Spizzzarko

"Continuing education is important and makes a huge difference. USPA should make a Canopy Coach/Instructor rating, make the standards very high to get the rating, and ensure those standards are maintained. If USPA had done this with the AFFI rating there would be a difference in the average AFFI." Now there's some sensable talking there folks! I know we are not going to make perfect canopy pilots out of people in 25 jumps, but I think we should as a comunity hold ourselves up to the standards we set. Just because someone has 25 jumps should not "Entitle" them to be a license holder. USPA has set a precedent by making the A license card. We as instructors should mandate that all people seeking the rating beable to perform the tasks listed in the requirements. Not "Oh he or she was close enough". It's out there in black and white. You must beable to do A B & C to get your license. If you can perform these tasks then you need to do it on every jump. I'm a firm believer in continuing education, but I just don't think there needs to be another rating system that can and will be bastardized over the years, and end up producing shitty instructors and even shittier students.

You say "Of course. But overall the AFF program has worked pretty well, wouldn't you agree? We could do something similar with canopy control." I say all in all the AFF program is pretty good, but the certification process is currently flawed. 1. There are to many course directors. It seems like everyday there is a new course director out there. How can you maintain a standardization of course material, with all these different course directors putting their own spin on how AFF should be done. 2. The AFF course graduation criteria currently allows unqualified candidates to slip through the cracks. Look at how the grading is done. if you pass 51% of the graded area's with out an auto failure, then you pass the dive. Do that 3 out of 4 dives and you are now a rating holder. Do you think a AFFI who is in the proper position 51% of the time is acceptable? This is what will happen to the canopy control coach rating system should it be implemented. You say "Any school is no better than the coach who runs it." I say you are right, and I also say and aff FJC is as good as the person teaching it. Any "A" license holder is only as good as the amount of time that their instructors put into them. A solid foundation of canopy control should be instilled in the student from day one.

Let me refresh your memory. Jumping your canopy was fun, but I just didn't like how it cut down on my options for landing. I just loaded it way to much for my experience level. You are a much better canopy pilot that I will ever be. I suggest we do a quick little jump on 170's, just you and I, and you will see that I'm the 170 master!

Yes Derek, I firmly agree with you, but the foundation of good canopy flight begins with the first jump course, and is continued from there on. Do you think that these canopy piloting schools would be popping up everywhere if the coaches and instructors where doing a proper job?

I call bull shit. You say"I think every skydiver, regardless of experience level and regardless of if they want to learn to swoop or not, needs canopy control training beyond what they got as a student." I say, If AFF training is not sufficient enough then whoever is doing the training needs to reevaluate why they are an instructor. AFF and the A liscense is designed for a skydiver to safely exit an airplane and get to the ground. A skydiver who has completed his or her "A" liscense should be armed with the knowledge of how to properly land a parachute. If this person honestly does not know what he or she is doing under canopy then that is a reflection on the training recieved by the student, and the instructors are to blame. If the person does stupid things under canopy, because they want to look cool (which is usually the case), and they break themselves or someone else, then they are to blame. So saying that the student program is flawed, is bad logic on your part. You say "The creation of a canopy education syllabus and a "Canopy coach" rating would eventually bring state of the art canopy control training to every jumper that wants it, regardless of where they skydive." I say the creation of this canopy syllabus has been done in the SIM, for the "A-D and Pro" licenses. If people are not able to perform to the requirements of the license on EVERY jump, then why have they been given that license? The rating system is currently flawed, because there is no real standarization with in it's structure. I have seen many times that one Instructor is more strengent on the enforcement of license requirements than another. The rating applicant then goes to the easier instructor to get the boxes checked so that they can go out and start free flying with their friends earlier. This becomes a disservice to not only the student, but all the other skydivers in the air. Is it the students fault? NO, the instructor is responsible for putting all the other skydivers in jeopardy by unleashing an UNQUALIFIED rating holder loose. To fix this there needs to be better standardization enforcment in the skydiving community. The S&TA's need to stop pencil whipping their instructors. The instructors need to slow down and speen the time with the student that they deserve, and not hurry up to the next $30.00 as fast as they can. The DZO's need to stop rushing the instructors from student to student. It's a viscious cycle in which we ALL lose. You say" Currently such training is available only to those who can travel to where the training is or to those who jump where someone feels it's important enough to bring in a "name" coach. This limits the number of people such training is available to." I say why do you need a big name coach to teach canopy control? Look at most of what is talked about in Brian Germains book. He goes back and focuses on the basics. Look at what is taught in the canopy control classes given by these big name guys. Most of it is fairly basic in nature. Let's take the pattern for example. How many license holder skydivers fly a true pattern on every jump? Most that I have seen just either blow it off all together while trying to set up for their hook turn, or only fly a base to final. When in AFF where you taught that? You were taught to fly a downwind, base, and final. The pattern is the building block to all accuracy. Take the classic accuracy competitors for example. The really good ones fly multiple patterns in there decent. Look at the pro swoopers. The really accurate ones fly a downwind base and final. The only thing different is the degree of turn from base to final. You say "Good canopy control is a survival skill. Survival skill training should be available to all skydivers." I say It is, and that you just need to pay attention to what you have been taught, and to do the right thing. It may not be cool to do PLF's, or fly patterns, but since when was cool always the right thing?

You really think that a canopy coach rating is the answer? I have seen some very good coaches and some very good AFF I's but I have seen some VERY VERY VERY bad ones too. I have corrected coaches and AFFI's who are blatantly providing bad information. So I am of the opinion that the school option is better than that of some "canopy coach" rating that is going to put more money in the pocket of USPA. Also who is going to certify these canopy coaches? If you are serious about learning canopy control then you need to go to a school for it, and practice it. Just like serious RW where people travel to camps the canopy control issue is set up the same way. Is it the most cost effective way, NO, but it's what we have, and if you got in this sport as a cost effective way to spend your time, then I think you are in serious need of some accounting training with your canopy coaching.

It reminds me of the kid who had all the cool toys, and he didn't have time to play with them all.

Haha, you panzy...you never could do more than a 90 with that thing! It's not my fault that you had to resort to an inferrior Precision product with ultra low front riser pressure, to be able to turn your canopy. ...cough...bullshit....cough If you want a true test, then I suggest that we both put the spectre 170's back on and swoop those. I'll smoke you any time any where. Just bring it.... If your man enough.

Are you giving up on the velocity that fast?

i would stick my hands in front risers and pull my knees to my chest and pull on the front risersto lift me up. Arnold voice "Get to the gym girlie man... Do iiittt now!!!" arnold voice

I never had a problem with the VX when I flew it. I actually really liked it, yes the front's did build up, but I could easily do a 360 turn with it. You may not want to hear it, but hit the gym. I did my turn from full flight, as I found it carried more power into the dive. I just didn't want to be to hi on my entry point. You can try using a braked approach as it will lower your front riser pressure for a little while. If you are having a hard time finding your front's you need to get new risers, as this can put you in an early grave. I have no idea what you mean about lossening your legstraps. I have never loosened my leg straps, and I have always had leg rings for my harness, and have never had a problem. If you are talking about a riser turn, then you need to lean more to one side instead of shifting weight forward or backward in your leg strap. Please be carefull as the vx isn't the most forgiving canopy out there.

You speak so ellagantly.

It's more of a pinching motion with my thumb and index finger, but my index finger is around the riser. Can you visualize this? I have a pretty strong grip, but if I ever drop it I have my toggle secured in my hand.

Very carefully!!! I keep my toggles in my hand with my pinky middle and ring finger. I pull on the rears with my index finger and thumb. Grant

The drinking.

Semi wood kind of sucks as it just sticks straight out. It's easier to hide a full erection at work, than a semi.

The biggest thing to keep in mind in a medical emergency is to REMAIN CALM!!!!!

according to a health website: Embedded Foreign Body (an object penetrates the globe of the eye) Call for emergency medical help. Cover the affected eye. If the object is small, use an eye patch or sterile dressing. If the object is large, cover the injured eye with a small cup taped in place. The point is to keep all pressure off the globe of the eye. Keep your child (and yourself) as calm and comfortable as possible until help arrives. Chemical Exposure Many chemicals, even those found around the house, can damage an eye. If your child gets a chemical in the eye and you know what it is, look on the product's container for an emergency number to call for instructions. Flush the eye (see above) with lukewarm water for 15 to 30 minutes. If both eyes are affected, flush them in the shower. Call for emergency medical help. Call your local poison control center for specific instructions. Be prepared to give the exact name of the chemical, if you have it. However, do not delay flushing the eye first. There are many causes of eye injuries. These include: Physical blow to the eye. Harsh chemicals like lye, bleach and acids can burn eye tissue and permanently damage the eyes. A grain of sand, fleck of paint, sliver of metal or splinter of wood can scratch the cornea and induce infection. Excessive exposure to the sun, very low humidity or a strong wind may dry the eyes so much they feel like sandpaper rubbing against your lids. Insect bites. Prevention Avoid alcohol. Never stare directly at the sun. Don't allow a child to stick his or her head out of the window of a moving vehicle.

It only gave me semi wood, but I was impressed none the less.

you! you're a fucking nut job and you! you're a fucking nut job too! and you! well......... you're canadian.... but don't encourage those two fucking nut jobs! hahahahahahahaaaaa Do you guy's need me to out there and show you how it's done?

We had a guy pull the pin and drop the spoon on one to indicate a dust devil. He tossed it a few feet in front of him. After a few seconds it hadn't done anything, so he went over and picked the damn thing up and looked at the bottom. It then decided to fire, and blew slag all over him. It scared the shit out of the dude, and he jumped about 6' in the air while tossing the grenade at the same time. He's an O-5 now.

If using an HMA line in the cascaded configuration, what is the weakest point? Is it the straight stitch that is causing the reduced lifespan, or is it just the fact that they are using a weaker tensile strengthed line? If it is the stitch that is causing the problem why don't you use the racer knot at the cascade? Is it not strong enough to hold the cascade together?

That's like dropping glow sticks on night jumps. It usually made the ground crew a little nervous. We often used the avaiator NVG's for ground crew on night jumps. They were really sensitive, and we were able to pick up the jumpers glowsticks on the ground when they were in freefall.

The military smoke burns rather hot. We always had two grenades per smoke bracket (per foot). We alway's wore boots when using smoke too, as the military smokes burned hot, and they produced a lot of slag. Slag would put little tiny holes in your canopy if your smoke was burning during opening. It would also change the color of your canopy. White turned pink as we usually used red smoke. Red was the most visible. Green, and yellow's don't contrast against the blue sky as well. We didn't smoop our smokes into the water, so I'm not sure how well they would work under water, but I'm sure they would work somehow. I would think that your odjective of swooping with smoke is to not get submerged, and if you are dipping your entire foot into the water, then you will probably have a really short swoop, and that's not what we want, is it? If you are going to use the military smoke then you need to have a bracket securing these to your leg and foot. Just taping it to your shoe isn't a good idea. They are heavy and hot, and might burn through tape. You don't want to drop one of these, as it looks like someone is going in, and also they can start a fire where they land. Being blamed for starting another Haymen fire because you dropped a smoke wouldn't shed a positive light on the sport. Grant