wolfriverjoe

Do you know how 'easy' it is to modify a semi auto to full auto (and have it work)? How many mass shootings have involved illegally modified full auto?

Thing one - You got your reserve out and landed safely. Things you didn't do: Fight it too long. Think that because it was flying 'ok' with no toggle input that it would be ok to land. Not pull the reserve handle (some folks trust the RSL and don't - bad idea). Get hurt. I agree that not peeling the velcro is 'bad form', and could have resulted in issues, but it worked. I also agree that not looking for the reserve handle is 'bad form' and could have been a problem, but you found it and pulled it. I also agree that losing a handle is a minor issue. Keeping them is ideal, but not required. Things you did: Kept your head and evaluated the situation. Made the decision to chop before it was too late. Landed safely. You are now on the ground and engaging in the extremely important and useful action of 'after action report'. Evaluating what you did right, what you did wrong, and how to make the next time go better. You have enough recollection of the event to make that a fruitful process. As you noted, you can learn and so can others. And last but not least... Was this your first cutaway???

True. Volume vs area (cube vs square) does not really apply to this. But the idea that canopy size vs wingloading isn't linear is true. And that does apply to this. A 'big boy' under a 200+ sq ft canopy at 1:1 is a very different situation from a 'little lady' under a 135 at 1:1. Brian Germain generally considers anything 150 or below to be 'High Performance'. Also the fact that the OP has canopy piloting experience is a double edged sword. As a licensed fixed wing pilot, I had a fair amount of experience & understanding of landing patterns, how a wing landed, judging altitude, flaring, that sort of thing. I had less of a problem learning that stuff. However, there's a lot that didn't transfer and a lot that simply wasn't there. So 'knowing what I didn't know' (more accurately not knowing it) was an issue. Overconfidence was too. I'd suggest being cautious. Far, far easier to be 'slow and careful', even if it means sitting down some days. The potential consequences of going too fast are pretty serious.

Just like that sort likes to pretend they know a lot about "Special Operations" and know a lot of retired SF, SEAL, and others of that sort. And that knowing those folks gives them a "Back Channel" to what's going on. I do know a couple of those types. None of them talk much about what they did. None of them claim to have any info on current stuff. I know a LOT more 'pretenders' and "wannabees" than I do real ones. I don't pretend to know a lot about the Spec Ops world, but I do know how to spot a fake.

You did. It's obvious from your posts. Others, however...

You do understand that his "intelligent, thoughtful response" basically said that there is no possible way that "Q" is real, right?

Fair enough. Thank you for the correction and detailed explanation.

Quite a few. And Trump has insulted the group on a regular basis. He also has repeatedly attacked HRC, but she was his opponent in the election. How many white members of congress (House or Senate) has Trump individually attacked? Telling them to "Go back where you came from?" Or criticizing the 'horrible condition' of the districts they represent? How many minority members has he individually attacked? I do count the attacks against the 4 dark skinned women an 'individual attack' because he specified the 4 individuals.

The idea that those sources are fake, yet Trump tells the truth & "Q" is real says a LOT about you.

I find it both amusing and depressing that these idiots don't seem to realize that 'racism' isn't limited to insults that directly address skin color. How many white people has Trump directed his insults towards?

I'm not so sure about that. I will agree that we are not likely to see it, because it won't happen for a while. And it won't happen all at once. It will start slow and progress. But I would guess that, unless there are mass deaths before it gets to the point of 'billions on the move' (and the 'billions' in vulnerable areas no longer exist), there will eventually reach a point where there are more than a billion refugees either moving or needing to move.

Opening is far more canopy design and packing than fabric. My understanding (and I could certainly be wrong on this) is that it's the aerodynamics of flying that's where the differences become noticeable. Particularly flare & landing. And the difference between 'new' F1-11 and 'ragged out' F1-11 is more than the difference between 'new' F1-11 and zero-P.

FIFY India has over a billion people. Add in Sub-Saharan Africa, Central America and other equatorial regions, and you are looking at a lot of folks living in areas that will become uninhabitable. The places they will look to head for are already inhabited, in some places rather crowded. In some places occupied by folks who are not terribly friendly towards the 'intruders' (think about Pakistan & India). The possibility of significant conflict is very real. The possibility of nuclear war is also very real. At that point, Ron would be right about SHTF.

For what? What specific crimes? And your 'drops' have yet to mention civilian federal courts. Just "Military Tribunals". On "Gitmo" (Guantanamo Bay). One of the main reasons the "Enemy Combatants" were kept there was because courts have ruled that US laws (and Civil Rights) apply to all people on US soil. By holding them somewhere that wasn't US soil, the government could legally deny them those rights. By calling them the new name "enemy combatants" instead of "POWs", they could legally deny them the rights guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions. When your "Q" idiots make those claims about 'military tribunals on Gitmo', they are clearly saying that there will be civilians tried by the military in a place that isn't US territory, and clearly implies that those 'defendants' won't have the rights they are due.

Dunno. Saying "we did some heli jumps where we did proximity near the Eiger summit" sounds pretty freaking cool to me. You can't base proximity at a summit because there's no higher point to exit (Captain Obvious, at your service ) Edit to add: Proximity wingsuiting is pretty impressive in its own right. In part because of the danger and risk. Which doesn't change regardless of where the jump begins.

Well, in Texas a hunting party saw 'illegal immigrants' trying to steal their RV. A shoot out ensued. Two members of the hunting party were wounded. A Go-Fund-Me raised around $26k, the Texas Ag commissioner wrote about it on FB. Unfortunately, there were NO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS present at the scene. Or tracks from them. Or any other evidence. The two idiots shot each other. And (fortunately) are facing charges. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/texas-hunters-blamed-immigrants-after-accidentally-shooting-each-other-a7591471.html?fbclid=IwAR1da5EnN2bnoum6br37q-cw0SX-Z0q5V-W6hbnfCqUgiuIq_Zb7S88p07o

Name one. Name one single prediction that your "Q" has made that has come true. OTOH, it is truly disturbing how readily you latch on to the apparent idea of a 'military takeover' of the justice system. The idea that US citizens would be taken to Guantanamo and tried by the military is abhorrent. It flies in the face of every civil right we have. But you're ok with it because you don't think your 'enemies' deserve those rights, aren't you?

Don't bet on it. Again, look at Ray Moore in Alabama. He's not the only one. During the mid-term campaign, there were a LOT of Rs campaigning on 'stopping illegal immigrants from taking our jobs', or 'stopping the Muslim terrorists', or banning abortion or halting the advance of gay rights (hidden under the code of 'religious freedom') or any of that garbage. The "alt-right" has come to the forefront and has a fair amount of power. Don't think the Rs don't see it.

Well, a big part of the problem comes from the R base. They like Trump's attacks on immigrants and minorities. They are the ones chanting "And make Mexico pay for it" (in reference to building a wall) or "Lock her UP!!!" or "Send her BACK!!!" at the rallies. They are the ones who will be almost certain to vote in the primaries. When the less vociferous (and less idiotic) won't go the to trouble. Look at Alabama. They had Ray Moore as a final Senate candidate. And it was a fairly close election. The R congress creatures know full well that they will face serious consequences for attacking or condemning Trump. The senators know that they would face the same if they voted for impeachment (one of the reasons the D congress isn't doing it). I noted this during Trump's early rise. Obama's presidency really pissed off a lot of 'old school' conservatives. They had to 'play nice' since the early 70s and couldn't publicly air their racist views without consequences. Once Trump came along and started publicly stating all of his garbage, these people crawled out of their caves and from under their rocks and were very happy to support him. And also, the "military-industrial complex" is a really bad place to look for 'wasteful spending'. Not that it doesn't happen (it's the worst place for it), but because it's so different from the rest of the government. Defense contractors and arms makers (and planes and missiles, and on and on) make incredible amounts of money from the government. They hire former high ranking military to become 'lobbyists' and then bribe the shit out of congress to get the military to buy their stuff. Because the money is so much, and the stakes are so high, pretty much anything goes, as long as they don't get caught (and they don't, much). Any other budget/appropriations process pales in comparison.

The locations for cell towers aren't very 'adjustable'. They need to put them where they need to put them. "Friend of a friend" kind of thing, a guy absolutely refused to have a tower put on his property. No amount of money could get him to agree. So the tower went up next door. About 150' from the property line.

If you use a helicopter to get to the top of a cliff to BASE off of it, that's still a BASE jump. If you jump from the heli, it's a skydive. I'll even argue the "lazy rich kids" comment. Some of those climbs are very difficult. Some places, climbing to the exit point from the landing area is simply impossible and it's a very long drive to get there by road. If you jump from a tower that has an elevator to the top, it's still a BASE jump. Climbing or not is not the determining factor. Where you jump from is. A dam, regardless of it being a 'building' (man made structure) or a "cliff" (man made one) is still a fixed object. And I see it as 1-4 that it's a BASE jump. You are the only one calling it BASE.

Concise version? Easy. The way you rationalize and justify and minimize Trump's racism. Mexicans are rapists Muslims are terrorists. African countries are "Shitholes", while Norway is "nice." Nazis and KKK are 'very fine people'. Four women with dark skin should "go back where they came from". All are citizens and three were born here, same as Trump. Today, a black congressman from Baltimore is responsible for the faults of the city. The same way John Lewis of Atlanta was responsible for the hugely exaggerated problems there. Why aren't any white congress creatures responsible for the problems in their districts? It's not 'underlying' racism or a 'racist undercurrent'. It's his entire platform. The people who overtly support it are bad. But at least they have the courage of their convictions to stand up and say that they hate blacks, Muslims, Mexicans, ect. Like at the rally last week where they shouted "Send her back!!!" https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fascist-trump-rally-greenville-ilhan-omar-send-her-back_n_5d30529fe4b0419fd328b270?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063&section=politics&utm_source=main_fb&utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages&utm_medium=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0e7J6riCplwtbKDCuuj7nbmzNpRBDsacjbVldMgk-Dr50GKrYyPrpv1gs The ones who support Trump, but refuse to admit his racism are somehow worse. They hide their racism behind rationalization and justifications. Like 'I'm tired of hearing it' or 'keeping it in everyone's face emboldens the racists'. It's supporting and enabling the racists and racism without taking ANY ownership of it.

A dam is a man-built structure. B. Or it could be considered a (man made) cliff. E. (Building, Antenna, Span, Earth - Right?) In any case, no aircraft are involved and the jump is made from the ground. By definition (both FAA & USPA), jumping from an aircraft is a skydive. I think the FAA calls it an 'intentional parachute jump'.

As opposed to the coal fired plants that put 'fire and brimstone' into the air (the 'brimstone' came back down as acid rain).

Professor, only idiots & fools believed that Mexico was ever going to pay for the wall.