matthewcline

A good start is to cut every program that the military didn't want but had forced upon it by Congress. Just this act alone could be the Billions in cuts Defense needs to make. Letting Sec Def Gates continue as Sec Def and continue his directive of cuts is the second step. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

The "At Large" S&TA's could fill those positions already. They could jump at the Various DZ's during the year, HELPING to make things safer. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

I received a call from Groupon asking me to do business with them. (I had aspirations of running a skydiving operation upon retirement, so I opened a yahoo listing or google I forget, then I changed my mind and took a "real job" I was offered. The listing is still out there as I have since deleted all the log in crap for it. that i show they got my number.) I let Mike the salesman ramble on with the program, just to hear it. When I told went to tell him I was not interested as I am not a DZ, he cut me off and said he would make this offer to a competitor, and said the name of a none existent DZ (this lead me to believe he had a search page open and was cold calling the listings in order). When I said that sounded like extortion he hung up. Is that how they sold to others who work with them? or was this guy just making a bad decision in a failed sale? Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Sure the program can use some tweaking, but it is better than the old one. At least now there are written standards to follow, which for the most part removes the "Ego's" and "Attitudes" in evaluating. USPA has disciplined I/E's, one has been mentioned here and others are mentioned in the USPA BOD Minutes. Should Instructors who are disciplined become I/E's in the same method they where disciplined for? I agree with you, No, they should not. I think they should have that ability taken away as part of the punishment of being discipline by the BOD. USPA Coaches are not supposed to be expected to Coach like RW champs. They should be good, decent, honest flyer's with the ability to observe, recall and retrain. Tandem Instructors (all Instructors actually) have the FAR's and BSR's at their disposal to read, if they still act like carnies after the Course it is their fault. Now if USPA and the I/E's had a direct line of communication they could use PRIOR to a Candidate attending a Course..... Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

You guys do know your arguing over two DIFFERENT pictures, right? Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

My feedback would be don't use one beyond the Manufacturer's Stated Standards, they have the TSO for them. As for using a FCI Reserve, they are fine reserves. I have saved my self from my main packing errors a few times with FCI reserves. I have a 175 in my sport rig, used it once, fly and landed awesome. When I was on a Mil Team we had Spartchuter 245-R's and Furry 220-R's, I have aired one each out. Same deal flew and landed great. There are a few used Star Trak's and FCI reserves in the Classifieds. Check them out or call Red directly Mon through Thur to ask about a Demo. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

LOL - you must have known you would get a Canopy Nazi comment by posting that! Put a few in a bag before you call anyone a "Canopy Nazi" hot shot. Sparky Yeah, besides it is "Canopy Control Agent" any ways. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

So they prefer that old F-111 stuff? Or are those canopies also made in ZP? (eg, Mantas are available in ZP too these days.) I would think - but don't know - that demo jumpers would also be using big Triathlons or other even more modern ZP 7 cells. Tho' some don't go up to the really big sizes. (For the little demos I do, when there's limited room, I pull out my old F-111 Maverick, so I'm not against F-111.) Yeah they tend to use the old tried and true F-111 type stuff for this very specific type of skydiving. But you can get the Canopies with ZP top skin. I have jumped a few and they are just as solid in the brakes, a little better glide ratio and longevity. Demo's are not a normal weekend skydive, as you know, and no single canopy can do all the OP is asking, but several can do most of what is is asking very well and in the right hands the others things safely too. That last this is just a "toss it out there comment" no directed at ya, Chap! Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Damn, does it EVER!! Saw a guy do a BAD ASS swoop and blindman on a Velo into a rodeo arena. The best part was when he hit the chutes on the end. Yeah, several years ago I saw a vid on youtube of a demo, I think it was 6 jumpers, 4 under Hi-perf wings. The hi-perf dudes all ran out of space and went long, all the while "in contact" with the ground. First time I ever saw "The Superman". I am not sure if these where under control. Shortly there after I started seeing the 7711-1's having verbage that literally banned the "Hook turn" on a demo. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Canopies that "Sink" good into stadiums and tight level two fields as well as provide a good platform for flying medium to smaller drop flags are the line of canopies made by Flight Concepts International. The Sharpchuter (245 square feet), Star Trak I and II (265 and 290 square feet) are all used by most of the Military and several Civilian Demo Teams. If I was buying another Demo Canopy I would get another ST II from FCI. I have several thousand jumps under the FCI Canopies and hundreds of Stadium Landings with them. They are solid in the breaks and hold firm in turbulence. They also do very well with medium sized drop flags (up to 2500 square feet has been what I flew under the 290). Drop flags look best when flown slow. The FCI Canopies can do that with a little brake input and not lose altitude any faster than in full flight. Feel free to ask more. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

If I read this letter right, and understand the situation in the US right, all this letter does is get the Argus up to Argus Standards and ready for when/if the HC Manufacturers lift their bans. Is this Correct? Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

That is because almost no one does that anymore. And if the jump BEFORE the skilled FF group they could easily track under the skilled group and might be pulling higher. The list works most of the time. When proper exit separation is maintained this list will work every time. It only fails when the "human factor" fails. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Good for you. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Who's manual? the AAD's or the Rigs? If a Rig manufacturer says that the AAD states it has to be in "X" location and the Rig says that is not feasible, then I would suggest the Rig's manual is the one to win out. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Blue skies Pat. Soar Free. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

They should. Legalize it and other drugs. Have the DEA be a bit more on QC. Actually roll the DEA and ATF together. Tax the drugs at the same rate as booze. Make the age to buy and use the same. I say the Feds cross the line and make a Federal law about the age of majority/consumption. Make it 18. One standard across the board. Buy a fifth, roll a pinner, pay taxes and join the Military all in one day. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Well, with that they should be well informed. Unfortunately, I do not think they have any better ethics. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Freefall separation is secondary to getting out of the plane fast.agree, a fast file out is probably best as it is controlled and quick Do as the pilot says. Unless he gives you other instruction, get out as fast as you can. Once in freefall, I like to build a big star if possible. It gets everyone together. I disagree! Exit and deploy as soon as you are clear of the plane. Do not meet the plane at a lower altitude! Give the pilot all the air space over the airport to maneuver and land. I have been in a DC3 with an engine out. The pilot brought it around at 10k and told us to exit as normal. I have been in a Queen Air with an engine out and the pilot told us to get out without putting floaters out. We built a star with the whole load. I have been in a Cessna 185 with an engine out and the pilot told us to get out as fast as possible. We were at 4 so we just pulled out the door including the AFF I have been in a porter with a trim running wild. The pilot told us to get out as fast as we could. We just pulled out the door including the AFF students. An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Until you complain to your States Attorney General they will keep at it. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

Isn't Sunrise's Wings a set up like the Sunpath? Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

"No harm"? Only if we make those jumps legally. If those cool sunset loads go past legal sunset, and do not have the FAA required 3-mile-visible lighting, they are ILLEGAL. Experience is fine and a very good thing, but get it LEGALLY. The BSRs require us to make all our skydives in compliance with all applicable laws, and the applicable law requires that light. My "No Harm" comment did not imply to violate the FAR's nor the BSR's. I simply meant that having the experience of two well executed night jumps could give the Skydiver experience that could help them be safe, from "harm", when they find them selves in a less than ideal lighting situation. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

That would mean not getting on some of those sunset loads that are so damn cool and beautiful. No harm in being experienced with it, huh? Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

You seem to have a fixation on this "fear" thing. Wasssupwiddat? Oh...you're in the "I had to do it so YOU have to do it" camp, right? No...I'm from the "if I can do it ANYBODY can" camp! Night jump experience is just one more simple tool to have in the toolbox that just might come in handy some day, whether you PLAN to need it or not. The only fear fixation I have is with the carnival ride aspect some take in regard to preparation for involvement with the sport..."its' too hard to pack so I'll pay somebody...water jumps are stupid...night jumps unnecessary" If that's the kind of skydiver one wants to be then okay, go for it...don't get the Master license, don't be a TM...just don't try to dumb everything up to make the rules fit your desires. What's next, don't train for certain types of malfunctions because they probably won't happen? Half the day is made up of darkness, there's a pretty good chance if you stay with the sport for any length of time, having made a night jump will be beneficial in some way. Ah, Wisdom. Sage advice my friend. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!

As I read the SIM, a jumper must be "B Qualified" to make a night jump. But there is no restriction for someone who is not "B Qualified" to stay off the sunset (or late sunset) load. Should we have a BSR that says no sunset load until you are B qualified and have a night jump? (Is that actually already a requirement as the SIM is written now, and if so, should we start enforcing it more strictly.) Or should we allow any licensed jumper to do night jumps with proper training and the approval of the appropriate authorities (I, I/E, S&TA, DZO), regardless of his B qualification status? (Of course, all this says nothing at all about why a D license needs night jumps.) Why do we do any of the requirements? It is for Safety, through training and experience. Matt Was that an answer? Should we limit the sunset load to "B qualified" or better. Or is it actually a requirement now that is widely being ignored? If sooner is better (see red highlighted text above), should we make it a B requirement instead of a D? You say it is about safety. Great. How does that relate to the D night jump requirement? Not sure what your beef with me is, but sure I answered so I am a good target. If Sunset is defined as actual Sunset, then I think your question is answered with: Yes, only B qualified or higher and wearing the proper lights and other items done. This would jive with the FAR's (Lights) and BSR's (B Qualified or higher). And no I do not think ANY DZ does that. They go till it is REALLY dark, and some well beyond. The jumps can be noted any where, they are currently noted in the D license application. Maybe we should put them in the B license requirements, good idea. Matt No beef. You've been representing a position on the D night jumps. I asked you some questions. The response post didn't have any answers, so I asked the most important ones again. I appreciate your taking the time to tell us your position. As I see it, the D license night jump requirement is either for safety or for bragging rights. If it is for safety, then it should be required long before the D license, because lots of people never get a D license in the first place. If it is for bragging rights, then it really isn't for safety, and we should drop it if that is the will of the membership. By the way - The FAA requires the 3-mile-visibility position light anytime between official sunset and official sunrise. If dropzones are going "till it is REALLY dark" without that light, they are violating the FARs, and therefore the BSRs as well. We really should, as an organization (USPA), take a far stronger stand on this than we do, because real laws are being broken. Cool. I think we keep the nights jumps and get the experience for the Jumpers. It will be safer IMO. I also think earlier is better. But we have to be careful, we will load up the B license area pretty heavy. Matt An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!!