skybytch

Oh great, that means I have to drive. Fair warning, with this quittin' smoking thing I've been living up to my screenname.

Mmmm... chili at the DW tomorrow night? I'm there!

Don't be fooled, he has no money.

I don't. I think there's a place for it, just as there is a place for self proclaimed freeflying, RW and wingsuit "experts" to be charging for coaching. Do I think everybody needs to pay for said coaching? No. But I do think there is great value in having structured instruction available to those who have the time, money and/or desire to attend them. The way I see it, the value of a structured program is in the consistency of the information presented, a focus on learning the new information and practicing the new skills and the availability of someone (hopefully somewhat knowledgable) to provide feedback on the "student's" performance. There's a section in the 2006 SIM that outlines a basic canopy control course; it covers things like braked turns, landing patterns, canopy flight plans and getting back from long spots. The course appears to me to be exactly what Scott Miller teaches in his basic course, which I took a couple of years ago. I don't see anything in there that would stop anybody out there from taking this outline and presenting it to other jumpers at any dz, whether they choose to charge for their time and effort or not. imho, this is a far better way for jumpers to learn than the "traditional" 12 ounces of coaching at the end of the day.

Baby Elephant Walk by Henry Mancini. Crystal Ship by The Doors. Breaking the Law by Judas Priest. TV Party by Black Flag. Yeah, I'm weird.

It was late in the fourth quarter of the Rose Bowl. Sure, it was a good game but it was just college football. I had a much better idea of how to spend that time. So I grabbed the battery operated trimmer and began making improvements to the landing strip. Let's just say that it didn't take long for someone to forget all about the last four minutes of the game.

You already are. No, you won't likely be going 300 yards with it but it's a fine platform to begin learning more aggressive landing techniques under. And with your current canopy you have the advantage of having just a bit more fabric over your head for those times when you screw up. S turns on final are a bad habit. Think about what you doing S turns does to the person coming in behind you. It's far better and safer for those you share the air with to adjust your pattern so that you will land where you want to without doing S turns.

I would add conservative gear selection during the learning process to that list, as I feel it is the number one thing that will keep us from femuring while we are learning.

Ah, but I must live up to my name. Sometimes it works. Oh, I agree. If I didn't think that talking about it here was valuable I wouldn't waste my time doing it. My point is that it is only one part of what those of us who feel this way can and should do to change what we see as a problem. We've got the leadership we have, good or bad, by our own action/inaction. It will only change if we make that change happen.

Many of us feel that the "let them do what they want, we're not their parents" attitude when it comes to canopy choice is just as dangerous as it was when the problem was people pulling low. We now have a "nanny state" controlling the dangers of pulling low; the rules that say you can't/shouldn't do that were written in blood years ago. We think there's already enough blood on the ground with which to write rules that will reduce the impact of this latest method of killing ourselves. The risks involved in jumpers flying canopies beyond their ability to land safely in less than perfect conditions don't affect only the person flying that canopy. They affect everyone who shares the air and the landing area with that person. I'm not just talking about seeing an accident happen, or having to scrape up what's left of that person from the landing area, or attending funerals, or the disruption to a dz's daily activities that comes from an accident. And all that is without even touching on the potential for mad mothers to push for regulation of our sport, the potential for lawsuits or even just having to explain to crying family members why Johnny went in. Yes, you have a right to do whatever stupid stuff you want to do unless and until you are risking my life by your actions and choices. At that point, what you fly becomes my problem. If Joe Jumper can't control the canopy he is flying he is risking my life. If he slams into me in the landing area because he can't stop or if he runs into me under canopy because he has not yet developed the situational awareness that is required to fly faster, smaller wings, my life has been irrevocably changed by his choices. The Ferrari/teenage driver analogy doesn't wash with me. Try to think of it more like giving a five year old the keys to the Ferrari. Instead of that, we give them a bicycle with training wheels and we tell them to ride it only on the sidewalk or in the yard - this keeps them safe from traffic in the street and keeps those on the street from potentially running into them. Once they learn to ride it we take the training wheels off, allowing them to go faster. As they gain skill and maturity we allow them to range further, off the sidewalk and into traffic, until eventually they are ready for the keys to the car. A novice jumper is like that five year old. First they fly big, slow parachutes - both to keep them safe on landing and to keep them out of the flow of experienced jumper traffic. Once they've learned to handle that then the training wheels can come off - they get a canopy that is a bit smaller and faster but still big and slow enough that they aren't flying with the fast traffic and also big and slow enough that they can safely land it in a bad situation. Once they've proven they can handle that and they decide they want to go faster... then it's time to move from the bicycle to the car. Lots of new jumpers feel the same way you do. And then one day they're on the dropzone when their buddy hooks himself in. The aftermath of witnessing a serious injury or fatality (or even just knowing someone who went in) has caused countless jumpers to quit the sport. Why? Because until that point they didn't realize exactly what risks they were taking. I think your tune will change after losing your first friend to his own choices and actions.

Because they're not allowed to land on the airport.

Well duh. If she knows you like it she's going to make extra sure not to leave marks. Mainly cuz if she did, you'd post pictures later.

None of that surprises me in the least. Good on ya for saying no.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

How much do you want to spend? I have one of each (I use the Neptune as a visual alti). I like them all. If you only care about having something beep at you, a ProDytter (or equivalent) will work great and can be picked up relatively cheap. I find the logging feature of the ProTrack and Neptune to be handy, especially on those days when I'm too lazy to log after each jump. It's also nice to have a semi-reliable freefall time reference. If you're a geek/tech head type the computer interfaces for logging are cool too. You can put any of them into a Protec with a little effort. All skydiving specific helmets currently on the market have some form of audible mount. I prefer the internal ones; to me the extra protection of having it inside the helmet is worth the "hassle" of removing it to set and/or look at the data. That said, I put a couple hundred jumps on an Aviator with an external audible mount without any problems. Definitely try on whatever helmet(s) you are considering with the audible(s) in them before buying. I jump a Bonehead Gunner and can't feel them; YMMV.

Good idea. Another thing that I've found helps me to flare symetrically is to flare to the center of the body instead of to the sides - ie at the end of the flare your hands are in your crotch, not at your hips. Keeps your hands within your peripheral vision, making it easier to see when one is higher than the other. It also helps me to avoid reaching - kinda hard to reach with one hand when both of them are in your crotch.

I've always had good luck finding those kind of things at Square One.

How many pounds are in a stone? Many people, myself included, will recommend that a novice not exceed about one pound suspended weight (ie exit weight) per square foot of canopy size for their first main. A wingloading of about 1.0 allows you to screw up a few landings - and you will, we all do in our first couple hundred jumps - without as much pain as the same screw up under a smaller, faster canopy will create. Definitely discuss this with the people who trained you and have seen you fly/land a parachute, but if they recommend something smaller than you are currently capable of landing safely on a no wind day feel free to ignore their "advice" - those people do not have your best interests in mind.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on two points. My Spectre has a great flare, imho equivalent or better than the Safire I put 30 or so jumps on last year. It's much easier to stop in no wind than the Safire was. A nine cell will generally have a better glide angle but not everyone wants that out of their canopy. The only way to know what someone prefers is to jump both and decide for themselves. I think a Tri is a good first canopy, especially for someone who is looking to get a zp main for not a lot of money. You can find some screaming good deals on them. I disagree again. Some jumpers who don't do camera, CRW or BASE jump just prefer the steeper approach of a seven cell to the flatter, more "airplane" like approach of a nine cell. Again, the only way to determine which someone prefers is to jump both.

Maybe cuz I'm not really from Earth? I dunno what they are thinking. Trying to build up the patience to call the admissions office and not go ballistic on them.

You may find some of the articles here to be helpful. I wouldn't consider a Tri 160 at 165 exit weight to be overly aggressive for someone with 40 jumps, but then again I've never seen you fly or land a parachute, don't know where you jump, don't know if you have previous injuries to protect, have no clue of your personal level of risk tolerance, etc...

Hey, at least the school you're going to doesn't want to charge you non-resident tuition when you really do live there. The school I've registered at says I'm not a California resident, even though I've spent all but 12 months of my 40 years living here, the 12 months I didn't live here ended over a year ago and I've never had a driver's license in any other state. I wish I could afford to pay $1600+ in tuition for 9 units at a junior college.

The blame doesn't solely lie with USPA board members or manufacturers. The blame lies with every skydiver who has ever told a new jumper "I did that and I survived, you'll be fine." The blame lies with every skydiver who has ever told a new jumper "just fly that 1.3 wingloading conservatively and you'll be fine." The blame lies with every skydiver who has ever told another jumper they "should be on something smaller." The blame lies with every skydiver who has given another jumper shit about flying a big parachute. The blame lies with every skydiver who insists that wingloadings under 1.0 are inherently unsafe. The blame lies with every jumper who tells a new skydiver that they will want to downsize after 20, 50, 100 jumps. The blame lies with every skydiver who has forgotten about all the things they didn't know when they had 50 jumps and makes gear recommendations based on their current experience level. The blame lies with every skydiver who says that canopy control courses are designed solely to pad the pockets of those jumpers who care enough about the future of our sport to put their time, money and effort into putting them on. The blame lies with every skydiver who tells a new jumper that those who preach conservative gear selection are "old school" and out of touch. The blame lies with every skydiver who says that big parachutes are boring. The blame lies with each and every one of us, because at some point or another we've all contributed to the "go small, go fast" culture. ZP is not the devil. I don't see an issue with novice jumpers flying Sabres, Spectres, etc. as long as they are loaded light enough that the novice can screw up and still walk away. ZP canopies flare and fly differently than do older, all F111 designs; you can get away with a very sloppy flare on an older design canopy. I think it's best to learn to fly and land zp early instead of waiting until a sloppy flare is ingrained into muscle memory. Canopy manufacturers are giving the skydiving public what they want. Isn't that how successful businesses stay in business? Spend a few minutes talking to some of their employees and you'll see that most of them will do everything they can to keep novice jumpers away from canopies that are not suitable for them. The same is true of the majority of gear dealers. Unfortunately, the same is not true of many people with pieces of paper that say they should know something. Ask any gear dealer how many times a novice jumper has told them their instructors recommended a 1.2 wingloading for a first main... Just because you've got 500, 1000, 2000, 3000 skydives doesn't mean you know how to skydive responsibly either. The sport has changed in the past 20 years; those who refuse to change with it are just as hazardous to others as are those who let testosterone make their gear decisions for them. That 6 month, 300 jump wonder is probably far better in the air than I am. I'd even go so far to say that in many cases that 6 month, 300 jump wonder is a safer skydiver than I am - because he's very current and I'm not. Heck, for all we know that 6 month, 300 jump wonder may be an excellent instructor. I was told that I was an excellent instructor when I had 200 jumps and a year in the sport... I don't see a difference. Who's responsible for that guy not knowing how to spot? The people who taught him to skydive. Spotting is still a part of what USPA says should be taught to students. This is not a failure of the "system", it's a failure of individual instructors. I've been a big proponent of a wingloading BSR based on jump numbers for a few years now. Yes, I spent quite a bit of time bitching about it on these forums but I've also written letters to the S&T committee and talked face to face with USPA board members about it. I think that they are listening. Take a look at the latest version of the SIM - there's a section in there that gives solid, conservative guidelines for jumpers to follow (and instructors to refer them to). This is progress. Yes, progress has been slow and I think more still needs to be done, but I don't think that slow is neccessarily a bad thing. What we don't need is leadership that throws down regulation from on high without taking the time to be sure that said regulation is workable in the real world. I'd much rather have BOD members who have to be convinced of the need prior to taking action than have BOD members who will force feed us what they think is right. You don't have to run for the BOD to be a part of the solution. You don't have to attend a BOD meeting to be part of the solution. Did you vote in the last USPA election? Have you let your regional director know how you feel? Have you let the S&T committee know how you feel? If you aren't willing to do more than bitch about it on an internet forum you are as much a part of the problem as are those who continue to "advise" new jumpers to buy and fly canopies that are beyond their ability to fly and land safely.

Sorry, I only have pictures of The Rack (tm) v.1.0. Besides, even if I did have pics of The Rack (tm) v.2.0, I wouldn't send them to you since you seem to have forgotten to type a vital part of her title.

Don't want to hijack riddler's thread too bad but... It wasn't taught to me back in 1991-1992 when I was a riglet. When I sold gear - including quite a bit of used equipment - for Square One (1996-2003), not once did I see two data cards sewn together. Stapled and/or taped together, yes. Sewn, no. And I did see used gear and data cards from all over the US. I'm not saying I'm right - I am often wrong. I'm just stating what I was/was not taught and what I've seen. And thanks, btw. It's good to know that some people still consider me young.