UDSkyJunkie

I learned the basics of swooping on a Sabre1 135 at approx 1.25 W/L. This canopy had a VERY short recovery arc, and I don't believe it was the best tool for learning, because you had to start the turn so very low (270 at around 200-250 feet, 90 at less than 100). After I had a pretty good handle on that canopy, I moved to a Sabre2 120, W/L about 1.45. This canopy has a very nice recovery arc... it's long enough that I can start the turn much higher, but short enough to recover quickly with toggles. I do not think this canopy would have been a good choice for learning the very basics either. Perhaps a size larger Sabre2 would have been more appropriate for the beginning. For the record, I agree with all the statements that the Sabre2 is one of the most underappreciated swooping machines. I am relatively inefficient with my swoops (often plane out too high), but I'm regularly getting as much or more distance that everything at my DZ except for the cross-braced pocket-rockets. It will be several hundred jumps before I have a reason to downsize. When I do, it will likley be a Sabre2 107. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

If your sister's rig has the reserve flap coming open on every single jump, regardless of orientation, she needs to have it looked at by a rigger immediately. I am not familiar with the Naro container, but I am guessing that the reserve flap is held down with velcro instead of tuck-tabs. If so, simply replacing the velcro will likley fix the problem, and should cost very little money. I cannot stress enough how important it is that this be addressed. an unexpected reserve deployment at freefly speed is one of the most dangerous events that can happen to a skydiver, because even a reserve in excellent condition could easily be damaged or destroyed on opening. Even if the canopy were to open fine, it could open so hard that the jumper can be hurt (whiplash, broken bones, compressed spine...) Because reserve pins are held very securely, and are low-profile, the odds of an open flap causing a problem are pretty low on any given jump, but it's important to remember that it only takes a single incident to end in disaster. Think of it like a main malfunction... most people could get away without a reserve 100 or 1000 or even 5000 times in a row, but would you ever go without? (excluding BASE) "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

umm... really? you ever jump much 1980's F-111? With a few exceptions, those canopies open WAY nicer compared to anything ZP, and plenty soft. The older folks out there would back me up on this I think. Best opening canopy I ever owned was a PD-170 9-cell... opened like a dream every time, no matter what. Had a Sabre 135, it opened quick, but not "brutal" or "hard". Except for the 2 times I pulled in a track (duh). Now I have a Sabre2 120. Opens soft but wild. Honestly, if I was a newer jumper I would MUCH prefer even the harder openings of the old sabre to the completely unpredictable openings of my current canopy. I'm with Martini... the old Sabre's a great canopy... you can't get more value for your dollar on your first rig. I also agree with the rant on responsibility. If your canopy opens hard... LEARN TO PACK!!! And the point of driving the buick to the limits before the corvette is so that the first few times you fuck up you do it on a big, slow, tank of a car instead of at 150 mph in fiberglass. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I agree with your observations, but I disagree with closing the thread. I have learned things I did not know in the incident threads. For example, the recent mid-swoop cypres fire fatality really took the skydiving world by surprise, though many people including myself had wondered how close to the limit we were. What many, many people did NOT know was that cypres mis-fires on landing had already happened, they just hadn't caused an accident yet. I have also learned a number of things about our equipment when people like bill booth step in and address a question raised about a fatality. When I read those threads, which is rare, I don't read the circular discussions much, because it's mostly so much BS. I scan it for useful information. If the incident is something so obvious as "the deceased had a blood-alcohol-level of 0.35" I don't bother... nothing new to be learned there. Another thing to consider: you have 1800 jumps in 5 years listed in your profile, so you're obviously heavily involved in the sport. That means that many of the things that you believe are not "new" may as well be to someone with 50 jumps. This is particularly the case if they are the type who isn't immediately obsessed and/or if they jump at a one-cessna DZ in the ass middle of nowhere in Kansas. The constant repetition of old points and counterpoints can be very educational to that type of jumper. Contrast that with the incident reports in Parachutist... I have VERY rarely learned anything new in those. Certainly nothing about my gear. At the risk of sounding a little insensitive... while some may be being disrespectful to the deceased, I think it's important to remember that the right to free speech gives people the right to be assholes. If it offends you (and some of it does offend me), don't read it... noone's forcing you. The sensitivities of some should not detract from the learning of others. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I think these stats are a big pile of crap! Not that they're necessarily inaccurate, just that they don't compare to each other well. 1 in 1000 is a reasonable number for the number of USPA members killed in the sport each year (25-40 fatalities out of 30,000ish members). 1 in 5000 for car accidients would probably be either the number of people killed in accidents or the odds of being killed in a single accident. 1 in 250,000 for an aeroplane crash would have to be the number of people killed in the sum of all plane crashes... sure as hell if you're in a plane crash your odds aren't that good. But it's all meaningless, since the amount of time spent in each activity is so different. Plus, the airplane crash stat includes all the people that don't fly or fly only rarely, but the skydiving stat assumes you're an active jumper. The car accident applies to most people fairly evenly. So basically, while these stats are probably true numbers, using them together is not useful. You would have to compare, say... odds of being killed on one skydive odds of being killed on one plane ride odds of being killed on one day's commute to work Sorry for the rant... I'm an engineer, and I can't help but be irritated by stats sometimes. After all, 87% of statistics are made up on the spot. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Thanks

In my opinion refusing to ever jump w/o an AAD is not, in and of itself, a sign of device dependancy. It might be overly paranoid, but that's about it. I personally choose to have an AAD, audible and visual alti, and full-face helmet on every jump. I have occasionally done without one of these elements, including AAD... I'm not as comfortable, but I'll do it if necessary (borrowing a rig with no AAD to test fly a canopy, or audible batteries are dead... something like that). Am I "dependant" on my AAD? No! Why not? Because I don't expect it to pull for me unless I can't. If my cypres ever fires when I'm concious, I'll be having a long self-evaluation about just what the hell I was doing that low, because obviously I did something very stupid. I'd rather that then be dead, though. Even if it were to fire when I'm incapacitated somehow, there will be some serious reflection because either 1) I fucked up real bad or 2) someone else did. Again, I'd rather be alive to make that reflection. If I had posted the paragraph above, but instead said I would not ever jump w/o an AAD under any circumstances, would it magically make me dependant on it? There are many people who are depandant on their AAD (sadly), but just refusing to jump without one doesn't put you in that group. Otherwise, BASE jumpers could all call us "device dependant" on our reserves, which we expect to save our ass if we mess up on our main. I wouldn't call myself dependant on my reserve, but it sure as hell was nice to have it around when I needed it. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Was "the jump" worth it? No. Was jumping in general, whether 100, 1000, 10000 jumps? I don't know, and hope never to find out. But let's face it... normal people take normal but unnecessary risks every day for fun that you could ask similar questions about... like: If you found out tomorrow that you were going to be a dad/mom, would the sex have been worth it? (or worse, if you found out you had AIDS) If you were otherwise healthy and diagnosed with lung cancer at 50, would the cigarettes have been worth it? If you were arrested and sent to prison, would smoking weed have been worth it? All of these are permanently life-altering events that can easily be prevented by simply not partaking in the activity. The first two, on a statistical basis, have a WAAAY higher chance of happening to you then being paralyzed skydiving, but people are more than happy to think "it'll never happen to me" or "I'm not going to worry about it right now... it makes me happy." Personally, I'm in the 2nd group... I know shit happens, and I know it could happen to me, so I pay attention to what isn't a good idea and I hope that that, along with a little luck, will let me dodge all the bullets sent my way during my short time on this earth Of course, you could always live in a bubble. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I'm not familiar with the specifics of the SLOWPO suit, but... as vicki said, "mega" booties should start from the knee, and are often (not always) made of cordura. The cordura may or may not (i personally believe not) have any effect on how the suit flies, but it's very rugged, so it's a good idea. Starting from the knee is more important, as it makes the booties bigger, and thus more effective... I've seen a lot of booties out there that start mid-calf or even almost down by the shoe, and I can tell you they are a waste of money. One more thing... when you get your suit (yay!) check the fit of the booties... they should be pretty slack when you are standing strait, but taught in an arch. If they're not taught in an arch, the wind force will push the booties to follow the contour of your leg and foot, and the booties will be useless, or nearly so. If they're too tight, they could reduce your flexibility, or even your ability to arch properly. Happy bootie flying! "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Very cool! I've been wanting to get data like this for my team, particularly block inter times, but it's a huge pain in the ass. This makes it prettymuch effortless. I bow to your computer programming skills... seriously, I've already added it to my favorites. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

This is a lot like asking how old is too old for a used car. Well, it depends... is it a 15-year-old honda from california with 75,000 miles, or a 5-year-old chrysler with 150,000 miles owned by a punk kid and driven in boston where there's a lot of salt? I own an 8-year-old Sabre 135 that has another 10 years in it easily... needs a new line-set though. My sister has a similarly aged Spectre 150 that has 400 jumps tops on it and a new line-set... practically brand new! On the other hand, I know a guy that owned a monarch for 10 years or so and always dragged it around in the peas and over cement... small wonder it was like tissue paper when he finally got rid of it. ZP last a LOT longer than F-111, and it's only been around about 16 years, so anything older than that is probably not worth buying. And billvon, a Nova in perfect condition? I wonder why that is? "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

This is my opinion: if you have to ask that question, find a new rigger. You can force the repack by pulling the reserve out of the freebag yourself, and an inspection by watching them, but if you feel the need to do either, I'd evaluate if you ought to be trusting your life to that person. Questions like this are also one of the many reasons I am my own rigger. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

On a similar note, here's a picture of ME circa 1981 packed INTO my father's front-mount reserve! Just wait till the first time he whips your ass on a 4-way. Or freefly, or swoop, or whatever it is you're into. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

No. With respect to the FARs, I think this comes down to interperetation. You and I (I agree with you here, by the way) may say that "understand" just means you have to be familiar with them, work with them regularly, be able to recite them, whatever. Another person, say... a judge... might interperet "understand" to mean "you just read the specific instruction you're about to execute." Who is right? I don't know, but all that matters is what the judge decides. Again, this is open to interperetation... my DPRE, as well as the DPRE that the riggers I learned from had, interpereted this to mean the instruction had to be open and to the correct page. Others may be different, I don't know. I wouldn't want to find out the hard way. Whether or not you need to have them "open" or "on the page," it sure seems to me like you have to have it at least readily availible for reference, and have read them at least once at some point in order to "understand" the instructions. So if you're an experienced rigger with 200 javelin packjobs do you need a manual? Maybe not. If you're an occasional rigger who has never packed a Javelin before, do you need them (that was essentially the situation that started this thread after all)? Yes... because you have to understand them, which means reading them. This whole mess is about how different people interperet vauge regulations. So far in my experience, two DPRE's, several master riggers, and a couple dozen senior riggers have all told me their interperetation is what I "misquoted." So far exactly two people (admittedly intelligent, current, professionals) have said they interperet them otherwise. I'll side with the mob on this one. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

You're right insofar as part 65 and 105 do not say any more than that a rigger may not: (e) Pack, maintain, or alter a parachute in any manner that deviates from procedures approved by the Administrator or the manufacturer of the parachute; or (f) Exercise the privileges of his certificate and type rating unless he understands the current manufacturer's instructions for the operation involved and has— (1) Performed duties under his certificate for at least 90 days within the preceding 12 months; So, assuming you "understand" it, and you have "performed duties under your certificate for at least 90 days within the preceding 12 months" (whatever the hell that means), it could be argued that you don't need to open the manual. Unfortunately, that's not how the FAA tends to interperet those regulations, and no offense, but you damn well know it. Before I took my test, I had a contraband copy of the DPRE test procedures, which we mere mortals aren't allowed to see. I seem to recall reading in them that the applicant must be ON THE PAGE at all times to pass. I could be mistaken, and I no longer have the document to find out. Regardless, my DPRE said strait up he was required by law to fail me if I was not on the page, even though he thought it was silly. Every rigger I know believes that the same holds true if an FAA inspector comes by while you're rigging.... if you're not on the page, then you're in violation of something. Is it really written in the FAR's? I don't know, and I'm not going to spend a week looking. Is it effectively a law, wether on the books or not? Yes. That's enough for me... if it's not enough for you fine, but I think it's better to tell people the regs, and then tell them what will be expected of them in real life instead of demanding to see it in the FAR. We all know a demand like "show me where it says that in the FAR's" is unlikley to work in the courtroom... they'll find a way to show you, even if it isn't there. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Some container manufacturers (such as the Relative Workshop) provide packing instructions starting at the point where the reserve is cocooned. Essentially, the reserve manufactuerer provides instructions to lay out, flake, and fold the canopy (or pro-pack), and then the container instructs you on how to get it in the bag. I believe the cocoon is the line where precedence transitions from reserve to harness manufacturer, though as the person above stated, there are others who may give a more complete or better answer. As a rigger, you ought to know the official answer to this... the law dictates that while packing a reserve, the rigger must have the manufacturer's instructions immediately availible and OPEN TO THE CORRECT PAGE at all times. As such, if you do not have instructions, you cannot pack the reserve at all. In reality, I think you will find that each rigger has their preferred method of packing, which will either be a reserve-style Pro or "flat-Pro" packjob, and that they will use the same method for all square reserves, regardless of the manufacturer's instructions. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Thank you! That's rather refreshing and unusual. I am looking for the same, although my style tends to be interpereted as debate The SIM is a great source of information, and certainly should be the primary reference of any USPA instructor. Unfortunately, what I'm aiming for here is gathering data on real-life... have people found the advice given in the SIM regarding RSLs and collisions to be useful or practical? The web of complexity in the SIM regarding this rivals the tandem instructor decision tree; this is not because the SIM is written badly, but because the situations are each unique. I find the topic of what system an experienced jumper should use, RSL, SOS, skyhook, or none of the above, to be beyond the scope of the SIM. I was hoping for more responses to the first three options of the poll... without them, this thread is essentially pointless. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

As with the previous post, this is a very, very slight advantage of the RSL over SOS. From a strict benefit to risk analysis, I think this can drop out. Or, if you're really clever, you can pull the handle a few inches and use a finger to pull the reserve cable the rest of the way. It might be just as easy as releasing an RSL in a violent spinning wrap! (please understand that was a joke) "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I was well aware of the disadvantages of the SOS system vs. the 2-handle w/ RSL when I posted this. I disagree that "the" reason is what you state, although it is certainly ONE reason. Other reasons could be: - jumper simply doesn't think of it in a high-stress situation, regardless of training - jumper does not have time to disconnect RSL - jumper is unable to disconnect RSL because they can't see it due to rig distortion and/or their wrap is violent What I am looking to learn here is if this "option" of pulling a small tab in an awkward, unfamiliar location during a wrap is really practical. So far only one person has responded who had an RSL, and he has not told his story. I encourage that person and any future poll takers who had an RSL to give details of how difficult they found it to release the RSL or why they did not/were unable to. I agree entirely, and I'm not saying the SOS is a replacement for the RSL. I am merely saying this: 1) the SOS system is unquestionably simpler. 2) IF you want an RSL on every jump for added saftey, the SOS will do the job just as well 3) It could be argued that wraps are relatively rare compared to the sum of all emergencies, and furthermore that the potential inability to release the RSL, combined with the significant possibility that cutting away from a wrap with an RSL connected, though unwise, will not cause any harm, makes the advantage of the RSL over SOS very, very slight. As such it could be said that the benefits of SOS over RSL outweigh the risks. Since that's the argument I keep seeing from RSL enthusiasts, I'm surprised the SOS is so rare. (I, for the record, would never jump the SOS system) "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

First off, I agree with about 99% of what you said. However, I disagree with 150 being the line. From 100 jumps to about 650, I flew a Sabre 135 loaded 1.2. Given the right inputs, I was (eventually) able to fly it like a high-performance canopy. However, for the first 300 or so jumps on it, I didn't do that. I made lots of mistakes in those first 300. Crosswind landings, downwind landings, landing in corn, a couple lowish panic turns, a couple last-minute flare-turns, a couple times paying more attention to the person videoing me than the groud, twice I had the drawstrings from my slider get caught in one toggle and prevented flare on one side, and once the right half of the canopy collapsed at 25 feet while I was on double-fronts. None of those resulted in more than a bruised ego, and most I even stood up. If that's not the definition of a "forgiving" canopy, I'm not sure what is. Granted, had I reacted to some of those situations differently, they might have not gone so well, but the same could be said of those events if I was flying a 170 or 190 instead. Now my current Sabre2 120? Yeah... that's strait up a HIGH performance canopy. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone without several hundred jumps and some demonstrated skill. PD even called my S&TA when I asked for that demo. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Sorry for starting yet another RSL thread, but I'm curious. It's fairly common knowledge that if you are in a canopy wrap, entaglement with another person or own main, or have 2 canopies out (particularly on the racer) that it is best to disconnect the RSL prior to cutting away. Yet in all my years of hearing "no shit, there I was..." stories, I have never heard of someone actually doing it. As an extention of this, for all those RSL fanatics out there: if the poll goes as I expect (which is to say, I expect very few people to have ever disconnected an RSL mid-emergency), then why use an RSL at all? Why not instead use the SOS system? It's as simple as it gets, and the whole "device dependancy" debate goes out the window, since EPs are identical no matter the malfunction... "if something's wrong, pull this handle!" I know maybe 3 experienced jumpers who use the SOS. Obviously anyone who would do occasional or frequent camera or CReW jumps would want an RSL instead so they could disconnect it on the appropriate jumps. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Sometime when you're up high and have no traffic, try pulling one toggle until the eye in the line is even with the guide ring, to simulate one toggle being prematurely fired on opening. You'll get a pretty good spin going. Now imagine you're in that situation AND you have several line twists in the opposite direction! That's what I had to cutaway from, and I admit I was shocked by the violence. Granted, I was flying a Diablo at 1.4 at the time, but I also had 500 jumps and plenty of experience kicking out of linetwists... something much more mellow would have seemed pretty violent at 35 jumps. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

They are, by today's standards. Twenty years ago, a spectre at 0.96 would blow the doors off any but the fastest canopies around... maybe even those. Violent malfunctions and severe line twists aren't unique to highly-loaded elliptical handkerchiefs. They're just worse. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

A fair point. I actually don't "recommend" an RSL as such... I believe each person should make an informed decsion. I also think that those who are new to the sport and haven't yet become informed are most often better off with an RSL then without. I made my decision long before I ever started jumping (been on DZs since age 2 weeks), and have not used an RSL since I stopped using rental gear. My reasoning was that I did not want one in the event of a canopy collision or a spinning malfunction, and that I did not believe I needed one. I am much more impressed with the skyhook then the RSL, and intend to send my Vector back to the relative workshop this winter to have the skyhook mod done. I still do not feel I "need" one (and have the malfunction to prove it), but the design of the skyhook is such that I believe it can handle a truly violent malfunction better than any human or traditional RSL ever could, and that tips my personal benefit/risk scale in favor of it. The (non-CReW) canopy collisions I have seen (a few personally, most on video) have always been immediately after deployment before toggles are even released or as you say, on final approach. Unfortunately, none of the ones on final were anywhere near as high as 1,000 ft. All that I saw were below 500. Some people chose to cut away, others did not... all resulted in either a fatality or serious injury. Of those who cut away, none would have been helped by an RSL, although some may have been by the faster-acting skyhook. Another note on collisions (sorry to beat a dead horse)... if you are the guy at the bottom of a collision, and you've got at least 500 feet, an RSL will probably save you. However, if you're the top guy and wrapped in somebody else's canopy or lines, an RSL won't help at all until the other guy chops and you can get out of the mess. Each collision is unique, and there is no answer as to what is better for them in general and precious little useful advice on how to deal with them. They're just plain ugly shit. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Looking at some of the things you have written, I would strongly recommend you find your local rigging guru and have him explain to you how an RSL works, what it does and does not do, and why... I think you are missing some important details. I can touch on a couple of things here, but there is much more information: Since the purpose of an RSL is to deploy your reserve when you cutaway a malfunctioning main, leaving it disconnected until AFTER you have a good canopy means that it can't do it's job. The answer is no. An RSL pulls the reserve pin when you separate from one of your main risers. The only way the situation you describe could happen is if the riser with the RSL lanyard is cut away (or broken) and the other riser is not. If your cutaway cables are the correct length, the first is all but impossible. Risers have been known to break, but it's extremely rare, and replacing your risers at recommended intervals reduces the possibility further. A canopy collision (high altitude) is one of the few circumstances under which having an RSL connected is VERY BAD! The reason being because you need to have some separation from the other person before deploying the reserve... remember, the other person may also have to cut away... if you both cutaway and both reserves are deployed immediately, there is an increased chance of having one person fall through the others reserve or the two of you getting into another collision, only this time under your reserves! A low-altitude canopy collision (say... under 400 feet) complicates the situation further, as cutting away, RSL or not, will likley mean the reserve does not have enough altitude to deploy. The best way to survive these situations is not to get into them (useless advice if it happens anyway, but it's true). Again, please find a rigger or instructor to explain why all of this is true. The advantages and disadvantages of the RSL are somewhat complex and cant' really be captured in print. Good luck! "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."