Ron

Yes, but considering just leaving... I think it is a bit too much to risk to just take off and hope he figures it out. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I am sure this student looked great on the ground and that the instructor thought he would be fine.... But the video seems to show that the student is not performing his emergency procedures.... Just like so many experienced jumpers failed to do over the years. So while I expect the student to arch out the door.... I still make damn sure I have a good grip. And while I expect the student to be altitude aware, I still check mine. And while I expect the student to pull, I still get ready to help. So while expect any student to be able to handle a mal.... that does not mean I am not ready to help if they seem to be having issues handling it. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I think the instructor did great.... In good faith, I could not just track away from my student having a mal.... And from that video it does not look like the student was in the process of cutting away. Andy's suggestion of doing the cutaway for the student is cool.... I seriously doubt I would manage to pull it off in that situation. So, if I was presented with the same situation... I'd hope I did the exact same thing. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You are participating in the problem if you work or jump at a DZ that accepts SR. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Easterpig.... Used to be a guy in Zhills that used to call himself that. Last I checked, he was run out of town for trying to start trouble with no evidence to back up his claims. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

You think I want to ban hook turns?????? I have more 270* hook turns than you have total jumps..... So that kinda disproves your point. The difference is I know that a 270 creates more traffic issues than a 180 and am not trying to justify what I LIKE with some false argument. Sheesh, I know I said I was done here, but this last claim that I want to ban hook turns was just so silly I had to respond. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Most likely, someone with 1,000 jumps would be ready to downsize anyway. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

No. What I do have is consistency. Do you have a personal policy to only thank a few people, or everyone? Do you do it randomly, or do you make a list of people you think are worthy? I normally thank people who do things for me, or for others. I normally thank the pilot, the DZO, my students and YES, even the guy that delivers me my pizza.... so I have consistency. But, my level of thanking people and who I thank is not the question. I asked another poster who said we should "all thank the Conasters" for the plane. I asked him a question if he thanks everyone who does something for profit, or just a few people. So maybe your question is better asked to him. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

The jumper that is in a bad area needs to stay on the ground, not get a higher performance canopy. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Would you rather hit a tree at 30 MPH, or 3MPH? A larger canopy will have both a slower fwd speed and a slower rate of descent. This is not how canopies work. A bigger canopy will have less of a fwd speed and is MUCH better suited to a steep descent angle. For example, look at an accuracy canopy... Do they jump a big canopy, or a small one? In a tight area, FWD speed is bad and angle of approach is important. Which would you rather land in a tight area? 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCkBtN6tVD4 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWFBVzDWk_o&NR=1 Uh, well you could also have been wrong on the spot. You could also have been in an RW jump and in the back of the plane unable to check the spot. Fact is that with 40 jumps you may not have landed off YET, but you WILL land off at some point. Yes, but the speed of a canopy requires your brain to be faster than the canopy. It will not prevent it.... It will reduce it. They call it "unforeseen" for a reason. Unless you are always 100% perfect, then reality happens. Two simple questions. Of all the people that die each year skydiving.... How many of them thought they made choices that would kill them, or thought they didn't have the skills needed to survive the jump? No one plans on dying, yet each year people die. 2. What makes you different than them? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And a lot of people ignore advice they do not want to hear. They use anything to justify their position. I know jumpers that "shop" for advice. They keep asking till someone gives them the answer they WANT and then use that as justification. Simple fact is that adding complexity does not make anything easier, safer, or more predictable.... But people will try to debate that since they want to justify a 270. Safest and easiest landing approach, that has been discussed, to predict in order 1. Straight in. 2. 90* 3. 180* 4. 270* 5. 360* Any increase in degree of turn creates more blind spots for the jumper performing the turn, creates more possible swoop lanes, and is harder to predict for observers. None of this should be difficult concepts to grasp. If you were trying to claim that a SOLO jumper doing a 270 has more time to bail than a guy doing a 180... you would be correct. But the assumption that a 270 is safer in regards to traffic has no basis in fact. I realize that people only hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest.... so I am done here. But I am not some guy under F-111 7cell trying to bitch. I had a Xbraced canopy back in 1997, I have jumps on canopies from a 69sqft to rounds....I have done 16 way CRW diamonds and have a PRO rating. I have done test jumps for two different canopy companies. I realize that you are not going to listen to anyone that says things you do not want to hear.... But you have not provided any data to back up your opinion. I have realized that most discussions like this are worthless... So I am done here. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Maybe, but the fact is the manufacturer has the right as well.... How many lawsuits are brought against the USPA vs. PD? And in the end, who knows its products best, the USPA or the people that tested and designed the product? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nice personal attack! I thought you were suppose to play the ball, not the player? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Go try and tell that to Pilcher, Bobo, etc. Nonsense, you start a turn AWAY from the landing area at a much higher altitude, then 90* through your turn you are doing a 180*. It makes zero logical sense how you can claim a 180 is dangerous, but by ADDING more degrees of turn makes it safer and easier to predict... It is pure fantasy in an attempt to justify what you WANT to do. You keep forgetting that almost all your complaints about a 180 ALSO apply to a 270.... Simply because a 270 CONTAINS a 180 as part of it. Seriously, ring up Flight 1 and tell them that you think folks should go from 90's to 270's.... That should be a riot! Your advice to skip the 180 in a swooping progression is dangerous, and based on terrible logic. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Enough said right there. They did it to make money... And there is no harm in that. They tried to bring in a unique product.... A great business move. So if Papa John had to sell his Camero to try and start making pizza's you would thank him for taking the risk to start a business? You know most food companies don't make it right? The simple fact is that Perris did something to try and have a unique aircraft... they did this as a BUSINESS decision, not some nice gesture. Make no mistake... If the Conasters knew how this jet deal would turn out before they did it... I very much doubt they would have done it. You are free to thank them.... But not thanking others that have done the SAME thing is a bit rude. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And you think the Conasters bought a jet to "do a nice thing"???? Again, your blind support of something is overshadowing your logic and common sense. They bought a plane to turn a profit.... Not to be nice. They didn't buy the plane to help you through a tough spot in your career... They did it because they thought they could make money in the deal. You know this, I just think you are too busy trying to defend your earlier position and you just like to argue. Have fun, your little game has gotten old. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Are you really honestly saying that you can't tell that both companies are *businesses* and that they both exist *to make money*? Neither is being altruistic. The Coansters didn't buy the jet to be nice, they did it to make money.... thanking them for trying to make money is the same as thanking Papa Johns for delivering a pie. This is not a difficult concept. Exact same thing I am thinking about you here. I think the love of your "home DZ" is blinding you here so much that you can't/won't see facts... "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So it is better to go into traffic AFTER the turn has been started???? You are trying to claim that a 270 does not put a person into a traffic pattern.... Yet you are also trying to claim that a 180 is so dangerous because it is ALREADY in the traffic pattern? Again, your physics is off. All things being equal, you have failed to provide any data why a 270 is safer than a 180 for the OTHERS around the guy doing the turn. You can LIKE a 270 all you want. But that does not make it SAFER for traffic. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And yet you think that hooking INTO that same traffic is safe? Yes, they give YOU more margin for error. Nonsense.... A 270 is not more predictable than a 180. A 180 follows the SAME 'lane'. A 270 cuts ACROSS all 'lanes', starts with a blind turn and turns INTO traffic. Physics does not agree with your opinion. A 270 is nowhere near the same as a 90.... You are free to have an opinion, but the physics do not agree with you. There is no way a 270 turn is MORE predictable. Safer for the PERSON doing the turn (if alone in the sky) sure. But as a part of a traffic pattern... No way. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

A business has to make money. There is a difference in product, but the basics are always the same. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Yes, but that is more an issue of the USPA not really being up to date. If you are looking for a USPA license to PD alignment.... Well, I doubt it can be found "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

And flying ACROSS the line of flight and doing a turn that STARTS BLIND and puts the landing area in your BLIND spot for a 180 is safe? Never forget that you can only look ONE way and with a 270 the landing area is off your right and the traffic is on your left. That just makes no sense. If a 180 gives a blind spot and puts you against the grain of others... Then ADDING more degrees of turn makes the situation WORSE, not better. Never forget that the 270 is a 180 AND a 90. Safe is: 1. Straight in 2. 45* 3. 90* etc. You are trying to claim that a 90 is fine, a 180 is death on a stick, but suddenly a 270 becomes safe???? Again, this makes zero sense. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

What happens if you find yourself on a bad spot in a small area? What happens if, while you are flying your "simple" pattern, another pilot almost flies into you? Your canopy selection has to be for the WORST day and the WORST situation... Not nice calm winds. I am not saying your canopy CHOICE is wrong... I do think your reasoning has some errors. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then those with less than 200 jumps would still be considered "Novice". Everyone wants to think they are not a beginner.... People want to envision themselves as experts... But "want" does not make it real. Someone with 200 jumps IS a novice. Someone who is "Expert" is the guy that is making many hundreds of jumps a year (AFFI, team guys etc). An "Expert" is not a guy that makes 100 jumps a year, even if he has been doing it 10 years. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

YOU would, but I am willing to bet that not everyone would.... For example, I have a bunch of Jet jumps (thanks Uncle Sam). This was a great idea... But the costs and paperwork made it a long shot. I seriously doubt the Jet will be back. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334