timmyfitz

What if the illegal was apprehended after, say, rescuing a child from drowning in a swimming pool? Or if a good Samaritan illegal had a gun (for self defense, of course) and used it to stop a robbery in progress? Or if the illegal good Samaritan pulled an unconscious woman from her crashed and burning car and was then detained by the responding cops? Al Capone was a nice guy. He gave a lot to charities. That should have been enough to excuse his criminal activity.

This is the old dz.com problem where any general statement is misapplied to a specific case, while any specific statement is misapplied to the general case. Anyway, I'm obviously talking about the perceived situation where something heavy and fast is dropped accidentally over the normal countryside. It would clearly be interesting to know whether Airtec had taken precautions -- otherwise it would be dangerous. Presumably your dummy drop was preplanned with appropriate safeguards -- rather than just hoping a 254 lb dummy going at 200+ mph didn't hit a farmer's house or some new San Diego subdivision. Why would you presume his was safe and preplanned but not give the same courtesy to Airtec?

One person agreeing (out of many disagreeing) with you is not vindication that you are right. Nice try though.

No. Say it isn't so.

Good comeback. You win.

As a Vigil owner this makes me feel mcuh better. Why would they be testing them? Didn't they say the device worked as designed?

The spelling Nazi's are alive and well. You must have a hell of a time surfing the internet if you are this concerned about a misspelled word. If someone wrote "I flaired my canopy", I would know what they are talking about and wouldn't be such a cheese dick to point out a simple mistake. Lighten up Francis.

That's only because you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. It's OK though. If you have anymore questions don't be afraid to ask. Yes, that is my answer. It may not be the right answer, it may not be the wrong answer but it was my answer. Would you like to add something to the discussion instead of just snide remarks and attitude?

Does this happen every weekend in the UK and Italy? When was the last time it happened? You do know that the UK and Italy are two separate countries with different cultures, different languages and separated by a few miles? Coincidence...yes. You asked two questions and then gave a geography lesson. Your definition of clarity is answering questions with questions. I answered the question. Having a reading problem? From the OP: "Is opening separation given more emphasis in other parts of the world, or is it just coincidence that there were two collisions this weekend on FS jumps in UK and Italy." My answer: "Coincidence...yes." I hope that clears it up for you. If you have any more problems understanding the simple text written, don't be afraid to ask.

Unless they do something stupid at the last second that was unexpected and not avoidable. Then you're not flying right. Bullcrap. With all your bragging about how long you've been around the sport, you should DAMN well know that 'shit happens'. By your 'logic', since Roger Nelson was 'flying right', he should have seen the other guy 'coming from far enough away' to be able to avoid the collision. By your 'logic', since Bob Holler was 'flying right', he should have seen the other guy 'coming from far enough away' to be able to avoid the collision. Etc, etc, etc... Fail. Why, yes...yes you did. Logic fail. A panic turn is an attempt to avoid a collision. Since a panic turn is an attempt to avoid a collision, your supposed point is equally valid for the incidents that took Roger and Bob's lives. QED. Please quit stroking your own ego. Sigh... As I understand it, neither Roger nor Bob saw their collisions coming, so no "panic" turn could be made, which means their collisions are not relevant to this narrowly focused tangent within the larger thread about student and/or low-timer use of Stilettos -- whether, in responding to seeing someone cut you off, you make a "panic" turn that could have more injurious consequences under a Stiletto than under a lower performance canopy perhaps better sutied to EFS4LIFE's skillset. Which, of course, is a valid point that Timmyfitz made, and with which I have no argument. Absolutely, the higher performance the canopy, the easier it is for any pilot, low- or high-time, to enter too much input during emergency maneuvering -- and it is more likely that a low-timer will "over-input" in that situation than a more experienced jumper. The thought behind my "flying right" comment is that, if you use good collision avoidance techniques throughout your descent, you should never end up in a situation where you have to "panic" turn to avoid someone that you see cut you off. Neither Roger nor Bob saw their collisions coming, so a "panic" turn was not part of the equation -- which, again, means their collisions are not relevant to this narrowly focused tangent within the larger thread about student and/or low-timer use of Stilettos. I am now officially done with this thread. It's been fun and there's been some good thinking and discussion, but now I must get back to the real world. Love to all, see you at the DZ. Spin it any way you want but you are wrong.

Unless they do something stupid at the last second that was unexpected and not avoidable.

I think I made it very clear, obviously not for you. It is not happening with any frequency that anyone with any intelligence could point a finger and say "this is because people in Europe have bad tracking skills". The last two incidents are just coincidences not a reoccurring theme. When was the last time this happened for each country? How often does this happen world wide? You can usually find a few people with poor tracking skills at just about any DZ, whether it's in Italy, the UK or North Carolina.

Person A "flying right" has no bearing on whether person B may do something stupid at the last second. It helps that person A is predictable to other jumpers but it does not prevent other people from making mistakes. Shit can still happen at the last second that is out of jumper A's control and may panic turn. Enough said.

Does this happen every weekend in the UK and Italy? When was the last time it happened? You do know that the UK and Italy are two separate countries with different cultures, different languages and separated by a few miles? Coincidence...yes.

Except you sangi. We know you are special, as in short bus special.

If I'm "flying right" then I should have very little concern about other people that may cut me off at the last few seconds before landing, even though I saw them from far away? How did that work out for Roger, who was "flying right". as i recall, the subject was doing a "panic' turn to avoid someone cutting you off -- and as i also recall, roger was hit from above and behind so a possible "panic" turn was not in play and so that particular collision is not relevant to the point you raised. Try again. Your response to me was "if you're flying right, no one should ever cut you off". I just pointed out that you can fly right(Roger), see people coming from far away and shit can still happen at the last second that is out of your control. Try again. (a canopy can not stay fully inflated after it has been cutaway) Roger was not cut off. Roger didn't see it coming. Ergo, his collision doesn't fall within the parameters of either my "flying right" comment OR the point you're trying to make about a "panic" turn to avoid someone you can see, who cut you off. You are saying Roger was flying right. Roger didn't see it coming. Shit did happen at the last minute that was out of his control. Thank you for agreeing. (a canopy can not stay fully inflated after it has been cutaway)

Not neglecting anything. The question is both irrelevant AND out of line according to forum rules. You do like to quote the rules when they are convenient for you. Kallend's status, irrelevant though it may be, was made clear enough up-thread. So was his role as a lawful, productive, tax-paying member of American society for the past 3 decades. And even then the smokescreen ad hominem BS still continued. Do you have the same problem with JP's repeated refusal to simply explain the relevance of his original inquiry? No? That's what I thought. The thread is about right to US citizenship under the 14th Amendment. Any time the babies want to join the adults in discussing that topic on an adult level, they're welcome to do so. Until then, maybe they should just stick to sucking their thumbs. You may want to re-read my post in this thread before you direct such a response to me. Does not apply.

Not neglecting anything. The question is both irrelevant AND out of line according to forum rules. You do like to quote the rules when they are convenient for you.

If I'm "flying right" then I should have very little concern about other people that may cut me off at the last few seconds before landing, even though I saw them from far away? How did that work out for Roger, who was "flying right". as i recall, the subject was doing a "panic' turn to avoid someone cutting you off -- and as i also recall, roger was hit from above and behind so a possible "panic" turn was not in play and so that particular collision is not relevant to the point you raised. Try again. Your response to me was "if you're flying right, no one should ever cut you off". I just pointed out that you can fly right(Roger), see people coming from far away and shit can still happen at the last second that is out of your control. Try again. (a canopy can not stay fully inflated after it has been cutaway)

Yes it's true. Also parachutes go up after you deploy them. To the OP. More than likely it was the harness causing the problem. The tandem harness is usually the cause of people blacking out or passing out, not breathing.

This surprises you? That is his MO. That is how he rolls. Still struggling with intellectual honesty, I see. Still struggling to answer the question, I see. From the forum rules, post #1, thread#1, this forum: When discussing in this (or any) forum, a good rule of thumb is the one we learned in 2nd grade soccer--play the ball, not the player. If you find yourself directing things at a person rather than at what they say, chances are you are out of line. Of course you have never directed things at a person rather than what they say. You are funny. Are you directing that at me? Yep just like you. But I'm not the one quoting the rules.

Rubber bands are generally latex, a vegetable product. "Today more than three quarters of all rubber products are made from synthetic rubber[3]. Modern synthetic rubber is made by mixing petroleum byproducts in a reactor with soapsuds which produces milky liquid latex."

This surprises you? That is his MO. That is how he rolls. Still struggling with intellectual honesty, I see. Still struggling to answer the question, I see. From the forum rules, post #1, thread#1, this forum: When discussing in this (or any) forum, a good rule of thumb is the one we learned in 2nd grade soccer--play the ball, not the player. If you find yourself directing things at a person rather than at what they say, chances are you are out of line. Of course you have never directed things at a person rather than what they say. You are funny.

That is the funniest thing I have seen you write. You have made a career making post bashing the U.S. what's it to do with YOU - it's not YOUR country. You are the best troll this website has ever seen.

I think you need a nap. It is affecting your ability to think clearly.