davelepka

Ohhhh, snaps! Lets put them on riser covers too. That'll work good. Seriously, wouldn't you have to blow (another) big hole in the center of your riser to seat a snap? I know, I know, until we see a picture, blah blah blah

***I've got to disagree with you about adding it to a license. Take a look at all the crap about D licenses requiring a night jump. I can hear it now. "I'll never jump an elipticle wing, why should I have to take the class?" ================================= The night jump is not a fair comparison. The night jump can be a risk to your perosnal well being. Some people don't even like driving at night. There is no risk in sitting through a canopy course. If they want the license, they take the course. Period. Just like you do X number of jumps, or pass the wriiten test. Don't want to take the course? Fine, you have your 'A' license and all the restrictions that go with it. The license belongs to the USPA to give out how thay see fit. As far as enforcing a WL restriction, that why I think thats the more complex part of the solution. The enforcement would most likely be on the part of the DZ's. Make it a BSR, and group memeber DZ's will have to try to enforce it. It won't be an overnight success, but in five or ten years, it will be common place, and accepted. It might not be 100% effective, but it's a step in the right direction.

***I think they would be MUCH easier to establish WL restrictions than a new training program. Look how poorly the ISP has been handled. ------------------------------------------------------ Establishing the WL restrictions, and gettign them enforced would be tough. Where do you draw the line? How many jumps? What WL? What shapes? What sort of test do you need to advance? Etc. I could come up with a 30 min presentation in less than two hours. Covering some basics like spotting from under canopy, stratagies for off field landings, reinforcing patterns and traffic managment. Make Bill Vons list available to all (incidentally, I know a USPA RD who is on the S and T commitee who handed out copies of the list to all the board members). Some aerodynamics and discuss the casue and effect relationship between the jumpers weight shifting under the canopy, and the canopies response to this. Done. This is what I mean by it's not rocket science to impletent a program. Put this info into the jumpers hands, don't tie it up in red tape for years. I know that EVERY dz has a jumper who knows what they are talking about, who would step up , and help the people out on a Sat night. If you know this jumper at your DZ, say something to them about it. Print this thread and show them. Make it happen. Just do it. I wanna be like Mike.

Just a general response (you happened to be the last post, Ron). It seems that most have agreed that this a problem, that needs addressing. The thread seems to have shifted toward arguments for and against WL restrictions and additional training. I am actually in favor of both solutions wroking together, but the reality is that the WL restrictions will be harder to establish and enforce. There are generally accepted restrictions in skydiving, such as 100 jumps doesn't get you an X brace sub 100, but even then , sometimes a jumper will slip through. The education is the key for a solution TODAY. Better informed jumpers, even if they are on questionable wings, will fare better if placed in a bad situation. An advanced canopy control course (not swooping, but advanced in regards to the barely adequate training given during AFF) to coincide with a B license would be ideal. A jumper seeking a 'B' license has shown that they are going to stick with skydiving, and are at the point where they are going to be thinking about a their first set of gear beyond thier ultra conservative first rig. Every jumper wants to progress through the license program. This means they will all attend the course in order to qualify for the license. As far as existing 'B' license holders and up, my guess is that if there is a canopy control course being held on the DZ, people will hang around and pick up whatever info they can. As this couse wouldn't be for a profit (maybe the S&TA or AFF I could get $15 or $20 for their time) nobody would mind the hangers on. This idea is not rocket science. I would guess that every DZ has a qualified jumper who wouldn't mind spending 30 minutes going over some addtional info on canopy control. USPA or not, this is something that each DZ can implement TODAY. As far as WL restrictions, I would endorse the USPA persues this as quiclky as possible. Even a simple 1.0 or less for a 'A' license jumper would go a long way. In conjunction with my above plan, it would keep the WL reasonable unitl each jumper has been to the canopy course. Addtionally, most jumpers (who are poor) will not be in a position to purchse a new wing on the day they earn thier B license, so the 1.0 or under would stay with them through a little more experience. These are some simple and easy ideas, that could be put into motion TODAY, if only as a band-aid while the USPA works on some more intricate and premanant measures. So WTF? Is it going to be naother ten years and 113 jumpers before we see any action?

***how many cells do paragliders have? aren't they like super-efficient? ================================= They are, due in part to thier aspect ratios, which are extreme by skydiving standards. As a by product, they tend to fold their ends up under the canopy. Their sqaure footage allows them to keep flying, and the pilot can unfold things, but it might not work so well with a sub 100. Thats one of the reasons canopies are 'limited' to 9 cells. To have an 11 cell canopy at the same sq. footage as a 9 cell, you have 11 smaller cells. If you maintain the cell dimension, you end up with a thinner wing. If you maintain the canopy thickness, you end up with a thinner cell. Either way I think you would lose rigidity, and see more collpasing and folding like paragliders (which are huge and have a million line groups).

***do you know anybody on the S&TA committee to address your issue?? ;) ================================= My quote " I have it on good authority......", were both thinking of the same good authority.

***How many of the fatalites had to do with landing off in gusty winds? ------------------------------------------------- I added the gusty wind part just for effect. In reality, a number of the fatalities were attributed to last minute obstacle avoidence during an off field landing. Additionally, a number of non-fatal incidents reported on this website were either low turns off field, or a low turn onto the field after flying back from a long spot. Either way addtional training could have taught those jumpers better decision making, or more refined canopy control skills which could have minnimized their injuries.

Facts: 1. 113 people have been killed under open canopies in the last ten years. 2. Of the 25 fatalities in 2003, 13 of them were jumpers with open and functioning canopies (11 landing problems and 2 collisions). 3. In the the review of the USPA board meeting, the section on Safety and Training had ZERO mention of implementing any sort of additional canopy training to any of the training progressions or licensing requirements. In all fairness, I do have it on good authority that the USPA is working on a solution, but shouldn't the number one killer of skydivers be the top priority? To the newer jumpers: Only two of the fatalities resulted from freefall collisions. You need to focus your time and effort on canopy training. Perfecting your 4-way technique or head down skills will do little to help you when you have to land off in gusty winds.

***Mentors told me to pull my front riser faster and harder , which brought me more horizontal with the canopy, ------------------------------------------- And -------------------------------------------- *** I find myself digging out EVERY time it's windy ==================================== Did you really type these two statements in the same post?

***Can't some of us 'low timers' make a SEMI aggressive canopy choice but still be safe? ----------------------------------------------------------- YES. Some low timers can be safe under an aggresive canopy. The trouble is, nobody knows which low timers that is until it's too late. One of the problems with newbies and understanding the importance of good choices under canooy is that the people who show us what bad choices can do are no longer with us. They may not be dead, but they're not hanging around the DZ anymore. Sometimes it takes seeing the tragdey of life changing (or ending) injuries to a fellow jumper to really make someone understand that they are playing with fire when they push the limits of canopy selection and usage. Think for a moment about never being able to jump again. Sounds horrible to me, although it pales in comparison to never being able to walk again, or never being free of pain. This is the reality of what happens when you make bad choices. I've seen it, others have seen it, and the fatality/incident reports comfirm it. Here's a general message to newbies: SLOW DOWN. Spend your small canopy money on more jumps. If you are not doing 10 jumps a day, at least twice a week, you need to jump more. The ground is hard and it can and will kill you. Everyone who was either seriously injured or killed under an open canopy thought "It will never happen to me". It will happen to anyone at anytime. Fly an appropraitly sized canopy, and stay out of its way.

There are ways to freefly a tandem video while being interactive with the student, produce a more polished product, and maintain a margin of safety. That video did not represent any of them. An accidental main or reserve deployment from the camera man would have been a disaster. An accidental drouge relase would have similar resutls. Just because you can fly yourself into a certain position doesn't mean it's a good idea. Attempting to recreate this video would be dangerous and irresponsible.

***that is a risk i am willing to take. -------------------------------------------------------- Why? Isn't skydiving dangerous enough already?

I'm not sure I understand what your problem is. If you're hooking it too high, you need to practice more. If you do notice mid-turn that you are too high, you can A) reduce the turn rate by letting the riser up somewhat. This will give you more time in the turn, and let you get around to where you want to be, OR, B) it's kinda like the first one, but if you're extra high, you can let off of the riser entirely, let the canopy dive in straight line to where you are the right alti to start a new turn that will finish the first one. In either case, you will use up more sky, as your final will go from a thin column of air, to a big oval shaped thingy, so traffic clearence becomes as issue. If you have to use plan B, keep in mind your canopy will be flying faster than normal inbetween the two turns so you will get to your #2 turn in point quickly, and the canopy will be more sensitive to inputs (such as your second turn). Here's a thought, if you are new to swooping, and having consistency problems, why are you swooping the beer line? Every beer line I've ever seen is the closest possible point to spectators and buildings, and is generally the target for more experienced jumpers. Do you think it's wise to 'learn' a skill you have been told is not safe in a crowded area?

Unstow your brakes. Done.

***it's early yet but i still wanna do it by the time i get to 75 jumps ------------------------------------------------ Before you try shooting video, maybe you should spend some time learning how to read.

Trespassing? According to the story, the princiapl, said "Now you're suspended (monentary pause) and NOW you're trasspassing, take him away". That in itself seems a bit unfair. Can he suspend the student on the spot, without notifying his parents? How can he be arrested for trespassing, when he wasn't given an oppertunity to leave a building he was authorized to be in in the first place? How can a group of twisted dumb motherfuckers end up in charge of educating America's youth? Will Timmy be resuced from the well in time? Tune in next week for more......

***i would cut away, make sure my risers have seperated from teh harness with a sweeping motion, and then silver --------------------------------------------------- Lets take a good look at this idea. First of all, you're still at terminal, and things are happening quickly. Any non-essential steps will use up more altitude than you think. Second, it's already been mentioned in this thread, thread that a jumper had his main come out of the container, and as it tried to get past the opening reserve, the loose main risers fouled the reserve. The jumper survived, but only by being extremely lucky. Your plan would ensure that even if the main container remained closed, your main risers would be swinging free while your reserve is deploying. These seem like two very good reasons NOT to do what you had outlined. What are you trying to accomplish with your actions? Is there a better way to achieve your desired result? How about this: You go straight to silver. Get the reserve out, and bring the ride to a halt. Game over. If your main has decieded to deploy alongside of your reserve, now you have two out, and should know the procedure. If your main didn't deploy, pull your cutaway now, and manually disconnect the risers. If your main container should open, the main will fall down and away from you (and your reserve) before it gets out of the bag. If your main container stays closed, you land with your main, and only have a freebag to find in the trees (or cactus, or whatever). The scenario you want to avoid is a main reserve entanglement. Your procedure opens the door for the main to realease and go flying past the opening reserve. BAD. By leaving the cutaway in place, you turn that into a two-out scenario. BETTER. By pulling the cutaway after your reserve is open, if the main is still in the container, you eliminate either possibility. BEST.

***After her "firing," the 30-year-old claimed former contestant Ereka Vetrini had called her the "n-word." ---------------------------------------------------------- Am I the only one who finds it 'interesting' that this didn't come up untill she was fired?

Freeing your hands should take proirity over turing off your camera. Forget about the camera untill you are under a good canopy, and in clear airspace. On your average jump, this will add maybe 5 sec of extra footage on your camera. Big deal.

Buy everthing used for a first rig. You'll use it for a season, beat it up a little, and be able to sell the whole thing to another new jumper for next year. At that point you'll be ready for a rig that will get you through a couple of seasons, with a change or two of the main canopy along the way. If you're ready for a 170 at that time, get a rig that will hold a 150, and you'll be able to fit a 170, 150, or 135 in there, so you'll be able to use it for awhile. Edit: It's amazing how a typo can turn a a 170 into a 107.

***a great deal with the eliptical canopy ===================================== This line seems to come up alot with people asking if this canopy or that is good. A great deal is only great if it's the product you want at a price you are happy with. If your friend is ready to jump a Sabre at 1.4, does she really think she'll be happy with a Nitron at 1.1? Just because it's elliptical doesn't mean that it will be faster or more fun than a square. In this case I think it would be quite the opposite. It will be slow and floaty, and have poor penetration into the wind.

I've seen this on two Javelins. Both were built between 98 and 2000. Reserve sizes are correct, and several different pack jobs didn't solve the problem. The flap is just a touch too short. An extra 1/4 in. would make this a non-issue. However, the side tabs on the flap have kept it shut at all times.

Thats quite a set up you've got there. Has anyone ever told you you're f**kin crazy? If not, you won't have to wait long. You are brave, however. Very brave.

***yesterday we were married. In the eyes of the governments of Multnomah County and the State of Oregon, we are wed. His clerk who acted as a witness was cheering and crying for us both Our last-minute party that evening was fantastic with champagnes and caviar and fois gras pate and cakes of all sorts Imagine if we'd had 6 months to plan it (instead of 1/2 day)! ---------------------------------------------- When you read the above quotes, it sounds like any other wedding, for any other couple (although the menu sounds better than most of the weddings I've been to). I can't understand why anyone would have a problem with this. Good luck to both of you.

I would avoid the advice about jumping a camera suit in a simulated camera jump. The reason that you want several hundred jumps before starting with a camera, is that shooting video is an activity. Skydiving is also an activity, and doing both at the same time can be tricky. At this stage of the game, you need to be focused on making a safe skydive, and nothing more. You need to be a part of every skydive you are on. Often times a camera flyer is on the outside of the skydive, doing his own thing. Part of this is observing the skydivers, and making sure that thier problems don't become his problems, or vice versa. There are a small handfull of jumpers who will be focused on thier skydive, and thinking about the camera flyer at the same time. Most jumpers will forget that you're there, and may try to kill you because of that. Just to put it in perspective, many camera flyers at a busy DZ will do more than 33 jumps in a long weekend. You've got a long way to go, don't rush yourself into an unsafe situation.