davelepka

You should look at your PC pouch, and how you pack your pilot chute. Seeing as the deployment was 'conventional' it would appear that your pilot chute escaped your pouch. Even at freefly speeds, a loose bridle is unlikely to extract your PC, in fact it would be more likely to unseat your pin. Of course this would have led to an out-of-sequence deployment (or horseshoe) both of which would have resulted in a more 'interesting' opening. As such, the condition of your pouch is one thing to consider, but I'm sure that has already been looked at. If your PC is folded in such a way that it can unfold lengthwise, or just shoved in there as one long bundle. a section of PC can escape the pouch. The high speeds of freeflying will cause the loose end to flap hard enough to work the whole thing out. Look for a PC folding method that creates a tight bundle that cannot be unfolded, and that is big enough that the mouth of the pouch will keep it from escaping. Get a little crazy about your gear, it's packing, and maintenence. Especially if you're freeflying, you run the risk of damaging yourself or part of your rig you can't cutaway. It's worth it to spend whatever you need to spend, and be a real stickler about your packing.

I going to go ahead and disagree with you on that one. Here's why - The chord is the measurment from the leading edge to the trailing edge, and I don't believe it ever changes. Deep brakes may technically change the chord, as the air doesn't really flow from leading edge to trailing edge, it sort of gets backed up on the bottom skin, and probably peels off the top skin when it nears the trailing edge. Aside from that. and especially on rears, the chord is a constant. As far as the pitch of the lines, I'm not sure what you mean. Pitch is an angle, and the relationship between the C and D line groups remains a constant when using the rears. You're maintaining tension on the lines by using the rears for input, and in some cases, the D lines are just cascaded off the C lines so there is no way to pull one without the other. Where one goes the other will follow. Now in deep brakes, you can take some of the tension off the D lines as the tail and brake lines begin to support more of the canopy, but that's only in deep brakes. Anyway, the deal is this, whichever way you add input to the rears, that input is indentical for the C and D lines. The pushing or pulling issue shouldn't impact the canopy much for several reasons. The first is that the outward force of the pushing method will have little effect on the canopy as there is spanwise tension on the fabric to begin with. If say the canopy was bowing upward in between the line groups spanwise (side to side), then pushing outward might take up some of the slack, and make the canopy flatter between the line groups, but there is no slack spanwise, so the input does not effect the span. Pushing out doesn't make the canopy go out, it's already as 'out' as it's going to get. Second, any input you make at the riser is going to be diminshed by the time it reaches the canopy. Imagine you were holding a string attaced to hook 8 feet away. If pulled straight back in the string, it would have one effect on the hook. If you pulled back with your hand 10 inches to the left, how much different would expect the load to be in the hook? I'm guessing not that much. To make the analogy correct though, we would have to include the fact that the hook can only move forward and back, not side to side at all. Remember that the canopy is already spread out as much as it can be across the span, so it to is restriced from side to side movement. Even if there was some slack, you would only be able to flatten the middle of the canopy, between the left and right center line groups. All of the left side groups are moving as one, so if the outmost group moves out two inches, so does the one next to it, making the distance between them a constant. By pulling the left and right sides apart, you could flatten out the middle, if the middle needed to be flattened. I can't remember the last time I saw the middle of an X-braced canopy (spanwise) bowing up without broken lines. I'd be interested to hear who told you this, and (no offense) how accurately you're repeating the information. I'm going to maintain that the primary difference is in the range of motion you can get out of the riser before the stall.

When you use the rears, lets say you can deflect the tail 30 degrees before you need to switch to toggles. If you grab and pull the rears straight down, maybe you get 8 or 10 inches of travel before you hit 30 degrees of tail deflection. If you grab and pull them to the outside, you still only get 8 or 10 inches of vertical movement before you hit 30 degrees, but you're actually moving the riser through an arc, with the bottom of the riser being the pivot point. So even though you are still only moving the riser the same 8 or 10 inches vertically, the actual distance the riser travels is further than that. Keep in mind that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. The same straight line you follow when you pull straight down. This might explain why you feel more power using that technique. You get more output for less input. When you pull them out, and travel along the arc, the sensitivity (power?) is reduced as you have to pull further to get the same result. As far as which is better or worse, who knows? The more I think about it, I can't even say which one I really use. I do tend to pull the riser to the outside, unless for some reason I need to pull straight down. Somtimes one goes out, and the other down. I think it just comes down to flying the canopy at all times, and not just pulling or spreading or whatever. Nobody really asks how you pull your toggles down. It's different every time as you adjust to the conditions. I think risers are the same, just do whatever it takes to make whatever you want to happen, happen.

That canopy was designed to be opened with the brakes unstowed. Even if it wasn't, at some point it was determined that leaving the brakes stowed was a better option, enough so that they now produce them with no provision to stow the brakes. The Velo was designed to be opened with the brakes stowed, and as far as I know PD still ships them with a cats-eye down near the bottom of the steering line. All signs point toward the OP fixing his toggle stowing problem. However, I would be interested to hear how it turns out if he does jump it with the brakes unstowed. Which brings up another question, if the canopy does spin up, will it spin faster because the brakes are unstowed?

You don't have a problem, you just have a misunderstanding. If you want to be a 'super skydiver', you'll have to interact with other jumpers. If your goal is to make the most out of your jumps, first off you need to be jumping with other people. Doing solos will severely limit your learning and progression in the sport. Now that you're jumping with other people, you need to dirt dive your jumps, and communication is key to make sure that everyone on the jump is on the same page. Likewise, after the jump a debrief is essential to making sure that everyone knowns what went right, what went wrong, and what to do differently in the future. You'll get nowhere keeping to yourself. If you really want to excell, start talking and make some friends at the DZ.

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that all of the instructors who are the product of the new style course are sub-par. I'm sure many of them would have earned a rating under the old style course as well. What I am suggesting is that there is a portion of the instructors who recieved a rating under the new style course who have no business acting as an instructor. The two in this case are a good example. The guy who tied a banner to the rig of an unsuspecting newbie jumper is another. All three of them are products of the new style certification course, and it's not a coincidence.

That's a negative ghostrider. If you watch the video, you can clearly see the canopy pitch up, and level off just before it dives into the crowd. Let's remember that a powered parachute is still a parachute. Think about what happens when you apply brakes to your canopy, and then let them up, your canopy dives to recover the lost airpseed. Tandem instructors do this all the time to 'swoop' their tandems. They go into brakes at 50 or 60 feet, then let them up and use the speed from the resulting dive to get a little swoop from their canopy. This was poor piloting all the way. At a minimum, he should have held the brakes and added power. He might have been able to climb out of the situation, but if not at least he would have mushed into the crowd nose high with a mostly vertical component as opposed to driving through the crowd with high forward speed.

What are you trying to do? So far you all have said is that you're thinking about starting an organization, but you haven't said what you intend this organization to do. It's like a person decalring they're running for mayor by saying, "I'm going to run against Mayor McCheese this coming November, will you vote for me?". The obvious question is what is their position on the issues at hand. OK, we understand you want to start an organization, now tell us what you see this organization doing, and how it will benefit professional skydiver, and THEN we'll tell you if we're interested.

Oh really? Well you sure sound like one when you say this - A mature person, with an understadning of what they were doing, would realize that when you ask a question and the majority of responses are not what you wanted to hear, or contrary to your position, that maybe you are the one who is wrong and not those answering your question. To suggest that because you didn't recieve the answer you want that the forum is somehow suspect is amazingly arrogant and shortsighted. The very reason you turned to this forum for answers, that being the large cross-section of highly experienced jumpers, is the same reason you should be re-directing your critical gaze not the forum, but at your situation. In this case, it is to your dis-advantage that you are not an 18 year old hotshot. An 18 year old has a MUCH better chance of coming back from a broken femur and a shattered pelvis than person in their late 30's. My only hope is that you are a single person without children or other dependetns as you are on the road to creating serious hardship and pain for those around you.

Great, skydiving has led you to steal from children. OK, really you just need rubber bands, a couple of closing loops, and a few pull up cords. The other spares that were mentioned were in case you have a cutaway. If you're at a boogie, or on vacation and have a cutaway, you'll want your rig repacked right away so you can keep jumping and not ruin your vacation. Of course you know that you could drop your handles if you have a cutaway, so having a replacement cutaway handle and reserve handle would be a start. Figure $100 for a cutaway and a bit more for a reserve handle. The other thing is the freebag. In case you didn't know, the reserve pilot chute and deployment bag are NOT connected to your reserve. When you dump your reserve, they seperate completely and fly away to land in a tree or swamp. You'll need one on hand to get your rig put back together. Figure between $150 and $200 for one of those. Now that's about $400 in parts you may or may not need. If you have a cutaway and need any of those parts, they can always be ordered and in your riggers hands within a few days if you don't want to pre-purchase them. If you're on vacation, that few days might be the rest of the trip, so some guys buy the stuff and have it on hand. The other side of the story is that you might not drop your handles, and find your freebag after a cutaway, and not need any parts. My impression is that the majority of jumpers do not pre-purchase these parts, and deal with the problem if and when it occurs.

You've brought this up before, but you're ignoring several factors. First of all, the FARs as they regard to this issue were probably written before the existance of AFF or tandem, and were probably written without any consideration to SL students as well. To the FAA, a parachutist is a parachutist, and if you board an aircraft with a single harness, dual parachute system for the purpose of sport parachuting, you're just the same as any other jumper regardless if it's your 1st or 101st jump. As akydivers, we know that this is not ture, and we have students board an aircraft under the premise that they are under the direct supervision of an instructor, and that without that instructor they are not qualified or preparred to be there (for the most part). As it applies to this incident, or a situation like this, the PIC has the ability to call for an exit, but I don't believe that includes the right to call for a restricted exit. As it applies to fun jumpers, the PIC can certainly call for 'at least 4 or 5 jumpers out' if he feels that 800 or 1000lbs less will allow him to make a safe landing, but if 5 guys get out before me, you can bet that I'll be the 6th man anytime the pilot needs to make an emergency landing and is concerned about the weight. I'll respect the minimum number of jumpers to exit, and would be one of the five if need be, but I would never respect a maximum, and feel required to stay in an impaired aircraft. As it applies to students, be it tandem or AFF, the PIC needs to understand that they are a package deal. They will board and exit the AC as a pair, in any situation. A traditional, two JM AFF dive may have one JM exit in an emergency, but if the student stays, at least one JM will stay. You can site the FARs any day, but like I said, they are not current in terms of modern day skydiving, and modern day skydiving instruction. Furthermore, in this situtasion, the suggestion was not to dis-obey the PIC on an exit order, but to see the exit order through to completion, and for the JMs to do their jobs and take the students with them.

This is what you say, and Grantsville might be a shitty place for anyone to land, but then you go on to say this - Given than, my question would be, with the fun jumpers gone and one engine running, was the plane maintaining altitude? If it was, then there is no reason not to fly the plane towards to DZ at 5k. Let the students out, and than proceed to land. Even if the other engine did quit en-route, you're flying towards to airport and only increasing your chances of setting it down on the runway. Even then, if the other engine did quit en-route, and they were still over congestied areas, the AFF-Is are able to exit at much lower altitudes than 5k, and could have bailed without the students at that time in order to lighten the load. Which brings me to my next point, hwo much a difference would the one or two instructors made in terms of the weight of the aircraft? Lets keep in mind were talking about a King Air, and 350 lbs. of load is not going to make that much of a difference. In terms of a 182, every jumper makes up a sizable portion of the aircrafts useful load. But to put in relative terms, the King Air dropping 350 lbs, is probably close the Cessna lightening up by about 50 lbs. How far out of your way would you go to toss a tandem rig out of the 182 before conducting an emergency landing where you have partial power from the engine (keep in mind the KA had one good engine at the time). The tandem rig weighs 50 lbs, how bad do you want that gone? I don't think were going to get an answer to this question, but was the plane maintaining altitude? If so, why did anyone get out over a congested city area? Why didn't the pilot turn back and give everyone a pass right over the field? As a pilot, I can't think of a better place to be with an engine out than at 5k directly over an airport.

With the spectra line being larks headed around the outside of the handle, dragging the rig while packing, or even just rubbing the front of the rig against anything will have the rip cord pinned between the handle and whatever the rig is rubbing or dragging against. While spectra is fairly robust, and slippery as well, over time this will lead to wear on the line and require replacement. I have to imagine the cost of a new line would be very low, as there would be no need to replace the D handle, but aside from the cost, it's just another area the requires attention from the jumper on a regular basis. Many jumpers are very bad with regular maintenence. Also, with the larks head just going around the top of the D handle, it appears free to slide from side to side, and on the harness side is the velcro that hold the handle in place. Velcro + spectra line = not good. It might be nice if it was held clear of the velcro in some way. Even a wrap of super tack through the cable hole in the handle. Does the handle even have a hole? I also wonder if the spectra is more prone to damage during a reserve deployment, be it via skyhook or handle pull. I know metal cables can get kinked during an RSL deployment, but otherwise they are pretty resiliant. Are these cords sized differently for different rigs, or does the internal bungee make 'one size fit all'? One size fits all would make it easy for riggers to stock one or two extra lines, and have them available for installation when one is damaged.

Fuel exaustion or contamination would kill the second engine shortly after the first. It would be a real shame to leave your student behind and have them deal with a solo emergency bailout (from a lower altitude) or ditching with the plane. They should have never left those students in the plane. Really? I have all sorts of doubts. How much thought and consideration do you think they gave the matter? 20 seconds? 30 seconds? What sort of open discussion do you envision they had? The SOP to not leave your student was established under no diress. There were knowledgable people considering the issue while not under the pressure of an aircraft emergency. That decision was made with a lot of thought and to the best judgement of those involved. There's a reason we drill EPs over and over. It eliminates the need to make tough choices in tough situations. Fall back on your training, and count on that to be the right choice. These guys knew the SOP. They took a different route when push came to shove. What will their response be to an in-air emergency with an AFF student? Both track away to 'clear the area' for the student? Where I learned, and then spent my first few years as a video guy, one of the JMs carried a handheld on every AFF jump. That JM dumped first, before myself or the other JM, and they jumped a bigger canopy, so they could stay up with the student. Most of the guys could do the entire talk down from under canopy, and could set the student down right next to where they landed. That's the right way to do it. If something goes wrong, as in this case, you exit with your student, get on the handheld, and lead them down to safe LZ. Anyone want to bet that both of the AFF-Is in this case got their ratings from the new-style AFF certification course?

All the tunnel teaches you is freefall skills, which are primarily a waste of time. I mean that in the most literal sense. The time from exit to opening is just a time killer until you have to perform in such a way as to save your life. Tracking is the only freefall 'skill' that contributes to safety, and that's only when you jump with others. Use the tunnel all you want. Just be sure that you don't confuse your skill as a freefaller with skill as a skydiver. You will gain nothing in the areas of aircraft operations/safety, spotting, canopy control or landings, all essential skills needed to perform a safe skydive. Don't get caught up in the idea that freefall is skydiving. It's not, and it's probably the least important part of making a safe skydive. The tunnel is a great place for students who cannot seem to get stable in freefall. It's a great place for an experienced skydiver to hone their skills. It's a great place to go and have fun. It's not a place to become a skydiver.

Here's a couple of other points- First off, $5k is one price, there are others. You can spend less than that and come out with a safe, airworthy rig. Next, take a good look at the gear. It's all VERY well built, and given proper care, will last a long, long time. I have personally put 2000+ jumps on one harness/container with no repairs needed. I have also put 1000+ jumps on a couple of canopies, with no other maintenence than a line change (which is common), the fabric an stiching were solid when I sold the canopy. All of the other points made are good ones too - custom made rigs, lots of time and money in R&D, but the biggest point is the size of the market. There are only a 30,000 members in the USPA. Of that, I'm sure a percentage of them are not active jumpers. Of those that still jump, how many do you think are buying new gear at any one time? When you figure that a guy can buy a rig and jump it for a decade, that's going to hurt your sales. Additionally, there's a big turnover in skydiving, and when people stop jumping, the used gear market just gets more inventory. Again, not good for the manufacturers. All that said, don't spend your money on new gear until you have gone through a few used rigs and canopies. Your money is better spent on jumps, and your tastes and needs will change after you have a few years in the sport. Once you're ready to make an informed, smart decision, THEN spend your $5k or $6k on some brand new stuff you'll get years of use out of.

Look pal, you're no better than him with this post. You explain nothing, and throw out accusations just like he did. In all fairness, the guy said he bought a complete rig, and was shipped only a container and reserve. I know that things happen, and sometimes life deals you a tough hand at a bad time, but I have trouble understanding what sort of trouble would prevent you from putting all of the purchased items in a box as opposed to just some of the purchased items. I mean, you did pack a box, and successfully ship it to the guy. Why was the main, risers, and D-bag not included. If your reputation has beed sullied, and you want it fixed, come clean and offer up your explanation.

Heard that one before. The fact that you have to explain that to people might mean that you're not being as cautious as you think. I intend to win the lottery next week, can I borrow $10,000? Unless you have found a way to make more than one landing per jump, then you jump numbers are your jump numbers. Every jump is a canopy control jump. Every jump includes left turns, right turns, accuracy and a flare. Just because you want it to mean more than that, doesn't mean that it does. One jump is one jump. You don't see this as a red flag? You're the poster child for an accident waiting to happen. I don't need to see you fly or meet to know that. You enganged in deceptive practices in an attempt to squeeze advice from those you knew wouldn't tell you what you wanted to hear if you were completely forthcoming with your experiecne. Additionally, your 'thoery' that quickly moving past 90s into 180s is retarded, and another great illustration of what a bad postion you're putting yourself in. Do yourself, and everyone at your DZ, a favor and re-evalute the choices you've made. Take a step back, and slow down. Rushing into anything in skydiving has never worked out well.

That's what my post was about. It's everyone's job to watch out for everyone else. I specifically mentioned bringing your concerns to a qualified staff memeber, and not directly to the jumper in question. This way, the issue is filtered through two jumpers to determine if there is indeed an issue, and if there is, the person now aware of it if has the 'teeth' to do soemthing about it. You want an example? How about this - earlier this season I saw 'new to me' jumper at the DZ. He was an older guy, and didn't seem to act like I thought a newer jumper should. I didn't mention this to the jumper, but to one of the other staff members, just to see what he thought. It turns out the that guy has been jumping for 30+ years, and had just moved back the area thsi year. Problem solved. The jumper in question never knew there was a concern. Then there's this example - walking to the plane a few weeks ago, I notice that I can see a bit of bridle on another jumpers rig, but it's in a spot where I'm not used to seeing bridle (above the pin). I mentioned this to the jumper, got permission to open his pin cover flap, and found he was using the wrong flap order and bridle routing to close his rig. This was fixed before the jump, and now he knows the proper way. This was discovered with a quick visual scan of the rig, no touching required, and all of the other rigs I scanned that day that looked OK, the owners never knew that I gave then the once-over. Somehow you have missed the fact that all of these people around you on the DZ can have an effect on your safety. In and around the aircraft, and of course in the air. Just putting on blinders and saying there's nothing you can do about it is a cop out. Everyone on every DZ needs to be keeping an eye out for the safety of the group, and the individuals.

In my case, that is not true. It IS my business as I am a staff member of the DZ, and it is my best interst to protect the DZ from undue exposure to lawsuits and the media, and to protect the contunuity of business during the jumping day. If you are not an employee or owner of a DZ, it may not be your business, but you have to ask yourself what impact an incident will have on the DZ, how that will effect your future patronage of the DZ, and what your relationship is with the staff and ownership of the DZ and how an indicent would effect them.

I would say no. Everytime you hear a guy say he 'really just wants to BASE jump' or is really just jumping so he can 'become a skysurfer' (this isn't a new phenomenon) it's always a guy with between 0 and 1 jump, usually closer to 0. It's the classic 'mall ninja'. The suburban guy who thinks he's a badass because he's got a 'tactical folder' pocket knife, and an opinion on the best semi-auto hangun for close quarters combat. Just douchebags posing as their favorite super hero, just like the 'BASE jumpers' in training. The other side of this is the guy with 100 jumps who prefers the 'flight characteristics of HMA over vectran' and has already plotted out his downsizing progression through a 79 Velo. Because they have 100 jumps, and some idea of what they're talking about, I classify them as less of a 'mall ninja' and more of a shithead. I think a good majority of jumpers are appropriately impressed with and terrified of regular skydiving enough to keep on the right track.

While that is ture, an engine loss at an altitude where jumpers could safely exit is a different story. An engine loss on take off with low airspeed and high power settings is very dangerous situation, and requires very quick and correct action from the pilot to avoid disaster. A failure at an alititude where jumping would be feasible, even just barely, say 1000ft, is a different story. The pilot has the altitude to push the nose over, and create airspeed and control while securing the dead engine. In this scenario, the single engine could then be used to return the aircraft to the airport (this is assuming that the pilot is trained and current in the aircraft, and that the aircraft is properly maintained, and all systems aside from the failed engine are fully functional. If you are flying with an untrained or uncurrent pilot, or in an airplane that is being flown with know maintenence issues, then your safety has already been comprimised, and you deserve to go in after an engine failure). There are failures that could cause a complete loss of control at any altitude, and in these cases, there is a real need to panic.

That's bullshit, and you know it. The kid that jumped a wingsuit without his legsraps on was provided with good information. In fact, he was turned away by a very experienced wingsuit instructor due to his low jump numbers. Despite this, the kid just went to another DZ, and jumped a wingsuit anyway. Twice, and he didn't survive the second. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if low timers listened to the words of wisdom they're provided, but they don't. So you're 18 (not you), and want to do what you want to do? Great, you're old enough to drive, so you can go do it it at another DZ. If you want to act like a jerk-off you're not going to do it where I jump. I don't have the time to waste standing around the LZ waiting for the helicopter to come pick you up because the whambulence can't get you there fast enough. I don't have time to wait for the coroner to come pick your body, and for the cops to rope off the LZ and pick their noses for 72 hours. I don't have time to drive to a DZ further from my house because your surviving relatives sued the DZ, and put them out of business with enormous legal fees. I jump in Ohio, where we have a long cold winter. When it's warm enough to jump, I still have two kids and a day job keeping me away from the DZ. When the planets alaign, and I'm on the DZ and the sun is shining, all I have time to do is jump. Yes this is America, and you're free to go anywhere you please. If you come to my DZ, I'll be watching you like a hawk, and I'm not shy about speaking up if I see something I don't like. You can protest all you want, but in the end I'm going to win. (You know all the referneces to 'you' weren't really 'you'. I can see that you've been jumping for 9 years, so you must be older than 18. It's a theoretical 'you', the average 18 year old)

Just to make the point, 10 jumps in one day equals one DZ, one set of weather conditions, one group of jumpers, generally one aricraft and one landing area. 10 jumps over the course of two weeks equals at least two different weather conditions, and two groups of jumpers. It might very well be from a two different planes at two different DZs with two different landing areas. See how making two trips to the (or one trip each to two different) DZ offers you an exposure to a wider number of factors and experiences? Beyond that, let's say you need 200 jumps or two years in the sport to take a wingsuit class. If you happen to be the guy making 260 jumps per year, can't you see that you'll be that much sharper in two years, when you have 520 jumps than the guy who just breaks 200 after two years? Can't you see that it's to your advantage to go into wingsuit flight with more jumps than less? More time in the sport than less? It shouldn't be that hard to understand. Here's a lesson for you - 'Shut up and jump' does not mean to literally shut up and jump, it's a term used in skydiving to denote when talking won't get you any further, it's just time to skydive. It's not an attack, more of a state of mind.

Fair? This isn't about fair or unfair, this is about what would be safe and prudent. There's nothing fair about going in. Let's be real though, not everyone will do 260 jumps per year. Jumpers with seasonal DZs are lucky if they can get 100 jumps per year between the winter, weather in the summer, and other life obligations. Even then, if you are doing 260 jumps per year, so what? Keep it up, you're making alot of jumps. Don't whine about what you can't do, how about get better at what you can do. Rushing into anything in skydiving has never worked out well. I remember being a newbie, and wanting to do it all. 200 jumps seemed like a mountain, and three years of jumping sounded like an eternity. 15 years later I'm still at it, and can easily see that 200 jumps isn't that much at all, and three years of skydiving is a damn good time. Shut up and jump.