AndyMan

That brings to mind the incredible dangers of dihydrogen monoxide. BAN DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE! Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO withdrawal means certain death. Dihydrogen monoxide: * is also known as hydroxl acid, and is the major component of acid rain. * contributes to the "greenhouse effect." * may cause severe burns. * contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape. * accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals. * may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes. * has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients. Contamination is reaching epidemic proportions! Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream, lake, and reservoir in America today. But the pollution is global, and the contaminant has even been found in Antarctic ice. DHMO has caused millions of dollars of property damage in the midwest, and recently California. Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used: * as an industrial solvent and coolant. * in nuclear power plants. * in the production of styrofoam. * as a fire retardant. * in many forms of cruel animal research. * in the distribution of pesticides. Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical. * as an additive in certain "junk-foods" and other food products. Companies dump waste DHMO into rivers and the ocean, and nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal. The impact on wildlife is extreme, and we cannot afford to ignore it any longer! The American government has refused to ban the production, distribution, or use of this damaging chemical due to its "importance to the economic health of this nation." In fact, the navy and other military organizations are conducting experiments with DHMO, and designing multi-billion dollar devices to control and utilize it during warfare situations. Hundreds of military research facilities receive tons of it through a highly sophisticated underground distribution network. Many store large quantities for later use. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

>> Has nylon changed? Has the air changed? > None of that has change. The standards that a reserve canopy and H/C are tested to has changed. Hasn't the use of Spanwise reinforcement changed? Not that this would apply to the older Maverick. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

>>I would put my rig back on and jump the 400 way. I wouldnt even >> bitch about it............ > Good for you! Thus, you _are_ willing to jump without an AAD. That was the original point. Just so I understand, succumbing to peer pressure and lowering ones safety threashold is a good thing??? Edit: Not intented as a jab at LawnDart. Peer Pressure affects everyone, and would play a role in anyones decision given the scenario described. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

People constantly sacrifice safety for the sake of peer pressure. That is not a new thing, nor is it a good thing. To me, peer pressure represents a far bigger risk than people who plan on using additional safety gear whenever possible. It's far wiser to plan on never succumbing to peer preasure than to plan on giving into it. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

There is some wiggle room. From http://www.ftc.gov/bc/compguide/illegal.htm Which doesn't make a lot of sense to me. To me, the anti trust laws read something like "Manuafacturers have a responsibility to treat customers fairly. Price controls will be vigorously prosecuted.... Price controls are perfectly acceptable." _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I guess her penis is bigger than mine. I'm sorry. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

You might want to research two things before you jump to conclusions. 1) Where she works. 2) Who she's maried to. I will say only one thing. She's absolutely right, your arguments make no sense at all. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

You can download the whole video here: http://www.troyhartman.com/video/BurningParachute.mov _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

IIRC, that was Troy Hartman from the "Senseless Acts of video" series on MTV. He soaked the canopy in kerosene, jumped from the airplane holding the canopy, deployed it instantly.... And ignited it with a flare gun. He later cutaway the canopy and deployed a second main. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

See what this site says: www.resellerratings.com _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

4 of 5 Ddigital Rebels shooters at my DZ use the Sigma 15mm for tandems. The .6 conversion makes it equivalent to a 24mm on a film body. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Interesting. So after all this shit you just laid on me, you won't even share your own thoughts. I don't expect to. If I ever need to, I hope I do. Either way, if you're in a wrap at 300 feet you're up shit creek no matter what you do. Having a rote reaction that may not apply could screw you up just as much as inaction. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

So you yourself violate this fictional BSR you invented. Interesting. So Derek's off the hook because he doesn't jump anymore. Why are you off the hook, then? Thought so. Now maybe you can actually answer his question. Me? I can't answer his question, because I don't have a Minimum Cuttaway Altitude. Do you? Did you decide on it in the last 24 hours? Like I said, I haven't decided on mine. I can't come up with a simple round number that works in all cases. At the altitudes we're talking about, something as simple as whether you're over a building or not could affect your survivability just as much as the gear you choose. Consider Skydive Chicago where there's a large river about two hundred feet below ground level. If I'm over the river, I might be willing to cuttaway even lower than normal - if things were bad enough. Likewise, if I'm jumping at a DZ that has hills nearby, I'd hope I remember that when the time comes, too. Of course, to be in this situation in the first place means there's been a long series of errors that've already happened. I think it far wiser to avoid the issue by breaking the links earlier in the chain than planning to death every contingency that can happen at 300 feet. That said, if I find myself in that situatin at 300 feet I will use every tool I've got to keep myself alive. If that includes the skyhook, so be it. I hope the day I need it, I've got it. As for now, I don't. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I still don't understand what a "General Recomendation" has to do with the BSR's I aparently have so little respect for. I also still don't understand what this has to do with the original question, which was regarding a "Minimum cutaway altitude", which is ENTIRELY different than a "hard deck", which I presume 5-1.E.4 refers to. Strangely, http://www.uspa.org/publications/SIM/2004SIM/section5.htm Doesn't have a 5-1.E.4. It does have a 5-1.E.3(c). I hate being pedantic though, so at least I'll grant that the SIM does mention the notion of "hard deck". I am curious why you think this is relevant to the notion of "minimum cutaway altitude", though. Would you chop from a wrap at 1,400 feet? Derek himself admits his minimum cutaway altitude is 500 feet. Why aren't you lecturing him about his flagrant attitude towards this fictional BSR's? Or, is it maybe that you didn't understand the question? _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I like to think the reason people get flamed is because they did something stupid. I might flame a safety Nazi if they do something stupid. They are human, just like everyone else. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Well, at least you're respectful - as usual. A hard deck is an altitude at which you deal with a pre-existing malfunction. That's quite different than a "minimum cutaway altitude", which I presume is an altitude from which you do not cuttaway below. My hard deck is 1,500 feet. My minumum cutaway altitude is situationaly dependent. Having a Hard Deck of 1,500 feet most certainly does NOT mean that I won't cuttaway from a wrap that occurs at 1,400 feet. I will refrain from cutting away from that same wrap at 200 feet. There is no BSR for either "minimum cuttaway altitude", or "hard deck". Stop talking out of your ass. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Correct. A malfunction at 1,500 feet is relatively straight forward issue to deal with. A wrap at 500 feet is altogeather a completely different animal. Whatever I end up doing to correct it will be based on countless different variables, some of which are: 1) Can I reach my handles? 2) Will the reserve deploy cleanly? 3) Am I tangled with my main? 4) Am I tangled with the other persons main? 5) Do I have an RSL ? 6) Do I have a skyHook ? Those are six critical issue which will affect how I choose to proceed. That makes a combination of 720 different possible combinations. I certainly do not plan on coming up with 720 different plans of action prior to my next skydive. I will deal with that situation if it presents itself. Through respecting my hard deck and being a aware pilot, I prefer to avoid being in that situation in the first place. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Because I don't have a "minumum cuttaway altitude". The question didn't ask about a "hard deck", it asked about a "mininum cuttaway altitude". There is a difference. I have a hard deck, which is 1500 feet. If there's any shit going on below that, then all rules are off. I'll do whatever I think will get me on the ground safest. That may, or may not include cutting away below an arbitrary altitude some stranger pulled from thin air. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

I do that exit without the grip. It works, and the stills are priceless. I don't have any with now, maybe I can post some later. I see adding the grip as finesse, and largely unnesesary. I think being a heavier guy probably helps me out here, because when I'm on my back I can easily stay underneath a drogueless pair for as long as I need to. Of course, having the back fly skills are critical here, and I certainly wouldn't expect the guy who started this thread to have any of those... _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

If I had reason to think a low cuttaway would improve an otherwise fatal situation? Absolutely. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Chicagoland Skydiving Center has a Skydiving for MS boogie every year.... It's now growing into a pretty big deal. You can read about the people who started it here: http://www.msjump.com/ You can find Ken Adams email address on that page, he's a good guy to talk to about jumping with MS, unfortunately he's had to quit jumping in recent years... Every year the Skydiving for MS boogie takes a good bunch of MS quads for tandem jumps and raises a truckload of money. This years Boogie is being held on June 25th. http://www.skydivecsc.com/zone/calendar_detail.php?event_id=372. I know I didn't answer any of your questions, but be sure to drop Ken a line. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

You've been lucky. In the last two years I've known 2 people die in canopy colisions. One of them was Roger Nelson, so clearly having skill is not enough. The other was "Porno", who was working on a CRW world record. He had plenty of skill, too. We'll never know if cutting away low was an option for either of those two people, but it is a potential tool to use when you need it. It might make things a whole lot worse, but it also might save your ass. Shit does happen. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Yup. Awesome movie. Must buy DVD for rainy weekends at the DZ... _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Just so you understand, the sarcasm is more than just good fun. You need to clearly understand that your pilot training means next to nothing when it comes to parachutes. Unfortunate, but true. I think people are jumping on that comment because you seem to have an air of confidence that approaches arogance. Strangely, I say this with the utmost respect. We all have tons to learn, and in this sport, the minute we think we've got it all figured out we end up smacking into the planet at high speed - ending with titanium inserts (or worse). Try and keep in mind that even the people with thousands of skydives still consider themselves students, and they never stop learning. That makes you an infant in the grand scheme of things... Even though you think you know tons, it's still just a trickle in the river of knowledge that will keep you alive. Don't ever stop listening and learning. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

When we do that for tandems, the DZ charges upwards of $100. Of course, the exact price depends on the DZ. Of that, the camera man sees slot + $40-something. When a fun jumper asked me to do that last year, he paid my slot plus $20. I'm pretty sure I was undercharging, but those feelings were tempered by the knoledge that the jumper will probably have the film processed at Walmart, which will butcher the prints and the jumper will be paying another $30 in enlargement fees for a crappy print. _Am __ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.