davelepka

You'll lose less money if you look into used canopies. They cost less and are easier to pack, and have already taken the big depreciation hit going from 'new' to 'used'. The AAD, on the other hand, you should look into buynig new. It's hard to find a good deal on a used AAD, and that's because they sell in a minute and typically to someone the jumper knows. Eveyone and their brother is looking for a cheap (used) AAD. If you have the money, buy used canopies and a new AAD, with the benefit being that the AAD can be swapped into your next rig. Of all the gear you'll buy, that's one that will work in any rig you choose down the line.

Starting point? Did you see Bill's letter from a decade ago and my story from 8 years ago? The BOD has a long way to go, and a lot of actual progress to be made before I'm willing to change my tune. Starting points are all well and good, and would have been noteworthy 7, 6, or even 5 years ago. At this point I'll need more that 'getting started' before I'm willing to accept that the BOD is meeting it's responsibilities and honoring the commitment they made to the membership when they took the job. What we need (and have needed for many, many years) is for the USPA to set the standard and make canopy selection and education an important part of the skydiving culture. They have the power to do so, and this is what's required to change the tide and get things moving in the right direction. I'll come back to the time issue, but let's say the BOD took action 10 years ago. Let's also say that it took three years to get all the ducks in a row, and implement required canopy control courses and some sort of WL regs for jumpers as they advance through the licenses. What that would mean is that every jumper who earned a license in the last 7 years would have taken a canopy control course. Every jumper who has less than 7 years in the sport would only know skydiving with a WL reg in place, and required canopy control courses that coincide with a licesne. Think of the number of jumpers that would have been effected if the BOD had acted responsibly. All that opportunity has been lost, and that loss isn't easliy forgetten.

When you say it that way, it makes it sound like you don't have 500 jumps yet, is that the case? Even if you're right at 500 jumps, that's still a very low number for an x-fire or Katana loaded at 1.8, that would be something more appropriate for a jumper with 800 or 1000 jumps. If you are in the (or below) 500 jump range, those canopies, that WL, skilpping sizes all while not being a fan of 'running' and having back problems are all that much worse. You're playing a dangerous game that's not likely to end well.

Send a PM to likestojump on this site. He sells used gear and ships internationally everyday, typically going much further than Canada. If he can't help you, Chutingstar offers used gear brokering at no cost (I think). They're in the US, and the seller ships the gear to them and you send them the money. You do have to pay for them to inspect the gear, but you need a pre-purchase inspection anyway. Provided it passes, they will ship you the gear and send the seller the money. Also, keep in mind that sometimes after gear sells, people will stop replying to emails for the gear. It would be nice if everyone would send you a 'gear sold' message. but not everyone is that considerate. Just keep sending emails, and something will pan out. Finally, stop looking for a complete rig. Your chances of finding a container with a harness that fits you, the right main and the right reserve, all within your budget is fairly low. Buy them all separately, and just put them together.

Ideally, it would be more of a 'program', to include Wl, canopy type by jump number, and have canopy control classes required in order to earn a higher license, like an intermediate class required to get a 'B', an advanced class required for a 'C', and an expert class for the 'D'. The idea is to both inform and guide jumpers on their path to becoming good canopy pilots who know and understand the elements of good airmanship, and how to effectively work with the range of environmental factors out there. The other thing it does is bestow a level of importance on the whole thing that's not currently present. Yes, some jumpers give canopy piloting it's due respect, but it's easy for a jumper to say they have no interest in swooping, and just want to do RW, and they don't need to really pay canopy control much attention. When you have an ongoing and required program surroudning it, it gives it the importance in the community that it's deserves. No offence, but for all I care we could give every jumper who is beyond the 'program' at the time it's implemented a 'free pass', to just go about their merry way forever. No restrictions, no classes required ever, you can jump whatever you want and get any license without taking a canopy control class. It's a drop in the bucket, and not even worth worrying about. In time, you'll all 'grow up' and either quit the sport or just make enough jumps that you'll be beyond the 'program' anyway. If the only hurdle is some unhappy jumpers currently in the 200 to 500 jump range, give them whatever they want to make them happy, and let's focus on everyone esle. Of course, this is all just 'pie in the sky' talk, as nothing of the sort will ever actaully come to being.

Here's the thing about any of the proposals that have been floating around, they're all progressive in that the more jumps you make, the less restrictions you'll have. So if we take every jumper who is beyond the chart on the day it was implemented, and just wrote them off, there would still be a significant number of existing jumpers who would be in line with the new regs, or would fall in line (no pun intended) as their jump numbers came up. Beyond that, in 3 or 4 years, between all the jumpers who bring their jump numbers up, all the jumpers who quit, and all the jumpers who take up the sport during that time, the majority of effected jumpers would be 'in line' with the program. It's not a perfect solution, and there will be some 'teething problems' on the outset, but if you look just down the road slightly, you can see where it would just become common place, and generally accepted. I'll make the old comparison to pull altitudes. It used to be 'anything goes' (like canopy selection is now), and then they made a BSR with some hard numbers. Sure there were some unhappy jumpers, and some that thumbed their nose at the BSR and still pulled low, but 99.99% of them either eventaully just gave in or gave up jumping. Everyone esle just started pulling higher, and the vast majority of jumpers today have never known skydiving without a pull altitude BSR, and it's rarely questioned or intentionally broken. How is canopy selection any different?

Thanks for bringing this back, let's look at it- Didn't happen Didn't happen, but without the first things, it's kind of irrelevant Does not exist Wonderful sentiment, too bad it seems they didn't share it. Remember when I said that I personally contacted the chair of the safety and training comittee? I made many of the same points, along with being open to other ideas/avenues, and offered to help in any way possible. That was probably about 8 years ago. So your letter was 10 years ago, and my contact was 8 years ago, and none of the ideas put forth have become a reality. That's 8 and 10 years Bill. Not 3 months until the next meeting, not a year until after the next election, it's something in the neighborhood of a decade. An entire war was begun, fought and ended in that time Bill. The US went to war, did it's business, and the troops are on their way home in less time. Not in less time than it took the BOD to act, less time then has passed since you and I, long time dues-paying members, spoke for common sense and the good of the sport, and got nowhere. I applaud your efforts to side with the BOD to some extent, and the truth is I don't believe that their an 'axis of evil', but how do you convene and reconvene, year in and year out for a decade without making any progress in this area? Again, as one of the few areas we have hard numbers to look to, I don't think I'm speaking out of turn when I say 'no' progress. There's no WL BSR or chart to follow. There is no training requirement beyond jump 25 of any kind. There is no 'official' canopy control course designed, built and administered by the USPA. There is no USPA rating or training provided to instructors in the area of canopy control. Nothing, Bill. Not a thing, and I don't feel the least but bad about pointing it out. They should be ashamed to spend our money to conduct dozens of BOD meetings over the last decade, and not touch this issue in any meaningful way. I'll admit that I don't have the time to donate toward being on the BOD, but the simple fact is that the members of the BOD volunteered for that position, all of them knowing full well what was expected of them. They made the choice to take on the responsibility of 'manning the ship' and I expect them to fullfill it. Thus far, it seems to me they have failed.

Indded. Your point is as valid as mine. You're suggesting the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and I'm suggesting the being the largest slice of the pie chart should be enough of a 'squeak'. FYI, I did my share of squeaking a few years back. I reached out the chair of the safety and training comittee, and expressed my concerns and offered to assist in any possible getting some sort of solution in place. I recieved what amounted to a 'form letter' in response, which concluded in a promise to get back with me in the near future. When that didn't happen, I initiated another contact, and was not replied in any way. I squeaked. The issue itself has been squeaking year in and year out for over a decade. Other countries have taken action and put programs (now long-standing) in place with great success. The BOD has yet to act in any signifacnt manner. It's not like they're made of gold besides this one issue, there's a host of areas where they have let down the membership, but this one, in my opinion, is the worst example.

Granted, but nobody had to lobby the BOD to get them to spend their time going over (again) the manusha of the competition manual, and I doubt it took all that much personal effort to lighten the USPA wallet to the tune of $10k for the 'demo team', but I'm supposed to be OK with the idea that I should bust my ass just to get the BOD to take action on what is clearly one of the biggest problems in the sport? Let's face it, short of the FAA taking over sport skydiving, open canopy incidents are the #1 problem facing skydiving today. Truth is, if there were less open canopy incidents, we would be that much further off the FAAs radar anyway, so really focusing on open canopy incidents takes care of two birds with one stone (I thought 'kill' was a poor word choice given the context). It should be issue #1, without any extra effort on the part of the membership. Of the few things we do have hard numbers on, open canopy incidents are far and above the biggest slice of the pie-chart, and have been for as long as I can remember.

Inaction of the BOD in the past? How about inaction of all the BODs in the past. It's not like this is limited to the current administration, it's been going on for years, and let's remember that the bulk of the BOD are long-standing members, so the fact that this has spanned multiple admistrations is a mark against them on two fronts, 1) that new members of the BOD failed to take action, and 2) that old members have taken no action year after year. Take a look at this thread I started in 2004, when this had been going on long enough for this to be an issue. When is this going to get some attention and resolution? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1383081;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

Long before wingsuits became a problem (or even a viable reality), canopies were the leading killer of skydivers. What's shaping up in that community? Who's the chair of what comittee to solve that problem? What experts have you called in to establish a canopy coach rating, or even just a canopy control course that any instructor could teach? I never claimed to be able to, or even concerned out the majority of problems. I don't think I'm speaking out of turn when I point out the lack of progress or attention to the deadliest, longest standing problem in the sport. It's a HUGE, dare I say MASSIVE oversight on the part of the BOD for many, many years, and through several administrations. There's no excuse for it, and the fact that so much time and attention has been focused on freefall based activites (both in student training and beyond) only adds insult to injury.

Oh yeah, between who? If the BOD would open their eyes, there would be no 'give and take', there would be a WL BSR, and a requirement to take an additional canopy control course for each license. This isn't a case of people trying to get an issue to pass a popular vote of the general public, this is essentailly a dictatorship, where the BOD does have the power to 'just do it', with or without anyone's approval. I'll point to that BS $10k 'loan' for the USPA demo team as proof of what I'm saying. Despite all this, there had been virtually zero action on this issue for over a decade. I can recall a poster that was printed, and a suggestion from the USPA for everyone to 'take a canopy control course', even though the USPA did not provide a courses or even a syllabus for someone else to teach a course. There was an interesting comment in the wingsuit forum from a poster who said a USPA RD was at his DZ asking around about a wingsuit coach rating. He wondered why they would be there as the wingsuit culture at that DZ was, in his own words, pitiful. My immedaite thought was why the BOD wasn't looking to the established expert wingsuiters we have in the community, the ones who work with first flight students every day, and have the most experience with wingsuits and wingsuit training. Of course the answer was that the BOD can't seem to pull it's head out of it's own ass and do something smart. Take the canopy control course issue. I'm willing to bet money that if anyone had called Scott Miller, Jimmy Tranter, Luigi Cani, Jim Slaton or Brian Germain 10 years ago, any one of them would have gladly helped to develop a 'standard' canopy control course that could have been folded into the licensing program. Instead, they kept themsevles locked in closed sessions, sure they were all experts in everything they needed to know, and came up with a poster. Brilliant. I'll quote one of my personal heros, Don Schwab, S&TA at my first DZ. About 2 or 3 years into the sport, I had a question about break-offs from freefly jumps (which was still very new at the time), and this is what my 'expert' S&TA said to me, "I have no idea, you're the freeflyer, not me. Truth is, if anyone esle asked me that question, I probably would have told them to go ask you". That summed it up for me. If you want the best results, get the best person for the job. Sometimes it's you, other times it's someone else, but one way you can always succeed is to make sure the best candidate is the one who gets the job. Give it up USPA. Call in the experts, and defer to their expertise.

Just a quick note on those certificates - they're generally 50% off list, not including options. What that means is that you can come darn close to mathing the coupon deal by just ordering through a dealer. None of them charge list price, and often also charge less for options. The point is that those coupons have very little 'value' from a cash standpoint. If you can get one for $50 or $100, you might save a few bucks, but it's not worth it to pay much more than that. About your gear, you can have a harness resized to fit you if you can find a container big enough to hold your canopies. You'll need the serial number from the rig, and a set of measurements off an order form for that type of rig, and then you can call the manufacturer to get a quote for a resize. It might be as much as $500, but if you can buy a container for $500 and then add the cost of the resize, you end up with a brand new, custom fit harness on your rig for $1000 total. Barring that, you might have to buy a new container, and fill it with used canopies.

No, my theory was that the TI made a mistake, and that mistake made it impossible for the video guy to deliver his product. The passenger recieved a jump, and like you said, sometimes things go wrong, but they did exit the aircraft and were delivered safely to the ground. The video, however, became an impossibility, and the cost should be refunded to the customer. Seeing that the video guys pay is included in that, and through no fault of his own that pay is being refunded to the customer, you could look to who is at fault. In this case it's the TI, so he should cover the video guy's pay for the jump. As others have stated, a complete rejump w/ video is the best option customer service-wise, but then that brings up a whole new host of problems. Who covers the three slots from the rejump? Now the video guy has to make two jumps, and only gets paid for one (again, through no fault of his own)? Is there time in the day or schedule to get both instructors to jump again? There's a ceratin degree of 'shit happens' in skydiving. In my solution, the customer pays for and gets a skydive (albeit somewhat modified) and also takes home a free video/stills of the plane ride, exit and landing. The video guy gets paid for doing his job, and the TI has to settle for a 'freebie' due to his mistake.

Is that all supposed to be the same color? What did it start off as, Royal Blue? If that's the topskin and it's next to the inside of the cells, there's clearly a problem. It looks closer to a faded Navy Blue than anything that started off as Royal. Given the type of damage, your location, and the time of year, I'd say you have a pretty good case for fraud. That's not a tear or broken seam that you could have caused, even with one jump. That's severe fading that would take a signigficant amount of time to develop, so unless you left it out in the sun for a couple weeks, there's no way you could have caused that damage. Beyond that, who out there in the great Northeast knows Kevin whats-his-face? Seems like a guy with enough jumps and time in the sport that he's got to have some friends, and some of them have to be on here on DZ.com. Anyone know where he jumps? If not a friend, anyone know him casually from the DZ? Let's start to circle the wagons and get this guy's attention. This clearly looks like a bad deal, and for the guy to just try and vanish on the buyer is downright shady.

Great advice. I do some business consulting, and one of the biggest mistake is when people spec equipment to start their business, they're always looking for bigger or higher capacity equipment than they need. They claim that they don't want to have to upgrade or buy new equipment down the line, but then they're faced with paying off the big machines. If you start off with smaller equipment (aka, less upfront investment), you have a chance to see how things will pan out. If it turns out that you're running the smaller machines to their absolute limits for 80 hours per week, guess what, you might need to upgrade. Guess what else? You've been making money off the smaller machine for 80 hour per week, and you have the money to upgrade.

You didn't choose your Odyessy based on market research and carefully considering the options, you got it because it was sitting in a closet, it would fit you and your canopies, and the owner gave you a great deal (and probably a payment plan). Try paying full price for a new rig, and then see what you buy. I bought VSE. On another note, more jump and dumps to come. After daylight savings we'll be doing some after work stuff during the week. There's another new Katana pilot who needs to get some swoop practice.

Just wondering, were you assigned to work with these jumpers? Was the work to include ground school and the jump itself? This is an area where the 'book' is a little incomplete. While the SIM seems to indicate that a coach is sufficient for a recurrency jump, both of those examples are close to 'retraining' and not just 'recurrency' and would not be a good place for a coach. As mentioned, both of those examples are ripe for a harness hold exit, and might require additional actions from the instructor beyond 'observe and report'. In many cases, a cheif instructor or DZO would step in and assign an AFFI to work with these jumpers, but when staff is short or people just go 'by the book', you could have a low time coach go up in either of those sceanarios, and that's not a good thing. 400 jumps 10 years ago just means you have a guy who thinks he knows how to jump, but hasn't been in the air for so long that his body doesn't know that. If the guy is over 50 years old, that's another red flag. One lesson to learn as a coach or instructor is when to decline a jump and let someone esle do it. It doesn't demonstrate a lacking in your air skills, it demonstrates a surplus of good judgement, and that's way more important than air skills.

Just a thought, but keep in mind that once you have a licesne, you're the same as every other license holder. So if you get yours in a week, and go to another DZ to jump, your license doesn't say 'A License #xxxxx, earned in a week'. You'll be treated the same as the jumper who spent 12 weeks earning their license, making one jump each weekend day, and the rest of the weekend at the DZ 'absorbing' the sport. Especially when you plan to get the license at one DZ, and then jump at another, again, these people have no idea as to the scope of your involvement, just that you have a license. If you earned it at the same DZ you were going to jump at, the staff would know you and know that you have a license, but that you're very 'new'. That's not to say that you can't tell people you've only been jumping for a week, or continue to study of your own accord beyond that level, but that's up to you. Let's say you only spend 9 months in any one place, that's plenty of time to get a license and a good foothold in the sport. Even if you took a month to earn the licesne, you still have a good hunk of time left to build some experience and round yourself off as a jumper on your 'home' ground. If you want to travel, there's something to be said for showing up at a DZ with a license, 50-100 jumps and your own gear. In that circumstance, you could make use of the non-stop lift capacity, and knock out 50 jumps in a week or ten days, and have a blast. As a student, you're not going to be doing more than 3 or 4 jumps per day, and you don't need a 'destination' DZ for that sort of pace.

Do you mean that the TI accidentally pulled a drouge release at the same time he deployed the drouge? So the drouge worked like a pilot chute and opened the main right away? If so, you refund the customer for the video, and provide them with the footage from in the plane, the exit, and the landing, all for free. The TI does not get paid, his pay goes to pay the video guy.

Just go with the bungee. It's not a 'static' area in that you need to have some independent movement of your legstraps, and the bungees allows for that. It's a simple mod that any rigger could sew up for you in about 15 min for a not very much money. Have them stich a small loop of binding tape to the binding tape along the legstrap pads, and then thread a length of bungee through the loops and tie it off. This way when the bungee starts to wear or fray, you can just cut it off and tie on a new one yourself.

Like Wendy said, sales tax is a state-by-state deal. So if you buy something from an online store that's based in the state you're shipping it to, you have to pay the sales tax for that state. If you're shipping it to another state, sometimes you can avoid paying the sales tax. Some states have caught on to this, and are now charging sales tax for online purchases from out of state. Those details aside, here's the good news - sales tax is typically fairly low, like 6% or 8%. The other good news is that it's all collected at the time of the purcahse, so if you order something online and there's no tax in the checkout procedure, then you're not going to be charged sales tax. My .02 cents, Walmart is probably going to be your best deal. Even if they charge you tax, the prices are generally the lowest. Of course there's still shipping to think about, and seeing as there's a Walmart in Z-hills, maybe just buy the stuff there the day you get there. You can avoid shipping costs, the DZ having to store the stuff until you arrive, and any possible mix-ups with your order. Also, if you're planning to leave the stuff at the DZ, maybe put up a sign the day you arrive with a list of all the stuff you'll be leaving to see if anyone wants it. Maybe trade it for a jump ticket or two?

Where do you live? What about local Dzs? What about the DZ you plan to jump at once you have a licesne? Any thought to keeping your business local? Once you factor in the time and cost of travel/lodging, you would have a nice budget for a local DZ to try and match. Even if they don't have a cheap package, the savings from not having to travel will make up for that. Also, doing it locally takes away the pressure to get it done in a week. Even if you say you're OK with 'almost' getting it done, we all know your goal is going to be a flight home with an A license in your pocket. One thought about keeping your business local is to support the DZ, but the other is to make contacts with the staff. If you work with instructors and coaches to get your license, they become a valuable resource for you as you continue to learn beyond the A license. I'm not saying that an instructor wouldn't help any new jumper who had questions, but you'll get a different/better/quicker response if you're one of their previous students. Just something to keep in mind. If you do want to travel, the Farm in GA on the east coast has a program, Skydive Chicago is a good one (in a couple months), and Perris and Eloy both have on-site wind tunnels but both locations will get oven-like in the peak of the summer.

In that case, he should avoid a 120 anything, and really not get involved in HP landings. Unless you're VERY good at it, it's almost impossible to avoid running, sliding across the ground, ot taking some lumps and bumps when you push a canopies performance toward the upper end.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that no certification means that a skydiving helmet is useless. They're tough, much tougher than your head, and will provide protection. Understand that a certified helmet, like a motorcycle helmet works on the basis of energy absorbtion. They have what is essentailly a 'styrofoam' liner that is designed to crush as your head hits the inside of it. This crushing is what allows your head (and brain) to slow down more gradually than an 'impact'. For this reason, those helmets are 'one shot' deals, so once you have an impact and crush the liner, the helmet is junk. Likewise, if the helmet gets too old, the liner begins to break down, and the helmet is useless. The shell, on the other hand, of a certified helmet is simialar to that of a skydiving helmet. It will protect you up to a point. Once you get to the point that the EPS (foam) liner is going to make the difference between a helmet being 'good enough' or not, you're going to have some huge problems. Not really. If you have a high speed stall while swooping, you're going to land on your feet/ass, and crush your lower body. Keep in mind that the majority of impacts are going to be from an upright position, hence the number of lower body injuries in skydiving. You're upright (ish) and you hit the ground. Your head is the last thing to make contact.