
markbaur
Members-
Content
476 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never -
Feedback
0%
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Dropzones
Gear
Articles
Fatalities
Stolen
Indoor
Help
Downloads
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Videos
Classifieds
Everything posted by markbaur
-
I tried camping at Eloy. Turned out okay because I brought a decent tent and very large stakes. Discount-store tents tend to collapse and blow away. If you do camp at Eloy, get the $1/day health club membership. Better showers, plus a place indoors where you can take shelter if you need. I've done the Super 8, also. Relatively inexpensive, but cheap. Includes donuts for breakfast. I know folks who have tried the Toltec. They report rock-bottom prices, and worth every penny. There are some nicer places in Casa Grande, but you'll spend twice as much, too. Mark
-
I just got back from a visit to MIT, where one of the items on display is Robo-tuna, a mechanical fish used to investigate Gray's Paradox, which was a question of how dolphins were able to swim faster than the mathematics said they should be able to. That's hydrodynamics, but it got me back looking into low-speed aerodynamics. I'm happy to report that the field is still poorly understood, which means there is still hope for a major improvement in canopy technology and performance. For example, it may be possible to use something like vortex generators to better attach the airflow over the canopies. I'm eager to see what the next generation of improvements brings. Mark
-
The requirements were removed from the SIM when it was updated last year, and are now included in the yet-to-be-published Instructor Reference Manual (IRM). USPA has been referring folks to the 1998 SIM (not available in on-line form), which many of us threw out when we got the new one. As others in this thread have written, the process begins with the coach rating, which is the one part of the IRM which actually has made it to the field. You can download the Coach Course manual and the Coach Course Proficiency Card from www.uspa.org.
-
A couple seasons ago, I had a student unstable on opening, resulting in a dislocated shoulder. The Manta opened fine -- a testament to the safety of our sport. The student unstowed the brake on one side, steered his canopy with that one control line, and landed going straight ahead, essentially in 1/2 brakes. He was in the hospital overnight, mostly for the shoulder, some for shock/observation. So it is possible to land some canopies one-handed. However, I don't think I'd try it with my Fireball sub-100. Mark
-
I like bill von's idea of checking in freefall much better. The view from the airplane is framed (by the door, window, etc.), and usually oblique, not straight down. Good info for canopy perspective, but not a good comparison to the freefall view. Mark
-
I thought this was third-party insurance, so it won't pay a claim by one USPA member against another. Even so, I think the insurance is a good deal in case I have an incident with a whuffo. Mark
-
Not really. First, the ISP is a recommendation, not a requirement. How you get the skills to qualify for your A is up to you. And second, the BSR requiring a USPA Coach for categories G and H can be waived by your local I/E or S&TA. BTW, it takes an Instructor, not a coach, to sign items on A Card. It's still cheaper to pay a coach and learn a skill right in a few jumps, than it is to make many jumps to figure out the same stuff. Mark
-
The exit airspeed is slow enough for the pilot to lower the flaps 10 degrees, which makes an adequate handhold -- push-hold, really, since hanging on the flap leading edge will bend the aluminum. Face toward the wingtip, left hand on the strut, right hand on the flap, left foot around the person in front, right foot on the step, ready to pick up the grip on launch. Plan on the train turning to the right on exit. The pilot needs to retract the flaps before descent. Mark
-
I didn't know that. For years I thought DZs in Florida and Arizona were first. Mark
-
Frightening, isn't it! The rigger who packed your reserve had to know what he was doing a little over two-thirds of the time. Could be worse. If it took two riggers to pack your rig, the chances they'd both be right at the same time would be a little less than 50%. Even worse: the three folks in the cockpit of that 727 at Quincy had to get 70% on their writtens, too. So the chance they might all three be correct at the same time could be as little as 35%. Mark
-
Mine does too: Icarus VX or FX at between 2.1:1 and 2.2:1. Also when I jumped a VX67 at better than 3:1. Kinda neat -- reminds a guy that fast forward comes at a price: fast down! Mark
-
It's okay to be concerned about a low-probability event with significant consequences, but there's more to it than just being ready to go any time the door is open. Some things to consider: First, what are the consequences of the tandem instructor moving around inside the airplane? Is there a chance he or she could dislodge handles or snag equipment while attaching or detaching the passenger? Second, how likely is catastropic aircraft failure from parachute problems, and how does that compare with problems (in the aircraft or on the jump) resulting from tandems moving in the aircraft? Third, how important is the size of the aircraft? Would you accept unbuckled tandem passengers in a Twin Otter? How about a 182? How about something in between, like a Caravan? Fourth, how would you deal with airplanes that take off with a door open, like the plexiglass door on the tailgate of Eloy's Skyvan in the summer? On balance, I think the tandem instructor's decision to avoid movement can be easily defended. Mark
-
My guess is Dan Cooper is dead. The statute of limitations on the hijacking itself expired long ago, but the statute of limitations on passing the 200K doesn't start running until he tries to spend the money. The movie rights would be huge, much more than the 200K, but Mr. Cooper hasn't made any movie deals. Ergo, he is probably dead. Mark
-
Try writing to Dave Becker, dbecker@mmm.com. Dave disassembled a high-8, mounting the vidicon on his helmet, the recorder in a chest assembly. Headhunter (Perris-based?) had a lipstick-cam helmet on the market, using a digital recorder in a waist/chest pack. Auto-irising was poor, and the two helmets I saw were poorly constructed. The recorder itself was okay, even though the pack was second-rate. Mark
-
There is no longer a requirement for a written (multiple choice) A license test. Instead, there is an oral test: your instructor asks questions from the 8 category quizes in the ISP. There are a few other changes to A license requirements -- check out your SIM, page 15. Mark
-
Your hand has a burble as well. It's most obvious with a Digitude: read with the alti on top of your hand, then rotate your hand so the alti is in cleaner air. The Digitude mount works best with the loop around your thumb, so the instrument is in relatively clean air. Think they're on to something? Mark
-
The A license card comes in two versions, both of which can be downloaded from the USPA website. If you haven't seen either card by the time you are near graduating, convince your instructor you want the 2-sided card. The 4-sided card works best for DZs using USPA's recommended student training program, which you can find in section 4 of the 2001 SIM (also downloadable from the USPA website). Also, you no longer need to take a written (multiple choice) test for your A license. Your instructor asks 20 questions from the category quizes in the ISP, section 4 of the SIM. All the questions are listed, as are all the answers and the references. You can read the complete A license test procedure in the SIM, on page 15. Mark
-
Tandem Cypres calibrates for 2000 feet, much higher than student/expert Cypres. Does the HALO reserve open fast enough for a student Cypres? Do you have a minimum weight for your HALO rig? How do you deal with the AAD issues? Mark
-
1. Practice with a current AFF Evaluator. "Current" means current at evaluating, not just current doing AFF at your DZ. 2. Practice the AFFCC eval dives, which are similar to Cat C (with a Cat A exit), and Cat D#2. Similar, but not exactly the same. 3. Practice the dives to AFFCC standards. You need to be able to give freeflown (not docked) freefall instruction, and you'll want lots of practice for the pull sequence at the bottom end. 4. Train with a partner. As an instructor, you'll need to be able to jump with a variety of other instructors, but the ground preps in particular will be easier if you've already rehearsed. 5. Use the AFFCC ground instruction checklist to help organize your ground prep. Have your ground prep (a full dress rehearsal, complete with demonstrator and stand-in student) critiqued by a current AFF Evaluator before going to the course, so you can be smooth when you get there. 6. Get the new (Lake Wales) video from USPA as soon as it becomes available. Toss the old (Yuma) video as soon as you get the new one. 7. Have your proficiency card completed before you get to the course. Bring your current USPA membership card, including proof you've completed the BIC or coach course. Bring proof (logbooks or freefall badge) of your 6 hours of freefall. If you bring logbooks, freefall times should be added up every 4 jumps or so if you have one of the Precision-style logbooks, in hours:minutes:seconds. 8. Get to the course site a day or two early, to make some practice jumps from the aircraft you'll be using, to get oriented to the DZ, and to scope out the training areas you'll be using for the ground stuff. 9. Get video of your dives at the AFFCC. If you can, get video of your practice jumps. Get video of your ground preps. (Okay, nobody does that, so you can be first. You'll appreciate what the Evaluators endure, and your ground preps will improve dramatically.) 10. If you have to travel, budget for a motel. You'll be mentally sharper if you can get a good night's sleep, and can take a shower for however long you like. 11. If you see a problem in your AFFCC, try to be part of the solution. Cooperate with your fellow candidates and the course staff. Dare to be great. Good luck, Mark
-
I have seen a Jedei Knight make hook turns to downwind landings in winds up to 30 mph. He's getting a glide ratio over the ground of better than 6:1 before he begins his swoop, and the swoop itself is a magnificent display of skill. For me, it would just be really dangerous. But Obi Wan practices, picks the conditions, and has nearly 2000 feet of smooth grass runway to work with, so for him it's safe (relatively). Mark
-
We like to imagine the airflow over a wing as going straight from the leading edge to the trailing edge, but that's true only for the airflow in the center of the wing. At the wing tips, the air tends to flow toward the wingtip -- the shortest distance between between the high pressure area underneath and the low pressure area above. The air swirls off as a "wingtip vortex," a form of turbulence and a waste of energy, since we're interested in lift. For a given wing size (square feet) and airspeed, a greater span means less wingtip vortex, a more efficient airflow, and higher glide ratio. An infinite wing span would eliminate wingtip vortices, but is a significant design challenge. We can increase the span of our skydiving parachutes by making the cells wider, but the individual cells are only approximations of the desired airfoil, and the wider they are, the less efficient they are. One design solution is cross-braces, if you are willing to pay extra and accept a higher pack volume. We can increase the number of cells. We've gone from 5-cell Strato-Stars to 7-cell Strato-Clouds to 9-cell designs common today. Each cell is additional labor, and additional bulk in seams and lines, and we are near the limits of this approach. Not many 11-cell parachutes around, are there? As the span increases, if the lines for each cell are the same length, the outer cells contribute less and less to vertical lift -- they're oriented outboard, not up. If you try to compensate by increasing the outboard line lengths, you decrease the relative pressurization in the outboard cells, and you increase the chances of opening problems as well as stability in turbulence. On the other hand, if you compensate by making all the lines longer (so the canopy occupies fewer degrees of arc), you increase line pack volume and line drag. Pack volume is not a problem for soaring paragliders, and their lines need be strong enough only for soaring, not opening shock at 120 mph. Elliptical planforms offer a significant performance improvement over rectangular wings, but are more difficult to design and manufacture. It's interesting to note that for all the improvements in ram-air canopies since their wide-spread acceptance 20 years ago, the glide ratio hasn't changed much -- still around 3:1. Mark
-
The primary purpose of those tube things on your sleeves and legs is to act as "static wicks." Airplanes have static wicks help drain off excess static electricity, and so do we. For skydivers, our rapid movement through the air generates friction, the same way that rubbing your feet on a rug does. If we didn't have static wicks, we'd get one heckuva electrical shock when we landed. Mark
-
I can't believe this stuff is still going around. It takes a few jumps to for your brain to adjust to the notion of a constant speed fall. You can spend those jumps popping the risers, or you can just do the jumps. Same result either way. And 8 knots forward speed for a modified T-10? I could believe 8 knots allowable wind, and I could believe 8 knots with a 300-400 pound suspended load, but there's a good reason why folks used to do downwind accuracy -- it was so they could see the target. Mark
-
No. Mark
-
Under canopy, would your jumpsuit (say, slick freestyle suit vs. baggy freefly suit) make much difference in how fast you could fly? Mark