bofh

We have dedicated swooping areas and it has worked out quite well this far. At our first DZ we separate it with the runway, at the other by the taxi area. It works a bit worse at the second DZ where people tend to fly into the edges of the swooping area in some winds. We also have more guest jumpers at that DZ that probably contributes a bit to it. We don't land downwind at that DZ to get more distance between us. I agree, its non-competitors that are busy looking at the altimeter more than anything else. At competition (and serious practice) it is also much easier since you know the landing order and have fewer canopies in the air.

I've organized a few six way scrambled speedstar competitions. One year I had a google docs spreadsheet setup where the competitors wrote their jump numbers when registering for the competition (via a webform - easy to setup with google docs). We had two numbers per competitor - number of jumps and number of FS jumps. Then I had a formula that made a third column based on those numbers and I sorted the document based on that column. We divided the document in sixths, printed it and cut out each name and put in different pots. We should have skipped that step and used dice instead (or taken the time to make a little script that would have done the draw). Another year we did it on paper. We just insertion sorted each entry, divided them in six piles and put each pile in its own pot. We used more paper, but it was easier since we didn't have to cut as much... It seemed to work out quite well and was rather easy.

It would be nice if there was a "Misc" category for various items like Paralog, Skydiving Logbook, FlySight, etc. Or perhaps have a misc software/hardware categories? There could also be manual links from the product's page to threads about them, like the huge FlySight thread and the spin-off threads for FlyBlind, mount etc.

I don't agree when there are dedicated swooping areas, but swoopers should look out for people that have flown in to that airspace by misstake and people don't do that when they are fixated at their digital altimeters.

If there are more canopies in the air, I'm a big fan of the audible altimeter. With it people have the time to look around for the other canopies instead of just looking at their digital altimeters. Me and most of my experienced friends have seen plenty of people not looking at anything but their altimeter during the downwind and base flight. That is of course ok in competitions, but not so good when the landing order isn't set in advance... I prefer listening to the beeps, making a control check with my digital altimeter and then having the seconds after the beeps as input to how much faster I should make my turn or abort if I miss the setup point.

My best swoops have been when I've been so deep into the corner that I could just recover with the rears. I don't like that at all since I am too inexperienced to know where the limit between deep and too-deep-for-rears are. If a magical device appeared that would know exactly where that limit was, I think plenty of people would use the device to reach that limit often and sometimes go past it, negating any safety it would bring. If the device was conservative, people would not always take its warning seriously when needed, just like people have gone for "just one more point" when the dytter has beeped.

Some people like to have the loop on the bottom flap with no loop going over the bag and bridle. If you later get a canopy that packs smaller, you may get too little pressure on the loop/pin. If I remember correctly you get both retainers if you order that, but if I'm wrong (check with the dealer), don't order it if you later plan to have a canopy that packs smaller in the container. After having my pilot chute pouch cut up on something in the plane on my previous container, I ordered the wings with the cordura pouch and freestyle pod. I really liked that combination. Even more now that I'm starting to roll on the ground more often... The low profile reserve handle is really tiny. I got it instead of the larger one by misstake, but I liked it and kept it. If you have thicker fingers together with gloves it can be hard to get a thumb inside the handle though.

Then you will miss a few Icarus canopies. NZ Aerosports does not seem to sell the Icarus Omni, Neos, Equinox and Reserve.

I've only done this twice ever, its often easier to either fix whatever problem there is or put it unpacked in the gear bag. For those two times I didn't close the side flaps and didn't remove the pull-up cord, letting it hang out. That makes it rather obvious that it shouldn't be jumped, yet everything is held in place for easy transportation. Would one still in some way miss it and jump with it, it might still open in some way...

Everything could be tweaked as much as the pilot/manufacturer want, just as long as it is documented so everyone can make the same tweaks. Of course the judges can make the decision that part of the system (like the RDS) does not matter and neither has to be available to the public or be documented.

It allows the design to be compared directly to all the other types of canopies that are used in competition, against the other top pilots, and on level playing field in terms of venue, conditions etc. This cannot be re-produced in any other way than in actual competition. I was in Dubai (even entered the competition, but not really competing with my hundred jumps on my Scirocco and never having dragged a foot in water nor navigated a speed course before the competition...). Due to the size of the competition the weather conditions were rather different between the first and last jump in each round, so again, I don't really see what valid test data was gathered if one wanted to compare designs. With weather being what it is, luck is a part of CP competitions. I would like to change my position a bit though. The zone acc and freestyle rounds do not really bring much test data to the table, so at most six jumps per competition and competitor are sampled, or in Dubai's case four jumps, diluted by different weather conditions. The manufacturers can develop new canopies just as well without that little test data. Yes, but what I wrote was that in most other fields manufacturers want to save up that buzz to near the product launch, not spread it out so thin that people have almost forgot about the product when it is finally released. The canopies could still be introduced at a competition, I'm just saying that it should be available to everyone if it is to be used in a competition, just like in most other sports. Some say get better and you can also get access to the experimental canopies, I find that a bit narrow minded. If the competitors were more even, most people would still not be added to the factory teams nor get to play with the experimental canopies. If the canopies bring a measurable improvement then the sport is more unfair than it needs to be. Of course it will always be unfair, but why allow for the most obvious kinds? Someone else said it is the combination of the pilot and the wing that are competing, but if so why are not the equipment presented in the competition results (or even collected by the organisation)?

There was a fatal accident in Sweden this year where the metal mount was found broken in half (Fritte's mount: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3858134) and the camera was never found. There has also been accidents where the gopro case or mount broke, I've not heard of any accidents where the tape broke before the plastic mounts.

I agree that it currently doesn't matter as far as results are concerned, but at the same time it is not fair. Even if it only makes a minimal difference, it should be available to all the competitors or none. In most other sports there are either design rules for the equipment or it must be available to all competitors. In paragliding there is a different class for experimental equipment and I think that should be adopted in the CP competitions as well. I call BS on the argument that the manufacturers need competitions to test their new designs. What input will those nine/twelve jumps per competitor and competition have on the development compared to all the other test jumps done? We are talking about a rather simple sport here. Its not like there are loads of different variables per competition that are unavailable at other times. Sure, one can get lucky like the Petra collapse, but the competition did not add anything to the testing that not a regular test jump could have. On the other hand, it is probably a way to keep the costs down somewhat. The sponsored jumpers can train while test jumping new canopies, making them more competitive for the same budget. The manufacturers do not have to introduce their canopies on a competition before it can be ordered either. I'm not much of a salesman, but in other fields you try to get as much buzz as possible just before you release the product for sale, not spread out for a long time before it is available. For NZ Aerosports it even backfired a lot with the Petra.

It was I, but I think I write larger dropzones. I really can't ask my friends to drive 2 hours to pick up stuff for me when they are on vacation.

Well, the proposed rule changes came after one was supposed to have paid already. The rules were also changed back to the IPC rules after comments from competitors. It was also not so much what the Prince wanted. The course is less than 272 meters long, which it should be according to the IPC rules. They will simply skip over that part of the rules and go with a shorter course since after all this is at sea level.

I bought my wings rig and two canopies there. They were very helpful and even corrected some misstake I had done on the order form. The price was also the best around. They also included a gearbag for free. The only drawback is that they were a bit off from the major dropzones that my friends were visiting so they had to send the stuff instead of having some friend pick it up right there.

Emails from the swedish judge. They are supposed to update their site soon too.

Now they are going back to the normal IPC rules.

The latest news seem to be that speed will use the normal IPC rules and for distance, the speed's VE rules apply for the first 50 meters and touching water is allowed, but not necessary.

During a rainy day I made a metric altimeter in SVG, so it could run in a lot of different browsers: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4048510/alt_m.svg It does not have a GUI to change the parameters, but they are in the beginning of the file if someone wants to make a custom version. Later I also made an imperial version: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4048510/alt_f.svg and a version that could be controlled via an admin interface on another computer, but after a web server upgrade that doesn't seem to work reliably anymore. It simply made an ajax call to the server looking for a control file and an admin page updated the control file (via a php script) with start/deploy/stop commands for the clients. I can send the code to that version if someone is interested (the current admin interface controls all clients so I don't want to share my installation).

The scirocco has normal slider rings, but two line loops comes out on the side. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150284974284012&set=a.10150284974049012.403718.532314011&type=3&theater https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150284974164012&set=a.10150284974049012.403718.532314011&type=3&theater I've not noticed any wear on the lines yet, but I've only done 100 jumps on it (including some sand landings and one landing in salty water).

Wings usually have one pricey option for free each month though, this month its the cut in laterals, increasing the price difference to $442. Sometimes its half the base price. Personally I also prefer to avoid stainless steel, further increasing the price difference for me at least. I also don't care for cut in laterals, so I would wait a month and see what's free the next month. I guess my point is that "equal" is not that interesting. What's interesting is what would it cost given the options one wants.

Isn't will a bit of a strong word? As others have said the skyhook doesn't always work and a standard RSL is pretty quick to get a reserve out too. During my second reserve ride the reserve's slider was coming down as I pulled the reserve handle and that was with a normal RSL. There are pros and cons to every system. If you can't pull your reserve and the AAD fires, the pilot chute has a whole lot more fabric to move out of the way on a Vector compared to a Wings which eats time and altitude. I think more people have hit the ground after an AAD fire than have been saved by a skyhook. Correct reserve sizes helps a lot for that though. To the original poster. If you have not had a malfunction yet, buy an RSL system of some kind. Way too many people have bounced after pulling the cut away and not finding or pulling the reserve handle.

Bill Burke had some numbers in his report about safety at Skydive Arizona. If I remember correctly it costs around 700.000USD per AAD saved life. Pretty cheap compared to many other safety items/policies.

I can't remember I've ever closed it violently and I find it a bit unlikely that I would have done that. But the drilled holes were a bit rough so I would be surprised if it didn't start to crack from the holes when it got tension from lifting the visor out to open it up. I agree it doesn't fog up in the plane and I often close it quite early if it is cold. It often fogs up under canopy for me though, but then it is easy to open up the visor. There were no extra paddings nor instructions provided with the helmet to me and I got it new in the box.