SethInMI

Here is my crappy camera phone pic. Micron V310 with a 150 main, 23" risers with louie loops. I too put the fronts closer to the backpad than the rears. I can't see the risers looking at the packed container. I don't have alot of experience with different dive loops, but I like the louies. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

clicky http://www.uspanationals.com/WorldRecord2009-SpacelandForce-1.wmv It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Ah, it's one of those "it works great for the developer but no one else" bugs. Those are fun. Let's see if I can figure it out. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Looks like you are running XP. Did you install the 3.5 runtime I linked to? The error message says you are running 2.0. Seth It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

I have created a new 3D simulator/spot/pattern/seperation calculator. An expanded version of the original by John Kallend and Dave Blumenthal. The program does several things: 1. Plots freefall and canopy trajectories for a configurable number of groups in 3D. 2. Reads the Wind Aloft information from aviationweather.gov to enable modeling current wind conditions 3. Calculates proper exit delays for group separation based on fall rate, breakoff, wind conditions, plane speed, desired distance between groups at opening etc. 4. Calculates the spot based on number of groups, canopy descent rates, wind conditions, plane speed etc. 5. Plots a landing pattern based on wind speeds, directions, and canopy speeds. The program is an xbap, microsoft's version of a java applet that runs inside a browser. It runs only on windows, and requires Firefox or Internet Explorer. It also requires the microsoft .NET runtime version 3.0. This version is included with Vista, but must be downloaded and installed. If you want to use firefox, you need a plugin and an extension. Installing .NET framework 3.5SP1 (link below) gets you both. There is a help tab that gives some primitive instructions, but here is the quick start guide: Run the application by clicking on the link below, then: 1. Click the "Run" button. A single group of jumpers gets dropped over Perris Or 1. Click the setup tab, choose a DZ OR choose "My Dropzone" then enter the Lat,Lon coords and elevation for any other DZ in the boxes then click Save to save the location. 2. click the Get Winds button, and choose a wind station. The current forecasted winds will now be used by the simulation for the Lat,Lon coords you selected, then adjust as desired. 3. Add and configure groups as desired (freefliers,flatfliers,exit delays,etc) 4. Optionally click the calculate exit delays button to set proper exit delays for the groups based on desired spacing. 4. Back to the overview tab and click "Run" So if you have Vista, here is a link to the application: http://skydiveallegan.com/freefallxbap/FreeFallXBAP.xbap If you have XP, here is a link to the 3.5SP1 framework: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=AB99342F-5D1A-413D-8319-81DA479AB0D7&displaylang=en It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Since you jump at 47 degrees latitude, I would subtract 2 degrees for everything. Since you are half way between the pole and the equator, the Coriolis force cancels out the winds aloft and you can take any delay you want. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

No, Bill's formula shows that if there is no difference between opening and exit winds, then the winds cancel each other out, and seperation time is independent of wind speed. Bill's formula: (Ground speed of the airplane + windspeed at opening altitude) * seconds between groups = distance. Groudspeed of airplane is airspeed of airplane - wind at exit altitude (flying into the wind), so we can make Bill's formula: (airspeed of airplane - windspeed at exit altitude + windspeed at opening altitude) * seconds between groups = distance. So if exit and opening windspeeds are the same, they cancel out and then Bills formula becomes: airspeed of the airplane * seconds between groups = distance. So if the winds are the same they don't matter at all. What most people forget is that after they open, the canopy is carried out of the way by the wind at opening altitude, so the stronger the wind is, the less separation time is required. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

resplendent. Esp with regards to women. A resplendent woman is an amazing sight. and from Dutch: gezellig. It is fun to ask a speaker of Dutch to translate that word; most start out with, "it's a good word". I usually start singing the theme song from "Cheers" in my head as my non-dutch speaking definition. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

You are correct Scott, I don't think a cell/smartphone platform is going to be the answer. And yes, the WA info is not probably good enough to do much with, but a "true estimated" glide is not really required for the two purposes I proposed. I am not envisioning a "moving map" style display while under canopy. Just a few lines of text on a display. Line 1 says: "glide 2.0 " Line 2 says: "dz arrival 1200 ft" or "dz arrival -400 ft" if line 2 is under 500 ft, perhaps you should change your canopy inputs or find a new landing area. As far as Sparky's comment about being distracted under canopy, I would expect this sort of device would be used like a canopy pilot uses an altimeter now, quick periodic checks only. And really it would only be used when trying to answer the questions "Can I make it back" or "what do I have to do to make it back" once this question has been answered, this information is as useful as my Neptune's descent rate info, that is, it is kinda neat, but not something that a pilot will use on a regular basis. I still think someone someday will integrate GPS into a Neptune/Visio device, and it could display (or through lights and sounds) that info. And I do think this will be helpful. But even so it may still fail to sell, if it is too hard to set up or use, too expensive, too bulky, or too unreliable etc. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Holy thread bump. I didn't figure it out until the mention of the C130 at the WFFC, then it's welcome to 2002. To comment on technology, GPS, etc: I believe we have the tech on an Iphone or other GPS equipped smart device to program a few things: 1. Best glide indicator. Shows what the glide on your canopy (or wingsuit) is. With an internet enabled smart phone, it could download the WA forecast to come up with an instantaneous "true estimated" glide. A light or beep could help you fine tune your inputs (arms and legs in a wingsuit, risers and toggles under canopy) to get the best performance. 2. From that, a "you are not going to make it" signal. Based on GPS, using the DZ location, your location, and at your current groundspeed and descent rate, you are not going to make the DZ. Give more brake input and the signal changes to "you are going to make it." This would be great to have to help make the "I am going to have to find an out" decision as soon as possible. Of course this signal could still trip you up, as lower level winds could be at a different direction or magnitude, but again you would have a helper to signal that to you ASAP. I assume from Campos posts that the military has both these things already (and has had for many years), but the software and hardware to do these things is pretty much now commercially available, just needs some developer to put it together, and stick it on a device that can be worn or beeped in the ear or flashed by the eye. Both of these tools will come out someday, and when they do they will help someone avoid an out landing or have a safer out landing and maybe save a life. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

See sig line. I could add recovery arc not recovery arch to that too. Bridle vs Bridal is a common one. If you are not getting married in freefall, I suggest forgetting the spelling "bridal" when you think about skydiving. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

That was a nice summary of the decision, and I agree with all of it. I just wanted to draw attention to that passing statement, that the court said that part of the waiver appeared to violate state law. It had nothing to do with the outcome of this case. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Although the pilot is in command of the aircraft can can order a lot of things, I don't think he can ORDER anyone to exit the aircraft while in flight, even if they are wearing a parachute. He can order them to stay, but not to leave. Am I wrong? It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Interesting quote from the decision http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2009/2009_06153.htm Sounds like the court is saying, "you can't waive negligence". I know the "you can't waive negligence vs. you can't waive only gross negligence" gets debated on here periodically, and now an appellate court throws in its 2c. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Very cool. I can't read German, but the tables were all in English for some reason, so I could get the gist of it. I would love to know more about Kate and I hope they get some more testing in (rear risers, deep brakes, more canopies, etc). Thanks for pointing that out! Seth It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

I think someone could give you a good estimate, at least knowing if it was a 7 or 9 cell, but an exact number would not be easy. I think the canopy manufacturers probably have canopy flight data, but I have never seen a good collection posted here. I would love to see a big table with glide ratios and airspeeds for a range of canopies at a range of wingloadings (0.5,1.0,1.5,2.0) and control inputs (full flight, half brakes, deep brakes, etc). But a pipe dream it will remain I am afraid. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

I am 6'3" and 175lbs. It will harder to find a nice fitting rig, but if you are willing to compromise a bit on fit it should not be too bad. I bought my 1st rig at ~40 jumps, I wanted to be on a canopy size of 1.0 wingload for my 1st canopy, and I looked for a few months till I found a rig in my harness size that could fit (barely) a 190 canopy. I didn't care too much about brand, just wanted a decent fit for my body and my canopies. Even finding a rig with the correct MLW and yoke width was not enough though, because after I bought it I found that the lats were too long (the previous owner was a big guy) and the rig would slide around on my back when backflying, so I had to pay to get them taken in. Since you are slim, this may apply to you as well. Seth It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Lets make like a baby and head out. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

I will chime in as another "infrequent" jumper. I have 216 jumps over 7 years. I have jumped at least 10 times a year every year, but never more than 60. I love skydiving; I should get my new container next month, and I plan to use it for many years, but I don't think I will get more than 50 jumps a year very often, as I haven't over the past 7, and I don't think that will change. But I am not sure that makes me less safe. I think a separate thread would be necessary to discuss the increased likelihood of death or serious injury (not per jump, but per year) among jumpers making less than 50 jumps a year. And I don't think there is any shame in being a "tourist". I have picked up and put down a few hobbies that I would like to return to someday when I get some time. Working on cars, mountain biking, woodworking, indoor soccer, raquetball...I did them, I don't now, but I hope to again someday. Pick it up, put it down, pick it up again someday. Lots of people do just that. Be safe and have fun, whatever you do. Seth It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

My S&TA stresses in his safety day briefing on RSL's that RSLs often have velcro holding them down to the reserve riser or the container. He points out the uncertainty in how a cutaway main will break this velcro. Would there be any hesitation that would be enough to cause the main to turn and tangle? Seth It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

Great shot. Not too long ago, I spent about some time installing equipment at BNFW, the building at the arrow. I remember it well, working in the maintenance shop, music blaring all the time (They can say fuck on the radio?)... Nice to see it as a WS pic. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

This is a test FreeFall xbap It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

I used to have similar thoughts begin bored while flying commercial. "What would I do if the plane had a massive structural failure and I found myself outside the plane?" My thoughts were like this: 1. At normal cruise altitude, I assume I would freeze or pass out pretty quickly. Would I regain consciousness at 10-5k or so? 2. At a lower alt, like 15-20k MSL, I would be left with plenty of time to contemplate my fate, and skydiving would give me a huge advantage compared to the rest of the passengers now hurtling toward the ground. I could try to do some RW with one of them, or just enjoy the last moments of my life. I might be screaming in, but not kicking. 3. I think Springsteen's scream/yell at the end of "State Trooper" would be a good one to emulate. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

www.runnersworld.com has a customized training schedule applet that I liked, if you don't have a schedule you like. The runnersworld applet gives you the standard recommended training program, mixing long slow runs on the weekend to build endurance, with shorter speed intervals and up-tempo runs during the week for stamina. Like punkd asked, What pace are you planning to run for the race? How many miles are you running per week? It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

On Luck: I don't believe in luck. What I think people call bad luck, or "you do everything right and it still does not work", is what engineers would call a stackup of tolerances. You think, "my equipment was good, my packjob was good, my body position was good, I still had a mal, it was bad luck." Yes, ok, call it that, but what actually happened was your packjob was a little off, your equipment was a little off, and your body position was a lilttle off, all off in just the right way to add up and cause a mal. There are 100's if not 1000's of different things that influence a deployment: Tuck tabs, risers in riser covers, line stows, flakes, slider position, canopy line lengths, shoulder heights, leg strap tension, etc, etc. Each may be acceptable in itself, but all can contribute to your mal, and it is possible that you will never be sure of the root cause. Make no mistake, I believe there is a root cause or causes for every mal, and a root cause or causes for any accident of any kind. Labeling an accident "bad luck" is usually a code word for "we don't need to change or improve anything to recude the likelihood of this happening again. We have done all that we can already" Now maybe that is true, and maybe it isn't. It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".