Speed2000

Henry, I have no experience with jumping in China, but just got back to the US after living in SE Asia for three years. Thai Sky Adventures is a "regular" DZ not too far (in global terms) from Shenzhen. It is about an hour south of Bangkok and the DZ can arrange fairly cheap transportation to/from airport, as well as reasonable lodging. They fly a Pilatus Porter, which is a good aircraft, and turn it pretty well. 4-5 jumps a day, once you have your license, is not unreasonable. They are ATC restricted for some of their jumps (I think it was to 9000ft IIRC but don't quote me), but the rest are to 13,000ft. Landing area is spacious and flat. The Philippines is a different story. Great for scuba, not so good for jumping (though the people are wonderful). The two small clubs in the country fly C-172s to 6000ft. They are quite expensive and you'd be quite lucky to get more than two jumps in a day (I never did). Most of the other DZs in the other countries in SE Asia (Indonesia and Malaysia) are reputedly similar. Don't rule out Australia for a winter trip either. Ngambie is great and I have heard very positive things about Tooloowah as well (the rest may also be fantastic but I don't know). Please let us know if you find a DZ in China.

Awesome! Only 20min from my house. Thank you very much!

Thanks for the updates! Where in Ashburn is the site? You can have a lot of fun skydiving without ever making a hook turn, swooping, or flying a tiny highly loaded canopy. - 377 No, no; without good grammar, skydiving is meaningless - Andy908

Personally I think AN-2s are fun - once in a while. Language is Russian, BTW. You can have a lot of fun skydiving without ever making a hook turn, swooping, or flying a tiny highly loaded canopy. - 377 No, no; without good grammar, skydiving is meaningless - Andy908

From Chantilly, Chambersburg should only be about 1.5 hours. It was under two for me from Manassas. You can have a lot of fun skydiving without ever making a hook turn, swooping, or flying a tiny highly loaded canopy. - 377 No, no; without good grammar, skydiving is meaningless - Andy908

She was on top, too. Very nice!

AC105-2C would disagree with your interpretation: E. The key to determine if an authorization is or is not necessary is the word "into." The following examples may clarify the intent of FAR Section 105.15 and help to determine when an authorization is necessary. 1. A jump will be at a town just east of a large lake. The jumper wishes to exit the aircraft over the lake and drift eastward to land in an open area. Authorization is not required. 2. At the same town, the jumper wishes to change the landing site to a school playground in the eastern part of town. The playground is several acres in size, completely fenced in, but surrounded by residential dwellings. Even though the landing target can be placed 500 to 600 feet from the fence, the jump is into a congested area. Authorization is required. 3. An exhibition jump is planned for a county fair. The fairgrounds are on the north edge of a town with clear, open land on three sides. The jumpers plan to exit their aircraft on one side of the fairground and land on the opposite side. This is a drift-over jump. Authorization is not required. 4. At the same fairgrounds, the target will be placed in the middle of a racetrack, enclosed by a wire mesh fence, and located near the center of the fairgrounds. The target is more than 500 feet from the fence. This would be a jump into an open air assembly of persons. Authorization is required. 5. Jumps made into large areas, even though near or within a populated area or near an open air assembly of persons, do not require written FAA authorization. This provision applies to open areas large enough to enable the parachutists to exit the aircraft over the area and remain within the area during descent and landing. Since at no time would a jumper be over a congested area, jumps of this nature would not impose a public hazard. However, parachutists should ensure that the landing area is completely clear of assembled persons other than the ground crew and other show performers. Oddly enough, the framers of the federal regs seem to have taken a common sense approach...

Gotta love Class E airspace.

Hmmm, from my reading of regs, the above listed information is only required if the parachute operations are to be conducted into Control Zones (105.19) or Positive control Areas/terminal Control Areas (105.21). The paragraph you omitted is: FAR Section 105.25 prescribes that applicants for an authorization under FAR Section 105.19 or FAR Section 105.21 and those submitting a notice under FAR Section 105.23 are to include the following information in that application or notice. For a friend's farm with a grass strip (presuming it doesn't have a tower ), it appears 105.23 would govern, to wit: No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted from that aircraft, over or onto any airport unless- ... (b) For airports without an operating control tower, prior approval has been obtained from the management of the airport to conduct parachute operations over or on that airport. Edited to add: AC105-2C expands on this with: 20. Jumps in or into other airspace FAR Section 105.23 prescribes the advance notification requirements for parachute jumps in controlled and uncontrolled airspace other than those previously covered in paragraphs 15 through 19. The ATC facility or FSS nearest to the proposed jump site should be notified at least 1 hour before the jump is to be made, but not more than 24 hours before the jump is to be completed.

What he said.

Who was the author of said reports? He/she had a wicked, if black, sense of humor.

LeMorte, First off, congratulations on deciding to learn to skydive! I've known quite a few long and short distance haulers over the years who also skydive, seemed to me that they really enjoyed the freedom the job gave them to travel to different DZs and events. Can you get your license through a bunch of different DZs, in different states, with different instructors? Sure. There is nothing in the FARs, BSRs or anywhere else that limits you to one DZ or one group of instructors. I split my training between two DZs. Hell, my best friend jumped in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Kansas, and South Carolina before finally doing his check-dive back in Pennsylvania. That said, bodypilot has a very good point. Traveling around to do your training may be fun and exciting, but it has its' own problems and risks. Here are some things to think about: First of all, just because the ISP supposedly standardizes the training program doesn't mean all instructors or DZs will teach the same way. So the first thing you'll have to prove to a new instructor at a new DZ is what you already know. Maybe that won't bother you, maybe it will. Secondly, different DZs have different gear, so you'll have to adjust to a new set of gear at each new place until you get your own rig (skydiving rig, that is). It may seem trivial now, but spring-loaded vs throw-out, ROL vs BOC, SOS vs. regular, can all make a big difference. Third, different DZs have different landing procedures, obstacles, and prevailing weather. There is a lot to be said for learning one area and sticking with it until you get licensed. Fourth, if you do decide to travel around during your training, make sure your logbook is as detailed as possible. It will be your first introduction to each new instructor. In short, you can do it whatever way you want. Traveling will expose you to a lot more different airframes, methods, gear, and landing areas, and if you can absorb things quickly and have a good head on your shoulders, you may be fine with that. It'll make you a better parachutist (which is a little different than a better skydiver). If you want to get in a groove, though, get to know your instructors and fellow jumpers better, and knock out your stduent jumps, go to one place and do it there. Then, once you have your license, let the world be your oyster. Many flight schools recommend student pilots do their flight training up through solo on one airframe, at one location, with one flight instructor so the student is focused on learing to fly rather than on new variables. It's something to think about. For jump numbers, plan on only doing one jump your first day. After that, it is hard to predict. Maybe one, maybe four, maybe zero each day. So much depends on variables like: level of business, weather, the airplane, and other things. Talk it over with the DZO and instructors there. Hope this helps. Blue skies, Johnny

Rebecca, The Faqtor is an all z-p, semi-elliptical, nine-cell canopy targeted for intermediate to advanced jumpers. The leading edge is square, but the trailing edge is tapered. It is built for fun-jumpers who want a solid, fun canopy, not for the professional swoop circuit. It has one quirk in that the slider is larger than many other mains, but the flight characteristics are very impressive. There are several reviews in the gear section of this website. The NRG is a brand new canopy being released on the market this year and might be another option for you. You should be able to contact Stefan or Eva at Paratec through your rigger, or directly, and get a demo of either canopy to try before leaping in headfirst. Hope this helps. Blue Skies, Johnny PS - A Speed 2000 reserve would be infinitely preferrable to the Tempo in your old rig. You can have a lot of fun skydiving without ever making a hook turn, swooping, or flying a tiny highly loaded canopy. - 377 No, no; without good grammar, skydiving is meaningless - Andy908

Normally no, however, the IRM recommends one notch of flaps for IAD CAT A and B jumps out of C-182s to ensure the pilot chute passes under the horizontal stabilizer.

Trivial Trekker, Glad to help. As far as losing sight of the plane, don't worry about it, it's normal. Remember, when you let go of the plane, at first, you are moving faster forward than down. As your acceleration downward builds and the energy from the `throw' of the plane bleeds off, your body position becomes less vertical and more horizontal. At this point, assuming a good arch, the plane will disappear from the upper edge of your field of view. This is normal.

Trivial Trekker, Congratulations on your first jumps. Welcome to the sky. The differences between IAD and Static Line are small compared to the differences with other methods, but they do exist, and they affect the DZO/Rigger/Packer, the Pilot, the Instructor, and the Student in different ways. Let's take a brief look at them in turn: DZO/Rigger/Packer On the packing floor, IAD has an advantage over SL in that it more closely follows the KISS principle. On an IAD dropzone, all student gear can be rigged to throw out and kept that way. On an SL dropzone, the student gear will either have to be parsed out: some for static line use and some for throw out (AFF, rental, students on self supervision), or be re-rigged on a regular basis. The DZO either has to purchase additonal gear or simply accept the fact that the day will come, probably sooner rather than later, when a load has to be delayed as a rig is converted from SL to throw out or vice versa. A small point, perhaps, but disconcerting to the nervous SL student watching his/her inctructor/rigger/packer hurredly re-configuring his/her gear five minutes before takeoff. Also, a jump airplane used for static line will need to be painted more often due to line rash (I said the differences were small, right?) The Pilot Trades one potential emergency for another. Jumper-in-Tow or pilot chute over the horizontal stabilizer. The risk of either is slight, but the pilot and instructor will need to have thought each contingency through beforehand and incorporate preventative measures (e.g. flaps) into their respective checklists. The Instructor Each method has its' own quirks, a lot of the time it boils down to personal preference. Personally, I prefer IAD, but then I do IAD more often. I know other instructors who prefer static line. Preferred seating arrangements, how far out on the strut the instructor likes to climb, and comfort level with the entanglement possibilities from each method are factors. The Student Leaving the aforementioned (in other posts) differences between direct-bag vs. pilot-chute assist aside, remember the biggest factor affecting deployment is you. A solid arch and eye contact with your instructor will go a long way toward better deployments regardless of method. One possible drawback, from the student's point of view, to pilot-chute assist SL method is transition training. Ask if you will need to transition from ripcord to throw-out at any point in your training. If so, be aware it may cost a small additional fee to transition and may lead to a disconcerting moment the first time you forget you're not on ripcord anymore. In summary, both IAD and SL are valid training methods. The differences are minor compared to the other differences between dropzones and instructors. A well-run, professional SL dropzone will be superior to a poorly-run IAD dropzone, and vice versa. I gather you have started training at one DZ, but are considering switching to a different one that uses static line. If you are comfortable with the competence and professionalism of your current instructors and the general atmosphere of your current DZ, stick with IAD. If your current DZ is reminiscent of "Fandango", then by all means explore other options. But don't switch DZs simply on the basis of chest-thumping `SL(IAD) rules IAD(SL) sucks' arguments. Hope this helps and good luck in your continued training. Blue Skies, Johnny

Phobos, I would have to check my logbook for an exact count, but I have done about sixty jumps at Chambersburg over the last couple years. Overall, the DZ is big enough to support a turbine, small enough to have a `club' feel. The owners, JR and Kathy Sides, are top notch. To a person, the staff are professional and good people. Greg, the master rigger and packing supervisor has packed well over 10,000 canopies and most of the other packers have their riggers tickets. The tandem gear is well maintained. I am not an A&P, but the planes (King Air and a pair of C-182s) seem to be in good shape. Matt, the primary pilot, is very skilled. The landing area is large, flat, and grassy. There are a LOT of good DZs in the middle eastern seaboard area, C-burg is one of them. Blue Skies, Johnny

Harry, Yup, could very well pan out that way. Also dead on (no pun intended). I still gotta go with Genn's answer, though. Top or bottom person, one canopy for both is better than no canopy for one. Johnny

Jan, A very sobering question. I admit it has been a couple years since my last CRW jump, but the rule "NEVER drop someone unless you are sure it is safe to do so" is etched in pretty deep. Depending on canopy wingloading, local conditions, specifics of the incident and myriad other variables, landing two people under one main may result in a double fatality and/or serious injury to one or both participants. However, it has been done. Dropping someone from that altitude is very likely to kill them. From a practical perspective, unless the top person has planned and drilled for a similar situation, the response is likely to be one of instinct and the event probably over before a choice can be made. Even if the jumper in question has drilled to respond in a given way, the opportunity present itself in any given specific case. From a speculative perspective, though, I think it boils down to a choice. A direct question (which certainly doesn't capture every eventuality but gets at the meat of it) would be, "Would you prefer a year in traction for yourself or to attend the funeral of a friend?" Johnny

JP, Please don't construe my post to mean I am suggesting that S&TAs are a single point solution, or should be made a single point solution, for giving gear advice. If there was a single group of skydivers both universally qualified and accessible to give gear advice to new jumpers, then this thread would not exist. I brought up the subject of S&TAs for two reasons: 1) They can be a resource for the new jumper (in addition to the triad of instructors, riggers, and gear dealers suggested above) because: a) overall, they meet two of the three criteria you suggest: experience and longevity in the sport. The third, open mindedness, is an extremely subjective requirement, which varies from individual to individual and is difficult to apply to a group. b) responsibility. Among their other myriad duties, one of the jobs of an S&TA is, "provides safety and training advice to skydivers, drop zone operators, and rating holders" (S&TA Handbook, pg 4). c) interest. Although only anecdotal evidence, no S&TA I have ever talked to wants to write another incident report. d) access. Every region, every state with a USPA member dropzone, and most foreign countries with a USPA dropzone, has at least one S&TA whose contact information is readily available on the USPA website under safety. Many DZs have more than one S&TA. 2) The S&TA can be a resource for the frustrated DZO, instructor, rigger, or gear dealer. Before you laugh, I have personally seen an S&TA take action regarding an individual giving egregious advice to student jumpers, and I am far from being a big fish in the sport. It does happen and, in this particular case, the problem was resolved (for obvious reasons, I won't go into specifics here). Whether or not informal resolution is the most effective method of enforcing a standard is something that could be dabated at length, but that is not the purpose of this thread. Once again, I am NOT saying every new jumper should ask only their S&TA for gear advice. I am, however, saying that gear selection is safety and training related and that S&TAs tend to be experienced, involved, and safety aware skydivers who can be a helpful resource to both the new jumper and the frustrated mentor. Blue Skies, Johnny As a general comment on this thread, I think there's enough to this subject for an article in Parachutist. I know it has been done before and that articles already exist on this website, but considering the average half-life of a jumper entering the sport is about three years and not every jumper reads the articles here, perhaps it's time for a reprise. edited for grammar

Funny how no one has mentioned the local S&TA.

Austin, Congrats on finishing AFF. Your instructors (knowing your size already and having seen you fly and land) are going to be able to give you better advice than you're likely to get here. JR and Kathy are good people and won't lead you astray. Try calling them, or stopping by, during the week or on a rainy/cold weekend when they will have some time to spend talking to you. Blue skies, Johnny

Best. Show. Ever.

Dale, I have a little bit of experience with the Speed2000, in the loft and in the harness. After all, my user name wasn't chosen by accident. First of all, cheers on nearly completing your student progression and congratulations on purchasing your first set of gear. We expect beer will be forthcoming.

News to me