davelepka

I don't think so. I doubt they're trying to steal his money, it just sounds like they're understaffed. Importing a coach is a stretch, but if the DZO was really trying to work with him, then it would be a simple proposition. Beyond that, if he does get a license elsewhere, he should still be able to spend the money he put on his account. As much as they're not trying to steal it, they don't want to refund it either. So if he gets a license, he can work the balance down paying for gear rental and slots. Larry has been around for awhile, and this isn't an everyday problem for this DZ. It's a weekend DZ, and it's common for these types of places to be very tight on staff. If one or two guys move away, or are out with an injury, it really puts the squeeze on the whole operation. I'm sure this situation is an exception to the norm, and that the DZ would rather see the OP satisfied as a customer.

I know that somebody suggested that you may be the problem, that maybe you're a 'problem student' or just a dick, but you said your buddies are in the same boat, so unless you're all dicks, I don't think that's the problem. Are you calling ahead and making an appointment for your student jumps, or just showing up? I'm sure that you made one for your first jump, you called ahead, maybe made a deposit, and had a date and a time to be there. The reason they do this is to make sure that they have the staff there that day to handle the workload, and to make sure that they don't get 50 tandems on Sat and none on Sun. With appointments, they can close out the Sat. jumps after the first 30 tandems, and schedule the other 20 for Sun (just as an example). I know that some DZs don't require an appointment for students beyond the first few levels, but maybe this is what you need to do. Even if they say they don't make appointments for higher level students, the fact that you prepaid should get you this courtesy. Look into this, or maybe scheduling a day where you can at least get to the point where you can self-superivse your jumps. This way you can always just do a solo if there are no coaches around. Maybe you can bring in a coach from another DZ for a day as well. See if the DZ is willing to pay them out of your money, and this will help you get ahead. Or see if you can use the money for just gear rental and jumps, and go finish your training somewhere else. You must live near Suffolk, so if you can get a license elsewhere, it never hurts to have money on account at a local DZ. If you go this route, just make sure you get an accounting of just how much you have left on your account so you know what you have to work with when you return. Generally these package deals are discoutned, so you'll have to work out how much your jumps to date were worth to figure the remainder.

By who? If the inspector was working for you, then maybe you could take it up with them. If the guy you bought it from told you it had been 'inspected', and you purchased it based on that, you should produce your bill of sale stating the warranty the seller was providing, and use it to seek repairs or reimbursement. If you bought it without a written warranty, then you're out of luck. Every canopy that has ever blown a cell was just fine on the jump before the cell went south. You bought a complete rig? I'm guessing the harness held together, and the reserve worked as well, so the seller can't be all that bad, right?

CG issues aside, the KA is probably going a little faster on jumprun than an Otter or Caravan, and the smaller door also helps to slow down the TIs a little as well. Actually if you picture that block of deployment airspace, drop three tandems and three camera flyers into it and visualize how much of the space each falling object could possibly reach, you'd see there's an awful lot overlap invovled. It's kind of scary.

Of course. I already mentioned that if you're jumping a 182, it's just you and you can track where ever you want. A 206 with 2 tandems and video, you might want to back off the tracking speed a little if you like to track. At the same time, the situation this thread was trying to prevent, is not likely provided you give your tandem enough vertical seperation, and visually confirm that the slider is down (or most of the way down). If you really think about the timing involved, as I outlined above, the camera flyer falling 1000ft, and the deploying only takes 10 to 12 seconds, and that countdown begins the second the tandem reaches line stretch. You've confirmed the slider is down, so you're actually only 'under' the tandem for a few seconds before you canopy flies you out of that airspace. Meanwhile, the TI has been under a good canopy for 10 seconds by the time you are departing is 'under area'. As I mentioend before, tandem cutaways from a low speed mal are not quick. They pull high for a reason, and this is it. They have time to asses the situation, verbally instruct the student, and perform the cutaway. There's no reason to rush, and there's every reason to take a breath. slow down, and do it right. If you consider the variation in fall rates between tandems, the non-standard pull altitudes, and the laundry list of things that can go wrong, and you put it all in that block of 'deployment airspace' I mentioend, you can see that there's no way to have one plan that covers all bases. I don't know about you, but I've opened above other tandems mnay times. I roll over to see a canopy below me one notch down jumprun. If this was a fast faller, and they went low for a reason, there's a fair chance the TI is either still dealing with, or is still distracted by that reason, and might just be flying up jumprun, into the area I would track into if I was tracking. They would get down there fast, and plenty of time under canopy to cover more ground than I would expect. Tandems and camera flers are a unique situation in skydiving as we don't all track at break off and pull at the same altitude in different parts of the sky. There is a built in vertical component to our pull altitudes based on the fact that we film the deployment. In this way, the situation is different from other jumpers. I prefer to utilize the vertical component, but otherwise remain in 'my' column of air (I say 'my' relative to other tandems, I actually share it with my tandem) through my own deployment. Once things have slowed down to canopy speed, I can get read on the situation, and proceed. I'm not crazy about the idea of leaving that column of air while still in freefall, especially back tracking where my heading, and what's in my heading is unknown to me. I have stated several time that both methods have worked well for many people for many years. They both have their pros and cons, and it's up to each camera flyer to choose what works best for them on each jump. My real purpose for posting was that I disagree that there is one way, and only one way to handle the situation.

Just to be clear, did this involve a camera flyer who gave more then 1000' of vertical seperation before dumping and then a tandem cutaway, for a possible tandem reserve/camera flyer wrap? Either way, let's run through some problems with tracking- You film the second tandem out, and there's 10 seconds from exit to exit. You backtrack away from your tandem, and happen to be tracking right down jumprun. Maybe you make it halfway to the other tandem airspace in your track. 10 seconds before your tandem dumped, the first tandem releases his drouge, and opens to find a stuck brake. His canopy opened facing up the jumprun. Now both of you are in the same airspace, you below, the tandem ready to chop. Remember, all the time you may have beofre your tandem chops a low spped mal, the tandem that got out first, and flew above where you opened is 10 seconds ahead of schedule. Now you might have a problem. What if the first tandem out is a linebacker, and for one reason of another, they don't release the drouge until 4000ft? If they happen to open and be flying back up jumprun, and you backtrack down jumprun from 5500' when your TI dumped, you're going to backtrack into their open canopy. How about this - tandem one is a slow faller, and your is on the faster side. Your TI opens at 5500, to give you a fighting chance against a long spot. You backtrack down the jumprun, open up, and point yourslef back towrard the DZ, like most jumpers on a long spot. Meanwhile tandem one is still in drougefall somewhere above you. A high speed mal will have him down in your neighborhood in a big hurry. Here's another, you backtrack away, but this time away form the DZ, about 45 degrees off jumprun. You open and turn toward home, offest from jumprun because of your track. Meanwhile your tandem opened 90 degrees from jumprun, and your ground tracks are soon to cross. Again, tandem cutaway = bad news. We haven't even gotten to the subject of multiple camera flyers on one load. Now you have all sorts of problems with people tracking, and opening in the same general area, and still have the tandems above. I'm sure you could run down ten ways not tracking could go bad, but the truth is that parachutes don't open and sit still. In some ways that's good, and in some ways that's bad. The idea is that we're all sharing the same block of 'deployment airspace' from 5500' down to 2500' (below that somebody really fucked up) and a couple hundered feet either side of the jumprun. Almost anything could happen in that block of space between the camera guys, and their pull altittudes, the tandems and their differing pull altitudes (maybe a little higher if we're way out there) and various tandem malfunction scenarios. Those rigs have like 5 or 6 handles, anything is possible. Anything could happen, any one of 100 ways. I like to put a little vertical distance between myself and the tandem, open up and take a look around. Get eyeballs on the other tandems, any other camera guys and go from there. It could kill me and my tandem 6 different ways. So could your way. That's why I vote for understanding what's going on around you, who's where doing what, pay attention, and be careful. To be any more specific is just guessing as to what is going to go wrong and how it's going to happen, and that's impossible.

Many people have suggested that they will actually lose money hosting Nationals, and if that's the case, I certainly hope a weekends worth of tandems are more profitable. Keeping this in mind, the DZ stepped up and put in a bid good enough to win them the meet. I'm sure that they were well aware of what they needed to bring to the table while bidding, and wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find out that they had consulted DZOs who had previously hosted Nationals while researching and preparing their bid. With this in mind, they moved forward with the bidding process, and won. They determined that the investment would be worth the return, even if that return isn't monetary, be it facilities, or DZ promotion or somethig else entirely. Maybe the DZ was in need of new hangers or other facilities, and their choices were to out-of-pocket 100% of the cost, of host Nationals, and let the meet pay for a portion of those improvements. Whatever their motivation was, they (presumably) did their due dilligence, put in the bid, and accepted the responsibility of hosting the meet. After the fact they found a way to generate additional revenue by making the sponsorship for the event more exclusive. In terms of their bid, and what they said they would do it for, the DZ is ahead money because of this. If this represents additional profit, or reduced loss is not important, the DZ is ahead of where they thought they would be. The rub is that to get that leg up, they had to step on the competitors toes. You just can't do that. That's dirty pool, and that's not the way to make friends or influence people.

I'll take a new approach to this issue, and ask this - What advantage will the competitors experience over previous Nationals as a result of granting exclusive advertising rights to Aerodyne, Sky Systems, and Vigil (those happen to be the 'partners')? I know that the DZ will experience an increase in revenue as a result of making the sponsorship positions exclusive, so unless the DZ plans to offer amenities or services in excess of what was offered in prevuous years, then placing a limitation on the competitors and their personal sponsorship opportunities is actually subtracting from their experience. Competitors get less, DZ gets more. Unless, of course, the DZ does plan to offer new and unique services or amenities for this event. Anyone know what they've got up their sleeve? Is Snoop Dogg performing at the opening ceremony? Free valet parking? Two-ply tissue in all of the johns?

Let me play devils advocte - What about an off heading opening on the part of the camera flyer? If you think about how many horizontal feet you'll cover in your track, how long would it take a fast canopy (even with the brakes set) to fly right back along that line? In that sense, dumping right under the tandem has the advantage that whatever heading you open on is going to fly you out from under the tandem. Let's back up, and return to the off heading opening of the camera flyer. So you're back tracking way from the tandem, and most likely you're fliming head on for the opening, so you're tracking along the tandems heading. If the tandem opens on-heading, the tandem canopy will be flying in the direction of your track, and then if you go 180 off heading, the distance between the two is bruned up even faster. It seems that between the fact that canopies can and do open off heading, and that canopies do begin forward motion as soon as the slider is halfway down, there are quite a few variable in place in this situaiton. Here's another idea - vertical seperation, due to the RSL can be a very good thing. As a camera flyer, you should be filming through the opening at least until the slider is most of the way down. What this does is confirm to you that the tandem is not experiencing a high speed malfunction. In the case of a high speed mal, your job is to get the hell out of there. It's anyone's guess as to how things will play out, and gone is the best place for you. If you're just one in a line-up of jumpers/groups out of a turbine, and you see a high speed mal developing, you need to stop filming, and track on your belly so you can determine jumprun, and curve yourself off to one side or the other after you've gotten yourself moving. With nobody else in air, by all means, backtrak away and bring home the footage, Let's go back to the slider being down. At this point, you've fallen at least 1000' past the tandem as the opening takes time. Unless is a slammer, then you spend two seconds feeling the pain of your buddy the TI. Now you're 1k under an open tandem. You toss your PC, and are under canopy anywhere between 1200' (ouch) and 1800' under the tandem. Total time elapsed between drouge release and now is 10 to 15 seconds. Total time the TI has been under a canopy with the slider mostly down (which you watched for) is half of that. We know that the tandem is limited to low speed mals. Tension knots, stuck brakes, broken lines, etc. The TI has two options, either take a shot at working out the problem, or prep the student and perform the cutaway. Of course if they take a shot at fixing it, by the time they identify the problem and spend 20 seconds trying to sort it out, you as the camera guy who started out under canopy 1500ft below them have been under canopy for at least 20 seconds, and have increased that vertical gap due to the higher descent rate of your sport canopy, and flown a considerable distance away from under the TI. If the TI cuts away at this point, you are free and clear. Now lets back up again, and say the TI is not game to do any in-air rigging. They take ten seconds to identify the problem, and ten seconds to prep the student ("Hey Billy Bob, I'm going to need you to grab your harness and arch again, thanks") and perform the cutaway. You have now been under canopy, 1500 ft below them, for at least ten seconds, where again you've gotten further below and flown out from under them. The end result is that the RSL will have the reserve deploying in a very short vertical distance from the cutaway, and the slow speed of the mal will help to reduce the vertical distance needed for the canopy to open. Of course, if the RSL breaks,,,,,, It can go on forever. The real magic bullet is to pay attention. If you watch your canopy open, look for the tandem up there and confirm that the 90% of an opening you watched completed without incident. If your an eyes-on-the-horizon kind of guy during deployment, you need to get your head up ASAP and see what's happening up there. The key thing to remember is that once the tandem slider is most of the way down, the pace slows considerably in terms of cutting away and how fast that happens. On top of that, by hanging in there and visually confirming the slider is down, you have built in a cushion of altitude that you build up even further while rolling over, throwing your PC, and however much altitude your canopy takes to open. Considering the number of tandems performed with video over the years compared to the number of incidents of tandem cutaways colliding with camera flyers, I hardly think that this is a 'problem' that needs to be solved with a solution that in itself has holes in it's theory (just like my theory above has). In terms of the examples of long sniveling tandem mains colliding with open (or opening) camera flyers, those guys ignored the basic concpet of watching the slider, and that's just plain wrong, but not related to situations involving camera flyers who do watch the slider, and tandem cutaways.

Of course they would, because that would also be improving the DZs bottom line at the expense of the competitors. So you've highlighted another way you could make people unhappy. How does that make this way of making people unhappy any better? They could do all sorts of things to fuck people over, and each of them would all be independantly wrong. Solving one of them, or adding ten doesn't change that fact that each of them still sucks.

Your example is involving all parties attempting to make money. The race promoter is trying to sell tickets, Honda and Yamaha are tying to sell bikes, and the race team is trying to win prize money. Even in that business intensive enviorment, all the teams are permitted to display their colors (and sponsors colors). For the USPA Nationals to be more restrictive, and be more restrictive towards the USPA members who have spent their own dollars to compete for no prize money at all is crazy. The competitors fund the USPA in it's entirety. The competitors are all out-of-pocket to some extent for training, travel and competition expenses. The competitors stand to make zero dollars as a result of the competition. These are the people who's hands are to be tied? It's just going too far when 'Nationals' the event is given priority over the competitors, who make the whole thing happen. I'm sure the DZ wants a big swinging-dick event, but at what price?

150 jumps seems a little soon to be hitting the front risers. Knowing how to land with the rear risers is a good skill to have, but you might want to put that on the back burner until you have a little more time under canopy. Let's face it, a guy who has seen you land suggested that you back off. At the very least, if you do yourself in and snap a femur, that guy can rightfully stand over you and say, "I told you so", and let's face it, nobody wants that.

Bringing a team to Nationals is not cheap. The return you can expect on your investment when you send yourself to Nationals is having a good time, and developing yourself as a skydiver. Both of which are great things, neither of which pays the bills. As such, many jumpers rely on sponsorship to offset some of the costs, making it within their budgets to train, travel and compete. When you limit their ability to attract sponsorship, you limit their ability to train, travel and compete. Would you agree that a jumper with 50 team jumps is at a disadvantage to the jumper with 100 team jumps? That's what happens when the DZO pulls your team rate, you end up with fewer jumps, and that takes points off the board. So if you spend your money on training, and can't afford the travel or lodging, you're not there - you're not scoring points. Of course if you train and travel, but cannot afford the resistration or competition jumps, again, it's zeros across the board. You have to remember that nobody competing at Nationals is a paid athlete. They are all digging into their own pockets in one way or another to be there. Getting a few sponsorship dollars can often make the difference between going, or just reading about it in the magazine. And really, most jumpers going to Nationals are spending 100% of they can to be there. If they can afford $3000 to train, travel and compete, and they get a deal from the DZ that saves them $500 on training jumps, they're not going to reduce their investment by $500, they'll just crank out another $500 worth of jumps. It's a shitty thing to do, limiting what little offset they can get, to improve the bottom line of the DZ. The same DZ that bid for Nationals, and said we can do it for 'X', is now trying to do for 'X' minus the cost of these exclusive advertising dollars. You bid for it, you got what you wanted, now deal with what you have.

All things being equal, I'm sure everybody would want the DZ to turn a fantastic profit off of the event, but in the end that's the DZOs business, not mine. When you have to limit the competitors to make it work, all things ar no longer equal. In comparison to previous years, the competitors are at a disadvanatge because the DZ wanted an advantage. It's not hard to understand why people would be upset about that concpet. If you bid on Nationals, you're saying that you can run the meet to the standards of the USPA for a certain dollar figure. If you want to increase your margins (and decreasing your expected loss is the same as increasing your margins) then build a better mousetrap, and find a way to host Nationals while spending less. They have not built a better mousetrap, they've skewed the playing field in their favor and they will benefit from it. It's not the accepted practice, it's not in the spirit of a competition held by a membership driven (and funded) organization for the sole participation of it's members, and it's just wrong.

How about every DZ that has hosted Nationals before this year? If this was a boogie at a DZ, like Summerfest at SDC, I wouldn't expect them to allow a windblade from a competing DZ. They would allow it, but if they didn't I would understand that. Summerfest is a for-profit venture put on by SDC, and anyone who doesn't like is free to go to Lost Prarie, or some other boogie. You've made my point quite well. The DZ will profit off of those improvemnts for years to come, the same improvements paid for in part by sponsors, the same sponsors who are placing limitations on the competitors. And shit, I wish I had thought of the Knights. What are you going to do with them? Their whole game plan is to advertise and recruit for the Army, and they have windblades, and tents up the wazoo. Who's going to tell them no? Somebody better tell them no.

Because it's bullshit. So the DZ has sponsors for the event who are helping to foot the bill for Nationals. Let's keep in mind that part of the bill for hosting Nationals is getting your facilities ready to handle an event of this size. More restrooms, showers, bunk houses, team room, creeping area, etc, are all going to be needed to pull this off. So the DZ rounds up some sponsors to help pay for those, and other costs. Here's the rub - the week after Nationals is over, and the mess is cleaned up, all of those improvements still exist at the DZ. The management ends up with a better DZ, and the sponsors helped to pay for it. The same sponsors that put a limitation on the competitors. You want examples of who is effected? I don't know, but a DZ with a sponsored team who planned to send their windblade and packing tent, to make a statement that 'Skydive Smithtown is a cool DZ where we support our jumpers' is going to be out of luck. Out of luck because they already comitted to the sponsorship, already bought and lettered the tent, and they end up with zero. Let's move forward - what is this going to do for teams looking for sponsorship next year? You can bet that any business who had the rug pulled out from under them this year is not going to be in a hurry to commit to a team for next year. Furhtermore, any business who is not invovled this year probably won't be looking to sign up a team for next year. Your examples are poor at best. Nobody is worried about Airspeed. Their business extends far past Nationals, and this won't put a dent in their program. It the smaller teams, who manage to work out a deal for discoutned jumps, and 50% off jumpsuits that are going to suffer. Those are the teams that are going to have trouble finding sponsors in the future if businesses know that this type of thing could happen.

Again, you're missing the distinction between a vendor, there on a commercial basis, and a competitior who is there to compete and is a dues paying member of the USPA. The DZ is a for-profit venture, their business is to sell slots. If Mike Mullins wanted to sponsor a team, and wanted to show up with his KIng Air and sell slots, then that is a conflict, and the DZ should not allow that. However, this is not a for-profit event in terms of the USPA. This event is for the enjoyment and benefit of the competitors. By selecting a DZ that would impose these restrictions on the competitors, the USPA acted against it's membership, and I'm not sure how you can see this as acceptable. You suggest that I bid on Nationals, and see what I can do for free. Well, this issue has never come up in the past, either the DZ ran is for free, or found sponsorship that would 'play nice' with the competitors. Like I said before, if the DZ cannot run Nationals without this limitation in place, then they either got in over their heads trying to host it, or they have set the bar too high in what they want to do. Either way, the needs of the competitors should be #1 above all else. I like how one of the pakcers from Spaceland keeps posting that, 'T-shirts, and jumpsuit with patches are still allowed'. Yeah right, try running Nationals without allowing skydiving T-shirts on the DZ, see who shows up.

I see you've made some comparisons to other aviation events, such as airshows or the Reno Air Races, but I think you're missing a key concept. Those events are for-profit ventures, where all involved are there for the purpose of making money. The event is put on by a private enterprise with no relation to the performers aside from the contract they enter into with regards to that event. The USPA Nationals is not a for-profit event, and is put on by a membership driven organization for the exclusive participation of the members. The entire purpose of the event is to serve the membership. The limitation of the membership with regards to what type of sponsorship they can employ is most certainly not serving the membership. Let's keep in mind that no sponsor has ever shown up to Nationals and attempted to take over the event based on the fact that they have sponsored a team. The competitor related sponsorship exposure has always been reasonable and in check. This 'partnership protection' is not in place to reign in out of control sponsors. I'm sure the DZ is going to do a nice job in hosting Nationals, but in this case they have completely missed the mark. If we increased the registration fee to $500, we could have a champagne banquet at the end of the event, why don't we do that? Let's make it $1000, and we could book the Counting Crows to play at the banquest. I could go on, but you get the point. If you can't run the show withtout cutting the competitors off at the knees, then you're trying to run the wrong show. If this is what Sapceland needs to make this happen, than Spaceland has gotten too big for National's britches. I'm going to be interested to see just who these 'partners' are. I'm also going to be interested to see if these are skydiving-related companies, and I'd be really interested to know if these companies are aware of the impact that this arrangement is going to have on the competitors.

More productive partnerships for who? The USPA? The hosting DZ? Both? Any of those answers are bullshit. What about the partnerships between the competitors, and the sponsors they have? Last time I checked, Nationals was a recreational competition put on by the USPA, a membership funded organization, for the benefit and enjoyment of those members. This is not a commercial venture, where the competitors are going after cash prizes in a for-profit capacity (ala NASCAR), this is a chance for USPA members to get together, and see who's got the right stuff. Any sponsorship they manage to obtain, is almost guaranteed to only be partial sponsorship, and often times is just discounts on equipment or jumps. The companies and DZs that offer this support are the ones who make Nationals happen. Without that support, many of the competitors would not be able to afford the thousands of dollars and immense investment of time it takes to bring a team to the show. I'm not sure what fucknut in the USPA thought it would be a good idea to pull the rug out from under the competitors, in an effort to 'partner' with the hosting dropzone. No offence Skydive Spaceland, but there's a fair chance that in 2010 Nationals will be far, far away from south Texas. Meanwhile, all the competitors will still be there, wherever it is. Talk about not knowing what side your bread is buttered on, the USPA has really missed the mark on this one. Are the people in the home office even USPA members? It seems like they go out of their way to fuck over the general population in any way they can.

You didn't say what size Jav it was, just that you have a 170 in there. Judging by the pic, it looks to be a tight fit, and I have a feeling that you have to stick to the smaller end of what canopies will fit a certain size container with cut corners. Another thing you could check, and this is a long shot, but make sure you're using the correct D-bag for the container. I'm sure you're using the one that you got with it, but get the specs from Sunpath, and measure your bag just to be sure. I used to pack student Racers that had unconstructed corners like that, and canopy size, and how you shaped the canopy when you folded it into the D-bag made a huge difference. Generally flatter and wider was bettter. Maybe experiment with some of that. Call Sunpath first thing in the morning, and have the rig size and serial number and the canopy model and size handy when you do. Ask them what they think.

What size canopy are you using? Is it the correct size for the container? I find it hard to believe that Sunpath would build a rig that couldn't be securely closed. If you were trying the stuff too much canopy into the container, I could see the corners hanging out a little. One option would be to have a small extension flap sewn onto each side of the bottom flap. When packing, you would place this flap against the side of your bag before pulling the side flaps over. The tension from the side flaps would hold it in place, and once the pin is pulled, the flaps would blow harmlessly in the wind. Racer reserve containers use a similar arrangement on the bottom flap. It a little extension that closes up the corners all nice and neat. You use a packing paddle to tuck them in after the reserve is closed, but that's because it already takes 5 hands to close a Racer resrerve, and you could never do it during the closing process. On the main container of your Jav, it would be much simpler.

I agree, that he should not be scared to question, but in terms of this jump, there may have been a reason he told to exit last. Special circumstances between the student or TM may have dictated their seating position in the plane, blocking the fun jumper from getting to the door first. I doubt that was the case. I'm inclined to believe that the TM simply preferred the seating arrangement that mandated the tandem exiting first. We know that this was a new TI, and a female so she may have seen some advantage to sitting next to the door, and avoiding the shuffle up to the door. Also, the OP mentioned that the pilot hooked a right turn at the end of the jumprun because the spot was getting long, which is exactly what would happen if the TI was slow to get out of the door.

As a TI, you have to be within arms reach of all of your students, good or bad. As a camera flyer, you can judge how the student is reacting to freefall, and approach accordingly. If you do want to dock, make sure that either you grab their wrist, or you hold their hand, but just their fingertips, like you would shake hands with a high-society type lady. This way, you are in control, and can release at any time. Students are like stray dogs. Some are friendly, some look friendly but don't like people in their immediate space, and some are just dirty, flea-ridden mongrels who should be filmed from odd angles and with backlighting so you can't see their face.

There have been other stories like yours, but there was a slight difference. The other story goes like this - the tandem exits, the TI forgets to deploy the drouge. The TI tries to open the main at 5500' but since the drouge (aka pilot chute) is still in the pouch, nothing happens. The pair is travelling at tandem terminal (maybe 150 or 160) so by the time the TI realizes the problem, and gets the reserve handle pulled, the reserve opening can be quite low, even close to Cypres fire (or in some cases, the Cypres does fire and save the pair). The difference in your story is that the TI claimed to not be able to find the drouge. In this case, the SOP is to dump the reserve immediately, so you can get it out before you reach terminal (remember 150? 160?). If the TIs story is correct, she spent the entire freefall looking for the drouge, and only went for the resreve at a very low altitude. Aside from going against the tandem SOP of dumping the reserve immediately, she also proceeded with the freefall right past her designated pull altitude without dumping the reserve. If that's what happened, then she should probably think twice about being a TI. My guess is that she forgot to dump the drouge, and didn't realize until pull time. She probably reacted in a reasonable amount of time, and got the reserve pulled. If that's what happened, then I don't know. That's a pretty big mistake, and then to lie about it doesn't really help her case.

What is wrong with you? You post about the most odd and random topics, and none of it seems to make any sense. Public Serivce Announcement - Twoply is no longer a skydiver! Not only has he not made jump number one this season (and he is young and health with enough money to get current) nor has he shown his face at any dropzone. He has, however, made plenty of time for BASE jumping! News flash Mr. Ply, there's a forum for people like you, it's called basejumper.com, why don't you go over there and bother those people with your bizzare topics of conversation. Those people are just as weird as you, and would probably have some input for you. Speaking of input, I have some ideas about what and where you should be inputing some things!! You know what I'm talking about!!! This is no joke. If you don't clear out of here, I'll move into your new neighborhood and rally the neighborhood against you, just like I did the last time. Good day sir (I don't really mean that)