davelepka

Just a couple things. Flying with both toggles stowed would only be a factor if BOTH toggle hung up upon release. It can happen, but it's far more common for only one toggle to hang up, at which point you have a another scenario to deal with. With only one toggle, your canopy will need constant input to fly straight. Landing would be tricky, as you would have to flare with one toggle, and the other riser, or just keep it flying straight, and land with no flare (and a PLF). You could also cut it away and land your reserve. The correct chopice will depend on the situation, the pilot, and the canopy. If both toggles were stuck, you could fly and land with rear riser input only, however, with the brakes stowed, your full flight (as in no jumper input to the canopy) will be slower than normal. This will equal less available lift with which to flare. So yes, you will start off goig slower, but you'll be less able to slow down further, and will land faster than usual (that speed may be vertical or horizontal). Additionally, it has been said that the rear riser will have a higher stall speed than the toggles, which is true. The rear risers also have a much shorter control range than the toggles. Both of these factors will be amplified if the approach is flown with the brakes stowed.

How about the FAA? They drew a line, it's eight hours between your last drink and your next take-off. I agree that if your pilot is falling down drunk, and stops drinking eight hours before wheels up, thats a problem. A pilot who flies until 9 PM, and has a couple of beers unitl he is at eight hours before the first load, and stops right there, should be no different than the pilot who doesn't drink. The FAA isn't know for being soft or wishy-washy about things. If they say eight hours, there's a good bet that there's scientific data to back up that number. I read an interesting story about a reporter who spent a couple days flying with some fighter jocks. He mentioned how odd it was they every one fo them was drinking beer after beer during a late dinner one night, unitl 10 PM, at which point they all stopped drinking, to the point of not finishing the beer in front of them. They had a 6AM flight the next morning, so at 10, they're done. I would guess that those guys are 'good' pilots, right?

Yeah, I get that were skydivers talking about skydiving, so naturally, all the spotting stuff comes up. I think the original intent was get people to think through their criteria for what a good pilot is. Many jumpers will assume that the guy thats been flying them at their home DZ is a good pilot because they know and like the guy, and everything seems to go OK with regards to the AC. The idea may be to get some ideas and thoughts out there for jumpers who maybe don't have a good knowledge of flying of what to look for when evaluating a pilot. Yeah, the jumper related stuff sure helps out, but if they guy isn't checking the tanks for water in the fuel, or double checking his trim settings before begining the take-off roll, none of that stuff will matter.

It takes time to determine the quality of a pliot. The ability to follow a procedure, and repeat that over time is what makes a good pilot. If a pilot can do the following consistantly, then they can be classified as good: -proper preiflight of the aircraft -follow a checklist prior to every take-off -proper communtication with ATC/tower/other AC (a good realtionship with the ATC/tower personel shows an ablility to communicate with others, as well as follow instructions/procedures effectively) -follow a checklist proir to every landing The only way to confirm all of the foolwing is by observing a pilot over time, including sitting right seat (or watching them in a Cessna), wearing a headset (if available), and, yes, riding the plane down from time to time (easier if you are a paid jumper who's student is a no-go). All of the talk about the winds, GPS, spotting, etc may make a good jump pilot, but all that does is make the jumpers life easier, and has no bearing on the pilots abaility to safely operate the AC. My father is a multi rated CFI-I, and couldn't spot a load to save his life, however, I would fly with anytime, anywhere.

If the Racer has tuck tabs, it the newer, more secure model. Don't forget about the Cypres situation. The age of the unit, and it's need for batt. and maintnence will effect it's value. A usable Cypres can have a value from $1000 to $100 depending on these factors. If the Cypress' were equal, I'd say the Racer for sure. I put 1000's of jumps on a Racer, so I know they build them well. Combine that with the PD canopies (main and reserve) and you've got a great rig.

The next CPC meet will be held Saturday, June 18 at Aerohio. This one will be on Saturday, to allow Sunday as the weather day. The first load will go up at 7:00AM, so we can finish the meet up before noon, and have the rest of the day for Otter jumping. This should help free up some additional staff memebers interested in competing. As before, we'll have the courses up the the day before for practice. The noodles will be up for the speed course, and we'll have the zones painted out for zone accuracy so you can work on both events. We will have a meeting on Friday night for competitors. If you were in the last meet, feel free to skip the meeting. If you have not competed yet, and cannot make the meeting, let us know, and we'll make sure you're kept in the loop. Try to make it out this weekend for hop n pops at Aerohio. We'll start flying at 8:00AM, and usually get four or five 182 loads in before the Otter flies. Take advanatge of the calm morning air, and get yourself ready for the next meet.

I'm on Ebay looking for aother PC series camera. Are there any models that you wouldn't reccomend? Am I right in thinking that the PC 100 is the bigger one? Did it have a funny focusing problem (or was that the PC 10? Did they even make a PC 10?) Any thoughts on the PC 109? I bought my PC 1 six years ago, and since than I haven't kept up on the different models. Thanks for any info you have.

Give them to someone with a good Cypress that needs batts. They are good for two years from the date of installation, as long as you properly document the switch, and the date the batts will expire, you should good. Look in the classifieds for a Cypress that needs batts. Either buy it, and run the batts down, or give/sell them to the seller/buyer.

Step 1: Place canopy/container in a large duffle bag. Step 2: Place duffel bag in the closet Step 3 : Lock closet door.

Really? My first thought was back flip. Isn't a really tweaked out lazyboy 1/4 of the way to a back flip? If you could get some rotational momentum going by laying back kinda quick, combined with a little push off the water, I would guess you could use your abs to pull your legs up and over. Please note I said I would guess. As for a front flip, or bouncing off the water, I would be really surprised if the idea was to impact the water hard enough to bounce your self through your lines. It would seem like it's too fine a line between just hard enough, and too hard (ouch). Although I was really surprised the first time I saw Blindman.... Edit: Oh yeah, if Jim posted this on the forum, and made a webpage up for it, it may be slightly more than a dream..

No, but it makes them a bad photographer. Ignoring all the shots/angles made possible by flying on your back, you severly limit your pallet. If you want to shoot the same video sequence on every jump, eventually you would be good AT THAT. If you want to react to the situation presented to you (lighting, clouds, passenger, etc) and shoot the best video for that individual jump, you need to have and use a full compliment of skills. Hey look, Norm Kent and Gus Wing seem to prefer sit/back flying. Nuff' said.

I think Scott has the complete scoring sheets, but I know that you were 2nd in speed, 3rd in distance, and 1st in zone accuracy.

Just pull your knees up to your chest, and look up to follow them as they deploy. As you rotate to upright, get your hands behind you (kind like a sit-fly thing), and you're there. Keep your legs knida in and together, if you let them get too far out, the wind will catch them, and you'll end up doing the complete back loop. Once you are stable, as in you've stopped the rotational momentum, go ahead and strech out into your back track. After a weekend of practice, it will all happen in one smooth movement. In regards to the other comment. about back tracking, and being far out, and not making it back, you need to have some separation of some kind from your tandem regardless of your spot. Be it vertical or horizontal, either way, you just cannot dump so soon after the tandem that you don't have time to get a little footage. He says it's a shame to land off just for a few seconds of footage. I say it's a shame to dump too close to a tandem just to avoid landing off, and I'm right.

As opposed to the barrel roll, try 1/2 of a back loop as they go by. This keeps you from having the pic. rotate 180 in the frame. Also, once you are on your back, try back tracking as it will allow you to start your track sooner, and film the opening longer, and ultimately get yourself open sooner.

Ohio CPC's fisrt meet went off without a hitch yesterday. All six rounds were completed by 1:30, with the last round of zone accuracy flown just before a line of nasty looking clouds shut down the DZ for the day. We had nine competitors in all, none with any swoop competition experience of any kind. Most of them had never even swooped through a set of entry gates until the Saturday practice. The overall results are as follows: 1. Jim Moss 2. Todd Tietze 3. Dave Lepka 3. Greg Rick 3. Nate Varns 6. Ryan Petrie 7. Sherry Butcher 8. Dave Roberts 9. Mark Timm Jim and Todd were tied for points, but Jim's top finishes in both Speed and Distance gave him the top spot. Dave, Greg, and Nate were tied for both points and rankings, resulting in a three-way tie for third. Thanks to the staff at Aerohio for keeping us flying and contributing to the success of the event. Anyone near Ohio interested in attending the next event, drop us a line at cpcohio@hotmail.com for more information.

You need to twist your slider up tight before stowing. This will prevent it from flapping, and allow you to turn your head as well. The plus is that when using the twist method, you don't have to collapse your slider, and subsequenly un-collpase it during packing. The removable slider is neat, but it will add a significant amount of time to your packing, as well as introduce complexity to a simple system.

Allright, allright. It does have a big door, and STOL capabilities, and looks like a good inbetween plane for a smaller DZ (bigger then a 182, smaller than a Caravan or Porter). It would be similar to a 206/207 in it's capabilities. The new price is less than used Caravan, and similar to a used Porter, without the maintainence issues of a used airplane, and a good long TBO on the engine. In the end, my opinion doesn't really matter because I don't own or run a DZ. This is a good thing.

I think the Skyventure guy has (or had) one of those. He flew it to Nationals at Perris 7 or 8 years ago.

Check out airvanusa.com. I read about it in Flying magazine, and they projected a price around $500,000. It looked to me like a good jumpship, and when I saw the website, they've got a pic of a guy jumping from one.

You're giving up distance on your swoop. The stall speed with your rear risers is higher than the stall speed with your toggles. when your rears run out of lift, and you put your feet down (or if your feet are sliding, when you put your full weight on your feet) you're traveling at a speed higher than the stall speed of your toggles. If you would make the transition to toggles, you could swoop further before putting your feet down. I experienced this several times when I was first starting to use rear risers. I found that if you're quick, you can fly the rears into a stall, and make a quick shift to toggles only losing 10 or 12 inches of altitiude (I could pick up my legs, and not touch the ground). Anyway, I found that after making the transition, I had enough speed left to pop back up 12 inches, and keep swooping for another second or two). This isn't the way I fly it all the time, but it was useful in the begining for determining the stall point of the rears in a swoop. Now that I know where that limit is, I can stay away from it (mostly).

Good advice. When was the last time you heard someone say, 'I just got his new canopy, and I can't wait to be reckelss with it, and rush into things I'm not ready for' ? Everyone says that they'll be careful, and conservative and blah, blah, blah. That plan has proven to have some holes in it, and anyone who proceeds forward under those conditions is an idiot.

The reason that WL was never an issue in the old days, is that an F-111 canopy has a pretty conservative operational window in regards to loading. They simply won't slow down and flare with too much weight. For this reason, most jumpers were jumping a conservative WL as a factor of equipment limitations. A ZP canopy, on the other hand, can provide good landings at loadings up to 2.5 or 3.0 to 1. For this reason, you can't count on the operational limits of the equipment to be the limiting factor. This is why WL has become a known quantity, and is used to judge the approximate performance you can expect from a given wing. Why many jumpers pay no attention to these numbers, and load canopies up beyond their own abilities is beyond me.

During a post jump interview, I once had a TM chine in and ask, "So, are you going to go home and beat your wife?" I chose not to use that one, but if you really need ideas...

Read about the incident last weekend in West Tenn. That kid was pushing the limits too.

I take this to mean that you were downwind of the DZ when you opened. If that is the case, then you want to use very little, if any input of any kind. Your canopy needs to cut through the wind as effectively as possible, and generally speaking, adding control inputs will add drag, which isn't your friend when you're downwind. The bigger consideration, however, is your 700 ft decision altitude to land off. Within a short time after opening, you should have found the DZ, and begun to head that way. Your forward progress should have made it obvious to you that you were not going to make it back. Determining your landing area much earlier in your canopy ride will go a long way to keeping you safe in the future. Additionally, when you are downwind of the DZ, keep in mind that you are upwind of the rest of the world. Looking a the options between you and the DZ, all of them involve flying into the wind to reach them. If the wind should increase, you may not even make your alternate landing area. By simply turing your canopy 180, you will have many more options to choose from,as you are upwind of all of them, and have the wind to help you reach your destination. Remember that open canopy incidents are the #1 problem in skydiving today. Having a plan in place before you jump (which includes stratagies for bad spots, as well as off field landigns) is essential to keeping you safe.