murps2000

I'm not sure you're reading my posts correctly. I don't think spandex is immune to anything except perhaps coming back in style. As for what it takes to make it happen, well, I'll give it a shot. I think that if a pilot chute is packed in such a manner that when the handle is pulled, it pulls first on the center of the pilot chute pack job while the material in contact with the inside surface of the pouch (particuarly closer to the mouth) remains stationary, the potential exists for the pilot chute to ball up and cause a hard pull. I doubt I could clearly explain in words the ways I think someone could pack the pilot chute so it would behave this way, but I believe it can be done. And as I have said, I believe spandex might make it worse.

Do you mean a Talon container? With a cordura pouch ROL? Interesting. The one time I jumped an ROL rig it was a javelin with a spandex pouch, so I've got nothing to compare to your experience. Maybe on the leg spandex is better, and I didn't think of that since I haven't even seen an ROL in use in quite a while. You mention the pack method causing the pilot chute to bunch up. I have heard of this and suspect that to be at least contributary in the two hard-pull situations I know of. I have heard of people even s-folding their pilot chutes to avoid this. But this is what I have a hard time envisioning happening on my rig. My pouch, unlike spandex, does not grip the pilot chute over its full length. It is kept snug by pressure from the main pack tray, but really only the elastic at the mouth holds it in place. It is secure, but always easy to deploy. I think, but can't prove, that because spandex grips the pilot chute so completely, it is more likely to cause it to ball up, or at least exacerbate packing errors that cause it to do so. To me, a spandex pouch seems like it can occasionally turn into a really mushy chinese pilot chute trap.

I'm curious what kind of rig it was and how it was packed. I have a hard time seeing how that could happen with the cordura pouch on my rig unless someone made a serious error packing the pilot chute. I guess as is often the case, our opinions are based on situational experience. Off-hand, in ten years of jumping pretty actively, I can recall one non-deployable hard pull with a spandex pilot chute pouch that I've witnessed, and one that I know of but didn't see. They were both on fairly new gear. But in both cases jumpers played tug of war in the landing area until the pilot chute came out instead of taking the gear to a rigger to try and actually see what was wrong. I'm not sure what, if any packing errors occurred. I don't know if I can conclusively blame the spandex pouch, but I know after my 1000+ jumps with my cordura pouch, I don't want one. Still, spandex is popular. I could be wrong. You're absolutely correct about inspecting and maintaining your pouch, regardless of material. That is key, and really the point of this thread.

I've always wondered why spandex was so popular as a boc pouch. My old reflex with well over 1000 jumps on it has a cordura pouch with an elastic mouth that still secures the pilot chute about as well as when it was new. I wonder if it will ever wear out. An added bonus I've noticed is that if the main pin is ever pulled out of sequence, the pouch goes slack as soon as the pack tray is empty and the pilot chute pulls out quite easily with the bridle. I don't think new spandex releases it's grip in that situation.

Was the pouch spandex, or cordura with an elastic mouth?

http://forum.419eater.com/forum/ *** Boy you are not kidding. They are good. Thanks for posting that.

[BASE jumpers apparently practice landing with one toggle and one riser....I wouldn't try it.]. Why not? Give it a whirl. One day you might need it in a pinch. Find out how your canopy flys in all modes. Who ever said landing this way was easy, was right. Making it it look good and not getting hurt is a different story. *** All salient points. As I said, I have tried it up high, and I believe it would work for me. As I also said, it was only for this one canopy that I used to jump. It felt like it wouldn't flare for shit on rears alone. As I furthur said, I'm not gonna tell anyone else to do it on this forum. (see Lepka's above post to understand why) I will admit that you bring up a good point in your first reply to me, and it's one that shows I didn't think through every aspect of the scenarios in which I might consider this technique. I practiced it up high as possible response to dropping a toggle while swooping, and although I made up my mind that I would do the same thing if a steering line broke, you are correct in pointing out that the canopy may behave differently. But if a steering line breaks while swooping, I'm not sure there's a better response (at least for me). Maybe drop the other toggle and go to rears? No thanks. I doubt the time factor is there. Still, it makes me want to go screw around with it some more just to see how much my steering lines "assist" my rear risers.

BASE jumpers apparently practice landing with one toggle and one riser....I wouldn't try it..*** I've jumped at least one canopy that I would rather land this way than on both rears, unless maybe it was really windy. I've practiced it a few times up high, and I'm sure I can make it work. It feels strange with your hands at way different heights trying to keep the canopy level while flaring. You definitely have to cognitively overrule your muscle memory. With that said, my DZ.com advice to anyone else would be the same as that for a canopy transfer. It might be what I would do in certain situations, but don't you ever try it. It's really better to maintain your gear and pack carefully, anyway.

Aerodyne used to make the AR-11, as in 11 cells. I don't think it was a sales success but it might fit your needs if you can find one. Better ask someone who actually flew one, tho.

I agree, I was not smug, just oblivious when I first started skydiving. I read the Indentent Reports and thought: "sucks for him he f**d up. Wont happen to me" But after a few years and more tha a few close calls I took the reports to heart. If I understood then what I know now....I would have grounded myself *** My, how time can change a man. Would you still have told me ten years ago that my spectre 190 was a dangerously underloaded canopy? Hadda ask.

Thanks for posting that account of what happened. It's good to hear that the Herd guys got their due. I had a lot of fun at the last of the herd boogies, although, as I understand it, in the late 90's it was the "kinder, gentler Herd." If that was kinder and gentler, I can't even imagine what the old days were like. I definitely never met a skygod there, tho. Those ditch guys would jump with anyone.

On the second jump it looks like he went for the drogue twice, but didn't get a solid purchase on the handle the first time. Might have been lucky he didn't , with the 360's on the hill and all. Luck is a shallow reservoir when your a TI. Keep shooting for the guy and you might get some nice side spin footage for us. Tandemonium at it's best.

...and progress in leaps and bounces.*** Progression in leaps is great, but not progression in bounces. just sayin Anyway, don't stop. Keep it coming.

"Today, each jumper has a personal GPS. It has an automatic homing and course correction mechanism that steers the parachute to the landing area in a safe way. The anti-collision controls are directed by a master computer that tracks each jumper's position in the pattern. Every jumper wears a personal transponder with a unique code. The ground proximity device automatically corrects the canopy orientation to an injury free landing. These devices are not mandated. Jumpers want them. Some jumpers will not do a jump without them."*** Hope you don't mind that I copied this part, but it seems highly plausible to me. I also expect that at some point "failure to use a gps controlled canopy" will be listed as a reason for a canopy collision. Oh, and I'd bet that some DZO's will mandate their use.

I have a responce for one, anyway. If there's such a thing as a perfectly good airplane, why were parachutes invented?

Thanks everyone... Great advice... I was conflicted about payin money for tunnel training but I think thats one thing Im gonna have to shell out money for... and from now on I will be annoying the hell out of the experienced people to let me jump with them *** Tunnel time is worth the price, but beer's cheaper. Buy them beer; they will teach you, and you get to be in the sky while you learn.

At your loading that canopy is within its design range to allow you to perform consistant landings. People tell you to get a new canopy but I don't think that's your problem. There's lots of other good advice in this thread, though. Any canopy class will likely help, and video debrief of your landings is always informative. You might also try pulling a little higher than usual sometime so you can do some practice flares before landing. It helps. Although you don't have the ground as a reference when you do them up high, you can feel lift in your harness when you do practice flares properly and smoothly. Also, just watch good canopy pilots land whenever your at the dz but not on a load. Watch their techniques.

There's testosterone dripping out of your ears. Please swallow, it might help. Personally, I wouldn't even want to land a slow canopy like a Manta 280 downwind at 15 kts. 15 kts is about 28 kph or 17 mph - without even taking the canopy's own airspeed into account, which in this example should approximate something like an additional 5-7 m/s (or 10-13 kts or 18-25 kph or 11-16 mph). I don't swoop, can't run that fast and as for PLF - would you jump out of a car doing 50 kph (30 mph)? *** No I wouldn't jump out of a car at 30 mph, but I wouldn't PLF a downwinder. It was no 15kt wind, but because of a traffic avoidance move I once ended up doing a braked approach at 2.0 WL when I followed a FMD downwind at a boogie. I was running like Forrest Gump before my feet touched the ground, but don't take it as advice. I felt fit enough do it at the time, the terrain permitted it, and I believe after unloading a bit my canopy continued to support some of my weight until I slowed down. I'm not sure I could handle it now at my level of currency. That's why I'll use a bigger canopy the next time I skydive and go to a DZ at low elevation. You never know, I might have to land downwind.

See, now everybody is jumping to conclusions. That guy is a hero. He's obviously tying to tell some unseen jumper above to get out of the "cone of death" in the interest of keeping the tandem pair safe. He should get some sort of award.

If the first man down can't figure out which way to land with a 15 knot wind, I'm going to land into the wind and then tell him he's a f*cking idiot. Hell, you don't even need a wind indicator to figure the wind direction at 15 knots. *** Maybe he figured correctly but just differently than you or I might. If I'm under canopy at DZ where FMD is the rule, the first man lands downwind, and I don't want to, I'll land into the wind, too. But I'll land out and take my sweet time walking my tiny balls back to the packing area while I rethink my main canopy choice.

I'm sure a lot of my ranting is born out of my inexperience, I need to remind myself (less so recently) that any time it seems black and white or, at least relatively straight forward, that's more than likely because I don't see the big picture. In this case I feel *very* strongly about this and it *seems* crystal clear, that's a couple of red flags right there. Unfortunately, I've yet to hear a convincing argument for FPD over pre-determined landing direction. I'm hoping someone can convince me because with all these experienced people saying it's the best way but not really giving good reasoning (again, maybe too inexperienced see the reasons are good) I'm left wondering what I'm missing and therefore how safe I am with the possibly mistaken perception that FPD seems like a clusterfuck waiting to happen. *** Like most things in life, there is no black and white and nothing is crystal clear. There are often only smokey shades of grey. I'll admit that I like FMD for reasons that may not be the best, but what needs to be reiterated is that this rule is definitely not the way to go for all dropzones. Last time I was at Skydive Orange (a while ago) it didn't seem like a good strategy for them. They have a nice highly visible tetrahedron, however, and had rules that made use of it. From more recent aerial photos I've seen, it appears that the number of obstacles surrounding the main landing area has not decreased as the years have gone by, so aborting an approach at 500' to land out would likely be more hazardous than at some other dropzones. Last time I was at Perris (a little less time ago) they had what was essentially a linear main landing area. It was basically a parachutist runway next to the real one, in which jumpers would land in one of two directions. The winds do shift direction quickly there, so a predetermined direction decided upon boarding may or may not result in everyone landing in the "safest" direction. I can also see how a tetrahedron indicating a crosswind could create more confusion than just letting FMD select landing direction. It's defensible confusion, too, because everyone can claim they were following the tetrahedron. Perris also had plenty of room for dissenting jumpers to land out and a seperate landing area for students. There's no golden rule that works at all dropzones, and additionally, whatever strategy is employed to govern landing direction in the main landing area should not apply to students and tandems if at all possible.

If the low man decides to make a downwinder 'just for the hell of it' or because they are an idiot, hell yeah I'll be complaining. Just because of their incompetence or for their thrill I now have to expose myself to a potentially dangerous downwind landing in high winds, OR to the dangers of landing off in an unknown area. If the low man is so hell-bent on going downwind, why not make them land off? *** Looks great in writing, but it's not always how it plays out. How are you going to get the low man, who may not be determined until the last 30 seconds of the skydive, to land out? It also looks great in writing when people state that one should select a canopy under which they can safely land out or in any direction. Many people have expressed that view on these boards. But again it's not always how it is. Many jumpers are under canopies that for them are dangerous in such scenarios. I don't feel the rules should encourage this. Sooner or later every jumper has to contend with landing off or downwind and it should not be significant danger to a licensed skydiver. If you have to land in the landing area into the wind to land safely, you need a bigger canopy.

I'm with you...blindly following the low man is plain stupid. I may do it, even have the skills to, but that doesn't mean I like it or agree with it. *** Land out if you disagree, but don't blindly follow the low man. As others have stated, it works best this way. Especially if the winds are 15 knots or so. Any jumper under a 2.0 WL canopy for whom it is dangerous or possibly fatal to land downwind can then save themselves from their poor decision in electing to jump such a small parachute that they may have to land downwind one day. I actually always liked this rule for one reason. Usually after a load has to land downwind you can tell by the stains on jumpsuits who is under the proper canopy for their skill level and who isn't. You can often tell by who is complaining or not in the packing area, as well . I will admit, however, that a low man rule may not be the best for all drop zones. You obviously need enough room for dissenters to land out.

I never met you or jumped with you but I wish I had. Sounds like your experience was a similar fun ride to mine. You used to say it best years ago: "You cant expect to improve your jive by disjiving other jivers. All that does is interrupt the flow of the universal jive, to which we all serve, by our own individual jive patterns, unique to our area's funkadelic aqua-groove. Sucka! After reading that, I always wondered what a great world it would be if the dijivers could only understand. Hope you get back in the sky again. She'll wait for you.

anyone out there had a similar break? doc's said i had a spiral fracture to the right fibula and they used a titanium plate and screws to put it back together... i went in a few weeks ago to get the staples out, they put a fresh cast on and said it should stay on four weeks. what's next? can i start walking on it after they take the cast off? and more important: how soon can I jump? *** When I had a similar break after ground launching three years ago, my orthopedic surgeon basically said that when I can hop up and down on my injured leg I should be good to go. I waited until I could do that before I jumped again and I think it was a good decision. At around 30 jumps that will be more difficult for you, but it's worth it. I know it's tough to wait around to get back to the sky but the sky will wait for you. I think I was lucky to find a doctor who was damn good at what he does, but I did my part in heeding his advice and it paid off. Although I felt like I could, I was warned not to attempt to walk until I got one screw that held my tib and fib together removed and so I didn't. I waited eleven weeks from the day I was injured. The day after I got it taken out I walked on it into work at my job as an ironworker. It hurt like hell after a few hours and swelled a lot but it still felt good to be rid of those crutches. It's a physical job, so I didn't bother with therapy and I really didn't need to. Three weeks later I could run up a flight of stairs. YMMV I think is how they put it. One suggestion I have for you is to eat right while your healing. For me that meant yogurt in a blender with any fruit I had once a day and lots of greens with dinner. My doctor didn't think this was as important as I did but I need my legs for work and I figured it couldn't hurt. Although I broke my fib pretty badly at 35 years old, tore ligaments in my ankle, and I still retain hardware, I can run about as fast as I could at 34 and my injury doesn't bother me a bit. At least for now anyway. And I realise that if I had broken my tib it might be a different story..