mr2mk1g

I think thats what Nullified is saying. Within the class of people who say "I will never jump without an AAD" there are two subclasses. Subclass A says - "I can do anything cos my AAD will save me. To that end I will never jump without an AAD". Subclass B says - "I recognise an AAD only gives insurance in certain situations but for various reasons I am unwilling to accept the risk of posed by those situations". Subclass A is dangerous as they do not appreciate the risks they take and inflict upon others. We should question their decisions and try to make them re-think. Subclass B is not - they have identified the risks, assessed them and decided which they are willing to take. We should not berrate them. The problem Nullified correctly identifies is that people are too quick to identify someone as bing in the overall class of someone who will not jump without an AAD without considering the subclass they to which belong. Without that second consideration, they question the safety of both classes of people, and in the case of people in class B, wrongly so.

would be great to upgrate to it from my MkIII

Cool - I'd take the Supra.... or the Celica VVTI with a full body kit. mmmmm

Not saying it would be a bad thing. Just something the organiser might want to consider. If they decide that it would be fine - then cool. Just furnishing them with the facts on which they can base their decision. ++ are that there would be a large attendance and BCPA events are always fun. -- are that many would be there through chance as opposed to actaully traveling to a DZ.com boogie, many loads would be filled with studes, some people dont like studes, the boogie would be out numbered by the studes, people may be looking to enter the comps instead of dz.com jumps

The list you refer to - or at least one version of it, is here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=47 Perhaps IC2 should include the very manouvers this document adresses? There is certanly a great deal more about canopy control that one can demonstrate than simple landing accuracy, and you're right, the ability to land within a smaller circle is not nessaerly going to save lives - its the other things people need to learn and be tested on.

Why'd you think its called "Great" Britain? I heard on the radio the other day said to an American "Great Britain - you know, the country that used to run the world before you guys took over". LMAO

Thats the same weekend as the BCPA Nothern Regionals at Hibaldstow. Hold it there and you'll be overun with student types and their hangers on. Hold it at nethers and half those that would have turned up will be at Hibbs.

Note to all that the article illustrates the fact that the paparazzi are still watching this thread. (hello all you reporters - why don't you post on a one of the other forums first to at least get the wording right for your articles - we'll happily help. Oh and go HERE)

I think the best example of the person you are describing is (I think) Skymama. I remember one of her posts that she will not jump without an AAD becuase of her daughter. She is already maxing out the 'risk' that she is willing to put her family to by jumping. Removing the AAD just tips the scales. Skymama is not someone who belives "its ok I have an AAD". She knows that it only saves your life in a small number of situations, but she has made her decision, based on her family life, that she is unwilling to accept the risk of those small number of situations. Why would anyone want to criticise her for those decisions. They are hers, hers alone, and who are we to judge. I think the important factor is not the decision the person comes to, but the information on which they base their decision. I am confident that Skymama has based her decision on all the right information. I would bet money that the average newbie who says "its ok" has only examined a fraction of the data and doesnt understand much of that. How could anyone be comfortable with a decision reached on only part of the available data? (all my wording paraphrasing what I remember her posting some time ago).

Where's the best place to get hold of cheap stroboframe quick release for a stills camera? The best price we can find is $56.50 at a couple of differnt online shops. Anyone know any better? Cheers

AHA - someone does read what I write (I've heard applcation, girth length - in that order)

I like the idea of the IC2 qualification (not mine I hasten to add). For one, there is no requirment to spend any money. All you have to do is demonstrate certain skills - how you obtain those skills is up to you. If you want to pay for them, go ahead and talk to Scot miller or Chris Lynch. If you've hung arround on the DZ for 2 years and know those skills and can demonstrate them then you get the qualification too. The downside is that as a qualification it is not mandatory or even nessaserily encouraged to any real degree. Perhaps if you had to have IC2 to say swoop or to load a canopy above 1.2:1 then people would put in time to learn the skills. Again, no requirement to expend money, just a requirment to have skills - its up to you how you gain those skills.

In England we have a post licensing quilification called IC1 (individual canopy 1). There is not a great deal to it. I would support a bid for IC2 - which would be a more advanced qualification aimed at canopy control and safty.

In the British Army there is a long standing tradition that in the officers mess three subjects are banned from discussion. 1. Religion 2. Politics 3. Women There is a reason why these three subjects were banned. They led to so to many fights, arguments and duels that they risked threatening the very fabric of the professional army. Many would do well to head the old traditions and have no cause for complaint when the predicted difficulties come their way. This thread, however was not started as a point for discussion. It's a poll. There is no need to discuss anything, nor even reply to anything. Its simply a means to survey the religious beliefs held by other members. I do not doubt that it too will succumb to the arguments and bashings of its precursors however.

errr... you've seen Ron Jeremy right?.... you know WHY he's a porn star right?... and you still think they chose him cos he's non-threatening to many men?

I agree - from now on - only Lesbian Porn!!!

so you yanks stick cornish pies on your nips do ya.... you learn somthing new every day.... I s'pose y' can always eat the spiced meat when y'done.

Forgive me if I'm wrong but I always understood it that Buddha isnt a God - just a bloke who taught a way of life and Allah is the same entity as "God" just Muslims believe that Mohamed was sent as his prophet whereas Christians believe that only Christ was sent.

We have a system in England where the voters vote in the side promising the most benefits from the public treasury (Labour) - they then fuck up the ecconomy and a few years later when the whole country is being driving to financial ruin, the public votes in another party (Conservative) who cut back on everything, fix all the mess created by the last lot, look increadably boring and give the country a sound ecconomic foundation for things to crawl allong at. No party (historically) seems to be able find the middle ground that actually works. I'll bite my tounge about whether the current party seems to be doing it or not... but then who would actually call them "Labour"?

the last one is how i intend to order my new canopy. hopfully the red would show through the yellow to some degree so the whole thing will be shades of red through yellow, with yellow and red accents where only that colour shows.... very much like my tie-die yellow and red rig.

Ah - I missed that bit. Makes it a bit more unfair. Funny joke otherwise - boss should have been more careful with what he said. Guess he figured they were only Hooters employees - those who arn't blond are dyed blond Not sure how she would go about suing in the UK - theres no real cause of action. America's different - so I can't really comment.

I don't see anything wrong with her breasts... although I would feel a little miffed if I was in Hooters and that was all they could provide me. I can't see why she's complaining - she was promised a new toyoda and she got a new toy-yoda. I bet they never once said a "toyota automobile"... although... she probably has an arguable case... PS - I have that toy yoda and its awsome - he teaches you how to properly use your light sabre!

I've seen you arround at both Cark and the AGM - you'll recognise me when we meet up next.

Yeah - he's a good mate. I got a lift home from the AGM with him - I think he had mostly recovered from the night before - despite your best efforts. (I'll make sure the printers print "SkydiveUWE Rule" on your Manchester scum pull up cords)

Eddie Prentice sales@trsribbons.co.uk I just orderd 300 from him. They'll cost about £100 with shipping and the cost of the printing block (which you can keep for reprints). That makes 33p each and the next load you buy will be cheaper than that as you don't have to buy the printing block. Drop my name - maybe I'll get a discount for client referral. These ones are in the UK and work out vitually exactly the same cost as all the US manufacturers I found even after you factor in the great exchange rate.