davelepka

I hear what you're saying, but that still comes back to fall rate. In your own quote from above, you mention not 'sinking out', which means you're flying a fast body position (sitting up, chin up) at a moderate airspeed and that's all thanks to the wings. If your tandem is fast enough, you could fly that same position without the wings. In fact, if the tandem is too fast, getting low and sitting up that way is a great way to go fast if you don't know how to sit or backfly. You get your chest, shoulders and head out of the relative wind, and you can keep up a pretty good airspeed (if you're flexible enough).

Did I not make a fair response to a question about basic airmanship on a very high performance canopy? Should a person jumping such a canopy have those type of basic questions, or should they have learned those lessons prior to jumping a high performance canopy? If someone asks what I believe to be a flawed question, I'm going to point out the flaw, not perpetuate the flaw by providing an answer. These threads are here for discussion and learning, and on this topic this is what I have to contribute. If you don't think it merits discussion, or that you (or anyone) could learn from it, then I guess I've failed you personally, and I am sorry. Hopefully someone out there understood my point of view and was able to take it into consideration. "Keeping my fingers crossed"

Nope. Just a tool for adjusting your fall rate. Holding your head still, and moving it with smooth deliberate motions are not related to what you are wearing. Yes, unprofessional, no not related to the wearing (or not) of wings. If anything, not wearing wings would have you flying flatter to stay with things, and in a flat position, your extemities cannot get into the frame. When you bend at the waist, or move an arm forward of your body, then those parts can get into the frame. Bingo- when you lose control, you lose the ability to actively 'shoot' video, and you switch to just 'recording' whatever you can get while staying with them. While there may be a psycological aspect of your confidence taking a hit if you're a little bit 'off' on the fall rate, and while wings may restore that confidence, they really are just a tool for making an adjustment to the basic physical property of your weight vs. your surface area as compared to whatever you are filming. Don't try to make it more than that, it's not a magic bullet or the only way to skin a cat, it's one tool out of many you will need to always get the shot. Sometimes you will need the wings, and sometimes you don't, but in no way are they a prerequisite to getting the job done on each and every jump.

Oh yeah, like this one later in your post- That was becasue his passenger was a highly experienced jumper who understood the level and nature of the risks they were taking. Nobody has a problem with any stupid tricks that two experienced jumpers want to do with a tandem rig. As long as everyone involved is reasonably experienced and understands the risks, that's their business. When you bring an non-jumper into the jump, you have a responsibility to them to ensure that the only risks they are taking are the most basic risks invovled in making a skydive. Adding risk by introducing equipment or techniques that the rig was not designed for, and that the manufacturer of the gear does not endorse is irresponsible and not fair to the passenger.

If you live in San Diego, stay in San Diego. Traveling to get a license has costs and risks. Of course the travel and lodging cost money, but you run several risks that can cause the trip to be a loss, with you returning without a license. Weather is a biggie. If you have a week or 10 days at a DZ, and big front line comes rolling through, you might lose half of your jumping days right there. Also, students have a lower wind limit than fun jumpers, so even a day when the planes are running strong, you might be on the ground watching due to a stiff wind. Time is another problem. When you first start jumping, it takes a physical toll on your body. Using muscles you're not used to using, and the stress/adreniline of making a jump also wears you out, so you're limited to how many jumps you can make in a day. Even if you're fit enough to overcome that, and 'bad' jump where things don't go as planned can easily rattle your confidence, and shut down your jumping for the day, or a couple of days. Along those same lines, the time can also push you to go beyond your comfort zone in an effort to get the program done before your trip is up. Not a good thing by anyones measure. Travelling to a DZ is a better idea of you jump in a seasonal location, with a limited amount of time to jump. If you can go south in winter and get licensed, then you can spend the entire season fun jumping, and not burn half of it trying to get your license one weekend at a time. If you're nearest, and 'home' DZ, is a one Cessna operation, where the instructors and jumps are hard to come by, then going to turbine DZ where you can train at whatever pace you choose is a plus as well. For you, living in San Diego, between Skydive San Diego, Perris Valley (with a wind tunnel) and Elsinore, you have 3 really great, top notch, multi turbine DZs with an hour or so. Stay home, and put your travel money toward jumps. You can pay one jump at a time if you cannot afford the whole course up front. Jump as often as money allows, and you'll be licensed in short order. The price difference between your local DZs and DZs abroad is not that much, and after you factor in the travel costs, the difference is even less. Of course, the other benefit is getting to know the instructors and fun jumpers at your local DZs along the way. One last point - there is a difference between 'AFF' and getting an A license. An 'AFF' program is typically 7 to 10 jumps, after which you still need to do coach jumps up to jump #25 to earn an A license. If a DZ is offernig a cheap 'AFF' program, that does not get you an A license, there are still many more jumps to make. If you are considering traveling to a DZ for a 'package deal', make sure you understand exactly what they're providing for your money.

I'm not even sure this thread has a point, except to highlight the fact that people who don't know what they're doing are jumping X-braced canopies. I don't think I'm being too optimistic when I say that anyone jumping an x-braced canopy should already be an accomplished high perofrmance canopy pilot, and the simple issue of min. descent rate should not be a question in their mind. This brings up another good point. Of course I have been out before, but it was not of my own doing. Shooting video on a tandem or AFF getting out last is a prime example. In that case, the go/no-go decision is not mine, but the instructor in the door. I took the job and agreed to film the jump, so if they're going, I'm going. The point that this highlights is that when you jump an x-braced canopy, and then put your spotting and exit decisions in the hands of another, you had better be that much more familiar with your canopy as your chances of needing to use the maximum performance in any aspect goes up, be getting back from a long spot or dropping into a potentially tight alternate LZ. There is a real lackadaisical attitude about high performance canopeis and their use in this sport. Jumpers seem to think that becasue they want to be a high performance canopy pilot, all they have to do is buy one and jump it, and Bob's your uncle, you're 10x cooler then you were last week. That's bullshit. The same rule that we suggest newbies follow, that being to jump only what you can safely land given the worst case scenario, should apply to all jumpers. Nobody jumping a high performance canopy should be asking questions about how to achieve min decsent. That's like a guy buying a Ferrari, and then asking which gear to start off in. These are lessons that should have been learned on much lower performance canopies, and utilized and rehearsed ad nauseum over the course of 100's of jumps. I'm not suggesting that people reach a point where the know how to fly every canopy at every loading, but they sure as hell should reach a point where they know how to evaluate the basic performance of a canopy, and then they should apply that knowledge to the first couple of jumps on any new canopy. To make an even more direct comparison, how would you view the pilot of an Extra 300 who had questions about trim settings for landing? This is an ultra high performance aircraft, and the question itself is with regards to basic airmanship, not about the purpose for which the aircraft was built. If a guy new to the Extra has questions of other aerobatic pilots about snap rolls, or how the Extra behaves in a negative G pushover, then those would be valid questions that even an experienced aerobatic pilot might have if transitioning from a Pitts to an Extra, but if a pilot of such an airplane has questions about basic airmanship, that pilot is clearly in the wrong airplane, and their real problem is not their wonderings about trim, it's their choice of aircraft.

Not in the least. Buying an item in that price range, and for the intended purpose, sight unseen is taking a big risk. Anytthing from unseen (by a non-rigger) damage, to mandatory recalls, to just plain shitty gear, there are many ways to lose out even if the seller ships the rig as promised. Some alternate thoughts - -In some cases the seller is from the best DZ in the world, or has the best rigger on earth, AND your DZO, rigger or instructor knows that DZO or rigger well enough to accept their word that the gear is sound and the seller is honest. This is, of course, after your representative calls and speaks to the other DZO or rigger in person. -There are some 'thrid party' escrow services out there (Chuting Star, for one). This way neither party is sending gear or money to someone connected to the deal. It's going to a reputable businessman with no interest in stealing anything or bad publicity. You'll pay twice for shipping (once to the escrow and once to the buyer) and also have to pay to have the gear inspected by the escrow services rigger. Some places charge for the escrow, some are just happy to get paid for the inspection. The costs are generally split between buyer and seller. -Last, and this is better when buying individual components (harness, main, reserve), you can ship gear back to the manufacturer for an inspection. Have the seller ship it, and explain in an email that this is being inspected in consideration of purcahse by you (the buyer). You pay for the inspection (generally by credit card), and this gets your name officailly into the transaction. Once the inspection is complete, and you see the report, you can send the money to the seller, and once they have it, they will instruct the manufacturer to ship the item to you. Not a perfect solution, however, it's unlikely that a seller who is trying to scam you would ship a quality peice of equipment to the manufacturer (remember, it has to pass inspection before you send the funds), inform them another person is invovled, and then have the manufacturer return the item to them once they are paid. There are other parties involved, lots of documentation, and a lot of effort for a scammer, not to mention it's in the neighborhood of interstate mail fraud, which I think is a felony.

Camera wings are simply a tool for adjusting the range of your fall rates. You need to be able to fly a fair bit faster and a fair bit slwoer than whatever you are filming in order to have the freedom to fly around them in any direction. If you cannot sink out on a subject, you'll never be able to shoot them from below, and if you can never float on a subject, you'll never be able to shoot them from above. So depending on what you're shooting, how fast they will go, and what type of flying you do, you may need wings. For a fat tandem with an average or above average sized TM, you might not need wings at all. In fact, wings might create a problem if they interfere with your attempt to go fast (like the tandem pair). The flip side is the light passenger with the bean-pole TI, where you may need a big wing just be there and manuvering around might be limited. The key is knowing your abilities, and being able to guess the speed of your subject beforehand. That said, this line can be taken two different ways - If what you mean by that is, 'Is it better to first become a great camera flyer, and then put wings on', then the answer is no. Part of being a great camera flyer is knowing how to use everything available to you to enhance your work. If you what you mean by that is, 'Is it better to put wings on before I'm a good flyer, and just learn that way', then the answer is no. Despite what others may think, you need to be an above average flyer in order to be even the most average of camera flyers. You need to be good at flying your body before you put on a camera or camera wings. Once you have achieved an acceptable level of proficiency flying your body, then you can add a camera to the mix (video only). Make a handful of jumps with the camera, then shelf it and try some camera wings. A handful of jumps with the wings, then bring the camera back. Now you are ready to start learning. Develop some sort of skill and consistancy with the video camera before adding a still. The video is nice because you 'set it and forget it'. Push record in the plane, and all of your camera interaction is done until you land. The still camera, on the other hand, requires you to physically trip the shutter in freefall. Not only do you have to manuver and line up the shots, you also have to actaully take the picture when it presents itself. It's another layer of complexity, and you'll learn slower overall if you try to introduce it too soon. Get a handle on the one camera set up and be able to produce some nice footage, then move to the next level with a still cam. If you're just starting to jump, you're going to need a couple hundred jumps before cameras come into the mix. Forget about them for now. Don't try to 'prepare' or pretend to fly a 'camera slot' on a bunch of jumps. Just go out, have fun, and see where it takes you. Revisit the idea of flying camera when you're qualified to do so, just be a skydiver for now, and explore everything you have access to today.

There is a distinct difference between a normal jump, and one with a wingsuit. An experienced jumper, who is familiar with a standard freefall skydive is able to recognize and appreciate those differnces. A first time tandem student, or even a repeat tandem for that matter, does not have the frame of reference to recognize or appreciate those differnces, so the benefit is lost on them. The benefit is lost, but the added risk remains. Makes no sense. None of that is mentioning the issue of passenger understanding and consent. Without in-depth knowledge of both tandem and wingsuit jumping, it's impossible to truely understand the nature and degree of added risk. A passenger cannot provide informed consent to those risks if they do not understand them. I seem to recall somewhere in Europe (maybe Italy) they offer tandem tracking dives (I mean atmo-whatever).

Are you fucking retarded? Do you know how to read? In truth, the answers to those two questions might explain the crap you post, but I doubt it. My initial point was that I check the spot, and pull high enough to get back to the DZ with enough altitude to safely fly my canopy in the way that I want. I then brought the 'conversation' full circle by answering your post with the following, which is just a more detailed version of my initial point - The truth of any of this is that checking the spot is always the solution to getting back to the DZ. If you are the last jumper out, and the other people you are jumping with are on the same page as you, then taking the spot you are given and pulling high is one way to do it. If you are not the last jumper out, and the spot is such that you cannot get back with pulling higher than you planned, then the solution is a go-around, and exiting on the next pass with a better spot. If the spot is such that you cannot make it back, the jumpers behind will probably call for a go-around, so instead of being last out on a long spot, and possibly backing yourself into a corner, call for the go-around yourself, and be the first jumper out on the second pass. Being too far out to make it back without extraordinary measures means you made a mistake. The real solution is not a max effort input to extend your glide, it's the preventative measure of checking the spot, and not exiting unless you are within reach of the DZ with an acceptable margin for error. A longer opening, or other 'minor' problem will turn a marginal spot into an impossible spot. In the end, this thread is about high performance canopies, and how to properly fly them. The pilots of such canopies should poses the training and experience to handle them, and the situational awareness to integrate them into the world of larger, slower canopies. None of the above applies to you.

If you're going to swoop, the first thing should be swooping safely, which involves planning ahead and making sure you have enough altitude to perform a proper traffic scan, set-up and turn. Thanks for bringing us full circle, right back to my initial point. Do you want to give it rest, or take another shot in the dark at making a valid comment, only to ultimately end up coming full circle once again, right back to what I said in the first place?

Really? I have not missed the point, the point is that altitude = options, so you if you short yourself on one, you short yourself on the other. The last place you want to be on any canopy is short on altitude or options. Additionally, when you are tyring to swoop, the set up is everything. If you squeak it back to the DZ just at your turn altitude, you have removed any choices you have in the matter. You either take the set-up you have or abort the swoop. None of this is mentioning the fact that the more time you have in your set-up area, the more time you have to scan for traffic. Canopy collisions are literally killers, so anything that hampers your traffic scan may soon hamper your ability to breathe on your own. Strike two. If you are jumping a swooping canopy, with the intention of swooping (as indicated above) then your predetermined altitude is high enough to ensure that you make it back. If your intention is to participate in a freefall activity, then you plan for that at the possible expence of your swoop, but that's your choice. So you want to swoop, where do you exit? How about last where your pull altitude is not limited by jumpers exiting after you, and the traffic will thin itself out by the time you get to the LZ. When the only other canopies still aloft are slow moving tandems and students, your options open up considerably (remember from above, the concept of options?) and your traffic scan is simplified (remember from above, the importance of the traffic scan?). You're way out of your league here Slick. Commenting on 'average' skydiving situations is one thing, but high performance canopy flight is another story. With little idea of what you're talking about in general, what would ever lead you to believe that you would have any useful input on this subject? (I'd be willing to bet the answer has something to do with Youtube). If you wanted to phrase it in a question and ask, 'What about x, y, and z, do they play a role?', that would have been one thing, but to insert your opinion as if you know jack shit is the wrong apporoach. To insinuate that I would endanger other jumpers is also making a mistake. The safety of the other jumpers and DZ operations in general is the focus of my attention any time I'm on the DZ. Ever notice how quick I am to point out the incorrect bullshit that you post, so as to avoid anyone getting the idea that you have a clue? I'm the same way in person with every other jumper on the DZ, and I have the USPA Safety awards as presented by an executive member of the BOD to prove it. Go find another tree to bark up, this one isn't for you.

I jump a Velocity 103, and I check the spot before I jump and open high enough to fly back to the DZ with moderate brakes or rear risers so as to arrive with enough altitude to set up for my swoop. Works great.

Between his past split with Deland, where he lost near half of his business, and his more recent split with Z-hills, where he again lost near half of his business, and the new development where Deland stepped into his old position as aircraft supplier to Z-hills, there is NO WAY that this is anything but a big F-U to Deland. He's already tried to F Z-hills to no avail, so he's just redirected his aim. The idea that he wants to start a DZ is not all that far fetched. Let's face it, he already owns the aircraft, which is the biggest part of opening a DZ. In fact, if you owned a bunch of Otters, and had no place to use them, opening a DZ is probably a good way to get some utilization of the planes. Seeing as how a rack of student and tandem rigs costs less than a hot section for one Otter engine, and that's all you really need to start a DZ (if you own the plane), it's not even that big of a financial risk. Even if the place tanks, it's not that hard to unload tandem and student rigs on the used market. Just like the plane is the biggest investment in opening a DZ, it's also the biggest liability in that you can't just up and sell an Otter at the drop of a hat. It might take time to find a buyer, or you have to offer it up at a loss, and the size of that loss might be equal to (or even exceed) the entire up front cost of all the gear needed to open a DZ. But again, if you already have the plane, you might as well open a DZ. However, opening one on the same field where there is already an established and succesful DZ makes no sense at all (from a business perspective). Unless you planned to literally run the other DZ out of business, the nest you could hope for is about half of what that DZ already makes. Why would you want to spend the time to compete with the other DZ to gat half of their business, or the money to under-cut them for a few years to drive them out of business, if you're goal was to make money? The answer is, you wouldn't. If you motive was something else, like just F-ing over the other DZ, then it makes perfect sense. If you were really just trying to make money, you would find your own unique location and simply establish your own DZ there. What about closer to Daytona? Lot's of tourists, ocean views, and no other DZ within 20 miles. That would be a place to open a DZ if you were really looking to just make money, and not kick another DZ in the nuts. Even closer to Orlando would be a better choice for a full time, multi turbine DZ. Close to tourists, close to the tunnel, close to orlando airport, again, a good idea for making money, but Billy is dead set on Deland Airport. It's stupid.

15 min is a lot of time for one person. Even 5 to 7 minutes will end up being a good work out for muscles you don't normally use, and will result in some soreness the following day. 15 might be enough to make all the standing around and socializing the next day a little uncomfortable. For just the two of you, I think you can do the 'intro' package, which gives you 2 min each, and then add some 'extra' time on top of that for an additional fee. Buying 30 min all at once is going to be pretty expensive, so you could probably add a few minutes to each intro package and still be well under the bulk rate you get buying 30 min at a time.

Becasue he's a dumbass. He 'always' pulls his slider down on other jumps, and the cool kids at the DZ told him how much better his canopy flies with the slider collapsed, so that's what he was doing. The reality is that his priorities are skewed. The first evidence is not checking the spot when jumping anywhere near such a congested area. If there was that type of city within a couple miles of a potential jumprun, you can bet that checking the spot would be very high on my list. Beyond that, an immediate application of brakes would have slowed his descent rate and allowed him more time to asses the situation. Instead he unstows his brakes, and let's go of his toggles to fuck with the slider at what appears to be less than 1000ft. The lesson here is for people to remember their priorities. This guy was lucky that the street wasn't busy and that he didn't snap his leg landing there. He could have easily went down and then got hit by a truck, but despite being backed into that corner, he wanted to collapse his slider for the last 20 seconds of canopy ride. There comes a time on some jumps where survival becomes the challenge, and that's not going to be pretty or look cool. Do whatever you need to do to survive, and forget about everything else.

What about some of the main/reserve entanglement videos we've seen online? There are a handful of them out there where the PC and freebag are launched into a malfunctioning main, and the only reason the reserve ever gets out it becasue of the ease of extraction. What happens when the freebag hit other things like lines or main canopy while trying to deploy? Won't these things act like a 'holding hand' in that case, and inhibit the deployment? Let's remember that the idea of the freefbag is that the reserve can easily escape and the bag/PC can then depart. In the case of a standard reserve deployment, where the freebag does indeed hit nothing but air, the fact that the lines are stowed and bag locked shut allows for a clean deployment with a velcro free stow pocket. Virtually every reserve deployment in the last 20+ years proves that theory as correct. When you get into 'unusual circumstances', such as a reserve deploying into a main or components of a main canopy, that's where you need the canopy to be easily extracted, without the proviso that it 'touches nothing but air'. The canopy should come out of the bag no matter what it touches, and in fact if there is anything there for the canopy to touch, it's that much more critical that it comes out because something is very wrong. I would like to note that I am not anti-Racer, just anti-speedbag for reserve canopies. The majority of my jumps were on Racers, and they always performed very well for me (all were built pre-speedbag).

The majority of northern DZs are 'closed' during the winter, however, some are more closed than others. Your best bet is to call around to any DZ you can find within your desired driving distance, and see what they say. Some Cessna DZs will 'open' for you if you show up with 4 jumpers willing to do 'x' number of jumps each. Sometimes it's just a matter of the DZO showing up to fly the plane, or sometimes they have to schedule a pilot, so no matter what the case, you're going to need to call ahead to some extent, even if it's just a day or so to set things up. Either way, call around and see what's what. Sometimes DZ will plan engine overahauls in the winter, so even a DZ than ususally jumps it the winter may be out of commision for a month or two. Be extra careful when jumping in the cold to balance the need stay warm with the need to wear clothing that will not interfere with your rig, or impede your flexibility, mobility or dexterity.

Again, this is too broad a question to really answer. You need to have some sort of a starting point, and this is usually determined by chatting with your instructors. Quality? Most rigs are certified under a TSO, so the designs are sound, and every rig is inspected by a rigger before a repack to ensure they are airworthy, so for the most part every rig is a 'quality' rig. Give us an idea of what you need - How many jumps do you have, and what canopies have you been jumping? What is your body weight (in pounds)? How many jumps are you planning on making on a yearly basis? What sort of jumps are you intending to do? How much do you want to spend? If you can answer those questions, more information will come your way.

Just to add to that comment, there was a Groupon offering in the Cleveland area for an introductory flight at a local flight school (actually not that local, about an hour from town). Either way, the deal was for something like $110 or $120 for the flight, which they listed as a '$180 value'. Meanwhile the fine print revealed that you would have a 30 minute 'ground school', followed by a 30 min flight with an instructor in a 152. Just for reference, you can rent a 152 at another local flight school for about $80/hr, and that's an hour of actual in-air flight time. Add in about $20/$25 for an instructor. So what you have with that deal is the 'double whammy', where they inflated the regular price to beef up the gap between it and the Groupon price, and then reduced the flight time to lower the operators cost per coupon. It seems that for higher ticket items like this, it does take some special circumstances to make to work. Again, if you can maintain a profit of some sort, and control the flow of these low-margin tandems into your schedule so they're working for you by filling in the excess capacity you have after you've booked as many full price tandems as possible, then Groupon may be a good fit. If you're close enough to capacity that you (as a DZO) and your staff are happy, then giving away tandems for close to cost makes little sense...... .....HOWEVER, how long before Groupon turns into a Skyride type fiasco, where DZ A starts to use Groupon, and then DZ B, who declined to use Groupon at first, has to also make a Groupon offering becasue DZ A is cornering too many customers with the program. You end up with both DZs fighting to rope in these discount tandems, where if both of them had just declined (assuming there are only two DZs in town), they would both still be competing on a level field for the same pool of customers, just a higher profit per customer when they let Groupon in on the deal.

It's the 'IF' that gets you. A pud is generally not as secure as a throw out PC in terms of accidentally being knocked out of place. It's far more difficult (assuming all gear is properly maintained) to get a throw out PC to accidentaly out of place than a pud. Even if a throw out does end up 'out of place' the result is an open canopy. Of course, an accidental deployment can be a real problem if anyone is above you. Of course, nobody should ever be above you, but it happens all the time. When a pud is out of place, it depends on how much reach/time you have once you figure out that it's not where you left it. Keep in mind you generally don't discover the problem until literally the second of freefall. By the time you are reaching back, you have made up your mind that it's time to end the skydive, and this when you discover that your main handle is not in place. Due to the lack of popularity of the pull out, you cannot count on your jump buddies to point it out to you during the jump. Most will have no idea what it is, or why it's blowing around just above your pin. Either way, you may or may not end up with a terminal reserve deployment or AAD fire (if so equipped). Many jumpers have gone very low looking for a floating pud (without an AAD).

If you note my post, I removed the wingsuit remark and sent you a PM noting the change as I had you mixed up with another guy, and that comment was not fair to you. Of course, you have taken advantage of the opportunity to display yet another thing you don't know about skydiving. Right out of the SIM - What's also surprising is that for a new guy to the sport who claims to have such extensive experience, knowledge and is so opinionated, you managed to miss the most recent BSR, the only one adoopted anywhere near your time in the sport. I guess we can mark off, 'extensive research' when we wonder where your opinions come from, becasue it's certainly not that.

Don't need to see you jump. Your comment alone is testimony to your level of knowledge (and presumably) experience with jumps of that size.

You say this based on what? Your extensive experience with 20-ways? What's the difference if it was 22, 24 or even 34? All of them are too big for you to be counting jumpers or canopies, and this is where you count on your skill, experience and training for both freefalling and flying a canopy in a crowd (provided you have those things). This is why skydivers spend time jumping, and learning, and developing skills, so they can achieve a level of proficiency and get invited onto larger, more technical jumps.

No, it really is about the initial sale. The VAST majority of tandems never come back to the DZ, and a slightly smaller VAST majority of AFF students never come back to the DZ. Of the slight few that return for a second jump (of any kind) even fewer actaully return for the thrid. Just consider for a minute how many students earned an A license at your DZ this year, and compare that to the number of first jump tandem or AFF students. There must be a profit for every first jump student that comes through the door. With the high probability of they will never be back, 'investing' in their jump by selling it under cost is a losing propositions. That's not to say that you can't cut the margins to a slim profit, and use the excess business to fill out slower times in your schedule or keep your staff and airplanes busy, but there has to be a profit involved in every one. There will always be unexpected expenses in business, so you have to be ahead money to account for that. If you're losing $20 a head on a group of 5 tandems, and somebody loses an altimeter or has a cutaway and loses the freebag, that load just cost you $300. Even if everything goes right on the load, you still lose $100. If you were making $20 a head on the deal, that same load would only cost you $100, becasue you'd be up $100 on the tandems and out $200 on the loss. Of course, if everything goes right, you (and your staff) all make money.