davelepka

I got it after the first clarification. I was thinking pull and you were thinking push. You do make a good point about pushing, and where to push.

You're suporting my point again. All of your notions of a safe pull altitude are based on what you were taught and what you have seen in practice. Once upon a time, you had no jumps, and no thoughts of pull altitude. Then you took a FJC, and got an idea. Then you proceeded on, and got a license, and when given your choice from 2000ft up to a clear and pull, you made additional choices based upon your onw judgement, which was derived from your existing knowledge, and any research you did. So your canopy is snivley? It was designed to be used in a world where 2000ft was the min. pack opneing altitude. In a world where there is no min. pack opening altitude, canopies are made differently (as in BASE gear). The manufacturers had 2000ft in mind when they designed a canopy that takes 800ft to open. They also had jumper skill in mind when they designed higher performance canopies. Not enough people are paying attention to the jumper skill required to jump those canopies, but almost everyone, you included, seems to respect the min. opening altitude the canopy was designed for. I wonder why? There were more deaths/incidents due to mis-use of open canopies than to low/no pulls. I wonder why? Just face it, things are changing in canopy land, and things need to change in BSR land to keep the balance. Yes, education is also key, feel free to search my posts for the million comments I've made on that subject. In truth, that all I really care about. If people could all land their open and functioning canopies safely, on every jump, that would be enough for me. This is a risky sport for sure, and lots of shit can go wrong, but when the parachute opens properly, and it's a lack of education and poor canopy selection that creates an incident, that's rediculous.

Say that differently or with more words so I can understand it better. What effect does the location of your grip have on the input applied to the canopy. Isn't three inches of pull the same at any point from mid-riser up to the cascade? All of my comments included the provision that there was sufficient slack below the grip to not interfere with your desired input. Otherwise, I still can't see how a three inch pull at the top of the riser, is different than mid riser.

The higher you grip the riser, the longer your range of motion will be before you hit your shoulder or run out of slack under your grip. I think this line of thought started with dive loops. Back when swooping was young, dive loops weren't all that popular, and many jumpers added their own to risers. Some of them would stick them mid-riser, and then they could only pull down to the three ring (just a few inches). By mounting the dive loops higher up, you get a longer range of motion. As far as rear riser landings, and your grip, I'm not sure it really matters. As long as you can pull your risers far enough to stall the canopy, gripping any higher shouldn't make a difference. Actually, the lower you grip the riser, the shorter your 'jump' to toggles will be when the time comes.

Lets not forget the intended WL. Some reserves have a listed max WL that is lower than some jumpers exit weight. I would think this would be a huge factor in choosing a reserve.

I would guess they would be pretty close. The 106 is lighter, so the reserve PC could pull it to line stretch faster, and the lines are shorter, so again, to line stretch quicker. As far as inflation, the 106 has less volume of air needed to fill it, but smaller inlets to allow that air in. It would seem that the 218 would slow the airspeed considerably before it was fully inflated, maybe slowing the end stages of inflation. I'll say the 106 will pop open quicker.

By your actions, you have shown how a BSR can be effective. You chose not to exit the plane at 1900ft., and we can only guess that you thought it was too low to exit. Where did you get the idea that it was too low? Whatever the answer is, it's related to the fact that the BSR's say 2000ft is the limit. Maybe you didn't contemplate the BSR in the plane, or ever for that matter, but you were taught, and you have witnessed, that 2000ft is as low as you want to go, and most jumpers you have seen also seem to agree with this. Apply this to any regulation, and you'll see the same thing. Adding a new BSR will take some time to adapt to, but sooner or later, new jumpers will be taught to work within the BSR, and they will see most other jumpers doing the same. You're a sheep, and you and the rest of the pack will go where ever the sheep herder tells you to (for the record, 99% of jumpers are also sheep, myself most likely included).

I don't know if more rules will make safer skydivers. I do know, in regards to the WL BSR, that you have to try harder to frap yourself in with a bigger canopy. The bigger the canopy, the harder you have to try.

Keeping the transition clean takes some practice. You figure that if the tandem is falling fast enough to stay with on your back, their fallng fast enough to stay with you while you transition. You can transition quick enough to not loose any altitude, but usually you want to sink out a couple feet (2 or 3) to get the different shot anyway.

Work on your freeflying first. Then tandems just turn into a slow freefly jump. It goes without saying to stay out from directly underneath them. Asdie from the risk of a premature deployment, your burble will suck them down on top of you. Of course, if you're low, and can't get back up, a shot or two of burble can get them down to you, but you didn't hear that from me. Also, stick to the fat guys to begin with, for obvious reasons. You can work down to the lighter ones by transitioning to your back for the last 1000ft or so of each jump. If you can't hang with them, you sink out just before they dump. As you get more confident with the slow ones, you can transition higher and higher each time. It actually works out well, because you get both points of view on the same jump.

Dr. Phil is a retard. "What made you think it was OK to make these kind of calls?" Gee, well, I was drunk, and in a suite at the Ritz. There were these two chicks there, and I'm a semi-celebrity, so I tried to get them into bed. What is so hard to understand about that? These weren't children, or nuns. He didn't suggest killing anyone, he wanted some coke, and these two chicks in bed. I would have done the same thing. So would Dr. Phil if he could only manage to pull that Oprah out of his ass.

This 'in the corner' disagreement sounds similar to the 'hook turn' one that used to be around. To some, a hook turn was just a swoop (maybe a good swoop) while others turned a 'hook turn' into a bad thing, it was low turn with lots of toggle stabbage to get out. So now, the corner, which started out as a bad place to be, is maybe what you're shooting for. If you go by the old definition, anyone with a Velo at 2.0 or better, is in the corner every time. It's hard to call it the corner, because it's where you need to be everytime, but by the old definition, you are in the corner. All we have to do is a 'too far' to make it work. As in 'Dude, you were TOO FAR in the corner'. As for the singshot thing, it seems like it's a narrow window you need to fly through to make it work. Too high, and you miss the effect, too low, and you're too far in the corner. I see how the recory arc on a Velo is too shallow at the bottom end. You need to be a little low, and use a little input to make it work. What I see with the sligshot is at the fastest point in your dive, use that engery to make a quick(er) transition to horizontal. Provided that you used less energy than you would have lost to drag if you had used less input later in the dive, you're swooping along with more energy. The speed will allow your canopy to fly further before additional input (aka drag) is needed, building even greater gains than the longer dive. An effect that I have also wondered about, is if when pulling out a little sooner, the additional input will accelerate the pilots swing under the canopy, adding momentum that will carry him further forward than the slower recovery. With the pilot further ahead of the canopy, the nose will pitch further up, again, allowing the pilot to fly further before needing additional input to stay level. It's really just a guess.

My suggestion was that the lack of flare from his canopy could have been related to the gusting tailwind, which effectively lowered his airspeed, decreasing the effectiveness of his control inputs. If the gust would have exceeded the full flight speed of his canopy, the result would be a stall. In this case, the tailwind was not sufficient to induce a full stall, but it did 'soften' up his toggles, and lead to him pounding in. All of the above is speculation, of course. The possibility always exists for simple 100% pilot error.

Yeah, misreading, bigtime. Let me rephrase that. "Jumping in gusty winds is ill advised." The thread was about a downwinder, but I wanted to be inclusive of into the wind landings as well. In gusty condidtions, you run the risk of your landing coinciding with a diminishing gust (if you're into the wind) or an increasing gust (if you're downwind). Both will effectively reduce the arispeed fo your canopy. This can lead to reduced flare performance or possibly a stall. With all the variables involved in canopy flight, adding greatly variable wind speeds only serves to complicate the situation.

Are you kidding me? Well, the bad news for you is that I have 4000 jumps, and no cutaways. By your math, there are four cutaways out there looking for a jumper. There are threads about how many cutaways people have had. Do a search and you'll see that many jumpers have had several cutaways within a few hundred jumps. In regards to your main, if you're scared of it, get rid of it. Don't get rid of the people making you scared, get rid of the canopy.

Understand that the suggestion of a stall was due to a change in the airspeed via a gusting tailwind, not due to any pilot input. When the airspeed dropped, adding brakes helped, as it lowered the stall speed, but there was little else you could do if the tailwind increased to a factor greater than your stall speed. The solution is not to get yourself into that position. Jumping in gusty winds, either landing into or with the wind is ill advised. The gusts and their effects on your canopy are out of your control, and can result in further incidents. The tailwind problems are not limited to canopies. Many AC's have stalled and crashed when the pilot was making his turn to the base leg. Coming off of the downwind leg, many pilots are flying slow in the pattern, and combined with the tailwind and a too steep of a turn, the AC will stall, and at pattern altitude, there isn't enough altitude to recover.

If the winds are such that you cannot control your canopy upon landing, disconnecting your RSL is not the answer. Not jumping is the answer.

This is where his story is partailly correct. If he did get an increased tailwind at or near the time of his flare, the airspeed of his canopy would decrease, thus reducing his flare power. Much like when landing into gusty winds, if your flare needs to occur just after a gust has diminished, your airspeed will be loer, and flare power reduced. Actaully all of your control inptus will reduced effectiveness during these conditions. The concept that a canopy is not 'aware' of the wind speed or direction is only applicable provided that the wind speed or direction is constant. A change in either one of those can/will effect your canopies arispeed, which will effect your control sensitivity.

Your story is BS. If there was no wind, and at 15' the wind picked up speed quickly enough to effect your canopy before you landed (at 15' you only have a second or two of flight time left) your canopy would have stalled, and dropped you on your ass. What do you think happens to your airspeed if you go from no wind to an instant 10 to 15mph tailwind? It would quickly drop to a very low, possibly negative number, both of which equal a stall. Take another look at the incident, and re-evaluate either your perceptions, or the actual events (becasue these are two different things). Once you come to a realistic conclucion, then attempt to learn something from this incident.

I'd start with cocking your PC before you put the canopy in the bag. Then check that it remained cocked just before you close the container. Cocking a PC with the container closed means the kill line has to work it's way around the flaps and into the tight container area. Often times the bridle will just bunch up under the flaps, and appear cocked, when it's really not. I would try it this way before cutting the corners on your container, or not rotating your bag. A 150 anything will fit into a G3 built for a 150 main.

I know you've gotten alot of grief regarding your decision to jump in what other's feel were questionable conditions. The word 'questionable' is the key here. Questionable for who, and where did they come up with their limitations? Right? Well, where they most likely came up with their limitations was in the wake of an incident or near-incident they personally experienced. At your level, your exposure to differing conditions is fairly low, and your chances of having a 'near-miss' are lower. I didn't see a problem jumping in high winds unitll I got backed up off the DZ one day. Then I knew what wind keveks were what, and what I didn't want to happen. I never understood all the hub-bub about turbulence unitll I had a low alt. canopy collapse on a hot, humid summer day, with T-storms rolling around creating a generally unstable atmosphere. After that, I knew what could happen, and didn't want to happen again. At your level, you need to count on the advise and opinion of others unitl such time that you have sufficient experience to formo your own. Everyone at your level needs this, it's the smart ones who recognize and capitalize on it. I would suggest that you locate a DZ staff member, possibly an AFF I who you respect, and who respects you (I would suggest a female, they make for smarter AFF I's than males), and confide in them that you would like the benefit of their experience, and would appriciate their two cents whenever they feel you could use it.

Was that the guy who's student corked into him? Maybe last summer at SDC? I'm not sure just from the name.

Check my profile, and the profile I was replying to. If the weather didn't look like crap yesterday, there's a fair chance I would been filing that very student, and his landing. It was just a joke.

I'm sure PD would do the same, but there aren't any rigers who refuse to pack their reserves. Go figure.

If the I was not a he, than the ratings shoud be left alone. I like all the she I's. Some of the he I's on the other hand...