AndyMan

DBuys has them for $589.00 _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I guess it depends on the helmet. I know my FTP will not move at all when wracheted down tightly. I guess it's due to how the "bone" grips tightly onto the base of your skull. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I don't know. I do know that manufacturers report that variations in the bulk of fabric will result in wide range of canopy pack volume, even across manufacturers and canopy models. From my observation, canopies built around the same period of time tend to have similar pack volumes. Alternately, a 2004 Spectre 150 could fit a given rig tightly while a 2005 won't fit at all, or will fit perfectly. I suspect that any attempt to hammer down a precise packvolume is a fools game. If the primary purpose of determining pack volume is to target a specific container, it seems to me to be much wiser to purchase containers that allow for a wider range of canopy sizes. _Am (not a rigger, YMMV) __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

If any part of a rig is wearing out when it's only got 70 jumps is EXCEEDINGLY strange. Make sure the rig gets a good inspection by a good rigger. If your rigger doesn't give you a good explanation then send it into the manufacturer for inspection. Skydiving gear generally doesn't have official waranty's, but manufacturers are usually very good at taking care of people after a sale - even if you're not the original purchaser. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Good jumpers stow their brakes. Good packers check the brakes to make sure the jumpers stowed them. A packer who's arrogant enough to intentionally leave brakes unstowed to "teach a lesson", should be fired on the spot and run off the dropzone. This is precicely why packers operate under the supervision of riggers. What rigger would risk his certificate for this? If the rigger condones it, he too should be run from the dropzone. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I believe Para-gear stocks it, but otherwise going straight to the source is always a good option. Look up Invista, give them a call and ask for the name of a local supplier. http://www.invista.com/prd_supplex.shtml Invista bought DuPonts textile business, and manufacturers Supplex, Cordura, SolarMax, and Lycra - among others. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

It might have something to do with tailgate airplanes. The term is much more appropriate on a Casa, Skyvan or C-130 - just to name a few. I would guess the name was borrowed from aviation. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

To answer your actual question, I have jumped in everything from thin golf and baseball gloves through to bulky ski gloves. I have always been able to feel my handles. When it gets cold I prefer a good warm hiking glove, as they're a happy medium of having good insulating and wind properties, but without being too bulky. I'm concerned that you're injuring your hands on PLF's. A well executed PLF should protect your arms and hands. Aim for your crotch. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

WooHoo! Congrats!

Congrats...! when is the housewarming? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

First, an anecdote. A few monthes ago I was taking part in one of Brian Germain's canopy courses. The course involved a wide range of students. I was at one end of the experience chain, while others had as few as 26 jumps. Most seemed to have had between 100 and 300 jumps. Brian was videoing the landings for discussion. On my landing, I executed an aggresive front riser manuever resulting in a 270 degree turn, putting me in a steep dive and (hopefully), a cool swoop. Brian videod the manuever and showed it to the class. He hit 'pause' at a crucial part of the manuever where it appeared that I was actually above the canopy. Many people in the class quickly started murmering, one person said out loud "that doesn't look safe....!" They thought that since it appeared I was above the canopy, that the canopy was about to collapse. Brian scurried over, picked up a copy of his book The Parachute and its Pilot, held it up, and showed the class that the front cover of his book showed a picture of him in the exact same position. That started a good discussion about the high risk of turns before landing, but it also talked about how jumpers can understand the mechanics of aggresive manuevers, and some day do it - at an appropriate altitude. In reality, I was not over my canopy, nor was Brian in the photo on the cover of the book. In both cases, the jumper being over the canopy was only the perception of people on the ground, simply a perceptual oddity of basic geometry In my example, while the 270 degree turn before landing certainly was dangerous, the orientation of the canopy at the start of the manuever was not. The point here, is that often times newer jumpers have a mistaken idea of what constitutes "safe", and what constitutes "dangerous". Young jumpers should be cautious about being too judgmental about issues they don't understand. Asking questions is good, making a big stink over something they might not understand may not be wise. In the post that started this thread, that does not appear to be going on. Still, something to be wary of. My second point is quite different. Young jumpers are in a very good position to give real criticisms to DZO's for unsafe practices. More experienced jumpers often get tied into keeping their mouthes shut because they work for the DZO, or have strong relationships with people who do. Experienced jumpers often keep their mouths shut for "political" reasons. Students are the livelihood of all Dropzones. They are the largest source of revenue for dropzones. If certain DZ practices are giving students the idea that DZ isn't safe - well, those students hold a lot more power over the DZO than a "fun-jumper". One student who migrates to "other dropzone down the road" represents a much larger cost to the DZO than one fun-jumper who takes the same path. Students hold a lot more sway in a DZO's mind than they get credit for. If a DZO is being disrespectful, that's a great sign that they should find somewhere else to jump. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I bet your Happy-Dance is well practiced by now... Congrats! _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I don't wear them in freefall, but I do sometimes wear them in the plane - depending on which plane it is. Planes with wing-mounted engines can be quite loud, so I do wear them. This means Otters, Skyvans and Casas, King airs, etc. I've been jumping a Caravan lately which is pretty quiet. I haven't been wearing them. I also didn't wear them the last time I jumped a PAC. I take them out before freefall since I use audible altimeters. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I don't think you can program it that way, but proper Neptune placement will have the same effect. I bought one of those old-school chest mount altimeter wedges and mounted my Neptune on that. It's a technique I stole from Brian Germain when I saw him doing the same thing. Chest mounting your Neptune means that you won't hear it in freefall, but you do hear it under canopy. It also means that when you're flying around under canopy you can look at the ground and look at your altimeter at the same time. You don't need to take your eyes off your destination when you check your altitude. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I've noticed my Neptune indicates a climb rate 300-400 fps faster than either my Suunto watch and the plane's FSI. That may be whats going on. When my Suunto says 800, my Neptune will show 1100. My home DZ is flying a Grand Caravan for the next few weeks, and its' showing mostly 800-900 fpm. Our Caravan does 25 minute cycles while our -27 Otter does 18. Those seven minutes adds up to about five more loads on a busy weekend. (btw - thanks for the tip on the neptune. very cool under canopy) _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Better pictures here: http://www.aogair.com/products/caravan_b.html _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Current: 228 Loss: -1 One more for me, too! Total goes to 14. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Um.... Yah. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Yup! Perfectly simple. Now figure out how to stop that system from activating on a hard opening! _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I think that's a big part of it - how many people have made smoothies, where the very first thing they do is add an entire banana, and then proceed to add in strawberries and blueberries? If they'd sat down and eaten the fruit one piece at a time they wouldn't have had nearly as much. It all adds up to a LOT of calories. Pureeing fruit makes it a lot easier to eat huge quantities. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

It's important to remember that this idea of protecting children from sex is a relatively new idea. The "natural" ideas of god's will stating that sex be purely a form of reproduction afforded children little protection. Pregnant 12 years olds were not uncommon. Strangely, it's exactly this notion that Kinsey was trying to disprove. Ironic. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Because every attack I ever hear about is an attack against Kinsey, not against the study. To me, that's a classic ad-hominem attack, which is preatty weak. I do acknowledge criticisms in the work, but when people want to shoot it down completely I expect them to offer countering evidence. As far as I can tell, there is no countering evidence. There are only two major studies of human sexuality, Kinsey and Masters & Johnson. They both have very similar conclusions. On that basis, lacking contrary evidence, I completely buy into Kinsey's findings, flaws and all. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

You have a better study, then? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Sex as a tool for only reproduction comes mroe from Aristotle than it does the Bible. Of course the Catholic church took much of what Aristotle said for their own benefit. I'm a bigger fan of Locke, myself. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Here's a closeup of the schematic. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.