shibu

My guess is… you're the kid in class caught texting a friend while the teacher was explaining an assignment.... Damn. He read her like a book.

Congrats. Did my 100 recently too. Nice hybrid.

Maybe safety should have been your point. What I am hearing from the older jumpers is they are using their "wisdom to educate the new jumpers of the risks". It is just hat you disagree with their "solutions", which is to learn to fly your body so well that you do it without thinking about it. I do not agree. I really want to wear a camera. One of the reasons I do not is bc I trust the experienced jumpers who tell me not to do it. I appreciate their advice when they tell me that I can mitigate the risks by taking the time to learn to fly better. Great example. It is sort of the same in that you are wrong on both counts. Times are changing. Maybe when technology gets to the point that cameras are the size of a pencil point so there is no entanglement risk.... Maybe when the cameras can turn themselves on & off by themselves so you are not thinking about the camera instead of thinking about doing another gear check... Then maybe. Or maybe still not. I'll defer to the jumpers who are already doing it. I can learn from other people's mistakes. I don't need to make them myself. Sounds like you should spend more time learning how to jump... or maybe how to control the kids in your classroom... and less time posting your uninformed opinions regarding camera use in skydiving for now.

I agree. I think alot of jumpers just want to wear a camera to capture the moment. But who said being a yoputube star was the reason not to wear a camera? huh? How do you know that most of the guys you met who jump a camera only think about it to turn it on & off? Agreed. The reason for having a camera may be a good one but it does not change safety issues. lol. This makes more sense than anything else you have posted.

I'm not taking anything away from the actual jump. It was a great achievement. But with 35 camera angles capturing the jump, I was surprised that most of the videos I saw were not as clear or as entertaining as alot of regular jump videos I have seen. I have a renewed respect for all of the video guys out there. Too bad there wasn't room in the capsule for a video guy. CGI Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCqnQq86fkY Real Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHtvDA0W34I

lol. good check of threes.

lmao

+1 on this. I just took my first Canopy Control Course & I read a few books & saw a couple of videos on canopy control so I was expecting to just get a better understanding of what I read or saw briefly. I learned alot more than that. Some techniques I had never heard of before (or I had heard of but completely misunderstood). I'm sure I will be busy repeating the new techniques I learned for some time. Liked it so much I think I am going to take another basic canopy course in the future.

Thanks.

I just heard about this recently. I made my first tandem with Bob at Duanesburg. I hope he knows how much joy he brought to so many. RIP.

Does anyone know a good place to check for Canopy Control Courses offered within 150miles of NYC. I keep finding out about them after they are over. :(

Well that explains it. 24 feet nominal diameter? What is that a measure of? The diameter of the bottom of the round when inflated? I thought they were much bigger.

Now I want to jump a round.

Typical skydiving round canopies of the late 60's and early 70's had a sleeve, which added a LOT of bulk, and many were of a more complex design then the reserve and were bulkier for that reason. In the era before custom civilian rigs, military bailout rigs were often converted for skydiving use. So the military backpack might have, for example, contained a 26' Navy conical, and was relatively thin. The canopy was exactly the same as might have been used in a civilian jumper's belly reserve. So the canopy bulk would be the same, although what it would "appear" to be would depend on whether you thought the spread out but thin backpack seemed "bigger" than a lumpy belly mount or the reverse. But for the civilian skydiver putting a ParaCommander or similar canopy in the backpack, the sides would be extended a few inches with sewn-in additions, to fit the bulk of the canopy & sleeve. (Rigs that were made for civilians later, could of course be sewn the right size from the start.) The ParaCommander has something like 24 different holes and slots in it, which means a lot of extra tapes supporting the edges of holes. I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that added a fair bit to the bulk. But the big thing is the sleeve. That's a heavy cotton "sock" that slides over the canopy from end to end -- so it is going to be 12 ft long or so. Instead of folding the canopy and then putting it into a bag as we now do, the canopy went in, then it was folded. To prevent nylon on nylon burns, the sleeve was cotton, and usually quite heavy. Have you ever seen one of the big, baggy, cotton freefly jumpsuits from the early days of the discipline, say the mid 1990s? Stuff that in your rig, and that's roughly how bulky a sleeve is. Reserves were much simpler in design, maybe with 3 open vents or meshed panels at the back for forward speed. And they didn't use a sleeve to slow the deployment. (Later ones would use a diaper that just wrapped the mouth of the round canopy until the lines were stretched out.) Another factor is that the main container had to be sized for quick packing in the field, while the reserve container could be super tight with the rigger sweating over it for a while! Old timers will know more, but I think that is a reasonable explanation why the "typical" skydiving rig with a belly mount reserve seemed to have so much bigger a main container. Never realized how much went into the rounds. I guess I always thought of them as relatively simple systems compared to ram airs.

Never would have guessed that the sleeve added so much bulk. Thanks Airtwardo.... but what... no sarcasm in this post?

Never thought of that. Thanks.

Just curious why the front mounted reserve parachutes appear to be so much smaller than the mains. I understand why the mains are so big now that I have seen them packed (on video) but how can the reserve fit into such a small package? Are they just smaller?

This is base but its freeflying: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp4TXIwWl3U

+1 on the black rig w red pinstriping & lettering. I demoed a vector micron that was black w red pinstripes & it looked great. I think the rig that was mostly white looked the best but I doubt I could keep it white. I am just getting rid of a car w oyster white leather seats. Hands down the best looking seats I have ever owned... and the most trouble to keep clean.

lol. I actually agree. Once you go black you never go back. It never goes out of style & I hear the resale value stays higher bc anyone can jump a black rig.

I used the Rx Foam inserts but for the Gasket, no the player. I originally got the x insert without the foam. The first day I jumped them the glasses seemed to vibrate no matter how close I had them to my face. A coach reccomeded that I remove the nose piece to get them closer to my face. I ordered the Rx Foam Inserts but they took ~ a month to arrive bc the original shipment got lost in the mail. In the mean time I kept jumping the glasses but forgot to remove the nosepiece. Guess what? No vibration! When they arrived I popped them in. They function just as well but they do fog up alot on the ride up. They even fog up sometimes when I leave an air conditioned car. The same glasses without the foam never fogged up. As far as the performance in the sky they are great, but they were great without the foam so I may remove them. I should also mention that these are the best glasses I have ever owned. I may get the T-flex though b/c I think it would be easier than adjusting & tucking in the skycord so often.

The opinion of an eye doctor is all I need. No LASIK for me. LOL!!!!!! I am an eye doctor, so my data comes from the primary medical literature. A minimum of 18 years after surgery, the flap can be displaced. Since LASIK is still fairly new, that's all the data that is available at the moment. If you want to play Monopoly in the middle of the highway, you may not get run over right off the bat, but eventually it will bite you in the ass. Why you'd be so blantantly stupid with your eyes is beyond me, but your problem. Jumping without goggles???? I saw a bug smeared across my husband's face and goggles after a jump once. Good way to lose an eye entirely. Good luck with that. Just don't be advising other people to play the same Russian Roulette that you feel comfortable doing. Edited to add: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0886335007006220 might be worth your reading time. This is by a long shot not the only case. It doesn't happen a lot, but it does happen.

The jumper I saw wearing them did say he was going base jumping next month. I would like to fly a WS some day but that's not why I wanted the tracking pants. Just wanted to be track more horizontally. I agree with you for now though. I like the tracking pants concept but think my money would be better spent on jumps & coaches at this point.

wow you saw an Impact ?? that's cool

I have had tracking coaching, but I agree, I could use more. I could also ask a coach if I am ready for one before I invest in it. Thanks.