UDSkyJunkie

I find it unlikley that most jumpers could be considered fatalists. If a rookie swooper is told he needs to stop doing stupid shit, and he responds with "we all have to die sometime..." or "God will take me when my time is up" (both of which I have seen said), he may be trying to convey that belief, but that doesn't mean they actually believe it deep down. If someone truly believed their fate was pre-determined, why would they still have an AAD? Or a helmet? Or an audible? Even a visual altimeter? If they truly believed, none of these things would be viewed as necessary, as they won't help when their time comes, and god will protect them until their time comes. No, I believe fatalism is yet another tool that a few people use to justify decisions and behaviors that a voice in the back of their mind is telling them are very bad ideas. It is no different from quotes like "well, he died because he made a mistake, and I'm very talented" or "it's ok because I'm a very conservative pilot" or "well, I've been doing this for a year and I'm not dead yet", ect. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I haven't tried them, and I'm not interested. Consider: - What if there is an in-aircraft emergency... do you really want to spend several seconds removing the headphones and forcing the pilot to repeat himself? - Sometimes sounds from your canopy tell you things... I'd like to hear them. - Even if you don't think so, it's distracting you. - Are you really that bored? I think it'd be really cool on a sunset cross-country, but anything else I just don't see how anyone could have so little going on while jumping that they need headphones. Funny story: My dad used to listen to headphones while jumping, and one day he had a malfunction right as the music started. To this day he jumps out of his skin whenever he hears the first 3 bars of "rebel yell". This malfunction was in 1985!!! "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

If you're running, doing some lifting, and you've lost 80 lbs at 57, I think you're probably in better shape than a lot of jumpers in their 20's. That said, I think stretching is the most important thing you can do because if you take a tumble on landing you're less likley to just bounce back from it like us young'uns do. Aside from that, if you're looking for something new, check out www.crossfit.com. After 3 years of "normal" lifting/running workouts with moderate success, I've been on crossfit for 6 weeks and I've already seen tremendous changes in practical strength, endurance, and flexibility (even though I'm horrible about stretching). Their full-up program is pretty hard-core, but they have excellent suggestions for scaling it back as far as neccessary for those who aren't up to it... to quote them "the needs of the olympic athlete and your grandmother differ in extent, not type". "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

First off, good question. That's the book answer, and it's the answer you'll see 99% of the time in the FJC, but it's not necessarily the only option. For students, who have almost zero gear knowledge and are in a very complex, unfamiliar situation, it's almost always the best option. If the canopies are in a bi-plane, and the main is in the back, cutting away the main may be a good choice. If the main's in the front, cutting away is the worst thing you could do. If they're in a side-by-side and you've got lots of altitude, inducing a downplane and cutting away may be a good choice. This applies even more if you've got very different sizes/planforms and/or small canopies... the thought of trying to land a PDR 143 and a Velo 84 isn't pretty... or imagine a PDR 99 and a Velo 84, even combined your W/L might be 1.25:1, but they're both flying like crap and you can't flare. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I really think the "why would you ever want to jump out of a perfectly good airplane?" question is really a textbook defense mechanism... it's an impossible to answer question that makes us look like idiots, thus preventing the wuffo from having to admit that they have smaller dicks than us. Fans of George Carlin will appreciate this all the more. I've tried different approaches, all without success so far... but I think my next one will be to ask the question right back about a sport that the wuffo probably admires: "Why would anyone want to tailgate someone at 200 mph for 2 hours?" "Why would anyone want to get tackled by a 350 lb linebacker?" If they go into broken record mode, f*** 'em. I've stopped caring. P.S. Peter Pan has to be the least manly comeback... EVER! "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I know people who have thrown an uncocked PC and gotten an open main. I know others who have gotten a PC in tow. Some of those with PC in tow have dumped their reserves and the shock/change in orientation/timing have caused a 2-out. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

reply]I guess I disrupted the burble when I moved my arms? Im not sure, but I have noticed that this has happened about 3 or 4 times in my last 20 jumps or so. Honestly it scares the shit out of me.. Im going to let one of the experienced instructors or riggers look at my pilot chute, but I was wondering has anyone had this problem. Is it time for a new PC? It SHOULD scare the shit out of you! There are a few things that could contribute to this. 1st, make sure you're giving a good throw. If you're just kind of flopping the PC out of the pocket vs. throwing it, there is an increased risk that it could get caught in the burble. 2nd, how old is the PC, and what fabric? PC's do wear out, and F-111 ones wear out faster (although the fact that they are larger sometimes offsets that). If it's got 500+ jumps on it, you might consider replacing it even if it appears in good condition (I recently had to replace my PC that had about 500 jumps on it because it started hesitating a LOT no matter how hard I threw it... it's condition looked great). Another question is how large is the PC? A common Para-gear size is 27" diameter... the smaller you go, the more likley that it can get stuck in your burble, especially as it wears (part of my problem was I had a 22" PC... worked great at first but not so much later. I replaced it with a 27"). People here are correct to refer you to a rigger before replacing, however please go to him asap! preferably before your next jump. Unless you are jumping a canopy that tends to open very fast, there really isn't much reason to get any smaller than a 27" ZP PC, which you can buy from Para-gear for about $125 (Monkey-fist Kill-line PC is a great choice and should arrive within a week). If you look around you can probably find a better price, just make sure you know what you're getting (size, material, handle type). "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Congrats and welcome! AFF is one method of progressing through the ISP... other methods include static-line/IAD and tandem. Most people only use one of the methods, but the ISP tries to ensure that equivalent skill sets are taught at the conclusion of each, and provides guidelines if students switch from one method to another (maybe because they change dropzones). Becoming a TI takes awhile... you're required to have a "D" liscence, which requires 500 jumps and some other things that you shouldn't have trouble doing by the time you've got 500. You also have to go through a USPA Coach course and Tandem Instructor Course, plus the TI course for the specific gear manufacturer (Vector, Strong, or Racer). Expect the process to take a minimum of 3 years if you have decent resources and some ambition. It could be done in less time but you'd have to have a lot of time and money. (not trying to scare you away, just giving you the facts) "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Skydiving, like everything, is very individual. Some people love the feeling of freefall for it's own sake, some people don't care about freefall and would rather do hop-n-pop's from 5000' so they can swoop, and some people want to rip up points like maniacs. I've even met people that I don't think really enjoy skydiving so much as they enjoy hanging out with skydivers... they'll do a jump here and there but they are really just there for the atmosphere! How is it fun if all you want is points? Well, it's not JUST about points... for me, it's about competing, I've just always loved competition in all things. I like the challenge. I like the team comraderie. I like the constant improvement. I love the feeling of a perfect, clean exit and the visual when turning points on the hill. I like the anxiety before a meet dive and the rush afterwards when you do well. And I like the fact that 4-way flying skills make me better able to do anything else on my belly (big-ways, coach jumps, AFF, organizing, tracking...) That's not everyone's scene, and I understand. (well, maybe I don't understand, but I respect it). But for me, the novelty of the feeling of freefall for it's own sake wore off before I graduated AFF (true, I swear!), and I need something more to keep my attention. Truthfully, I think that's just my personality overall, because I could say the same about every other activity I do... for example, I lift weights but it gets really boring if I'm not making some kind of progress... but I love it when I make a new personal record. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

My first AFF student ever (who had figured out that he was my first) pointed to his cutaway handle and asked "what's this do again?". Fortunately he was joking, but he had me for about 1/2 second until I saw the grin on his face. Damn smart-ass students "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Nice job! I've posted this story on other threads, but one time when I had about 50 jumps I looked at the guy across from me (he had about 400 jumps) and pointed to his incorrectly routed cheststrap (through the back, then strait to the keeper). His eyes got big as dinner plates, and he thanked me profusely... and actually he has also used that story as an example of why everyone should be checking everyone else. By all means, keep checking others. Everyone makes mistakes, and a lot of the big gear mistakes are easy to catch if you look. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Yes, at least they asked... I actually thanked him for asking during the debrief and then explained that we plan our deployment altitude for a good reason, ect. What had really shocked me is it was the same guy who, after going through all the Cat B training and during gear-up asked if instead of using his legs to move forward, could he just use his arms, because he'd rather do it that way? Again, maybe a legit question for a newbie, but it caught me off-guard! "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I vote hype. Consider: what do you think puts more stress on the topskin... the steady pull under canopy or repeatedly yanking the bag out of the container during opening? Also, when was the last time you heard of a student canopy with a non-collapsable PC getting worn out and failing at the PC attachment point? No, it's not a wear issue. What collapsable pilot chute WILL gain you is a small speed increase, a small lift increase, and better penetration into the wind. Given a choice I'd go collapsable every time, but unless you're under a small canopy (spectre 210 not so much) it's not a necessity. As canopy size decreases, it becomes an issue because the PC can actually deform the airfoil. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I can't even remember the last time I did a solo... freefall alone is boring IMO. Sure, I could practice some stuff, but once you get to a certain point it's hard to tell how you really did without a reference. Canopy stuff however, I agree... it's always fun

As an organizer it drives me crazy... I'll have a 6-way planned, get everyone together, be in mid-dirtdive, and suddenly someone wants to join in. Then two more see the opportunity and join as well, and suddenly I've got to re-plan the dive on a 10-minute call. End of rant... to be fair, what I described is pretty rare where I jump, but it definately de-rails me when it happens. I try to make the rule that once the dirt-dive has started, I don't add people or make big changes. On a more amusing note, I had a AFF student (cat B)ask me in the plane, like 2 minutes before exit: "If I finish the dive really quick, is it ok if I just pull early so I can get more canopy time?" "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Amen!!! This can't be said loud enough! I can't count the number of people who say some version of "get off my ass, I stood it up didn't it?" I have personally stood up the following: - Incredibly stupid 270 front-riser from way too low... slammed both toggles to full-flare and recovered from being in a full dive at less than 100' for a nice, tippy-toe landing. - Equally stupid landing in a tiny area in high winds... 180-left-270-right toggle whips starting at about 300'. Perfect stand-up 10 feet short of being impaled by a rebar tent stake after pulling the dive out of my ass. The one person who saw it said "nice job... you lived!" - Much less stupid, gentle 90-deg front riser turn, planed out at the right time but I was too busy geeking and my knees hit the peas... 1/4 second later my body was in superman position 1 foot above the ground, held the flare and ran it out. I have video proof of that one! Bottom line: If someone says your landings suck, they're probably right. Standing it up/not dying are not the measure of a good pilot. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Dude... check out www.ic3.gov (the FBI's internet fraud site). One of the things they specifically say to watch out for is anything involving Western Union (although usually they request a wire transfer instead of a money order). Anyway, several aspects of your story (presence of western union, other party in Europe, discussion of "clients", a push to rush the payment out the door) closely resemble a transaction I was involved in about a year ago and it literally screams to me "don't do it". Look for deals in the US... we have more used gear than the rest of the planet combined anyway. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

The same way every other large organization in the world does. The largest, least effective organization of people I personally belong to is called the United States of America. I think all would agree that this organization "monitors its own adherence to legal, ethical, or safety standards" and "directly monitor(s) and punishe(s) its own members". I think we all also would agree that they do a pretty shitty job of it, and that various standards, laws, ect are violated billions of times per day by hundreds of millions of people, the vast majority of whom are not punished. Yet, it would be hard to say we're not self-policing, what with the FBI and a hundred bazillion state troopers waiting at every corner to give me traffic tickets. At the same time, most of these violations aren't important, and it's not the end of the world that people aren't punished for every single one. That goes for the USA and USPA equally. I think one should start by asking if USPA does a better or worse job of self-policing it's members (at all levels, from president down to newbies) than the country it resides in... I vote it does a better job, and that's a good start. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

One situation hasn't been brought up... what if there is no rigger error at all? Since even perfect rigging can fail... say they get a spinner, chop, get massive line-twists and go in trying to kick out of them. Then there isn't even ordinary negligence. It seems to me that to sucessfully sue a rigger you (should) have to prove there was a mistake made, otherwise the combination of the DZ waiver and the disclaimer that comes with the reserve should protect the rigger (not saying they couldn't be sued, just that they couldn't be convicted). "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

As an engineer and an analytical-type guy, I have gone through exactly that thought process and came up with the same answer. That said, the real world is much more complex... the wind is not steady in direction or speed, and the jumper and canopy have mass, so you're never truly static relative to the airstream. Does that make it possible to determine direction? I don't know. For your canoe example, I say it depends. If it's a slow-moving river, probably not... if it's faster, possibly yes... certainly the canoe will behave differently if it's sideways vs. forward or backward, and various forces will probably cause the canoe to always move slightly slower than the water, so maybe you could figure it out. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I remember talking to an experienced rigger a LONG time ago who said that when they developed large squares for military cargo they were able to design them so they would tend to naturally turn INTO the wind so in the event of a control failure it would at least head the right direction. I don't have any confirmed source to substantiate this. He didn't say how jumpers canopies are affected... I've never noticed a tendancy to turn in any direction, but then again I've never just let the toggles up for several minutes in high winds to find out. If there is an effect, it would be logical that larger, lightly loaded canopies would be affected to a greater extent. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

Different strokes I guess... 1000 high makes sense to me, although I've never done it that way so it would take serious re-training to remember not to break immediately. I set it at 4,000 for all RW dives... 4-way that's at breakoff, larger stuff it's 500 or 1000 feet below breakoff. I do it that way on the theory that if I'm not doing 4-way I've got time to look at my alti, and the theory has held (knock on wood). If i'm doing something really big (like a 20-way) I'd set it higher. AFF and coach dives I set it higher (5500 or 5000), but on those dives it's truly a backup... I'd be embarassed to be caught off-guard. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

I may not have written clearly, but I agree with you. Stratostar's comment was that the person putting their kid on a bike was not a DZO, instructor, S&TA, blah, blah, blah, and somehow that makes the bike sin more forgivable than the tandem sin because DZO's, ect are emplyed to be held to a higher standard. My response was intended to say that maybe that's true if the biker is joe suburbia who works as an accountant and maybe doesn't know the law, or is ignorant and doesn't understand the risk (though neither makes them less guilty). But the biker could easily be a cop, ect who most assuredly knows the rules and the risks. In the end, I'm agreeing that taking a kid on a motorcycle w/o a helmet is every bit as bad as taking a kid on a tandem. To those who say they've never seen this, good... I see it all the damn time in Ohio and it really pisses me off. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

.... unless said person is a cop. or a judge. or a politician. or employed by the BMV. or a driver's ed instructor. the list goes on. One thing I think is interesting is that whenever the underage jumper issue comes up everyone screams "can you imagine how many people would get sued by the parents if they bounced?!" And it's a valid question, because the TI, DZO, Pilot, Mfr and others could all get in a lot of trouble... but how is it that they PARENTS wouldn't also have charges brought against them by the state? What happened to the child endangerment laws? The parents gave written permission. wether that's considered "legal consent" of the child is irrelevant. There is irrefutable permanent written proof that the parents allowed/encouraged their child to engage in a dangerous activity for which they have not reached the age of consent. Curious if anyone knows of a situation where the parents have had allegations brought against them? "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

While USPA frustrates me sometimes (usually when I'm cutting them a check for $50 every april), this is exactly the reason that I support their existence. The number of times that USPA has intercepted the FAA, congress, ect to prevent something very bad from happening to skydiving is worth the money, and yes, even worth the bullshit. Top that with their help of several DZ's that have had lawsuits/insurance issues, and I think they're doing a pretty good job, although there is plenty of room for improvement. Bottom line, if USPA did not exist we would have: 1) a free-for-all system that would have big(er) saftey issues, or 2) an external organization that would cost more money for fewer services that are a lot shittier. By nature, their work is behind the scenes... both because most jumpers aren't interested and because their whole job is to take potentially high-level issues and quietly resolve them with the proper authorities and away from the media, so joe skydiver isn't affected. "Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."