yoink

The DZO says 'take the wingsuit off, and then link up with your parents in freefall and get a photo of you all together'. I BET 99% of whuffos would find that a better memory of the jump - linking up with their son and posing for a photo, than a 3 second glimpse of them as they go past.... The same applies to swooping on demos - whuffos are just as impressed by standard skydiving stuff. We don't need to show off. Don't try and make this about what's best for the students. It's not. In no way.

Which is singularly irrelevant. Answer me this - why do you think it's a good idea that you should be allowed to fly within 500ft of tandem students? What tangible benefit does it bring to them to offset the risk? The biggest issue is that it seems like your position is 'you're stopping me having fun' to which every reasonable skydiver is replying 'you don't get to have fun with students... Go and play with other experienced jumpers.' I fail to see how this is in any way unreasonable.

I AM mathematically stupid. Maybe that's the problem.

Again - it's a question of risk vs reward. The payoff for doing a jump in marginal conditions is that they actually GET to make a jump when they might not otherwise be able to. Tandems don't expect to just hang around at a DZ weekend after weekend, after all. This produces revenue for the DZ and Tandem Instructor, has a chance of getting a new jumper into the sport and can be used as teaching-time if it's a working tandem. There is simply no benefit for the student to have a wingsuit do a flyby. None. It's the skydiving equivalent of dividing by Zero... Mathematically stupid.

So this is one of the more interesting posts in the last several pages of mania that Ron brings with him. Something that can be discussed and questioned. I think it was DanG a few pages ago who said it best - for me, it's a risk mitigation scenario. Will Hillary be able to weasel around restrictions that Trump wouldn't? Probably... But I don't think she'd do anything to instantaneously destroy the entire country. The Likelihood is moderate, but so is the Risk. But Trump... (and this is where opinion comes in), like you, I believe will be controlled more heavily by the rest of the government, but is arrogant enough to do something exceptionally dangerous if he can get away with it. A preemptive strike on NK. A complete cessation of trade with China. Screwing Putins wife live on youtube... who knows? He doesn't have the sanity filter that others seem to. It may be deliberate, or it may be the people controlling him screwing up, but while the Liklihood is Low, the Risk is Extreme. That's how I see it.

On the contrary, we chose to self-regulate like adults. If you were doing this effectively, there wouldn't be a BSR out. QED.

This thread has seriously lost its way.

I just responded in kind. Maybe I shouldn't have stooped to his level. apologies. If everyone can keep this in mind, we'd have such better disagreements...!

Looks like a great way to dice pedestrians though!

You fucking people... I know you are, but what am I?... US political debate, ladies and gentlemen. No wonder we end up with this shitshow.

Don't go the the most despotic country in the world and then act surprised when you get thrown in jail. Idiot. ""Otto was one of the smartest guys I've ever met," Thomas said. "I've never met a person that had a bad thing to say about him."" Obviously not bright enough to NOT vacation in North Korea...

"Both of my Republican competitors and Ms. Clinton are such complete arsecunts that I'm forced to ask those few people who did support me to transfer their votes to Mr Bernie Sanders. Because he looks like my grandad."

So Rubio has just quit. Does he throw his support to anyone or just go home and cry in a corner quietly. I'd love to see him support Bernie. Just for the shock value of the announcement.

Because the risks / benefits are entirely different. Show me a wingsuit flight that can creep up to a tandem with a single-digit closing speed and maintain that. Show me that the benefit to the student of having someone perform a close flyby is equal to that of having outside video in terms of either generating repeat custom or as a teaching tool. Tandem instructors are skydivers first and so can evaluate and predict the risks and behavior of having another discipline they're familiar with on the jump. They may have no experience with wingsuiting at all. The only people who think buzzing students is acceptable are the wingsuiters and it's purely for their own kicks. There is basically zero benefit for the student, just increased risk. We've had pretty much the exact same argument with swoopers about getting them to swoop away from the main landing area on this site. The only reason they wanted to swoop spectators or the beer line was for their own kicks as well which was just as idiotic and selfish... Again, I think it's stupid that the USPA felt that they had to introduce this BSR - enforcable or not. If you have to be told not to mess with students then there are wider problems...

I still can't get over how many people think it's a good idea to put someone with zero political experience into running for the President. Apply for pretty much any senior job in the world and they'll ask about your experience. If you answer 'none. But at least I'm tellin' it like it is!' you'll be given the don't-call-us-we'll-call-you speech, but somehow this doesn't apply to Trump. It baffles me.

The problem is that I suspect you and I have pretty divergent opinions on who the real enemies are. And what constitutes 'spiritual wickedness'...

Make sure skydiving is specifically called out in that policy. Many life insurance policies specifically exclude 'extreme sports' in the fine print.

Wingsuiters don't have rights to endanger other people - let alone students. That's just stupid. The is absolutely no reason that a wingsuiter needs to get within 500ft of a student except for their own kicks. It sets a bad example for a student skydiver and increases risk on the skydive in an already more-risky-than-normal scenario. The face that the USPA thinks it even NEEDS a BSR to explain why this behavior is moronic reflects poorly on the judgement making skills of those wingsuiters. Every other skydiving discipline knows that you don't mess with students....

She asks other people to pay it.

Now there's a quote I can agree with. I'm terrified that a fundamentalist of any religion ends up as president.

Once again, NK are playing one-upmanship in the theater of mass destruction by claiming they're miniaturized nuclear warheads enough to put on intercontinental missiles... Do I think they've done it? no. Do I think they WILL do it? Yes... it may take two years, or it may take twenty, but eventually I think they'll manage to create an intercontinental nuclear weapon. My question is twofold: 1) Do you agree? Do you think NK will ever get long range nuclear missiles? 2) (and the more interesting one) What then? I'm genuinely worried that they're insane enough to launch one - even if it means they're wiped off the globe as a result. Do you think the rhetoric is just that and there's some sanity in the NK leadership, or do you think it's inevitable that we're heading towards if not a nuclear war, at least a nuclear launch?

Duh. That obviously only applies to white christians. Everyone else is far lower on the totem pole.

The negative dihedral makes it look cool. Along with the obnoxious rock soundtrack. Lots of moving parts to go wrong or maintain with that many fans. Seems like an odd way of doing it.

It's how you choose to see it, isn't it? If this was simply an oversight, then it can't be used as ammo against the Republicans, therefore you choose to see it as a deliberate attack. I'll say it again. I think the NRSC response lacked any class, but I don't believe there was any intent in the original message to mock the handicapped. (In this case) Remember - we're only seeing part of the email response. It may well have gone like this: "The NRSC would like to apologize to Ms. Duckworth for the poorly phrased tweet sent out this morning. There was never any intent to draw attention to her handicap and we believe this battle should be fought based upon public policies [and] it would be great if reporters would pay as much attention to a deleted tweet as they should to Tammy Duckworth being sued by VA whistleblowers for ignoring claims of mistreatment and corruption." See how the message changes? Equally, I think calling for the instant firing of the person who spoke thoughtlessly shows a lack of class.

Just because it's happened in the past doesn't mean it's right to do so again. Have you never said anything stupid or poorly phrased, professor? Should you have been instantly fired for it? By all means, point out that the message is insensitive and stupid, but then move on to more important stuff. Spending time fighting over this rather than on substantive issues doesn't benefit anyone, least of all the public.