MakeItHappen

I am truly sorry that Danny Page did a stupid, selfish act and took out Bob Holler and himself. We cannot change the outcome of March 17, 2007. We can only change the future. I fully support separating HP landing patterns from conventional landing patterns, in time or space. But a BSR is not needed and should not be implemented. There are DZs that separate the patterns and have great success. Elsinore is one such DZ. Elsinore has a swoop pond, a student area and an area for the conventional patterns. Elsinore's current setup was precipitated by a non-fatal canopy collision in May 2000. The local jumpers demanded that the patterns be separated. Implementation and enforcement of separate landing areas has to be at the local level. That involves the DZO and local jumpers working out a solution that works for their particular DZ. What works at Elsinore may not be needed at a small Cessna DZ. A geographically small Cessna DZ may have a separation plan that is determined by exit order and exit altitude. The proposed BSR does not allow for a swooper and a classic accuracy jumper to exit at 5k and then a second pass at 12.5K. The swooper executes a HP type approach, the classic accuracy jumper executes a classic approach and the freefallers to execute conventional patterns, all landing in the same physical area. There are many other scenarios that the BSR would essentially ban, but we know can work. There is also much more fundamental reason not to impulsively implement 'separate landing areas, in time or space' as a BSR. I will call this the 'There ought to be a law!' syndrome. 'There ought to be a law!' syndrome: This happens when friends or family of someone that dies in skydiving get on a path saying 'If only such-n-such was in place, then my little Johnny would be alive today.' 'If only such-n-such was in place, then many accidents like this would be prevented in the future.' We've seen this in Nevada, when the parents of a student campaigned and succeeded in getting the USPA BSRs written into the state law. We've seen this from Jane Melbourne when she tried and failed to get local, state and federal laws changed after the death of her son. In the two cases mentioned above, most jumpers took a stance of 'No we don't want the government to regulate us. We can do it ourselves.' Inside the skydiving community, we self regulate. RW, CRW, vRW and Swoop organizers regulate who gets on what loads to maintain the highest safety level. We impose rules upon our groups that USPA or any other national parachute organization does not mandate. PST has qualification jumps. RW has qualification jumps. VRW has qualification jumps. CRW has qualification jumps. We impose rules of 'thou shall not swoop on a x-way'. We cut those that violate these self-imposed rules. We don't call up USPA and say "Well, Joe Blow here did a 270 approach in the middle of a 100-way. Can you suspend his membership?" We cut Joe Blow off the load. We implement safe canopy patterns based upon the event and people on the load. We do it without a (perceived) heavy hand from a national organization. We do it based upon our authority as jumpers in the same airspace. We do need to separate the different types of patterns in time or space. We already have the authority to do that. We do not need a BSR. We should not bend to 'There ought to be a law.' pundits within skydiving anymore than we would do so if they were promoting local, state or federal laws. If we follow this path, next it will be the 'mandatory RSL' pundits. That would have saved two people at a recent WFFC. Then it'll be the 'mandatory AAD' pundits. Etc, etc etc... Education is a significant part of canopy patterns. Please contact me at aerosoftware_AT_makeithappen.com ( _AT_ = @ )to see a preview of an article that will appear in SNM June 2007. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

see SIM Cat F . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

From Parachutist Sept 1974, pg 22 1973 Fatality Study By Allen C. Webb and Jerry Schrimsher From Parachutist Dec 1972, pg 14 1971 Fatality Study By Mike Linz QED. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

We apologize if you receive more than one copy of this notice. It is important that we reach all of Tom and Tammi's extended family and friends. It is with heavy hearts that we share the news of Tom's passing Sunday morning. (4/22/07) You all know Tom as the happiest, friendliest, nicest guy, and most of you know how deeply in love he was with Tammi. Many of Tom and Tammi's family are here in Southern California now, and arrangements are being made for a Memorial & Celebration of Tom's Life this Sunday, April 29th, at Perris Valley Skydiving. For anyone who may need directions: Perris Valley Skydiving 2091 Goetz Road Perris Ca. 92570 Driving directions are also available on the DZ website at www.skydiveperris.com The plan for the day is as follows: Beginning at 11:00 AM, skydiving friends will gather for organized jumps in Tom's memory. 2:00 Dirt-dive for the Ash Dive, organized by Rich Grimm 2:30 Take-off for the Ash Dive. 3:00 Ash Dive will take place. Following the ash dive, all family and friends will gather by the pool to honor Tom's memory with words, pictures, and stories. We invite everyone who wishes to share something about Tom to please come up and speak. If you have photos you'd like to share, we encourage you to bring some, or you can e-mail photos to janet Lundquist at After this memorial there will be a celebration of Tom's life, sharing food and drink and more stories. Please join us. We're working on a headcount, too, so please let us know if you can attend. In lieu of flowers, a donation to the American Heart Association in Tom's memory would be greatly appreciated. Please visit: https://donate.americanheart.org/ecommerce/aha/aha_index.jsp. For those of you who wish to send cards of condolences to Tammi, her address is: Tammi Rettig 22846 Cove View St. Canyon Lake, CA 92587-7998 Thank you for all the love and support you have already extended to Tammi and Tom's Family. In Peace and Love, Friends of Tom & Tammi .............. RIP Tom. attached is a picture taken by Deb Henry at the Go-Fast 300-way. Tom tweaked his knee on the jump before the 300-way record dive. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Originally, there was no expiration date. Then it was 10 years. Then is was lengthened to 12 years. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Hadn't really thought about that. I think there is enough free stuff on DiveMaker.com that I don't have to give away DiveMaker. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

yes. And it can also illustrate 3d moves. It also has some nifty features of a wacker tool, star tool, reflect thru centerpoint tool that make it very easy to create the bigger way dives. IOW, you do not have to place each jumper individually. That web site again was DiveMaker.com PS You can also print to pdf and do screen captures to put formations on a web site. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Your video project is an overkill. You don't need to show this mal and that mal to FJSs. You have to show them: - a good canopy - a canopy with line twists - a canopy with slider up - a canopy with end cell closure then tell them what they have to do to fix each minor problem. Then an explanation of total - nothing out and partial - something out, but not square or controllable and the appropriate EPs. Then pop those students into the hanging harness and throw all the various mals at them, even if they have not seen a picture of it before. Get them to demonstrate they can figure out what is or is not controllable and execute the proper procedures. There is no need to sit through minutes of mal examples on a video to see these examples. Instructors need to know if the STD will respond correctly. Get them in the HH and have them show you (off some flash card or projected image of a scenario) what the proper response is. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

It's one thing to watch a video and then ask what would you do? It is MUCH more productive to place these pictures above their head in a hanging harness and say show me what you would do. The video snippets are nice to watch and you can get verbal feedback from the students, but you have to see the student execute the proper response. I think this is where the 'disparity' is, in that the video is not an end all to this. You HAVE to have the student demonstrate proper responses in the hanging harness. If we can all agree on this point, then it should be obvious that the only E&D that needs to be done is: - a good canopy looks like this - line twists look like this and you fix it by pulling the risers apart and kicking - slider up looks like this and you fix it by pumping the brakes - end cell closure looks like this and you fix it by pulling the brakes down and holding until they inflate Then in the HH you toss out pics of line overs or bag locks and ask them to respond. The STD does not have to know what that mal is or what caused it. They only have to demonstrate that they know it's not square and it's not controllable, so they will cutaway and pull reserve. And they have to do that in the HH. Watching a bunch of video clips does nothing to add to their learning. Only the proper execution in the HH gets them to the 'ok' to go do a jump. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I think you do not understand the difference between passive and active learning. It does not matter whether you use flashcards or some image projected from a DVD or computer to show a jumper in a hanging harness 'this is what you have' - and asking 'show me what you will do?' The plain simple fact is that when you give these pictures to someone and they respond by operating or pulling handles appropriately, they will learn better and faster than just watching a passive video presentation and nodding in agreement. There is no reputable skydiving school that says 'here watch this and read this' and then takes someone up on a jump. They need to see the student execute the proper procedures (more than once) to be convinced that they have learned what to do. You need to focus more on Trial and Practice than Explanation and Demonstration. E&D is easy. It's getting the student to do the T&P correctly that is the hard part. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I looked at both of your videos. My impression is that you are making it WAAAAAYYYYYY too complicated to learn what a good canopy or malfunction looks like and what to do about it. This applies especially to FJC students. Students further along could learn more about the specifics of mals, but you need to keep it very simple for FJS. In a nutshell, all a FJS needs to know is - is something there? - is it square? (really rectangular, but they get the idea with square) - is it controllable? If the canopy (or lack there of) fails any one of these tests, then execute EPs. FJS do not need to know the names of line over, torn canopy, broken lines, bag lock, pilot chute in tow, streamer, horseshoe, slider suck on a half-hitch, slider spin, etc. To handle the minor problems of line twists, slider up and end cell closure, you have them in the hanging harness and say 'You look up and see this' Show flash card of line twists. They respond by pulling apart risers and kicking out of the twists. Then you say 'Oh the slider is still up near the canopy' Show them a flash card. The std responds by pumping the toggles to get the slider down. Then you say 'OOps the end cells are closed.' Show them a flash card. The std responds by pulling the toggles down and holding them until the end cells inflate. You do this all on one practice opening in the hanging harness and repeat. This is much more effective than watching videos of the same stuff. To handle the mals that require EPs, show them a picture flash card of such-n-such. You do NOT have to (nor should you) go into the names and detailed descriptions of these mals. That only overloads their already overloaded mind. No one, especially FJS, needs to diagnose that they had such-n-such mal. All they need to know is that it was not there or that it was not square and was not controllable. For the two-out situations, you tell them the proper procedure and then flash them a picture and have them respond. Repeat until correct. A few minutes in the hanging harness can teach more than the same time spent watching your video. For EPs all they need to know are the procedures for totals (nothing there) or partials (something there, but not square or controllable) Some DZs do teach the same EP (cutaway-pull reserve) for both totals and partials. That is acceptable but is not the best solution. EPs Total - pull reserve Partial - cutaway and pull reserve Some specifics about your video: - what you call the floater exit is not a floater exit. It is the praying mantis exit. You are setting them up for confusion down the road. - the 'good canopy' example is one of a CRW canopy (looks like a Pursuit) with a retractable PC. STD gear is not like this. They will see a PC and bridle line trailing the main. - 'unusual mals' - You use this term to describe the minor problems or line twists, slider up and end cell closure. These are not mals unless the jumper reaches their decision altitude. The SIM uses the term 'unusual situations' for premies, two-out and canopy collisions. This could lead to confusion down the road. - It is a really BAD teaching technique to teach 'what not to do'. Recast into 'what to do'. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

proven how? It's funny that the two rigs mentioned with tuck tab problems are not also the two companies mentioned with the 'new solution'. Kinda makes you think that all mfgs have had tuck tabs problems. Also - as a historical side note on Racers: The reason racer riser covers came apart so often was because the velcro was either worn out or not mated correctly. You cannot depend on jumpers to do things right all of the time. BTW, thanks for the instructions for the hard to find 'rig tour' link. When I look at the RWS (aka ??? what was that acronym?) secondary riser covers I see a good way to unstow toggles during deployment or even hanging a main riser. I am sure if you stowed everything the right way that would not happen, but jumpers won't do that 100% of the time Just to be clear, the toggles are on the back of the rear risers. The secondary flap is supposed to lie directly on top of the front of the front risers. This assumes that the risers are to be packed with the main toggles inboard. One scenario I can think of is someone that stows the risers over the top of the secondary riser cover. This would place the riser cover and the toggles in close proximity to each other with a shearing motion during deployment. A toggle has (most often-nowadays anyway) a keeper for the top tip of the toggle. The keeper may or may not be close ended (at the top side of the toggle tip.) Now, if the more-or-less 'rigid' binding tape portion of the secondary flap jammed into the space between the toggle tip and the toggle keeper or if the binding tape jammed in-between the toggle and riser at the bottom end of the toggle, you could have an unstowed brake or a riser hangup. Another scenario is that the secondary flap 'sticks out' and then is tucked in at some later point in time. Who knows where that flap will get tucked into. Another scenario is the person that packs the toggles outboard and uses the flap properly. That will also have a high probabily of a toggle snag or riser hangup. The Velocity version of the secondary riser cover also looked like it could hang or displace a toggle when it was packed correctly too. I am assuming that the flap gets tucked in under the risers and the risers are stowed with brakes inboard. Someone could put longer risers on the main and make it really easy for a toggle hangup. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

So, it's just a wider flap that wraps the risers? It is still held in by the tuck tabs at the shoulder - ok some tension from wrapping the big flap around the risers helps too. BTW, where is their packing manual? Did not see any rig tour. I did look at the latest, greatest manual and did not see anything there either. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

So for those of us not hip on the latest fix to the tuck tabs riser covers opening at all the wrong times problem, what are secondary riser covers.? picture please . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

ok I couldn't stand this any more. I called Gary and asked him what the story was. So here it is, straight from Gary Patmor. Yes it was Gary in Masters of the Sky. He wanted another camera view so he was experimenting at a DZ out by Sacto. He had a doubled nylon strap that went around the strut of a C-182. He climbed out and let go of the strut. The excess line was fed out by someone in the plane. He had a quick release that allowed him to cutaway. He also had a jumpsuit with extra wings that allowed him to fly off to the side and get better shots. He did these tests in the Sacto area for preparation for the Nationals later that year. (Sorry Gary did not remember what year it was) . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

How's that not real life? You go into brakes - you plane out, and your eyes will be looking more towards the horizon and the sky than before. (Not talking where the sweet spot would change here) fuck it you guys can do your own skydiver physics to earth's end, it won't change what Newton's laws say. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

hmm.. Isn't everything that you said above already there? no because I can 'exit' and set a steady course on the cross hair and cannot make it to the target. If I do turns I can get to the target. Maybe there is some algorithm that isn't quite right in the mappings? In real life, that would not be true. If I go into deep brakes in your simulation, the target falls to the bottom of the screen. That is also not what real life is. In real life, if I go into deep brakes the target will rise. I cannot reproduce that in your simulation. I would say some back and for emails directly could clarify things Yes. That's true. Given that you're going into the wind. Under the canopy, to measure the wind strength you'd find the wind line, and find the brake setting that will make you go vertically down. Add more - and you're backing up, release - and you've got some penetration. If you have a high airspeed, and you apply brakes - you pop up little and increase the angle of attack, but only temporarily, until your airspeed decreases, you loose lift, and start dropping out of the sky, or even stall. Am i missing something? hmm.. maybe I should think a little more about it I only looked at the no wind situations. I tried one 'with wind' but had no indication of what the direction of the wind was. I could do a ground speed check, but that did not seem to be fruitful. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

That's cool. But the visuals are not right. When you do either front riser dive or significant brakes the target should float up the screen. ie whenever or how ever you make the approach steeper the target should float up to the top of the screen. In one case (front risers) you have faster airspeed and should drop out of the sky faster. In the other case (deep brakes) you should slow your descent rate but also increase the steepness of the trajectory. There is also a cross reversal with brakes added. A little bit of brakes should float you and give a shallower approach, target drops to bottom of screen, but with more brakes you should get a steeper approach and the target should float to the top of the screen. I never noticed any significant changes in descent rates called out, except for the flare. Let me know if I can help you. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

???? huh??? what??? oxymoron??? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

There is not much of a need to reply to this thread since the original post is from 2001. The recent additions to the thread are 'enlightening' to the various 'beliefs' about a pull-out. It does 'boggle my mind' that so many people do not understand how a pull out works and they assume all pullouts are the same. Just in passing, the Racer pud has an 'idiot' velcro on the short bridle line that sticks to velcro on the tape that connects to the PC. This ensures that the PC base is close to the right hand corner of the rig when packed. Then if you do get a floater, the pud is right there at the corner of the rig and not dancing wildly above the pin someplace. Also, back when hand deploys first came out - the BIG lecture was they were not for students because it required stability. This applied to pull outs and throw outs equally. After AFF came along and a student's stability was enhanced by instructors, Roger thought of using a throw out for students. He could have easily used a pull out too. As far as I know, the only differences in the 'pull' between a pullout and throw-out are - that your elbow is in near your body for a pull out and it is out away from your body for a throw-out. - that the pull direction is a 'punch' for a pull out and a lateral pull out to the side for a throw out. You have much greater strength with the punch type pull than a pull out laterally away from your body. I think all of the non-Racer pullouts require a wrist twist to get the pud off the velcro. I never did like any of those other puds. The names of the two systems are misnomers too. Rob's comments about right shoulder low and line twists was too funny. I'm sorry, but when the myths get as ludicrous as breathing by absorbing O2 through the skin, I just have to laugh. If anyone still wants more info, please see Deployment Initiators But what do I know? I've only been jumping a pullout since 1981. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I think Brian is out playing. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Well then fill in the blank: A conventional pattern includes the airspace from the ground to 1000 ft directly above the landing area plus a 500 foot lateral margin. A swoop pattern includes the airspace from the ground to ___________ ft directly above the landing area plus a 500 foot lateral margin. These descriptions have been added to What is a standard and predictable pattern? and the glossary. But, the swoops I've seen from people doing them in the main landing area are usually from below 1000 ft. Swoops at competitions or solo approaches to a swoop course start much higher. I think you should reread the article because I do mention standard swoop patterns as being part of the 'standard and predictable' patterns. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

What is a standard and predictable pattern? What is your answer? My answer Please discuss. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Let's call a truce - cease fire for a moment. I think one of the things that we are all having difficulty in doing is articulating exactly what we mean. Some terms or phrases mean different things to different people. Explanations seem to go along these lines too. What I have heard is that just about everyone agrees that pulling a 270 in a congested airspace is a dumb thing to do. So take your arrows and fire them on target - not at someone's post that you may interpret differently than the poster's intention, but at something that tries to encompass all of these views. I have gathered info from many sources and put them into a draft document called Avoiding Canopy Collisions and a Glossary. I still have comments from others to add in. There are a bunch of diagrams that I want to add. It's a work in progress. It is much easier to edit than create. So edit away. I will add in my usual disclaimer for prototype work. This is not the end all or the final product. It is a work in progress. Corrections to spelling or grammar are welcome too. Keep in mind I have not gone thru to make sure tenses are consistent. Just don't stand there bitching - do something! . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

All of the 'no - over-fly' rules in the FARs for demo jumps are from the days that a pilot would let a jumper out and if they burned in, the DZ or airshow hosts could not be held accountable. The FAA added in the pilot accountability to ensure safer operations. The NV state legislature added the USPA BSRs as part of their code. Use search to find the details. A foiled attempt was made by a mother of a 1st jump student. See Jumping Through Clouds. One could also place the changes that happened to FliteLine, Inc into this category too. Years ago when most states had their own Civil Air Authority, there were many rules concerning demo jumps and just regular DZ jumps. There are a plethora of articles in Parachutist that address the locals taking on these rules. The possibility of others getting state or federal legislation passed that mandates certain rules in skydiving is very real. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker