DrewEckhardt

Sounds right to me. Bush 41 said "Read my lips, no new taxes" and then raised taxes. Bohener said "read my lips: We are going to cut spending" and then Congress asked for a $278 billion dollar increase from $3,552 billion to $3,830 billion. I guess it depends on how you define "cut." While most of us consider "cutting spending" to be reducing spending like "I cut spending by stopping Starbucks," the congress critters consider "cutting spending" to be making do with less than projected increases, like "I cut spending by trading my Ford in for a Porsche instead of the Ferrari I planned on buying with my home equity loan."

600 PD Stiletto 120

Although a lot of those people bought into the myth that the home they were buying was worth what the bank-paid appraiser said it was, that home prices always go up so it was an investment justifying spending 2-3X what it would cost to rent a similar property, and even committed fraud as prompted by mortgage brokers which was then ignored by the banks so they could pocket the origination fees and perhaps loan servicing costs with the risk passed on to investors or insurers like the government sponsored enterprises. If banks had held the mortgages and only issued loans to people spending 28% of their verified income on PITI with 20% down payments property values wouldn't have gotten artificially inflated and the mess wouldn't have happened. Home owners walking away from $200,000 (or $1,000,000 in California) mortgages are as justified as Morgan Stanley walking away from a few billion worth of office towers or the Mortgage Banker's Association turning in their keys instead of paying the $75 million on their DC headquarters. Where the benefits (not paying hundreds of thousands of dollars on a depreciating asset) exceed the costs (expensive credit for a few years or perhaps 7 in the worst case, especially in no-recourse states like California where deficiency judgements aren't allowed on first mortgages used to buy a property) it makes plenty of sense.

We live in a post literate age where we believe whatever the pundits tell us, and neither the government (which bought or guaranteed most of the mortgages underwritten on fraudulent data and believes the banks owning a few of them are too big to fail even though they'd be insolvent when held to strict accounting standards) nor corporate media (which has government granted monopolies on the airwaves and their own portfolios and agendas) have told us to be upset. If we were outraged, in practice our first past the post electoral system means that at best we could vote for a Democrat or Republican who isn't of the party currently holding the seat but is part of the same problem (Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43 encouraged the mess and Obama has yet to address it) . As long as we have places to live and creature comforts it doesn't matter much in practice. 98% of us have color television, so it's not even bad for the "poor". If we get to the point where people are starving, there will be plenty of outrage which will get directed at whoever they tell us is most deserving (with the banks buying the elections and commercials).

As long as it is 8 hours between bottle and throttle there is no issue. Right! As long as it's been eight hours since your bender ended you can even be rather drunk at the time by European standards since the FAA sets the blood alcohol cut-off at .04% which is double what it takes to get a DUI in countries like Norway, Sweden, and Poland. THC aka delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol is metabolized within hours to 11-hydroxy-THC which is also psychoactive but quickly oxidized into 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC which is not. THC blood levels in light users are undetectable after 8-12 hours. It's only the inactive metabolites that hang around with a half-life of 10-13 days, with drug tests looking for 11-nor-9-carboxy-THC indicating recent use regardless of impairment.

For a given wing area biplanes have less lift and more drag than monoplanes. They look good and are easier to build in a small garage but are otherwise an anachronism predating the cantilivered monoplane design in 1915 and better materials.

He owes you Oreos. Guests only get what they want when they're paying for it, as at a hotel. You might remind him that needing to pay for a hotel room next time will be way more expensive than a bag of Oreos.

I told this guy that a wing loading of 1.3 under a semi-elliptical wing was too much for his experience level. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3610363;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread I used to dislike being right in these situations until I realized that only one of my friends had been back to the orthopaedic surgeon under an even smaller parachute and no one who'd broken themselves came down with a terminal case of stupidity.

I wonder how many of the opening problems are coming from "bad" canopies and how many are coming from parachutes with old lines that have gone out of trim. I got my Stiletto 120 with 600 jumps and 0 on the lines and put 600 on it which was enough to shrink the outside lines by 6" and some of the inners 1.5". That was enough to radically change the opening characteristics. I replaced the lower steering lines and toggle lines in the last 100 jumps since they were getting both short (toggle lines replaced around 250 jumps due to shrinkage) and ratty; and the rest of the lines still looked good because all but perhaps 50 of those jumps were made into nice grassy landing areas. If I didn't know better or was unscrupulous I would have passed the canopy on to some one who couldn't tell the difference between trim and canopy problems. Instead it's sitting in a bag because I'm not going to sell it without a reline and service is going to run most of what I'd get selling it. Monarchs are fine too. My second one which was alleged to have "300 jumps" looked worse than the 600 jump Stiletto and 600 jump lineset that followed, could have opened better, and didn't flare too well until I had it measured (it was out of trim) and sent it back for a reline. Opened and flared better after that.

Just seeing regular landings isn't enough for people to say anything supporting an aggressive canopy choice. Landings straight ahead into a wide open field aren't a big deal. Low turns to avoid unseen obstacles, landings with induced speed because you won't always turn flat, down-wind and cross-wind landings because you don't always have a choice, and up-hill/down-hill landings are a lot more interesting and essential to survival. If he hasn't been doing those things no one has seen him. If there are a lot of people watching him do those things on a regular basis, it's probably because he's doing them on the same pass as other jumpers on a freefall load in which case he's a menace and shouldn't be jumping. Time to build muscle memory, explore a canopy's flight envelope, and have bad things happen which you deal with successfully like out landings and wind shifts set some prudent jump number minimum and I think Brian Germain's 1.0 + .1/100 jumps with adjustments (and 300 jumps before getting under a fully elliptical canopy) aren't too far off. That plus being proficient at the survival skills make getting through the experience without trips to the emergency room more likely.

Thankfully health insurance isn't priced like life insurance.

When I've shipped internationally, the documents for customs purposes go into the same envelope as the US post office's forms with the insured value. Having lost a package shipped overseas via USPS global express I'm not going to send any insured for less than full value or risk having to deal with whatever results from having two different values listed.

I wouldn't jump a fully elliptical canopy or downsize faster than Brian Germain's chart allows, and would do all of the things on Bill von Novak's at the previous size before jumping a smaller one. It's not a big deal to land any parachute straight ahead into a large wide open landing area. When things go wrong it gets interesting.

The smart thing to do is ask instructors at your Drop Zone what you should do. They are the ones watching you every day and can give you advice based on what they see. Nope. It doesn't take much to get an instructor rating and that's mostly freefall skills. I know (knew?) at least three dead instructors who killed themselves (plus one tandem student) under canopy and another one who came close because she didn't manage to learn good piloting skills during her first few thousand jumps. Plus a few more who I also like but are only living because they're bouncy and/or lucky. Even if they're competent, your local skydiving instructors are probably only seeing you under the best possible conditions with low winds, bright light, and a wide open landing area. You're sizing your canopy for the worst possible conditions at dusk with a low turn to avoid unseen power lines to a down-wind landing on asphalt. Consider the sunset load where the cute chicks flash the pilot for extra altitude, some one in your group gets hypoxic and gets their foot caught on the seatbelt so you take forever to climb out, and you have a long spot. Things seem to happen much faster, you may not stay flat enough in the turn to avoid a painful impact, and you won't get away with running out a landing where you didn't flare all the way. A better starting point is second and third-hand advice off the internet originating from people like Brian Germain with 10,000+ skydives who've been around long enough to see such situations and make a career out of hanging out at different dropzones teaching canopy flight. When local instructors tell you to be more conservative because of unique situations (altitude, a tight landing area, you aren't a good driver in the air...) that's good advice. When local instructors tell some one to be more aggressive that's probably inexperience; although since the advice recipient lacks the experience to pass judgement and will be the one making friends with a nice orthopedic surgeon if things go wrong (I like mine, but would have preferred to meet him in a social setting) they'd do well to go with the more conservative advice. At 100-200 jumps a year it doesn't take long for most people to downsize without exceeding Brian Germain's recommendations to the point where they don't want to go any faster. There isn't a good reason to do things in fewer jumps. Right. You _really_ need to be able to make flat turns down to ground level and land down/cross-wind plus down hill and up hill. It's fun, and you'll be using those skills unless you're an odd engineer somewhat afraid of skydiving who only jumps solo with a large parachute (I was surprised to meet him and learn that guy really exists).

Nope. Switzerland had 45.7 guns per 100 residents in 2007, Finland 45.3, Sweden 31.6, France 31.2, Austria 30.4, and Germany 30.3. And shoot guns. And believe what you want regardless of facts.

You need to consider inseam length too. A good rule of thumb for main lift web length is to take your height, subtract your inseam measurement, and subtract 20". I'm 5'10" with a 30.5" inseam. 70-30.5-20=19.5. I think my custom rigs measure out at 19.5" and 20". Some one 6'1 with a 33-34" inseam would take the same size. Get your measurements taken as specified on UPT's order form, call UPT with the serial number, and ask them how things match up. The custom rig will come in your choice of colors with whatever options you want.

Quote You need to create a substantial amount of airflow which requires a large electric motor. I doubt your average domestic supply is rated to supply enough current. [/QUOTE] People have built vertical wind tunnels for human use around old radial engines (maybe a 1340 or 1820)

My favorite dark and light beers (I make the distinction on mouth feel and whether I can see light through the beer). Arrogant Bastard Ale, which is a fine and slightly chewy American strong ale. Well balanced with plenty of flavor which isn't all hops. Not too much so that I can't eat/drink a second one. Yum! Racer Five IPA, which is a refreshing live India pale ale. Like Bridgeport might make if they weren't afraid to offend people's taste buds by using more than a hint of hops. Yum!

I have a couple that I like a lot. They're very comfortable and construction quality is better than the Javelin I have (for example, the Reflex main container is lined while the Javelin isn't). Some riggers fail to distribute bulk so the pilot chute seats and leave the cap sticking out out where it could theoretically snag a line in adverse situations like a CRW wrap. (While Reflex pack jobs compress a little over-night and might need a little attention, some people manage pack jobs that can't be fixed). When that happens I blame the rigger not the gear. My first reserve pack job ever was on a Reflex and didn't have the problem because I searched on-line and talked to people about how to distribute the bulk. Based on that I can only conclude that some riggers are too lazy to do a little research when they come across something a little different. You don't want those guys packing your rig regardless of the brand and might even be better off with something like a Reflex where the inattention to detail is more likely to be obvious. The Reflex reserve closing loop can be tightened without opening the container and breaking the seal in the process. A few riggers won't pack Reflexes because they're paranoid about an idiot messing with things, leaving their seal intact, and getting blamed if something bad happens. Those guys are rare enough it shouldn't be a problem in practice.

You're not a parasite until you take out more than you put in; and I'd argue that doesn't even happen until you get out more than you would from the same money invested privately. When I ran the numbers (assuming the rate doesn't increase, the wage cap doesn't increase faster than inflation, and benefits continue to keep pace with inflation) I found that if I wait until I collect the maximum benefit I'll need to outlast my statistically expected lifespan by nine years to get back what I put in to Social security with a 0% inflation adjusted rate of return.

It's not going to fail. The private insurance industry is going to thrive even more with the government requiring all Americans to buy their product and offering government subsidies for those that may have a hard time managing with just their own pay checks. Medicare for everyone would deprive the health insurance industry of its profits and reduce campaign contributions.

Yes of course it was avoidable. Imagine if millions and millions of people lived within their means and did NOT put themselves into the record personal debt they found themselves in. But it is so much easier to blame someone else than it is to blame the people who spent more than they made. It was a team effort. People who signed up for more debt than they could afford. The Realtors(TM) who made bigger commissions selling those homes. The mortgage brokers who made bigger commissions with larger mortgages. The banks which make bigger fees by originating bigger mortgages, processing them, and even foreclosing on them. The appraisers who kept getting business because they agreed with the numbers buyers and banks wanted to mortgage on homes. The financial industry which made money securitizing the loans. The bond raters who stamped "AAA" on the resulting bank loans so they could be securitized so the financial companies wouldn't ratings shop and send their fees elsewhere. Everybody except the buyers and bond buyers won big by getting the buyers into unaffordable mortgages likely to end in foreclosure.

Can't help but wonder, then, why are you taking it? I've jumped out of chartered helicopters without a dropzone.

I bought my own rig and packed it for jump #13. Might have done it sooner except the DZ required the first 5 post-AFF jumps to be on gear with an AAD. Of course...

Having sex with yourself is more fun than being completely celibate, but most people find it more enjoyable with a partner. Freefall is the same way. Given typical door sizes and how common sky surfers are as one you'll be doing it by yourself or perhaps with one camera person so you can look at yourself afterwards. Lots of us tried skysurfing in the 1990s and decided that although it was neat other sorts of skydiving involving other people were more fun. If you want to try (it's still a worth while experience) the usual suggestion was to have a stable stand up, have no problems getting there from any situation, and 360 degree rotations in that position in both directions on all three axis (left/right, front/back flip, left/right cartwheel). Tamara's page has more details and adds starting and stopping 360 degree flat spins back flying: http://www.koyn.com/CloudDancer/articles/Surf.html