davelepka

If they should not be swooping, the proper instruction is to tell them not to swoop. Enabling them to swoop is not helping them in any way. Once again, a jumper who is unwilling to listen when told they shouldn't be swooping is a fatality waiting to happen no matter where they are. Nobody would ever tell someone to go to another DZ, they would tell them not to come to their DZ if they are going to engage in dangerous behavior. What that jumper does when they pull out of the parking lot is their business. You seem to be making the mistake that you have a 'right' to do whatever you want, and that the best case scenario is that people should help to do whatever that may be. That is incorrect. You have a right to do whatever the management at a given DZ allows you to do, end of story.

Flying high performance canopies 'correctly and responsibly' involves waiting until you have sufficient jumps and training to do so such that senior jumpers/swoopers do not disapprove of your choices. 'Doing it anyway' in spite of such disapproval is not doing it 'correctly and responsibly', and no amount of training from me is going to change the fact that you're in over your head. Your argument amounts to blackmail. 'I'm going to do it no matter what, so if you want me to be safe you need to teach me'. That's bullshit because your bad choice does not amount to forcing me to make a bad choice (teaching a newbie to swoop). I've mentioned this before, but why would I teach someone who didn't listen to the first, most important piece of advice I gave them? If I tell you that you don't have the jumps/training for the canopy your jumping or what you're doing with it, and you disregard that, what's going to happen when I'm training you and I tell you're not ready for another downsize or a bigger turn? Should I expect you to magically start listening then?

Here's the catch, at that point nobody should give two shits what you think. If you're the guy who is posing a danger to themselves or others, your opinion has just been rendered null and void. What you want, what you like, how you learn and what you think no longer count, you lost those rights when you made whatever mistake it was that you made. This situation is simple, all it takes is knowledgeable people who care, and this comes in one of two forms - 1. The one is in a regulatory body that restricts canopy type and WL with regards to jump numbers and continuing education. The only way to truly cover your bases is to connect both to advancement in canopy piloting. Just using an equipment restriction or education is leaving the door open for too many people to slip through the cracks. Equipment restriction only doesn't work for the guy who amasses 500 jumps over many years on bigger wings with no training. Then, all of the sudden, he's allowed to jump virtually anything he wants, and that doesn't 'add up'. Education only allows for poor judgment on the part of the instructor, or the student getting lucky on the day of the class. If the student is your 'best bud', and you push him through the class with a nudge and a wink because he's 'super cool' and he'll probably be fine, that doesn't work. Likewise, if the guy put's on a 'show' the day of the class, he might come across as solid and reasonable, when he had other ideas once he gets that hot canopy he wants (anyone ever 'adjust' their personality/behavior on a first date or job interview?) So you need both ends of the spectrum if you're going to start making written rules. 2. The other option, and this is essentially what we have now and it's not working that great 'overall', is just individual supervision at each DZ. In some places, it works like gang busters. Where I jump, we have a DZO, two S&TAs (so one of them is always at the DZ) and a staff who keep a close eye on all of the operations, and aren't shy about acting on anything they see that isn't 100% above board. We care about what happens way more than we care about jumpers having 'freedom' or being 'happy'. You can be happy and free somewhere else if it's posing a danger to yourself or others. The flip side, is that in many places this just doesn't work. Either the locals don't know enough to recognize bad behavior or a bad situation that's brewing, or they don't care, or the operation is too big to keep an eye on every jumper all day long. To that end, years ago I was at Perris and met JC Colclasure who introduced himself as the local 'safety officer'. I said, 'Oh, you're the S&TA?' and he explained that he was not, he was there to stand in the LZ and watch openings, canopy flights and landings, and make sure everything was 'square'. This was 15 years ago, and I'm not sure if they still have a 'safety officer', but that's the right idea for an operation of that size. Truth be told, option #1 is the right way. Make a couple of hard and fast rules that cover everyone in terms of equipment choice and canopy piloting education. Nobody has to downsize or fly higher performance canopies, and for those people these rules would be a non-issue. For the ones who want to, you have to put in the time and do the work. I can't think of one accomplished canopy pilot who wouldn't recommend that new jumpers build experience and get coaching, and that's what those sort of rules would do.

Upsizing, in my opinion, is a real 'power move', in that it shows real judgment. Everyone around is downsizing, and it's tough to find a guy who is not jumping 2.0+ who's planning a new canopy is planning to go bigger. To have the presence of mind and strength of character to go the other way is a big step. I upsized a few years back from a 90 to a 103 (both Velos). The 90 was fun, but it just wasn't getting it done for tandem videos with long spots. I was actually looking for a 96 when this 103 came up for sale with low jumps, a good price, and a super cool seller who was easy to work with, so I pulled the trigger. Turned out to be a great choice that I've been happy with for 1000+ jumps. After I switched, I realized that it was the first time in 15 years that I upsized, and wasn't just blindly pushing for smaller, faster, meaner canopies. Snapping out of the herd mentality and going the other way, in this case, is proof positive that the guy is using his melon. I'm not suggesting that everyone who downsizes isn't using their melon, but I would guess that a large percentage of them are probably ahead of where they should be and are just pushing forward based on testosterone, desire, and peer pressure, with solid rational thought taking a back seat. You can't the same thing about a guy who upsizes and switches to a more conservative planform.

The bigger canopies, 150 sq ft and up, I just did slower, carving turns from scary low and just let up when I was 'close' to the ground. Without much recovery arc to speak of, the plan was to keep the turn shallow and stay mostly under the wing. The commitment level was low, and I wasn't really trying to 'swoop' them hard, it was just for a goof when I was jumping a back up rig or filming something under canopy where I needed more square footage. For the Storm, I just did a couple of 'practice turns' up high to see what sort of altitude I would burn, and went from there. I was only jumping the Storm for a weekend or two, so again, the level I was shooting for wasn't real high. I just wanted to be able to throw a decent 270 while I was jumping the Storm (my Velo was at PD for a reline). Here are the disclaimers - 1. A 270, for me, is a step back. On top of that, the 270 I was going for was an 'easy' 270 where I know I wasn't getting 100% out of the canopy and that was OK with me. 2. This was at my home DZ, where I'm very familiar with the overall site picture. Flying the set up there is second nature. 3. At this point, I'm 'very' consistent in that I can make the same turn and fly the same set-up with a high degree of reliability. In my case, the canopy was the only variable, and in this case, it was a bigger, slower canopy than I was used to. The point is that most people, in most situations should give a little more time and effort toward getting to know a canopy before pitching 270s. Again, the key factor is where you are in your progression with regards to canopies and swooping. As someone who has been swooping small canopies with big turns (450 is my normal approach, sometimes I go bigger for fun) for many years and 1000's of jumps, a 270 on a 120 Storm is a pretty big step back. It's like this - if you're jumping a new-to-you canopy and you're only going to be under for a handful of jumps, just fuck it and fly straight in. It's not going to kill you (hopefully) and you can just work on your accuracy (not 'general' accuracy, I mean throw down a Frisbee and try to dead-center it). If you're going to be jumping the new canopy for any length of time, or on any regular basis, then you have the ability to take your time and 'get to know' the canopy before throwing it down 'in anger' close to the ground. It's one of those problems that solves itself, like the guys chomping at the bit to swoop or jump a camera. If you're dedicated enough, pound out the jumps and get the experience under your belt, and it won't be long before you have the numbers to go after what you want. If your pace it slower, then it will take longer, but it should because you don't have the depth of experience to go where you want just yet.

A swooper can swoop any canopy. Some canopies give you better results than others, but the 'swoop' is in the pilot, not the canopy. I've swooped big Sabres before, mid-sized Spectres, and earlier this season laid down some nice ones on a Storm 120. It's not the canopy, it's the pilot.

It depends on what kind of lines you have. Some brake lines are one piece, with a 'cats eye' fingertrapped in for the brake setting. Those type would need to be replaced from the toggle to the cascade. A two piece brake line consists of one line from the cascade down to the brake setting, where there is a loop at the bottom that is the brake setting. The lower line is fingertrapped around the bottom of the that loop and goes down to the toggle. The lower brake line can easily be replaced on it's own if the upper is in good shape and in-trim. The other issue is why your lowers are frayed. If you have exposed Velcro on your risers, that's probably the cause, and you either need to upgrade to velcroless risers (a very good idea) or at the very least, refine the way you stow and handle your brake lines so as to avoid contact with the exposed Velcro.

If you read the article, one non-skydiver guy is quoted by a non-skydiver reporter as saying, 'They put a machine 16 ft into the ground...'. To me, the fact that the guy said '16 ft' leads me to believe he heard that figure somewhere with regards to tunnel, so it might be a 16 footer.

Just so you know, your size has nothing to do with any of those issues. Your size only comes into play when jumping with other people where you are trying to match their fall rates. With that said, it's tough to teach over the internet, and damn near impossible without video. The only two things I can add are that you need to 'relax' as part of your plan to stop the spin. Arch, legs out, and relax. Another thing you didn't mention was your heading. Did you pick one, or did you just look which ever way you were facing? If you pick a heading, and keep your eye on it when you start to turn, the act of turning your head to keep looking at the heading will help counter the turn. Likewise, if you let your eyes/head just follow the turn with you, it promotes the turn. Talk to your instructors about relaxing and holding a heading before your next jump. Also, be aware that this is by far the most repeated jump in all of AFF. There are jumpers who repeated this jump several times (even up to 10), but stuck with it and eventually passed, finished AFF and became 'normal' skydivers. Being the first release, this is the jump where you really learn to 'fly' and it does take time.

I guess you didn't make it all the way to post #3, huh?

You're in a touch spot being a dude of your size. On the one hand, there are a limited number of non-student canopies big enough for you to keep your WL down in a 'reasonable' range given your experience. On the other hand the bigger you and your canopy are, the higher you can generally bump your WL and sill be considered 'safe'. It's not something to go crazy with, but if you were on the borderline between two canopies, and they were both north of 220 sq ft, you could probably be OK with the smaller of the two. Just like a 100lb girl should not choose a 120 sq ft canopy for her first rig, even though it would be at 1 to 1 WL, bigger guys can fudge in the other direction. The longer lines and increased drag of a huge canopy mean you can 'push' the WL a little. In terms of no-wind, it's common for new jumpers to have trouble with those, regardless of their WL. The increased ground speed can be intimidating, and that will mentally effect your performance. If you're scared of the speed, you're not going to be at your best. It just takes time, and practice. One thing to keep in mind is that the wind will not effect your descent rate or your ability to stop it with the toggles. In any wind, when you hit the 'sweet spot' in your toggle stroke, the canopy will level out and fly with zero descent rate. When you have a 10 mph wind, you also end up with little forward speed, well within what you can walk/run. When you have no wind, you're going faster forward, but you'll still have no descent rate. Hitting the ground with some descent rate is scary and might hurt. Gently setting down and sliding out some forward speed is generally not that bad. Keep that in mind, and work on your descent rate more than your forward speed, and things will improve in short order. As far as jumping a 210, if your skills are up to par, I wouldn't sweat the weight issue. The canopy will not blow up or snap lines at your weight. I would, however, not jump mini-risers at your weight, as those have been known to break on hard openings.

I'm willing to bet that he got some very specific, focused instruction before he jumped in the configuration described above. I'm also willing to bet that he was thoroughly vetted for his natural abilities to handle those types of situations. I'm also aware that the military has an 'acceptable' casualty rate when it comes to dropping soldiers out of a plane. They have a 'mission' that overrides the need for complete and total 'safety' as it would for a sport jumper. If they can get 98% of the boots safely on the ground, the helps the mission, and thus makes the 2% casualty rate an 'acceptable' consequence. I wouldn't classify wanting to film your friends on a shitty 2-way a 'mission' worth increasing the casualty rate at your local DZ.

There's some info online, but what you noobs really need is to approach an experienced camera flyer at your home DZ, and learn in-person, face to face. Anyone can sit and read articles online. Anyone can also misunderstand what they read, or incorrectly assume that they 'know it all' when what they read may have been incomplete. Working with a real person, in real life increases your chances of getting complete instruction, complete understanding, and covers you for as much 'idiot factor' as you need. If you're an enormous idiot, a real person can slow the instruction down, and be vey sure to double (or triple) check that you really know/understand the material. Reading online does not provide that type of 'personalized' instruction. I've said it a million times, the internet is a terrible place to 'learn' how to skydive. It's a 'fair' place to learn to hone your basic skydiving skills, and it's a 'good' place to discuss (or argue, or shoot the shit) about things you already 'know' fairly well. There are too many nuances to gear, situations, techniques and individual people, that you really need that focused, one-on-one attention to really learn anything new in this sport.

Ok - Done. Send the check to the 'Help Rico' fund for an injured jumper who needs a new wheelchair van. There's a thread all about it in the Bonfire forum.

Another thought to keep in mind is that if you have one breakdown, that could cause the 'cost' of buying vs renting to skyrocket. Something like a water pump could end up costing you $500 + when you factor in a tow and the general lack of ability to 'shop around' for a good garage or rate for the repair. Keep in mind that when you buy a $2000 vehicle, you need to pay taxes on the purchase, fees to transfer the title, and fees for plates/registration. That could easily run you $250/$300. Add in the cost of insurance which has got to be an easy $100 or $200 to get a policy in place, so you're looking at $200 to $400 that you're going to 'lose' on the deal right off the top. Add in the cost to title the vehicle in Ca (or Az) if you can, and taking a possible loss of a couple hundred on the sale when you're done with it, and buying ends up costing you $600 to $700, and then you still have the 'risk' of any work/repairs the van ends up needing. Compare that to renting, and see what you come up with. Keep in mind that renting gets you the guarantee that the vehicle will be newer and will run well the whole time with no additional cost to you for repairs. Also, your current auto insurance policy or credit card may cover insurance on rentals, so that's a cost you can avoid. Another thought is that you might look into a renting a smaller car as opposed to a van. Most DZs should have a couch you can crash on, or a local who will put you up for a night for a case of beer, so you don't need something you can sleep in. Outside of that, if you have to get a cheap motel for a night in between DZs, you can find them for $40 or $50 a night, and that get's you a bed and shower (things you might need on occasion). So if you can rent a smaller car, the rental costs and fuel costs will be less. I know around here you can rent a car for $200-ish a week, depending on the deals they're running. So even if you just look at the 'fixed' costs of buying a vehicle, you could rent one for 2 or 3 weeks for the same money, without the risks or hassles of buying/owning/selling. A quick tip when shopping rates, try to avoid renting a car at the 'airport' locations. They charge way more then at the 'neighborhood' locations, so look into taking a cab from the airport out to the suburbs, and get a car out there. Same rental companies, same car, way less money.

As far as the 'rules' goes, I'm not sure how things work up North. I'll let another of 'your people' chime in as to the position that Transport Canada takes on the issue. What I can comment on is the practical/safety issues. For starters, keep in mind that being on a DZ with experienced jumpers provides many 'services' that you might not see, but they are certainly of value. Having another (or multiple) sets of eyes looking at your gear helps to avoid problems you may miss or not be aware of. Another factor is going to spotting, and wind/weather conditions. Having more experienced jumpers around to makes these calls helps you to learn the way it's done, and helps you to build your ability to do it yourself. Supervision with regards to landings, malfunctions, landing off, and injuries is another. There are typically several jumpers watching canopies open and land, and if there are any of the above problems, there is a 'crew' of jumpers that will snap into action to find and treat you or your gear. There are other things you 'get' from jumping at a DZ, but the above list are some of the 'biggies'. You can train yourself, and your brother/family/friends to take care of these things, but it represents as effort on their part and they should understand the role they are playing in your safety, and take it seriously. Beyond that, currency is another factor that comes into play when making 'safe' jumps. No matter how current or uncurrent you may be, the staff at the DZ will be current and professional and 'taking care of business'. If you need more help/supervision based on not having jumped in a while, they're there to assist, but of course, you lose that if you're jumping alone. Overall, jumping (and jumping alone) can be done safely, but it's important to remember your own personal skill level and currency, and then plan your jumps based on that. The fewer jumps you have and the less current you are, the more conservative you need to be when choosing when/where/how to make your jumps.

Honest question, and I'll preface it by saying that I think you're making some better choices with regards to the canopy control courses you've taken, is 202 your accurate jump numbers as of today?

Nothing, but that's the most important part. If you dump the toggles to full flight out of a stall, the canopy will dive before returning to full flight. Do this on final, and you would pogo yourself into the ground. Learn to do it the right way, by easing up on the toggles, and you can recover from a low-altitude stall and not break your legs on landing. Isn't that enough?

Ok, fair enough. So you pressed the issue, and they decided to make an effort to help you out. So you sent it in, and they were correct that it could not be repaired. How is this their fault in any way? They told you up front that there was nothing they could do, but upon your insistence, they went against what they said and gave it a shot. From my point of view, that is excellent customer service. They went against their policy to help you out, it just so happened to be that they could not (just like they told you in the first place). For their effort, above and beyond their company policy, you come on the internet and bash them. Real classy move dude, real classy.

That what I call it, and why I put it in quotes. The idea is that the inside instructor on an AFF jump, after the student 'checks in', will put the top of their head into the students ribs on their side. What this does is give you three points of contact with the student - legstrap, arm grip and your head. It works a couple of different ways. One of them is that you can sort of push your head in, and pull their arm/legstrap(hip) back into an arch if the student doesn't want to do it on their own. The other idea is that it gets you as close as possible the student before they leave the plane, reducing the chances that you get 'stretched out' if the exit gets weird. In any case, a GoPro on top of your helmet makes hard or impossible to do this.

Any of the minivans would be a good choice. Delivery vans in the US are typically the same as cargo vans, and as such have bigger engines and heavy duty tires/suspension/brakes which leads to poor gas mileage. A minivan will usually have a 6-cylinder engine, and some even have a rear bench seat that can fold flat and turns into a 'bed'. The upside there is that you have all the seats with you when you get to LA (I'm guessing you want to sell the van when you're done, right?). The biggest 'problem' you might have is the title/registration/insurance situation. I'm not sure what it takes to title a vehicle in Fla, but you usually need a residence of some sort. Look into that ahead of time. The flip side is being able to sell it in LA. Cali has some weird laws regarding emissions, and cars/motorcycles have (or had) to be produced in 'California' versions to meet those standards. Now things might have changed lately, but for $2k you're looking at an older car you might not be able to title in Cali. Let's say you can get a title there, you'll want to do that. I would never buy a used car with an out-of-state title, just in case there are problems getting the title switched, I'm stuck with a car I can't title/register. One thought, if you can get a Cali title, is to get one in a locals name before you leave. Of course, this needs to be someone you trust, but put the van in their name and have them sell it for you after you leave, and send you the money. It's easier to sell a used car if the title is in the state of the sale and in the name of the seller. if I guy said to me 'the van has a Fla title in another guys name, but it's a good title', I would look elsewhere for a van. I rode a motorcycle when I lived in Cali, and when I moved back to Ohio I put the title in my buddies name and had him sell it for me. I told him he could ride it as long as he wanted and then sell it when he was done (it was only worth $1000). He had his fun, and 3 months later sent me a check for $999, he took a $1 for all his 'trouble'.

I get the idea of 'zen time', but I would suggest that you might doing it at the wrong time. Take care of your zen business earlier in the ride up, and come back to the word of the 'here and now' for the last few minutes of the ride up. This is where you need to really be 'turned on' (no pun intended), but this where people will be moving around and prepping for exit, and where you need your eyes and ears open. I'm not suggesting that people expecting you to 'gear check' their cameras is any less annoying, you are correct that they should be able to handle their own business, just that there are better times to be off in your own world.

Good thought and good effort, however, let's remember that a 'determined' line/bridle will be under great tension and will cut right through (or just squish) the koozie and hang up on the camera anyway. It may provide some deterrent, and it is cheap and easy, but you really need something solid and smooth if you expect a line or bridle to slide right off. I think a better idea overall is the 'miners light' approach. It provides for a mounting option that doesn't 'protrude' much from the helmet, and for AFF purposed it still allows you to 'head jam' the students ribs on exit if need be. Here's my first swing at the idea, it's been working out pretty well so far.

No, what you actually have is 250 chances to screw it up (at a minimum). Every fingertrap, bartack, and cut is a chance to screw up the line because fingertraps have a way of stretching as the line tightens, and bartacks have a way of shrinking the line as you ley them down. Even if you're only off by the slightest fraction of an inch, multiply that by 250 and have a pretty fucked up line set. I send my canopy in to PD. I have yet to have a line related problem and I'm on my 4th lineset on my Velo with 400-500 jump in between changes. It's less than a buck-a-jump, and that includes an inspection and factory repairs on any problems they find.

Not too bad. It does look like you're trying to 'snap' into the full tracking position too quickly. You don't have to go 'full' track right off the bat, you can ease into it as you develop the feel for the position. Start by pushing your legs straight but still keeping your feet shoulder width apart, and when that feels good and stable, then bring them together. Once you can that with stability and control, start to sweep your arms back. Start with your arms straight out to your sides, this will help with heading control and stability. Once that feels good, move your arms back to a 45 degree sweep, and do that until you feel 'good'. Finally, move them all the way in next to your body. Once you have your arms/legs where you want them, move onto rolling your shoulders forward and de-aching your torso. Tracking is not a natural position, and there's no reason you need to go 'all in' at once. Break it down into sections (as outlined above) and work on them one at a time. It make take several jumps for each section, but by the end of 10 or 15 jumps, you'll have all the pieces together. Keep in mind that just putting your legs out will move you forward, so if you have heading control and do just your legs for 5 or 6 seconds, you can get good separation from a 2-way jump (you shouldn't be in bigger groups at this stage anyway, you need to learn to track first). So you can work on the 'sections' of your tracking skills at the end of RW jumps, and it won't take long to get into the 'full' position.