tdog

It is kind of DZ specific, as there are USPA rules that are followed differently. Some DZs are more strict than the USPA, some less. A new rule - a D licence skydiver may jump with you, up to a 4 way group, so as long as two of the folks have a "D".

You made me think a bit about this... I know, even after tracking just a little bit away from a higher level AFF student and pulling, I am still far enough below the student that I can't identify much other than canopy color and if it is flying straight. I know, because I tend to look on every jump after I deploy. If I entered a high pull situation, even hanging in brakes on a canopy loaded 1.4 (not a tiny velo), I am going to out fly the student and never get back up to their altitude. And, if the uppers are cooking bad enough that the student might land out, I may land out differently than the student, thus making the ground crew work twice as hard to find two people. I think the key is quick radio contact, whether the radio operators were the AFFIs on the jump or the ones on the ground. "Great job, now fly that direction for a while and look around and enjoy the view. You are doing great up there, everything is alright." The jury in my mind is still out - if I would stay up with the student or both Is b-line for the ground.

Note - on a sandbar, that is OK. But it is far from the correct thing to do in a river that has a flow where there are debris on the riverbed and you can't see the bottom. Rebar, trees, and rocks all can catch your feet, and then the flow's pressure against your body can break limbs and hold you under water. But, in your case, the story is very funny.

I asked Bill Booth the same question. His answer was that the reserve would be at full line stretch and out of the bag almost instantly if your main is still inflated and acting like a sail when you cut it away. The question becomes - will the reserve inflate or sit slider up in a ball on the ground. This is determined by the situation, but I got the impression that under most situations you would not get an inflated canopy. My analysis... Any RSL will pop the reserve if you cutaway a main on the ground that is inflated, so the financial inconvenience is the same... But there is a slightly higher likelihood that the reserve becomes a sail too, so I choose to make it a slightly higher priority to disconnect the RSL if I know the landing is going to be under very high winds or on a roof.

Kudos to Skyventure Colorado. I did the AFF level 7 jump for one of the guys who participates in the "adult league" at SVCO. This was his last AFF jump. It was one of the best AFF jumps I ever have done. Heck, it was one of the most fun I have ever done too. I am looking forward to fun jumping with this guy. We had a non-orthodox dive flow because he had already accomplished everything on previous dives, and even had a tracking dive under his belt already. He said, "can't we just do something relaxing". So I built a relaxing fun dive that for someone with an A licence without tunnel time would have been daunting and challenging. It required skills that are beyond the A licence. I looked at my altimeter in freefall. He must have thought I was a bit worried about the altitude since we were close, so he used his hands to sign language to me the altitude he was going to pull at. This was a first, never have I had a student tell me with sign language, "don't worry, I still remember my pull altitude." I was completely convinced he was totally relaxed, having fun, and knew where he was at. Then he whipped a fast center point leg turn, smiled at me, waved off and pulled. He flew the pattern without any assistance, and then landed three feet away from me. Some say tunnel rats still crash their canopies, he proved them wrong. God, he did not even make me walk a step to debrief his landing, which was stand up on a hot no wind day. The closest accuracy I have ever seen from an AFF student. I asked, "tell me about that 360 you did after you told me your pull altitude." He said, "I just wanted to see how fast I could whip a turn." Whatever the guys at Skyventure Colorado (yes they are my friends so I am bias) are feeding their students, they need to bottle it and sell it to more... Communication skills from this guy were some of the best I have seen in freefall. He clearly communicates often to his instructors in the tunnel and was able to use those skills with me. I have seen coaches and instructors struggle with communication, so this is an awesome skillset from a student.

Now - I assume you pack your own rig... I got as far as pealing my handle two weeks ago in a high G spin... It fixed itself on its own after I tried and gave up... In the back of my mind I clearly thought as I was reaching for the handle, "Sh&t, I am tired and I don't want to have to repack this tonight. Why today?" It was a better feeling than what I used to think, "god I hope my rigger packed it well." Next time I might think, "Sh&t I packed this one too, I hope I did a better job on the second one than the first."

The DPRE locally was given 8 symbols to hand out to the canidates that passed. When he runs out, he gets another 8. I might be in line for "SHE", if the timing works out. Now I am confident about my own sexuality, but I don' know if I really want to be known as: "Who packed your reserve?" "SHE did".

The harness that the tandem students wear is sometimes less than forgiving on pressure points in your body. Keep on jumping, stay hydrated, eat well, and have fun. If people got sick in skydiving there would be FAA rules where vomit could be released in freefall.

Oh... Well, see... After you get your rating you are grandfathered in and never have to be re-evaluated, unless you go uncurrent. The DZO and peers at the DZ will determine if you are good enough for their program. (And I know people who have been fired and/or not hired due to their skillsets).

You are describing the AFF instructor evaluation, at least what it was designed to be. 4 jumps, must pass 3. The evaluators pretend to be new students. They keep their mouth pretty much closed. If you fail to teach something, or teach something wrong - it is almost guaranteed they will exploit your teaching weakness and make that their failure in the sky that you have to fix. They won't ask for clarification, so if you never teach how to get in the door, they will do a handstand or something very weird that you have to then fix on the fly - or fail. Some are known for being difficult. Some are known for being easy. Except for changing the system so the easy ones are weeded out, what are you recommending? P.S. Your comments about instilling confidence and trying to motivate the student to continue to learn... It is not pushed in the textbook part of the course, but I know Bram (my evaluator) expected it, which is why I like him.

#1 - you can disconnect your RSL with your teeth in about one second. #2 - rivers are very narrow typically, with trees around them. Landing in a river is completely unacceptable for even a novice skydiver if there is another available option, such as a big field. So it is my THEORY that the average river landing is chosen and/or known as a possibility, higher up: "Gee whiz, I am going to jump from this plane and land on the beach" (at which time the skydiver should have a plan before leaving the plane that would take into account an accidental landing in the river)... Or... "gee whiz, I just opened at 3K and am over a huge forest. The only non-tree landing is that river. I will shoot for the shore, but if I overshoot I am going to go into the water. I need to be ready now." Both of these scenarios apply for ocean landings too - you know before you leave the plane that an ocean landing is possible, so getting ready for it mentally before you leave the plane is appropriate. So, yes, a skydiver who is not trained (or is too closed minded) not to start their water landing procedures at 2,000 feet (actually before they even take off in the aircraft), probably will find 300 feet a bit low to start their water landing procedures... These are the people that are most likely to get hurt in every scenario because they waited too long to get ready. But a skydiver who knows water landing is possible when they leave the plane, who analyzes the likelihood of water landing at 2,000 feet, and starts preparing for it at 1000 feet or more if landing in it is imminent, has plenty of time to take care of the housekeeping. I have swam with a rig on my back as part of watertraining myself. It was fully water logged. If I am in a rapid, if anything, I am going to keep that container on my back to protect my spine from the sharp rocks, instead of swimming out of it and possibly making my head the lowest part of my body most susceptible to impact. I think the stats show that a reserve acts like a floatation device for 2 minutes due to the air in the rig, and after 2 minutes it becomes an anchor. Hence, I am likely to keep the rig, without the main, on me, if I am a few feet from the shore after going thru a rapid, especially since not self rescuing and trying to remove gear could cause me to go thru another rapid.

I don't have faith my Regional Direcor would care about something like this, it is just not his style, so if anyone else wishes to send their friends at the USPA a link to my post, they have my permission and request to do it.

Makes sense. But, a few things. #1 - I always give caption info in the e-mail. So I never can use that to judge. #2 - They always ask immediately, if you don't spell it out clearly, "have you submitted this photo to anyone else?" If you send low-res to more than one rag, and answer "yes" (truthful), won't they just discard the photo because they feel you have less loyalty to them and it is too hard to manage? Or do they accept "first yes, first exclusive" terms? #3 - If you send to multiple rags to see who will bite, and both do, who do you give it too? This seems a way to get burned from one rag for life. They start to do layout and themes, then you come back and pull your photo because the other rag said yes? The solution (should parachutist be paying attention)... A file upload system with username and password. The USPA could view the photos, immediately click "reject" on the ones they hate, click "pending" on ones they think they could use in the future, and click "accept" on the ones they wish to print. The ones not printed could be, if the photographer opts in, published online in a photobook, drawing people to the USPA website. Automated e-mails and/or just checking the website would establish if you have been rejected or accepted...

If you look at the SIM/ISP, the drills are there just to insure the basic level of safety to live. A student is often so worried about the freefall, that the canopy ride is the "reset" afterword. The canopy class I went to (and went twice, once with 200 jumps, once with 700 jumps) - I learned life saving skills well beyond the SIM. We dumped at 6K on each load and spent time playing with more learning objectives per jump than a student gets in freefall. The cost of the course was $150 per day for six jumps with video, including everything, from a "flight one" trained instructor. $300 for 12 jumps. Ya, the student does not have to do anything past AFF to learn, but if they WANT to be safe, this takes it to the next level. This is not to say AFFIs should not teach what they can to a student to make them safe as possible, but why not take it a step further? There is only so much to teach in a single AFF or coach jump before information overload, and if freefall skills are taught too, that it is overwhelming and the adrenaline is pumping after pull time for the student, so they are not in the mindset to learn. Plus, the resources of being able to watch 10 video taped landings of you and your peers in invaluable, with the coach watching from the ground the entire time to evaluate. I look at it this way. The number one leading cause of death in our sport is canopy control. The current system is broken and I only half blame the instructors, and half blame the system. Canopy control courses fix it. The tunnel is to freefall learning as canopy courses are to canopy learning. Innovative, new, exciting, detailed, focused, etc. If nothing else, it is much cheaper than the alternative. Hiring a coach for 12 skydives that will video tape landings is $1068 and will take multiple weekends because of lack of efficiency. Taking a class, pre-manifested for every hour and half, with a dedicated focus, costs the student $300. Plus you are teaching only canopy, as the student is cleared to do the hop-n-pops. If I had my way, every city would have a tunnel... This would be my progression: 1) 30 minutes in the tunnel - learn how to fly. 2) 3 jumps in the sky (or more if needed). Stability, altitude awareness, and pull. 3) 6 hop-n-pops to refine canopy pattern and get comfortable with flare, etc. 4) 6 hop-n-pops, finding the sweet spot, stalls, flat turns, riser turns, toggle turns, EPs, etc (Flight One Essentials) 5) 6 coach jumps, tracking, exits, group safety skills 6)6 hop-n-pops, (Flight One advanced). In the end, it would cost less, and our students would be rockstars. Over and out, opinion expressed.

Assuming you did not post this and edit this video to brag about how bad you screwed up, I guess I applaud you for sharing a negative experience. I admit I have a few videos in the file that show a few close calls. If you are a serious friend asking for personal experiences, I will gladly share the dirty laundry. The point - yes I have screwed up a few times real bad myself. But what makes my videos/jumps "acceptable", even though in two of them, injury was imminent, is that each person was qualified and operating within the industry established acceptable parameters. For an example, a two way tracking dive with two people with 200 jumps each, both extremely current. No one will say, "200 jumps is too little to do a two way track." But we almost hit at highway speeds, which could have broken a neck or worse. But your video... Almost every part of it shows industry accepted guidelines being ignored. Guys with 200 jumps, never lurked a tandem, flying like shit, is a recipe for disaster. It is so obvious that I can't believe you would burn the tandem instructor by showing a video of his poor judgement. The problem is - if someone was hurt, any experienced skydiver who would be called to testify in court, would admit freely that there are world wide accepted standards for tandems, and every one of them was broken. I am confident that you could train (and test) someone that flies well to lurk a tandem with less than 500 jumps, and pull it off safely... But you added so many poor choices that I just had to read the first few words to know that this would be a scary video. The warning signs to me: 1) You had multiple unknowns (skydivers not prequalified, not preevaluated). Only add one unknown at a time to a skydive, especially one that is as dangerous as a tandem. It could be a new container, a new canopy, a new wingsuit, or a new friend. You can manage one unknown, you can't manage more than one. 2) You had a boyfriend/girlfriend, which always adds pressure to perform. Never have family, especially sexual friends, involved in anything where one is doing it for the first time. If you want proof, I have a dead friend who went big for a girlfriend. 3) No one was qualified to lurk a tandem without the 500 minimum jumps or instructor rating or previous training. Sure there are ways to break the rules safely, but if you are going to break the rules you better have a pretty good justification to prove you can, such as adding one unknown at a time and proving that unknown can become a known, and the known is comfortable. 4) You say you learned a lot in evaluating others, but you never accepted responsibility for YOUR actions, since you were PART of the problem. Do you see that maybe you should have opted to do some other jump? "Hey, you know this dive just got out of my comfort zone. I don't know these guys. I will see ya on the ground." AND MOST IMPORTANT 5) You say the tandem master tore the guy a new asshole... Who is going to tear the tandem master a new asshole and ask him to go home for the day. If you read my previous posts, you will see I rarely get so opinionated at other's actions (yes, I have strong opinions about procedures, policy, and regulations, but not about people). But, now that I have said my part, I congratulate you for posting the incident because others can learn.

You know, I have submitted a few shots that were pretty darn cool... Each time they ask, if I don't say, "have you submitted to any others?" But I never get a denial or any further replies. I stopped submitting because they don't have the manors to say, "thanks for submitting but we are looking for..." On the other hand, my 4 way team (I am the video guy) was on the cover two months ago of Skydiving. We found out when it came in the mail. All this being said, while I can appreciate why the publishers want exclusives, but I can understand why people submit to both because you never know what they are going to do. I think they should reply within a few weeks if they wish to accept or deny the photo so you can move on.

Diablo, I agree with you 100 percent. But, since there is not perfection now, I gave options for the newbie to get what they need. Also, no matter how good the SIM and ISP, a two day, 12 jump, hop n pop with video canopy course is going to beat any form of coaching an AFFI or coach can give, unless they are the ones giving the two day, 12 jump course. Reason = focus of the TLOs in such a course. If you can tell me how an AFFI can beat a canopy specific course, tell me how. I see this as the ISP with balls, not a replacement to the isp.

Hijacking an RSL thread... I teach (from what I learned from Kayak and Rafting instructors) in water training for skydiving... Don't attempt to stand up, as if you get a foot caught, you will be pushed over and held under. A few hundred pounds of pressure could snap a leg while your foot is trapped under a rock. This ties over to the canopy in the water. You want the least attachment points with rocks, trees, etc. The reason - being held in place (canopy or body) will cause harm - thus separating your canopy ASAP from your body, in Martha Stewart terms, "is a good thing." Ride the rapids, feet first and at the surface, butt down, head up, until you get to a point you can self rescue and swim to the shore. Flipping out of an harness with a main attached is not going to provide the optimal body position to ride a rapid. As a kayaker, do you agree?

I disagree. I teach, when I teach water training, that there are three types of water: Single direction current (river) Bidirection current (ocean waves) Stagnant (lakes) When there is a current, you have a higher risk of the canopy becoming a water sail and taking you where you don't want to go. Landing where the water breaks on ocean waves can be real bad as the water can wrap you. So I teach to remove the RSL as soon as you know you are going to land in water. But never cutaway from the canopy until your feet are wet, you have finished your flare, and done your PLF, for all the obvious reasons. Try to get out of the rig, but if you need to cutaway the main first, do so, as swimming to shore with a container can be safer and quicker than trying to get out of the rig while being dragged (or worse, the canopy stuck on a rock and you being held underwater in a whirlpool). Think about a skyhook equipped rig, with a main dragging a skydiver down the river while they try to swim to shore. The decide they cannot overcome the pressure of the canopy to swim or get out of it, so they cutaway. Suddenly they have their reserve out of the bag at full line stretch. I just took a Kayak class. I saw a picture of a plastic kayak "tacoed" around a rock. The instructor explained the pounds per square foot of a good river flow, and I realized that it could easily remove an arm if a canopy line was wrapped around a body part. Hence, unless landing in a lake, disconnect the RSL (if you can safely) before landing in water. I teach the students to do it with their teeth as it does not require letting go of toggles. Then all options remain open AFTER landing, from cutting away to removing the harness, to swimming to shore.

Hint - instructors like to bitch about DZOs. Video guys like to bitch about Instructors. Skydivers like to bitch about anything. If you look at the incidents (on these forums, or in the USPA Parachutist Magazine) you will quickly learn that Bone Heads (your term) are not killing students these days. You can search on these forums a lot and find you have the least chance of getting hurt when you are a newbie... It is when you downsize to a smaller canopy and you decide to swoop your landing fast, or make an invasive maneuver that you are not trained to do on the smaller canopy, that you get hurt. The system is not perfect, but it is far from broken. I look at incidents (death, injury, etc) to judge. If you want to be safe, ask a lot of questions, do a lot of research, go to your favorite rigger friend (you will easily find one if you don't have one yet) and ask them to show you how to pack a reserve. With an open mind that acts like a sponge, you can increase the safety to a point it is manageable and justifiable. If you just go out and jump, but don't spend the time on the ground, you will have higher risk. Your job now is to get the baseline education you need. Find an USPA dropzone (if in the US), and talk to experienced jumpers from the area. If I felt that AFF instructors were killing people left and right (or even had a history of incidents), I would be the first to lobby change. But as much as I read about every incident for the last, say, 10 years... This is NOT where people are getting hurt. It is canopy control. And as an AFF student, your risk is NOT hurting yourself (statistically) under the big student canopy, but instead the lack of knowledge your AFF instructors will teach you for when you have 30 or 100 jumps. You can however fix this by immediately taking a canopy control course after you are done with AFF. Or, by finding an AFF instructor who will give you lots of knowledge about canopy control. So, go jump. Calculate the risks by reading about incidents. Pick the low hanging fruit first, and you will lead a long life in skydiving. P.S. I see you are in Colorado. I would be glad to help you out (in finding the best of the best). PM me. I am (your term) one of those Bone Head AFF instructors.

The discussion of aspect ratio in 8.30 (beginning on page 330) centers around rigidity and flight characteristics. No direct mention of opening speed. Is there something else in 8.30 that would answer more directly? Mark Good question. The sheet I have is sometimes incomplete and has assumptions... If I was going to take the test now, I don't know what I would answer... Look at the Spectre (a 7 cell) known for soft openings. Look at a PD reserve known for quick openings. Look at a BASE canopy, known for very fast openings. They are all about the same aspect ratio (correct me if I am wrong, I need to run to work otherwise I would download the specs on a PDR and Spectre)... I believe canopy design (nose angles, etc) will alter opening speed quite a bit. So if I was going to answer based upon known facts in my personal experience, would I choose the soft opening spectre, or the hard opening BASE canopy, as my basis???? I hate the question myself, because like a lot of them in the test bank, the answer I think is "It depends."

What is your experience??? Your profile says student. You probably want to discuss with your mentors, at the DZ, if you are new to the sport, how to learn from others. This is my way of saying, "talk to your instructors", but I am a bit more open. I think you should use your mind to ask lots of questions, and understand that most of the answers will be wrong. Until you are off student status, you need to follow your instructors advice and/or disclose any requested alterations to their advice. Once off student status, you will be charged with the task of learning, and it requires thinking hard about questions like this. Very loaded question: Pros to disconnecting the RSL: ***at 12,500 feet you have time to make sure you are belly to earth, stable, and ready to deploy your reserve (as soon as you can) *** The jumper probably can't tell how much entanglement he has, and disconnecting he can verify he fell away from the plane. *** The reserve won't be deploying in the dirty air behind the aircraft at aircraft speeds *** If the plane is "going down", the skydiver can make sure he does not collide with the plane under canopy, but it could be the opposite too, being above the plane with an open canopy could be good. *** If the RSL hangs up, you stay attached to the plane Cons to disconnecting: ***If he is injured or lost situational awareness due to impact, hard openings, confusion, etc, the reserve handle has to be pulled too... *** There could be other skydivers who bailed from the aircraft, or even the aircraft, that will provide collision hazards, where having a RSL activated reserve will keep the malfunctioned skydiver higher than the others in freefall. Conclusion: The list above is not complete. Skydivers need to fully understand their gear, how it operates, and the ramifications of using the gear in multiple situations. Skydivers have to then make personal educated decisions based upon knowledge. In situations like this, where you suddenly accept the role of an experimental test pilot, you have to think on your feet and make quick and accurate decisions based upon knowledge. If the situation changes one variable, the ramifications could be drastic. So there is rarely one right answer.

"C" Poynter Volume 2 - 8.30 (I don't have P2 here to verify, but I have the answers with support for the answers on a study guide)

Unfortunately, I don't believe the tunnel gives you the skills to handle a sudden 100 foot separation. I learned slot flying, roll overs, spin stops, etc, in the tunnel... But what about the student who gets a bit nervous at the end of a turn and pulls their legs to their ass and arches, because that is what they were told to do to maintain stability (of course the legs on the ass were not what they were told, but they do it anyway). Suddenly they are backsliding as fast as someone can track. These are the difficult skills that are not able to be taught in the tunnel. The spins that students can do, with the center point of the spin being 10 feet in front of or behind the student, especially when another AFFI is holding on and trying to roll the student over, requires the ability to predict where the student will be in a second, not where they are now. When a student corks in the tunnel, you as an instructor can burble them with your hands and the driver can see in your eyes you wish for slightly less wind speed and you bring them back down. Imagine your job if the tunnel was, say, 300 feet wide. You would be doing a lot more running. I respect you a lot, and we discuss these things for hours when I am in the same room with you... Since you did not take my hint and run with it - I will: Continuing education. Required... How? Well, on a slow day, where there are slots empty on the plane that is otherwise going to fly (above the minimum revenue level to make the plane turn, but still with two slots open), send up two AFFIs to "play with each other". The drills will be half made up by the person playing the role of the student, and half requested by the AFFI who wishes to practice a move. All based upon the biggest challenges they have faced recently.

Hook, Why don't you post some of your experiences working for Skyventure franchise tunnels where instructors have continuing education and pay for performance. I know you shouldn't and can't post compensation related things, but maybe some of the stuff you have told me in person about the continuing education would inspire DZOs and AFFIs reading this to do some "continuing education drills." Sharing how it works on the other side of the fence will help others see what I believe is a good training system.