, what you think of the KKK doesn't change anything.

Well, as long as the pilot didn't know about it and the jumper actually did have a parachute, then probably the only violation is FAR 91.13. If on the other hand if the pilot did know about it or the jumper did NOT have any sort of parachute, there would be a number of violations. At the very least -- 2-1 G. -- the one regarding minimum opening altitudes. The last time I checked, the verbiage of that particular BSR said you couldn't open below a particular altitude. If you don't open, you are in compliance. If they said you must open above a particular altitude, that would be a different story. Blue skies, Winsor

Life was created by God. God evolved from a Myth.

I think concern beats fear. The biggest concern here is the size of the harness; if it is not secure, it will not be used, period. An appropriate rig, with AAD and large enough main and reserve will be found. The initial suggestion of a BT-60 (175 sq. ft.) was based on the jumper's normal canopy being a Sabre 150. When the number of jumps became apparent, a PD-170 (for a 0.75:1 wingloading) was put in its place. I learned to ask about total experience after encounteriing someone who went right to a Class IV elliptical right off student status, so his high-performance experience was close to his total experience (he's still alive). I have a dozen ramair rigs assembled and in date, a total of 19 ramair mains, ranging from 99 to 340 sq. ft., and 4 CYPRESes. I have put together an appropriate combination for someone coming in from out of town on numerous occasions, and this is no different. I agree that the combination of low experience, uncurrency, and a host of other variables thrown in make staying in one piece more of an effort. By focusing on safety, the level of risk can be made manageable, nonetheless. I think making low pressure hop and pops with forgiving gear during the cold weather months can make things a lot safer at the beginning of the season in the spring. There is no pressure for anyone to get in over their head and become a casualty - quite the opposite. I appreciate the people who have looked out for me, and try to pass it on. Blue skies, Winsor

My personal feeling is that a liar is the lowest form of life. I actively avoid people who are given to mendacity. I find it annoying when someone puts forth on a subject and is flat out wrong, but there is a big difference between a misconception and a crafted falsehood. I have often found myself listening to someone, having no idea what was the truth, but being certain that it was not what they were saying. Whenever I have been motivated to check out the story, I have always been right. In general, thought, it is not worth the effort. In the long run it is better to associate with people who speak the truth. Life is too short to spend it in the company of people who work hard at being contemptible. Blue skies, Winsor

Nope, not at all. I tried it, and it didn't agree with me. The last time I touched the stuff, Reagan was president. I've had enough for one lifetime. You can have mine. Blue skies, pink elephants, Winsor

The way I heard it, the Gurkha Colonel came back and said hie men would do it, but asked if they could jump from 200 feet. The Brit was stunned and asked why 200 feet, since their parachutes would not have time to open. "We get parachutes?"

Not a chance. I'll jump one of my crossbraced canopies at 2:1 all day long, but when the sun goes down I'm putting the biggest, most docile thing I can find over head. If you have an emergency exit at night, you may not land somewhere with lights or with sufficient runway to plane out a Class V canopy. I can think of rather a few things with which I don't mind dealing when there is sufficient light, but can do without in the dark. A high performance canopy is one of them. Blue skies, Winsor

Recognize the difference between luck and ability (I certainly don't always). Ego gets you out the door, but humility is what gets you to the ground in one piece time and again. I have, upon occasion, been willing to take credit for pulling off a close one or two, and appreciate the folks who took the time to point out that I had actually come a RCH shy of biting the dust. The best advice I have had in this sport was when I was told that I had more than my share of luck, and if I kept pushing it, it would run out. When I consider how many close calls I have had where I wasn't particularly scared, I figure if something frightens me, I am in for a near-death experience at the very least if I continue. All too often, when I stood down because I didn't like the conditions, one or more of the people who forged ahead became casualties. Thus, the smarter things I have done include listening to the advice of people who don't want to see me hurt or killed. Blue skies, Winsor

I'm familiar with that. You will note that I specified "malfunction," not simply two out. Big difference. Your likelihood of having a stable biplane when you started out with a spinning malfunction is nil. Once you have transitioned past a sideplane, it behooves you to get rid of the main STAT - at least if landing without serious injury or death is a consideration. Blue skies, Winsor

Besides the obvious lessons, I'm curious if there have ever been any experiements with two-out situations where one of the canopies is 'aerodinamically challenged'. I've thought about it and it seems to me in this case, the possibility of a stable configuration is pretty small. Am I right? Quite right. With two out due to an AAD fire or whatever, there is a good chance (assuming compatibility) that they will fly just fine. If the main has controllability problems from the start, such as with a tension knot or lineover, there is a near certainty that it will result in a personal downplane. In the cases with which I am familiar, there is a slightly better than 50% chance of survival. Survival, however, involved life-flights, lots of surgery and less than complete recovery. The lessons learned here are: 1) Stay the hell out of the basement. 2) If you have a malfunction and the reserve appears of its own volition, GET RID OF THE MAIN! The jumper in this case dodged a bullet. If this is typical of their decision-making skills, they may be advised to take up another hobby. Blue skies, Winsor

McGyver was a phony.

Same basic deal. Jack Daniel's and other brands use charcoal filtration to get rid of the nasty allenes and whatnot that show up in rotgut. FWIW, using Brita filters is a bit of overkill. In addition to activated charcoal, they contain a mixed bed ion exchange filter, and deionizing a distilled product is kind of redundant. If you can come up with a straight charcoal filter type system, you have it made. BTW, ethanol alone is quite sufficient to provide hangovers. You can get a monster hangover from absolute alcohol (diluted with mixers) - trust me. The presence of some of the strange organic compounds can only make things worsse, both from the standpoint of taste and aftereffects. The only way I have found to avoid hangovers is pretty simple - don't drink. Blue skies, pink clouds, Winsor

It wasn't very long ago that a bunch of people hated the British and the British way of life; the IRA killed and maimed many Britons, and planned to kill many more. And people in Boston and New York and Houston and Dallas and San Francisco and Chicago sent the IRA money and weapons to assist them kill the British. So what was your point again? Hey, I didn't send the IRA anything. Then again, I have been known to wear my International Orange down vest on St. Patrick's day, so that is hardly surprising....

Answer: Neither of the two options. If #1 - Which god? Deities are legion, and equally "real." If #2 - "The Bible" is a group of tracts assembled from various disparate sources by committee, and translated and edited by other committees. The popularly available versions have clearly demonstrable errors, as well as verifiable fact. So it is "true" about as much as it is "false." Whatever. If #3 - What Jesus claimed or did not claim is one thing, what is attributed to him is something else altogether. Every word he said could have been correct, but what is attributed to him is oftentimes clearly false (new wine in old bottles, bricks without straw, etc.). If #4 - It is not possible to prove anything beyond all doubt. "Faith" is by its very nature a disease of denial. No amount of "proof" can override so fundamental an emotional failing. Sanity is lost on the mentally ill. Thus, the answer to the question is, again, E - none of the above. Blue skies, Winsor

I expect to be there. If you need a rig, I have rather a few that might work. Let me know if you're a small person, and I'll stick a CYPRES in something with an appropriate harness. Blue skies, Winsor

Are we not men? We are DEVO!

We used to make "Sunkist" dives, which were great fun. A large, spherical navel orange was found to have a fall rate that was no problem with which to stay relative in freefall (bellyflying). Just toss it out the door and chase. If you have one that is asymmetrical, be prepared for it to begin spinning. It will then require quite a serious track to stay anywhere close to it. Given a particular density, fall rate will tend to increase with size. IIRC, to keep fall rate constant, the weight of the object should vary with its area, rather than volume. A 10 cm ball that weighs 100 gm should fall at the same rate as a 20 cm ball that weighs 400 gm. A 20 cm ball with the same density as the 10 cm ball will weigh 800 gm and fall 1.41 times as fast. Playing with the numbers, given a 12 cm orange falling at 120 mph, a 33.3 cm orange would be doing 200 mph at terminal. If a pumpkin has density similar to an orange, you would have to stand on your head to keep up with one 1 foot in diameter. Blue skies, Winsor

Ah. Tolerance at its finest. I find the concept of "tolerance" to be singularly offensive. The condescension inherent in someone choosing to tolerate me is such that I would rather do without. You do not tolerate something unless you consider it fundamentally unacceptable. You only tolerate something if it is has basic negative qualities, and you are showing strength of character by your ability to endure it. You do not tolerate a nice meal, you tolerate a poison. You do not tolerate nice weather, you tolerate conditions that are unfit for your needs (rain, cold, wind, etc.). "Tolerable" means something that is bad but can be survived. If someone does not accept me, that is fine. It is honest, and I am partial to honesty. If they basically disapprove, but wish to "tolerate" the characteristics they perceive to be my shortcomings, they are not doing anyone any favors. Talk about sanctimonious. If I have a friend that is into something that I decidedly am not, I prefer to remain indifferent than to say "you suck, but I am so superior that I will put up with you nonetheless." I have friends that are gay, watch football, drink, and do many other things in which I expect to die of old age before participating. I don't expect them to be anything but indifferent to the fact that I am a breeder who doesn't watch football or drink. Neither of us has to "tolerate" the other. Thus, I view tolerance as a bad thing. I see "tolerant people" as synonymous with "fatuous assholes." Blue skies, Winsor

Being a pilot is useful when learning to fly a parachute. Be advised, however, that it is much harder to execute a go-around with a parachute. Blue skies, Winsor

The question still stands "do you know why" Yes, I know why. When someone presents such s garbled picture of what they think is going on, it is usually an uphill battle trying to convey to them the errors in their thought process, since these may be inherent. If you can come up with an approach that is anything but optimal and get it to work nonetheless, bully for you. I will stick to the optimal method and be done with it. Blue skies, Winsor

Bullshit. Skydiving is an activity that involves a near-death experience every single time. You are, in effect, committing suicide, convinced that intervention - when you have scant seconds to live - will be effective. EVERY time you skydive, without intervention you are dead. You can count on the magic gizmo to open a 100% reliable parachute that will flat guarantee that you will land uninjured, but I have news for you - the gizmo is not magic, NO parachute is 100% reliable and you can do everything right and still die. You can reduce the level of risk to acceptable levels by a combination of equipment and procedures, but you can make it fatal in short order by some relatively innocuous actions. Skydiving may be accurately described by a number of adjectives, but "safe" is not one of them. Blue skies, Winsor

Kallend has explained what the policy should be and why. That's what we use. Ok Mr bigway you seem obsessed with Mr Kellend That's DOCTOR or PROFESSOR Kallend. With an "a." It doesn't follow. If you do a brief search you will find a variety of sources, all of them quite legitiamate, whose analyses come to the same conclusions. John Kallend's presentation is among the best. if not THE best. Do your homework and get back to me. Actually, it is anything but surprising. With all due respect, that standpoint is entirely irrelevant. The principles put forth by any of us are about as cut and dried as whether an anvil, when released, will go up or down. Nobody with a clue would describe Physics as "everything," but the disciplne does detail some inescapable realities. Ignore these physical realities at your peril. The answer is: the policy which optimizes horizontal separation between groups in all regimes of the skydive. And yes, I know why, and Dr. Kallend and I are in complete agreement. Blue skies, Winsor