davelepka

If money is no option, buy all the new stuff you want. However, keep in mind that rigs depreciate in value very quickly when new. In six months, your brand new rig, with your colors, sizes and options (some or all of which may or may not work for others) will be worth a lot less than you paid for it. If you buy a used rig, in six months you can count on it being worth 95% of what you paid for it (provided you paid a fair price). If you find in a year that you prefer a different size or type of rig, you can sell your used rig for 80%, or more, of the purchase price. Buying your first rig is sort of a shot in the dark. You think you'll like this, and think you'll like that, so that's what you buy. As you progress in the sport, you'll borrow a few rigs, and demo a few canpoies, and maybe discover that you actaully like a different type of rig much better than what you bought. It's nice, then, to be able to sell your first rig for most of what you paid for it. It's also nice to buy a complete used rig for half the price of a new rig. That's a lot of jump money staying in your pocket. It's actually jumpsuit, helmet, altimeter, and jump money in your pocket.

Take a pass on this rig. By the time you resize the harness, and replace all the canopies to fit your weight/experience, you'll have spent twice what it's worth. If you're looking for a rig that will hold a 170 main and 170 reserve, that's a very common size container, and you should have no problem coming up with a variety of used rigs to choose from. You might also look to buy the components seperately, and piece a rig together. The main thought is to involve your instructors and a local rigger. Consult your instructors for advice on what type and what size canopies you should be looking for. They have jumped with you, and seen you fly the student rigs, and are in the best position to advise you. Have ALL equipment you're considering inspected by a local rigger. Run any possibilities by him before you even contact the seller to se ewhat his impression is. Beyond that, have the rigger help you to arrnage for equipment to be shipped before you tender payment to the seller so it can be inspected, and in the case of a harness, test fitted. You may end up having to tender payment to a third party to hold while the gear is being inspected, but this is normal, and again, have the rigger take the lead on this. Proper equipment selection and compatibility is key to making a safe skydive. Some errors in equipment choice can limit your learning, and make skydiving less fun, while other errors in this area can kill you. Be sure to involve professionals in these choices until your knowledge of gear and rigger is established.

$76 for a 20 second delay? Just to be clear, this is a solo freefall from a Cessna with a jumpmaster watching you from the plane, right? If that's the case, that is very steep, and on high end of what you'll pay at any DZ. Just as a mattter of economics, you should jump at the less expensive place. I know the issue of 'home dz' has come up, but you can't be expected to subsidize their high prices so they can stay in business. If the difference were closer, within $20, I'd say stick with your home DZ, but those prices are way off, and nobody should be surprised that you're not willing to pay one of the highest prices I've ever heard for a 20 second delay, especially when there's a more reasonbly priced DZ across town. Go and get your license at the cheaper place, and then you can return to the other DZ to spend some money on fun jumps. What do they charge for a fun jump anyway?

That's very forthcoming of you. I want to be clear that I an not accusing you or your business of the dishonest tactics of the Skyride crew. But even in the absence of that behavoir, I still have several key issues with the concept of a booking service in the skydiving industry. 1. How does your business advertise nationally to bring new business to every DZ in your program, and not just intercept those customers already searching online for skydiving information? 2. Does your business take a cut of every tandem you sell, and if so, wouldn't it be cheaper for a DZ to hire an phone operator for Sat/Sun, and have the existing staff answer phones during the week? 3. Wouldn't DZs be better off competing for customers only with other local DZs, and not also competing with a business whose sole task is managing and optimising search results in order to attract the largest number of customers? Thanks in advance for any answers you provide.

Just act like a utility company. Fire up the parental controls on the cable box, and lock the whole thing down with a pin code. Put a padlock in on the breaker box, and throw the breakers that lead to his bedroom. Dsiable, or put some sort of password on the wifi.

Booking services, in this industry, are nothing more than a parasite which siphons profits out of DZs. A DZ is a local business catering to local customers, and a non-local booking service has no business 'inserting' themselves into those transactions. Let's say Smithtown has two DZ, Skydive Smithtown West and Skydive Smithtown East. Let's also say that Smithtown will produce 1000 tandems per year out of it's population. If left to their own devices, SSW and SSE will complete for and roughly split those tandems, and all of the Smithtown tandem dollars will go to those two DZs. Enter the out of town 'booking service'. They have the ability to intercept web searches for skydiving in Smithtown, and grab those customers. Of course, they pass them on to a DZ in Smithtown, for a cut of the profits. Neither DZ wants to give away a cut of it's profits, but it's the fear that the other guy will 'get into bed' with the booking service that leads either of them to 'get into bed' with the booking service. Even with honest sales tactics, and good customer service, a skydiving 'booking service' is borderline organized crime, using fear and leverage to force their way into a market they have no business being in. The Smithtown DZs, with the addition of the 'booking service' are now fighting for a smaller peice of the pie. The 1000 tandems they used to see, now only produce the revenue of 750 tandems, but the two DZs are still conducting a combined 1000 tandems annualy. A booking service works in markets like travel. Airlines, car rental agencies and hotel chains have a lot in common. They are all national business, and by their very nature, they never know the locality of their next customer. Therefore, if a booking service were to conduct a national advertising campaign, and provide a useful website that offers comaprison shopping and multi-use incentives, it would be of value to those nationwide companies. DZ are not nationwide companies, and skydiving booking services are not providing any new, unique advertising to generate new customers. They are not offering the consumer a service by means of comparison shopping, and they don't have the ability to offer multi-use incentives as most of their customers are one-time shoppers. They have no value to the DZ, or the skydiving industry. The service they provide is essentially answering the phone, and booking a reservation. A DZO can either answer his own phone and speak with his customers directly, or they're too busy jumping/packing/flying to answer the phone, in which case they can afford to hire someone to answer the phone. It's not rocket science. What DZ do you know of that can afford to ship profits out of state to a company that doesn't create any new business? The only benefit might be to a DZ that is complicit with the booking service, in that they might gain a larger share of the local business. However, if you consider that they give up a percentage of the profits to gain that business, they're taking two steps forward and one step back. The increase would have to be so significant that it would outweigh the fact that the DZ has to fly more loads, pay more TIs, and maintain more tandem rigs to make the same amount of money they could without the booking service. Which brings me to my next point, lets say that DZ does gain enough market share to offset the profit loss to the booking service and the increased overhead to actually make more money, they are doing so at the expense of their local competition, who will be left with such a small market share that they cannot remain open. These booking services should be viewed as dangerous, and are driving skydiving down a road where the number of DZs will be reduced, along with the profit per jumper at the ones who remain open. Who's to say which DZ will fall by the wayside, and which will remain in business firmly under the thumb of a 'booking service'? What needs to happen is that tandem and student skydiving needs to go back to being a local business, serving their local population, and keeping 100% of the profits. If these DZOs starting 'booking services' want to make money, they can do so by operating a DZ, and providing the service of skydiving to the local population around that DZ. Period. Anyone enganged in the business of a skydiving 'booking service', or attempting to start a skydiving 'booking service' should be viewed by this industry as a greedy, opportunistic parasite, who uses clever computer tricks to bend DZOs over a barrel. They should be ashamed of their blatant attmept to force their hands into the pockets of DZOs nationwide, who are already struggling in a business known for slim margins and high risk. Any jumper in their right mind should have zero tolerance for this behavoir, and have a zero tolerance policy regarding working for these people, or patronizing any DZ these people might actually run. It's a slippery slope that has no end.

I'm sure he wasn't trying to sell you a PAC, but he is trying to sell everyone on the idea of a PAC. I'm not saying that the PAC doesn't make a suitable jumpship, but there's no reason to believe that it's any safer than any other aircraft in widespread use as a jumpship. You could almost argue that the low tail makes it less safe than an Otter or a T-tail King Air. The issue of tail strikes aside, the low tail is more prone to dirty air off the floaters than a higher tail. Cleaner air means greater control authority at lower airspeeds. Stalls are governed by angle of attack, and angle of attack is controlled by the elevator (tail). Greater control authority over the elevator means greater control over stalls.

Yeah, it's called stall speed, and if you fly above it you're flying, it go below it you're stalling. Every airplane has one (except AN-2) and it differs based on configuration i.e., flaps up/down, gear up/down, and for jump planes, the number and position of floaters. It's the job of the PIC (pilot in command) to know these different speeds, and keep the airplane above them. None of this is unique to the PAC. Ray Ferrell wasn't lying to you on Safety Day, he was just telling you what he wanted you to hear. Did he also mention that he is the US importer for the PAC 750? If you go to a Subaru dealership, they'll tell you that all of their cars are equipped with all-wheel drive, and that it helps them to hold the road in slippery conditions. While this may be true, they don't go out of their way to tell you that Audi, BMW, Mercedes also produce cars with all-wheel drive, now do they? That's what happens when you're wrong.

That's quite a shipping bill. If you do the math, it's only $6/$7 a pound, which isn't that bad. If you chartered it Monday, and it leaves IAH on Sat, the freight will be in Korea by Monday. I wonder what it would cost to ship a pound to Korea in a week? Probably more than $6, but I guess you're getting the quantity discount. The real question is how much is the freight worth if the shipping is $1.5M?

You are correct about the title of the thread, however all of the other possibilities being discussed were AFF courses. You're assertion was that your course of action was a significant savings over others that were posted, as well as your local DZ. It's only fair to point out that your example was not apples to apples. In terms of .50 per mile, that's the number the IRS came up with. I have to figure that the IRS isn't giving anything away, so after fuel, upkeep, and depreicaition, that's probably a pretty fair number. Even then, I cut that number in half to .25 per mile, and you still just barely came out on top. In your favor were other factors, some of which I pointed out like the lack of pressure due to time, and the ability to schedule around the weather. Also working in your favor, being a poor college student at the time, would have been the deffered cost of the wear and tear on your vehicle. You may have incurred the costs, but they were not immediate costs, and you had to time recover your finances before those bills came due. The point is that in the end, the actual savings are very little. How and when the costs are incurred may have played a real factor in making the training a possibiliy, but the costs were there.

Average height, with a smaller rig. The problem with small rigs on average or above average sized people is the yoke is always in the same place, and they just make them shorter and shorter. The obvious problem is the hackey moves further and further up your back. Another problem I have is that I jump a camera suit with a full wing. In addition to the hackey moving up, so does the lateral. Seeing as the wing needs to go over top of the latertal, this cuts into your wing. Also, with a full wing, I prefer to not have to reach too far up my back to get to the hackey. So I had the rig built with a longer yoke. It lowers the hackey and the lateral, making more room for the camera wing, and less reaching for the hackey. As a bonus, it keeps the rig down on my back, and makes for a more comfortable cushion for leaning on in the plane.

I was surprised to see in that linked video that the TI does get to deploy his own drouge. I guess it's one way to ensure that it gets out quick, but as illustrated in the video, it's also a way to get a drouge bridle wedgie if you over rotate the exit. The best part was after the drouge was set, and the dog was eyeballing the TI. He was looking right back at him, and I wonder what they were each thinking. Either way, I'm 90% sure that Swoop has done some test jumps with dogs, or was present during test jumps with dogs.

FYI - the toggles are what you need to 'cover' with a riser cover. The riser itself being exposed to the elements is of no consequence unless they being to pull lines out of the container. Provided that a riser cover keeps the toggles covered up, there's nothing wrong with the bottom of the risers being out in the open. One end is attached firmly to the three ring, and the other is pinned under the riser cover. I've got an Infinity with an extended yoke, and I have at least 5" of exposed riser before the riser cover and have had no problems in 1000+ jumps.

To the nearest $10K, what's it run to charter that thing to Korea? Do you get the whole plane, or do they piggyback other freight in the nooks and crannies?

I'll just make a list - 1.Fancy that! The tandem pax is a hot chick with her own pair of matching pants 2. I would challenge any of those jumpers to dump during the 'tandem-o-nutty', and if they wouldn't that's why it's a dumb idea. If the TI has a problem with the drouge, he'll be dumping the reserve at a 'less than ideal' airspeed 3. With all those cameras, not one of them got a decent exit shot 4. How come the camera guys wash all over the place trying to fly in their slot 5. Why is there a zoo of people directly up the relative wind from the tandem pair? An improperly rigged drouge turns into a really big pilot chute, and none of those guys looked ready for the drouge toss. If it had turned into a main deployment, it would have made the newspaper for sure. 6. What's that length of toilet paper hanging of the TIs foot supposed to prove? That a tandem can barely do the atmo thingy? 7. I guess that's it. Is that enough for one tandem video?

That's great, but not relevant to this discussion. For starters, you're talking about a static line progression, and this thread has been about AFF. The $3k cost of an A license at your local DZ wasn't via a staic line progression, was it? If you're starting figure was closer to that of an average cost to complete a static line progression, your savings would be cut in half. Also, in your example, you made three seperate trips to complete the training, and if that's a possibility, it removes two of the key problems with training abroad; the pressure from only having a week to finish the course, and the possibility that the weather could make the entire trip a total loss. All of the possibilities the OP was considering were not close enough to allow him the luxury of making multiple trips, or making a last minute go/no go decision based on the weekend forecast. In your circumstance, there certainly was a savings to be had by driving to the other DZ, but your circumstance is much different that that of the OP. As an asdie, if you use the IRS figure of allowing .50 per mile deduction for automobile use, you come up with a travel cost of $2100 for fuel and wear and tear on your vehicle. Subtract the actual cost of fuel, and you're left with $1680 worth of wear and tear for the 4200 miles you put on your car. We all know the IRS rate is a little high, and maybe you drive an older car that is already depreciated, but even if you cut that in half, you're still looking at $840 worth of tires, oil, filter, and maintenence it 'cost' you to make the trips. If you had compared apples to apples, your savings over a local static line program would have been closer to $900, and if you factor in the vehicle use, you really only come out $60 ahead, but who's really counting anyway, right?

I don't think anyone is saying that. Some have said that the sport is expensive, and that if you cannot afford the A licesne programs local to you, you may not be able to afford continued participation. In terms of quality of training, I even stated that you could assume that any DZ will offer the same level of training, as they are all doing it in the name of completing the same proficiency card. Of course, you will run into differences from instructor to instructor, and DZ to DZ, but none of these are 'selling points', they're differences that are unique to each student and their expereinces. My argument is not against low-cost training, it's the trade-offs you make if you have to travel to seek such training, and then having to complete the course within your planned travel dates. When you combine the costs of travel, and the pressure that the time frame creates on your training, I don't think there is sufficient savings to make it a worthwhile proposition. If the bottom line, after expenses savings is $300, $400 or even $500, that same jumper could eliminate the risk of weather making the trip a complete or partial waste, and the pressure of the return travel dates by trianing at a local DZ. If the jumper is able to raise the $2600 to travel and complete an A course abroad, but not able to raise the $3000 it would cost to train locally, the local DZ offers the opportunity to pay as you go. The guy has $2600 to start with, and then has the duration of the training to raise the last $400 to finish the deal. I think we can all agree that going from no jumps to A license in a week is an ambitious goal, mayeb too ambitious. Currency is king in this sport, but especially for students, it has a point of diminishing returns. Each student will be able to handle a different number of jumps per day, and even then that number will differ based on personal and environmental factors. A successful jump may pave the way for a productive day of 2 or 3 additional jumps, while a 'problem' jump might create a situation where even a repeat on the same day will be counter-produvtive.

There are very few DZ that fly all day during the week like they do on the weekends. Sometimes they'll have a group of tandems schedueld at a certain time, or an AFF class that will have the plane flying in the afternoon. Either way, you need to call ahead, and see what they have scheduled, and make sure they'll have room for a fun jumper. A 182 DZ with ten tandems will fly 5 full loads, and you won't be on any of them. Where do you jump on the weekends? Are they available during the week? Your best is to find three other jumpers who also want to jump during the week. If you all agree to make 4 or 5 jumps, you can usually get the DZ to arrange for a pilot, and you guys are in business.

Just to correct the article, the Lancair in this incident did not have a turbine engine. You can build a Lancair with a turbine, but the FAA has this one listed as piston powered, and the photos in this article - http://www.islandpacket.com/2010/03/16/1174196/ga-man-running-on-beach-was-killed.html - that JohnRich posted clearly show the shorter nose of the piston powered version. One of the other photos also shows what appears to be the access door for the dipstick hanging open as the plane sits in the water. I don't know if it was opened after the landing or if it happened in-flight, but at least for the pilot I would think that would be the last thing on your mind after killing the guy on the beach. Maybe the feds opened it, maybe the passenger did? The article does report that things happened in this order, 'engine trouble', then 'oil on windshield', and then 'prop falls off'. That would mean that the oil on the windshield was not a consequence of the prop falling off, but it began before the prop fell off. I'm sure the news people are confused about something. The NTSB will clear this whole thing up. Eventually.

I think one of the problems is that the 'students' may have a misunderstanding about the nature of the AFF course, or any other learning progression. There are alot of 'classes' or 'courses' that people take these days that are really just a 'show up and pass' type of scenario. For example, when I got divorced, the court mandated that I take a co-parenting class, to learn to work with my ex. The 'class' consisted of two hours in a hotel meeting room with 40 or 50 'students'. They played a video, and some woman spoke for about 20 min, then you got your court paper signed, and I was a certified 'co-parent'. There was nothing to 'pass' no test, and no real learning took place. I spent most of my time hitting on other, newly divorced, parents. These newbies may think that's what it's all about, "Do this, don't do this, give me your money, now you're a skydiver". If that was the case, I would want the cheapest course as well. I don't think they realize the mountain of inforamtion they will recieve, and the immense personal challenge of jumping out of a plane and learning at the same time. I'm willing to give them the benefit of their ignorance in this case. Too many things in this world are 'show up and pass', and it's easy to get used to that. Even doing a few tandems doesn't mean you know the deal. If you happen to pull a tired or half-assed TI each time, you might only know to arch, and not grab anything.

I'd be happy to if you could tell me how to do that. I always have to shrink pics to post them here, but I think you're asking me to post a little part of one pic at full rez, right? Either way, I looked at a couple of pics I have on my computer, and I can clearly see the baggy parts of the jumpsuits are 'frozen'. My guess is that they would be a source of blur, but they're clear. What's odd is that I would think that it would be more of an issue on a tight tandem shot than a backed-off RW shot. Between the jumpsuit, hands, hair, and sometimes cheeks, there's all sorts of up close details that would tend to blur if the shutter speed was too low. On an RW pic, you couldn't make out those fine details anyway, and the movement of the jumpers would be much slower then the flap of a jumpsuit or the turkey neck of a fat tandem pax. I'm a MUCH better skydiver than computer operator, so hook me up with some instructions, and I'll post whatever you want. I'm working with Win XP with the Office Suite, and that's about it. I do have a Photobucket account if that helps. In terms of your aperture, you know that it opens wider the higher your shutter speed, right? The lower speeds let's close down a little, and should widen the DOF.

That shutter speed is really high. I have the same set-up and use TV with the shutter set at 320, and if it's really dark out I'll even drop it to 250, and haven't had any blur. Try to notch that shutter speed down a little, and you'll get a wider depth of field.

Wear and tear in the drouge is one issue, but the larger issue is tandem terminal. A tandem pair with no drouge will be falling at 150 or 160 mph. If a TI should have a problem deploying the drouge such as a hard pull, collapsed drouge, or broken drouge bridle, it will becoem impossible to deploy the main, and they will be forced to use the reserve. The longer you wait to throw the drouge, the more speed will build before you discover a possible problem with the drouge, and the higher your airspeed will be once you do dump the reserve. The SOP for a drouge problem is to immediately deploy the reserve (again, in an effort to keep the deployment airspeed low). Tandem reserves are designed and packed to open much slower than sport reserves for this very reason. Even then, high speed deployments only increase the risk of damage to the reserve during deployment.

If you look at your last pic (#17) you can see where the lateral (the thingy from the container to the harness) is pulling the MLW back toward the container, and that's bad. The MLW should be straight down to the hip ring. If the lateral was a little longer, it would ease up on the MLW a little and give you some more room in the shoulder area. Also, the legpads are waay to short for you, and it looks like you squeezing your nuts to get the pads close to wrapping around your legs. This will also pull down on your shoulders a little as well. You should be able to get the legpads to within an inch or two of each other, and still be able to get two fingers under your legstraps. The MLW looks OK. You should be able to stick your finger into the hip ring, and be pointing right at your hip joint. It looks really close from the pics, and will drop a touch with a longer lateral. Also what range are the canopies for that container? Are they on the big side for that container? If you stuff the smallest container with the biggest canopies it can hold the container part will 'square up' and feel like a brick strapped to your back.

The cheapest is rarely the best. In many cases, you don't need the best, just 'good enough', like a TV, or a DVD player. You're not hosting the opening night for 'Ironman 2', you just want to watch TV at your home. Even then, every Sony XB42 tv is going to be the same, so find the lowest price. With skydiving training, however, the final product you are seeking is the ability to preserve your life, and in that case you do want the best. The training you will recieve at most USPA DZs will be very similar and of a high caliber. The difference is that if are trying to catch a deal, and pound out an A license in a week, you're pressured to do so. Part of the quality of your training will be you. How you feel, how you want to progress, what you are comfortable with. If you're tired one day at the DZ, even if you planned on two jumps, being able to call it a day after the first jump is a big advantage, there's always next week. Which brings up another point, the more time you spend at the DZ, around skydivers, seeing how the whole thing works, the better off you are. More trips to the DZ equals more exposure to more jumpers, and more unique circumstances. All of these things will benefit you in the end. Getting the A license is not a 'hurdle' you jump over and now you're a skydiver. It's the first step in a never ending process of learning. It's not something you knock out to get to the good stuff, it is the good stuff. Take it one jump at a time. If a local DZ wants to cut you a deal, by all means take it and pay for it all up front, but after that forget about anything beyond your next jump. Until you safely complete jump 1, jump #2 is theoretical at best, and not worthy of your time. Try this - make one AFF jump at a local DZ, and see what you think then. You'll have a much better idea of what's involved, and if you think that hunting down the bottom dollar to punch out the training in a week is a good idea, then go for it. Otherwise, tell the DZO you love it, and haggle yourself a good price on the rest of the A license jumps, and schedule your second jump.