davelepka

That is correct. On a tandem system, the drouge is the main canopy PC, and it is pinned to the rig just above the pin the holds the main container shut. A tandem falling under a drouge is just like a solo jumper with a pilot chute in tow. The difference, of course, is that the drouge is intentionally 'in tow', and can be released by the TI, allowing the drouge to function like a PC, and deploy the main. In this case, even though the drouge was out of the pocket, it was still pinned to the rig and in turn the main container was securely closed. If the same thing was to happen on a sport rig, the situation would be a little different. If your PC was out of the pouch and hung up somewhere, technically your main canopy deployment has begun. If the hang up was to clear, the PC would proceed to open the main container. If you should pull the cutaway before the reserve is a tricky situation. On the one hand, the full force of terminal velocity wind couldn't get the PC to clear, there's a good chance it's not going to. Also, seeing as you initiated main canopy deployment to create the PC in tow, you probably want a parachute out pretty soon, so time is of the essence (unless the PC came out on it's own well above pull altitude, in which case you would have more time). The other thing to consider is both canopies deploying at once. If this happens, it might be better to let them deploy next to each other as opposed to the main cutting away past the deploying reserve. The two out you get by not cutting away might be easier to deal with than a cut away main tangled in your deploying reserve. All bad situations for sure. Pay close attention to how your PC is packed, and that the handle remain in place. Check that handle often in the plane and before exit. Also pay close attention to your bridle routing, flap order and main pin position. Lastly, make sure your PC pouch is well maintained, with no holes or runs, and is tight and still 'springy'. Most of all, thanks for posting that video. Anyone who has followed this thread should study it closely. While it is not a direct example of the subject of this thread, it is an excellent representation of the chaos caused by a bridle hang up in freefall. Pay close attention to the amount of time it takes to do things (like when the camera guy tries to grab the bridle), and imagine if this episode had begun at your regular pull altitude, 15 seconds to impact and 12 seconds until you are too low to get reserve inflation (at best).

Please note that everyone giving you tips on body position has fewer than 500 jumps, and everyone telling you to jump with weights has 1000+ jumps. By the way, I think you need weights too. Just like a fat guy needs a baggy suit, the lightweights need lead. It's just a physical reality that if you want to comfortably fall with the more average sized jumpers, you need to weigh more. Take your pick, weights or cheeseburgers (I went with cheesburgers). Start slow, maybe 5 lbs. Do a few jumps, and then add 2 lbs. Repaet until you can be comforatable and relaxed flying with the formation. Not just barely making it, not arched 'kind hard', but comfortable and relaxed. You're going to end up with 8 to 12 lbs total. Working your way up will also let you adjust to the changes in your canopy. The actual changes will be slight, but taking it little by little will help with your confidence in jumping your canopy with the extra weights. Weights are not a crutch, they're not cheating, and they're not a sign of lacking skills. Strap them on and be proud to be slim enough to need them. Of yeah, if you ever jump near water, make sure you can get them off under canopy so you don't drown in the case of a water landing.

I'm going to try to explain to you in a way that maybe you can understand. I don't know if you're out of the Marines, or still in, and I don't know if you put any time in the Middle East, but let's try this anyway. Imagine if you will, you're serving at a base and the problem at this base is that the south side faces some high terrain that is perfect for snipers to hide in. It's so perfect that more of your buddies have been killed by snipers from the south than have been killed in actual battle. Now picture a new recruit, fresh out of base camp shows up to report for duty. Soon after that, you notice him near the south wall without his helmet or body armor. What do you, as the experinced Marine do? You tell that Marine to stay away from the south wall, and if has to be there, to be in full combat armor. Imagine your surprise when the new recruit says to you - "I like to take risks from time to time. As dangerous as you may think people like me are, I have never had any problems by the south wall. I can't be too dangerous. Go knit a sweater somewhere ya big Sally" That's almost word for word your response to my initial quesiton, which if you really read it squarely places the blame for your (what I believe to be very poor) canopy choice on whoever sold you that thing. You realize that the situations are virtually the same, right? The majority of fatal incidents over the past decade have been under open, properly functioning parachutes. Everything worked fine, except the pilot. See for yourself - http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/fatalities/search.cgi?fatal_category=Landing;nh=1 At least a half dozen of those were guys just like you, who got the forums and got into a pissing match with guys just like me (and sometimes actually me), and that's where they ended up. At least three or four of them were jumping the exact same canopy as you, and one did it under a 190 Stiletto, the biggest one they make. That list, by the way, doesn't include the 20, 30, or 50 guys who didn't die, but ended up spending the rest of their lives in a wheelchair, or the better part of a year in a hospital bed waiting for both of their legs, or their pelvis, or their spine to heal, and let's face it, most of the time those things never really heal. If you want to risk your life and your health above and beyond the risk of just making a jump in general, that's your choice. For the sake of your family and those close to you, I sure as hell am going to make sure you understand the risk you are taking, and that you truely are making an informed decision.

Running my mouth? That's a stretch at best. Here's my first post to this thread, verbatim - "Are you really jumping a Stiletto 135 at 140 jumps? If so, who the hell sold you a Stiletto 135 when you had less than 140 jumps?" If you want to talk about canopy control (hence the name of the forum), then your past and current experience on what model and size canopies you've jumped is certainly relevant, and on topic. Again, I asked a valid question based on spending my entire adult life as a skyidver, and having 4500+ high performance landings. You were the one who got up in arms, became immediately and overly defensive. This thread has become more productive since my post. Before hand it was a repeating of various canopies and their classification. A search of the forums would have turned up all of that info. Since I came to the thread, relevant and new information and viewpoints on safety and canopy control have been raised. I'd call that an upgrade. I can assure you, and anyone who has ever met me would agree, that I am 100% the same person over the internet, the telephone, via the mail, and in person. This is where you can't see the forest from the trees. You don't make as long as I have, or through as many jumps as I have, if you don't listen and learn. I've worked very hard to get where I am, and learn what I've learned. None of that has anything to do with calling a duck, a duck. It's not a stretch of the imagination to say it's a bad idea to be jumping a Stiletto 135 with 140 jumps. Just to put in perspective, I have 3000+ jumps on different sizes of Stiletto and I know what I'm talking about. How many times are going to say that?

No offence man, but how did you ever get that from what he said? To paraphase, "Don't be too big or too proud to listen to what someone else has to say. Even if you don't like the way the advice was given, just take it for what it is, and put in your pocket full of tools". I get the exact opposite of what you did from that. To me, that means that the delivery of the adivce is not what's important, it's the advice itself that counts, and it's the advice you should remember and use someday. The pile of shit delivery you can just let go and forget. Some shithead's bad attitude isn't going to help you, or change your life, but what they have to say just might. I think the best line from the whole video was when the interviewer summed it all up and said, "So, just put on your big-boy pants, right?". That's really the solution to this whole issue. Grow up and act like an adult.

Not to worry, I don't have feelings. Skydiving is not made up of good intentions, or well wishes. It's a science, where things work (or don't work) in a very specific way. If you have any hopes of success in this sport, you need to start thinking more like a scientist. The first step is setting your ego aside, and being open to learning something. You have to admit that you were not being very 'open minded' with regards to my post. I certainly have the time in the sport and experience that my opinion should be of some value to you, but because it wasn't what you wanted to hear, my qualifications and opinion simply fell by the wayside. Skydiving doesn't give two shits about what you want. Every jumper that went in last year didn't want to die, but they did. Whatever mistake they made killed them dead, regardless of how right they thought they were, how much they wanted to be right, or how great of a person they were. It's that clinical and that fast. I'm trying to give you some adivce that might increase your lifespan, or decrease the amount of time you spend in a wheelchair. Back away from the edge, there's no reason to be that close. In another 100 jumps, the edge will move itself further out, and you will become more free without the added risk. Repeat as needed.

It sounds funny when you put the two sentences together. In reality, though, they did come from the same post. What's so great about a place with a DZO like that? You like all that space, huh? Did you know that a Caravan (a used one) is a million dollar airplane? That's how much it costs for space to 'not be an issue' at your DZ. That million bucks has to come from somewhere, and it's not coming from you very quickly at $21 a jump. If the guy wants a tandem factory, it's his playground, and there's nothing you can do about it. I'll echo what others have said - find out where all those talented flyers the DZO ran off are jumping, and join them.

That's a negative ghostrider. The ironic part is that my proof you are incorrect is the very same poster you were replying to, danielcroft. I've had several exchanges with him in the past few months, in threads and PMs, and they've all been positive and productive. It starts with a good attitude, and extends into asking intelligent questions. Your attitude, as proven by your response to my original post to you, is a pile of shit. It doesn't help that what you're asking about isn't the least bit intelligent. You are so far off in what you're doing, and what you're thinking about doing, it's not even funny. Here, I'll prove it with your own words - Maybe that's what your guidance counselor told you in 9th grade, but that's not how it works in the high speed parachute business. You learn the high speed parachute business by jumping. End of story. Everything else is just icing on the cake, but first you need a place to put the icing, and jumping is the only way to bake that cake. You know exactly what he's talking about. It's the other thread you started asking for help on how to close a Reflex reserve container. You went on to explain that you were 'self-teaching' yourself to be a rigger just because there was nobody around to help. So you found yourself a Reflex with a reserve in it, and were working on it by yourself, up until you got stuck and started a thread looking for answers. You clearly haven't been in this sport very long, but you should know that this is no place for a cavalier attitude, and that the rules were made for everyone, you included. Things go from great to a horrific tragedy very quickly. If you saw the video with JC, he describes just how fast it happens. Literally 15 seconds after breaking off from a great skydive (with a great skydiver) was all it took, and the jump still stands out in his mind after 12 years and upwards of 10,000 jumps. Slow yourself down a little, and build in a little more margin for error in what you're doing. Just because everything seems great right now, doesn't mean that it's going to stay that way for very long.

Interesting response. Good luck out there, Chuck. You're gonna need it. -sally out-

All good poitns. If you check out post #28, I used the pic from your avatar to illustrate my point. I think I used goolge image search for 'freestlye swooping' or 'lazyboy swooping' or something like that to come up with that pic. It was also interesting to see the other random, non-swooping, images the search came up with. The internet is a wild place.

I'm surprised nobody touched on that point earlier in the thread. The guy is certainly asking some leading questions, and then a peek at his profile, looks like a duck to me.

You're on the right track with your thoughts, but also on the right track when you state that the degree of change would be nil, or even just theoretical. Yes, you can 'remove' the lower connection of the rear risers by pulling down on them. You can pull them in such a way that the riser below your grip will be slack. However, you can also apply outward input (spreading) to the rear risers, which maintains tension along the riser down to the attachment point. Your next suggestion, that unloading the lower portion of the rear riser could cause the entire attachment point to move forward, effecting a change on the canopy might technically be right , but there are two caveats. The first is that applying input the rear riser, be it with or without maintaining tension between the riser and attachment point, will cause the load to move forward, as that it the very purpose of that input. Applying the input causes the wing to slow down, and allows the pilot to move forward under the wing causing the nose to pitch up. To assert that adding rear riser input will casue a forward weight shift is a foregone conclusion. The other problem is that I, for one, and others have found that spreading the rear risers makes for better performance than pulling them straight down (where slack between the riser and attachent point would occur). If slacking the risers would allow for additional forward movement, above and beyond the movement induced by the input itself, this is something that would have been addressed, or at least given the technique of slacking the lower riser equal billing with spreading the risers, but this is not the case. You have to remember that the amount of force you can apply to the rear risers is very low, especailly compared to the force of gravity holding the jumper squarely under the three ring attachment point. As such, the rear risers are not an effective point with which to lever the load in any direction. Of course, the overall ruling factor in this situation is that while discussing fore and aft weight shift, and it's ability to effect pitch changes to the canopy, you cannot include any input to the rear risers as that in itself effects a significant pitch change to the canopy, and creates an entirely new set of circumstances.

Got it. When you mentioned that you did this on clear and pulls, I was thinking of a low pass, and that you were alone in the sky trying to controm your speed with your body position. It is useful when flying with others because sometimes those slight adjustments are all you need. See post #3 for a what I believe to be a quote from BG on the subject of leaning forward in the harness. His basic premise (and mine) is that it's matter of putting your body in a posture similar to running/walking, so when you do need to start running/walking you're in a more natural position to do so. I went on to thoerize that leaning forward became the de-facto swooping 'position', so everyone started doing it because it was the thing to do. The aerodynamic benefits came last when guys really started leaning waay out there. In addition to the diminishing returns discussed above, I also think that tyring to utilize that posture too soon in a progression could do more harm than good, because if that extreme posture has any effect on your ability to efficiently fly the canopy, you're taking one step forward with your body position, and two steps back with your inability to fly the canopy from leaning that far forward. Just another reason it should be the very last thing on your 'to-do' list when learning to swoop. Maybe second last, with a skin-tight rubber suit like the style jumpers wear being last. Thank god nobody has made it that far.

Are you really jumping a Stiletto 135 at 140 jumps? If so, who the hell sold you a Stiletto 135 when you had less than 140 jumps?

That's correct, and that in turn allows the jumper to get further behind the canopy, and prolong the dive by taking longer to swing back under the wing. Like I stated uprthread, there are several different factors at work when you dive a canopy, which brings me to my next point... Again, you are correct about the size of the canopy relative to the size of PC to the size of the canopy. Taking the bag and PC off of a 190 is only going to reduce drag by a very small percentage. However, if you are able to dive your canopy long enough that it reaches it's 'terminal velocity' where drag equals the force of gravity, then any canopy will see a benefit from an RDS because the reduced drag will allow the canopy to reach a higher top speed. It's true that a smaller wing would also benefit from faster acceleration to that higher top speed, but in theory if you're taking your canopy 'to terminal' the RDS will alllow you to go faster. Are you saying that while under canopy, you were adived that your body position should be used to adjust your speed? I'm not sure why anyone would tell you that, because that has to be the least efficient way to adjust your speed over a very small range. If it was intended as a learning tool, just to illustrate the effects of drag, then I can understand that, but as a normal course of action, it seems like a waste of time. The only times I use that technique under canopy is when I'm waaay out there, and making back to the DZ is a question in my mind. In those cases, I will tuck up and streamline my body position to squeeze every last inch out of my canopy. The problem with that technique is that it encourages target fixation, and lures pilots into focusing on making back instead of coming up with a plan B, being preparred to land off. When I do that, I'm last out with a tandem video, and trying to get back to shoot the end of my video. I'm also generally flying back for a straight-in downwind landing, so making the turn back into the wind is not a factor. Additionally, I am very familiar with the territory surrounding the DZ, and have landed in all of the surrounding fields several times. I would advise any jumpers using that technique to get back to the DZ abandon the idea by 1500ft, and focus your attention on making a safe landing at a location you are sure you can reach. Again, it does make a difference, but it makes less of a difference the slower you are going. I remember someone measuring speed at the gates of a swoop comp, and they found that the top guys were coming through at 90 mph. So if the benefit of the drag reduction at 90 mph equals 'x', if your speed through the gates is reduced by 20% (72 mph), your reduction in drag is only going to be, lets say, 70% of 'x'. Even though you have 80% of the speed, the drag reduciton is only going to be 70% of what you would expereince at 90 mph. Now, let's remember that once you blow through the gates, you're just getting into the plane out, where you immediately being to slow down, and that nobody is in 'the position' though the gates, that happens after establishing the plane out. So even a guy who goes though the gates at 90 will not be in 'the position' until the canopy is doing 80 or even 70. To take that one step further, the guy who hits the gates at 70, won't be in 'the position' until they're doing, potentailly, 50 mph, which is almost a 50% redcution in speed from 90 mph, so the reduction in drag will have lost 60% or 70% of it's usefulness. Of course we all know that speed is constantly diminishing throughout the swoop, so you can see that the benefits will drop off quickly.

There is a difference, but the problem is the very nature of drag itself. There's a technical, scientific reason that the effects of drag increase at a higher rate than the increase in speed. It's a multiple or a square of something or other, but the basic deal is that if you have 'y' drag at 30 mph, you'll have more than 'y x 2' at 60 mph. The speed will double, but the amount of drag will triple (or something like that). So when you look at swoopers leaning forward as a drag reduction technique, you can see that the benefits quickly diminish at lower speeds. Of course, if you happen to build a ton of speed, and 'assume the position', I'm not advocating sitting up as you slow down, once you're there you might as well stay. In the end, unless you have that monster speed to start with, there are far more beneficial things to focus on to improve your swoop. An RDS, on the other hand, I think is a bit more useful, and I'll tell you why. The leaning forward trick only comes into play after your dive, once you have planed out and begun your swoop. The RDS, however, is providing benefit during the entire canopy ride, and especially during the dive itself when you'll reach the highest speeds, and get the most benefit from the drag reduction. Now if there was a way to fly your entire swoop, from set up to shut down in 'the position', that might be something, but I'm not sure how that would work. That said, I think the RDS is a huge pain in the ass, and really just a 'look at me' deal for anyone who's not a serious competitor.

Indeed, check out post #5 in this thread, and that aspect is covered. I'm a pretty firm believer that the reduction in drag is very slight, and really only significant at higher speeds, which is another way of saying that it's not going to do shit for you unless you destroy your swoop and just wring your canopy out like dishrag. With the Olympics on, I can make the comparison to the skin tight suits a lot of the competitors wear. At that level, yes it's an advatage, but really only at that level. You won't see many weekend skiers in one of those suits just so they can go that much faster down the hill. Beyond that, this discussion is not about the effects of drag reduction on the canopy, but about leaning forward in the harness, and if that will effect the pitch of the canopy in any way. I'm still going with 'no', but others seem to disagree.

Just to add another, somewhat productive point, just about every jump in skydiving is a team effort. The way fun jumping works at a dropzone is that before each load, various jumpers will get together and plan a group jump of some sort. The size and make up of the group changes from jump to jump, and from DZ to DZ. You may show up, and see three of your DZ buddies, and do a 4-way formation jump for your first jump of the day. The four of you will plan out who jump first, second, and so on, and what formations you will make in the sky. You'll rehearse this plan on the ground, then go make your jump. For that one load, you guys are a team. You may land from that jump, and find that it went so well, everyone wants to jump with that same group again. You may land and find that two more of your friends have shown up, so you plan a 6-way jump, and for that load you're on a 6 person team. The general idea is that once you have a basic 'A' license, you'll always have people to jump with, and for the most part will make most of your jumps with other people. You don't need to have a set 'team' to have group involvment, in fact most jumpers don't. You go to the DZ, and see who's there, what's going on, and choose your jumps based on whatever you want to do. Putting together a formal team is generally reserved for after you have 100 or so jumps, and have tried the different types of skydiving and liked one so much that you want to focus on, and compete in, that one type of skydiving. So, back to my original idea, just go make your first jump. For your first 25 or 30 jumps, you will have a great deal of structure and planning to your jumps, that thinking about anything but the very next jump is almost a waste of time. Not to sound like an AA meeting, but take it one jump at a time. Now go make one jump and report back on your experience.

I think you're looking at it backwards. The motion of you pulling the risers back, does just that and only that, pulls the riser back. Your position in the harness is not a factor bacause regardless of your position, your weight will again center itself under the pivot. For your assertion to be correct, you would have to find some way to both pull the risers back, and move the attachment point forward at the same time, which is impossible. The amount of force you apply to the risers is not enough to support your weight, so even if there was a way to move both yourself forward and the risers back, you could only apply as much force forward as you would to the rear, and this would be too much for the rear risers and you would stall the canopy. When you apply rearward (or outward) pressure to the risers, the pressure is applied against line tension, which runs between the canopy and the base of the risers. So the pull against the risers uses the base of the risers as a stop, and that point remains stationary, with the risers moving relative to it. If you're the type who pulls on their risers and slacks the riser under your grip, then of course you're not using the risers as a lever to hold yourself out of CG, you're not applying the force against anything but the canopy (such as the base of the riser). If you were to view the application of rear risers from the side, you would see that the three ring remain in place, and the risers move relative to it. Weight continues to hang level under the attachment point, and it's realtion to the front riser remains the same. Again, a good example of this is any freestlye move that requires a backward lean in the harness. If your suggestion is that a forward lean will produce a flatter glide, than a rearward lean should prodcue an opposite reaction, a steeper glide causing the canopy to dive into the water, but we don't see this, or any reaction from the canopy during these moves. If I'm not mistaken, there's even a version of the lazyboy where both hands are removed from the toggle and risers. Here is a situaiton with a pronounced rearward lean, and no opportunity to apply any sort of input to the canopy. If leaning fore- or aft in the harness could indeed effect the pitch of the canopy, this move would not be possible, as the pitch change would be fully unchecked. http://slipstreamairsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/stu-freestyle.jpg

You know that there is a difference between an instructor and a coach, right? An employee of the tunnel will spend most of their time working with non-skydivers, teach the class and trying to stop them from hitting their heads on anything in the tunnel. It's not like you spend all day in the tunnel just flying around, most of the time you'll be standing on the net trying not to get kicked in the face. A coach is another story. These are the people who bring expereinced jumpers to the tunnel to help them become better skydivers. Freely coaches will spend time in the tunnel with their studetns, and RW will coaches will too in some cases. If it's a 4-way team, and all four guys are there, the coach just watches from the outside. Also, keep in mind that tunnel employees probably don't make a whole lot of cash. My best guess would be $10 or $12 an hour. So if you want to consider the draw of nearby DZs, keep in mind you need money to be able to jump at those DZs. You're almost better off as a packer. You can make an easy $25 an hour, maybe under the table, and you're directly on the DZ, so jumps on your lunch break are a reality. Also, if you're thinking about getting a rating or shooting video, a season or two of packing gets you 'on staff' and you'll have a better chance of getting a slot being paid to jump.

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. Of course lift is the counter-force to gravity, but each of those forces work do not only work in the absence of each other, they work in concert. While the canopy may provide lift that counters gravity, gravity is still present, and pulling the jumper straight towards the earth. Any attempt to deviate from being pulled straight down, such as an attempt to alter your C of G will result in a rotation about the three ring attachment point returning the load to being pulled straight down. No it doesn't. Those are two seperate situations you've outlined, and they co-exist without conflict. The entire canopy/jumper system does indeed rotate around a point up near the canopy itself, and this is the result of the jumper swinging around at the bottom of the lines. In looking at that system, the lower pivot point made up by the three ring attachment is of no consequence. As previously disussed, gravity maintains the load directly under that pivot point, so that pivot point, in essence doesn't even exist. If there was a way to 'hard mount' the harness to the risers, it would not effect the pendulum effect of the jumper swinging under the canopy to effect attitude changes. (Note - the jumper will indeed deviate from being pulled straight down while in a turn or dive. At that point the jumper will remain centered and balanced under the three ring attachment point, but for off of straight down. During those manuvers gravity is overcome by the force of the turn. However, this discussion is surrounding fore and aft weight shift in the harness while not in a turn or dive, so that situation is not a factor.) The issue being discussed here is of a smaller system, that of the jumper in the harness, and how they move in relation to the risers. As I mentioned several times, any attempt to alter your C of G while hanging from the three ring attachement point will result in the load rotating about that point, and returning to a balanced state hanging from that point. The concept that a different body position will apply input to the pitch of the canopy is the same as trying to push on a rope. Because your weight will always 'find it's own level' due to pivoting about the three ring attachment, and the fact that both risers are attached to the three ring, you cannot apply force from below the three attachment point that will have an individual effect on either the front or rear risers. You simply have no load path on which you can apply a force in that direction. It's like having a rope attached to a wagon. You can pull on the rope all day long and effect a change on the wagon, but the second you attempt to push the rope, the system becomes useless. There is no load path on which you can apply a force in that direction.

No, I know who you are. I was explaining this perticular situation to you, and why I said what I said. I didn't realize that your qeustion about experienced jumpers hating skydivers went beyond the comments in this thread. The reason you get the, "Whoa, you're still a student line...." is becuase it's not uncommon for low time jumpers to actually use information they read on the internet in place of actual training. Maybe not for student level jumps, but many novice jumpers have gotten themselves in over their heads by trying to imitate things they may have heard about online. Some of these situations end badly. For this reason, you'll get a lot of that as a low timer asking questions on the internet. As far as being called a moron, that's another story. I'm not sure there's any valid reason for anyone to call you a moron. Some experienced jumpers are just jackasses.

Not at all. Look at it this way, you need an A license before you can fun jump with anyone you want. You're right in the middle of it, so you realize how much there is to learn, and how much work it will take just to get the A license, and make jump #1 with a non-rated skydiver. Keeping this in mind, you can see how asking about a team when you haven't even made one jump is a little silly, and like most silly things, some smart-ass skydiver is bound to point that out.

That's your opinion. Go to the DZ, make a few jumps and see how the whole thing works. Looking back, you'll see that you were indeed putting the cart before the horse. Beyond that, where do you live, and what DZs are you considering for your first jump? There's a pretty good chance that some of the staff or fun jumpers from all of your local DZs are on DZ.com. They might have some input for you regarding the different DZs, and would be a friendly face (sort of) when you show up for your first jump.

Yeah, I would try looking at a dropzone, I've heard skydivers hang out there. This is a team activity, your first team will be you and your instructors. Get good enough that they kick you off the team, and then worry about finding a new team.