AndyMan

Nope, it isn't. I would not get on a plane without knowing what gear I had. I teach students to verify their mains and reserves during gear checks, too. Always know your gear. Glad you're OK. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Yup, I took one out of the 412 at Quincy a few years ago, and the pic used as my Avatar is the result. http://www.bombshelter.ca/~andy/photos/wffc/helo1.jpg http://www.bombshelter.ca/~andy/photos/wffc/helo2.jpg They can be easily stuffed down jumpsuits for deployment. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

These have been standard issue in Japan for decades... I"m surprised they're finally making it here. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030913.wspole0913/BNStory/National/ __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The earlier that you start to jump the type of gear that you'll eventually buy, the better. That said, you don't want to go back and forth. Don't transition unless you're going to make the move permanent. It is not a good thing to be going back and forth. So... transition as soon as is practicle for you, keeping in mind that once you go BOC you don't want to go back. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Next time you ever feel down, listen to this song, loudly: http://66.102.107.165/andrew/. Listen all the way through. It has NEVER failed to lift my spirits. It's got the power. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

That sounds pretty accurate, to me. I fall frimly into the second group. I did my first jump in 99, and didn't make a skydive withouth a cypres until jump number 478, a 10 second delay on the way back from Roger's memorial. I was too lazy to figure out the difference in ground elevations, so left it turned off. To me, I trust my Cypres in the exact same way that I trust my harness and container, my 3 rings, my reserve canopy. Trusting our gear comes with the teritory, and the Cypres is just another piece of gear. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

If my cypres fired...? Not necesarily. It might have mis-fired, or it might have fired mid-snivel resulting in two out. I don't think those events would make me reconsider jumping. If it did fire legitimately? I dunno, I'd certainly consider not jumping. It'd depend on if it fired because I brain farted, or because I was unable to pull. That makes a huge difference, I think. That said, this is a hypothetical, and I'd prefer not to have to make that decision. __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Thanks Howard, somehow I knew it'd be like that... _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The only reason I recomend people use Mozilla is because it's better. It's got more features, renders quicker and more accurately. I don't give a rats ass about politics, about giving Microsoft support or not. Business people make business decisions, not political ones. Any product needs to stand on its own merits. If Moz doesn't work for you, then fine, use IE. However, I would be very short with a business partner or company who is forcing me to to use a specific product. It's MY business decision what to use, not theirs. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Then submit a bug report to that website, because if it is not standards compliant it's broken. It's their responsibility to make their website work, not yours. Oh, I forgot to mentionI also coded www.molson.com to be compliant, when I worked there. Standards compliancy is not rocket science. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Since you seem to be the only one defending them... Do you work for them, in any way? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I don't. HTML, WEB, and HTTP are all standardized by the World Wide Web Consortium. Mozilla follows the standard better then IE. If I site works in IE, but not in Mozilla, then it was designed for IE. Designing for a particular browser is never smart, programers should code for the standard and expect the browsers to work. Where browsers don't work, a workarounds are permitted as long as those workarounds don't break OTHER browsers. Code to the standard, everything works. Code to a browser, and things get screwed up. When I wrote www.littletikes.com, www.rubbermaid.com, and www.gracobaby.com, we coded to W3C compliant standards. We never had interoperability problems with any browsers that couldn't be easily fixed. Proramers who code to the dominant browser are lazy. As for pop up blocking in Mozilla, they do tell you when they block one, an exclamation mark shows up in the status bar bottom right. Click the exclamation mark to enable pop ups for that site. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

None. I use Mozilla, because it's faster. For reasons yet unknown, google doesn't make a googleBar for Mozilla. That's fine, because all of its features are built into Mozilla, anyways. I haven't had an unwanted pop-up in over a year. Yay! _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Born, Toronto Ontario. Moved to Ottawa, Ontario for college. 4 years. Back to Toronto for one year. Cleveland Ohio, lasted one year before going nuts. Now in Chicago for 3 years, starting to get wanderlust, again. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

When the first one came out, I waited around for the 4-cd box set. When this one came out, I saw it at Costo for $22... and debated. I could get the 2 CD set now, or wait for the box set... in which case I'd now have 8 DVDs. Presumably, when the third also came out I'd wait for THAT 4 DVD box sex, at which point I'd have 12 DVD's. By my math.... 12 DVD's is roughly 36 hours of video. That's friggin stupid. I rejected the idea of buying the 4 DVD box set for each movie. So... My choices were now to get the individual movies when they come out, or wait for that one big final box set, which probably won't come out for a few years. The fact is, that I want to watch the movies NOW, not 2 years from now. I bought the single movie DVD... which surprisingly was a 2 DVD set. This trilogy will also reign as the most over marketed DVD spectacular. How many combinations of DVD's are the hawking? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The rig that you've described is called an "Intentional cuttaway Rig", or a "Tertiary rig". They do exist. They tend to be found at larger dropzones, they are usually only used during tandem training, and testing new canopies. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I am not a fan of separating students from instructors. I like the idea that they play togeather in the same space, means that the students questions will be answered quickly by people who know the answers. I'm concerned that if students had their own place, while some instructors would lurk and answer questions, the quality of those questions would go down. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Was this the case when you had 21 jumps? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

The sunset load at chicagoland is frequently a cross country. I've gotten out 10 miles away at times. It's not a huge thing, but you'll need to wait until you've got your 'a' licence, and be sure to talk to your instructors first. You also need to be comfortable with the idea of landing off. The tough part is figuring out where to get out. Bring a cellphone... I frequently joke that I'm planning on landing in the parking lot of the local restaurant a few miles down the road... _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I would advise you to convert if, and only if, you're willing to make the conversion permanent. Once you go throw-out, you don't ever want to jump another rip cord rig, at least for the conceivable future. When you convert you need to relearn the muscle memory of your procedures... and I'd hate to see you confuse yourself by finally learning throwout, then confusing yourself by going back and forth. Go throw-out if you're ready to go permanently. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Doubtful. this is dz.com, afterall. ;) In the 4 years I've been around, I don't think I've ever seen people who were physically unfit to the degree they can't pull their toggles. I don't buy it, I don't think it exists. - We're not talking about tandems here, nor are we talking about special cases like the disabled. I've seen lots of people that don't finish their flare, but I don't accept that fitness has anything to do with it. I attribute people who don't finish their flare to people learning on canopies where you didn't need to finish their flare, or lack of canopy training. If I saw someone who physically couldn't flare, I would agree they should take up golfing. I've never seen this, though. To people who think they're seeing this?, Take another look, and try to imagine another reason why they might not be finishing their flare. Lack of landing skills never cease to amaze me. I've never seen a sport rig that takes more then a few pounds of force to flare completely. Likewise, I've had hard pulls, and I've seen people chop because of them. I doubt very much that in any of these cases physical fitness had anything to do with it. A monkey-fisted pilot chute will be nearly imposible for anyone to pull, no matter how strong you are. Relying on strength to help you from a hard pull is not effective. I would much rather see someone cuttaway and pull their reserve then have them yanking on their handle until their BOC rips open. Strength is the wrong answer. When Missy Nelson had a hard cuttaway that nearly killed her, I doubt very much it had anything to do with her physical shape. She's in excellent shape. You could argue that if she'd been a profesaional body builder, she might've been able to clear her spinning main through brute force. I would point out that gear is not designed for a few hundred pounds of force on the cuttaway system, and that putting hundreds of pounds on that handle puts you at risk for harness damage, or damage to the cuttaway system. I would much rather see riser inserts, so that a cuttaway can be done with under 5 pounds, even in a 5 g spin. Most people still don't have riser inserts. I hope everyone posting in this thread, does, though... If "strength" ever played an issue with how we skydive, then we screwed up long before that jump started. __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Sure. However, I would prefer to have two canopies. I'd be less reluctant if there was a tandem cypres deployed main, a cuttaway handle, and a expert cypres/rsl deployed reserve. The Cypres has proven its reliability. I have no concerns over it malfunctioning. I DO have concerns over packjobs, and would like to have a backup. I also trust my Cypres more then I trust my harness. Harnesses have a higher rate of failure then properly maintained Cypres's. Before anyone flames me too harshly, I have jumped without a Cypres, and have no problems doing it in the future. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

There are few people on my DZ in worse shape then me. Not only am I a fatass, but I also jump a highly loaded eliptical canopy. The worst injury I've ever had skydiving was a sprained ankle, which in hindsight I clearly deserved given how it happened. If I can skydive safely, then being out of shape is not a hinderance in this sport. I entirely reject the notion that people who aren't in prime shape are a danger to themselves, or others. The suggestion is cenetered in misguided arogance, and is quite frankly, offensive. I guarantee that you're in better shape then I, and I also guarantee when I swoop my stileto, my landings are a hell of a lot better then yours, mr. 35 jump wonder. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

What amuses me most about Chicago is the deep seated insecurity complex. This is most publicly manifested in the "Second City". This nickname comes from a time where Chicago closely follwed New York in terms of population, but is traditionally used in a much greater context - Chicago's theater is second to New York, its' restaurants, its parks - these are all the second best in the US! The trouble is... it's not. Chicago theater sucks, there are no permanent shows. Chicago is lucky if they get a touring off-broadway production to stop in for a few weeks. Chicago food sucks. Try finding a good cheese shop, or a butcher, or a good bakery on a corner somewhere. The concept of gourmet ANYTHING is completely foriegn. The local Safeway (called Dominicks) claims to be a "gourmet" store, but sells nothing but national brands like Velveeta. I'm pretty sure that the people who're proudly claiming Chicago is the best city on earth haven't traveled much. Those that claim that Chicago is "better" then New York haven't been there, nor do I suspect they've been to Seatle, or Portland, or Sacramento, Toronto, or Paris. The insecurity of Chicagoans is manifested in them firmly believing that it's the best place on earth. It's not. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.