ufk22

Adrenaline IS the most addictive drug Had that put on a t-shirt right after the jet jump in Quincy in 1993. Chemical highs just don't do it for me......... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

What you will enjoy more will become apparent to you about 150-200 jumps from now. If you truly want to become some kind of instructor, spend your first 150 jumps on your belly. Freeflying doesn't build the kind of skills you'll need. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

No, it hasn't. Don't ever try and do physics based on what is "obvious". Ditto... Either in a steady wind or in still air the aerodynamic forces on the canopy and your body are created by the movement of the canopy through the airmass. But there's a lot more going on here than just aerodynamics. Do we also want to factor in gravity? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Actually, in certain conditions with some types of water, hot water will freeze faster than cold water. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

You sound like you know what you're doing. Good advice. Quote I learned alot from some old guy from Iowa.... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Confirmation of anomous posts by an anonamous poster...... Sorry, I guess I've just heard way too many one-sided stories over many years in this sport. These stories are usually much less "shocking" when the object of them is standing along side the accuser. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Seeing as no one has asked, what 170 main????? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

The best cold weather gloves ever, to replace my current worn out set. Made by Black Diamond, model Torque, made for ice climbing and mountaineering. High grip, thin PVC palm and inner fingers, insulated back side. Great grip and feel, and by turning your palms rearward, very warm under canopy. From my sister Oh yeah, and the new Bevsuit I bought myself.... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

I strongly suggest that said keyboard terminators do that by resting their fingers for a while and reading Sun-Tzu's Art of War (I prefer the Samuel B. Griffith translation). Quote That genie's been out of the bottle for way too many years.... There's also way too many egos in this sport that KNOW that the rules are written for all those other fools, not for them, and maybe (not certainly) this discussion might make some of them realize their potential personal liability (even if they have little concern over the safety of their passenger) for deviating from USPA or manufacturers recommendation i.e.; current discussion on whether to follow manufacturer's recommendations on lower attachments, current discussion on back-loop exits, ongoing discussions on hook landings, recent videos of tandem CRW, I've seen nothing here that in any way suggests that Strong is at fault, and I have no sympathy for any TI who negligently kills or injures a tandem passenger. Who exactly are we at war with, and who is part of "we"? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

I don't think I would put too much stock in claims of misconduct posted anonamously on the internet. If someone won't at the very least identify themselves, why put any stock in their "stories"?????? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

If the req for a coach rating is a C license and 200 jumps. What would that do to a static line instructor rating? Quote As a small DZ S/L I/E, I know what you're talking about. Lower time jumpers bring an enthusiasm and a "just done that" point of view to the student program that older (more time in sport) jumpers don't have. I see no reason to raise the required jump #'s for a coach rating. I know that with only 100 jumps that these candidates don't have world class flying skills, but if they've been belly flying for the 100 jumps, they usually have enough skills to do the job. The most important thing is their ability to teach, or at least learn to teach, following the ISP. I can't imagine getting through a coach course in 1 1/2 days. I run 4 hrs Friday night, 12 hrs Sat, and am lucky to get done with an additional 8 hrs on Sunday. I try to have no more than 2 students per I/E, and 1 to 1 for evaluators. The biggest problem is people showing up unprepared, so now I ask for the test and a copy of teaching outlines for each catagory prior to the class weekend. There is no way to do justice to all the material in less time. The only changes I would like to see are a 1 year wait between coach and ANY instructional rating and to allow coaches to do the old S/L jumpmaster duties. Having to wait for an I rating to handle a S/L student out of the airplane is foolish and counterproductive for all the small Cessna dz's. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Also sorry, my original post was addressing airrage2 This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

HAHAHA, I was contacted by a few that wanted more specific information on the incidents that I spoke of. I've been identified to everyone that needs to know. Don't feel that bad that your not that important. As far as a face to face goes, if I see KL in person again that will certainly happen. Funny that you say "The internet is the worst thing that ever happened to skydiving." Ur using it buddy!!! Now go take some percocets. You've got to keep your log-ins straight. airrage to airrage2 in 2 days and gained a bunch of examiner ratings in the process. Not a matter of MY importance, more a matter of YOUR integrity.... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

to: stratostar and airrage2 Pretty f****** easy to jump on this bandwagon and go after someone anonymously. Typical of the internet. Do either of you have the balls to identify yourselves or just say this stuff to someone face to face???? I thought so.... This whole "I'm afraid of being thrown off some dropzone" crap is just that. The internet is the worst thing that ever happened to skydiving. Used to be, if someone had a problem, we'd deal with it face to face, then get over it and have another beer. Get a pair....... or shut up This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

You should have separated the 4 points. The only part I could agree with is the 1 year as coach before getting an I rating in any discipline. The year as coach would be the probationary period for the other ratings. I've seen alot more Tandem I's that scare me than anything else. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

By very low time, I mean just that. VERY low time. nothing wrong with a couple of semi-good (50-200 jump, just ok at RW) plus 1 very low time. If needed, keep the low man in a grip for a split second or more during transitions to keep him/her from floating/backsliding away, kind of holding them in place til someone else can take the new grip on them for the next point. I know it's technically not right, but so what??? As the day progresses, you'll need this technique less, as their confidence builds and they get into the flow. Also, design your points so the the least experienced has the easiest job on the early points, getting tougher as the dive progresses. Have a plan for moving on if someone is out and can't get back. Better to move on than spend the dive in a 3 way watching someone fly around below you. If the exits are a problem, free-fly (as in unlinked) them. Better off losing a few seconds to build the 1st point rather than lose the whole dive to a funnel. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Should have been labeled "Both instructors lose student" This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

1. Design your dives around the abilities of the group, don't try to make the group fly YOUR dive. Start with very easy, everybody facing the center, points. It can take a couple dives just for everyone to get their fall rate in synch. 2. If you're working with very low time people, don't go bigger than 1 good, experienced flyer/low timer. A dive with 1 who can and 3 who can't will be a waste, and no one will be sure who did or didn't fly right. 3. Spend as much time on the exit (exactly where to put each hand and foot, body position for and right after launch, how long to hold the launch grip, etc) as you do on the dive, maybe more. 4. Try to get people to focus not on what the next point is, but the move they have to do to get there. 5. Praise in public, chew in private. good luck, it's a lot tougher than it appears This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Homemade anti-fog Mix dishwashing soap and water, 1-4. Put a few drops on the inside of the lens at the biginning of the day, rub over the entire inside, then wipe off with a soft paper towel or a kleenex that doesn't have the lotion in it. Just wipe off the excess, don't try to buff it out. Problem solved. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

I have, in the past, passed people for their S/L I that were great teachers but had limited flying skills. Same thing for the old S/L jumpmaster rating. I would have a problem passing a coach who didn't have those skills. The problem with giving a rating to someone thinking "they'll be alright after completing the course" is that they have to be "alright" and complete the course before I would give them a rating. This is mostly about $$$$. All DZ's need staff. People want to make some money skydiving. They need the rating to make money. What small DZ's that do S/L or IAD need is the old JM rating back. What big DZ's need is someone to help low timers along that doesn't cost the DZ much $$$, and hopefully makes them a few. I agree that low time people in the sport bring an enthusiasm to this, just haven't seen ANYONE with 100 jumps that really has the flying skills to do the coach thing right. I've seen many that could be a great JM at those numbers, but that's a whole nother thread.......... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

I've got maybe 10-12 jumps out of low-wing aircraft, primarily Pipers but one out of a V-tail Beech. 1/2 solos, 1/2 2 ways. Spotting is a little more interesting out of a low-wing, but no real problem if you know the area. What could go wrong? PS It was years ago (maybe 40) and I haven't done it since. I promise. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

When you've seen enough people die, those you know and those you don't, and helped board (as in backboard) enough people who didn't die, you'll understand why "our panties are in a bunch". I'd be grateful that enough people who've never met you are this vocal about not wanting YOU to die. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Actually, Dave, I thought your last post was still rather sensitive. I thought I was the "dick" -------- Been following this one, biting my tongue (or would that be fingers), but it's time to be "a real dick about advice" Sorry, kid, but you are a stupid, ignorant, arrogant, asshole. The fact that you are slightly less stupid or ignorant than some others you know is more than made for by your arrogance. You will end up dead or severly injured, or worse you will kill or severly injure someone else. Not totally your fault, even I don't understand how a Sabre 150 at 1/1 has become a conservative canopy choice for someone with under 50 jumps. _____________ Unfortunately, he still doesn't get it. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Been following this one, biting my tongue (or would that be fingers), but it's time to be "a real dick about advice" Sorry, kid, but you are a stupid, ignorant, arrogant, asshole. The fact that you are slightly less stupid or ignorant than some others you know is more than made for by your arrogance. You will end up dead or severly injured, or worse you will kill or severly injure someone else. Not totally your fault, even I don't understand how a Sabre 150 at 1/1 has become a conservative canopy choice for someone with under 50 jumps. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

In Reply To I can see lots of guys around who are talking about downsizing all the time. To me it seems like one should be as cool as possible - the smallest your rig is the better. Now I'm planning to buy a new rig with a new main canopy and a little downsizing. At present I am using a 190 square-feet canopy with a wing loading of 0.8. Considering my exit weight and experience (180 jumps) I could jump a 150 or even a 140. In spite of this I'd like to buy a 170. The reason is that I do like to stay in the sky as long as possible - but everybody smiles at me. They say I should choose a smaller canopy. I know it would penetrate better into the wind and I could make more spectacular landings. The rig could be smaller which would look great. Do you also find my choice ridiculous? I like that attitude. I think you are a paraglider at heart. A few things you can do that maximize your airtime under canopy, as well as increase safety, is instead of downsizing, buy something like a stiletto 150 or a moderate 'swooping' canopy. I had a TON of fun for a hundred or so jumps on a stiletto 150 loaded at 1.1. this will make you a smoother pilot. Plus the wing is more efficient, meaning you can stay up longer if you want, penetrate better, and go really fast if you want or it is needed. Quote The world is full of this kind of advice.... 1st, this is about more than just size. You don't say what 190 you're currently jumping, but 180 jumps does not mean you can safely jump a 150 or smaller, no matter the wing loading, and going to something like a Stiletto make even less sense. If you're currently jumping a 7 cell, downsizing 20' and changing to a 9 cell will be a huge difference. I would definitely stay with the 170 reserve, then go slow, downisizing at a rate that allows you to "live to jump another day" This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.