tdog

2 day boogie for $100 of unlimited jumps? What is the manifest time/number of planes per participant? I, on average, jump 10 to 15 times a day at a boogie. For 30 jumps for $100, I would do it hands down! That is $3.33 a jump! I am SO IN!

You in your last post said you don't want to be an "I"... But you wish to bash the "I"s publicly on these forums and post videos? Perhaps offer the videos to the course directors and USPA so they can see what needs improvement if you want to make a change. If you are so good, then why don't you become an instructor or evaluator for the directors so you can make the rating harder? If all the good guys claim that all they are passionate about is video (and people tell me their choice is video over AFF because it pays more, is less work, and is more relaxing), then you will have a hard time finding the best instructors. If all the good guys blame the system, the system will stay broken.

How big of a canopy? I could see anything sub 170/190 square feet to be a handful. When I think of JC, I think of a real small crossbraced swoop monster canopy, which would be, just as you described.

I have been towed up over 60 times on a paraglider, sometimes as high as 2000 feet to catch some thermals over a field, after cutting away from the tow. A paraglider is not too much different than my current skydiving canopy, if anything, it is harder to fly because of the twitchy nature of a lightly loaded fabric, especially in turbulence. I know I could tow my skydiving main as my canopy loves to kite better than my paraglider did, I can keep it overhead for minutes with just a small breeze. I have tried to kite other brand fully elliptical canopies, and found the kite-ability is definitely different for every canopy, some just hated to kite, some loved it. The skydiving canopy would be very challenging because it flies so much faster, so, everything would have to happen real quick, including any recovery. I would do it over water, launching from the beach, with say, 10 MPH breeze into the wind, because I don't like running faster than humans can run. The payout winch would be in a boat. The water would provide the necessary "crash mat" at the crucial period where the canopy wants to start to fly, but you are still too close to the ground to recover. (BTW - this is a proven system as paragliders use this technique) Now, this being said, I spent many hours and many days learning how to do this. I am not going to tell you the details as I feel a qualified instructor should. A skydiver attempting a tow without training, without proper tow equipment, and without the knowledge of how to keep the canopy flying (when to apply inputs to risers and toggles), would certainly run the risk of getting hurt real bad. Think of a two out downplane. That is what you get with the tow system as the "second canopy" should you misconfigure the angle of flight. The worst I have ever been hurt in aviation was on a paraglider tow launch that went real south real quick. Think a toggle whip into the ground landing. In 2004 I posted on dz.com about another tow malfunction, including a picture of how the equipment failed, as it is an adaptation of the skydiving three rings. Note, with the three or four years of skydiving knowledge since I posted the paragliding story, I now know how to redesign the paragldier tow so the malfunction would be impossible: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1311922;search_string=tow;#1311922 Here is a sales propoganda for one company I know of that offers water training on a tow: And here is a picture from a site of a tow: http://www.flyaboveall.com/havasu82.htm Here is some text about how to tow: http://www.paragliding.org/book/el/9-4.htm

There is something to be said about this... I had a bad spinning mal, two twists, on a 1.5 loaded fully elliptical today. My hands were up on the risers as I was kicking. The video shows my head shaking left and right (either in disbelief that I would have to repack my reserve that I just put in the container so nicely a few weeks ago, or because it was moving with the kicks. I am going to go with the 'moving with the kicks' theory) I realized that it was not recoverable after burning thru some altitude. My neptune said my average speed at 3K was 174 MPH and I deployed at 2300 feet. In reality I pulled at 3.5K and was not out of the twists until 2300. Of note, this was a sitfly jump, 172 at 9K, 123 at 6K as we were tracking (we broke early for an unrelated reason), then 174 MPH in the twists at 3K. The canopy was diving as fast as I sitfly! Anyway, I brought my hands to my cutaway handle, and due to the G forces I could not even see the handle, so it took a second to find it, so it was difficult getting my hand lined up. In the two seconds I played with finding my handle, I suddenly spun out of the twists and was flying, albeit erratically and still in a dive, for another 500 feet, until the canopy finished it's recovery arc... The video clearly shows the twists NOT getting better until I got smaller (legs in, arms down) and stopped kicking concentrating on the handle. I have a new appreciation for the difficulty grabbing the cutaway in high G situations, and clearly have proof that kicking was not as useful as getting small, just as you said. Now - every mal will be different, but this is not the first time I have experienced the canopy fix itself in high G twisty dives. The only time I have kicked and found it to work well is when the canopy is flying straight and there is no other G force or spin to throw you out of the twists. Every other time, it has fixed itself (although if this one happens again I am chopping before kicking as the G forces were adding up).

I have found this is one of those companies you are best calling on the phone...

EDIT: I deleted my post because it opens a can of worms I cannot put back in the jar, or watch crawl around, because I am going to be busy for a few days. See the reply below by DiabloPilot that addresses how coaches can operate... It basically points to how it can be done.

Only??? My home DZ uses the two-page card, and they have a very organized coaching system with dive flows, coaches on staff, etc. The card is not pencil whipped. I feel the students (if they opt to participate and be active learners) are some of the best out there...

the 45 degree rule - how else? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE don't hyjack this thread to another spotting thread. There are many, many, many threads on this. (How I get 6 seconds... I know the speed of jumprun from the pilot, I know my separation I want in feet, so I know how many seconds it takes to go X feet).

I guessed you missed the point of my post... A spoiled child is not going to respond to a message delivered in the wrong way. If you really care about the message you are delivering, the way you deliver it has to transcend the maturity of the other party. No... The second the other side starts to get defensive - you need to realize the way you attempted to deliver the message, even if it was meant well, and even if you did not see it as being confrontational, is not being accepted. This is the time to go back to step one and reinvent how you are delivering the message. Sometimes you have to sell your idea so the buying party thinks it was their own. Normally this does not happen by being negative and confrontational, but instead motivational and supporting in the right direction.

Observations 1. I don't think it is the responsibility of these forums to regulate skydiving. Often the person replying does not know, has not seen, or fully understand the person they are replying to. 2. I think on these forums often people use words and a tone of writing they would not use in person. They hide behind the internet. Unfortunately, this does not work, if anything it turns off the person on the other end more. As proof, I read all the locked threads on this subject, and a thread about a 120 velo mentioned in the locked threads as a reference of the "next guy". They all are the same. The delivery of the message is done poorly. 3. Those with a lot of experience (who, by the way, probably did things themselves a bit too early in their career) preach as if they are experts. The receiving side does not hear it. The reason is, they use justifications like, "I know more than you because of jump numbers." Solutions: 1. Don't expect DZ.com to regulate someone's actions. 2. Since online you rarely know the person on the other side, it may be helpful to post what DID and DID NOT work for YOU, instead of telling the other person what SHOULD work for THEM. If you are a great swooper, telling someone how YOU DID IT makes you a role model, telling someone how they CAN'T do it, makes you the fun police. 3. When you see someone posting something dangerous, instead of saying a brash, "you are an idiot", post questions... Example: "Downsizing at this point makes you an idiot" vs "Hey, so you want to downsize. I found practicing these things worked for me. If you answer a comfortable yes to each one, then time to downsize. #1, can you XXX, #2, have you XXX? #3, are you comfortable XXX?" By having a "test", you eliminate the false sense of skillset "I have raced my motorcycle all my life" arguments. Maybe they are ready early, maybe not? 4. In the real world skydiviers are the opposite of on DZ.com. They watch their friends and stay shy and simply speak behind their friend's back "they are going to hurt themselves". I have seen so much backstabbing and behind the back comments instead of a single well delivered message to the interested party. 5. In the real world, skydivers who are slightly less shy than the norm still deliver it wrong, by either using sarcasm, insults, joking, or hints. Or, they do it publicly in front of the whole local crowd in order to boost their own ego or feel superior like school yard bullies. When I have brought up these concerns in a few other threads online, many skydivers replied, "skydivers are adults, there is no reason to sugar coat anything" - or in the case of a young skydiver, "he needs to act like an adult, until then I am not changing my ways." These excuses have been used to justify terrible presentation and delivery of messages. Let's say you were a VP of Business Development pitching a new idea to an investor, an adult... Would you say: "You would be an a$$hat idiot not to buy my idea. I have been in business longer than you, you need to trust me. Write me the check now"... Is that how adults "sell" an idea? No, they sit down, give a full presentation, share ideas, allow questions to be asked, etc. Why is skydiving different? Why do we call people "you are an idiot if you..." and expect them to buy the message - then use the "you are an adult able to make decisions" as an excuse when the delivery does not work? HINT: Adults are emotional and egotistical too, so sometimes message delivery has to be modified to the person that needs to hear it. Recap When someone wants to downsize or swoop, give SOLUTIONS not RESTRICTIONS. "Hey, I see you want to swoop more and downsize. Do you want help getting to your goals? We can learn together, and practice together. I have been getting coaching from XXX, and we can spend a day sharing his fee." or "Do you want to swoop. That is cool. How about we go to XXX DZ next week and watch the competition, and I will buy dinner if we can go out with one of the pros and pick their mind around the bar or bonfire." Real World Example. Someone I learned to respect a lot (who since passed away because of an incident very similar to things we should learn from this incident) did it right when he had a message for me... He thought I was doing something a bit risky. He DID NOT come to me, but instead found someone I respected a lot, who came to me and said, "a birdie whispered in my ear that he is concerned..." I paid attention and begged to know who the birdie was. I thanked both the messenger and the birdie because the message was appropriate, and the delivery was exceptional - done like ADULTS do it.

Our company provides services to the buildings that a chain of adult stores occupies. (hey, just another building, right? But the workorders always have things like, "above the edible underwear rack the...") Well, I had to call the customer to schedule services. I could not stop laughing, because I said the person's first name, and they said, "there are two people here by that name." I then said, "I am trying to call Ms. Cox". I was put on hold, then it hit me: How many times in your life do you call a sex store and ask for cock and get paid to do it?

Think of it like a hospital, like a commercial airline, or like a restaurant. Look for the clues you can tell, even though you are not a trained doctor, pilot, or chef. Are the facilities well maintained, is there pride in ownership? Are the planes clean and visibly maintained? Does the gear look new or faded and worn? Are there a lot of skydivers that are fun jumpers (not staff) jumping there? Does the manifest staff conduct professional office operations? Does the staff answer your questions professionally and honestly (like, 'say - how can I tell if your planes are well maintained?') Do the instructors act professionally and answer all your questions? Do you have a level of comfort with the operation?

Are you sure it is only 1/2? I was there for a week for work and remember going to get a bite to eat and not being able to see the other side of the "nicest restaurant in town" our vendor took us to. It seems it is a cultural thing in your 'hood, that smoking anywhere and everywhere (packing hangar) is culturally expected. I am with other people. A small burn hole in a rig will not kill you. If anything, the burn will be safer than a stick that would tear the canopy, as the burn will melt the threads and prevent fraying threads, whereas a stick leaves a frayed tear. In fact, PD uses some kind of laser/cutter to burn little dots into the fabric to serial number the fabric pieces. The factory does it on purpose (although not with a cigarette). But, I would gladly drive an extra hour to a DZ that is smoke free.

Thanks for the tip! I'll do that before I jump again. Because now that it's in my head... I have a even better idea... Hang around the DZ and get to know the jumpers and staff a bit. Do you check the pilot of the commercial airliner to see what is qualifications are? No. But you probably are more likely to have a comfort level with an airline known for great training and maintenance. The same goes for skydiving. The more professional the operation, the more likely the DZO is going to hand choose his staff, the best are going to want to work there, etc. (I am hinting that the licence shows that the instructor meets the bare minimum requirements. There is much more to safety than a piece of paper.)

Where are you from, and are you choosing to jump from USPA group member DZs. (In the US, it is not a federal or governmental agency that issues licences, but instead the www.uspa.org.) The USPA publishes all new licences and ratings in Parachutist magazine. Because that is public knowledge, I suppose you might even be able to call them and confirm if you suspect you need to and can't find a back issue. The USPA also has a member website for group member DZs. You could ask the DZ management to show you the webpage with the person's ratings.

Thanks for finding that link. I think this shows how important it is to have a plan that will work. The skydiver who had the problem in that incident was current and experienced flying a conservitively loaded canopy. I know of a few incidents (mainly swooping, watched the broken legs leave the DZ, a lot when I have been out of town when visiting DZs) where someone lost grip on a toggle/lost grip on a riser/did not transition from risers to toggles effectively/did not use risers effectively. I kind of discredited a lot of it to swoops gone bad. But a 190 square foot canopy did serious harm to this skydivers legs when he gave incorrect input. Proof that rear risers need to be practiced by all. Back on thread topic: I think it is very important, if one toggle is useless, to have a plan for the other, not to be invented on the jump, but part of your EPs planned now. I can't think of very many good reasons to keep one good toggle after you enter final. But I can think of a few good reasons why having your hands empty of toggles ready to use risers would be better, the primary reason being - if your hands slip off the risers or down the risers, at least you won't spiral your canopy... But I am not an expert.

How about a packer with 3000 packjobs and 1 jump. Does he know more or less than the new guy with 30 jumps? How about a fighter jet pilot who has trained to work under pressure, knows how to prep a task, knows how to debrief the task, and knows how to take instruction, with 400 jumps experience... How does his experience relate to the egotistical 500 jump wonder who thinks he knows everything? How about the pilot of the DZ plane who has dispatched 1000 loads of skydivers who finally jumps? Jump numbers hint to background experience, but are not an indicator of a video guy's experience being able to safely video a tandem. Don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting let anyone fly. I am sure the 500 jump requirement is waiverable and is a good requirement as a baseline, but if I was a DZO, I would hold my video guys to a completely different standard, and it would not have a jump number requirement. It would be based upon flying skills, people skills, attitude, working within limits, ability and confidence to say no when they were not comfortable with a task, general knowledge (tested) beyond the no-brainer D licence exam, rigging and gear maintenance knowledge, agreements to participate in continuing education, attending safety seminars hosted by the manufactures and known experts, etc.

I agree 100%. When a rule is published, breaking it, even if you don't know you are breaking it, adds liability. For an example, in a flood restoration job, various trade organizations publish conflicting recommendations on how to clean sewage water spills. If you follow one, you can be sued and the other can be used against you in a court of law. "Look, they did not follow the published recommendations." So for each rule, you have to follow the most strict published recommendations, or else those recommendations or rules will bite you.

That can best be answered by Tom N @ Strong or TK @ UPT if he still works in that job fuction. I'm sure Tom would be happy to share the info. And - the only way to improve the safety then would be to analyze the incidents to determine what caused the incident. Experience vs poor training vs jump numbers vs attitude vs what???

There you go with jump numbers again. (and by "You" I mean the skydiving community) I am thoroughly convinced jump numbers has very little to do with skill sets, attitude, and capacities of a skydiver. Tunnels, advanced coaching and mentoring, the goals of the skydiver, dedication to improve, and experiences outside of skydiving, all add up to the end product. Jump numbers only proves gravity works. ()

I would say (sorry I am going to be harsh, and it only is by the tone of your posts) that your problem is simply confidence... You need some! Except for a rare few, skydivers are everyday joes, nothing special. You, hence, can be an everyday joe and survive. I would say you are ready to skydive, but another tandem can't hurt, where you fly the canopy. Here is the key. Make sure the tandem instructor and you have a plan, and it is a learning skydive. If the manifest office tries to put you up with a tandem instructor with only a few minutes before your load, cry foul. I actually would say, do the FJC (assuming AFF is what your DZ offers) and then if you feel you want another tandem, you will be ready to apply your skills to the tandem skydive, or perhaps you will decide you are ready for level 1.

[opens cans of worms] The incident reports show that swoopers or wanna be swoopers with various jump numbers are getting hurt more often than AFF students. You are right. But the problem is we don't have fancy simulators like the airlines. We can watch a student land their canopy in a big open field when everything goes right. What happens when everything goes wrong? You can quiz the hell out of them, but in the end, their first time to practice landing on a roof is the first time they have to do it. The first time a student has to flat turn away from a powerline, do they whip a toggle and dive into the ground, or land safely? Imagine if a 737 pilot's first time to land the plane with no engines was with paying customers on board a real plane... Commercial aviation would have a higher "incident rate" too. (I have no proof other than a good guess... But those of you who are commercial pilots, when you go to the simulators, how many times do you see not-so-perfect landings until practice makes perfect?)

How do you know? Yes Fort Carson is next door, but if you have "definite" in your post, do you have some proof? GQJumper used to be out of Carson and jumped military down there. I remember him saying that visitors came often. They did static line and HALO and HAHO jumps.

Well, some DZs, like Eloy, if you land out, you land in the desert. Some you land in the trees. Some DZ, like Canon City, if you land out, you land in a prison. Last time I drove thru the city, all the business establishments and home builders had signs in the windows, "Discounts for Department of Corrections Employees". Seriously, though.... The "outs" near the airport (Freemont County Airport) are like Eloy, big open fields. But if this unit was practicing and not landing near the airport, landing in a prison would not be difficult by accident. On the way up and jump run, you see all these buildings that look like high schools that are really just different jails. Some are underground and you don't see at all, except for the admin buildings. To give you an idea, 16% of the residents of the county are inmates - and the SuperMax prison is where all the "big boys" go to stay...