davelepka

Really? Is it like, twice as fast? It's only a parachute, just use your brain. It should be no surprise that you lose 200ft faster than you lose 400ft. Add in the fact that the turn from downwind to base (at 400ft) will increase your speed a touch, it's not hard to see that your base leg will happen a lot faster than your downwind leg. Did you give any thought to adjusting your alitudes? Maybe plan your trun to base at 500ft, and then onto final at 300ft? Get rid of that beeper thing. Learn to use your eyes and brain to make things happen, those two will always be available to you on every jump, where the beeper thing can fail, batteries can die, helmets can fall off, etc. If you find yourself under canopy without the use of your eyes and brain, you're fucked any way you look at it (no pun intended). What you need to do is your homework. Look at the wind speed and direction for your next jump, and write out a flight plan including your holding area, altitude and location you will enter the pattern, altitude and location where you will make your turns, and your intended touch down location. After each jump, write down the actual events that took place during your canopy ride, and compare those to your flight plan. Look at the differences between reality and your plan, and try to figure out why those differences occured, and what you could have done differently to have closer followed your plan. Repeat this for each and every jump, and within 15 to 20 jumps you won't need the process any longer. You'll develop an 'eye' that will get you close enough that you can just figure it out as you go.

I sem to remember reading in another one of your posts that you have one jump, so I have to ask the obvious question, have you considered just making another jump at a DZ near your current residence? If you live in Cali, there's a DZ within an hour or two of where ever you are, so how about you find a dog sitter for a day or two, and drive to that DZ for the day (or camp out for the weekend) and make a jump or two. All of the plans you're considering are making some pretty big 'life' choices surrounding a sport you have very little info about. Let's face it, you thought you could get a job as a videographer right off student status. In all fairness to you, nobody expects you know the in's and out's of the skydivign world until you're in that world, but that's the whole point, you're not in that wolrd. Why not ease your way into it, and see if it's a 'lifestyle' you want to persue? Find a DZ local to your current residence, and go through your student training. Get a license, get your own gear, and get a foothold in the sport. Then look for a DZ to move to spend some time at.

This is where you miss the point. In a perfect world in perfect conditions, a wide range of jumpers can jump a wide range of canopies, many outside of what most would consider 'normal' in terms of WL and performance. The trouble is that this is not a perfect world, and you are prone to encoutner unusual situaitons. Putting a handful of test jumps on this canopy or that does not make you an expert on any of them, or on any canopy at all. It gives you a glimpse, a mere peek into what the canopies are all about, but in no way does it give you an understanding of the complete performance envelope. You don't know how your canopy, or you for that matter, will react when push comes to shove and you find yourself in a situation you don't want to be in. The solution to this is to limit the performance of your canopy until you have proven yourself as being able to handle it. A lower performance canopy will have a higher tolerance for mistakes, and overall is harder to get into trouble with. The slower your flying, the more time you have to make (good) choices. When things start getting 'tight', and your canopy doesn't have a 'slow down' button, that's when people get hurt. You do realize that you dig yourself further and further into the hole with your, "I'm doing just fine so far" and, "I must know nothing becuase I only have 125 jumps" attitude, right? It genuinely makes you look like a guy who knows nothing. Speaking of which, have you considered that you might not know as much as you think you do? Let's face it, in terms of jumper 'experience', 125 isn't exactly on the upper end of things. It's a fine accomplishment for anyone, but the bar has already been set much, much higher. I'm not sure how many there are out there, but I woud have to think that there are at least 1000 people on this planet that have 5000 jumps. I can think of a couple dozen off the top of my head who are on the high side of 10,000 jumps, and there are a select few upwards of 30,000. What do you think all of those people did from jump 125 on? Not learn a thing becuase learning time was already over? You'll catch a lot more flies if you just tone down the attitude and be a little more reasonable. You don't even have to make good choices (like not jumping a Stiletto), but don't stand so rigidly behind the bad choices like they're not what they are, bad choices. We've all made mistakes at one point or another when we thought we were on the right track. AS teenagers I'd bet we all did it with more knowledgable people telling us it was wrong, but we did it anyway. The problem here is that you sound like a teenager. Own up to the reality of what you're doing, and state that. As an adult, you choose to take chances; one of them is to jump out of planes, and another is to jump a canopy nto designed for a jumper of your experience. Nobody here can argue with that because we're all guilty of the first part.

Let's say that point 1 and 2 didn't apply to you, point 3 alone would dictate a step or two back in all areas of your skydiving. You'll want to take more time preparring for your jumps, jump with smaller groups than you used to, jump a larger canopy than you used to, and pull higher than before. After a handful of jumps you can work your way back to where you left off before you stopped jumping. To take a break, and then attempt to return to jumping with a smaller canopy at a higher WL is asking for trouble. The smaller canopy will react to input faster than a larger one, and the higher WL will only make it worse.

I forgot to mention the issue of delivery time. Any new rig is going to run you at least 3 months, with most rigs being closer to 4. So an order today will come in around Sept. A used rig that fits you could be up in the air next week. A harness resize shoudn't take more that a couple weeks, so figure on a month to find a rig, get a resize, and get everything assembled and ready to fly. So in addition to the lower upfront cost, and better resale value, a used rig will save you the three months of gear rental you'll need while you wait for a new rig to be built.

Have you looked into Skydive PA up in Grove City? If you're in SW PA, there's no way you're more than 1 or 1.5 hours from them so you can just live at home and train there. Drive up Fri or Sat, and camp for free for the weekend. Nice DZ, great people and lot's of night life after jumping on the weekends. I'm sure they have a website somewhere, I'm just not going to look it up for you. You know the name and location, just google it.

Obviously. On the other side of the coin are the people who buy a $15k tandem rig and rent it to a DZ for their actual cost and make no money. I've got news for you friend, tandem rigs are made to make money. Literally. Everyone in the transaction is making money, the manufacturer, the DZO, the TI, so why not the rig owner? Maybe it doesn't cost $50 to $70 per jump to maintain a tandem rig. Maybe it's $40 to $60, which is exactly why you charge $50 to $70 to rent it out.

You're not that far off the mark in terms of 'average' size. In case you weren't aware, the harness on a used container can be resized at the factory for between $150 and $400 depending on the rig, type of harness, and amount of work needed. Locate a used container that will hold the main and reserve canopies you intend to jump, then get the serial number from the seller. Have someone with some experience measure you according to the order form for that type of rig, then contact the manufacturer with the serial number (so they know what they're starting with) and your meansurements for a quote on the resize. It's entirely possible to get a used container with a new, custom built harness for 50% or 60% the price of an all new rig. Another thing you can do is have the seller ship the rig directly to the manufacturer for an inspection. If the rig passes inspection have them proceed with the work, and you can send payment to the seller. If the rig does not pass, have it shipped back to the seller. Maybe agree to split the cost of the inspection and shipping in the event the rig does not pass inspection. I can't think of any legitimate seller who would not be willing to ship the rig back to the factory for an inspection without having payment in hand. They will be shipping, and the factory will only return it to them unless they call and advise them of a new return shipping address. It's a safe transaction for all involved. The other bonus is that you have a factory inspected rig, with a fresh, custom built harness. Of course, you also have the $1000 you saved still in your pocket.

I'll try to make this quick since it's been posted 100 times eslewhere - a used rig is a good for your first rig or two unless money is no object, and here's why - Main canopy - If you're buying the right sized main, you'll be looking to downsize within 100 jumps or so. If you buy new, you'll lose your ass on resale ($500?) trying to sell a big canopy with 100 jump on it. Also, big brand-new canopies are very hard to pack, and are a shitty way to do your first 100 pack jobs. Look for a canopy with at least 200/300 jumps on it, and up to 700/800 can still be a good canopy. Reserve canopy - No reason to buy new or used except what's available. Reserves are regualy inspected and well cared for, so you can save money buiying used if you can find the right size available. Container - Same story as the main canopy. When you do go to downsize your main, you might need to downsize your container as well. IF you buy one with an 'easy' fit for your first canopy (makes it easier to pack) it will be on the 'larger' size, and you'll want to downsize the container anyway. If you bought new, you'll lose even more than the canopy on resale ($800? $1000?). By the time your container is custom made for you, with your choice of options and colors, it becomes harder to find a buyer who wants exactly what you have, so you have to drop the price to sell. There's also the idea that you'll biff it in on landing a dozen times in your first 100 jumps, and that sucks when it's a brand new $2000 container. AADs- Most AADs have a set value they loose every year, so the resale market is pretty well set in stone. If you can find used, buy used, if you can't find used then buy new. The overall idea is that for 1/2 the price of a new rig, you can put together a used rig that will suit your needs just fine, and you can spend the $3000 you save on jumps or hookers. Down the road when you know more about gear and are ready to upgrade to new stuff, you can ususally sell the used gear for 80% to 90% of what you paid for it. If you're between 5' 4" and 6' 1", and anything close an 'appropriate' weight for your height, you should have no problem finding used gear that fits. Involve a local rigger to assist you with your purchases. Have them inspect everything you're interested in either before you make payment, or make sure you can return anything that doesn't fit or pass inspection.

That sounds more like a cosmetic repair. I'd be more concerned about the structural integrity. You might want to look into some sort of fiberglass or carbon fiber repair. Maybe trim the rough/splintered edges of the cracks, and use some gaffers tape to hold the shell in the correct shape on the outside, then lay the repair material on the inside of the helmet. Build it up until it seems strong, and then address the outside. You could sand and bondo for looks, or re-inforce the repair by laying some material on the outside as well. It might not finish up as 'pretty' but it would be strong. First, go with Spot's idea. You might get yourself a steep discount on a replacement, or maybe they'll throw you a lid they have sitting around the factory just because they feel sorry for you. I know that L and B replaced dozens of Pro Tracks lost due to riser strikes when moutned on the outside of a helmet. They didn't have to, but they did. I understand that your cameras might be hurting pretty bad, but borrow one and post some pics of the carnage.

Does it look like the brakes were locked up before touchdown? It looks like there was a whisp of smoke after the bounce of the left main, and then immediate smoke upon the actual touchdown. I know jest will 'smoke' the tires on touchdown, but that's at 120+ knots while the Stearman looked like it was doing about 40. Maybe an in-flight problem caused in increase in pressure in the brake system? The article mentioned this was part of a multi-plane promotional flight landing at Reagan Intl., so I would assume the pilot is not a 'newbie'. I'm not sure if there are brakes in both seats of the Stearman, but even if there was I would think that the pillot might feel the passenger wailing on the pedals hard enough to lock up the wheels. I do like how they claim only damage to the tail, upper wing and prop, and they leave out the part about the very expensive prop-strike inspection and repair to the big radial up front.

Indeed I did. If you look at a jumper like Kallend, it's easy to see that whatever it is that makes a person a good fit for skydiving, he has it. I say this based on the fact that he has PROVEN himself in the skydiving world over the course of many years and many accomplishments. It stands to reason that for a person to successfully follow Kallends learning progression, they would also have to poses that 'x' factor that makes a person a good fit for skydiving. Without being sure that you poses that quality (keeping in mind that the only way to be sure is to achieve and accomplish in the sport) would be foolhardy. I would address that assertion to you and every other new jumper out there, regardless of my knowledge of them or their abilities. If you want to pattern yourself after a jumper, look for a more 'average' Joe, as in your early days of jumping you have no way of knowing if you are anything more than that. One point I think you may be missing is that so little of skydiving is a physical activity. Yes, avoiding a collision is a physical reflex action, but the real avoidance manuver is not putting yourself in that position. Making good choices that will keep you from having to save your own life are the real skydiving skills you should be trying to cultivate. It's not combat. People are not trying to kill you, and you don't have to face undue danger to stay alive. You can use your mind to protect yourself before you even board the plane so the shit never even comes close to hitting the fan. Equipment choice is a bag part of that, what you do with that equipment is another.

As a brief side note- I read this post an hour ago right after you replied to me, and after thinking about it, I thought that the above portion was the key point I wanted to address, as I thought it was the most telling. In that hour, I see that Ron has posted a reply, and also selected the same portion to focus on, and I have to tell you that when two people independently choose the same portion to reply to, that might be telling in itself. That said, I think one point your missing is that you learn canopies from bigger to smaller, not the other way around. Your experiecnes on the St 190 just slower, watered down versions of the same thing I expereinced in my 1000's (literally 1000's) of jumps on Stilettos from 97 to 150sq ft, and wl from 2.0+ to 1.3. There's nothing going on between you and that canopy that I haven't expereicned tenfold, and to a higher degree of speed and sensitivity. I'm not sure why you think there is anything new going on here. The canopy was designed alomsot 20 years ago, and for the better part of that 20 years there have been jumpers pushing the limits with them with varying degrees of success. You're not new or special and the canopy isn't either. The real bitch about canopies is that only find out if you made the right choice when you start flying a different one. Did you survive the first? Then you made the right choice. Didn't make it, well.... As for Kallend, who is the guy who seems to be on your side with this issue, yes he did start flying a Stiletto early on, and it worked out well for him. I may be wrong on some of these facts, but consider that by the time Kallend starting jumping he was a college physics professor, an accomplished pilot, and pushing 50 years old. Since that time, he has gone on to participate in several world records and other high profile jumps in various disciplines. The idea is that John Kallend turned out to be a talented jumper who 'gets it'. I don't even know John personally, but I can tell you that you sir are no John Kallend, and it would be wise not to hold yourself to his standard. Just for reference, I had the privledge last summer to do some AFF jumps with a student who has expereince in both of those fields well beyond what you could possibly have. This man was a pilot in Vietnam who survived several tours flying jets and helos, was shot down and survived several times, and spent some time as a POW. He returned to the states and went into law enforcement where he was highly decorated and partnered with what the local news described as a 'supercop'. In fact, the week before his first jump, he was transporting the police helo to a shop for maintenence when the engine failed, and he simply auto-rotated it into a backayrd with zero damage to the ship or any private property. Fast forawrd to the jumps, and in short, they did not go well. Freefall was not the place for him, and despite our best efforts, it didn't get any better. To his credit, he was smart enough to realize that despite his accomplishments and uncanny ability to survive, that skydving was not for him. Don't think that one thing makes you ready for the other. I am a highly skilled, and very confident skydiver, and the one thing it has taught me about life is how much time and effort it takes to reach such a level, and the same way I would suggest that a newbie approach skydiving is the same way that I now approach any new venture I embark upon. I'm a hero on the DZ, and just an amateur everywhere else.

This is where you fuck yourself over in terms of your argument, and possibly in real life if your 'theory' is ever put to the test. The 'faster' recvovery arc of a Stiletto is only in relation to newer designs intended for swooping, and having a long dive built-in as a design consideration. The Stiletto will still dive a long way in a turn, more than long enough to drill you into the ground if done at a low altitude. Let's be real, only a turn done close enough to the ground to allow you to impact before recovery could ever be called a 'panic turn'. If you preformed a turn high enough to allow for a full recovery and land without incident, it would simply be called 'manuvering'. Back to the Stiletto, the real problem with it is that it has very little built in stability in the roll axis. The canopy has a tendency to 'over turn' and is not self-centering in that it won't return to straight and level flight on it's own. Let's say that the Stiletto will only dive 200ft as a result of a 90 degree turn, and another canopy will go 300ft. The trouble is the high roll rate of the Stiletto means that when it does come to a 'panic turn' you're more likely to roll well past the 90 degree mark, and you'll induce a dive that will exceed the 300ft mark. The difference is that the longer diving canopy has a slower roll rate, and is easier to control. You can't plan your actions in advance for 'panic'. That's the whole point of the term, it's a loss of judgement or control in a high pressure or high stress situation. What you can plan ahead is your equipment by selectiing equipment that will make up for your shortcomings when you're not at your best, and I've got news for you, with about 100 jumps you better hope you're nowhere near your best.

Probably to no degree at all. This would be for the same reason that PD doesn't list 'student' or 'beginner' Wl on their charts for canopies like the Stiletto, Katana, and Velocity. None of those canopies are intended for low jump numbers, so there's no reason to consider any factors (Wl, elevation, etc) beyond jump numbers with regard to those canopies. Let's face it, we all know the guy is grasping at straws here. There's no way a guy with 100 some jumps can accurately make an assesment of a canopy like that. He just hasn't had the exposure to different canopies and unusual circumstances needed to provide him with the proper perspective. He can take a guess, but he's doing so at his own risk.

However, your canopy choice is clearly not average for your experience level. That's the whole point of the discussion, if your canopy choice was closer to 'average' there would be no discussion. That said, if the canopy choice is above average, wouldn't the pilot also need to be above average for the system to reliably work? The agrument then, of course, would be if your skills were indeed above average, and while you may have a hard time making that judgement, as your frame of reference doesn't extend beyond what you know (aka, your skills), an experienced jumper familiar with your abilities could confirm that your skills are above average. Do you see the problem here? You're clearly putting yourself in a position where above average skills may be required, but you insist that you don't think of yourself as above average. If you want to hang your balls out there and push the limits, just say so. Aknowledge what you're doing and that you understand the consequences of your actions. Don't hide behind a cleary not-average choice and insist that your assesment of the situation as being 'acceptable' is the real truth, and that the majority of jumpers, who see it as 'unacceptable', are in the wrong.

Rumor is... If this is the case, than it's not hard to understand why the other partners would drop Freefall Express without a cheaper (or even equal) replacement. As far as the business with TK flying jumpers in a 182, like I mentioned in post #26, while he did break the rules in doing so, this can hardly be looked at a 'safety' issue. The man holds a multi engine comm rating, and I would say that 99% of pilots who hold that rating have logged at least a hundred hours in a Cessna single of one type or another. Combine that with his years of skydiving out of 182s, and I would have no trouble sending my mother up with him as PIC of a 182. Earning a multi engine comm rating, and getting checked out in an Otter to the satisfaction of the insurance co. is no small feat. Let's not discount that accomplishment and say that his flying jumpers in a 182 is unsafe. Against the 'paperwork' of the FAA for sure, but not unsafe.

Is it just me, or does that make no sense at all? For starters, why would you drop one vendor without having another vendor offering you an equal or better deal already lined up? From a business point of view, that doesn't add up. If the idea is that they thought Billy would just lie down and take the reduced rate for the aircraft use, that doesn't make sense either, as that move is essentially increasing the profit share of the other two partners, and decreasing Billy's share. Let's say they were paying him $18 a slot, and let's say that everyone is making 50% profit on income. Billy would make $9 off the slot through FE, and $2 a slot through Skydive City (assuming a $24 ticket price, $6 profit x 1/3), for a total of $11 per. If Skydive City wanted to pay $17, Billy loses a buck through FE, and only gains .17 (.50 profit x 1/3) through Skydive City for a net loss of .83 per slot. Why would he ever agree to that, and why would the other partners ever think that he would? It just doesn't add up. The other two partners are taking a loss by having to deal with a more expensive vendor, and I can't see why they would want to do that just based on the fact that they weren't happy with the slot price. Let's face it, if the only problem was that the slot price was too much, going to a more expensive vendor certainly doesn't solve that problem, it makes it worse. There's more to this that the general public is not privy to. I'm not sure what it is, but just basic business sense dictates that it's more than just a money issue.

I do recall his post when he finally got his twin engine comm rating, and was flying loads in the Otter. I would have to imagine that he had more than enough time in a single engine Cessna to qualify for a single engine comm rating by the time he had earned a twin engine pilot, and twin engine comm rating, and amassed enough twin time to check out in an otter, and make an insurance company happy enough to allow him to fly jumpers for money.

It sounds to me like Freefall Express is full of shit. Richards uses the incident with the book keeper stealing all that money as proof that TK is mis-managing the DZ, meanwhile Billy was a 32% shareholder in Z-hills all along but doesn't do squat about it until they want to stop flying his planes. He could have sold his share, or pulled his planes if he really thought the DZ was in trouble. Bringing it up now hardly seems like a valid point. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find out that the slow economy has created a 'bidding war' among the various fleet owners, and somebody rolled up with a much better deal than Freefall Express. Maybe Billy thought that owning 1/3 of the DZ, and 20 years of history would insulate him from being undercut, but money is money, and like I said, slow economy. There's no way he'll get the city to intervene. All of his claims are surrounding the DZ ops, not the AC ops, which will be handled by an outside vendor. As long as Spaceland, or those CSC guys, or whoever it is that got the business are on the up and up, the city won't shut them out. Either way I like the part about the Freefall Express otters still being parked in the hanger and the loading area. What do you do, call a tow truck? Haul them to the impound lot? Put one of the 'boots' on the wheel until they pay their parking tickets?

Thanks for sharing. Next time trim the clip starting about 3 seconds before the door opens, and ending just after deployment. Nobody wants to look at the inside of the door, or see you spiral under canopy. Also, maybe think about checking the spot and looking for traffic after you open the door.

Click on this - http://skydiveseb.com/aff.htm Not too far north of Miami, no tandem required.

A few things to consider - if your current canopy is really taking 1000ft to open, there's something wrong with it. Spectres were designed to open soft, but not 1000ft soft. The line set may be out of trim, or the slider may be the wrong size, but either way it's not quite right. That's not to say that the canopy isn't airworthy or is dangerous, but just not working 'as designed'. The point is that nto all Spectres will take 1000ft to open, and ones that do can be 'fixed' by a trip back to the factory. With that in mind, do NOT buy a new Spectre 190 (sorry PD). That is a lot of very new, very slippery fabric that will need to be packed, and that's not an easy task for anyone. If you pack for yourself, you don't want that, and if you use a packer, they don't want that. Stick with the Spectre, it's a great choice. Look for a used one with a few hundred jumps on it, and who ever packs your rig will be thankful. I know a guy with 3 Spectres, all with over 1000 jumps on them and they are still going strong, so one with 400 or 500 jumps is just getting broken in. Involve a local rigger anytime you purchase any used equipment so they can properly inspect that it is airworthy, and that the price matches the condition. Don't be afraid of a canopy that needs a new lineset, as the purchase price should reflect the need for new lines. When you send the canopy in for new lines PD will check it stich by stich, and when you get it back it will be good as new, just much easier to pack.

As previously mentioned, you'll need to shell out about $15,000 to get a license, a basic rig, and the 200 jumps you need to start wingsuiting, and that's a conservative estimate. If you do actaully start jumping and make it that far, the number will most likely be up over $20k. Seeing as you haven't even bought a $3 pair of goggles yet, maybe planning out your spending strategy on wingsuit purchases is a little premature, eh? How about you make one jump, and see if you even like it before we get too far into your wingsuit needs and wants.

Good for your instructor. Now tell me what you would have done if your climb out took too long, and you exited the aircraft 1/2 mile from where you thought you would? How about if you had paniced (like some students do) and opened your canopy at 8000'? What if your main or reserve accidentally deployed at 8000'? Any of the above scenarios would have made it more difficult to locate the airport from under canopy. In the case of the high altitude deployments, you would have also run the risk of landing miles away from the airport, making it more difficult for the staff to locate you. If you had suffered an injury on landing, this would have delayed care from a first responder. All of the unusual circumstances aside, students typically open at 5000', and if there's any kind of upper winds, you won't be exiting or opening too close to the DZ. The bottom line is that with a radio the instructor could give you a heads up like, 'Hey Skipy, the airport is behind you. Turn around and head home'. If you happened to find the airport, your instructor always has the option to say nothing, as if you had no radio, but if you really have no radio, then saying nothing is the only option.