davelepka

Consider that the USPA, one of the slowest moving organizations in history, has changed the requirements for the 'expert' D license from the long standing 200 jumps to the new requirement of 500 jumps. 200 jumps is still 200 jumps, but the jumps were far easier and quicker to come by, leading to 'expert' skydivers who were less than 'experts'. Now it's 500 jumps, which of course takes longer to achieve, forcing the 'experts' to have more time in the sport.

You need time in the sport. For sure. Currency is only valuable up to a certain point. If you're jumping every weekend, let's say five jumps per weekend, then you're current. If you're making ten jumps per weekend, you're not more current than the guy making five, and at the end of the month, you're not twice the skydiver as him. You just have more jumps. Time in the sport will equal a greater exposure to more situations. Situations which you can learn from, and add to your personal library of information. I'm not even sure how this is a question. It should be a no-brainer. When in the history of skydiving has it been a good idea to rush into anything? A douchebag who wants to slam out 200 jumps so they can get to 'what they really want to do, like wingsuits and BASE jumping' it sadly missing the point. Things like wingsuiting, BASE jumping, swooping and camera flying aren't what start off trying to do, those are things you earn if you live through the experince building needed to get to those things. Even then, just surviving isn't enough, you have to survive AND flourish to an extent before undertaking those types of jumps. Skydiving isn't for everyone. Of those who are cut out for jumping, fewer still should ever consider BASE jumping, wingsuiting, camera flying or swooping. The final frontier is the 1 in a 100 jumper who will venture into those areas and rise to the top and become an 'expert'. Any way you slice it, it takes time.

Seeing as there was no news reports of an Otter going in missing a wing, the failure couldn't have been that bad. Without damage to the airframe, there's still one good engine to get home on. As far as AFF-Is leaving without students, that's what happens when you hand out AFF ratings like candy. All of the 'real' AFF-Is I know would love a chance to drag a student out of an injured aircraft for a 10 sec. skydive. That's as real as it gets, and if you want to be an AFF-I, you have to be ready to face reality, not run from it. I hope the part about the AFF students isn't true.

Anyone remotely close to "big', 'stocky', 'old' or 'not very flexible' should be put through a full hook up climbout on the ground when jumping a 182. No exceptions.

I'm willing to bet that a personal injury lawyer latched on to her pro bono looking for some deep pockets. When the DZ offered $5k, the lawyer advised her to decline, as his 30% would only be $1500. In lawyer terms, $1500 is hardly worth getting out of bed for. Meanwhile, the actual injured party would have taken home $3500, which would covered her medical bills if she's uninsured, or her co-pays plus a few grand left over over for her pain if she had insurance. Actually a pretty fair outcome given the circumstance, but thanks to her big money lawyer, she's gets hit with a suit to pay the DZ legal bills. What are the chances the lawyer is going to cover 30% of the judgement? Barring that, what are the chances the lawyer will handle the proceedings regarding the DZs legal fees at no charge? (Hint - I know the answer to both of those questions)

First off, it's not your bike, it's a rental. Second, you mentioned a tight, slow corner, and you said you were afraid to stall the bike. In those situations, pull in the clutch, and you won't stall the bike. You can ease out a little clutch, and then pull it back in any time you need to move the bike just a little, or negotiate a slow manuver. Also, keep your feet off the pegs until you're ready to accelerate up to speed. Let them slide along the ground to provide extra support if you need it. This only applies to slow speed riding, in parking lots and such. Last, watch this, and learn how to do it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkBN1ENtWz8&feature=related

That's being too kind. Aside from the obvious reasons, one of the linked articels revealed that the DZ offered her $5000 to settle on several occasions. Luckily, the greedy bitch declined every time, and six years later she's on the hook for ten times that amount in legal fees, which as per the waiver, the DZ is entitled to, and I pray to god that they persue. Then what they should do is blow the $50k on the worlds biggest boogie, and call it the Lisa Nuttley Affair.

I know everyone is quoting the 'rule' which is 500 jumps to jump with tandems, but very few DZOs or TIs follow that to the letter. If the DZO needs a video guy, they'll take whoever they can get, and alot of TIs will give anyone with 200-ish jumps a shot. That said, even if you have a slot on a tandem rotation, ask yourself if you're really ready to perform. Remember that EVERY customer deserves a well put together video that tells the story of their jump, and includes tight, well framed freefall camera work. EVERY customer deserves quality, properly lit still photos that make them look as good as possible. Be honest with yourself, and figure out if you've done enough jumps with a full camera set-up where you were able to shoot quality video from exit to opening, and capture the highlights with the still camera with no trouble. Are you ready to produce 100% quality, 100% of the time? Put yourself in the position of a first time jumper who laid out $100 extra for the video, and does not recieve their full product due to a technical issue, or has to watch a video of inferior quality next to the video their friend got on the same load. The point is that unless you have at least 20 or 30 successful jumps shooting video and stills from exit to opening, then you're really not ready. You need that time to work the bugs out of your helmet, and just barely get youself a procedure together for camera and gear checks in the plane. That's just for the helmet, the camera suit is a another story. You'll need a dozen jumps just to get it set up, and for you to have any sense of control. You've got at least 50 jumps to go, and even them, be honest with yourself about being ready (or not) to put yourself out there as a 'professional'.

What about a vaccum pump? I know a couple of guys who used to put lenses in a vaccum to dry them out, something about the low pressure and the pump drying out the air. Also, I've made it a policy that I don't jump cameras in rain. If it looks like rain, I just won't go up on a video jump. If I'm jumping with a team, I tell them this before jump #1, regardless of the forecast for the day. It's just not worth it. Possible damage to expensive cameras (cameras I may need later that day if the rain passes, or the next day), and if it's RW, the fact that you have to fall face first through the rain. Nobody pays enough to offest those two factors.

Just so you know, most riggers are not gear dealers, and of those who are, 99% of the rigs they work on were not rigs they sold to the owner. It's not like a car dealership, a rigger is more like an independent mechanic, they'll work on anything you bring them (unless is not airworthy). Also, if you're not bothering him by bringing him work, you're employing him. As far as your harness goes, not all riggers are equipped to do a harness resize. It takes some specialized equipment to do the job. Often times it is best to send it to the manufacturer. Not only did they build the rig in the first place, but they have experience building harnesses every day and can incorporate the latest in features and construction techniques. It's well worth the price, and will make it feel like a brand new rig.

The reason that I climb out all the way first is that it get's you out of the plane facing the same direction that you'll be facing once you're in position. It eliminates the need to rotate in any way once you're outside the plane. You get out, and move straight back. The other reason is that it lets you place both feet on the rear edge of the step before you start to transition to the rear float. There's no moving or rotating of your feet (or foot) as you move into position. This can help to keep you from losing your footing and find yourself hanging. It a tough spot to get to for sure. I just like the idea of making as many seperate movements as possible. Climbout, place feet, slide back. When you try to mix them into one fluid motion, one mistaken placement will throw the whole thing off, and there's no real room for errors trying to get back there.

It's all about the training, or actaully the lack of it. To the non-jumper, skydiving in general is dangerous, and they see news reports about every little thing that goes wrong at a DZ. Despite this, we skydivers continue to jump, and the whuffos would probably ask, "What is so hard to understand about this? Skydiving is dangerous, I heard it on the news". What we as skydivers understand is that there are way to mitigate the danger. There is training in place, and procedures to follow that can make skydiving less dangerous, and accidents purely 'accidental' We continue to jump because we all believe that we know and understand all of the factors needed to keep us alive. Take that same theory to the level of experienced skydivers looking at newbies who insist on flying fast canopies, and trying to swoop them too soon. To us, it is plain to see that it's dangerous to do these things, and many times it inevitably leads to an incident. Surely the only reason that newbies would continue with that course of action is that they believe they know and understand all of the factors needed to keep themselves alive. Of course you and I know that this is not true, but in the absence of any real canopy education, and some strictly enforced guidelines as to what canopies you can jump at what loading, how can we expect the inexperinced newbie to understand what we do? Sure, as an experienced jumper you can try to school the newbies as much as you want. The problem is that if you get to them after they have a license, and are showing signs that they may be the next square in 'bounce bingo' it's already too late. By that time they have been through their initial training, and jumped enough to have made up their minds about canopies, and how it all works. What needs to happen is that canopy training, and a program of gradual downsizing and careful canopy slelection needs to be taught up front, early on in the program. When a guy with 15 jumps sits through the official USPA sanctioned class about canopy control and canopy loading/selection, and is given a copy of the official USPA guide to canopy model and sizes, that makes an impression. If we take it one step further, and everyone on the DZ, or at every gear store fully supports the USPA guidelines, and frowns upon attempts to 'fast track' through the regulations, that make san impression. If it's important, it should be treated as such, and taught in an official capacity and as a requirement to become a licensed skydiver. It should be regarded by experienced jumpers as VERY bad form for any jumper trying to go 'off program'. Those things will make an impression, and those things will change the mindset of the new jumpers. I've made this comparision before, but it's like pull altitudes. A while back, it was 'anything goes', but this, of course, turned out to be a mistake. So the USPA kicked in some min. pack opening altitudes, and made it a BSR. At first, there was resistance, and some refused to follow the new BSRs, instead prefering to do whatever they wanted. Those jumpers either went in, quit jumping, or got sick of landing off, and gave up the low pulls. At the same time, every new jumper who came after the new BSRs freely accepted them as part of the skydiving landscape. These were rules that were in place the day they started jumping, and they probably heard about them either that same day, or soon after. They also caught on that if they, or anyone, ignored those BSRs, they got the evil eye from more than one jumper after they landed, and also got 'the talk' from the DZO or S&TA. It's very rare to see low pulls these days. People realize that it's an important rule to follow, and they see that breaking it doesn't make them any friends on the DZ. Do the same for canopy control and selection, and soon enough new jumpers will respect that too.

Climb out on to the step, facing forward, both hands on the strut. Position your feet so they are side by side, and toawrd the rear of the step. Reach back with your left hand, and grab the rear or the door frame just below the mid-point. Lean back to the full extension of your right arm (right hand still on the strut) keeping your bady as close to the plane as possible. This is the tricky part. Shift your weight from your right arm to your left, and release the strut with your right hand. You'll begin to 'fall' back a little, but use your left arm to slow this down. Aim your hip so it hits the fuselage just behind the door. As soon as you release your right hand, it should be moving quickly to the door frame, just below your left hand. Now you've got the rear of the door frame with both hands, your hips are jusy behind and below the door, and your feet are still on rear edge of the step. From this position you can move your feet to a position where they won't interfere with the TM or students feet. Pracitce the climbout on the ground while fully geared up. You can fall off the plane doing this. I have never fallen off, but others have, Aside from that, just modify your exit from the strut. Position your left foot on the outside edge of the step, and place both hands on the strut. Lean back to full arms extension, and bend your left leg to get as low as you can. When you exit, launch yourself straight back and you should be able to position yourself just behind and below the tandem. Back flying won't help you with that type of tandem exit. Also, any idea why the TM all started doing exits in this way? I've always thought the best way to exit a 182 was to put the student outside, feet on the step, facing 45 degrees between the tail and the wing. The TM stays mostly in the plane, and the rig stays completely in the plane. The pair then dives out from that position. With what you descirbe, the tandem pair are fully outside, facing the tail. This puts the rig outside, and requires that is passes the door frame, and then is around the strut and door while outside of the plane. These are all areas where there could be interference with the rig, while if they keep the rig in the plane, the only problem is hitting the pilot as the TM turns around (the pilot will recover). Also, it just seems like alot more work for the TM to get all the way out.

This might have been something to mention at the outset. When the advice comes from a highly experienced expert, people can easily understand that what works for you, may not be the correct course of action for them. As it was, you did not mention that, instead you made it sound like a valid course of action for most people. You even defended it as such when I suggested that there was a simpler and more reliable procedure that others should follow. The truth is, I don't really care which way you personally do anything. However it does bother me when you offer up bad advise for all to see. At this point the public at large has heard both sides and will do what ever makes sense to them.

I did watch, and you can plainly see that you do indeed take several steps back while you get the canopy under control. Not what you want to be doing in high winds. Next, if you look at the ease at which you can release the controls, and the angle of the canopy relative to the horizon, the winds on that landing were not high at all, and did not represent a situation where you needed to worry about being dragged. If the winds were indeed in the 'high' range, you would have needed to keep your canopy straight up over your head to keep the drag down, and you would have needed two hands to control it at all times. Finally, it's interesting to note that when you dump the canopy to the ground with the rears and it's lying there with the nose up, that you use the risers to fly one side over the other and get the nose facing into the ground before you start to pick it up. This is the same manuver you would make if you turned and grounded the canopy with a toggle upon touchdown. You would fly the canopy straight into the ground, because that's the best way to get control over it. Exactly what you did after you put on your kiting show. Your video is an illustration of one thing. In the case where a person has concern for their physical well-being, the correct course of action is what I outlined in my earlier post in this thread. Keep in mind that I'm talking about a high wind condition where being dragged is a possibility. It would be a situation where the winds have increased since your lift took off, and the conditions upon landing would be such that you would not have boarded the plane if they existed at that time. A good indication of what it would be like is if you went out to kite your canopy the next time there's a wind hold at the DZ. If it's too windy to too jump, that's the type of conditions where you need to be concerned about being dragged. The kiting will be much more difficult, and a physical work out to keep the canopy under control. Disconnect your RSL and wear a helmet.

Here's one idea, on a more loaded canopy there's a tendency to dive more in any type of turn. Keeping in mind that the effectiveness of control inputs goes up as airspeed goes up, you can see how a slight harness turn can start off slow, but as the canopy starts to dive and build speed that same input begins to equal more and more response. Soon enough you've got a good rate of turn with just a harness turn on a more loaded canopy. Think also about toggle turns with your canopy. With anything past, lets say a 90, when you release the input, the canopy has built enough speed that with no input it's making lift and floats it's way right out of the dive. This is a characteristic of lower WL canopies that they don't really dive very far after a turn because it doesn't take much of an increase in arispeed to get that big canopy produding lift, and pulling itself out of a dive. Now take that to a harness turn, and you can see how even if you can get it going, it doesn't go very far with a lower WL. Higher loaded canopies fall into that cycle of the turn makes you speed up, and the speed makes you turn faster, and can keep accelerating for a few rotations. Lower WL just don't fall into that cycle, so you never get much of a result from the harness. There's also the idea that a harness turn on a 100 sq ft canopy, and a harness turn on a 200 sq ft canopy are kind of the same degree of input. When you toggle turn your canopy, you can pull the toggle down to your hip if you want. If I try that at 2.0 on my Velo, it wouldn't go so well. Take that concept to the harness, and figure that you and I can both offset the harness to the same degree, let's say we can get a differential of five inches between the three rings. That five inches will produce a much different effect on my canopy than on yours. You would need to pull one of your three rings to your hip to get same response I get from the five inches. Play around with just the harness at altitude, and see what you can see.

One other quick point to make (and the quote I'm using isn't from you, but from where you quoted somebody else) That's the shittiest advice of all. Once you land, and your toggles are down, letting them up will do the same thing it does if you made those moves while flying your canopy; the canopy will dump all the lift, and surge forward and (try to) dive. All this will do is encourge the canopy to buck or fold under as the topskin is presented to the wind. The reusult of this is a sudden loss of control, and a good chance the jumper will get pulled off of their feet. It is entirely possible to do the manuver given a moderate, clean wind, and a practiced, careful jumper. In conditions where you feel at risk for being dragged, your chances of success are much lower.

This sounds like bullshit. If you're jumping in high winds, disconnect your RSL before you land, get your canopy on the ground ASAP, and be prepared to cut away if you get pulled off of your feet. In higher winds, spending any extra time with an infated canopy is ill advised. If there are gusts or turbulence (and there usually is), your kited canopy can buck and fold under which leads to a loss of control while the canopy remain partially inflated. Getting your canopy turned around and flying it into the ground should happen the moment you touch down. Once the nose hits the ground, move immediately toward the canopy, and get your foot on the nose of the canopy as close the center cell as possible. This will contain the canopy, and prevent it from going anywhere. Give up on the idea of stowing your brakes, or un-doing your slider. Reel in the lines, and bundle your canopy in your arms, keeping the nose inside of the bundle to prevent partial inflation as you walk in. I am a fan of kiting, and do it frequently if I touch down and feel enough wind to keep the canopy flying. However I would never reccomend it to anyone jumping in winds where they are worried about being dragged. The real answer is not to jump in those conditions. If you find yourself in that situation, get down, get the canopy down, and contain it ASAP.

I'm not sure what you're getting at asking how people initiate harness turns, but if you're looking for tips, it's not going to happen. At lower WL, for various reasons, harness turns aren't a very effective control input. If you're trying to get more out of your harness turns, you may be fighting a losing battle.

Let's face it Einstien, you haven't been working on anything for a little while, you haven't been jumping long enough. While I'm sure you think you all sorts of power in your thighs and knees, there's a reason all the top RM guys use booties. Maybe ask some of the more experienced RW guys about how to use the booties the right way and go with that. As far as freeflying goes, you'll need another suit for that anyway. Even if you take the booties off this suit, it won't make it into a freefly suit. The suit is for RW. Booties are for RW. Leave the suit alone, and start freeflying.

Alot of great points already. All add a couple of things- being a smaller jumper, you're going to have a harder time finding a harness that fits you well. Especially with your first rig, when your canopies will be on the larger side, and you're still on the smaller side. You need a medium sized container and a small harness, not an easy combo to find. One of the rules of thumb when buying gear is to buy what you can safely jump today. A 150 might be a little fast for you at your level. For various technical reasons, lighter jumpers need to err on the side of lighter WL than jumpers closer 'average' weight (175-ish). Here's a couple of ideas, first off, enlist the help of a local rigger in hunting down some gear. You need a rigger to inspect any used gear before you buy, so bring them into the process a little early to help you locate some good gear. Second, try to downsize to a smaller canopy before you buy, but only when you are actually ready. Enlist one of your instructors to help you through this process with advice on things to work on, and to watch your landings and help you make the call as to when to try a 170. Don't go at this alone. If you get stuck on a 170, then buy a rig that will hold a 170. When you're ready for a 150, you can often sell the 170 and use the proceeds to buy a used 150, so it costs nothing. As plus, the rig will get easier to pack as well. Third, for your first rig, where you need a little harness, and a rig that can hold a 150 or 170 (you want it to fit comfortably so you can easily pack the thing), you might want to consider resizing the harness. It will add about $200 to the price, but will be well worth it to have the container you need with a harness built just for you. Again, work on this with your new rigger pal. Last point, make sure you have some shorty risers to go with the rig. It's nice to be able to reach your slider and toggles with no trouble. Maybe even order a new set when you get your rig, custom made for you.

Just to be clear, I didn't know anything about the video when I posted it, except that it was from Russia. I didn't know who any of the jumpers were, their experience, or even if this was a complete comp or just the highlights (lowlights?). I just put it up because it's good example of how things go wrong when swooping, and it's got a good variety of things going wrong all in one video, with no real injuries to speak of. In light of the recent serious injury on the bank of the pond in Elsinore, the subject of downsizing, and who should be doing (or not doing) what with what type of canopy has come up again, and as such this seemed like an appropriate showcase for how quickly things go bad, and how badly things can really go.

What really got me was about 2 min. in, when inbetween impacts I glanced at the counter and realized that there was still 7 more min. of carnage to go. Well, almost 7 more min. The last min or so with the half naked Russian guys was a little much for me. I sort of got the vibe the camera person was a chick. One thing that did amaze me was the team swoop. After the performance in the solo rounds, I couldn't understand why they would want to team swoop, and throw a million degree turn while they were at it. If you watch, they might have stayed tight if they 270'd or 450'd it, but they went huge, and fly away from each other spinning in so many circles. The real reason I posted it was to illustrate how things go wrong, and how quickly and violently things go wrong. The water saved all of those guys that day, at least a few of them would be dead if that was over solid ground.

What does that mean? If that means keeping a low wing loading, and only jumping in light winds, you're leaving alot of risk factors on the table. If only do solos, that's a step. If you only jump from 182s, when you never have more than three other canopies in the air, that's a step. If you buy the other three slots on the 182, that's a step. No chance of a canopy collision then. If you have a rigger pack your main every time, that's a step. If you have an A&P check out the plane before every load, that's a step. If you only fly with an ATP rated pilot who gets yearly recurrent training, that's a step. Now if you were to take all those steps, you'd be paying $500 a jump. Even then, you're still flying in a small plane, and jumping out of it. It's not hard to see the risk there. Otherwise, no matter what you do, you're always going to depend on the maintenence of the aircraft, the performance of the pilot, the performance of the other jumpers in the plane, and the performance of the packer (maybe you) to ensure your safety. It's up to you to decide if you can indeed count on those factors, perform well enough yourself to overcome those factors, or quit jumping. It's that simple.

Hey friend, I never made any reference to your age. What panels are you talking about? You seem to place alot of importance on something I've never heard of. If you're talking about cut-in laterals, those are available on several types of rigs, and have been for years. Others have already made some good points about starting off with a used rig. One additional point it that you can spend $3000 on a used rig, and when you're ready for another rig in 2 years, sell if for probably $2800. In two years your $6000 new rig will be worth $4000. A used canopy you can get for $1000 will be FAR easier to pack, and when you want to sell it in a year, it will be worth $900. A new canopy will run $2000, be VERY hard to pack, and in a year will be worth $1500. The $6000 rig is best suited to a jumper who had a few hundered jumps, and a good idea of what they want in a rig, and will have it for a good number of years without needing to make any changes to the system. By the time they're through with it, the wear and tear has far exceeded the depreciation of making a new rig a used rig. If you factor in the money you're going to lose downsizing from your first rig in a year or two, plus the cost of renting gear while you wait for your gir to be built, you could almost pay for a used rig with the money you'll be giving up.