DrewEckhardt

As long as you allow different wingloadings there are going to be speed disparities in the pattern. With similar suspended weights a 105 in full brakes flies about as fast as a 170 in full flight. As long as you allow different planforms and line lengths the speed differences are going to increase at the transitions between down-wind and base, base and final. A big accuracy or BASE canopy doesn't speed up much when you hang on a toggle while small ellipticals can put you above the trailing edge. As long as those speed differences exist it doesn't matter whether they're coming from differences in canopy size or speed changing maneuvers like a deep brake sink, surging from deep brakes, symetric front risers, or a turning approach. A steeper 90 degree turn is predictable and doesn't break the pattern. There's nothing wrong with it given sufficient clearance for it to other canopies. Bigger turns are often not predictable. Given a single allowed landing direction (swoop course with entry gates) you know where people are going regardless of how they get there. With a wide open field and people chasing wind streamers there's no way to know.

Gas station profit is usually on the order of 7-11 cents per gallon even where gas is selling for $3.50! Limits on their markup is going to do nothing to gas prices although it does give voters the illusion that politicians are doing something about high prices.

Arrogant Bastard Ale.

They gave me some Ultracet samples when I blew up a disc and wanted something which wouldn't have me out of it like Vicodin. It worked about as well as Tylenol which is to say almost not at all.

I have two more terms: Public relations Average voter Congress critters can get the positive publicity they want "Hey look! We're doing something about gas prices! " with no danger of passing the bill to bring suit which in turn angers OPEC and gives us gas prices high enough to be really onerous (People believe it will take up to $6 a gallon before our driving habits change)

There are lots of cliffs and trees with heights of tens and hundreds of feet which eliminated individual animals that got too close, thus selecting for a fear of heights which remains to this day at the reptillian core of our brains. There are very few cliffs in the thousands of feet range and none past ten thousand feet so we never evolved a fear of airplane-like altitudes. Making parachute jumps from hundreds of feet where you have an instinctive aversion to heights is a whole new level of fear that makes what you experienced on your first skydive above BSR minimum pack opening altitudes seem like a roller coaster ride in comparison.

Gas won't be cheap between the time OPEC reduces our supply by 40% and we finish democratizing the whole middle east.

It's the only way to become a jedei master without making 3000+ jumps (While I've heard Brian mention 1000 jumps belly to earth, head-up, and head down that's probably conservative; over 1000 sit jumps hasn't been enough for me) which would be more expensive (with about 35 seconds of working time to break-off, freefly jumps are about $40 a minute per person. Tunnel time is under $13 a minute for up to 4 people which is just $3.25 a minute) and time consuming (20 minutes of flight time per hour versus 35 seconds). This completely disregards the communication advantages.

If you want to keep each altitude point exactly the same, then ALL the ground reference points, including the key point, have to move in conditions other than no wind. For a newbie, that's asking quite a bit. But is exactly what the SIM calls for in the category-C training for landing in higher winds. I don't think moving all three points is any harder than trying to change altitudes, although I'm not in the business of trying to teach skydiving and was left to my own devices after 7 AFF jumps (training was terse 10 years ago). I also think landing a C172 accurately is easier (especially with power), and my instructor didn't let me try that solo until after 90-100 nice landings with him in the right seat. The missing piece in the pattern section is that with winds every change in speed (via brakes or risers which also change trim) changes glide ratio - decreasing speed down-wind preserves altitude, while decreasing speed cross-wind and on final looses altitude for a given horizontal distance. That may be covered elsewhere in the SIM Quoting http://www.uspa.org/publications/SIM/2007SIM/Section4CatC.htm (the images are missing when I load the URL) Illustration 4-C.5. Adjusting the pattern for the day's conditions. 1. The landing pattern is square on a calm day, with each leg based on the canopy's projected glide distance from 300 feet of altitude (see illustration). a. Each jumper must know his or her own canopy's glide distance from 300 feet in no wind to plan a pattern. b. The instructor estimates the 300-foot no-wind glide distance for beginning students. 2. The planned final approach must be shortened from the known zero-wind square pattern as the wind increases; for example, cut the final approach approximately in half for ten mph. 3. The base leg also shortens as the wind increases; for example, also cut the base leg approximately in half for a ten-mph wind. 4. Plan the 1,000-foot pattern entry point farther upwind as winds increase; for example, double the length of the downwind leg used for calm conditions, ending at the new projected 600-foot point for ten-mph winds.

Dry-aged rib-eye. Yum.

There are two general problems here. 1. The second string players who aren't on teams are stuck doing a few jumps a weekend due to time and/or money constraints are more likely to spend their jump tickets on dives that they find fun. 2. The number of jumps it takes to be able to fly straight down at the right speed and not cause safety problems is a lot higher for vertical body positions. You can plan a small belly-to-earth RW jump with experience ranging from 25 to 2500 jumps, expect the plan to work well enough, and expect to have fun (more experienced people dive and fly harder slots). You can make a small tracking or wingsuit dive with people of all experience levels, count on knowing where everyone is at break-off, and expect to have fun provided that the leader does their job and doesn't go too flat or fast (more experienced people can take docks, fly over and under each other, barell roll and stay up with the formation, etc.) I'll jump with pretty much anyone in those cases. You can't count on seeing everyone or being safe if you do see everyone when you start with three random people trying to fly in a vertical positions. Some one might be falling too fast, some one might be loosing control and corking, some one might be back sliding miles away from the formation, and that's not safe or fun. I'll do 2-ways with uncalibrated freefliers but aren't going to invite them on bigger group jumps for those reasons. Chances are that if I'm at my home DZ I have something planned with friends. The analogy with skiing and other individual sports doesn't work well. When you're skiing other people can't screw up your performance unless they're bad enough to crash into you, ski areas don't limit you to 3-4 runs a day, and they don't charge you $25 for making one of your four runs down a bunny slope with a beginner. Competitive and group sports work a little better as an analogy because how your teamates do is important and leagues are organized arround ability (A and B or whatever).

You can always make your turn to final at about the same height regardless of wind conditions, and when the alttiude was set based on how long your canopy takes to recover from a turn that's the smart thing to do. Most swoopers do. Since the horizontal distance covered varies with wind conditions (you go longer with a tail wind and shorter with a headwind or when crabbing across the wind) the location of your turn and previous points in the pattern must move,

DONT S-turn unless you're in-danger of crashing into other obstacles, which you shouldn't be when jumping into a landing area large enough for student operations. Some one may be behind you and going much faster. While technically speaking you have the right of way that won't prevent a trip to the morgue or get you out of the hospital any sooner. Land beyond your target, note where you were relative to the target when you turned onto final on the jump you went wrong, and fly a longer final leg the next time you jump in the same wind conditions. Later you can do other things to steepen your approach without S-turns.

7000-8000 feet of density altitude, (like a 30% size decrease), a 5 MPH tail wind, 200 pounds of skydiver+beer gut (25-30 pounds)+rig, and 105 square feet of parachute which is not cross-braced. Or 245 square feet of canopy, 195 pounds of jumper+beer gut+rig and a lousy landing area. Loosing some lard is probably a lot cheaper than three new canopies and two BASE rigs... even without the cost savings on beer.

The choice in military weapons is largely political. We forced 7.62 x 51 on NATO when something intermediate like .280 British or the new 6.8x43 would provide a better mix of power and controlled automatic fire. While the FAL "won" our 7.62 trials we ended up with the M14 since it was more like the M1. The AR15 gas system was designed to work with rod propellants but the military opted for ball and got fouling.

What are solo CRW jumps? Every FAA legal skydiving container comes with two canopies for personal CRW :-)

You put in $900, because that's what lots of us paid before the dollar tanked and what you get when you start with the $1300 MSRP of a Cypres 2 and subtract $75-$85 * 5 battery replacements required for the original but not its replacement.

An 11-year old Cypres which had its 8 year and fresh batteries installed a year ago is worth about $150 of which you'll get $80 back using the standard Cypres pricing model $trade-in ($80) + ( original price - trade-in) * (1 - age / 12 years) - $4-year ($160) * (1 - years since scheduled inspection/4) - $batteries ($75 from Airtec, $85 local) * (1 - years since replacement / 2) where original price is arround $900 for a Cypres-1 bought when the dollar was strong versus the Deutsche mark or working back from the $1300 Cypres-2 MSRP less the $400 more a Cypres-1 will cost in battery replacements over its 12 year lifespan. Other cases of Cypres pricing are more complex. A 10 year old Cypres that's worth $220 for trade-in value and time remaining becomes worthless when you subtract $160 for the inspection and $75 for batteries. That doesn't make much sense, so you might look at it from the perspective of the $140 a year you'll pay for a brand new Cypres-2 assuming 12 years of life and no trade-in value. In the 10-year old timed out case that would be $80 + $280 - $160 - $75 = $125 to the seller and $235 to AirTec. A 4-8 year old Cypres which missed its 4-year is especially messy; since getting the 4 year doesn't change when the 8-year is due. In the classic method you'd subtract $160 for the missed maintenance and $160 * (years remaining to 8 year/4). When you're getting down at the end of a Cypres's life a lot of people don't find them worth selling. You might ask local jumpers what they have floating arround in their closet. You should know up to 46 of them from the cases of beer you bought for graduating from the student program and buying your first rig. Some DZOs think having an AAD is such a good idea that they'll sell you one at their cost. I've heard of at least one case where the purchase came with interest-free financing, with the provision that the AAD and therefore rig had to stay at the DZ until it was paid off. You might see if deals like that are available locally.

When you have enough jumps and are current skydiving itself is not that exciting. For most people it becomes more of a social sport where the rewards come from jumping with other people and building formations (under canopy, in wingsuits, tracking, atmonauti, or the standard four body positions - there's huge room for variation here). I usually won't waste the time and money on a ride to full altitude without people to jump with. Flying small parachutes is fun too. While I wouldn't skip skydiving to play xbox, I have skipped nice days to hang out with my wife or build things in my workshop.

Almost anyone who can track reasonably (as in fly in formation and have a reasonable fall-rate range which may not be the flatest ) can fly a wingsuit. The problem is what happens when things go wrong. You need to be relaxed enough not to make the situation worse and to pull all of the handles in the right order. Some experience actually doing that when you only have three handles to deal with would be nice to have before getting in a wing suit.

It depends on exit order and how the pilots fly. In full-flight a canopy loaded a little over a pound per square foot might descend at 15 feet per second (Paraflite's M1Z limit for 350 pounds under a 308) A small elliptical will dump over 90 feet per second in a turn (measured) and 15 feet per second in deep brakes (because it matches a large canopy's full-flight velocity vector assumed to be comparable to Paraflite's numbers) If both open at the same time and the small canopy starts manuevering at 3500 feet whilst the large one is at 2000 feet, they'll swap positions somewhat below 1700 feet (it takes a little while for the small parachute to accelerate). If the small canopy pilot goes into deep brakes he'll be at 1500 feet when the large canopy pilot lands which is a nice place to begin setting up for a high performance landing. When the big canopy pilot spirals down and the small canopy pilot does not slow down, it screws up the speed differential and they often cross paths below pattern altitude especially when the small canopy pilot opens farther from the drop zone and is saving his altitude to get back from the spot. I have 200 pounds under 105 square feet and usually land later once the Muppets have gotten out of the way.

The price of a brand new Cypres included 12 years of use before replacement, 4 years before overhaul, and 2 years before battery replacement. Used unit pricing needs to be adjusted to get back there and it's not friendly for sellers with 4-8 year old units that have missed their 4 year or timed out 9.5+ year old units. Assuming a $900 original purchase price (what a lot of us paid, and what it takes to have the Cypres-1 total ownership costs approximate the Cypres-2) and a 7 year 9 month old unit, the value for use as an AAD now is something like $80 trade-in + 820 * (1 - 7.75/12) - $85 batteries * (1 - 0 years/2 years) - $160 maintenance * (1 - 0 years/4 years) - $160 * (1 - .25 years/4 years) = - $25 which is less than zero. As an AAD to use later $80 trade-in + 820 * (4/12) - $85 - $160 = $108

3K for RW or freefly. Gives enough time to get back to the DZ from an average turbine load with sufficient altitude to setup for a high-performance landing, enough time to let impatient people under bigger canopies spiral down and land first instead of passing them at pattern altitudes, and enough time to become belly to earth between cutting away and deploying my reserve (last cutaway I didn't know how high I was and just dumped whilst arching. While it worked well enough I didn't have warm fuzzies about the body position).

No, my standards are higher than that. When in an English speaking country I want to KNOW what I'm eating. Last week's meats included beef tongue (tender & mild), goat (not so tender but quite tasty), and monk fish liver. This week we're going to dive into a box of squid from the Asian market. Yum!

Cross-bracing is an enabling technology that lets you jump a smaller canopy than you could with a conventional design when shutdown speed is the limiting factor in canopy size. By the time you get to that point conventional canopies are getting a bit twitchy so it'd be nice to go 25% smaller without a significant change in control sensitivity. The wisdom of going 25% smaller is a separate issue where the answer for most skydivers is "NO" due to experience and/or currency and might steer one to a conventional design if the longest swoop does not top their list of priorities. People with real experience under cross-braced wings can comment on other advantages (flight range?) that may be useful in other circumstances.