pilotdave

I thought it was funny to see that -13.4s actually weight something like 14.6oz (cant remember the exact number now) with the gel ear seals. If you wanna lose that ounce you gotta put on the foam ear seals that are included too. And yeah, I've heard their support is excellent, especially if you go to the factory in person (in MA). I learned to fly not far from there. My instructor mentioned that he'd flown there with a problem and they fixed his headset, icluding replacing some parts, for free while he waited. And it was like 10 years old. Dave

That's assuming they do the same job, which I don't believe. If I had to guess just by looking at pictures, I'd assume they do nothing at all. But that is not what test jumpers said after jumping the same canopies with and without them (see the post in the thread i linked to above). So test jumpers have qualitative evidence that the "winglets" do something other than increase parasite drag. I don't believe they decrease induced or total drag one bit. But if the jumpers are right and they really have an effect, I believe they are experiencing a decreased stall speed and better low speed performance (bottom end of the swoop) due to decreased spanwise flow. That's just my guess. Remember that just about every modern large plane is covered from nose to tail with all different vortex generators, fences, strakes, fins, etc. They all add parasite drag. But they improve the local flow around some feature of the aircraft, delaying separation somewhere for some reason (or actually causing predictable separation, to prevent oscillation). It's a tradeoff. Add drag to fix some other problem or improve some other characteristic. Dave

No they're not, most tend to have a dihedral wing configuration that helps their roll stability. In fact, high wings and swept wings produce effective dihedral. Too much of that effect leads to "dutch roll," kind of swaying in roll and yaw...very uncomfortable for passengers. Thats why high swept wing aircraft need anhedral. Almost every modern business jet has the fuselage sitting on top of the wing, so the spar doesn't have to pass through the fuselage. Then they just put a fairing over the wing-fuselage joint. They seem to fly alright.

What was wrong with truncate? Seemed a lot easier. Dave

DC H10-13.4. Course I bought mine in 1995 or 96... there might be better ones around now. But it works fine, it's reasonably comfortable, etc. No complaints, no problems. Never tried an ANR to compare it though. I mostly chose that one cause it was about the lightest headset available at the time. The gel filled ear seals are comfy, but do get kinda sweaty on long (or interesting) flights. I know they make cotton (or something) covers for em to wick away the sweat. But it's been a long time since I've looked at headsets so they might be totally different now. Dave

Select truncate... will probably do what you want. Is that a standard SQL function? select truncate(1.999,0) will return 1. Dave

Yeah but a cypres fire in an empty skyvan with the door closed isn't exactly an emergency. There's enough room back there to repack the reserve after landing. Dave

I disagree with that. At low angles of attack, maybe. But at low speed, I doubt you're right. Anyway, an elliptical canopy is NOT a perfect elliptical wing. I'm sure there's all kinds of nastiness going on. I bet someone will be putting vortex generators on canopies to lower the stall speed or improve the flare or something one of these days too. Dave

True winglets need to be placed such that they can interact with the wingtip vortices, wherever that happens to be. The wingtips are a good spot for that.

Actually that's exactly what I suggested in the last thread on this topic. Here's exactly what I said last time. Dave

I dunno what canopy it was or what wingloading, but I bet if it was a faster canopy at a higher wingloading, he'd have been upside down before he hit the ground. Perfect case of where a bigger, slower canopy can save your ass when you screw up. Dave

Are you suggesting that they do the same thing as winglets? I've posted about my thoughts on em a couple times so I won't bother again, but I don't believe for one second that they do the same thing that winglets do on airplanes. Dave

Might wanna post something about the boogie in the Events/Places to jump forum. Any web page about it this year? Dave

Hehehe. I'm sure it was just a mistake, but I find it absolutely hilarious that you're complaining about it. Maybe I have the wrong person (I'm not gonna go back and check), but arent you the one that was defending ASC doing THAT VERY SAME THING? Personally I hope it wasn't a mistake. Give them a taste of their own medicine. But I don't think sangiro is quite as bad as I'd be... Dave

http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1855 Dunno if the PLF was on purpose, but it sure looks like this one woulda been BAD if he had tried to land on one foot or something. Dave

0:3:1 Did my first IAD jump. That's some crazy stuff. Did 2 of em to get a couple instructors recurrent for the winter, even though the DZ doesn't do IAD anymore. I had never even seen an IAD jump in my life. Seeing my own PC in the plane was strange enough... feeling my bridle flapping around on my back while hanging from the wing strut at 3000 feet was just...different. It was like going back in time to the 1930s (j/k)! Also got in my first RW jump in at least a month (just a tandem and the 2 IADs in the last month). So much fun, but I'm so rusty. Tunnel time in january is gonna be...interesting.

This is where you lose me. The rig did not suddenly become "dangerous." It is exactly as dangerous as it was the day it was made (assuming it's in like-new shape). Those later design updates came about because of the hazards inherent in the old designs. "Dangerous" and "airworthy" are not black and white. It's all about risk assessment. What risks do you take by jumping old gear? I'm guessing you understand them a whole lot better than I do, so I won't even try to go there. But surely you recognize that there are hazards associated with the lack of all those modern safety features, right? What's the severity of each hazard, and what's the probability that it will occur? Do you know? If not, you don't fully understand the risk you're taking by jumping that rig. I know that by jumping my Vector 3, equipped with a skyhook, I have mitigated many hazards that someone jumping an original wonderhog has not. I've also added some hazards. But I think if you looked at the overall risk level, it would be significantly lower. I don't care if you're jumping a bedsheet packed in an LL Bean backpack. If you can find a rigger to pack it up for you, have a good time. But you're always gonna have to deal with dirty looks and riggers that don't want to touch it. Why argue with em? Dave

Bangkok mass drop videos: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1469 http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1470 http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1471 Dave

Yeah I tried to switch to mozilla when it first came out. Couldn't get used to it. But I absolutely love firefox. Has certain issues, but it kicks IEs butt. There are some awesome extensions to download. Just got one that lets me get a map of any highlighted address with 2 clicks. Have another that turns any URL or email address into a link...no more worrying about clickies... everything is clicky. I think the absolute best feature of firefox is the in-page searching. Just start typing, and it automatically searches the web page you have open for whatever you type. That makes life so much easier... Dave

http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1849 Dave

I think he's talking about a drop down (combo box) on an Access form. That's where access comes in.

The sim can be as realistic as you wanna make it. Check the real notams before flying in the sim if you want. Permanent notams like skydiving ops are listed in the Airport and Facilities Directory (and websites like http://www.airnav.com). Temporary ones are available online, but they're usually things like unlit cranes, airport or antenna lights out of service, VORs out of service, runways closed for repaving, laser light shows, and stuff like that. They don't really affect filing a flight plan. Gotta check the notams before filing the flight plan to know if there will be any problems along your route. People have even filed VFR flight plans and gotten ATC services to fly to closed or restricted airports. It's up to the pilot to check on those things beforehand. But yeah, in FS2004, you can file flight plans.

Hehe I was a little surprised when I saw that the nearest DZ is only 29 miles from me, when I travel more like 80 over the road to get to mine. Course the one 29 miles away is across about 28 miles of water from me (long island sound). Dave

In what form? Notams are just notices...not necessarily anything that could be...uhhh...simulated. Dave

Umm... there's no skydiving in MS flight sim, so it doesn't really matter. In real life, fly along at 4500 feet listening to 122.8 on a sunny saturday afternoon and you're likely to hear jump planes in the area (within 100 miles or so). I used to fly to Delmarva in DE and hear the jump planes at 3 or 4 different DZs along the way. And none of those DZs were anywhere nearby. Dave