davelepka

I wear a hoodie sometimes when it's cold, and have never had a problem with it. The hood itself isn't long enough to caught in anything, and even then I tend to roll it up inside itself before exit, mainly to keep it from inflating and 'choking' me with my collar. Really take a look at one being worn with a rig. Pull the hood out and see how far it goes (not that far), and then consider that it's a round peice (no edges or tails) of fairly thick fabric, and you can see that it's not likely to get caught up or wrapped up in anything. The DZO where I started jumping used to wear a hoodie on every jump in the cooler months, even under his jumpsuit with the hood pulled out of the suit. Again, never a problem. I'm a big fan of using the right tool for the right job, and I'm very particular about my clothes/jumpsuit and how they fit with my rig and in freefall. A hoodie with the bottom of the sweatshirt pinned securely under my legstraps passes my test for freefall safety, and the hood itself has never been a problem. I do remove the drawstring from any hoodie I plan to jump with.

My first piece of advice would be that anytime you get conflicting opinions from two reputable sources regarding safety and skydiving, go with the more conservative option. I can't recall that last time a jumper was injured because they chose to take to slow and easy. Next up, you already mentioned, talk to the local camera flyers. Truth be told, if your flying and awareness are up to flying a camera, you don't need more than a handful of jumps to prepare for shooting video. So if you have 70-some jumps now, knock out another 100, and then talk to the camera staff to get you squared away. In the meantime, just jump and have fun. The only jump you need to be worried about right now is the next one. Focus on that, and worry about flying a camera when you get closer to actually flying a camera.

On the contrary, I could ask you how many jumpers involved in tail strikes recieved adequate initial training, but in the end, neither one of us would be able to answer that question with any degree of certainty. Arguing the sematics and nit-picking the methods are the old protocol, when time was on our side. The new protocol is much more time sensitive, and much more demanding of results. The question you should be asking is, 'Could inadequate initial training be a contributing factor in any or all of the tail strikes?'. If the answer is 'yes' then that issue needs to be addressed in the effort to END tail strikes. Ditto for complacency, ditto for lack of placarding, ditto for the failure of the community to make it a 'hot topic' (like harness checks, remmeber when nobody did those?). Whatever the 'majority' cause may be, or even the 'most likely', the call now is to end tail strikes 100%, so the method must be to address any and all possible contributors to the problem. Excluding any one of them is running the risk that it will lead to the next tail strike, and the possible loss of coverage for aircraft that fly wingsuiters.

On the one hand it does sound fishy, on the other hand it's not a 'cookie cutter' scam. Having a guy willing to meet you is a good thing, and as others have mentioned, just have the buyer Paypal the 'friend' the money so he can pay you cash directly. Paypal can provide protection, but it's generally geared more toward the buyer, and generally requires some 'documentation' like tracking numbers and shipping records to make a claim. Even if you as a seller needed help, without shipping records or an ebay auction to reference, you're not going to get very far. The seller can send the money as a 'gift' to his friend and not pay any fees. The 'friend' can then transfer the money to his bank so they can withdraw the cash, but it takes 3 or 4 business days for the tranfer to complete, so leave time for that.

I see that you're responding to Ron's comment about BSRs, but your comment applies to the current WS-I and instructional programs. None of it is working to the level that we need (one that will satisfy the insurance company), and the proof is the problem with tail strikes. So there are manufacturer programs and instructional ratings in place that have been around for years? Great, but we still had a tail strike every 29 days last year, so those programs aren't working. Again, everyone can argue back and forth about what 'might' work, and what the problem 'might' be, but in the meantime, inaction can and will lead to no action for anyone with a wingsuit. Before the insurance company launched a warning shot across our bow, there was one camp saying we needed more structure, more training, and the USPA in order to move forward, and another camp that felt the status quo was fine, and at that time, that was OK. There was no impending problems or restrictions on the horizon, there were simply possible problems and those were all being cited by the pro-USPA crowd (big surprise). Things have changed significantly. Now the term 'do or die' has come to play, and I don't mean die as in the end of a life, I mean die as in the end of wingsuiting in the US. The tactic now should be to use anything and everything we can think of in order to end the problem and keep the insurance company happy. Like it or not, wingsuiting is not 'too big to fail', so you can either bicker back and forth about what 'should' work, and what 'should' be done, just do it all and hope that it's enough. Short of that, kudos for making the 100 way happen, as that might be the last wingsuit record set in this country. In a throwback to the DZ.com days of yore, that record got in 'before the lock'.

I would try rolling the tail less, and maybe working with slider placement (more toward the rear, but always on the stops), but like you said, one change at a time. Avoid flaking the nose in the open position, that's asking for too quick of an opening. Overall, I don't think much will change. Put another 20 jumps on it and see what you think. If you're still not happy, have an more experienced jumper (ask around the DZ as to who) take it up and see what they think about the openings. If they seem to think it's fine and you still don't like it, call the factory and ask them about a smaller slider and exactly what size to use (and then only try that size). I think in the end you'll learn to like your openings. Soft openings are nothing to complain about, and the alternative is much worse (hard openings). Though our hop 'n' pops from the Cessna are at 3500... freaks me right out I tell ya*** Keep in mind that when you leave the plane, your descent rate is low, so if you pull after a few seconds, your overall altitude loss will only be a couple hundred feet. So your PC will be out by 3200ft, and even then you're not going to be falling as fast so you'll use up less altitude evern if your opening takes the same amount of time.

Your above remarks are clearly sarcastic, but let's think about the situation - you're jumping a demo canopy on which you have had one good and one bad opening, and which you have heard is a handful and needs careful attention not to spin up. With this in mind your desicion is to exit with a tandem and pull in close proximity to them, as opposed to simply waiting 6 or 8 seconds in the door and adding some horizontal seperation between you and them. You claim that you pulled soon after exit, couldn't you bypass the brief freefall with the tandem to build in an extra layer of safety? Given the nature of your jump, jumping a demo that doesn't open well and a short freefall, I don't think it was a wise choice to exit with the tandem and pull in place next to them. You admit to kicking out of line twists for 2000ft on a previous jump, what if there had been a repeat of that? Others mentioned a premature opening from the tandem, and this can happen for several reasons. Passengers have been known to yank a drouge release mid-freefall, TIs have been known to pull high if there is a problem with the passenger in freefall, and gear has been known to malfunction. It was a bad call on your part. Get over it, learn something, and make better choices in the future.

This is a fundamentally bad choice, and advertising the results of this choice as being 'not bad at all' isn't a great idea either. If you want to practice cross or down wind landings, that's fine, but you do so by planning it ahead of time, consulting with an instructor and the other jumpers on the load to insure that there are no traffic issues. If you need to pull high to land last, or get out on a low pass to give you a clear LZ, so be it. "Barely' making the LZ means that you did not fly a landing pattern, and missed the oppotunity to select an alternate that you could reach with altitude to fly a landing pattern. The hazzards of not flying a pattern to yourself are obvious, you could end up making a low turn, but the other issue is that you entered the LZ from an odd direction and then landed in that same direction, against what other jumpers (who flew a pattern) would have done. Making a flight plan before each jump, to include a landing pattern, pattern altitudes and touchdown area is essential. Furthermore, once under canopy you need to make a determination if you can make it back to the DZ or not, and if there is a question, you need to find an alternate LZ. Keep in mind that making is back includes making it back by pattern entry altitude, so you can follow your flight plan. If you cannot, locate an alternate, and move you pattern to that location.

I'll second that the title of this thread is incorrect and misleading. The gist of the email is that the insurance company does support the idea of standardized training in an effort to stem the problem with tail strikes, but that they do not have an opinion as to who administers said training. No where does he state an opposition to the USPA being the source, just that he does not see it as a requirement that they are involved to satisfy the insurance company. The truth of the matter is that the insurance company doesn't care about required training at all, aside from the effect it will (might) have on reducing tail strikes. If there was a way to end tail strikes with no increased training requirement, like a static line that would hold your wings shut until you were 'x' feet from the plane, the insurance company would be happy with that. All they want is a solution, and they don't care where it comes from or what form it takes, so while this doesn't make the USPA a requirement, it also doesn't take them off the table all together. I did think this was a neat misconception - We all know that fun jumpers are not a 'profit center' for DZs, and when you distill that down to wingsuit jumpers, you can see that it's a 'blip' on the economic radar of a DZ. Take your average load on any given day, and think about how many wingsuiters there are on that load, maybe 1 or 2? How many loads fly with no wingsuiters? On loads with wingsuiters, how many of them left non-wingsuiting jumpers on the ground because the load was full, meaning that if the wingsuiters were not there, those slots would be full with paying jumpers anyway? The point is that there is very little incentive for DZOs to allow wingsuiters at their DZ. Sure, Perris hosted 100 ways the other week, but without a couple dozen DZs out there willing to allow 1 or 2 wingsuiters per load, where the flyers could build their skills and experience, those 100 ways would have never happened. So short of a handful of boogies or big ways, the wingsuit community has no financial clout with DZOs, and shouldn't expect to be insulated if the insurance company balks and wants to raise rates or pull coverage. I've said it before, and it's the same thing Jeff said, whatever the method, something needs to be done ASAP to take of this situation. One of the problems is that is seems that there is no problem until the next tail strike happens. We could all spend the next weekend wingsuiting with no restrictions as long as there is no tail strike. It's like jumping with a worn out line set, it's a risk, but as long as no lines break, everything will be just fine and you can jump as normal. Once a line breaks, however, the problem you had all along rears it's ugly head, and now you have a 'real' problem.

Exactly which models/sizes still come with packing tabs?

Game over, we have a winner. Everything he's doing seems to revolve around 'pop culture' and 'social media'. His interests and goals are so scattered, that the only thread connecting them is that he thinks they're just boxes to check off on hos website (and youtube channel, and twitter account, and facebook, and whatever other gay shit he's into). What seems to be missing is the passion. The laser-like focus that you see in anyone who is destined for success in any one area. He states 'one' of his goals is to BASE jump off the Eiger, and also wingsuit BASE, so I can only imagine that he wants to combine the two. Right there is where the guy is missing the point, and most likely because it's outside somewhere, and he's inside hosting a new 'webisode' of his crappy youtube show. Jeb Corliss, this and Jeb Corliss that. Great example, Jeb was skydiving and BASE jumping long before there were GoPros and youtube, and long before anyone gave two shits about what he was doing, with the notable exception of Jeb. He was out there teaching himself, learning, and driving to be better than he was the day before for himself, and if the fame and fortune never came, he would still be out there doing the same things he's doing now (maybe with less international travel as there would be less sponsor dollars, but you get the point). Just like the VAST majority of us here, who are on the DZ every chance we get, ready to spend every dime we can, and every ounce of energy we have to better outselves with no fame, reward, recognition, or even an honorable mention. This dickwad is putting the cart waaaay before the horse, and in this case there stands a good chance that the horse is going to kick the shit out of the cart, and the trample this kid into the dirt. He says he reads DZ.com, I hope he reads this and then let's his mom read it, so she knows the games that he's playing and the consequences that can result. What a tool.

Take this observation constructively, but all you have identified is a problem that you have, as a new licensed jumper at that one DZ. The reason the more experienced jumpers are skeptical is that they don't have the same problem, and in turn are not looking for a solution. If you jumped at another location, you might find that their wind indicator might be clearer to you, and then you would no longer have a problem. Truth is, if you really have a problem, set up some flags or a windblade to supplement the wind sock at your current DZ, and you have a fool-proof solution for very little money (under $100). Alternatively, you could look into a larger or brighter colored windsock. They usually start off neon orange, but that will fade over time, so you might find that a 'fresh' one will be easier to spot.

Think again. I'm a Pro packer, and have packed every one of my own jumps plus another 1000+ pack jobs for others, and I have never had or packed a cutaway. It's the packer, not the type of pack job that makes the difference. Flat pack, roll pack, pro pack, or psycho pack have all been used successfully for countless numbers of jumps, if done properly they are all reliable pack jobs. Proper gear maintenance and assembly is the other factor in preventing malfunctions. Keep gear in-spec and using it as it was designed will go a long way towards preventing malfunctions.

On the one hand, there's a father's pride in his son. On the other hand, there's out-and-out blatant exaggeration. I'm not exactly sure how far away the horizon is, but....

Dress for sucess, and you can do them anytime you want. I guess when it get's 'really' cold, you won't want to, but a sweatshirt and a pair of gloves can goa long way. I know a guy who takes a pair of big puffy winter gloves with him tucked into his jumpsuit. You can't 'jump' with them because you couldn't feel your handles, but he puts them on after opening and making sure he has a good canopy. Another tip, you don't need to hold your toggles the whole time. Keeping your arms up is tiring, and will drain the blood from your hands/arms. Point your canopy in the right direction, then release your toggles and let your arms hang at your sides. Watch your location, and make turns as needed, but you can do them with a rear riser or by just grabbing the outside of the toggle (no need to get your hand in there every time). If your hands are still chilly, tuck them inbetween your rig and you lower back, it's warm back there and out of the wind. Make sure you get back in your toggles once you get down to 3k or so, to fly the rest of the descent in a 'normal' fashion.

As a dealer, you should have that sort of outstanding servive. As a dealer, it's also your job to take customer calls with regards to orders/changes/complaints/concerns/etc, and either handle them yourself, or get the problem distilled down to it's core, and call the factory yourself to take of the problem quickly, efficiently, and on a 'professional' level, with one Wings expert talking to another. I don't recall an option on the Wings order form where you get a free education on the in's and out's of ordering and building a rig. The jumper in question here seems to think he is due that, and wants to blame the manufacturer for not providing something they never promised in the first place.

And that's where you're wrong. Your dealer is the one you should be directing all of your questions and concerns to, that's their purpose in the transaction. Ask yourself this, how many rigs would you guess your DZO currently has on order (for customers)? At least one (yours) and maybe a handful more, let's say 5 in total. So if everyone of those customers has a question, he has to take 5 calls to solve all the problems. How many rigs do you think Sunrise currently has orders for? Let's just guess 75 to 100 at any one time. What would happen if they all called the factory with questions? When would the rigs get built? This is why dealers exist, and factories sell them stuff at a discount, they're the 'experts' who are there to represent and market their products to customers in the field. If you buy a new car, and have a problem with it, where do you go? Back to the dealer. You don't call Ford HQ in Detroit, you work with the dealer who takes care of the problem.

In the case of a bigway, you don't need to be in a rush to fly because the base is low and getting away from you. There's no penalty to tucking up out of the door and even holding that tuck for a few seconds. If the whole point is to get the 4-way together fast, the first two out of the door want to fall as slow as possible, with the last two doing the opposite, and then meeting in the middle ASAP. It's how a no-show no-grip exit works. Floaters out first to float, sinkers out last to sink.

Seems like an invitation to a tail strike. According to the rules, the jumpers will be behind a line in the plane, and the clock starts when the first jumper crosses the line. So now you have 4 jumpers, still in the plane, with the clock running. Does rushing exits seem like a good idea with the current tail strike 'problem' going on? The better solution is to start the clock when the last jumper leaves the door, not the first. In this way, there's no rush to the exits. A GoPro ahead of the door isn't a bad idea either, and you could disqualify any team who has a jumper that exits without their wings closed. In 'theory' it's a fun idea, but given the problem with tailstrikes, it needs some work.

Skydive the Farm in Georgia. $1999 for the A license package including a canopy control course. See details here - http://www.skydivethefarm.com/prices/ Before you consider Lodi, research the DZ, the DZO Bill Dause, and the maintenance of their aircraft and what the FAA has to say about it (here's a hint - it's not good).

Go to SoCal for sure. Fly into LA, San Diego, or Ontario, and then jump at Perris and Elsinore. Both DZs are great, with tons of people and multiple turbines flying on a daily basis, and they are literally 20 min apart. On top of it all, Perris has a wind tunnel in the parking lot. Perris has the IHOP (international house of parachutists) which is a bunk house on the DZ. They also have a great shower house and restaurant. Aside from that, I'm sure there are good hotels somewhere near there, maybe one of the locals can chime in with ideas for places to stay. Maybe you'll get lucky and a local jumper can rent you room for a week so you can stay in a real house.

Pin protection and loop length are not related. Take a rig with a tight closing loop, and open the pin cover flap. Even with a tight loop, it does not take that much force to pull the pin from the loop. When you look at in terms of the force a jumper could apply while moving around for a climbout, or during an actual exit, even a properly adjusted loop is nowhere near tight enough to hold the pin fast. The purpose of the loop is not to hold the pin against all comers, it's to hold it secure enough that it will hold tight against the flapping of some loose bridle (if some should get free) and help to prevent a horseshoe, but aside from that, the loop's purpose is to allow the pin to come out. So when you jam your rig into the door frame, or anything really, hard enough to open your pin cover flap, you run the risk of dislodging the pin from even the tightest of closing loops.

Not neccesarily. If you saw the way he rotated to get in the door, he swung his rig toward the edge of the door, not toward the center. Always swing your rig toward the center, with your body facing the door frame. Then he was too far back in the door with his rig right against the frame. It doesn't look like there was contact while standing there, but on the exit he does move rearward as he leaves, and I'm willing to bet the pin was dislodged at that time. The proper move would have been to keep your rig clear of the door frame, and exit outwards, not rearwards. Even with a correct length closing loop, you can dislodge your pin with the right (wrong) move, or combination of moves.

Just a couple quick thoughts - making a 'big' downsize, like from a 288 to a 240 isn't so bad when your WL is going from ultra-low on the 288 to super-low on the 240. When you look at the change from a 240 to a 190, you're going from a super-low WL on the 240, to almost 1 to 1 on the 190, and that's closer to 'average' for a new jumper, and something you need to be more careful with. As previously mentioned, stepping down one size at a time is a good idea. You'll want to put a handful of jumps on each size to make sure that you're 'OK' on that size before going smaller. One or two jumps on a canopy does not show that you know how to fly it. All of the sizes mentioned sound like student canopies in rental rigs. The real person to ask this question is the person who chooses what rig you are given for your jumps. They know you and the gear better than anyone online, and they're the ones who can make the best choice for you.

Don't forget about the increased risks of driving in the snow- damage from other drivers, damamge from sliding into something yourself, damage from snow plows, damage from snow shovels, damage from ice scrapers, damage from chunks of snow/ice in the road etc. I feel 100% that winter time is tougher on cars than the summer. If you have a nice ride and you want it to stay nice, keep it off the roads in the winter. You'll avoid all the possible damage, and 4 or 5 months of milage and wear & tear. Not to mention you don't have to screw around with swapping tires/wheels between summer/winter.