Hooknswoop

No, it isn't a simple question because you tied it to the previous thread, which is about the contractors in Iraq. You are asking "Is it wrong that the contractors in Iraq are killing for money?". You have accused them of murder. You have called them mercenaries. If you were asking if being a hitman is OK, then it would have been a simple question, but you tied it to the previous thread, complicating the simple question. Agasin, you skipped, "Are they killing for money", assumed they are guilty of killing for money, and asked, "Is it OK to kill for money". You fail to understand this and this is why you you do not understand that you did not ask a simple question. Do you think the armed contractors in Iraq are mercenaries? Do you think the armed contractors in Iraq are killing for money? By your poll, you imply that you would answer 'yes' to both questions. Derek

So you think the armed contractors working in a security role are killing for money? Your poll skips 'are they killing for money' and goes straight to 'they are killing for money, is that right?' That isn't fair. I could put up a poll that asks; "Do you think it is OK if Darius11 sells crack to kids?" That wouldn't be fair to you since I'm sure you do not sell crack at all, but the poll implies you do. The "if" does not make any difference. To answer your question though, no being a hit-man is not right. Being an armed security guard in Iraq is OK. Using deadly force to accomplish your mission is OK in that capacity. If you think they are mercenaries, then you do not understand their mission or mercenaries. I know some of the armed contractors in Iraq and I know a guy that used to be a mercenary, very different things. The armed contractors in Iraq are not mercenaries and do not kill for money, to imply otherwise is wrong. Since you admit you do not know what they are doing in Iraq, you should educate yourself about them before you convict them of a) being a mercenary, and b) killing for money. I think they would take offense to such accusations and I think you have owe them an apology for making such accusations when you admittedly do not know what they are doing, much less know they are killing for money. Derek

Never said you did. Do you think the contractors are killing for money? Derek

It doesn't, but I am curious since another thread spaked this poll. Do you think U.S. contractors are killing for money? Derek

Who do you think is killing for $? Derek

You should not suggest they are killing for money then. They are not killing for money. They do not go and hunt people down. They defend themselves and break contact, defensive tactics, not offensive. Nor are theirs, doing a very dangerous job very different from the troop's mission. Do bad things happen? Yes. That is the nature of combat, always has been, always will be. We have made an effort and great strides in limiting death and destruction. They are human, doing the best they can, in VERY difficult circumstances. Derek

Do you know what the contractors are doing in Iraq? Some of them are my friends. Derek

I'll open, install an AAD, and re-close the reserve if I packed it last for no charge. I figure I don't want money to be a factor in safety. A full assembly is $100. It is time consuming and a lot of work. Derek

Absolutely. RSL's can torque the reserve cable badly. Not all designs do, but most. I have had to replace ripcords because they were just too damaged from the RSL. Look at how thr RSL works and you'll see how it damages the reserve ripcord cable. Derek

No, pobastard, it wasn't. When I looked over my shoulder, the lines were even, running to one stow, which would not release. On the ground, I pulled all the lines as they went to 1 stow, holding the bridle with my foot. They would not release. You right, it wasn't because I double wrapped them, the packer did. The bag lock was caused by double wrapped stows. Derek

The difference, like Tdog said, is you can't slow down a canopy like you can a bike. How often do people accidently roll the throttle to the stop, commiting themselves to go a certain distance before they can get it stopped? A hard turn under canopy does exactly that. Also, just like with bikes, people tend to push with a too small canopy. I don't see the big deal with starting with a less aggressive bike/canopy. Is it possible to get away with it? Of course, but why stack the odds against yourself? Derek

Yep, Ryan and I got caught up. Ran into John Grunsfield the other day. I dove with him on the last Hubble mission. Derek

I didn't write the article. It's not a perfect parallel, but addresses some of the same issues new canopy pilots face. (My first bike was a 600 too

An article from a sport bike forum caught my attention because of the interesting parallels between new sport bike riders and new canopy pilots. Human nature isn’t limited to skydiving. (Reproduced here with the author’s permission). "Form Equals Function: Sportbikes are Not Beginner Bikes Introduction Well, another riding season is upon us and as it always happens, we get lots of inquiries from potential new riders on how to get into the sport, what's a good first ride, where to take safety classes and so on. One particular type of inquiry that pops up with almost clockwork frequency is from a small number of new riders who wish to buy 600cc and up sportbikes as their first ride. For the past year and a half, I, along with lots of other BB forum members, have entertained this question of 600cc sportbikes for a first ride with patience and lots and lots of repetition. It seems this small group of newbies keep coming back with the same arguments and questions over and over again. As a result, I am going to take the time in this column to try and put into words, answers that get repeated over and over on the BB forums. Allow me to state first and foremost that I am a sport rider. My first bike was a Ninja 250R and I put nearly 7000 miles on it in two seasons before selling it. Although I am not an expert rider by any stretch, I have tinkered enough and done enough research along with talking with other riders to be able to speak with some degree of knowledge on the subject. This column is split into two parts. First, I would like to address the common arguments we see here as to why a 600cc sportbike simply must be a first ride along with rebuttals. Second, I want to cover the rationale behind why the sportbikez.net community-at-large steers new riders away from these machines. False Logic On about a three month interval, a whole slew of questions pop up on the forum from potential riders trying to convince the community that a 600cc sportbike is a suitable first ride and then proceed to explain to us why they are the exception. I can almost set my clock to this pattern of behavior since it is almost swarm-like. I guess the newbies figure by swamping the forum with the same questions in lots of places we might trip up and endorse such a machine. Hasn't happened yet but they keep on trying. For those of you that come to Beginner Bikes trying to convince us to endorse a 600cc sportbike, I offer you the following responses to your arguments. I can only afford to get one bike so it might as be the one that I want. I don't want to go through the hassle of buying and selling a used bike to learn on. These two lines of reasoning pop up as one of the more common arguments. I am going to offer first a piece of wisdom which is stated with great regularity on the forums: This is your first bike, not your last. Motorcycle riders are reputed to change bikes, on average, once every two to three years. If this is the case (and it appears to be based on my observations), the bike you learn to ride on will not be in your garage in a few years time anyway whether you buy it new or used. You're going to sell it regardless to get something different, newer, more powerful, more comfortable, etc. Yes, buying a bike involves effort and a financial outlay. Most of us simply cannot afford to drop thousands of dollars on a whim every time we want to try something new. Getting into riding is a serious commitment in time and money and we want the best value out it as much as possible. However, if you can afford to buy outright or finance a 600cc or up sportbike that costs $7000 on average, you can probably afford to spend $2000 or so on a used bike to learn on. Most of the beginner sportbikes we recommend here (Ninja 250/500, Buell Blast, GS500) can all be found used for between $1500-$3000. Done properly, buying and selling that first bike is a fairly painless process. Buying a used bike is no harder than buying new. I would argue it is a bit easier. No different than buying a used car from a private seller. If you've done that at least once, you'll know what to do in buying a used bike. Selling a beginner bike is even easier. You want to know why? Because beginner bikes are constantly in demand (especially Ninja 250s). These bikes spend their lives migrating from one new rider to the next to act as a teaching vehicle. It is not uncommon for a beginner bike to see four or five different owners before it is wrecked or junked. There are a lot of people out there looking for inexpensive, reliable bikes and all of our beginner recommendations fit into that category. If you buy a used Ninja 250R for $1500, ride it for a season or two, you can be almost guaranteed that you will be able to resell that bike for $1300 or so when you are done with it provided you take care of it. And on a bike like the Ninja 250R, the average turnaround on such a sale is two to three days. No joke. I had five offers on my Ninja 250R within FOUR HOURS of my ad going up on Cycle Trader. I put the bike on hold the same day and sold it four days later to a fellow who drove 500 miles to pick it up. My bike never made it into the print edition. Believe me, the demand is there. And look at it this way: For those one or two seasons of riding using the above example, excluding maintenance costs which you have no matter what, you will have paid a net cost of $200 to ride that Ninja. That is extremely cheap for what is basically a bike rental for a year or two. Considering it can cost $300 or more just to rent a 600cc sportbike for a weekend (not including the $1500-$2000 security deposit), that is economic value that you simply cannot argue with. Vanity Arguments The beginner bikes you recommend are dated and ugly looking. I want something that's modern and stylish. I want a bike that looks good and that I look good on. I call these the vanity arguments. These are probably the worst reasons you can have for wanting a particular bike. I will not disagree that aesthetics plays a huge part in the bikes that appeal to us. Motorcycles are the ultimate expression in personal taste in vehicles. Far more than cars. Bikes are more personal and the connection between rider and machine is far more intimate on a bike than a car. On a bike, you are part of the machine, not just a passive passenger. However, as entry into world of riding and with the temporarily status that most beginner bikes have in our garages, looks should be the least of your concerns. As long as the bike is in good repair and mechanically sound, that is usually enough for most new riders to be happy. Most riders are happy to ride and they will ride anything given the choice between riding or not riding. If you are looking at bike mainly because of how it looks and/or how you will look it and how others will perceive you on it, take a good, long, honest look as to why you want to ride. There are lots of people out there who buy things strictly because of how it makes them appear in the eyes of others. It's shallow and vain but it is a fact of life. It shouldn't be a factor in choosing that first ride but it is. I won't deny that. The difference is: a BMW or Mercedes generally won't leaving you hanging on for dear life if you stomp on the accelerator or throw you into the road if you slam on the brakes a little hard. Virtually ever sportbike made in the past 10-15 years will do both of those things given a chance to do so (for reasons that will be explained later in this column). The population at large may think you're cool and look great on that brand new sportbike and ohh-and-ahh at you. The ohhs can quickly turn to screams of horror should, in your efforts to impress the masses, you wind up dumping your bike and surfing the asphalt. Will you still look cool with thousands of dollars in damage to that once-beautiful sportbike and with the signatures and well-wishes of your friends on the various casts you'll be wearing months afterwards? You Be The Judge I'm a big rider so I need a bigger bike to get me around. I'm a tall rider and all of those beginner bikes just don't fit me the way the sportbike does. I'll look huge and foolish riding on such a small bike. My friends will laugh at me for riding something so small. These arguments are almost as bad as the vanity arguments. The difference being is they simply show a lack of motorcycle knowledge for the most part. Unless you are over 6'3" tall or are extremely overweight (meaning well over 300lbs), even the smallest 250cc motorcycle will be able to accommodate you without difficultly. To provide an example, the Ninja 250R has a load limit of 348 pounds. That is more than sufficient to accommodate a heavier rider in full gear and still leave plenty of space for cargo in tank, tail and saddle bags. Or enough to allow two-up riding between two average weight individuals. The idea that bigger riders need bigger bikes is almost laughable. It's like saying small drivers need Honda Civics but bigger drivers only 100 pounds heavier need to drive Hummers to get around. Or Corvettes with plenty of power to pull their ample frames, as the analogy goes. It is only because of the small physical size of bikes compared to their users that this train of thought even exists. It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. A look at any motorcycle owner's manual will confirm that for you. Tall riders suffer more from fit issues than weight issues. On this, they do have a point. I'm a taller rider (6'1"). I do fold up quite comfortably on the Ninja 250 which is considered a small bike. I found it perfect for my frame. Others haven't. Then again, my knees hit the bars on bikes like the Rebel 250 and Buell Blast. Just different ergonomics that didn't fit me. For taller riders, a much better beginner fit is a dual-sport machine rather than a sport machine. They offer the high seat heights that make them comfortable rides and their power is well within acceptable limits. We have a small but vocal dual-sport community here and they will tell you, quite rightly, that a dual-sport is just as capable on twisty roads as a sportbike. The same properties that give sportbikes their cornering ability is also possessed by dual sports (high center of gravity). As to peer pressure, I admit to taking more than my fair share of ribbing from my 600cc riding friends. Some of it good natured, some of it not. In the end, this argument falls into the vanity arena. Which is more important: Your safety and comfort on a bike or what your friends think? The ways to deal with friends giving you a hard time about a smaller ride is very simple. Tell them to ride their rides and you'll ride yours. It's your ride, after all. Most true riders will accept other riders, no matter what they are on. Only posers and losers care that your ride doesn't measure up to their "standards". And if so, do you really want to be riding with them anyway? It's more fun to stand out than to be a member of a flock anyway. And if they don't buy that line of reasoning, try this one: "Well if you don't like my ride, why don't you go buy me something that you will like?". THAT will shut them up REALLY fast. It works too. Unless their name is on the payment book or the title, it shouldn't be their concern. If your friends can't deal with your decisions, you're probably better off looking for new friends. And if you can't deal with the peer pressure, then you are putting your own safety at risk solely because of what others think. Revisit the vanity arguments above and think about why you want to ride. Decision Justification Arguments I'll take it easy and grow into the bike. I'm a careful driver so I'll be a careful rider and not get into trouble. I drive a fast car so I'll be able to handle a fast bike. Other people have started on a 600cc sportbike and didn't get hurt. So why can't I? These arguments are the most common ones put forth and the ones that are hardest to deal with. These are the arguments that start flame wars. Because it is on these arguments that you have to convince someone the idea of what a beginner bike is over their preconceived notions. The arguments also often surface in what I call the "decision justification arguments". Many new riders have their heart set on a specific bike and often come to BB to ask about it not to get real advice but to get confirmation that their decision is right. In cruisers, standards, scooters and dual-sports, more often than not these "pre-decisions" are generally good ones. In sportbikes, more than 3/4 of the posters are trying to get the community to approve their choice of a 600cc machine as a first ride. Their shock is quite real when they are barraged with answers that don't meet their expectations and that is when a flurry of oft-repeated discussion ensues. Let's take each argument in turn since these are the ones that turn up with regularity. I'll take it easy and grow into the bike. The purpose of a first bike is to allow you to master basic riding skills, build confidence and develop street survival strategies. You don't grow into a bike. You develop your skills on it. As your skills develop, so does your confidence and with it, your willingness to explore what the bike is capable of. But you are also entering in a contract with the bike. It is two-way. You are going to expect the bike to act on your inputs and the bike in turn is going to respond. The problem is, your skills are still developing but the bike doesn't know that. It does what it is told. You want a partner in a contract to treat you fairly. On a bike, you don't want it fighting you every step of the way. And like most contracts, the problems don't start until there is a breakdown in communication or a misunderstanding. In sportbikes, the disparity between a new rider's fledgling skills and the responsiveness of the machine are very far apart. That is a wide gulf to bridge when you are still trying to figure out what the best inputs and actions on the bike should be. Ideally, you want your bike to do what you tell it and do it nicely. You never want the bike to argue with you. Modern sportbikes, despite their exquisite handling will often argue violently right at the moment a new rider doesn't need them to. Remember, riding is a LEARNED skill. It does not come naturally to the majority of us (save those like the Hayden brothers who were raised on dirt bikes from the moment they could walk). It must be practiced and refined. Riding is counter-intuitive to most new riders. It doesn't happen the way you expect. For example, at speeds over 25mph, to get a bike to go right, you actually turn the bars to the left. It's called counter-steering and it eventually comes naturally as breathing once you've been in the saddle for a while. But for new riders, this kind of thing is utterly baffling. You want your skills to grow in a measurable and predictable fashion. You have enough to be fearful of riding in traffic. The last thing you need is to be fearful of what your bike might do when you aren't ready for it. It's never a good situation. It is interesting to point out that only one manufacturer, Suzuki, explicitly states in their promotional material that their GSX-R family of sportbikes are intended for experienced riders. This also applies to several of their larger, more powerful machines (such as a GSX-1300R Hayabusa). If Suzuki issues such a warning for its top-flight sport machines, it is reasonable to say that the same warning would apply equally to similar machines from other manufacturers." Derek

You cannot say you are not a part of ASC. You cannot say you do not know what ASC is all about. You are a part of it. You know it. You can try and justify anything to yourself, but if you are honest with yourself, you know what you should do. You are a victim of ASC, just like all the others. It sucks to find out you are a part of something so awful. I’ve been there and walked away. Do the right thing. Derek

Yes, it can, I know this for a fact. Derek

It's all in this thread. Derek

Think? No, I know it is. I had a bag lock on a tandem with normal, large rubber bands. Just because it hasn't happend to you doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Derek

Because it causes line twists and bag locks. With double wrapped stows, the bag tilts to the side more as the stow releases, this can cause the bag to spin. Do whatever you want. Not loose stows, correctly sized bands. If they are loose, replace them, don't be lazy. Not loose and sloppy. There is a middle ground between double wrapping and "loose and sloppy". Neat and corretly sized, single wrapped stows, replaced as necessary. I used tube stows because they didn't break very often. The only reason to stow any lines besides the locking stows for for a more orderly deployment. You can safely pack with only stowing the locking stows Again, if you needed tight, double wrapped stows, then no-stow bags and free-bags would cause malfunctions and hard openings. They don't. So much for that theory. Derek

If that were true, then the no-stow d-bags would be causing hard openings and malfunctions. They are not. Again, if that were true, then the no-stow bags would cause mals and they are not. Same thing for free-bags. Why did I not have mals or hard openings on those 3 tandems where the video showed line dump? Why? Just get the right sized rubber band. Again, as long as the locking stows hold untiul line stretch, the canopy will open normally. No-stow bags and free-bags have proven this over and over. Derek

Poor body position, poor gear maintenance, and poor packing. Derek

No, a normal large, rugger band. The drogue isn't 3-ft wide after you pull the drogue release ripcord anymore. Line dump is no big deal. I've had it on several tandem jumps and wouldn't have known if it wasn't for the video. Every reserve deployment with a free-bag is basically line dump. Bag strip on the other hand is bad. The good thing is that it is very easy to prevent because all thaqt has to happen to prevent it is the locking stows must remain in place until the lines are taut. Since the locking stows are close together, there is about the same weight of line between the stows as there is on the outside of the stows, so the weight is neutral and the lines don't want to 'fall' out of the stows. This is why bags with the narrower stows (same width as the locking stows) are the way to go. Derek

There is something wrong, the adhesive is acidic and attracts dirst/sand etc. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. A patch doesn't take me very long to do and is clean, permanant fix. I guess our standards are just different. To each their own.

I really like the raptors, I think they are the great whites of the sky. So, today I got to check out a Peregrine Falcon. Very cool bird. Derek

You don't have to buy it. It happened, you can believe it, or not. Well in excess of 163 pounds. Um, very sure. After the long trap door and looking over my shoulder to confirm the bag lock, I cutaway, hesitated a second because the main was slow to release, and the fired the reserve. No RSL. I just made sure the packers didn't double wrap the rubber bands anymore. Problem solved. Derek