riggerpaul

I never suggested that the information should be anything other than correct. But it should also be tailored to the needs and interests of the person who asked the question. Sometimes a simple question deserves a simple answer. In this case, I have PMs with the OP, and he has said that all he wanted was the simple answer, and that rest constituted information overload. PS - I apologize - I misinterpreted who you meant was the moron. With your explanation, I see my error. I'll try to read more carefully.

In a vacuum, roughly 31.25 seconds, and 16,000 feet, right? How high do you have to be for the drag to be so low as to be negligible?

My rig is equipped with an AAD. But I have not used it yet.

I don't think it's appropriate to make sarcastic jokes on threads created by newbies. I'd agree, but even to a n00b, something like that HAS to make ya ask yourself...did I miss 1/2 a class or his that guy a moron? Thankfully people like erdnarob understand the implications and have the capacity and willingness to break it down the right way! Why would you think the OP missed anything or was a moron? He posted that he has 2 tandem jumps. He's not been through a FJC. Nobody tried to teach him much about the tandem gear he used for his 2 jumps. And while erdnarob's answer may be more complete than some, was it really necessary for this OP to have this level of detail when we know that he hasn't been through a FJC, and have no reasonable expectation that he ever will? I can appreciate the distinction that pulling the reserve pin is not the whole deployment, but is that level of detail really needed to answer this OP's simple question? He wanted to know if cutaways open reserves automatically. Simple answer is that it depends on the gear. Some gear tries to open the reserve for you when you get rid of a main, and some doesn't. The rest of the details most likely fell on deaf ears in the first place anyway. Do we really think the OP was even listening much less appreciating the finer points of the extra 16 posts?

I like your sign very much. We have a sign like the one mentioned earlier, but I don't like the way it sounds. Your sign is far superior. I'm going to suggest that our current sign be replaced with yours. Thanks!

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends on the particular system. Some systems include a connection from a main riser to either pull the reserve pin, or even to actually aid in the deployment of the reserve parachute. Some rigs don't have this sort of connection. And, even on rigs that do have this sort of connection, it can usually be disabled by the jumper should the need arise. These systems are generally called Reserve Static Lines (RSL). You can search this forum for discussion regarding the pros and cons to such devices. These topics have been widely discussed.

excellent policy I love signs "Tips are not expected, but appreciated" well, that's a lie since they posted the sign in the first place On the other hand, I have heard customers, tandems and other students, ask about tipping. I think it is better that they get an "official" answer than just asking the nearest person and getting whatever that person might say. Unless tipping is literally forbidden, what should the answer to such a question say?

Is there a typo in there? "C-4" seems unlikely. "C" is the yoke sizing. No problem. I have a "C" yoke myself. But, "4" would be the main lift web length. I am only about 5'9", and my container is "C-18". So, please verify that number, if you would. -paul

In addition, and possibly as important according to the copied excerpt, it is unlikely that this use will result in any detectable decrease in any value to Wikipedia.

No, the original owner did not retract the copyright claim, but anyone who re-posted the video on YouTube, or Facebook, etc. and had it removed can contact the host, and request that it be restored under the fair use provision. The host must then notify the copyright owner; and unless the host is advised that the matter has been referred to court (lawsuit filed), the host must restore the video within 2 weeks. Once we knew it was a hoax, can we really claim fair use on educational grounds?

Does this apply to a temporary transfer? Or do you mean to refer only to a permanent transfer?

I am still undecided about the need for online voting. The cost is certainly a concern for me. Right or wrong, there are plenty of people who are concerned that the dues are used to the best purpose, and spending it on a voting system may or may not be the best use of the money. At another level, I am concerned that the capability to vote online has been portrayed as possibly combating the apathy that is so often found in the membership of an organization like ours. The way I see it, this can only be true if the existing voting method presents a significant deterrent to having the members vote in the first place. I just do not see that this is the case. Voting is easy. You don't need to go to a polling place. You don't need to go to the dz. You just need to fill in a simple form and mail it. If voting gets easier than that, I worry that it is an invitation for poorly informed persons to vote simply because it is easy. Face it - the most basic apathy is the unwillingness to study the issues and form your opinions. Will online voting do anything to fight this apathy? It is not clear to me that it will. So the result could be that we get a larger voting population that still doesn't really know what they are voting about. They'll vote for their friends, or they'll vote against people they don't think they like, and all the while still not be taking the time to understand the issues before casting their votes. I don't see that as a step in the right direction. Now, it is surely true that we have popularity voting now. Of that there is no doubt. But if the tiny effort required to cast your vote as we do now helps to inhibit such things, then I don't see that we gain by making voting any easier. Just because the voting is easier does not imply that the voters will be any less apathetic. Being governed by a larger group of voters who do not care enough to do their part is likely worse than being governed by a smaller group of voters who care.

You are, of course, free to have that opinion. And I thank you for admitting that the strongest form of a "no" vote is to withhold the proxy. All I want is for the voters to clearly understand the process. I want them to understand how sending in a "no" proxy might actually hurt the "no" position. When you portray this as the worst possible scenario, and push the apathy button, you are doing the very same thing that much of the US voting public has become totally sick of - you are putting emotional content where facts should be presented. So much of the campaigning these days has been on the emotions of the matters and not the facts. After presenting the facts, it is all well and good to present the opinions. If the clear presentation of the facts results in the issue being rejected, then maybe we weren't all so much in favor in the first place. Winning it without the facts is a hollow victory, as the losers will be able to say that the issue was not fairly represented, and they will have every right to resent it. Base the campaign on the facts and all will respect you. Base it on the emotions, and though some will agree, others will suspect your motives. There is a benefit to the concerned voters when the apathetic elect not to exercise their right to vote. It gives greater power to those who care. Regardless of the manner in which the voting is accomplished, I want those who vote to care about voting. Failing that, what we get is some sort of popularity contest. That is a disservice to all.

Interesting point of view, but not necessarily as correct as you might like to think, or rather, have us think. Should one be opposed to accepting this change now, the most powerful thing to do is to not send the proxy. If that causes a lack of quorum, then nothing changes. Sending in a "no" vote that helps to establish a quorum allows the possibility for the "yes" votes to win. I'm not saying that's what I want to happen, but your statement that the "worst case scenario" proves apathy is not so clearly correct. And, while we're on it, what is so "long lasting" about not making this change now? Does failing to pass this now for some reason mean that we cannot try again another time? When you make such statements that seem true at face value, but are not actually true after a more detailed analysis, one might wonder why you would present the issue in the manner that you have. If you want internet voting, send the proxy with the "Yes" box checked. If you don't want internet voting, send no proxy. Those really are the options without any emotional embellishments.

There is something hanging off the right riser both before and after the cutaway. I cannot tell what it is. It looks like if could be part of the cutaway cable, but it seems rather long to be just the end of the yellow cable outside the hard housing. Since the cutaway seems to be a long enough stroke, I don't really think it is part of the cutaway cable at all. Considering the great camera work, and that there seems to be something "extra" in the area of the right 3 ring, is there any chance that this was an intentional situation set up for the video?

Bill's and my posts were basically addressing the post where someone said, "The risers go with the rig. Period. " There's no argument that risers are part of a complete container system, and that you should receive appropriate risers when you buy any container, new or used. And, as you say, a new canopy does not come with risers. Bill's and my posts only meant to clarify that risers often stick with the canopy in the meantime - that it is not usually a safety issue that they often go along with the canopy except in the cases of permanent transfer of equipment. The OP of this whole thread was really not too clear about the terms of this particular equipment mixing and matching. Some quickly started saying that the rigger had done something wrong. But, depending on the whole story, the rigger might well have done just fine.

When did the canopy companies start providing risers with canopy purchases? Must be news to me. He means that once a canopy is on risers, the risers will often move with the canopy, especially if it is a temporary move. For example, all the PD demo canopies come on risers. You don't mess with those risers if you don't absolutely need to. You just take your main, with the risers, off the rig, and hook up the demo main, with the risers it is on. Same thing will often/usually happen when a couple of friends are swapping canopies to get some test jumps.

I never said anything different. I mentioned Advanced or Expert experience twice in my post. The original question related to a person with 1000+ jumps. That person should be capable of deciding if his skills are up to it. My point was that it is not about a "too low" a wing loading, as some have mentioned.

Where does it say not suggested???? The chart is the MAX, not MIN for any experience level... Just to elaborate on tdog's comment, if you read the PD "Wing Loading Interpretations" document, you will understand that what is "not suggested" for the Katana is use by pilots at the Student, Novice and Intermediate levels. The Katana is recommended for pilots of Advanced or Expert levels of experience. The Wing Loading Interpretations document is clear that there may be a variety of consideration associated with jumping a canopy at a lower wing loading, but that a low wing loading in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Some mention that the Katana openings at low wing loadings are not optimal. It may well be that packing the canopy more carefully, and/or in a manner to encourage quicker openings, will be needed. The PD wing loading chart for the Katana says that use by pilots with insufficient experience is "not suggested". That is not a statement about use at lower wing loadings when being flown by pilots of Advanced or Expert experience.

Just wondering how long do you think it will take for your brand new rig to look like a used one? Some people like to do their learning on something that doesn't depreciate quite so quickly.

It won't do that. Your anniversary date is your anniversary date, no matter when you pay the bill. The early billing helps you be sure there is no lapse in membership. It works like a magazine subscription. They bill early too, but you're still supposed to get all the issues that you've paid for.

The simple age is a factor as well. Inspecting and packing reserves can have a dramatic effect on the performance of the parachute. Regarding the CFM question. It stands for Cubic Feet Per Minute. It is a measure of how much air is flowing THROUGH the fabric. The test is performed under certain controlled conditions, like how much pressure differential is used, and how much area the air is leaking through. With new fabric, you will get 0-3 CFM leaking through the fabric itself. The canopy does not stay new, and once it gets inspected and repacked a few times, that number will start going up. This number essentially represents how well the fabric is going to carry a weight, because more air leaking through the fabric means less ability to carry a weight. Your 10 year old Tempo that has seen lots of repacks will not perform like a mint condition Tempo of the same era, much less perform like a newer design that is also has fewer Inspection and Repack (I&R) cycles on it. By the way, you mention a Tempo 175. Isn't it actually a Tempo 170?

I agree that jumping at weights above TSO placard limits is dumb. What, though, is the FAR that is violated? Mark Isn't an approved parachute only approved for operation within the approved limits? I'll use the analogy that operating an aircraft above its max gross weight limit is illegal, because you are not operating within the limits of the type certificate. If that is correct, then the jumper is not complying with FAR 105.43, which calls for an approved reserve parachute, because at that weight, the parachute is not approved.

Without knowing more about all involved, it is a hit and miss thing to answer. Also, we don't know where you are. So options presented in an answer may or may not be available to you. Your coach might have more experience than some of your instructors, but we cannot tell that from what you have said. It could very well be that your favorite coach is the best person to get your information from. Is there someone who oversees training? You might ask that person if the coach you like has enough experience to warrant the kind of trust we are talking about. Also, you should ask some of the same questions to this person, and consider what it means if the answers are different from your coach's. At a dropzone in the USA, an S&TA would certainly be a good person to talk to.

Andy, please send me a PM with your email addr. -paul