NickDG

Those Cessna 411s are death capsules. Or at least they seemed so. I don't know the numbers but over the last thirty years I've heard of bagfuls of them crashing in the GA setting. And there was just one a month or two ago. We had one for awhile. They are very ground hungry and it always seemed to me we stayed on the runway way too long - going way too fast. So I always made it a point to glance at the condition of the tires on that bird. And, if your student was anything but tiny, it was almost impossible to do two Instructor AFF out of its small door. Finally we gave up trying after a while and reserve side would take normal grips in the door and throughout the count, but then they'd let go on the actual exit. Then just follow and come down and dock. It was actually safer for all that way. The horizontal stab is low and close in this plane and an open rig in the door would suck balls . . . This of course, is quasi-illegal, but it was better than a premature opening and/or the whirling derbies we got handed trying to do it any other way. At first, before doing it that way, I briefed the students to expect a tumble on the exit but it was cheating them out of the good exit I knew we could do just being alone with them. We finally got rid of that aircraft and I was glad of it . . . NickD

It would probably work in the middle of nowhere. But according to the FAA there is no such place. And they have rather strict rules about tether lengths no matter if the floating thing is a certified aircraft, like a hot air balloon, or a floating Barney used to sell new automobiles. So you could do it from very low altitudes but then you'd be better off with a BASE rig - And then there's that whole can of worms . . . NickD

>>Maybe I am too trusting of the new tech?

Congratulations! The first jump back from a bad injury is mentally a million times harder than a first jump ever . . . NickD

Hi Rob, (hope you're feeling better by now)! When I got my Strong Tandem rating it was five jumps with my factory authorized tandem examiner, and then five more jumps with experienced jumpers as passengers, none of which were tandem masters themselves. We had "chicken handles" during all the jumps where my examiner was on the front. But on the last five jumps with the experienced jumpers I didn't use them. Some of these folks had never done a tandem in their lives so it didn't seem like a good idea in case they thought something was going wrong when it wasn't. And from his post it sounds like this is what skydude2000 was doing. If I was helping an already experienced tandem master get current again, and because I'm TM, then yes, I'd put chicken handles on the rig too. You bet! Once in the mid-90s there was a Tandem examiner doing a training class of two Japanese who had no other Instructional ratings and we were at a small DZ during the week. These fellows spoke a bit of English but it was weak. And I got asked to ride up front on a bunch of their second half jumps. This was after the DZO refused the offer, which I thought was a bit cheesy, since he sold tandem jumps for a living . . . My own early experience with Tandem, before I became a TM, had all been bad. Back when tandem first started I saw some of the growing pains. I almost got myself killed on a tandem rig in 1984, saw two experienced jumpers, jumping together, come within seconds of going in on a tandem at Elsinore, and knew two very experienced jumpers, also jumping together, who did go in on a tandem at Perris. So after that to say I avoided tandems was an understatement. I hated them . . . About ten years later I figured the knowledge, technique, and technology level had risen substantially so I jumped back into the game. But I did know one thing, while I enjoy teaching the teachers and sometimes more than teaching students, I'd seen enough videos of initial tandem examiner jumps with their want to be Instructors and knew it wasn't on my to-do list. But lot's of props to those who do it as they are very brave people. So I made damn sure both these fellows knew my showing them the finger meant pull the drogue release, and then with the chicken handles in place I figured I could handle anything else that happened. And I also emphasized not throwing the drogue until we were stable. The first jump went fine. It was fun trying to turn him, doing daffys, and stuff like that. The second jump with the other guy tumbled unintentionally out the door. And even with me helping it took a good bit to get face to earth. I was just thinking that took him way too long when I realized he hadn't yet thrown the drogue. And we didn't have a signal for that one. I could see his hands on either side of my head and knew he was brain locking. So I gave him a sharp elbow to the ribs. But that didn’t do any good and I knew giving him the pull signal might make him pull the drogue release with the drogue still stowed. So I reached back and tried to deploy the drogue myself. While that is something you do at least once in your tandem training course (deploying the drogue from the passenger harness) it's not all that easy sometimes. But my fumbling around back there woke him up and he pushed my hand out of the way and threw the drogue himself. I looked at the clock and saw we were going through 7-grand but I'd had it with this guy. So I waved off twice and pulled the drogue release. I wasn't going to give him another chance to mess up. On the long canopy ride down he keep saying he was sorry and I kept saying don’t worry we'll talk about on the ground. But I'll tell you this. The eight or so minutes I spent in that passenger harness were very uncomfortable. Sometimes I still hate tandems . . . NickD

Yes, everyone freaking over the shoelace got me too . . . And speaking of Norman Kent, although it might be a bad example, he stuck his first camera on his head on his 12th jump. What I was going for was today's camera gear could be worn without being a "thing" if you just put it on without the pressure of "gotta get the shot." But you guys are right. Newbies sometimes get distracted by a new pair of gloves. Consider that limb I climbed out on sawed off . . . NickD

I called the three Beeches, King Airs, Queen Airs, and Jack Airs . . . The Jack Air being the Beech D or S18 that most called a Twin Beech. We had a Queen Air at Elsinore they were turning into a jump plane but I never saw it actually fly. But over the years I've jumped a few of them here and there. At a DZ where all you had was a Cessna they were a step up but like most older cabin class piston twins you need a sharp stick in the left seat if things go south . . . NickD

Well, if yes and no, is all I'm going to get, I'll take it.

I've always taught EPs that way (but it was de-arch for gut gear) so for piggybacks it was always arch, look, and then onto whatever handle system they had . . . NickD

Poor ground crew . . . Probably walking around today with stiff necks. NickD

Gee, John . . . The guy asked for some advice on becoming a packer. He wasn't advertising for a parent. NickD

You gave them permission to search your car so they need no probable cause. But you could have said no. They don't really need probable cause to pat you down, as like homeland security, it's for everyone's safety. And yes, they stole your knife . . . NickD

I just went and read the links and also Bill's article. Here's my thoughts . . . And I'm going to climb out on limb here and just hope it doesn't get sawed off . . . I started jumping still cameras long before there were consumer video cameras. And I had maybe 300 jumps at the time. But in those days you went into your garage and drilled holes in an old motorcycle helmet, Then made yourself an aluminum mount and hung a three pound motorized Nikon F on it. Then you bought a Newton ring sight, if you could afford one, but if not and like me, you fashioned one out of a wire coat hangar. Then you attached the shutter release wire which was long enough to go down the sleeve of your jumpsuit and into your left hand. My first camera helmet probably had 10 prime snag points on it plus that wire flopping around. And there was no quick release or anything like that. Plus the gear we jumped in those days had no riser covers, less secure brake systems, no AADs and sometimes not even Three Ring releases. And you then either built up you neck muscles or you could really hurt yourself on openings because all the weight was so far off the center line. I remember being so initially afraid of that I'd grab the helmet with both hands after I deployed. The only improvement I made to that first camera helmet was when Carl Boenish suggested I drill another small hole in it so I could route the shutter release wire inside the helmet, down under my chin strap, and then into my jumpsuit. He even cut and soldiered the wire for me after I made the hole. But when I look at the low profile store bought camera helmets available today and the tiny light weight video cameras I don't think most people need 300 jumps to jump one. No wires and not really needing a ring sight is a big plus too. I'd stay with 500 jumps for shooting Tandems and AFF as that's commercial, or professional, skydiving. But if only fun jumping with a few friends I think you can start sooner. And since people are all jumping with helmets nowadays that part is not a big change. For me just having that big bowl on my head was freaking me out. I won't go as far as saying a 100 jumps is all right. But that's just because of the prevailing attitudes. If someone goes in at 100 jumps wearing a camera, for whatever reason, the camera would automatically get at least part of the blame. But I know by the time you get to around 100 jumps most people can walk and chew, at least, a little gum. And all they have to do is turn the camera on in the plane, give themselves a good gear check, and go. If they get some usable footage great, if not, it's no big deal. So just to be on the safe side I'd say somewhere between a 101 and 299 jumps, under the right circumstances, would be okay to start wearing a modern camera helmet. Now watch all the camera pros jump all over me, but don't let 'em fool you. They'll just want to protect their little piece of the skydiving dollar pie . . . NickD

>>I will remind you, though, that this is a thread about DB COOPER - NOT about Duane Weber.

No, it works without the control lines. Many B.A.S.E. jumpers have mechanically released their control lines after lines overs and steered and landed fine with just the rear risers . . . NickD

On your refrigerator door . . . NickD

Chris, I'm curious - is this something you've forgotten, or was it something not taught in your FJC? Thanks, NickD

Well, I saved you on the Telemeters thing, so I suppose I can do it again . . . Labor Day had something to do with Labor Unions in the very beginning. But now it's just a day of rest for all folks who have jobs. Many also consider it the last weekend of summer and on the east coast of the U.S. it signals a big run on moth balls as jumpers put away their gear . . . NickD

Palen - I don't care if she believes the Earth is only six thousand years old, but I do care she's thinks nothing of shoveling that garbage into young minds. She also thinks the "Pledge of Allegiance" was written by the Founding Fathers . . . And if anyone says it's not fair to use her pregnant child for political purposes just think about the field day neocons would have had if Chelsie Clinton had done the same thing at 17! Here's Mrs. WhoNeedsPolarBears when she was a sportscaster. If you can call it that. Looks more like a deer caught in the headlights . . . http://www.tmz.com/tmz_main_video?titleid=1764733625 NickD

>>Favourite Whuffo Reaction

Your idea would work on most seven cells and would be something to keep in mind if it happened on your reserve. But some 9-cell canopies might start bucking if you cut both control lines. Another thing to keep in mind is how sharp hook knives are and how easy things are to slice through when they are under tension. If you go at it in a panicky way it's possible to slice more lines then you meant to, and even cut through a riser if you're really flailing . . . On the rear riser landing, if not experienced with it, what you want to do is forget about "landing" in the normal sense. You just want to keep yourself obstacle free, into the wind, and slow yourself down enough to "slide yourself in," while keeping your legs together and your arms in. Think baseball and you're stealing second base . . . The mistake most make is not realizing a little riser equals a lot of toggle. If you haul in on the risers like you might with the toggles there's a big chance of stalling and then dropping straight in. Somebody here has a good sig line that goes something like, "Your chances of survival depend on your angle of arrival." So in this case think shallow . . . NickD

Here you are . . . There's some glare in the copy I made that's not in the original and the cityscape in the bottom portion is a good bit darker on the actual cover . . . Art is very subjective but I don't think it's all that bad. But my vote is canceled out by my girlfriend who looked at it and thought it was rather depressing looking . . . My beef with PARACHUTIST, which I've been getting since 1975, is the amount of repetitive content. This month we get yet another Joe Kittinger article. No offense to Joe, and the piece is well written, but it's got to be the 30th time I've read the same story. But on the other hand before we bag on PARACHUTIST too much we need to understand what it is exactly. It's not fair to compare it to mainstream magazines you see on newsstands. It's really a "house organ" or a publication meant to circulate inside an organization. So by nature the tone of it is, "everything is fine here in happy land." And while they have recently loosened up on some archaic editorial policies, like the prohibition of running first person articles, if you send them something with an "edge" to it forget about it. Article-wise I've been published several times in SKYDIVING but I can't crack PARACHUTIST (except for several photos) and have been rejected more than a few times by them. I could write exactly what they want but it would be pure Pablum and too embarrassing to put my name on. Another thing PARACHUTIST is besides a house organ is an ad-well. They make good coin selling advertising space. And I suppose because we pay dues you can’t moan too much about that. And besides SKYDIVING Magazine and the Web these advertisers have nowhere else to go for so many skydiving eyeballs. But it means if you write something unflattering about an advertiser, or their product, your stuff goes right into the trash. I'll never forgive USPA for waiting so long to pull the adverts for Glidepath's Nova canopy even after so many jumpers in the field knew there was something wrong with it, and it was killing people. A good friend and former student of mine wound up paralyzed when his Nova collapsed on a demo jump. By the same token, while there is some latitude in the letters section, if you do a thoughtful article on how their Instructional Programs (my pet area) might be better by pointing out inherent flaws in the current system it too goes into the trash. If you write just a letter you can't do the subject justice in three paragraphs without sounding like a kook. Just reading these forums you can plainly see there is a lot of exciting, scary, and controversial things occurring in the skydiving world. But you won't read about much that in PARACHUTIST where the word of the day is the same everyday. "Don't rock the boat!" NickD

Telemeters . . . NickD

>>No doubt. Where's the part where these first timers who are deploying through their legs didn't f*** up?

>>Not to mention my extreme shyness.