DanG

Maybe you were just exposed to the "other" side of the Rising Sun Debate. Now you can choose for yourself. - Dan G

I don't have any kids, but I still have to pay for YOUR kids' education. In fact, since you can claim a taxd eduction for them, I'm paying more per dollar than you are to educate them. So, since it's my money, I prefer they be taught reality. If you want to teach them fantasy, do it on your own dime and on your own time. - Dan G

I think you misunderstand how controlled demolition works. The explosives are used to weaken the structure, not completely remove it. Even in a controlled demolition, there is still material there that needs to be crushed by the falling building. There will always be material in the way unless you can magically transport the first floor of the building away a la Star Trek. The fires and debris damaged the structure in the same way that explosives would have, it just took longer. Once the load limit on one column was exceeded, it failed and transfrerred its load to the other columns. In a failure like this, that instataneous load increase would be enough to fail more weakened columns, and transfer load onto the remaining columns, which might even be non-damaged. At that point, a handful of undamaged columns couldn't hold up the whole building. Just because the structure is very large, doesn't mean that a cascade of failures like this needs to take a long time. The loads are transferred more or less instantly. In a situation like this, once one column goes, it is not at all unreasonable for the whole structure to go in a very short time. Arguing that the building couldn't reach "freefall speed" because of the manner in which the building arrived at the failure makes no sense. It doesn't mater if the structure was weakened by fire or explosives, the resulting collapse would look the same. A final note: you've asked people time and again to provide an example where a steel building collapsed at freefall speed due to fire. I'd like you to provide an example of a steel framed building that collapsed due to fire that fell over slowly. I'd be willing to bet that if you find video of a collapse it will look similar to WTC 7. - Dan G

Will he wear his prosthetics during the jump? I think that factor may make a big difference in how he is able to safely land. BTW, make sure you show him the Closing In picture in next month's Parachutist. He, and everyone else, may find it rather inspirational. - Dan G

I've seen it. If you resign your commission, you are starting from scratch. Technically, the Army (or whatever) can enlist you at any rank they want. Practically, former officers will usually come in at least at E-4. - Dan G

That's for making my point. Keep preaching to the choir, you certainly aren't going to win any converts with that attitude. - Dan G

Because that's not the sum total of their argument. If you'd listen, you'd know this. And because not listening makes gun owners look like assholes. - Dan G

listen to != compromise - Dan G

Then you should have made it clear that you were only refering to the people on the Seattle city council. That's not at all what you said. Surely you don't believe that everyone who is not as strongly in favor of a liberal (note small "l") reading of the 2nd as you are has NO respect for law? If you do, then I suggest you take a step back and reassess. I'm just trying to help you improve the effectiveness of your message. - Dan G

John, I'm with you on your goal of protecting the 2nd. Making statements like that just makes you look like a zealot who has no interest in even listening to people with other points of view. If you're trying to convert people to your way of thinking (and I assume you are otherwise why keep posting), you should realize that statements like that are very off-putting. - Dan G

Simple question. I would love a one word answer, but realize I probably won't get it. Here it is: Did passenger planes impact both the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center on 9-11-01? - Dan G

Everyne who puts their pants on slower than me is an idiot. Everyone who puts their pants on faster is a lunatic. (Props to George Carlin) - Dan G

Yeah, I agree, but it hasn't happened, so this is not the same as Bush actually raising taxes. - Dan G

Did you read what I wrote? I think not. Try again. His promise wasn't, "I'll not allow anyone studying the problem to suggest middle class tax increases." - Dan G

I don't think it is the same at all. Obama is convening a commission to study the deficit and make recommendations. The commission needs to be able to look at everything. The commission would be pointless if you told them from the start what you wanted them to conclude. - Dan G

Once you've been in the sport a while there will be a high likelihood that you'll know someone from their supposed home DZ, or at least know someone who knows someone. For the first time buyer, this obviously won't work, but your instructors or DZO might be able to help. When I purchased gear last year from a couple people on the West Coast, I asked for references from people I knew, or at least people I knew of. A scammer will not be able to get a real DZO or well known jumper to vouch for them. If the person comes back with a line like, "I've been out of the sport for a while, so no one remembers me," I'd advise looking elsewhere. If you are in the States and jump at a USPA DZ, your DZO can also look up people in the USPA database on-line and at least verify that they are or were a licensed skydiver. Don't buy gear that someone is selling "for a friend". The gear is either stolen or imaginary. - Dan G

Do you make rice? If not, then you are not competing against rice farmers. - Dan G

If the people in the disappearing lane, which are usually moving faster than the people in the destination lane, merge in different places, a given car in the destination lane will progress more slowly towards the end of the merge area. Total traffic flow may be the same, but it sucks to be the guy sitting there while the person in front of you (or you yourself) have to slow down or stop to let someone go in front of you. The ripple effects of slowing to let someone in are, IMO, non-linear and making them more predicatable and orderly allows people to move at a steadier pace. I understand that in a perfect world, in a full capacity road, if there are 25 cars in front of me, there will need to be 25 merges. I'm just saying that if the merges are orderly, traffic doesn't need to stop and start as much. If the cars were being driven by robots, it wouldn't matter where the merges are taking place. But people need to leave a margin of error, and unpredictable merges (and the guy who tries to do multiple lane changes at one time) make people slow down more than is really necessary. - Dan G

You're right as an academic exercise in a perfect world. In real traffic, the problem with early mergers is that they create multiple merge points. If there is only one merge point, then it obviously doesn't matter where it occurs. If there are multiple merges all happening into the same lane, it makes the local flow in that lane less efficient. If you're looking at only having one merge point, then the end of the lane is the logical spot. Don't get me started about mergers who don't give a polite wave after you let them in (not the one-fingered kind). There is a special circle of hell reserved for them. - Dan G

What altitude are you suggesting people disconnect their RSL? - Dan G

Cool. Thank you. We should also note 4-E-3-d: d. After landing, cut away if necessary (with an SOS, cutting away may open the reserve container, but only the reserve pilot chute will likely deploy). - Dan G

I don't have my printed SIM handy. In the online version there is nothing in Section 4, Category C about disconnecting the RSL under canopy. Can you quote the passage you are defering to? I never said I thought it was a complicated procedure. I said that focusing on it may lead people to become fixated on something that will only help them in a very few cases to the detriment of flying their parachute to a safe landing area. Collapsing the slider is even easier than disconnecting an RSL, but there are many instances of people being so focused on collapsing a recalcitrant slider that they lose track of altitude or position. - Dan G

That was my point. Your argument was that it only takes a second. I disagree. But if you think it only takes a second, why not do it on the ground? My point is that you would be better advised to spend your time avoiding the building that fussing with your RSL. You can't have it both ways. Either it is a simple procedure that takes a mere second, or it is too time consuming to do once on the ground. If it is too hard and time consuming to do on the ground, it is too hard and time consuming to do in the air. "You" was not meant to be you, popsjumper. I meant that advice for anyone. Why have a safety device installed if you think it will regularly necesitate in-air rigging? Also, if you want to train young-ums something about high wind landings, teach them how to control their canopy if they find themselves landing in winds higher than expected. It can be a great wind-hold training activity. - Dan G

Trying to disarm one segment of the population is a lot harder than disarming everyone. - Dan G

If it only takes 1 second to disconnect the RSL, and it such an easy procedure, why not disconnect it after touchdown? In reality, sinple things like collapsing a slider, undoing a chest strap, discconnecting an RSL, etc. may take more time than anticipated and lead to fixation. Your first priority should be flying the canopy to a safe landing. If you're freaked out about getting dragged, feel free to disconnect your RSL after you've achieved your first priority. If your procedure is to always disconnect the RSL in questionable conditions, do yourself a favor and it remove it from your rig. - Dan G