geronimo

I was asked to bring these posts to your attention. I did post in the Events Forum. Membership Committee Agenda Group Member Committee Agenda Competition Committee Agenda Use a news reader insstead of Google. Web based forums are harder to use. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Hidden away on the uspa web site is Meeting Agendas includes BOD, GMM, GM Comm. Member Services Comm, Competition Comm. don't know why Safety & Training is not up yet. The Chair has sent it to the Comm. There are some interesting items there. If you cannot make it, send in your proxy statement Get out that May issue of Parachutist and find that proxy. Fill it out and mail it in. Or use this link: Proxy --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

[sarcasm] Hey are these from just one year & only from the US? If so, why don't you start up a mandated RSL and or AAD thread?? That's six fatalities per year that would be saved by these life saving devices - about the same as your 'save' projection for the Max WL BSR. Proper execution of emergency procedures would have (most likely) prevented these fatalities. But wait - that is jumper education, knowledge and experience coming into play. I know - force an equipment requirement and then say 'An RSL or AAD may have prevented these fatalities.' It's all so clear to me now! [/sarcasm] --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Altho, I do not quite follow how this thread evolved to the Nationals, there is a thread on http://skyleague.com about National's site selection. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Here is a post from sangiro: What does the title "geronimo", "pooh-bah", and "carpal tunnel" say about a person's skydiving skills? I think it's abundantly clear that these titles have nothing to do with skydiving. So, to the confused out there: Check any advice you get on these forums (or anywhere else), whether the title says "newbie" or "veteran" and the profile says 10 or 12,000 jumps, with your own instructors and before you apply it. If this is not your attitude about this sport in general already, then you may want to take up bowling. This forum isn't playing a "dangerous game". Skydiving is a dangerous pursuit. If you're not smart enough to know that all information needs filtering and verification before you apply it to something that may cost you your life when you screw up... well, then you're halfway on the way to hurting yourself already... regardless of whether these forums exist or not. In the end you're responsible for your own safety in this sport, you make your own decisions on what to listen to and what not, what to do and what not - not some "veteran" on an internet forum! Don't be a Lemming! Safe swoops Sangiro BTW, I believe I joined DZ.com rosters LONG before the Geronimo 'rating' was even thought of. Member of the Purdue bowling Team 77-78 Ladder #1 or #2 --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

USPA is US may seem as a propaganda slogan to you. The truth is that USPA can only change some rules with the membership's help. That is what our founders saw to be self-evident and that is how it should be. USPA needs your support, yeah or nay, in determining three changes to the Constitution and Bylaws that relate to the size, composition and election of the Board of Directors. I understand the held over angst that many jumpers have from preceding BODs. I share many of the same disappointments and frustrations that other members have. I did something about that. I ran for the BOD and obtained a seat with the help of many, many jumpers across this nation. I am working within the bureaucracy - that is no easy task. I have answered many personal emails about these issues. Part of my duties as a member of the Constitution and By-laws Committee was to put forth to the membership, specific proxies that the membership demanded. USPA has done that. USPA has put forth specific proxies. Some of the changes have voter precedents in their passage. Other proxy initiatives have been called for over several years and have substantial data to support their merit. Still, even as USPA reacts as a malleable agency for the jumpers, there is resistance. I call all jumpers to ask yourself if YOU are doing what USPA needs today. Are you doing something today that will make USPA be what YOU want it to be tomorrow? If not, why not? Do you want to see Board members that only get 100 votes or less on the Board? Or do you want to see strong regional competition among several highly qualified candidates? see http://ParachuteHistory.com/skydive/uspa/elections/eleccandidates.html to learn how infrequently RD have competition. RD Candidates are currently under a rule that they must obtain 10% of their region's members signatures to get on the ballot. This is ludicrous. The incumbent RDs do not have to do this, The NDs (incumbent or challengers) do not have to do this. Have you sent in your proxy? You may assign your proxy to any USPA member that will be in attendance at the GMM. I have posted several times on these issues. A quick search will find the - PROS vs CONS - HISTORY - RELATED MATERIAL --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

USPA is US may seem as a propaganda slogan to you. The truth is that USPA can only change some rules with the membership's help. That is what our founders saw to be self-evident and that is how it should be. USPA needs your support, yeah or nay, in determining three changes to the Constitution and Bylaws that relate to the size, composition and election of the Board of Directors. I understand the held over angst that many jumpers have from preceding BODs. I share many of the same disappointments and frustrations that other members have. I did something about that. I ran for the BOD and obtained a seat with the help of many, many jumpers across this nation. I am working within the bureaucracy - that is no easy task. I have answered many personal emails about these issues. Part of my duties as a member of the Constitution and By-laws Committee was to put forth to the membership, specific proxies that the membership demanded. USPA has done that. USPA has put forth specific proxies. Some of the changes have voter precedents in their passage. Other proxy initiatives have been called for over several years and have substantial data to support their merit. Still, even as USPA reacts as a malleable agency for the jumpers, there is resistance. I call all jumpers to ask yourself if YOU are doing what USPA needs today. Are you doing something today that will make USPA be what YOU want it to be tomorrow? If not, why not? Do you want to see Board members that only get 100 votes or less on the Board? Or do you want to see strong regional competition among several highly qualified candidates? see http://ParachuteHistory.com/skydive/uspa/elections/eleccandidates.html to learn how infrequently RD have competition. RD Candidates are currently under a rule that they must obtain 10% of their region's members signatures to get on the ballot. This is ludicrous. The incumbent RDs do not have to do this, The NDs (incumbent or challengers) do not have to do this. Have you sent in your proxy? You may assign your proxy to any USPA member that will be in attendance at the GMM. I have posted several times on these issues. A quick search will find the - PROS vs CONS - HISTORY - RELATED MATERIAL --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Forgot One 5. If a WL Limit BSR was announced to go into effect x many months from now, there could possibly be a rush to downsize. That would be interesting to watch. Other points: Your USPA PD/PL insurance is valid IF AND ONLY IF you follow the BSRs. This is explicitly stated in the insurance policy. Ramp gear checks do take place. DOB gave me one once at Skydance because I didn't have that extra tag they put on the reserve handle. USPA is a non-regulatory organization. The BSRs are stated as REQURIEMENTS. The rest of the SIM are RECOMMENDATIONS. A BSR violation at most means your membership status is not in 'good-standing'. BSRs that are waiverable at the S&TA level are generally not good in practice. There are about 10% of S&TAs that will not waive a BSR no matter what it is because it potentially could bring additional liability upon them if a jumper is hurt or killed because of the waived rule. Waivers for a WL Limit BSR would more than likely be granted on a drop zone basis as opposed to an individual basis. BSRs that are waiverable at any level indicate that the rule is beyond minimal safety standards. The easier it is to waive indicates how much above minimal safety standards it is. Most jumpers do not care if a know-it-all jumper disregards advice from others & then does something stupid. Most jumpers do not loose sleep over this. At most, they'll say 'I told you so.' It is the bad PR that goes along with these accidents that concern most jumpers. That can be 'fixed' by telling the press that this jumper was warned and told numerous times about his impeding doom. Jumpers reaching the A-license level have an understanding of the learning curve for RW (RW, CRW, vRW), but usually do not have an appreciation of canopy progression. RW has organizers to meter how quickly people get in over their heads. Canopy progression does not. The closest equivalency is gear dealers and instructors. That can be circumvented because of jumper-to-jumper gear sales. A SIM section on Canopy Progression would work the same way the sections on Advanced Progression. Most student jumpers do read the SIM. Jumpers studying for a license or rating also read the SIM. If you build in a healthy appreciation for canopy progression early on, you have a much better chance of getting people to listen to your sage advice. Kallend - I asked HQ about that fatality file that you gave me a year or so ago. They said they did not have it. I think you somehow lucked out on getting that file. Ron - Your "Do I need a min pull altitude for every make of canopy at each license level?" is an argument for NOT having a WL Limit BSR. Billvon - Your argument (in another post that I cannot find) that jumpers watch the fatality rate of such-n-such and then adjust their behavior based on the number of fatalities or injuries does not scale to a generalized concept. Your logic would indicate that jumpers would say 'Well, there haven't been any landing in powerlines fatalities, so it must be safe. I think I'll give it a go.' And I'll repeat " Lots of text is not in there because either it is 'standard stuff' or I did not type it in." --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

To the folks for a WL Limit BSR: There are many jumpers that want the same outcome as you: reduction of the injuries and fatalities under perfectly good canopies. A WL BSR will not work for a number of reasons: 1. It is nearly impossible to enforce. A jumper can borrow a rig or just the canopy & defeat the BSR. Of course, if there are WL cops at the boarding that may be different. Reality Check: No DZ is going to pop open a customer's container just to check the canopy on the ramp. 2. DZOs will object to it because of the liability problem it introduces. If some jumper jumps a WL that is against a proposed WL Limit BSR and then causes property or personal damage - the USPA insurance will NOT pay off as the jump was made in violation of the BSRs. See #1 above. 3. WL Limits do not scale with jumper weight. Two people under the same WL of the same make and model parachute will have different performance characteristics. The greater the disparity in the two jumper's weights the greater the difference in performance. A WL limit does not do what you think it does for everyone in a consistent manner. 4. People that do receive proper education can and do progress to smaller canopies in a safe manner. Education does work. 5. Most of the fatalities under perfectly good canopies involve non-aggressive WLs or jumpers over 500 jumps. 6. A BSR would need to pass a vote of the S&T Comm. FIRST - before it comes up as a motion in front of the full BOD. I personally do not know anyone on the BOD that is in favor of a WL Limit BSR. For all jumpers: An alternative to a BSR is a recommendation in the SIM: Here is a very rough draft of SIM 6-10 Canopy Progression Recommendations Edit at will, but only if you understand iteration. Please turn on the 'track changes option'. Lots of text is not in there because either it is 'standard stuff' or I did not type it in. Most of the stuff is 'camp-fire' stuff. Let me know what you think because getting a new section into the SIM is MUCH easier than getting the WL Limit BSR to be approved. You can send me stuff that you already have & I can incorporate that material or you can edit or add to the Word doc. I'll then send some draft to the S&T Comm & see if that can be added to the SIM. I'd rather see the SIM expand to 1000 pages (to replace the long ago bonfire chats) than see a WL Limit BSR. Email me at the addy below. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

I can't really see Skydiving or Parachutist making money from something I write. It should be the other way around. So 'Talking To' has been added to SPSJ. You can send your $20 directly to me ;) at PO Box 2581 Hemet CA 92546 For your convenience you may also use PayPal to Geromimo_AT_ParachuteHistory.com Thanks PS - Have you sent in your proxy yet? --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Jack's missing issues was taken care of yesterday. I did not see a need to post that here - unless I was in search of pats on the back. If you have a problem, any director or anyone at HQ can help you. Mike - never say 'went in' to a jumper ;) --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Cool. Thanks for participating! --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

http://dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=460984; http://dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=473019; --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

USPA General Membership Meeting 7:00 p.m., Friday, July 11 at Liberty Lanes on Southpoint Drive in Fredericksburg, Virginia. If you cannot make it, send in your proxy statement Get out that May issue of Parachutist and find that proxy. Fill it out and mail it in. Or use this link: http://uspa.org/news/images/Proxy_Insert.pdf The earlier proxy was a general proxy. You DEMANDED that USPA submit specific proxies to the membership. That is what USPA did. Now, put your voice where it can be heard. Send in that proxy today. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Hey - get out that May issue of Parachutist and find that proxy. Fill it out and mail it in. Or use this link: http://uspa.org/news/images/Proxy_Insert.pdf The earlier proxy was a general proxy. You DEMANDED that USPA submit specific proxies to the membership. That is what USPA did. Now, put your voice where it can be heard. Send in that proxy today. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Hey - get out that May issue of Parachutist and find that proxy. Fill it out and mail it in. Or use this link: http://uspa.org/news/images/Proxy_Insert.pdf The earlier proxy was a general proxy. You DEMANDED that USPA submit specific proxies to the membership. That is what USPA did. Now, put your voice where it can be heard. Send in that proxy today. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

WOW! Most of the replies to my post are BIZARRE!?!? Maybe you folks can help further my education. I do not know about you but when I see people doing stuff (that they should not be doing) that can kill you, me or someone else, I make mention of it. I do not see anything offensive in any of the recommendations I wrote. It's written in the regular second person familiar (or whatever it's called). Most people write 'You do this or you do that blah blah blah.. Reaction to these sentences is the MOST BIZARRE. Perhaps your education in skydiving has ended, but mine has not. I've had a personal mission since 1981 (that may be longer than some of you have been alive) to learn why people go in. The more I learn about the reasons, the more information I have to save myself in a myriad of situations. I think thanking someone for an education is polite, not rude. If fact, this education prompted me to send in two more revisions to the SIM. 1) Based on a) 15 of 20 people at Safety Day that had never heard about practicing EPs at repack time b) recently witnessing a 100% CYPRES save by a guy that had never practiced EPs since a refresher course 5 years ago (He pulled his cutaway, then main. No reserve pull & no RSL. His CYPRES saved him.) c) the paragraph in the most recent S&T NL about EPs see http://uspa.org/safety/newsletters/STNews061003.pdf d) Deuce saying ' never practiced cutting away in a hanging harness' I sent this change request to the S&T Comm: With the large number of folks that do not practice eps after student status I think we should specifically state the following in the SIM. 5-1.A.5 (suggested section) Practice your emergency procedures on the ground at every repack. Simulate some type of main malfunction after your last jump of the day. Then cutaway and pull the reserve. This will give you first hand knowledge about the pull forces and direction on your gear. .. This seems really obvious and many of the longer term jumpers do this, but somehow some way the newer jumpers do not know this. No one has ever told them to do this. This is not an isolated phenomena. There are jumpers across the nation that have never heard of this. ---- 2) Based on a jumper with 488 jumps doing his first 35-way I sent in: add to sim 6-1.C.2.b to your assigned pull altitude Some other comments on this: I occasionally run into people with 50-100 jumps that have done mostly solos not realize that you should track all the way to your assigned pull altitude. Until yesterday I assumed that folks that have RW experience know to do this. If the plan was to only track part way, then why not break off lower & use that altitude for RW? The plan is to track all the way to assigned pull altitude. I will no longer assume that new jumpers know this. I have added this additional instruction to my organizing spiels. I was also so concerned about this that I sent this email to Kate & Dan: It has been brought to my attention that many newer jumpers (ones that have not done +30-ways) do not understand that they should be tracking all the way to their assigned pull altitude. Many slow or stop their track around 3500 to 3000 because that's what they do on the littler ways. This is just an informal request to emphasize this at your camp. Emphasize 'track all the way' and emphasize 'assigned pull altitude'. BTW, there is nothing in the sim that addresses this. I did put in a request for sec 6-1.C.2.b to read flat track away (....) to your assigned pull altitude. This will do absolutely nothing for your camp, but maybe after the next printing more people might know this coming in (or not). A couple of pointers that go along with this are that you can sit up & de-arch as you wave off to kill off the tracking speed. If someone says they have a long snivelly canopy, then you can ask them to get a different canopy or take themself off the load. I know you guys know this, but with the plethora of freefall & canopy collisions we've had lately, it couldn't hurt to remind everyone. oh yeah - no hook turns ;) ! cya -- Kate wrote back ' good points. I've also wondered if people understand that they CAN wave off while still moving forward and I bet many don't.' ---- Perhaps, adding a few items to the SIM will fill the in the missing information that newer jumpers are not getting, perhaps not. It is a start. The SIM has grown into a long list of recommended procedures that used to be passed verbally out at the DZ. In recent years, this has not happened. It might be because people do not stay the whole weekend anymore. You can burn up all your money in an afternoon. Twenty years ago it took two days. Thanks again for the education. If you take that as rude, so be it, but I know more today than yesterday. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Good job on your first cutaway-pull reserve. I would like to add a few related comments because your story made me shudder because it reminded me of several fatalities. On big-ways everyone is supposed to track all the way to their assigned pull altitude. This enhances separation. You should track to say 2500, wave off and pull. You can sit up and de-arch as you wave off to bleed off the speed from you track. From your break off altitude, it appears that you were on the outside of the formation. When you slow your track at 3500 you run a VERY large risk of someone catching you from behind. Stopping your track 1000 feet above your pull altitude is a proven way to get killed. If you were in a middle wave, perhaps you might have had a 3500 pull altitude. That would be unusual for such a small big way. 35-ways are 'small' big-ways. Usually everyone, except the center 8 or so, is told to pull at 2500. You were wearing a camera and pulled both handles almost simultaneously. Paul also mentioned why this is not so good. This is another proven way to kill yourself. Ask around about Jan Davis - the one from Hollister not Santa Barbara. Videos of two of her previous mals are available some place. Everyone should do a real deployment, cutaway and pull reserve EVERY time they get a repack (on the ground ;) ). There is no excuse not to. Not even on student status??? Improper emergency procedures are another proven way to kill yourself. I definitely have a much clearer understanding why people go in. Thanks for the education. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Ok. That is what you think. Actually you are not correct though. Jan has been saying this for years. This is nothing new. She posts stuff like this on another newsgroup pretty regularly. I've been agreeing with her for years. I am all for education. I think she is just the person to do something about it also. Busted once again! You are right I have been saying this for a long time. Read http://www.makeithappen.com/spsj/introd.htm the original, uncut, politically correct version - written in May 1988 As for the leader, it is an old organizer technique when you have a 100-way or so and people keep taking turns doing stupid mistakes. You give the 'Get Mad at Them' leader before saying the some old some old. You use it when people are just not concentrating & fly below what you know they can do. The leader I used here is a bit more extreme, but is based on a LOT of comments I get from LOTS of jumpers. As for getting Parachutist to print it - good luck there. The f word word has to be replaced. Long time ago Parachutist used to have editorials that vividly described fatalities. That has long ago disappeared because we are trying to be mainstream. Truffer might print it, but the last time he printed one of my letters he edited it so much that he completely changed the meaning. You'd have to get him to agree to no edits. I apologize to Bill Cole and anyone else that may have been offended by my 'French'. Mike - I'd use the $20 for a jump. ;) ------- --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Talking To.......... Hey - all you jumpers out there - LISTEN UP! I'm giving you a 'talking to'. This is not a new-age politically correct 'These are the areas your performance needs improvement.' talk. This is the old school 'What the fuck are you doing!' rant. What the fuck are you doing crashing into the ground! What the fuck are you doing killing my friends that do everything right! What the fuck are you doing colliding into each other in freefall or under canopy! What the fuck are you doing trying to kill me! I am tired of reading about people crashing into the ground and into each other. Skydiving is risk-taking. Risk taking consists of three stages: (1) a learning process, (2) a skill acquisition stage and (3) a challenge stage. A person accumulates information and "know how" about specific tasks, such as a skydive during the learning process. The knowledge is used to mentally and physically rehearse the planned dive sequence. Additional knowledge is required to react to unplanned events that may occur. Skills are acquired and mastered by applying the "know how" to simulated or actual dives. A simulated scenario is created when a person is in a hanging harness, and actual skills are learned that should be used again if an actual dive presents a similar situation. Jumpers also simulate body movements for freefall maneuvers during dirt dives and then perform similar motions on a real jump. Challenge must always be present on a jump. Jumpers may press their ability to swoop faster. New jumpers may be challenged by simple maneuvers. More experienced jumpers are challenged by complex maneuvers. You have to do this in order and you cannot skip stages - if you want to live that is. Learn how to press your abilities without imposing additional danger on yourself or others. Help newer jumpers get to where they want to be in several steps. Jumpers are not careless. We just bump into problems we may not see in advance. Seek out advanced notice about potential problems. Dedicate yourself to enhancing sport parachuting safety by disseminating information about equipment, environments and human factors. Blue Skies - Black Death!!!!!!!!! PS Take this message personally. Take it to mean you if you are a new kid on a pocket rocket. Take it mean you if you see, but never talk to a new kid on a pocket rocket or on some load over his head. Take it to mean you if you think 'that jumper is too stupid, cocky or arrogant, to listen. Take it to mean you if you have ever fucked up - that should bring everyone into the fold. I hope this is the last 'talking to' I have to do. ....... posted here by request of people that read it on r.s ....... --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Ron et al......... This is an FYI type post. Keep in mind that only about 1/3 of the USPA BOD actually reads this forum. If you want to make sure they hear your voice you have to either email them directly or use fullboardATuspa.org The process of a new BSR: A proposed BSR goes through the Safety and Training Committee, then the full BOD. If a proposed BSR is fully endorsed by the S&T Comm. then usually the motion will pass. When there is a split in the S&T Comm. there's no telling if the motion would pass. I would like to point out that there are two of the 6 S&T Comm. members that have already stated on this forum that they would be opposed to WL limitation BSRs. I do not know what the rest of the committee thinks. I do know that John Leblanc of Performance Designs is also opposed to WL regulation. It just does not work right- even in the countries that have such restrictions. There are many reasons for this. The BOD pays attention to people in the field that are considered experts in a certain area. John Leblanc is such an expert. We all want to see these low turn or off site injuries or fatalities eliminated. We realize that a WL restriction might mitigate the injuries. Such a rule would be unwieldly to implement. You gave several reasons for that, so I do not have to convince you of that. We also realize that skydivers are an independent lot and should not be restricted unnecessarily. I encourage anyone that has an idea to write the BOD directly. I also encourage you to be flexible in that idea. Many times a second, third or ump-teenth iteration of an idea works - not the first cut. You might think it is kind of stoopid of me to help you get your proposal through the USPA political process. I do not want to see your BSR WL limitation in place. I think that there is some middle ground - something yet to be defined - that will help eliminate these injuries and fatalities and still give other jumpers freedoms. Iterate. WL on my PD 170 0.85-1 WL on my Safire 149 0.97-1.14 somewhere around 5000 jumps. I have absolutely no desire to land at 20 mph or more. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

I have an idea on this. Many times when USPA looks at some issue like this they want some data or a pilot study done. The results of the pilot study provide answers to the myriad of questions. A pilot study may validate procedures or rules. Data from other countries may not be applicable here. How do you get the 256-jump wonder on a 1.6 WL to go back to a 1.2 WL? Or you would do a longer term study that starts with all the new graduates from your DZ and any new jumpers visiting your DZ. So I suggest that you do a pilot study. You have over a month to get very preliminary data for the next BOD mtg. What you'd need to do is find a DZ (or 2 or 3) that would be willing to implement your WL Limits on a temporary basis. After the month is up you could continue it. So step 1 is to convince a DZO. You could probably get ZHills & Billvon could get Buzz's place. Step 2: State the 'rules'. This looks like a good starting place. 100 jumps Max 1.1 Wing load 200 jumps Max 1.2 Wing load 300 jumps Max 1.3 Wing load 400 jumps Max 1.4 Wing load 500 jumps Max 1.5 Wing load Step 3: Enforce the rules. You have to figure out the logistics of collecting the exit weights and canopy info from each jumper as they boarded a plane. Then if someone is over the limit - what do you do then? Make them get a different parachute? Are there other demos available? Or do you implement this as an honor system. Then if you catch someone over the appropriate WL, you do something. What is that something? Step 4: Track the jumps. You need data that says these people with these many jumps did jumps at these WLs. There were x many injuries or fatalities. How does this compare to previous injury & fatality data? Step 5: Track the people 'breaking' the rules. Did anyone switch rigs? Did someone load up on weights? Did someone have 3 buddies carry 10 lbs. each on board & then give all the extra weight to the hotshot? Did anyone pad their big container with newspaper plus tiny canopy - just to get by the gear check? Or did people go jump someplace else? Or did people forge their logbooks? Step 6: Track the after 'Mommy Rule' behavior. Did jumpers that were under the 'protective blanket' fare better once they were unlimited in WL? This definitely calls for a longer term study. Other Stuff: You'll probably find out who supports this and who is against it. Who are those people and why? What adjustments to the rules could be done? What type of PR type work has to be done? Remember, you are USPA! That is one way to look at the BSRs. I like to think of the BSRs as the societal (aka the US skydiving community) acceptance of a given level of risk. If USPA's task really was to protect people from their stupidity - then the entire SIM would be requirements and not recommendations. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

That is because I have no intention of checking PMs or dz.com email for messages. This way no one will be wondering why I don't answer. I did that because I did not know around 80 women on that load. I like to know people's names. Ok, so you realized that I was trying to learn people's names. I say 'I don't know you' and then look at your name tag. If someone just described that to me I'd think that the person learning the names was doing mental gyrations of matching the face to a name. Since I was that person, I can state first hand that I said 'I don't know you' & then looked at a nametag to a bunch of people that weekend in order to connect a name to a face. I even did that to Cindy Gibson - about 5 times. And I've known her since the mid 1980s! I should have stuck with 'Cindy Chidester' in my head & then translate the last name. By the end of the week there were only 5 people that I could not remember. On the upside there were +140 participants plus various spouses that I did know. Now, how you go from that to ' my opinion doesn't count' is beyond me. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

Here are a couple of reasons: 1. I can't type & it's a pain to fill it out. I also do not need another data place to keep up to date. 2. I don't care about all that crap, so why should anyone else. 3. I'm a very private person. 4. Profiling is bigoted. 5. Posts on r.s under Geronimo do NOT have my real name. If you do a WHOIS search on ParachuteHistory.com you will find my name. 6. I have an account here with my MakeItHappen.com email. I do not remember the username or password. Sangrio could not find it, but I get those occasional mass emails from dz.com, so I know the account is there. 7. I'd rather have people NOT know my background. I'd rather have a reply based only on the message content - not whatever background I have. As what might be called a 'famous' skydiver, I'd rather people, especially new jumpers, not know I have a bunch of jumps, been jumping since the painted desert had a primer coat, have World Records, or am on the USPA BOD. People say more of what's on their mind when they talk to just another jumper full of opinionated opinions much more than speaking to a 'famous' skydiver or a USPA 'official'. Many jumpers won't talk to me peer-to-peer. I try to make them. If I lose the replies from people that want to 'know the background of the poster' so be it. I look for the content, not the messenger or the envelope. 8. I've posted on many forums & newsgroups in many different areas: skydiving, apache, linux, php, css, javascript, c++, java, email, UI design, web hosting, windoze, etc etc. Your reply is actually the FIRST time a post (question or answer for someone) of mine generated a "Who the Fuck are you?" as a condition for a reply. I find that interesting. My gut feeling is that it is an isolated manifestation of the culture on this board. Guess I owe a case of beer too. Please clue me in on what you are referring to, as I have no idea. I remember talking to your husband Chris during a weather hold last fall. --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com

I find that content of a post is most important. There is an old saying that 'History repeats itself.' or 'Those that do not know history are doomed to repeat it.' The WL problem is a recurring problem. It has become a greater problem in the US because we do not restrict jumpers as much as other countries. Our fewer restrictions is a double edged sword. Many people have freedoms that they embrace and use wisely. Other people take the freedoms in an uncontrolled way and hurt or kill themselves. I much prefer the fewer restrictions way. Jim Slayton told me recently that France has outright banned low hook turns. When he was presenting the spiel in Brazil for the first Canopy Piloting Championships, it was news to many people there that the stuff PST was doing could be done. It was news that it could be done safely. I seriously doubt that a person bound & determined to jump a small parachute would be 'stopped' in the US - even if there were a gazillion rules against it. People use their second rig or someone else's rig now for gear checks. A WL check would be easy to spoof. I personally think that the 'problem' lies in why new jumpers do not understand that there is a learning curve with parachutes related to planform & size. New jumpers see a learning curve for RW, vRW and CRW, but not canopies. Why is that? Yes students are required to use AADs - even SL. I'm glad the US has not gone the way APF & other countries have for 'experienced' jumpers. I do not want required AADs for experienced jumpers. Gosh - I wouldn't be able to jump right now cuz that gizmo is out of the rig for a 4-year check. It's been sitting in the closet for almost 4 weeks now. I promised myself to ship it off this week. I'd rather sell it, but its value is too low to make it worthwhile. I'm glad USPA did away with the mandatory helmet rule too. In a nutshell, here's how most Americans (too damn independent for their own good) think: "It is my life and I will do as I damn well please." We don't want some agency telling us to use beepers, AADs, RSLs, big parachutes, altimeters, helmets etc. People like me look 'very dangerous' on paper because we do not have all of these 'life-saving' devices. FMI see I can't find the Patent No. right now, but there is an invention along these lines. IMHO, freedom of choice is more important to us than making sure every idiot that straps on a parachute lives. There is also a BIG liability issue in the US that does not exist in other countries. Suppose an agency says "jump this canopy for x many jumps. You'll be safer." Then someone dies on that recommended parachute. Here come the lawsuits - "Hey you guys said it was safer - but he died anyway. You lied. You are liable." This is a totally weird comment. We agree that the WL issue is a problem. We agree that jumping larger canopies at lower jump levels mitigates the severity of a mishap. We agree that the newer jumpers should be guided along. We only disagree on the implementation. As I said before, I do not have an answer, but I do know the restrictions type method would not work well in the US. BTW, a personal attack would be something like 'I think your dog is ugly or your hat is crooked.' None of what you have said comes anywhere near to a 'personal attack'.???? --- I have a dream that my posts will one day will not be judged by the color of the fonts or settings in a Profile but by the content. Geronimo_AT_http://ParachuteHistory.com