Ron

Ask to borrow one of each and see which one you like better. Each person is going to have a different answer and it will all depend on what they like. I prefer analog. My reason is I can just glance at it and know about where I am and how much longer I have till pull time. With a digital, I have to actually read it. This works great for me since the only thing I care about is how far I am from "X" altitude (Exit/pull/cutaway). And the fact is that I have been using one for 18 years. But I think the same way with car speedometers, I prefer to see the range and where I am in that range than just reading a number. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

A history of safety violations (not just a crash, but one due to maintenance issue and a pilot that flew with an aircraft that was clearly not airworthy) could explain why an airport group might want to kick someone off and in no way is it going to help your cause. For the record, I support the DZ being allowed to run. But you are not helping your cause with your aggressive posting style. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Still does not change the fact that it is considered poor form in most forums. Breaking the 'code' of keeping private messages private will actually stop a lot of communication. I have had people contact me via PM to ask me questions they would be embarrassed to ask in person. I have had people give me information for me to post via PM that they could not post because of fear of retribution. Yes, and posting a vitriolic PM is just distracting from the point. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Now, I don't know much more than you on the issue being discussed... But yes, Cathy did MX on an aircraft without an A&P and yes, that aircraft had an issue. To the best of my recollection, she replaced a carb heat cable and it later broke causing her to have a crash due to carb ice. The regulations on what MX a pilot can perform was part of the problem... Again IIRC, a pilot is allowed to inspect and lubricate a cable, but not replace it. I believe she went to inspect and re-lube and decided to replace it... Again, I don't remember. That being said, while your question had some validity.... And Spoons responses (if true) are uncalled for... It is still bad form to take personal messages and post them without permission. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Can you use a wrench as a hammer? Yes, but expect it to be a bunch more difficult when you use one tool for another function it was not designed for. This would totally depend on the group, your suit, and your skills. For example, at 2010 nationals we had Melissa Nelson on our 10 way team... One of the Worlds best freefliers... She wore an RW suit for the RW jumps. You CAN wear a FF suit on an RW jump.... As long as fall rate and lack of grips are not going to be a problem. If you were doing a FF jump and a guy walked up with an RW suit on.... What would you think? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And yet hang gliding tandems, paragliding tandems, and commercial balloon flights no medical is required either. Fact is the FAA does not require a medical for the above or skydiving tandems. It is simply the USPA following the orders of their masters... The PIA and the manufacturers. The USPA has long ago stopped being the organization representing jumpers. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You seem to have quite the ax to grind. Maybe instead of hinting and sly methods you could just state what you are trying to say. Sparky's comment about people hiding while bashing is perfectly valid. 1. Show who you are. 2. Just come out and make your accusations. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Another point of view is that at the same time, swooping survives because so many people like doing it, on every normal jump, just for fun, without having the activity pushed aside as some freak show for specialists... (Maybe not actually on a pond though.) If one had to give that up, it would almost be like doubling jump prices, because you just lost half the fun of the jump. (But yes it is an airspace problem if everyone on the Otter load is swooping...) This was the exact same logic/argument CRW aficionados made when people started buying Prodegys and Lightnings. And yes, CRW at the end of an RW jump did die. But CRW also got a whole lot better. The difference is that no one was claiming CRW was dangerous to those that didn't do it... The same cant be said for swooping. If we didn't have so many collisions, it might never have been an issue. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Actually, it's not. His comment that limiting turns to final to 90* would result in fewer canopy fatalities is correct... But not for the reason you thought/responded. Think canopy collisions, not just turning low. Fact is that some people still try to claim that a 270 is a perfectly good landing technique even with traffic.... This has been proven wrong several times. What I thought would happen was this: You doing something in freefall? 90* finals for everyone that does freefall. You want to turn more than 90*? Hop n pop from 5k. I don't want to stop swoopers from swooping, I do want to stop swoopers from swooping near anyone else. Swooping has become like CRW. The advances in equipment and performance has made it so true swooping is no longer compatable with normal jumping. When I started skydiving, it was VERY common to do an RW jump deploy and then do CRW. Then the Canopys and techniques became so advanced that you really could not do that anymore... Swooping needs to evolve in the same way in order to survive. The days of doing an RW/VRW/AFF and getting a swoop are gone. You want swooping to survive? Start only swooping after a hop n pop. The only way I can see swooping survive is if swoopers have their own landing area and they only do hop n pops. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Well I will, but expect to be ignored. It has been proven time after time that the USPA BOD will side with the PIA, DZO, or manufactor over the general membership. UPT and Strong basically begged the USPA to take over tandem certifications, the one major sticking point was that they wanted the USPA to continue to require a 3rd class medical. So your chance of getting the USPA to change that? Zero. I would however be interested in seeing if a lawsuit against the USPA if they fail to act would work. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And yet to do hang gliding tandems, paragliding tandems, light sport flight training and commercial balloon flights no medical is required either. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Got it, you have nothing but to play but the fear card. The fact is the FAA does not require it. I am still waiting for you to answer the questions I asked. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

But since a medical is not required for: Commercial Balloon flights Sport pilot Instructors Handgliding Tandem Instructors Paragliding Tandem Instructors And they all take paying passengers. And yet an AFF rating has no medical requirement. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And that's the kicker.... Diablo is trying to say it makes tandems 'safer'... I'd like to see how. And if having a class III FAA medical makes tandems safer, then requiring a class III FAA medical for EVERY jumper wold surely make skydiving safer right? So Diablo... You going to request that EVERY jumper have to get a third class medical to make skydiving safer? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

A hang glider TANDEM INSTRUCTOR is 'non-comparative'? A paragliding TANDEM INSTRUCTOR is 'non-comparative'? Really???? And pointing out that Balloon Commercial pilots and light sport flight instructors is 'non-comparative'? How EXACTLY is any of that non-comparative? I know plenty of damn good instructors that can't do tandems because of some stupid rule like being color blind. A buddy was turned down because he needed to provide the serial number of the stint put in one of his veins 10 years ago and a surgical diagram showing its placement.... This Dr has long since retired and the FAA gave him THREE DAYS to get that information before he was rejected. I personally may quit doing them since the way the rules are written I could risk never being able to fly my plane again if I fail a medical.... Just not worth it. The FAA just did a SEVEN year study on light sport pilots (more of those than tandem instructors in the US) and found NOT A SINGLE CASE where a medical issue that could have been caught by a medical would have had ANY influence on ANY accident that occurred. Now, show me where having an FAA 3rd class medical has done any good. Tandems 20 years ago were also under a special exemption.... Should we go back to that since it was in place 20 years ago? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And I know people that had issues DUE to an RSL. If you think they are perfect and have not caused issues.... You are uninformed. And those people who were 'saved' by an RSL... Why didn't they pull the reserve? Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL? 1/30/1997 Taupo, New Zealand MAL,DMAL? 35 2500 ?/Y Description: After cutting away from a malfunction, it appears one riser hung up, while the side with the RSL released, casuing the reserve to deploy between the remaining riser. This riser then seperated, and the main ending up choking off the reserve. The pair decended on the partially inflated main which was caught on the wholly uninflated reserve. Lessons:Some of the above is speculation, but it's a good reminder to perform your three ring maintenance regularly. If you don't know what I'm referring to, you should talk to your local rigger. In a nutshell, disconnect your main, flex the webbing of the three ring, clean the yellow cable with a dry cloth, (for metal housings) lightly oil the cable, reconnect the main, perform a line check, and pack it. How about this one? 6/22/1997 Umatilla, FL MAL? 42 7500 Y?/Y Description: At the end of a normal tandem skydiver, the student pulled the ripcord at about 5500 feet. The left main riser broke, which in turn activated the reserve static line lanyard (RSL). The RSL immediately pulled the reserve ripcord cables while the right-hand main riser was still attached. The reserve pilot chute and free-bag cleared, but the reserve canopy entangled with the spinning main. The main was then cut away, but failed to clear the reserve. The student survived the landing, the JM did not. The Master 425 main was equipped Dacron with suspension lines. The type VII risers were manufactured in May 1996 and had the new heavy duty 3-rings. The rings were properly positioned during drogue fall, and appeared normal. The type VII webbing broke about 1" above the lower end; the type IV holding the small ring broke just below the grommet. Neither of the two rings from the left riser were recovered, nor was the cutaway handle or the reserve ripcord. All equipment was less than three years old and in good condition. Instructor and student total weight was about 380 pounds. Lessons:Perhaps a defective riser? Heres another Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL? 7/12/2000 Elsinore, CA DMAL 27 Y/Y Description: The Navy was at Elsinore training Seals; they had their own instructors and their own equipment. At the time of this report, no detailed analysis of the rig has yet been made. This report is based on preliminary examinations and eyewitness accounts. The student ( training under the Navy's equivalent of AFF) deployed his main normally at around 4500 feet. During the main deployment the RSL somehow deployed his reserve which then entangled in the main. Someone supposedly had seen that his main was square and apparently flyable while the reserve was completely fouled and entangled in his main lines. No one directly witnessed the incident while the student was between 4000 and 2500 feet. Somewhere during that interval the student apparently cutaway his main which then collapsed and remained entangled with his fouled reserve. It was believed that if he had not cutaway, he may have been able to land relatively safely on his main. The reserve was apparently NOT deployed by his CYPRES: the preliminary examination revealed a kink in the reserve ripcord where the RSL must have pulled against it while it was still under tension from the closing loop. As soon as the rig is released by the coroner more detailed examinations are going to happen by the DZO, the USPA, the rig manufacturer and the Navy. It is unknown at this time what pulled the RSL, it may have been improperly routed and was pulled on line stretch, or it may have been caught by a toggle. It is also unknown if this type of malfunction is particular to this type of rig or is an industry-wide concern. The Navy has stood down their training and grounded all of their equipment until more is known about the true cause of the incident. Lessons:Dual canopy out malfunctions are nasty. Discuss appropriate procedures with a local instructor. Cutting away from an inflated main when the reserve fouled is not a recommended course of action. One that can show the drawbacks of an RSL. Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL? 9/22/2001 Picton, Australia DMAL 34 360 ?/Y Description: After a camera jump, this jumper experienced spinning line twists on his Stilleto 135. He was unable to clear them and cutaway at perhaps 1800'. His reserve (an Airforce 120) opened (via RSL, though reserve handle was also pulled roughly simultaneously) slider-up with line twists, and he impacted in a spin still trying to kick out of the twists. The reserve was very highly loaded, at 1.7 lb/ft^2. Video review of the incident shows that the deceased may have been kicking the wrong direction to get the reserve to untwist, and was not observed to be pulling the risers apart to aid the untwisting. Lessons:There is some reason to believe that pausing briefly after cutting away from a seriously spinning malfunction can aid in reserve deployment. However, pausing also eats up valuable altitude, which is also an increased risk. An RSL removes your choice in this matter, but does insure a rapid deployment after a low cutaway. Note that this forum doesn't post the incidents where someone cutaway low, and their RSL saves them. Another one. 9/30/2001 Opelika, AL DMAL 48 308 Y/Y Description: Due to a hard opening, this jumper broke one of the D lines on his canopy, a 230 Rascal. it went into a spin, so he cut it away. The rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag. He was found dead at the scene. A second report from someone involved with the investigation reports that the RSL had nothing to do with it; I await further details. Lessons:RSL's are a mixed blessing. For novice jumpers, they provide insurance against failure to pull the reserve after a cutaway, a relatively frequent occurrence in the pre-CYPRES past. This incident may illustrate the downside of an RSL. There are more, but I don't have time to find them. I know of an issue at Lake Wales that I just can't recall the details and can't find it right now. I know of another one in the midwest that I can't find the details for either and don't have the time to look. But there are several listed above with details for your education. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then you change 'A', not require 'B'. If you don't like what you view as limited training, then you increase the training, not require a medical. The fact is the FAA has set a precedent and we just ignore it. But just for fun, back to your non congruent point: To be a commercial ballon pilot: And as for your claim about the people that pass them having a financial incentive... You know they get paid even if a person fails right? But what would you propose? We get the FAA involved? I'd be against that, but would be interested in your solution. And do you see the same problem with AFF and coach? But back to MY point: Balloonists don't need a medical Sport pilot instructors don't need a medical Hangglider tandem instructors don't need a medical Paragliding tandem instructors don't need a medical It makes little sense to make skydiving TI's do it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

False "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

False http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/airmen_certification/sport_pilot/media/sp_certification_brochure.pdf And from the EAA: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Hangglider tandem instructors don't need a class III Ballon pilots don't need a medical. Sport pilot instructors don't need a medical. So basically it is an added expense that limits a good number of otherwise quality instructors for no real reason and that has no equal in any other aviation equivalent "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nonsense, he made a claim that people who died might have lived if they had "X". That is by definition advocating something. 1. Then he should not propose a solution if he is not willing to give a THOROUGH explanation 2. Or when he suggests a solution he should also include the dangers his solution might CAUSE. And how EXACTLY is a new jumper going to learn about the downsides when the official report from the official organization fails to mention them? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

In my case, I didn't have an AAD at the time so I didn't have a manual and didn't bother to borrow one to read up on something I didn't own. But your point is 100 % correct. But this just enforces my opinion that to be balanced, both the good and bad needs to be explained. Yep. One thing that bothers me is when someone tries to sway a person but does not explain the whole story. For example, I know people that would be shocked if you told them that an AAD or an RSL has killed people. These people only have ever been told to positive sides of these devices and should also learn the negative sides so they can make a more informed choice. Don't get me wrong, AAD's and RSL's have saved for more than they have killed... But ALL the information should be presented, IMO. Otherwise how is someone going to learn? But back on topic... The DZO has the right to require anything he wants in my opinion. I may not agree, but if I don't like it I am free to jump somewhere else or start my own DZ. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

When he is advocating the positive side to be balanced he should mention the possibility of problems that the thing he is advocating could create. You have little danger of your reserve opening due to a low pull if you didn't have an AAD. Knowing that potential issue is important and ignoring it while lauding accolades on an AAD is not balanced and only a part of the story. I think mentioning that an incorrectly routed skyhook can cause a problem is EXACTLY the type of thing you should mention if you are saying how great they are. Fact is they are not... And how are they supposed to learn about it if no one mentions it? I didn't know a CYPRES does not arm till 1500 feet till my buddy burned in when he jumped out at 1200 feet. I didn't know a CYPRES would fire if you pulled low till I saw a guy land a down plane. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Here is what I would have: 1. One year between coach and TI or AFFI 2. 500 jumps. 3. 3 years in the sport from license. 4. Cutaway 5. Ditch the 3rd class medical. 7 years of 'sport pilot' has shown that not ONE accident could be attributed to a medical issue. In fact, the EAA and AOPA have petitioned the FAA to allow planes