Hooknswoop

Spaceland has one of the best student training programs in the country. DV

5 lines attached to the left soft link, 4 attached to the right. Left is the main, right is the reserve. If I 'needed' to know, I would reference the instructions. DV

Neil Houston told me a story about a 4-way team he was coaching and filling on one of the slots on a jump. During the dirt dive, they were turning pieces and Neil said, "OK, you guys turn right and we turn left......No, you turn left and we turn right." I think he was used to being in the other piece. So one of the jumpers, not having any idea who Neil is, says, "Wait a minute, are you sure?" Neil says, "Ya, I'm sure." "Well maybe we should ask someone......" Neil couldn't think of anything to say without sounding arrogant. Who you gonna ask? Someone on Airspeed? You just did. Don't worry about it Don, I'm sure Kirk isn't the least bit offended. DV

Just a suggestion. Try standing at the top of a long flight of stairs. Put your hands up as if you are under canopy at full flight. Walk down the stairs quickly. Begin your 'flare' 8-10 steps from the bottom and finish the 'flare' on the last step. It amazes me that when I have people try this after they tell me they flare too high, they will finish their 'flare' 6-8 steps from the bottom. "Well there's your problem" When you start your flare isn't nearly as important as when you finish your flare. As for tracking, lay on the floor. Now lift yourself off the floor so that only your shoulders and toes are touching the floor. Your arch is gone. It is more important to track straight than fast. If you turn, you can be getting closer to other jumpers instead of farther away. Hope this helps. Derek V

I agree, but that doesn't address option 'a)' make an accurate determination if the DZ is doing things as they should be. You cannot determine if a DZ if doing everything they should as they should be by asking a couple of questions. DV

If you believe you can just walk onto a DZ start asking hard questions and looking around and either a) make an accurate determination if the DZ is doing things as they should be, or b) not get asked to leave, you are kidding yourself. DV

The Cypres Packing Manual does not come with the unit, the Cypres User’s Guide does. They don’t have that manual to read. They didn’t toss the manual into the pile of extra stuff; “General information: At every repack the loops must be checked carefully and be replaced if necessary.” What questions would you ask? Who would you ask this? What do you do if they do tell you who is responsible? That does not tell you if the aircraft has been properly maintained. Would you ask to see their logbook and certificate(s) or just ask them if they are rated and current? How many jumpers know what it means for a pilot to be current? What should a student look for? In order to determine if the DZ is ‘safe’, you would have to really investigate the place. That would take a lot of time and experience to know what to ask and look at and be able to make sense of the answers and what you see. Odds are that a jumper would never get far enough into that process to make a solid evaluation of a DZ before being asked to leave. A first jump student has absolutely no hope of making an evaluation of a DZ. Interviewing multiple staff members, the pilot(s), the DZO, the A & P (which may or may not be on-site), going through maintenance records, etc, is a time consuming endeavor for everyone involved. I don’t think that going through all of that for every new jumper is an efficient system for ensuring compliance with FAR’s and industry standards. How would a DZ stay in business if they had to spend all that time and energy going through everything with every new jumper that walks through the door? I don’t ask for the airline pilot’s log book, aircraft maintenance records, etc when boarding a commercial flight. If every passenger on every flight did, and the airlines were required to allow them access, the system would collapse. It is much more efficient for the FAA to ensure that the airlines comply with the FAR’s. The FAA does a fairly good job of it and the airlines have a remarkable safety record. No one checks up on DZ’s and the safety record reflects the current, failed, system of self-regulation. DV

What should a first time jumper exactly check to do this homework? What should an experienced jumper do the first time they get to a new DZ? Which manuals specify that the closing loop must be replaced for every inspection? DV

From the Colorado Motorcycle Operator’s Handbook: "HEADLIGHT: The best way to help others on the road see your motorcycle is to keep the headlight on at all times. Use of the high beam in daylight increases the likelihood that you will be seen by oncoming drivers." I always ride with my high beam on during the daytime. I have never been blinded by another motorcycle using their high beam during the daytime. DV

OK DV

OK, let's say it is the same as the airbag sensor not being able to tell how severe the collision is. A shopping cart rolling into the bumper will set off the airbags. Not a good system. I would not have that airbag system installed in any of my vehicles. That system could actually kill people instead of saving them. That system would still save far more people than it killed, but that does not mean it is a good system. DV

The RSL deploys the reserve PC if the main is deployed (regardless if it is malfunctioning or not) and the jumper pulls the cutaway handle and the riser it is attached to releases. If the jumper pulls the cutaway handle the RSL activates the reserve PC. That is the same as firing the airbag if the brakes are locked up by the driver. If you lock up the brakes, you may or may not need the airbag, no way to tell. If you need the airbag, then you want them to fire. If you do not need the airbag, then you do not want it to fire. A collision sensor makes that determination for you. If you cutaway, you may or may not need the RSL to activate your reserve, no way to tell. If you do not need the RSL, then you do not want it to work. If you need your RSL, then you want it to work. There is no sensor to tell the difference. DV

I disagree and think that RSL's are like an airbag firing if you lock up the brakes. All the system knows is that you are in a panic stop situation, not whether or not you are actually going to hit anything or really need the airbags. This is the problem with RSL's. They are great if you are low or unable to pull your reserve or fail to pull your reserve. But they are bad if you have plenty of altitude and are able and do pull your reserve in plenty of time. All the RSL 'knows' is that you have released the riser it is attached to. The RSL doesn't know the difference and fires either way, even if you do not need or want it to. It cannot differentiate between needing the RSL and not needing it. It just activates the reserve PC, even if will do more harm than good. Airbags are great if you are in a collision they fire, if you are not, they don't. They only fire if you actually need them, i.e. a hard hit. If RSL's on worked when you needed them to, they would be great, same as airbags. Airbags have a sensor, RSL's don't. Airbags differentiate between the driver taking a specific action, i.e., locking the brakes and actually hitting something. If airbags deployed even when you didn't need them to ,i.e. brakes locked up, but not actually hit anything, they wouldn't be in widespread use, even though they would save more people than they would kill. Saving more people than they kill does not necessarily make it a good system. DV

Are you thinking of Van Horn's cutaway? I think that a proper fitted and adjusted harness as well as tension being released once he cutaway would have made finding the reserve handle possible. Also, what if it would have shifted the other direction? He would have been able to find his cutaway handle. Then what? An airbag system for cars that deployed the bag if the brakes were locked up would save many more people than it killed, but that does not mean it would be a good system. This is because the airbag would deploy even if you did not hit anything. The sensor that detects an impact and deploys the airbag means that airbags don't deploy unless you actually hit something. The RSL deploys the reserve PC immediately after the riser releases, regardless if you need it to or not. The RSL and a sensor-less airbag system both save [would save] more people than they [would] kill, but simply looking at the numbers is not enough to say if it is a good system or not. If it was possible and didn't over complicate the gear too much, adding a sensor to detect altitude and then a device that 'armed' the RSL at 750-ish feet AGL, then it would be a much better system. Combined with an AAD, it would be a very safe rig. DV

Because most skydivers are able to take proper timely action in response to a malfunction. That does not mean the RSL is a good system. DV

Then simply do not connect the RSL since you will be unstable after every cutaway. That eliminates trying to find a little red tab and pull it before cutting away. That is like saying (back to my airbag analogy) that drivers should turn off the brake-activated airbag if it isn't a real accident before applying the brake. That is an even dumber system than a brake activated airbag. The numbers that should be looked at is how many cutaways are there a year and how many of those would an RSL have helped? How many would an RSL have been unnecessary, i.e. the jumper would have or did take proper, timely action? Very few RSL deployments would an RSL have helped the jumper. Far more often, the RSL makes things worse by activating the reserve while the jumper is unstable. DV

The problem is that the no reserve pulls can be fixed by training and proper reaction to the situation. The RSL-reserve entanglement fatalities cannot be fixed, you are simply screwed, killed by your 'safety' device. Even if you would have taken the correct action in time, the RSL didn't give you the chance, you are dead. The RSL is like an airbag that deploys if you jam on the brakes hard. Doesn't matter if you will stop in time or not, the airbag goes off. That would suck to have that in a car. The ratio of airbags killing people vs. saving people in real accidents would be a positive one, but it would still be a bad system to have. DV

LOL, you mean the owner of the competing DZ? What for? DV

Same way you judge distance when pulling up to a stop sign while driving. DV

The Balvenie Derek

In the U.S. most often the DZO increases the minimum requirements to what insurance requires or more. I don't think a private ticket is enough but think commercial is sufficient, with parachute operations specific training. I agree there should be a formal, FAA training syllabus, like glider towing. The problem in the U.S. is people justifying a private pilot flying for a commercial DZ because he has been doing it a long time. Cheating the system and getting away with it should not mean that you should be grandfathered in. That would encourage more people to attempt to cheat the system. Sure you can find a private pilot that is a better pilot than a lot of commercial pilots, but the system is in place for a reason. A DZO should either train a poor pilot to standard or replace them. I would argue that the average commercial pilot is better than the average private pilot and have demonstrated such to the FAA. A private pilot flying jumpers at a commercial DZ demonstrates a dangerous attitude, "The FAR's don't apply to me." Where does it end? What about pre-flights? Manufacturer's maximum weight for the aircraft? Aircraft maintenance. When jumpers allow the FAR's to be ignored, they are letting down their fellow jumpers. Skydiving is supposed to be self-policing. Eventually, when the FAA realizes they are being laughed at behind their backs, they will take action. Skydivers will only have themselves to blame at that point. Derek

Your choices don't make sense. That 30-years of experience pilot had to start somewhere, and if the minimum qualifications is a private pilot, then your choices are a 20-something private pilot wanting to build hours or a 20-something commercial pilot wanting to build hours. You have to look at the SYSTEM, not just cherry-picked examples. I could just as easily ask, who would you rather have flying, the PPL with 30 years experience, or the guy with no license but 35 years experience, who really does not want to go through the hassle and expense of getting a PPL? Where do you draw the line? Isn't the line drawn by the FAA and they draw it at the commercial certificate? Lets say you don't have a driver's license and you get pulled over. Is it a valid argument to tell the officer, "I have been driving for 20 years, taking a silly test isn't going to make me safer"? Do you think the officer would say, "Oh, 20-years, heh? OK, no problem, go ahead."? Why? Derek

It is a commercial drop zone, flying skydivers and students for money. The pilot is required to have a commercial license. he knows that. He doesn't have one. What happened to all the skydivers at that DZ? What haoppened to self-regulating? This is a perfect example why self regulating is not working. You are a USPA RD and admit to having 1000 skydives from a plane with a private pilot at the controls. What example does that set to the other skydivers? What does that tell the FAA? What happened to your integrity? Derek

Then how do other DZ's make a profit charging the same rates? Is the TI jumping for free? When the DZ advertises to the general public and charges them for skydives, that is a commercial operation. There is no way I would believe that no one is profiting from charging tandems $220.00 a pop at that DZ. Derek Derek

Then where did the $220.00 go that the tandem student paid? Derek