Canuck

Hi, The 18-55mm lens will work just fine. Fixed lenses (i.e. 24mm or 28mm) generally are higher quality and generally will focus faster on auto-focus and generally are smaller and lighter. For those reasons, most people that are serious about freefall photography will use a fixed lens rather than a zoom. If you are going to use the zoom, find out where it matches up with your video, and tape it in place. A 24mm fixed lens will match up pretty well with a .42 video lens. The 28mm also works fine, and is much less expensive. I use a Canon EF 28mm. It was about $300-350 CDN and the pictures come out looking excellent (tandems mostly). I use a Sony .6 video lens and the two match up pretty well. Canuck

Why are you selling it then... Canuck

I assume that if the PC has a kill-line that the gear being used was the evaluators personal gear, not a student rig. IMO if your going to do the job (AFF course conductor) you need to be jumping the type of gear that a student would use. PC hesitations do occur on AFF jumps because of the HUGE burble, but obviously the chances are greater if the evaluator is using his/her 24 inch PC instead of something closer to 32 inches found in student rigs. Good practice though. It does happen. Canuck

Just wondering if people are actually ordering them, or if it's still just the handful of Atair people jumping them. Seems to me like the company is fading away... Canuck

Question for you Bushman, seeing how you have worked for both PD and Aerodyne, do those two companies use the same measuring technique? Would the PD 99 and the Smart 99 be the same size? Also, using the PIA standard, PD reserves are bigger than they are marked as (ie. the 126 is listed at 137 on the PIA chart). Same true then for the Smart? Thanks, Canuck

I pitty da foo that talks like that to the Skymonkey's wife! Canuck

Hell no! Like I said, I still LOVE to party, I just like being at a DZ where the whole crew doesn't get so blasted EVERY night that nobody wants to get up and at it the next day. There were days this season when I was doing back to backs that I would have 6 jumps in before my old DZ was getting out of bed. I still have the occasional run-a-way. It's hard not to when you're drinking Canadian beer - you know, the stuff that actually has alcohol in it and tastes good! Canuck

This is just a guess, but is it possible the canopy had a tear in it, and Icarus just decided to fix it? I had a Crossfire 1 that was on the service bulletin, and know of a few others, and the mod was a lineset thing, not anything to do with a patch. Canuck

I recently moved from one DZ to another partly for this very reason. I love to party, but I love to skydive even more, and I got real tired of having to wait until 10:30 every morning for all the drunks to get out of bed before we could put a load together. The two do go hand in hand, and that's a good thing, but in the end if the skydiving isn't coming out on top, then it's time to sell your gear and go hang out in a bar. Canuck

Sure I'd borrow larger gear for night jumps. The thought of jumping gear that I'm not current on at night really doesn't bother me. Each year I do a handful of jumps on various sized canopies without problems - upsizing is always easy. One other problem though - the DZ I jump at now doesn't do them becuase they operate off of an unlit grass strip that runs down a hill! It seems that Cesna pilots don't like trying to land in those conditions either! Canuck

First, let's define a night jump. There is a huge difference between catching the last load that never should have taken off because it was already twighlight as you were gearing up, and a two in the morning, no moon, night jump. The first I'll still do with my Velocity at 2.1, the latter I quit doing when I got my Crossfire at 1.8. I would probably still do night hop-n-pops, but the fun of a night jump is all in the freefall. It's the off DZ landings that scare me, especially up here in the boonies where off the DZ means no lights at all. Too bad. I use to do a ton of them each year when I was jumping 150+ canopies and really enjoyed them. Trade offs I guess. Canuck

Overweight, smoking, drinking national hero athletes... Two words: Babe Ruth. As for Olympic sports with "athletes" that are hardly athletic... One word: Shooting And I'm not talking about the biathaletes. Those mother fuckers are trim. I'm talking about the paunchies that do skeet and trap shooting. I've only curled a handful of times by the way, and yes, each time I've been wasted!! Canuck

Don't get me wrong - I fully realize that for those who can afford it the tunnel is a great tool. I just think for people like me, who skydive on a budget, that you get more bang for your buck doing the "real thing." Your points are well taken about the coaching, although a good freefall coach can also give immediate feedback and physically shape body position (I do it all the time on AFF jumps). The other thing is, all the tunnel time in the world won't help you launch exits and track - two very important parts of any group skydive. I've only ever been in an outdoor tunnel, and yeah it was a friggin blast!!! Canuck

Most of your math I can follow. But, 2000 operating hours per year? That's not even 6 hours a day. I think it's pretty safe to say that most tunnels are running a hell of a lot more than that. That puts the profit up considerably. I still think tunnel time is overpriced. For an hour in the tunnel, I can do 35-40 jumps. And yes, I know there is more freefall time in an hour in a tunnel than in 35-40 skydives, but how many swoops do I get out of the deal? As to the question how cheap would it need to be for me to think it's not overpriced - about half of what it is. For the person that said they invested in a tunnel not to make money, but to see happy faces, might I suggest that you go do some volunteer reading at a daycare or help an elderly person across the street. Canuck

The good news is that the price of tunnel time will drop as saturation occurs. Now I'm sure all the Skyventure folks will jump in and say how low their profit margins are - bullshit - nobody invests millions of dollars trying to make hundreds. Canuck

That's good to know. It's nice to see a company with some integrity. Canuck

I agree totaly. I was the first kid on my block to have a Crossfire, so I know all about the problems of releasing something before it's perfected. Still thought it was an awesome canopy though. I just think people are more tolerant of a few anomolies in a canopy if it is cutting edge. For example, people that want the flight performance of braced canopies are willing to take the sometimes shitty openings, but nobody should have to deal with a 9 cell canopy that opens like crap with all the superb opening 9 cell canopies on the market. If the A-max had blown all other 9 cells out of the water in terms of swoopability, I'm pretty sure Aerodyne would have released it even if the openings were a little rogue. Canuck

In a case like this where the canopy is really nothing new or innovative (it's a 9 cell elliptical) a company had better make sure, before they release it, that it is going to be the BEST in every way in that already flooded niche, or it's destined to get lost amidst the Stilettos, Crossfires, Cobalts, Sams, Katanas, etc., etc., etc. Canuck

All things being equal, a 7 cell will have a lesser pack volume than a same sized 9 cell. The difference is in the extra nylon and suspension lines for the 2 extra cells. Would a 210 7 cell fit in a container made for a 9 cell 190 - probably. So would a 9 cell 210. Most containers can pretty easily accomodate a canopy one size plus or minus what they were built for. As to why people are suggesting a 7 cell - good question. 7 cell canopies have a lower aspect ratio and are thus less prone to off heading openings and line twists is one of the few arguments I can think of. In my opinion, 10 years ago the Spectre and the Triathalon (both 7 cells) were about the best canopies out there for newbies. They open beautifully, fly well, and are relatively forgiving. I think a lot of people just got in the habit of suggesting one or the other as the best choice for a first (new) canopy. Now, however, there are a ton more choices, lots of nine cells, like the Sabre 2 and the Pilot. You wouldn't go wrong with any of the above. Demo if you can. Canuck

For sure, although it is likely more noticable with smaller wings at higher loadings. I definately notice it with my canopy if I'm somewhere 1000 ft. higher/lower than home. It's good to find out the elevation before you jump at an unfamiliar DZ, that way you can adjust the visuals and your approach accordingly. As an estimate, I would say every 1000 ft. ASL adds about 100 ft. to my turn altitude. Canuck

The funny thing about this is that once people find out that Greg has a hidden harness on, the awe factor quickly goes away. Really though, harness or not, it's a an amazing feat. Don't forget - he has to get back in the harness before landing time... Canuck

You will get the same reply in French that you have gotten a dozen times before in English. Ask the manufacture!!!! Canuck

I was just digging up the thread that Hooknswoop was the most active in debunking that myth in. I don't know how to make clickies, but you will find it if you search in canopy control and landing for "losing altitude in a carve in wind vs. no wind." It's a long thread, but there is some very good discussion in it. That thread, and a bunch of experimenting under my canopy, made me change my mind on the matter. Canuck

Dude, if you weren't looking for some feedback, then why bother posting the incidents in the first place? The first thing I thought when I read your post was why is this guy bragging about how often he hurts himself flying a canopy he apparently can't handle? By the way, high winds don't make your canopy dive any longer. I too use to believe that myth, but it has been discussed to death in the forums, and I have now come to realize that it simply is not true. And you can slide out landings on concrete - I have seen it done dozens of times in AZ when people overshoot the main landing area. You just need to get your feet way out in front of you. As for tall grass, my landing area is a gopher hole filled pasture, and I slide 'em out every time. Running out landings is asking for trouble. Canuck

Interesting that DiabloPilot hated it. We have a 210 at our DZ that we use as transition gear. I've put some jumps on it and thought it was a pretty decent canopy. We just got a 170 too, but I haven't jumped it yet. Their HP canopy, the Demon, I also thought opened and flew very nicely. Could be a quality control thing. As is the case with many manufacturers, not all canopies that they make fly the same. I can tell you that they have provided our DZ with unbelievable customer service. Canuck