danornan

To try and quote facts about something that happened over 2,000 years ago would be a belief, because the so called facts changed numerous times to fit the story. It becomes a buffet where you pick and choose to spin your story. Just look at current events with audio and pictures and 10 people have 11 stories. and now you think something that happened 2,000 years ago is a fact. Get real and use your common sense. Eye witnesses are inaccurate and you think a story repeated 100 times will be an accurate fact. NO, IT IS A BELIEF. Just because it is written in a book with a leather binder does not make it a fact. Dano

Quoting verse is not using logic, only your particular "belief" and so called interpretation. I can write anything ( which many profits did and a lot has been rejected over the ages) and call it my belief. Belief is personal and not allowed in a debate! Quote FACTS. Dano

Then how are we supposed to discuss our faith and try to reach some sort of an understanding of what we/others believe and why...with telepathy? That's ridiculous. Yet here you are debating religion with your "beliefs." How Ironic! ...would you like to include "writings" or some sort of logic to back up your claim as well? Don't know where you got that... I'm not debating anything nor is there any belief involved. You are projecting!. I just told you the purpose of Yom Kippur and stated that debates are useless. Your "beliefs" are just that. Something you choose to believe, regardless of truths or logic. There is NOTHING to debate. Dano

What I find interesting....... is that our governments FISCAL year always begins about the same time frame as Yom Kippur Coincidence We need rhys to check this one out in depth. Has to be a conspiracy..... Dano

I find it amusing to read debates on religion using "beliefs" "writings" and some sort of logic. People, it is a waste of time to debate religion with your "beliefs." ......and by the way Yom Kippur is a time to seek forgiveness and remember the dead. How ironic! Dano

CRW training doesn't do a thing for the guy that gets hit from above and behind. I get your point, but the only thing that really prevents collisions is getting heads out of asses from the jumpers, to the instructors to the DZO's. There are lots of things that ultimately prevent low altitude collisions, but I really feel that it starts with the given of a Predictable Landing Direction/Pattern. Many things, on the fly, happen at every DZ when there is what I call KAYOS, which defensible prevent accidents because of reaction. The purpose of this poll was to start conversation and get across the idea of being predictable so that it was not necessary to react, but have everyone act the same way below a certain altitude. Faster canopy present another problem, but that can be addressed if everyone is moving in the same direction. Thank you everyone for your replies. I am hoping for positive change. Dano

Looks will definitely get more initial attention, but if the spark or passion is not there, best to keep looking. I can still remember the feelings I had with my wife in the beginning. They are still there! Unfortunately, too much time today seems to be wasted on initial attraction and immediate gratification. Best way for a good relationship to develop is slowly... As in skydiving, slow is fast! Dano

I don't think I've ever responded to one of these questions because the answers and responses tend to quickly go away from the initial question. Before your theory can be addressed, "what is the right guy?" My answer would be that it is different for everyone. When you are young, you have preconceived visual notions, but as you age they change. As you get more mature, you open your eyes and see below the surface. The qualities that are important at 20 are different at 35. I haven't dated since the mid 70's but I don't think a lot has changed. The right guy has a lot to do with compatibility, not looks. The looks will change and if the emotional attractions are not there, the "right guy" becomes someone else. Dano

One simple explanation is suicide. It has happened. One in particular I'm familiar with at Z-Hills a few years ago. Guy get's his reserve repacked, tips the packer excessively and becomes a lawn dart after a 10-way. Dano

I started this poll to gain some incite into how skydivers are thinking about their landings and to also create dissussion as to the best way to reduce (not eliminate) the increasing number of landing fatalities; i.e., DUAWP (deaths under a good working parachute) below 1,000 feet. Just from these comments, that I really do appreciate, it is obvious that there is some confusion and there are different opinions that have their own logic. I am personally against new rules and regulations and feel that adding more can and sometimes leads to more confusion. Please continue to respond, leave your ideas and maybe we can come to a consensus and make landing a parachute on a DZ safer and less subject to whims and personal agendas. DropZone.com can have an influence and some of my ideas have been passed to the USPA Board for review. I sincerely welcome all suggestions and look to eliminate the LZ confusion. It would be great if the landing fatalities could be reduced by eliminating what seems to be landing direction confusion. Learning to land down wind would go a long way in eliminating the fear and fixation of "having" to land into the wind at all costs. Dano

These answers prove that there is still excepted kayos in the LZ. Too many exceptions and no one is in charge of the landing pattern. It is not enforced. Dano

That was the plan - It did not change, except for the individual who decides he is above it all and hooks it in without anyone criticizing him! Dano

A number of the responses tell me that we got serious LZ problems. This confusion is in my opinion part of the blame. Plans cannot change in freefall. Dano

It seems that there is another death in the landing area and I'm curious if I'm alone in wanting a PREDICTABLE LANDING PATTERN at the Drop Zone? By predictable pattern, I mean that at every drop zone, I would like the pattern determined and landing direction enforced. I have nothing against hook turns in a designated area. Deaths are occurring because skydivers are either afraid of landing downwind and turning too close to the ground or they think that they have to land into the wind. Deaths are occurring because some are landing without regard to others who should have the right of way. Deaths are also occurring because some "chase" the windsock. What do you think? Is there a good reason to NOT want a predictable landing pattern? I think that most airports enforce a predictable landing pattern for airplanes. Why can't skydivers have the same thing? Dano

Many people are so insecure with their own religion that they are uncomfortable when others are not the same. There is fear, hate and conversion that comes to mind. It's all a fantasy and a lot of wasted energy about something that strictly relies on faith and has NO LOGIC associated with it. Dano

No show, no grip, behind the door launch is a great way to learn how to do lots of things in the air, go fast and stop. Chuck exit is all about acrobatics and not skydiving! You'll learn a lot the old way and it's way more fun.... Dano

I really do think I understand your point. Regardless of what the "rules" are or what is "mandated" there will always be accidents and we'll never make the LZ bullet proof. I'm just trying to make it more predictable. Right now, it's very haphazard. 1. Watch the windsock and chase it all around. 2. Everyone agrees before boarding the airplane on a landing direction and then someone changes their mind. 3. First one down sets the pattern, unless the wind changes! and on and on.... Me, I land as far from the peas as possible and try to be last down. Never in a hurry to get down first. After the parachute opens I don't want any more excitement. Dano

Airplanes still have collisions in the pattern, no matter what rules the FAA has established. At least there is a plan. Right now there are no rules, just an informal agreement that changes with the wind! Dano

The term separate is very ambiguous and not the same thing as a formal landing pattern. Z-Hills has a swoop pond where EVERYONE must walk to get from the LZ back to the packing area. It is separate but in the path of everyone walking back to pack! Why wouldn't a formal landing pattern work. Just like the FAA enforces at every airport. Even the ones where we skydive! Dano

THIS IS TO ALL IN GENERAL, NOT ANY ONE INDIVIDUAL. As long as we allow hook turns in the predictable landing pattern, there will be deaths by landing. Even innocent bystanders die. The solution is really simple. DEMAND that the USPA require all DZs to enforce a predictable pattern landing. Most of these deaths will stop. If the FAA can mandate a predictable landing pattern for airplanes, we can do the same for parachutes. Until then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem. Dano

Maybe I'm missing something, but wouldn't you want to make a few skydives first to see if you really like it? Seems like the cart is a little ahead of the horse! Dano

Did my first 30 second delay out of the Southern Cross at Z-Hills.... Thought every DZ had a DC-3! Really did take it for granted.... Dano

Really nice pictures and video. Unless you've jumped out of a DC-3 or C47, there is just no way to explain the feeling. Can't help but smile and just feel good. Even the sounds of the engines makes the heart beat faster... Thanks for sharing the memories. Dano

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa that's not an expensive day at the DZ! An expensive day at the DZ involves a helicopter air lift to the nearest hospital.... The bills just keep on coming... Dano

People, new or old, on this site are only perceived and judged by what they write. The post that you quoted was written by me in response to a discussion about a certain technique for clearing the air around yourself prior to deployment at the end of a group freefall. Hopefully, you took the time to read the entire thread and didn't just see the term, "Hundred Jump Wonder", and think all newbies were being picked on. I carefully worded that response to the original poster. He was trying to find a justification for a technique that has been discussed in extreme detail, through many, many posts, and declared worthless and unsafe by at least 90% of the people who discussed it. He proceeded to pick apart these explanations to try to find some justification for this technique or to find anyone who would agree with him. Many times in the early part of a person's jumping career, they will come across a way of doing things that seems to make sense to them, and since no one else is doing it, they feel that they have discovered something fabulous and new. Sometimes they have. More often, however, they have come across something that was tried and discarded long ago as worthless or dangerous. Usually, when told about this, the person understands the explanation and moves along. That was not the case with this poster. It is frustrating to try to give information to someone that is intended to save their lives and those of their friends and have it dismissed as just another "suggestion". People who have been doing this for a while have seen their friends die because of unforseen causes. Once these causes are understood, it's tough to watch others ignore the lessons and make the same mistakes again. If you need to be gently and softly talked into believing a message that is intended to save you from a violent a horrible death, maybe you're in the wrong sport. Kevin Keenan Nice response Kevin - What a lot of new people fail to recognize or don't want to know ( it is the ugly aspect of this sport ) is that many of the rules were written in someone's blood. Too many of our friends have died over the years and we are just trying to prevent another death. People die skydiving and if you fail to recognize that you are doomed to repeat it. Why not benefit from previous experiences. More is learned by listening than by talking. Dano