wolfriverjoe

Bolding mine. The correct thing to do on a FF jump and the correct thing to do on a belly (RW or FS) jump are two very different things. And in the description above, it's really not a barrel roll. It's backflying at the beginning, then flipping over (1/2 roll) to the belly for proper tracking. As I noted in my previous post, that's the correct thing to do for a FF jump (at least that's what I thought). There are good reasons to do it that way. One of those reasons is the likelyhood for significant vertical separation during breakoff, as different people lose vertical speed differently, and there's a lot more speed to lose during that breakoff. In a properly done belly jump, everyone is at the same level, going about the same speed at breakoff. That speed doesn't change a whole lot, so the chances for big "level differences" is nowhere near what it is on a FF jump. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Seemed realistic enough to me. Adding a few typos would improve realism. Taking away the caps and punctuation would help too. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Or take the wings off, truck it to Nashville, Dollywood, etc. New exterior paint job and welcome tourists. Like this? I'm skeptical about the auctioned jet belonging to Elvis when there is already one on display at Graceland. Gonna guess that the provenance is solid. They clearly say that it's one of three (?) that he owned. It would take a little effort and money to get it to the point it could be displayed and attract fans. Cheap paint job, engine nacelles with a turbine disc in front of each one, lock the cockpit door. The attraction is the interior (and that setup screams "Elvis") and it's in good shape. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Well, as is often the case, "it depends." That's why I asked what the rules are there. Generally, the rule is "no crossing the runway below 1000'". However, I used to jump at a DZ where the runway was the landing area. You got used to scanning for airplanes while in the pattern really fast. It was a very quiet little airport, and we used the "least used" runway (of two, both grass). "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Yes. Lots. FF breaks off much higher for starters. Higher speed is one part of it. My understanding (and I don't FF, so I could be wrong on this) is that they transition from vertical to back, check the air above, then roll to their belly to finish the track, clear below, flare out and pull. Some of the problems with "barrel rolling during a track to clear the air above" are: Few people can barrel roll in a track and stay on heading. You can't really see anything while rolling. You would have to flip to your back, stay there for a few seconds, then flip back to your front. That takes up a lot of time. You lose altitude during the roll. That takes away from the distance you could potentially track (distance from everyone else is the main priority, right?). This comes up every so often. It seems like a good idea. But look at the experience level of the people who are saying "don't do this" and think about it. Then read my sigline and think about how they lasted long enough to be that experienced. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

If anything the instructor says or does isn't clear, you have to ask. Did you break a rule? I don't know. What are the rules there? It's your responsibility to know them. It's the instructor's responsibility to teach them, but if you aren't clear on them, you have to ask. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Taken from FB: THE BLONDE MORTICIAN A man who'd just died is delivered to a local mortuary wearing an expensive, expertly tailored black suit. The female blonde mortician asks the deceased's wife how she would like the body dressed. She points out that the man does look good in the black suit he is already wearing. The widow, however, says that she always thought her husband looked his best in blue, and that she wants him in a blue suit. She gives the Blonde mortician a blank check and says, 'I don't care what it costs, but please have my husband in a blue suit for the viewing.' The woman returns the next day for the wake. To her delight, she finds her husband dressed in a gorgeous blue suit with a subtle chalk stripe; the suit fits him perfectly... She says to the mortician, 'Whatever this cost, I'm very satisfied.. You did an excellent job and I'm very grateful. How much did you spend?' To her astonishment, the blonde mortician presents her with the blank check. 'There's no charge,' she says. 'No, really, I must compensate you for the cost of that exquisite blue suit!' she says. 'Honestly, ma'am,' the blonde says, 'it cost nothing. You see, a deceased gentleman of about your husband's size was brought in shortly after you left yesterday, and he was wearing an attractive blue suit. I asked his wife if she minded him going to his grave wearing a black suit instead, and she said it made no difference as long as he looked nice.' 'So I just switched the heads.' "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

On the rig? Or should it be on the tin of mints? I can see it now: Warning!!!! Due to upset and spill hazards, do not place open tin of mints near strong magnets. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Gotta love Paul Ryan. After the CBO report said that 23 million would lose coverage, he called is a Positive Step. Really? "Only" 23 million are going to lose coverage, instead of the 24 million predicted earlier. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Straight from the play book of the 3rd Reich. Anyone who doubts this should read The Rise & Fall of the Third Reich. Jerry Baumchen I wonder what the right would be saying if it was a "Stand your ground" state and the reporter shot him dead. SYG is unnecessary. Once the attacker had him on the ground and continued the attack, retreat really wasn't an option. That's all that SYG does. It removes the "requirement for retreat" that is normally part of self defense. Without SYG, the person claiming self defense has to show that there was no reasonable way to escape the attack. FWIW, "Castle Doctrine" removes that for attacks in one's own residence. And I gotta love Ron's broad generalization that a reporter wouldn't be the type to know how to use a gun. About as accurate as most of his broad generalizations and prejudices. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Gonna say that one reason is that it makes it a hell of a lot harder to disenfranchise the poor, elderly and minorities. God knows the Rs won't go for THAT "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Salads are usually "lunch", unless actual lunch is a big meal. Usually with soup or similar. Lettuce (green leaf or romaine), scallion (green onion), mushrooms, broccoli, tomato & cucumber. In summer, the broccoli, tomato & cucumber come from the back yard. Dressing is either ranch or Italian/vinagrette of some sort. Depends on what I'm having with it. I don't do Italian dressing and clam chowder soup, for example. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Talk about "poster boy for anger management." If you do that, you'd need a good lawyer. Depending on how bad the damage, knocking teeth out (that's why they'd need a dentist, right?) could constitute 'great bodily injury'. Which raises the crime to "felony assault." You're willing to face felony charges because someone insults your mom? "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Well, the US really is the head of NATO so I don't see why the President shouldn't be up front for the pictures at a NATO meeting. Having the US in front does free up the rest of you to spend your capital on things like free healthcare, free this, free that, so quit your bitchin'. We've got you covered on the defense front. Do you think that maybe they would have taken a minute or two to organize the people in an appropriate order? Do you think that they would have snubbed the US as far as where Trump got to stand in the picture? Could Trump have waited one or two seconds for a path to open up? Or does his narcissism dictate that he be in front all the time? And does his insecurity dictate that he has to be in front right now or maybe they'll take the pic without him in front? He needs someone to tell him when he's acting rudely and insensitively (he's doing it again). "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

It doesn't matter what was said. "He insulted my mom" is not a viable defense for a "body slam." Assault is assault. Defense against a viable thread of violence before the actual violence happens is a different matter. Link: https://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fighting-words/ "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

I don't think that's an option. If she tried to file essentially the same suit in Federal Court, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work. Jurisdiction issues, diversity issues, all that. It's a state case. There's maybe an argument that the FAA rules are federal, but she's not suing the FAA. What are you basing this assumption on? I don't see this as a "left/right" issue. I haven't seen any of her rantings and ravings show any strong liberal tendencies. Selfish, yes. Obsessive, yes. Irrational, yes. Liberal? I don't see it. Or is it just a matter that you don't like her, and since you also don't like 'far left wing activists', she must be one? "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Well, so much for the jobs he "saved." http://www.newsweek.com/carrier-company-where-trump-rescued-800-jobs-now-announces-600-layoffs-ahead-614352 "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Daesh may be "claiming" responsibility for it. But there's no proof yet. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Well, one of the way to avoid the "condescending responses" from the "wolf pack" might be to be open and honest from the beginning. Lots of people come on here posting seemingly innocuous questions, but they have a hidden agenda. In case you didn't notice, that was the general assumption. The only thing wrong about that assumption is what the hidden agenda was. If you had simply asked: I have a friend who is just starting. I have a rig that will hold a 170. What is a reasonable timeframe for that friend to be able to safely use that rig? Should I hang onto it or sell it. Betcha the snark would have been drastically reduced. Just sayin. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

The internet is a perfect example of what happens when you give people perfect anonymity - some of them inevitably use it to become assholes and settle scores. This may not be the case here but it might be and we have to take that into account. The approval society currently has for anonymous leaks in general worries me - I think it can very easily be abused and will inevitably lead to a decline in the accuracy and trustworthiness of the information it's providing. In this case for example I don't know these sources. I don't know if they're a janitor, a remnant of Obama's staff or Mike Pence himself - and it matters. That information is one of the yardsticks by which we gauge the likely accuracy of the information and what actions should be taken as a result of it. It also bothers me that these 'whistleblowers' seem to go straight to media outlets rather than a legitimate avenue such as the Senate or FBI if they think a crime has been committed. That choice also makes me more skeptical. All that said, if one anonymous leak says Trump is setting fire to babies in the oval office it should be given only dubious credibility. If 30 anonymous sources say the same thing it's probably time to start paying attention... Trump's definitely getting there. I'm not saying anonymous leaks are the devil. Just that they seem to instantly be given complete credibility at the moment - Look at the way Bill phrased his post: "More evidence that Trump was actively trying to obstruct an investigation" Those are powerful words. But it's not evidence. Not yet. It's not been proven as fact. I don't think that easy leap from anonymous accusation to evidence is a healthy position for society. The current outlets for these leaks are consistently the NY Times and Washington Post. They are undoubtedly from the same sources. The statements and stories, to date, have always been accurate. Thats known because again and again. trump denies, then others in his administration deny. Then they admit. The same stories and the same facts. Why would a inside source go to congress. The committees are led by republicans. Where the story can be covered up. The purpose these public disclosures serve in the short term is to paint clearly. The faces of truth and lies across the political spectrum. FBI, well they will get to the bottom of the story sooner or later. Did I say later. A FBI investigation could take a couple years. What if the participants in the coverup take the fifth? What if they and trump continue to obstruct the FBI investigation. trump just told the ethics office that he doesn't have to disclose the names of lobbyists in his administration. No, I disagree, pressure on the republican congress is the only mechanism to deal with trump. When constituents pressure congress, pressure republicans. trump will be delivered to his proper place in US political history. NY Times, Washington Post, good job. Carry on. Well, Phil111 beat me to it. His answer is pretty much what I would have said. I fully agree that those 'anonymous sources' need to be treated with skepticism. BUT... I'm pretty sure the NYT & WaPo know this. They know who the sources really are and can better judge their veracity. They know that they need to make sure the story is correct. They have a reasonably good rep for doing this. There's also the simple fact that these sources seem to be correct. So far anyway. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Apparently the Commerce Secretary thinks that all the Saudi's love Trump. After all, there were no protests there. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

What an idiot. 200 miles of travel is approximately 130 feet. Well short of the claimed "five miles." Proof the world is not flat. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

It's more hearsay evidence but shouldn't be held as fact until the memos are actually out. I'm a little suspicious of all the anonymous sources of late. If you think your boss, the sitting president, is doing something that you don't agree with so strongly that you're willing to leak information about it then I think you should have the balls to either resign or to attach your name to information you leak so that you can be questioned about it in the light of day. This cloak and dagger shit needs to stop. Why should career government employees throw their jobs away because the sitting president is (among other things) committing criminal acts? This is "whistleblowing" at it's height. In a perfect world, they would be able to do so publicly, without fear of retribution. Trump is clearly losing it. He's in so far over his head that it's pretty much a matter of time before his whole administration falls apart. Anybody's guess how it will end. But when he's committing criminal acts (obstruction of justice), he should know full well that there are going to be people who don't like that and will make those things public. I'm not a big fan of the anonymity, but Trump has a long history of retaliation against anyone who he feels has wronged him. I'd much rather see the anonymous sources make accusations that can be later proven or disproven than have the stuff stay secret. Think about when he told the Russians the classified stuff. Started off as anonymous sources in the WaPo. Later confirmed by Trump himself. These anonymous sources seem to be fairly accurate. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Well, I don't know what "they" (Trump admin) are doing. AFAIK, all the announcements have come from Clarke, not Trump (or any of his minions). It may be true, or it may be more of Clarke's garbage. In fact, DHS has said publicly that they would announce any appointments that are made and they haven't announced that one. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Good. Not even the FAA can override an Act of Congress. We can now fly paper planes outdoors again without having to register with the government. Now if they would just drop the part where it's illegal to shoot down a drone that's right over your property with cameras on it being operated by an asshole. Public Law 112-95 Sections 331-336 define unmanned aerial vehicles (aka "drones") as aircraft. They are therefore protected by federal law in the same way that any other aircraft is protected. Which makes it a federal crime to shoot at them. How about nets, ropes or similar? Seriously, what if some dingaling is videoing from a drone that's over my property, within easy reach (say 15 or 20 feet)? While I agree that shooting them down is wrong, so is invading my privacy. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo