tombuch

I didn't bother watching the video, 'cause I don't have a password, but based on the description as a student, it's not normal, and in the United States it is a violation of USPA BSR 2-1 (K)(2)(a) which says: All students are to be equipped with the following equipment until they have obtained a USPA A licence: (a) a ridged helmet (Except tandem students). Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

As I understand it, they report all skydiving fatalities they know about within the United States, including student jumps and non-members. They try to identify fatalities at non-group member drop zones as best they can, and as far as I can tell they capture all of those. They try to report fatalities that follow an accident, such as a long hospitalization that ends in death, and I think they do a good job on that rare event. They do NOT tabulate fatalities of USPA members outside of the United States, so a foreign jumper who buys a membership for his two week visit to Perris Valley will not be counted as a fatality if he dies in Europe several months later. Likewise, a United States citizen who is spending a week at the Herc boogie and dies, will not be tabulated in the USPA data, although if his death was especially boneheaded or public he might get still a mention in the annual report, and the death would probably be covered in at least Skydiving Magazine. They also do not tabulate BASE fatalities, even if the jumper is a USPA member. The number of members is the number of members at a fixed point in time, so it includes student members, but not students who are not members. I believe the total number of jumps is derived from membership renewals, and in past years has been reported as an absolute number, but this year seems to be a rounded number. As to your original question about USPA efforts to be consistent and accurate, I believe they are working to do that, but the problems with data make it impossible to create an absolute statistic that says one out of every X jumpers dies, or one out of every X-thousand jumps results in a fatality. The data is good enough, and consistent enough, to give us year-to-year analysis, and a general sense of risk and risk management, but given limitation in collection can't be pinpoint accurate. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Cool comment, I appreciate it. Last year I was riding the gondola at Stratton Mountain where I teach snowboarding and one of the guests asked what I did in the summer. I told him about skydiving and he said he had read a book for beginners, and based on that decided jumping wasn't for him. He was shocked to learn I was the author. So, some people have read it and made the decision to jump, and others have decided not to. Either way it's good to know I've helped folks to make informed decisions. Blue skies, etc., Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I did some checking on that when I was writing my book. I believe the 2.5 million is a best guess based on the numbers we report on our membership renewals. It does not include student jumps. I'll note that for past years the number of jumps is very specific, but the press release for 2007 rounds the number to 2.5 million. For more data, check out the member surveys at http://www.uspa.org/about/sport.htm Here are the number of jumps reported by USPA in past years: 1999 2,343,506 2000 2.244,165 2001 2,215,995 2002 2,151,228 2003 2,086,692 (Derived, USPA membership log was corrupted) 2004 2,221,115 2005 2,177,074 2006 2,122,749 2007 2,500,000 As for number of members, it looks like this: 1991 20,250 1992 26,150 1993 25,550 1994 27,750 1995 30,000 1996 32,900 1997 32,665 1998 33,526 1999 33,458 2000 34,217 2001 34,322 2002 33,664 2003 32,628 2004 32,057 2005 31,276 2006 30,618 2007 31,264 Fatality numbers look like this: 1991 30 1992 27 1993 41 1994 30 1995 27 1996 39 1997 31 1998 44 1999 27 2000 32 2001 35 2002 34 2003 25 2004 21 2005 27 2006 21 2007 18 From the data I have looked at, the drop in 2007 fatalities is dramatic, and is the continuation of a long term trend. Part of that is probably related to our adjustment to new technologies including AAD's and high performance parachutes. In the case of high performance parachutes, we saw a dramatic spike in fatalities as we began using small HP parachutes, but our experience and educational efforts are paying off, and our canopy fatalities as a percentage of jumps and members is trending down. That's all super good. We should be proud, and USPA has been a major part of that effort. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

One of the best preventative measures is to tend to the whole slider, not just at the stops. Reaching into the center of the slider and making sure that it's pushed down (in a pro-pack) into the canopy. This will help to prevent any build up of pressure above the slider. Remember rubber banding the slider to the canopy from back in the day? I had an old square that was set-up with a rubber band on one of the stabilizers to hold the slider, and another with a rubber band on the tail. The idea was to keep the slider at the top of the lines until the canopy started inflating and pushed it off the rubber band. I had another canopy with a packing strap that closed everything off with a single line stow until all the lines had extended. The slider was packed above the packing strap, so it couldn't move until full line extension. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I agree with most of the posters about the missing logs...forget about them for now, and start logging fresh. I'd also suggest you do more than log in the Pro-Track. Those things gets lost, or data can become corrupted. Take the time to use a paper log book, and to get the needed signatures for at least a few hundred jumps. I have 13 logbooks in total covering every one of my 4,700 jumps. It's seriously cool to look back at where I have been, and who I have jumped with. I skip signatures on most of the jumps now, but I still maintain notes about what happened, and I do have special jumps signed. I still remember the first few jumps I did with Jerry Bird, and my fear in seeking his signature, but he was super kind about spending a few minutes with me, as have been all the jumpers who signed my book. I keep that in mind when new jumpers seek my signature, and I really appreciate that they consider me worthy of signing their jumps. Heck, in 25-plus years I have never encountered a single skydiver who wasn't pleased to sign a logbook or share a memory. And each jump doesn't need to be signed by somebody actually on it. Any "witness" will do, so if you get behind at the end of a weekend simply sit down with an instructor or admired jumper at the end of the day and ask for a few signatures. Be proud as you do that, and be happy to offer up a story or smile about the jumps you made. Skydiving is more than just jumping out of airplanes. It also about building relationships, and log books are the records. Welcome back to the sport, and enjoy your future memories! Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I've never heard that one before. I think it's nice. One of the discussion points I use when teaching skydiving actually came from teaching snowboarding. It goes like this: The whole point of skydiving is to have fun. If you are having more fun than anybody else, you are the best skydiver! Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Check out the attached article I produced for The Ranch several years ago when I was S&TA. The web address listed is still the same, but the "help" option is now listed on the right side, near the top of the screen. Not having looked at the numbers you reference, believe the +05 is the temperature, and I think you are correct that the letter combinations on the left are the airports. See if the attachment and the page link help. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I'll give you a different pilot perspective story. Several years ago I was landing my Sabre 120 with the beginning stages of a head cold that I hadn't yet identified. I did my standard aggressive 180 front riser turn with a small straight in component at the end. As I came out of the turn into the front riser dive my head told me that I was still turning hard, and my hand twitched to pull down aggressively to stop the phantom turn. My pilot training told me my hands (controls) were neutral, and that I might simply be experiencing vertigo. OH CRAP! WHAT SHOULD I DO! Reluctantly I held my controls where I thought they should be in spite of all the internal information telling me I was in a deep spiral and about to die. I bit my lip, preped for a nasty slide landing, and hoped I had made the right decision. I had. Years of instrument training and time in an Air Force spacial disorientation class is really what saved my life that day. As the day wore on the head cold slammed me hard, but when I got in the airplane there hadn't been a trace. So after I landed I thought back to friends who had made foolish last minute corrections for no apparent reason and didn't live to explain why. And I was glad for all the money I had spent on my pilot training. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Hell no! We all learn things differently. The physics professors is probably focused on technical stuff (sensing, thinking, judging), and although he "feels" too, he will probably learn best if given concrete examples and then guided to understand how the tech fits into the operational world of skydiving. Another student may be all touchy-feely and not care a whit about the tech. They need to be approached differently. A good instructor will be able to recognize various personality and learning styles and adapt his teaching to the individual. Some of the first research into this area was done by Carl Jung in 1920. He offered a series of "function types", which became the focus of the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator in the 1950's, and were well described by researchers Kiersey and Bates in 1984. Others have added further depth to our understanding of personality types, and how they relate to the world. That information has been further defined to help instructor as they attempt to provide information to students. A good instructor will take the time to learn about personality types and learning styles, and then be able to apply this information to just about any student. The instructor who believes a physics or engineering professor should "go away" or suggests that the technical experience and mind set are not helpful, should probably find another line of work. As a starting point for additional information, take a look at an excellent description of this stuff on Wikipedia, under "Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator. There are tons of additional links at the bottom of the page, so you can spend a day or a lifetime learning about learning without ever leaving your laptop! Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

See article 7 "Skydiving Risk" at http://theblueskyranch.com/STA.php Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I think it is super helpful. You will already be familiar with so many things including the operation of the aircraft, that tend to overload non-pilots. The canopy part will make lots of sense given your understanding of aerodynamics. The landing part is very much like landing a light airplane, but of course there are differences. Make sure your instructor knows you are a pilot so he can help you latch new information to old information. The response from Quade is very solid. You may find a "lack of professionalism" in the GA world of skydiving that might trouble you, unless of course you have prior experience with ulta small GA operations. Several other posters suggested that glider training helps. I find that's true, but I thought my power training helped more than the glider experience. You can pick up a couple of books that will help you prepare, if you are a tech person who wants the book knowledge. The first book I'd recommend is my own, "JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy" published by McGraw-Hill in 2003. It is still selling from some outlets, but you might need to get a used copy. Another terrific book is "The Skydivers Handbook" by Poynter and Turoff. It's an outstanding resource. If you haven't already done so, check out the United States Parachute Association web site at http://www.uspa.org/news/index.htm. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It should be fine after four weeks. In the United States a main must be repacked every 120 days, the same as a reserve. If you are really geeky, you can read the specific regulation at 105.43(a). Your country may have a different regulation. As a general rule, a parachute will pack and then settle just a bit. Most of that settlement occurs over the first few hours to days. From there it remains pretty much stable in the container, and opening performance doesn't change much as long as the rig is well maintained. If it sits in a car trunk in the bright sun there may be problems, but generally, once a rig is packed it remains fine to jump for at least a little while beyond conventional mandated packing cycles. I don't have quick access to the data about packing changes over time, but I know somebody else here might be able to post it. The main reason the United States has a 120 day repack cycle, and other countries have repack cycles, is to allow for inspection, an increasingly important point with more rigs equipped with AADs that have batteries. For that reason, inspection, I'd strongly encourage you to follow manufacturers and regulatory guidance about repack cycles. So, you should be fine jumping your main four weeks after it was packed. If you want to repack it, go ahead, but don't feel obligated. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It's approved equipment, so it must meet FAA packing requirements. Essentially, the regulations say that if the FAA approves all the components, then the FAA knows what's best and you must follow US regulations. If one of the components (reserve or container) isn't approved, then FAA doesn't know enough about your equipment to make a judgment, and the home country rules apply. That's the law. Some drop zones may not enforce it to the letter. For more detail see an article I wrote for Dropzone.com in 2003 at http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=96 Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Interesting idea. My first concern is that the FAA will not fund the program, or hire new staff. Rather, they would simply load any additional skydiving regulation onto the backs of already overworked, and well intentioned but clueless inspectors. They have the mandate to regulate us at a relatively low level now, but don’t bother unless they get a complaint. I don’t think that will change in this day of federal budget compressions. Is the FAA the big bad boogie man? Nope. But they haven’t done much to manage skydiving aircraft, pilot, or equipment risk in the field, and I don’t see them stepping up to the plate on behalf of that part of the general public that participates in skydiving. Of course if folks are concerned about their local operation they can look up the FAA Flight Standards District Office in their phone book and ask for an inspection to address a specific or perceived danger. Or just click here: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/ to find your local FSDO. But we don’t want to do that as individuals, and we lack the organizing skill to do it as a group. I think the solution is already available for those who want to risk being perceived of as tattletales, but absent that initiative, nothing will happen. Or, perhaps the FAA is already reading this thread, and the other threads on this site, and is beginning to understand that many veterans of the industry are identifying a problem and seeking assistance through aggressive but informed oversight. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

The status of the Cypres should be included on the packing data card so that the owner, or anybody else doing a pre-jump inspection will know what that status is. Your rigger should have checked the serial number on that card, especially if it was the first time he saw the rig, or his seal wasn't on it. But that's not all. The same information should be on the Cypres itself. That should include the date of manufacture, the date of last factory inspection, and the date the battery needs to be replaced. A rigger should always remove the Cypres from the pouch and do a full inspection for damage, including leaking batteries, on every repack. As above, if the rigger didn't pack and seal the rig last time, then the inspection should include every tiny detail like all the numbers on the Cypres, matching all serial numbers, etc. I wouldn't get too upset at your rigger, but I would point it out. Let him know the Cypres had been changed and wasn't noted on the card, and ask him if he noticed. It's not exactly accusing him of being a slacker-packer, but he should get the hint and improve his inspections on all rigs. As for legalities, see FAR 105.43(c) which says "If installed, the automatic activation device must be maintained in accordance with the manufacturers instructions for that automatic activation device." So, if the manufacturer says it is out of date, it is out of date, and it isn't legal. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

A while back I wrote out a description of FAA parachute regulations targeted at airport screeners and police agencies. It was on Dropzone.com for a while, and somebody else added a letterhead to it. The idea is to throw in some specific regulations so the screeners know where and how the FAA regulates our equipment, and then think they have some kind of official approval. I have also printed it for other jumpers a few times and then signed it with my rigger ID, so they would have paper to hand to a screener if there were any questions. I have attached that briefing paper for general use. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

For those of us in the United States, that's about 121 pounds on a six foot frame. You are a bit lite for your size, but it shouldn't be that significant of a problem. You can carry a small weight vest or belt, and your student rig will add some weight. Plus, learning to arch will help. So, there are some things you can do on your end to make the skydives go better. But... Managing student fall rates is the AFF instructors job. They should be able to fly with you by changing their arch or wearing bigger jump suits. Now there are some instructors who are too heavy to comfortably match your fall rate, just as there are some who are too light to fly with the big boys, but overall, the DZ should be able to staff your jump with instructors who can make it work for you. Once you get into the sport your size may work to your advantage in several ways, depending on the type of skydiving you choose to do. In any event, our sport is open and welcoming to all, so stick with it and enjoy the sky! Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Not really, but close. Take a guy who likes to open at 2,000 feet. He knows it is riskier than opening at 3,000 feet, but believes he has the skill to deal with whatever problem might occur. That belief may be based on some level of personal experience opening at that altitude, or it may be that he is assessing his perceived skill against the skill level of others who have opened at 2,000 feet. The same goes for a jumper who sometimes likes to open at 1,000 feet. Or lower. When he evaluates risk, he will look at the probability of something bad happening, and the potential outcome(s). It may be that he is under calculating the probability of a problem, under calculating what the worst case outcome is, or under calculating the probability of a worst case outcome. Or, he may be appropriately calculating those factors. Risk assessment can be very technical and exact in that we can know with near certainty the probability of an outcome over time or class, but assessment of individual skill is inexact, and we can not know with certainty the outcome of a specific event prior to completion. Jumpers who take extraordinary risks may be making solid judgments, or perhaps not. To better evaluate the risks we need to take a broader look at the specific behavior, the skill and demonstrated experience of the individual, the potential outcomes including the impacts to the drop zone, the general public, and other stakeholders. The risk evaluation of an observer may be different than the evaluation of the jumper. One isn’t necessarily correct and the other wrong, but the understanding of risk and skill, and the balance points may be different. Managing risk is a tricky thing, especially for S&TA’s and DZO’s who may have significantly different levels of risk tolerance than those of regulated participants. Risk isn’t absolute, and acceptable risk varies greatly. That doesn't mean discussion is a "waste of time." Rather, it means the discussion needs to be carefully framed. For example, the risk taker may not be calculating the imposed risk on other stakeholders, and this needs to be pointed out. Likewise, skill assessments that are questionable should be pointed out. Sometimes the discussion will change the process of assessment, and sometimes not. Sometimes the behavior will be tolerated, and sometimes not. Discussion and mutual understanding, or at least mutual participation, is an important part of changing risky behavior and the assessment of that behavior. From the standpoint of a former S&TA, there were times when I told a jumper that he couldn't do something "for the following reasons...." And other times when I said I thought the behavior was inappropriate under my risk assessment, but that I would allow it given the reasoned explanation. That's the approach of a mature and experienced jumper who was once admittedly a hard headed and out of control near-statistic. Perhaps part of that is a lifetime of experience that tells me being dead sucks, but being almost dead sometimes sucks more. And that understanding changes the calculus of risk management. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I disagree with your concept of skydivers as fatalists. Rather, I think we assess risk and then seek to mitigate it as best we can. We, as a class, believe strongly in our ability to affect the outcome of every jump. With that, there is a broadly accepted understanding that even best practices will sometimes be insufficient to prevent injury or death, but always we always strive to control those risk factors as best we can. I think even those who appear to take extraordinary risk will generally be carefully evaluating and mitigating those risks. There are some folks who don't do a very good job of assessment (I was once in that category as a bulletproof 500 jump wonder), but I think even those jumpers would tell you they understand the risks and believe they have them under control. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Does anybody know who Cheryl Elliott is? She has written critical reviews of my book "JUMP Skydiving Made Fun and Easy" and Poynters "The Skydiver Handbook" on Amazon.com, and wrote a favorable review of "Jumping Through Clouds," a factually dishonest book that is critical of student skydiving. Her critical reviews were actually the same review just cross posted to both book pages. She seems to be advocating against tandem because of two unusual accidents involving students falling out of harnesses last year. Does she have a history with the sport? Was she wronged somehow? Her profile says she is in Missouri. The Amazon reviews (dated October 25-29, 2007) are available at http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/ACNCY70CBK7F0/ref=cm_cr_pr_auth_rev?ie=UTF8&sort%5Fby=MostRecentReview Her level of hostility toward the sport seems odd, and I'm wondering what caused it. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

A few years ago when I was the S&TA at The Ranch we compiled some statistics that showed off field landings were associated with a disproportionate number of injuries. For most of us, an off field landing isn't a big deal, but it can become a problem in half-a-heartbeat. There are lots of reasons, and a few things we can do to minimize the risk of injury. I wrote a feature for the S&TA page of The Ranch web site that explored causes and strategies to minimize injuries. If you haven't already checked it out, see Article 16 "Survival Strategies, Off Airport Landings" at http://theblueskyranch.com/STA.php Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I’m not a regular at Cal City, but have visited a few times. One of my favorite skydiving memories was a jump I made there many years ago. The space shuttle was scheduled to land at nearby Edwards, so all jump operations were on hold for a short while. Finally, it was decided it was too windy for a shuttle landing, so it was held in orbit and we were released to jump. We exited, opened, and then while under canopy heard a distinctive double boom. There in the distance was the shuttle, falling like a brick, on final approach to Edwards. Quite a sight. It turns out they reevaluated the winds and decided to bring it out of orbit at the last moment, but communication got mixed up and GA traffic wasn’t advised. I’ve made more than 4,700 jumps, and some really stand out. That was one of them. Thanks Cal City. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

You obviously have the right mind set for finding the best DZ, and the three you have selected are all good choices. My preference would be Deland based on the folks I know who jump there, and the Deland history as a leader in training (especially team training). If you haven't already done so, do check out a copy of my book, "JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy." It is a consumer book designed to help folks choose a drop zone, and includes specific questions to ask, and what the answers mean. One of the key suggestions, is to call and then visit several drop zones. In your situation is sounds like you have already made the calls, and are looking for that 'one thing' to push a drop zone above the others. I think a visit might do the trick. Of course you should ask more questions when you visit, and should look to confirm the drop zone matches the marketing hype, but you should also be looking for a general sense of comfort and your own 'feeling of belonging.' I'm confident that whatever choice you make here will be a good one. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Here is his web site with lots of information about what he's doing, and his other publishing ventures: [url]http://www.parapublishing.com/sites/para/about/about.cfm[url] Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy