murps2000

LMAO Dude, that is a really cool story. Is that how you got promoted to Captain?

First, a ground speed of 160mph would mean that the CASA would have to be flying a downwind jump run with uppers doing about 30 mph. This would be the BEST case. Most times, the jump run is flown into the uppers which would slow the ground speed to far less than 160mph. This means that 700 ft. separation was the best that could be hoped for under ideal conditions, which did not exist at the time. Actual separation was much less. Second, 700 ft. separation is enough, unless someone starts tracking up or down the flight line. As I stated in my first post, I do not trust everyone on a CASA load to do that. I'm sorry, but I am firmly convinced that there are quite a few unconcerned or oblivious jumpers out there, and in fact, as was demonstrated by one very close call that a friend of mine had down there, there were some on these CASA loads. Also, there were more than two ways on these loads. There were RW loads as big as 12-ways that I know of, and yet still three seconds was mandated as the amount of separation to be given. Now, how are you going to do a 12-way without at least one person ending up tracking up the line of flight? And what happened in reality was that some groups gave more time, and some gave less. It is simply indicative to me of how many people just walk to the tailgate and hop out, without any thought or regard for the situation that could be developing as a result of conducting skydiving operations this way. And as the thread originator appropriately pointed out, big-sky theory is what saves us most of the time. There is little I can do about this except leave and go somewhere that seems safer, so that is what I did, because it seems an impossible task to make the average jumper aware. No one ever seems to do anything until someone gets hurt or killed.

Man, I'm glad somebody's bringing this up. I hope many jumpers take a look, because I think a lot of people in the sport are either unaware or unconcerned with how important exit spacing is. This was an issue for my girlfriend and me when we were at Lake Wales just before the new year, and it's one of the reasons we left the DZ to go to Z Hills. After several CASA loads of 30 or more, on which the S&TA was insistant on a 3 second delay between groups, even to the point of yelling at the last few groups to get out (because he was doing tandems on the load), we were growing increasingly concerned. Even with a ground speed of 160 mph, by my calculations, this would mean, at most, about 700 ft. between groups, and this was simply unacceptable to us. There were often 5 two ways on each load, mostly jumpers who were unknown to us, and I just do not trust everyone to be situationally aware enough not to track up or down the flight line. Then, a few that were in our our group of visiting jumpers experienced some close calls, and we decided to say something. My girlfriend spoke to the DZ manager, and admittedly she was not excercising what I would call, IMO, the epitome of tact, but she was rightfully upset at the seeming lack of concern by the S&TA for jumpers' safety. It became quite apparent that this was getting us nowhere, so we decided to leave. I lament that we felt compelled to leave, because Lake Wales is a great DZ, with some fun people. But greater spacing, and a second pass, was really necessary, and it just wasn't going to happen. I'm thankful that no freefall collisions occurred while this was going on but I consider this whole affair to be very dissappointing. The institutional knowledge is quite available as to what could happen when circumstances such as these exist, with large numbers of skydivers jumping from multiple turbine aircraft. As a mentor of mine often has stated to me when alluding to an incident that he witnessed years ago at another DZ that operates CASA's, "It's all fun and games, till somebody loses a foot."

I'm not sure who it was. Possibly my friend Lance (username skydive2), because he had a camera, and I know he got a shot of one of my half decent runs on the pond, but it doesn't really look like him. Maybe just another swoop groupie. Yeah, a swoopie... Hey, good luck on your pond tour.

I was the one who came up & showed you the pic, and I'm sending you the shot as I post. But as you'll see, I'm not the guy in your photo. I was standing at the opposite corner of the pond. That's some other mystery photographer. Don't worry about sounding like an asshole, it was all good. If I'd layed some shit like that down on the pond, I'd be pausing to reflect, myself. Very nicely done.

Dr. Seuss rocks. When I have baby-sat my younger cousins/nephews etc., I always make a point of reading their Dr. Seuss books. *** Yeah he does, and my sister's an expert on tweetle beetles, now that she's got three kids. Nice, pic, Fredneck!!

A good year for me: 25-30 per month This year: maybe 15-20 per jumpable month It does, too!! Not like I wouldn't have made 20 jumps on July 4th weekend this year, if I could have, but I'm a just a filthy working joe, and the tandems just weren't there to pay me. Still, even if I'm not jumping, I'll remain at the DZ in order to drink beer and find fault with all the others who are still jumping. That should count for something, because beer, boobies, and fire are all part of skydiving.

Merry Christmas to you, also, and thanks so much for your sacrifice. If you're ever on the eastern shore of Delaware, or at Orange, VA, or maybe down at Carolina Sky Sports, or wherever you happen to catch me I'll cough up a jump ticket, too, as well as a drink of whatever I have. That goes for any of your other jumpin soldier friends. BTW, be careful when Santa comes over, I'm not sure he's equipped with an IFF transponder.

Did you finish AFF 6 years ago? Did you get your A license? If not, I would recommend finishing those two tasks before purchasing gear. When you're finished with that, and ready to buy, your instructors should be a good place to start when seeking advice as to what kind/size to get. They will be able to assess your ability with regard to canopy handling, and recommend a safe canopy of a proper size, as well as bring you up to date on the what modern gear is available.

*** >Wouldn't the increase in airspeed generate a corresponding increase > in drag . . . Yes. More speed=more drag (and more lift as well, needed to carry the additional weight.) >which would affect the glide ratio? No, since both lift _and_ drag increase. The glide ratio is often expressed as lift/drag; if you increase both at the same time, the speed may change but the angle does not. *** Okay, lift and drag increase exponentially with speed increases, and so the glide ratio is maintained. This makes perfect sense to me in the theoretical world and it corresponds to what little I've read on the subject. What I find escapes me, is that in the real world any gliding aircraft is powered by gravity, and therefore must fly at a certain nose down attitude to maintain enough speed to fly. Now, with any speed increase, parasitic drag increases, as well. In order to overcome this, and maintain the speed needed to continue to fly, particularly at heavier wing loadings, doesn't the aircraft then need to fly at a more nose down attitude? And if so, wouldn't that affect the overall glide ratio? You've already said that the angle would not have to increase, but you mentioned nothing about parasitic drag. I think what I'm alluding to here, at least as it pertains to the wings that we fly, is what very experienced canopy pilots refer to as the point of diminishing returns when flying canopies way above their normal recommended wing loadings. The wing remains the same, and so the glide ratio must remain the same, as well. But at some point, in the real world, the canopy's glide performance suffers, doesn't it? What gives? BTW, I'd be happy to start a thread about this in Swooping & Canopy Control, if it is more appropriate than here in Incidents.

Why would you do something like that? Would that make me safer?

Ahhh, but aren't we all... Your post was actually quite informative and stimulating.

***Why else is 420 important? There are a variety of explanations besides the most common and the most elaborate, all much more interesting than "police code", and many plausible. Known Myths: It isn't police code. It isn't the number of chemicals in marijuana (315, not 420). And it isn't tea time in Amsterdam (that's 5:30). (Gerhard den Hollander). Length of buzz: In a study reportedly conducted on the effects of cannabis, one of the conclusions was that the effects last for 4 hours and 20 seco...blah blah blah, girl, are you high?

You are all mistaken. Any pothead worth his binger would know that it came from the Grateful Dead shows, which typically started at 4:30. One had to properly prepare in the parking lot in order to get maximum enjoyment from the show, so 4:20 became the common time to commence with consumption.... Or so I've heard....

Yes, it is a situational position, from situational experience. As is yours. And I could recount a few more experiences, as well. What stands out most in my mind, however, is the fact that I've felt the sting of the pride stab, myself, when a less experienced jumper has taught me a trick or two in the packing area, and in the air. But I recognized the logic in accepting what they taught me regardless of how I felt about it. So I guess you're last statement pretty well sums it up. Some people can't deal, and I hope I always can. The day I can't is the day I stop learning.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0135482712/102-1699602-7434518?v=glance Try this link if you want to find an interesting book that deals with the subject. The story is called "The Man who Rode Thunder" by Lt.Col. William Rankin. He punched out of an F-8 at about 47,000 ft. somewhere around Norfolk, Va. Can't remember the year, but it was a while ago, and to date it is the highest known bailout from an aircraft in flight. He did it without a pressure suit, and had a very lengthy freefall through an exceptionally violent thunderstorm. His parachute was equipped with an AAD which deployed it at about 10,000 ft. The ride continued for quite sometiome after that. He experienced lightning up close and personally along the way, although I don't believe he was ever struck. He does claim, however, that whatever lightning may look like from the ground, it comes in huge sheets when you're close by. Very interesting reading.

In martial arts the one who's going to hurt you if you don't listen is usually the instructor. Hopefully that's not how your skydiving instructors work.

There may be some validity to what you say, but I can't agree with you completely because in the situations to which I refer, it did not reach a point where any information was even attempted to be gleaned. Some of the very experienced jumpers I knew had decades of RW experience, and were interested in this new fad of freeflying, even to the point of purchasing new freefly suits before they had really done any freefly jumps. But they simply wouldn't accept any offers for pointers from us 500 jump wonders, even though they were just starting out, and were at a level where basic instruction from anyone would have helped. They instead had to get coaching from the Flyboyz, and Adrien Nicholas, and paid $75 a jump to have those guys chase them around the sky. We jump wonders chuckled when we saw the videos, and just shook our heads. It was sad, because they had coached us on our bellies years earlier, and we would have been happy to return the favor, and chase them around for free. And what's worse, they finally just gave up and sold their nice new suits. So I stand by my statement. It's hard to learn from someone with less experience, and I hope I never become like that. In fact, I want to learn some CRW, and I hope one of my tandem students that I send off to AFF will come back one day and maybe teach it to me.

Yes! Definitely! I realised a while ago that the hardest thing to learn in skydiving is anything you have to learn from someone with less experience than you. I've seen 4000, 5000, 6000, & 7000+ jump wonders, who cannot learn to freefly unless they learn it from someone who has more jumps than them. It's kind of sad, really. Not to many coaches out there with that much experience, but plenty with less, and a lot to teach. I hope I never become like that.

As a TI, I can say that I, for one, appreciate the attitude you have about this. Personally, I have had two of the people who have asked me if they could lurk get quite offended when I declined. One had almost 300 jumps. But after having some of the people that I allowed to come deviate from the plan, even after they were briefed, my attitude changed. I've had people with as many as 1500 jumps, and lots of tandem video experience come up and grab my wrist on a tandem. They thought it was no big deal. But they never strapped on a tandem rig and a passenger, and have no idea how scary it is to have anyone grab your arms in freefall with a tandem. Now, if I have any doubts about your judgement or flying ability, I will not feel one bit uncomfortable saying no. I would hope other tandem instructors would feel the same. As has already been stated in this thread, you will have a great time just riding to altitude with your friend, and you will both enjoy making eye contact right as you back-flip out ahead of them. There is one thing I'd like to add, however, and this applies to anyone talking to tandems on the ride to altitude. A tandem instructor often has about 15 minutes to talk with a student before taking them to the plane to go up and do what is, for most, a scary thing. There isn't a whole lot that the student is required to learn, but what they learn they must remember to do, or they can make life miserable for the instructor. Things like "keep your arms crossed" "arch on exit" "keep your legs back between mine" are simple tasks, but on the way to altitude, they often need to be reinforced to the student, who can be quite nervous. You may think, by suggesting to the student to "remember to look all around" or "make sure to check out the airplane as you leave", that you are giving them pointers that will make their skydive more enjoyable. Often times, tho, you being discourteous to the instructor, who is really the one who should be telling the student what they should remember to do. More than once, in the middle of talking a student through the dive plan, I've had fun-jumpers break in with some well-intended comment, only to have to start over from the beginning, so that the student can remember the dive flow. So, just as a suggestion for when you take your friend to experience something that they will enjoy and remember forever, be thoughtful of the instructor whose job it is to insure that it will be done safely. I'm not saying that you shouldn't talk to the student at all, but just that you should be mindful of what you say, and when you say it. I hope you and your friend have a great time. Blue ones...

I never doubted that for a second.

It's 90 series. Can't remember if it's A-90 or B-90. Pretty sure it's not C-90, as those have a slightly larger wingspan. Definitely not a 200, although I believe the engines are the same as those on a 200, PT-6-34's. Slick 4-blade props, too. Correct me if I'm wrong, any pilots out there. I wish there were still a king air 200 flying jumpers, tho.

You forgot floating. I think one of the coolest things we get to do is stand around for a few seconds on the outside of a half million dollar turbine aircraft in flight. The air's all nice and shiny up there, too (no, I don't take drugs). If you're lucky and you get a young, irresponsible pilot, flying a rental plane, you may even get a couple minutes to walk around. Just make sure to check the spot when you finally fall off.

HIM! FUCK HIM!!! Uh... beer?

You said king air, but you didn't say which king air. Mullens' RULES! Plus I can't wait to check out the one at Titusville in a few weeks. You can't jump Norcutt's king air 200, anymore, but that get's my vote. 20 jumpers to altitude in 10 minutes, 12 floaters at a time, and it was just so pretty to look at.