tdog

Ok, so I have been told that some of my 4 minute packjobs (main, not reserve) are "trashpacks". I am reading Poynter's second edition, page 375: "Pro (Proper Ram-Air Oriention) packing (or trash packing)" Seriously - oldskool folks, do you, or did you, call a neat propack a "trash pack?"

The regional S&TA's are jumpers who go to the DZs for fun and work. Having them be the bad-cop puts their employment and relationship with the DZ on the line. Plus - it puts less credibility in the system, "oh, he works there, he just gave them all the points because he is the part owner too." This has been a real problem for some of my friends, who in the past, had to take action when the crap hit the fan.

I look at the www.USGBC.org model for certifying buildings as being "LEED Green". The ratings are now coveted by building owners trying to sell their projects to potential tenants. The model works like this. There are 5 or so "areas" - from energy use to availability of mass transit. Each area has "prerequisites" that are absolutely required. Each area has "points" for other items that the landlord may or may not implement. There is a point scale that allows the buildings to earn "silver", "gold" and "platinum". This model could work perfect for the "revamped" group membership/DZ inspection program. Maybe the USPA Group Member Inspection Program goes like this: PREREQUISITES * Instructors with ratings * Jumpers are USPA members * BSR followed POINTS TO EARN * DZ provides complete maintenance log of aircraft. Log must be audited by a 3rd party as complete, accurate, and appropriate. Maybe canceled checks and invoices for parts must be attached? * DZ provides complete training log of pilots, including syllabus, continuing education, and ground and air hours of education completed. * DZ, if equipped with rigging loft, provides continuing education requirements for riggers. * DZ provides complete emergency aircraft action plan. * DZ provides complete skydive injury emergency action plan. * DZ provides procedures for counting canopies/making sure every soul is counted upon landing. * DZ participation in safety day * DZ participation in 'innovative safety programs' * DZ's submittal of accident reports, even for minor injuries * DZ's published landing pattern, landing rules, landing area photos. * DZ's published jump run procedures, exit order, exit separation techniques. * DZ provides maintenance log of tandem and student rigs, with points deducted for age and number of jumps on assembly regardless of maintenance, points added for detailed preventive maintenance programs. * DZ provides continuing education (drill jumps/'safety meetings' in tunnel speak) for instructors * DZ's marketing materials meet truth in advertising criteria * Number of new USPA members that claim the DZ to be their home - by a ratio of 'seat miles' (or in dz terms, 'seat loads') flown. The DZ, if meeting the pre-requsites, can be a "basic member". Once earning points, can be "certified as a Platinum DZ". The USPA site would have an up to date matrix of each DZ and which points earned. The DZs would have to pay for the USPA to do a serious audit of the paperwork. $1000 per DZ, 50 DZs = $50,000. That would pay a part time person at the USPA to spend 20 hours per DZ to review and audit the paperwork, with enough money to pay airfare to do 10 spot, surprise, audits of DZs thru the year to keep DZOs knowing pencil whipping the application packet is not acceptable. Yes, this person would be the "bad cop"... "Hey DZO. I will be at your DZ on Monday. I will need these peices of information, and I will want to discuss with your instructors the continuing education you gave them." Maybe the USPA raises dues $2 per person. That would also pay for this. I would pay $2. Or, just don't send me Parachutist one month instead.

Don't be so sure. It is amazing who e-mailed me and PMed me already. People who, just might have a vote or two. Or people who are willing to stop by and personally visit. BTW. I was just asking questions - at this point - I am not the catalyst for change.

Lets keep the voting to more global issues and not let the Skyride passion and energy influence this decision (more than it should)... This is more than Skyride.

Well, hypothetically, I might have jumped an object or two, from say, 300 feet... I actually entered freefall before deploying the parachute. Granted, never a terminal opening... But since your question has to do with how to land a canopy at a low opening - I have opened an F111, 7 cell, reserve like parachute at 100 feet and still had time to grab the toggles and do two 90 degree braked turns followed by a soft landing on a road. This canopy specific, but most reseves are docile, even small. One key - put immediate pressure on your toggles when you pop them so the canopy does not surge to full flight until you are ready to let it fly.

Hooknswoop posted a thread a few days ago that suggested the USPA group membership program be eliminated and replaced with a DZ Inspection program. Hoping not to put words in his mouth, the USPA would basically endorse DZs that were inspected and found to meet safety requirements. Maybe they have to provide aircraft maintenance records, pilot training records, injury analysis, gear rental availability, instructors per student ratios - and scored "pass" or "fail" or on an point scale. DZs would compete for the coveted 5 star "good housekeeping seal of approval." Part of the scoring could even be "acceptable marketing practices". There is a Skyride settlement thread where people are posting similar comments - and frustrated that the USPA would endorse a DZ they don't appreciate. Almost everyone I talk to seems to believe the Group Membership program simply puts the USPA in conflict of interest with it's membership body. Some would argue that the USPA should represent skydivers, and we need representation not only with the FAA, but with the DZOs who maintain the aircraft, etc. Some would argue the USPA, thru the group membership program, grows our sport and provides assets to the DZs where we jump. Well, we are the members. So voice your word. Perhaps the elected officials will read.

If you have never jumped, not attended a FJC, or whatever... Then you might be doing more harm to your training than good by reading and looking at the most outlandish and freak problems in skydiving and calling it "training". Why? You will overamp your brain and lose confidence worried about all the outlandish stuff. It is true - on your level 1, you will not know everything you need to know to survive. It will be that way on your 1000th jump too. We grow mentally with every jump. However, you are actually, statistically, pretty darn safe as a student. If students were getting hurt, I could not sleep at night being an instructor. So start with the low hanging fruit first. Then move your way up the tree.

One of my good friends is a tunnel rat. I took him up on his AFF jumps and on his level 7, was flying as good as me on the formations we built (not your typical level 7). Upon crashing his canopy into the ground, I yelled, "once a tunnel rat, always a tunnel rat." He has since learned how to land a canopy, and is a great person and skydiver. He also has said he is going to spend all his income on skydiving as he loves the sky more than the tunnel, after just a few jumps. That was the basis for my comment that your kids will need to learn the canopy control that is foreign to them. In my posts I used the words "if they come with the attitude", not "they will come". I never assumed they would... I also said they would learn very quickly. Since you replied back to my posts, I assume your comments are to me. I have seen your kids fly in the tunnel, and I think they are awesome. I hope to someday jump with them. If I owned a DZ, I would even let them jump younger than the typical age, with your permission. They are focused and talented. But, I would in a joking way remind them that they are tunnel rats after they out flew me in freefall then crashed their canopy into the ground. I also would remind them that they are average joes - because the best mentors and skydivers I have jumped with have always assumed their skillset was lower than actuality. It is cool when you fly with someone like Airspeed and they treat you as a teammate, not a student. That is a cool culture. I hope they skydive as soon as possible. They will learn more with a young athletic mind. I don't think I would have said anything on the internet I would have not told you directly. My posts simply pointed out, that these kids had an opportunity of a lifetime, something I could never afford financially with what the tunnel charges my friends and I to fly.

When they have the average 20-something job and make $480 a week, and can only afford to spend 10% of their take home salary on their hobby, and can buy 15 minutes a month, maybe they won't be able to fly in the tunnel either. This is why so many skydivers can't! You know I love flying in the tunnel. I tell every AFF student to visit the tunnel. I still have more distance traveled in the tunnel than in the sky, and I am near 2,500 miles of "outdoor" freefall. But the fact remains. $120 will buy me a whole day of fun with my best friends at the DZ. The weather holds and plane rides have built relationships I hope will last for the rest of my life. $120 gives me less than a half of an hour of fun at the tunnel in a very antisocial environment where I can't joke or chat with friends because of the noise and earplugs. Maybe a quick chat outside before and after. But, I have not made any life long friends at the tunnel. For pure fun for the limited money I have - I go to the DZ or hike a cliff in moab with good friends, just to be winded off, for 1 second of freefall. To train I go to the tunnel. I think a lot of skydivers share similar perspectives. Oh, and for another post where you asked why we are haters? You are right, it is jealousy. And I am not a hater. I think these kids are awesome... (And lucky) Just a word of perspective, from what other skydivers have said to me locally... (not necessarily what I think, nor what everyone thinks) The community respects the kids. They are just sick of being told the kids outfly them, by the tunnel employees, the press, the news releases, etc. They know it is true. But they don't like being told over and over again, because they can't afford to spend the money to catch up, and know they will never be sponsored by their parents, the tunnel, or Go Fast. For the average American, the only way to fly as good as these kids, or you, is to get a job at the tunnel. The rest of us have to pay bills. (Hence the jealousy). P.S. I am ready to come back and work on my sit in the tunnel. (See I am still a fan). Can I hire one of the kids as a coach? They are great fliers and I am sure they could teach me a thing or two.

Your skills will be useful. The greenlight means "pilot thinks you should go." You make the final decision. If the spot is marginal, and you know you have acceptable outs below you, get out on the green light. The pilot likely knows about uppers and is compensating. If he is wrong, land out, and tell manifest to tell the pilot. Pilots will gladly accept your knowledge, in the same way pilots accept weather reports from other pilots in the sky. They want you to land in, and they want to turn on the green light at the right time. If you don't like the spot - here is a trick... Communicate to the jumpers before they yell "go, go, go." Simply look back at them and shake your head "no" and use your hand to sign-language "a second or two" or "a bit more." If they know you are actively making decisions, it is hard for them to yell. If you have the blank stare of a deer in the headlights, they will yell. Another trick. If you are first out and climbing out - but the spot is a hair far... Start your climbout and respot before you do your count. Likely you will be in the right spot by then, and the people behind you will not be able to yell at ya if you need to wait one second. Hint: A small DZ with only a cessna - the spots typically will always be over the landing area. A large plane needs to drop 8 groups on average. 1000 feet between groups = 8,000 feet. That means expect 4,000 feet prior to the landing area, and 4,000 feet after the landing area, as still acceptable spots. That is almost a mile - or almost twice the length of a typical DZ runway. If you are first out and you are directly over the landing area with no winds to compensate - you screwed up.

There is a big difference between a boogie and a normal weekend at a big DZ. Our DZ has 23 people in the landing pattern on every load, rarely are there problems, we all know what to do, and any visitor seems to blend in to the operations. Eloy has a holiday boogie where people from all over the world show up. Last year there were two canopy collision fatalities in the landing area in two days. This was because all 23-50 people in the pattern were undisciplined and from different DZs of different sizes. I have no problem landing "in" every load at home. In Eloy I run far, far away from others - and land out where no one is trying to kill me under canopy. Either way - you will do fine. Watch a couple loads before you jump. Count locals vs visitors and if the visitor load is high, see if they are disciplined, or if you want to find alternate landing areas. AND HAVE A LOT OF FUN!!!

I just don't see the difference between the tru-lock and traditional being that significant in terms of parts. Even with a 90 degree bend in the metal pin, this user was able to extract the toggle. The tru-lock is much superior to Velcro for a main canopy. It is a clean system. I would never use it on a BASE or Reserve canopy as you are right, the extra parts add complication.... Just like a freebag is much safer than a bag connected to the canopy, but we opt for the slight added risk on our main so we don't have to find it after every jump... Sometimes we add a touch of complexity to keep the everyday maintenance (replacing velcro, finding a bag) down. Another manufacture uses two tabs, both fabric, with the same loops on the back to stow excess lines. What is the functional difference? Not much. I can show you the biggest problem I see with MANY manufactures, including the tru-lock system... Basically any system that has captive loops on the back of the risers to push excess line in it can cause a malfunction... See my post:http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2971597;search_string=toggle;#2971597 So, for my personal education.... What specifically do you think makes the tru-lock so much more complicated than, say, any of the competition's two tabbed toggles?

You are right... #1 - could happen on any toggle. #2 - well my rig is packed so no photos... But basically, if the metal pin is not pushed all the way in on the bottom, and the top tab on the toggle is fully inserted into the pocket, the toggle webbing is "tight" and the riser has "slack" because the toggle span becomes shorter than the riser span. On opening, the riser becomes tight. The pin has more resistance than the toggle tab, so the toggle tab comes out instead of the pin going in. 2 out of 800 jumps for me, on tru-locks... I determined that as the riser aged and stretched a bit, the little hole the pin inserts into was getting tighter towards the last 1/8th of an inch, and I was not getting full insertion. By pushing in the pin very hard for a few packjobs, I loosened the slot and it now works fine. To popsjumper... I have jumped many rigs, ranging from velcro base rigs to all sorts of single and two tabbed toggle systems. I think the Tru-lock is one of the better, if not best, designs out there. I have seen more malfunctions on other systems. (When it really matters I like Velcro, and so do the manufactures because that is standard on most reserves and base risers, but I would wear Velcro out in a few weekends with how much I use my rig if my main was also Velcro.)

#1 - It is possible you put the tab thru the toggle above the metal ring - and caused part of the problem... How is the tape that the toggle tab goes into? Damaged? #2 - With Tru-locks, you have to push the metal pin in all the way. A slight bit of the metal pin not in all the way will cause a brake fire.

I guess I have a higher performance Katana - but the tru-lock pin and tabs on the back of the riser did - once - catch the line on a "brake fire" (sorry to the guy who does not like this common term) - and only let out a few inches of line. As it was, it was a very nasty situation that I could fix. Without the method of stowing I used, it would have been a chop. I like mine. I don't know what problems it causes.

You are very right. These are the luckiest kids around, they fly in the tunnel better than me, and I admit it, I am jealous... My post was kind of pointing out that it appears people believe these kids, just because they can outfly me and most of my friends in the tunnel, automatically have the skillset for the sky. There will be a lot to learn (and they will learn it quickly), should they skydive... But, if they come with the attitude that they outfly the instructors, as quoted in the article, well then........ If I had parents willing to purchase around $100,000 in tunnel time for me when I was a kid (based upon the published hourly rates for block time) - I bet I could fly half as good as these kids... (note - I have no clue actually how much money was spent on these kid's time - but someone, either by gifting from the tunnel, or paying by their parents, paid an arm and a leg for their skills. Their skills came from great financal investment, with a splash of raw talent and great attitudes.) Sure, they have great attitudes and great talent... But, the sad truth remains - these kids will be the very rare exception because: 1) Not every parent can spend more than the average US household income a year on their kids hobby and passion. 2) Not every kid/skydiver will be sponsored for the sake of tunnel marketing - because the tunnels need profit too. If anything was given to them by the tunnel, will the tunnel do it for every kid who walks in the door? Every skydiver? So, I don't believe they really are "the future" of our sport as the name "Team Future" might imply - simply because of the financial inability for people to follow in their footsteps. Now, attitudes, skills, ways to learn, etc - yes the tunnel is a great new(er) tool, and new skydivers at the DZ who have an hour or two in the tunnel are proving to be great people, great friends, and great assets to the community... They just won't head down on their AFF level 1...

From the article: I can't wait to see the 10,000 jump wonder kids land their first canopy. Instructors, might, even though we apparently are not that good, quite possibly, have some value, at least we can say "Flare, flare, flare" over the radio...

Yes Actually - reread his post... This is not a replacement to the SIM... Just a very customized training program that is DZ specific. And - perhaps more detailed. And perhaps with more drills. With links to resources that the USPA cannot officially endorse (like a list of websites to visit, and content to review when there) Etc...

Naked, I think the website is a great place for this. Zero cost to the DZO. Available to students for no cost. Various sections can be printed and posted on the wall for students who did not do their homework. Seems like that is one AFF jump income for us. I will split it with you. Not to copy directly. But to use as research...

I know what Naked69 is looking for... It is not what is in the SIM. The SIM is a boring procedural manual that does not "introduce the student" to the sport in the ways Mr. Naked is wanting to get them hooked. The best way to put a student to sleep is to give them a few pages of the SIM to read. It is also old school, with many many people having to vote to make a simple change. Some of the things in the book conflict with what some DZs teach - as I know one canopy issue (on purpose I am keeping this vague) that many people including the best canopy coaches and PD recommend the exact opposite as what is in the SIM. But to make that change, a BOD has to have the energy to debate then vote... It has no video, no fun pictures, nothing beyond the text. It is not DZ specific. It is not a "try this dive for size" selection book. If you want to be cutting edge, you gotta keep it low key and local.

Could it be that, in general, skydiving RW skills have increased due to better coaching, wind tunnels, etc? I hear stories where in the "good old days", 10 people docking once in a dive was considered an advanced skill. Now the "youngsters" are doing that on their heads and turning points. I remember doing a 4 way on my 50th jump with Dan BC's group as a coach in a training camp - and the coach watching the video and saying: "You guys at 50 jumps are turning points quicker than I was at 500... The tunnel has helped you in a way I am jealous about." For my AFF rating I spent 1 hour in the tunnel doing spin stops and roll overs. I had like 100 roll overs and 100 spin stops prior to going to my course, in addition to 15 coached hours for 4way RW skills. It is not bragging - I paid a lot of money and worked hard for it - but I also see all the most recent candidates locally going to the tunnel. One right now, who is at the course as we speak, did dozens of dives in the sky, and hours in the tunnel, to get ready.

The pilot will get easy to pack after a few jumps. A bit of dust will save the day. In 2004 I got a pilot new, and put it under the Christmas tree for myself. I opened it the night before and stuffed it back in the box. The canopy was so slick and explosive it broke the tape and exploded out like a volcano... The pilot taught me how to pack - I got it brand new as a novice. After learning on it, there has not been a canopy I could not get in the bag after the experience. If you like the pilot, buy it... If not, PD canopies are a tad easier in the beginning, so I have found.

You could be an AFF ground school instructor as you already understand how to do it! It is really that easy. Those who get all worked up thinking it is more complicated have a harder time.

Since I was the one who first posted "AFF is not about pass/fail", then someone agreed, and you replied to their agreement, I will respond... (That does not make sense, oh well). 1) Anyone who views AFF as pass/fail is doing a disservice to themselves and the ability for humans to learn at different rates. I have heavily modified the higher levels to cater to the student's needs - and ironically, I make them HARDER for students who have tunnel time, not EAISER for others. In the USA, there are only a few things on each level that is cut and dry - pass/fail. For an example, on level 2 the student must pull on their own without a reminder because on level 3 they will be let go - whereas on level 2, if the turns suck but still work - they can move on with a note in their file that on level 4 they need to perfect the turn... 2) Excluding canopy control, altitude awareness, and tracking... (all important skills) - I bet someone with tunnel time, 9 times out of 10, will outperform their peers on their "FS manual jumps." In the US we have the USPA training program, and to give you a hint between a few students I have worked with: Student 1 - exited plane, had fall rate issues, tracked too hard and crashed into me, reached for grips, and never completed the dock. Student 2 - "Hey T, I wanna do my A licence check off dive. This thing looks way too easy. Can I do the whole jump backflying, the SIM does not say I have to be on my belly." Student 3 - Swoop and dock. I told the student I would climb out and give an exit count - and he should follow as close as possible. In the door I was on my knees helping spot with another student. Our turn. I looked at my friend (student) and said, "I am so going to screw you" and fell out on my back. He had the longest swoop and dock I have ever given to a student. He went into a steep head down track that took most of the dive to complete, followed by a real nice dock. Which students had tunnel time of the 3 listed above? Which ones not only completed the learning objectives of the training program, but took them a step farther? Which ones are ready to be the last out on a 20 way, versus barely able to do a 2 way? This is why I say the tunnel time helps...