pilotdave

Sometimes my job reminds me SO much of the movie Office Space. I once got an email about a new format for PSM Memos. I decided not to, but I almost wrote back "I have no clue what a PSM Memo is, but my TPS reports are just great!" At least I only have 2 bosses. It just gets awkward because they work for two different companies that have 2 different sets of policies and procedures, holiday schedules, and work ethics. My boss came over to me yesterday at 1:15 and told me we better go home and test our emergency communications in case we need to get in touch with each other over the xmas break. He came back a minute later and said "let me put that another way. I'm leaving in 10 minutes. If you're still here when I leave, you're fired."

I have a reflex, and I've met riggers that won't pack it. Everyone's got a different reason though. I had a brand new rigger pack it once. It was his first unsupervised reserve packjob. He did just fine (I had another rigger let me know if it looked right at the next repack). I've never packed a reserve. Is a reflex really that much harder than any other rig? I doubt it. What you'll pack and won't pack is up to each rigger. I'm not complaining. I just take issue with any FAA certified rigger that won't pack a reflex because they've HEARD they're hard to pack or whatever. Other reasons I've heard are that they're dangerous either because the pop top will snag a line or because the catapult will cause half a billion different problems. One rigger wouldn't pack mine because he didn't think there was anyone to call for help if he had any questions. I just believe most people that won't pack a reflex are misinformed. edit: Let me put that another way. I tend to feel that riggers that WILL pack reflexes and racers are more well rounded. Riggers that won't, I tend to think of as not being confident in their rigging abilities. (Yeah, go ahead, yell at me!) Dave

Well, probably not. For coefficient of lift calculations, the area of the wing blocked by the fuselage is included in the calculations. But for other calculations (like the wetted area for drag calculations), that area is not included. And I'd be willing to bet different manufacturers estimate that "fake" area of the wing differently. Wouldn't surprise me if dihedral factored in differently too. There's probably a lot of standardization in the big airplane world, but I bet there's very little in the general aviation world. But I could be wrong. Dave

Why not? Dave

Definitely looks like a great DZ. I'm not too far away. I'll have to come up there some weekend. I've flown up there before but not since I've been jumping. Dave

Yep. I work in a joint venture... my company works today, the other company doesn't. This place is nearly empty. At least I got a good parking space for once. I might last till lunch. Dave

I ran into that yesterday too. Try downloading the whole thing before playing, by right clicking on the link and saving it. Were you using the http or ftp link? The server is still a little buggy but hopefully we'll get that worked out. Seems to be mostly working now. Dave

If that link gives anyone trouble, use http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ftp/public/misc/Jumptown2003Compressed.wmv instead. Dave

I think the correct answer depends on what radar you're talking about. If you were jumping close to Washington, DC, I guarantee someone would see an individual skydiver in freefall. Normal airport radar, I dunno.

On AOPA's members only website (with picture): Dave

Hard to say if I'd keep jumping, but I do know that if I had 2 lives, I'd have a hell of a lot more fun than I'm having now!

Yep, sorry about that. Moved it last night even though it wasn't complete. What's there is cool though! I'll move the full version later today. Dave

I honestly believe that a newbie that pays attention here can give better advice than a lot of instructors I've met. I've been given some WRONG information from at least one tandem instructor. I've heard bullshit that makes no sense from at least one rigger. And I can think of at least one incident posted on dz.com that relates directly to a newbie taking advice from a very experienced jumper (the type that SHOULD be giving advice). I've read a lot more posts on here from experienced jumpers complaining about newbies giving advice than I've seen posts by newbies giving advice. And I don't think the danger is nearly as bad as it's made out. Newbies are handing out information to newbies at dropzones all the time. Is it only worse here because it's being broadcast to the world? I think there's plenty of advice that a new jumper can share. There is other advice that they shouldn't touch with a ten foot pole. I just don't see a lot of newbies giving direct wingloading advice to anyone (as in, "you'll be able to handle a 120 canopy, don't worry about it"). And anyone that takes advice like that from ANY stranger should be smacked (if the ground hasn't already done it). I'm willing to bet there are a lot of jumpers buying larger canopies than they would have if they didn't read dropzone.com. I've been told by numerous people (not on here) that the Sabre2 135 I bought it too big for me, and I was even told by a tandem instructor that I shouldn't have upsized my reserve to a 143 because a 120 reserve was probably too big for me already. So I agree that there is advice newbies shouldn't be giving, but I believe there's plenty of advice they can give, and it's everyone's responsibility to get a second opinion from someone you trust before you go out and do something stupid. Dave

The right of way rules for canopies are the same, basically, that planes follow. They're very similar to boating ROW rules too. For aircraft, the rules are spelled out in FAR 91.113: Faster canopy overtaking slower canopy, pass on the right. The canopy being overtaken has the right of way. Two canopies head on, both turn right. Dave

At the time it was believed he did. Modern aerodynamics experts don't believe it's possible though. And to answer the question about how (at least I) know about this sorta thing, I took classes on it and now have a degree in aerospace engineering.

I got to see the windshield bird strike test articles for the Comanche helicopter after the testing. At first I was a little grossed out seeing yellowish smudges where the bird hit. Then I found out we don't use real birds anymore. We use gelatin with about the same density as a bird. Much less gross that way. I also got to see some pics of the testing. It's amazing to see how much those windows deflect and still survive... and that was for a 4 lb "bird" at under 180 kts. 600 is hard to even imagine. As for why they use 600 kts, they have to always test for worst case scenario. Birds have been seen WAY up high after being caught in thunderstorms or other major updrafts. Dave

I used to be president of a skydiving club and gave information sessions to prospective jumpers once a month. After one of my presentations, a guy came over with some questions. At first nothing TOO out of the ordinary... how fast do we fall, how low could we open and still live, etc. Then he asks how many jumps he needs before he can open lower. I explain the opening altitude BSRs a little... but he stops me to explain he means opening LOW, as in like 800 feet. I tried to explain that he wouldn't really want to do that. But he tells me he's an aerospace engineer so he loves going fast. He was all set to sign up for AFF, but he never did. I was REALLY hoping he would. I'd love to see him fight off his instructors and have a cypres fire on purpose. What an awesome show that would be. I'd even pay for video. Hell, I shoulda offered him a free AFF jump. Maybe even let him borrow my rig to find out if the cypres really works.

10 was my most under win98... and I was away on vacation for at least a few of those days.

Planes get struck, no reason a person couldn't. And I'm no meteorologist so I could be wrong, but I don't believe lighting could travel horizontally 10 miles. I mean maybe in theory there's enough energy or whatever, but I just don't believe it happens in nature. Anyone know? Dave

Ok, maybe not GREATEST. I got my windows XP computer to run for 100 days without restarting (since early September). Finally on day 98 the mouse decided to stop working so I've been on my laptop the last couple days. Other than the mouse dying and a few other small annoyances, it actually was running fine right up to the end. Even graphic-intensive games had no trouble. And all that software that tells you to restart after installation? Eh, it's either not worth installing or it works fine anyway.

I know I don't have enough jumps to be giving advice, but in my experience, 1.18 isn't a terribly conservative wingloading for a new jumper. I simply don't believe you can know how bored you would be on a 190 canopy or any other non-student canopy for that matter. I believe most (or all?) base canopies are bigger than what you're jumping now. Accuracy jumpers also jump big canopies (not that you're talking about competition accuracy). My point is that light wing loading DOES NOT necessarily mean it'll be boring. I put about 100 jumps (starting around jump #40) on an F111 canopy loaded at about .85, and I had plenty of fun. Also, keep in mind that if you ever do want to downsize, you'll sell your old canopy and get back the majority of your purchase price... it's not like you'll be buying a whole new rig. My first canopy was $450. Buy cheap first, use it till you want to downsize, then buy good stuff that you'll keep for longer. Just my opinion. Dave

Hehe, yup... I was reading the same line over and over... left eye, then right eye, then both, etc... Finally he asked me to read it backwards just to make sure I hadn't just memorized it. According to the test, my (corrected) vision is better than 20/20. Uncorrected is waaay off the chart. But at least I have perfect color vision and good hearing.

A class 3 medical is really a joke. If you know you're in good physical shape, definitely don't bother getting an FAA medical. The exam takes maybe 10 minutes at the most and costs around $80. Hell, the paperwork takes longer than the exam. The FAA really should just do away with the exam for those under 40 years old. Medical self certification is the way to go! USPA is right for once!

I wish yahoo had better filtering capabilities. I wrote my own spam filters which catch probably 5 times as much spam as yahoo's built in bulk folder. But I could catch a lot more if I could use some more complex filters. Drives me nuts. But together, not much spam actually makes it to my inbox anymore. Dave

K appears in , , , , and . Dave