mjosparky

Could you explain why? Skydiving systems are much more complex than BASE systems. This complexity introduces additional chances for delays in the opening sequence (or malfunctions). It is for this reason that skydiving rigs are intended to be deployed at much higher altitudes than BASE rigs. It's really a question of using a tool designed for the job. If you are intending to deploy your canopy with a few hundred feet of a solid object, there are probably better choices than a skydiving rig designed to be opened with thousands of feet of clear air in every direction. If I were ever in a situation where I had to deploy a skydiving rig in a proximity flight situation, I'd go straight to the reserve, which would still be more complex than a BASE rig. Thanks for taking the time to educate an old man. The canopies they used appear to Eiff Classic’s. The original Strato Cloud, my first ram air also had the bottom skin vents. Sparky http://eiff.com/manuals/manuals_index.htm My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Maybe you should go back to London, your attitude sucks. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

I guess you showed him. Good PR for the DZ. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

DC-3 D-18 Almost a Howard

Could you explain why? Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Multiple reasons. Partly because DZs, S&TAs, members, etc. all know that there will be absolutely zero consequences for failing to report. Even if it were made a "requirement" there would be no actual consequences for non-compliance. Just look at the frequency with which DZs violate the BSRs and countless other "rules." With no consequences. Why are there no consequences? Because it's not in the USPA's interests to dole out punishments. The USPA is NOT a governing body! They go to great lengths to point out that they have zero regulatory, governing, or enforcement authority. They're entire purpose is two-fold: 1) as a political lobbyist to oppose and reduce government oversight/regulation; and 2) as an advertising entity to promote the image of the sport thereby making money. The absolute maximum punishment they can possibly dish out to violators is revocation of USPA membership. They cannot levy fines, shut DZs down, suspend business or anything else. USPA licensing/membership is not required for a DZ to operate in the US. Revocation of membership will have little, if any, negative impact upon a DZ or individual. But it will mean less revenue for the USPA, risks having individuals/group members leave out of anger over perceived "unfair" enforcement of rules, reduces numbers which in turn impacts their lobbying leverage. Strict reporting requirements also runs the risk of providing information that can be used in lawsuits. It also creates records that can be used by government and/or supporters of regulation. Those records would reveal a more accurate reflection of the number of injuries and fatalities that occur in the sport. Under the current way to doing things, the USPA is free to use whatever "estimates" they want with regard to number of jumps, number of serious injuries, number of fatalities, etc. in order to show how "safe" the sport is. So, in a nutshell, even if the USPA had some kind of viable enforcement power (which they don't), enforcement of reporting requirements would hurt the USPA because it would result in reduced membership and provide fodder for lawsuits and suggested regulations against the sport, not to mention reduced public interest resulting from injury statistics. It's easier and better for them to simply ignore it. Actually their purpose is 3-fold. What started out an organization of individuals was changed by the BOD to include “Group Members” better known as DZO’s. Check how many Directors are either DZO’s or a proxy for a DZO. You have a group selling the service dictating rules to the people buying the service. What’s wrong with that picture? Sparky "The United States Parachute Association (USPA) is a voluntary membership organization of individuals who enjoy and support the sport of skydiving. The association is incorporated in New York and follows the constitution and by-laws contained in the USPA Governance Manual. The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs." http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/GM_USPAAircraftManual.pdf http://www.uspa.org/GroupMembers/GroupMemberProgram/tabid/72/Default.aspx My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

I would stay away from those manufactures. The reason the dimples work on a golf ball is because it is spinning. Sparky Actually, that's not why it works on golf balls. In fact, it works on cycle helmets, and on cars too: http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/dimpled-car-minimyth.htm Wrong. Sparky http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/sports/golf/basics/question37.htm Also, what the test Scott refers to failed to take into account, is the body behind the head in a cycling time trial stance. There is ample testing that shows the improvements TT helmets can bring to cycling performance. That being said, I love the pointy end right on top of the container! lol Mike: your link doesn't say anything about spinning, and supports the principle of adhesion to the object for longer, as I was implying (regardless of spinning). You win. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Can you explain why? Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

I would stay away from those manufactures. The reason the dimples work on a golf ball is because it is spinning. Sparky Actually, that's not why it works on golf balls. In fact, it works on cycle helmets, and on cars too: http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/dimpled-car-minimyth.htm Wrong. Sparky http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/sports/golf/basics/question37.htm Also, what the test Scott refers to failed to take into account, is the body behind the head in a cycling time trial stance. There is ample testing that shows the improvements TT helmets can bring to cycling performance. That being said, I love the pointy end right on top of the container! lol My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

No idea. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

I would stay away from those manufactures. The reason the dimples work on a golf ball is because it is spinning. Hopefully your head is not spinning during a wing suit dive. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Clicky Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

I was smart enough to last 30 years in the sport……nice try with the grown up words. Sparky ftp Personal Profile Name: Email: No email entered. Country: City: Jump Profile Home DZ: No home dropzone entered. Gear Container: No container entered. Main: No main entered. Reserve: No reserve entered. AAD: No AAD entered. My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Good looking young man John, you must be proud. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Lack of good judgement? reducing the drag to compensate for the extra Go-pro's More "look at me". Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

FIFY Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

That is exactly what is required to pass TSO performance tests but it can't exceed 22 lbf. Sparky SAE AS8015 Revision B 4.3.2.4 Primary Actuation Device/Ripcord, Actuation Force Tests: A load at the ripcord handle, or equivalent, of not less than 5 lbf (22.2 N), applied in the direction giving the lowest pull force, nor more than 22 lbf (97.9 N), applied in the direction giving the highest pull force under normal design operations, shall result in a positive and quick deployment initiation on all tests. A minimum of 10 pull tests is required. For chest type parachute assemblies, the maximum pull force shall be 15 lbf (66.7 N). 4.3.2.5 Main Canopy Release, Actuation Force Tests: While in a suspended harness (with additional ballast as required to equal twice the maximum operating weight), a force at the main canopy release handle, or equivalent (if used), of not less than 5 lbf (22.2 N) (applied in the direction requiring the least force), nor more than 22 lbf (97.9 N) (applied in the direction requiring the greatest force under normal design operations), shall result in a positive and quick release of the main canopy on all tests. A minimum of 12 pull tests is required. My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Sub 10's were done in the 80's......no problem. This is from 2002 I believe. http://www.flickr.com/photos/22259954@N02/5099847839/ Sparky I wasnt being serious. Just making fun of the mystical awe that surrounded the unattainable sub-10 in the movie

That applies to more than skydiving………….everything from booze to girlfriends. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Never truer words were spoken/posted.... F.U. G. B. F.U.G.B. ?????? Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Thanks that never occurred to me....duh. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Sub 10's were done in the 80's......no problem. This is from 2002 I believe. http://www.flickr.com/photos/22259954@N02/5099847839/ Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

If the manufacture said it wouldn’t fit, why would you go on line and shop a different answer? Just my thoughts. Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

We had a really warm winter this year though... it felt like spring the entire time with it only getting colder then 10 degrees a couple of times. Why would you live there? Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

I think Douglas may be referring to this. AC 105-2D 13. PARACHUTE EQUIPMENT RULES. h. Extra Equipment. The FAA does not consider the attachment of an instrument panel, knife sheath, or other material to the exterior of the parachute assembly an alteration. If attaching any extra equipment, take care not to impair the functional design of the system. While it may not technically be a violation of a TSO the FAA will take a dim view of the practice. Plus it is just plain stupid to put yourself in that position. Does anyone know the reason behind putting your handles inside of the suit? Sparky My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals