Scrumpot

Love the student jumpsuit! Standard issue for you there? (read: drooling jealousy exposed) coitus non circum - Moab Stone

You are correct, sir!

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Was your pilot-chute collapsed or not when you recovered your cut-away main in this condition? Locking-stows (rubber-bands) in-tact or broken? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I'm with Jan - Check that your bag-stop assembly is in place properly. If it is a rapide that has come loose, and now allows the bag to move up/down the inside bridal attachment lanyard(s) - when your PC is getting to the point of bag to line-stretch, if the bag is being allowed to move down the INSIDE length of lanyard (bridal attachment point to the top of the canopy) - that could explain the canopy having a "difficult time getting out of the bag", or the bag instead staying in place over the canopy. If you don't know what is being referred to (and I appreciate I also personally do not explain things necessarily technically all that accurately either ) - then have your rigger look at it now, while it is in his (her) possession. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Actually for the record - I have said that. I think that the clear delineation between the 2, and establishing the full understanding in advance of that happening (on both the "students" and the coaches part) THEN DOING IT - i.e. plan the dive, DIVE THE PLAN ...is critical. And, crucial to also avoiding any (roles/actual performance expectation) potential in-air confusion. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Right. And Jen's initial post, I think, was put up specifically to illustrate the challenges, of when one is also an AFF-I, effectively "taking OFF the AFF-I hat", and restricting oneself in-air, during a coaching jump, to acting strictly in the role of a coach. I think her post also had great value to us to look at, and consider in that vein/light and illustration. I'm sure she had absolutely no intent on it becoming "dissected" so vociferously since, although she has indeed been gracious in her follow-up(s) to it, and further enhancing others consideration of it (and the subject matter over all). However, I cannot help but to now feel somewhat guilty for (being party to) any, clearly now getting to be, well "over-dissection" and supposition resulting of her otherwise clearly valuable "real life" anecdote, example, and provided perspective. Just for the record. I feel the roles are clear, and should be clearly separated. However difficult that may be to actually perform when "in the heat of battle" situation. In other words, when doing an AFF jump - exercising there, AFF procedures. When doing a Coaching jump, exercising there, strictly Coaching prescribed procedures. Someone also mentioned I think somewhere, that following these (I think again - clearly defined) procedures and not deviating from them, might also become your only protection from potential liability, and/or at the very least, being called to task as to explaining more clearly why you deviated from them. It's a TOUGH job, with very real responsibilities and accountability. And anyone who approaches it (either AFF or Coaching) lightly or tritely could be setting themselves up for a very rude awakening. Jen's (Perigrinrose) posts and perspective, based upon her real life experience she has been willing to share (THANK YOU JEN - FOR THE RECORD) have provided great added value to this conversation, and as with others (and all the other added perspectives to consider) - I appreciate 'em! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I do not see how closing loop tightness, can have any affect or bearing, let alone have direct correlation in of itself to creating a bag lock. But maybe someone else can? You are thinking that either the PC being temporarily halted, or slowed (what I called "stuttering" before) as a result of a "too tight" closing loop, could be a possible cause? - Or that it caused the collapsible PC to collapse at pin-snatch, rather than bag opening/canopy extraction? I don't think that would occur/result either - so looking at the closing loop change as being causal to this, I think - is a red herring. Is your collapsible PC kill-line or bungee? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Now though, with my above post being said, and stipulated... ...I'm still not so sure your contention (that turning & burning would not have been effective in this case) is entirely correct; and think is still worth a little deeper, and further consideration / re- reflection. Okay - Fair enough. Clearly neither I, nor any of "us" (outside now looking in) were there. I get that. Now, I've had to sometimes even reconsider myself however, the other side of that very same coin. - What I mean by that, is your "familiarity" with the subject jumper maybe even working against you. Meaning - that still maybe ...just maybe still - the SOP procedure just may have worked / been appropriate / been effective? You "pre-supposed" (in a way), so you ended up putting you both in that (self-fulfilling prophecy) situation? Sometimes it is even better to have a completely "un-tainted" unfamiliar coach/instructor with the student in this situation - and then "magically", the SOP procedure actually works! ...I've seen that happen, 1st hand Earlier you posted: I have to presume he was at least "looking in your direction"? - Otherwise, why would you even bother giving signals? Now, yes - "looking", and actually REGISTERING are indeed entirely different things. I do not contend with you on that. However, it is actually PRECISELY why then (when they are not registering) - the "YOU waive, turn / track / deploy" - is specifically designed. You did not turn/track yourself: I disagree (but I could be wrong), as I have yet to see a Cat-G coaching student who can (or even for that matter really should) be able to even come close to catch up to me (to put themselves BACK into that proximity where this could be a legitimate concern) - nor should be able to really ANY coach - for that to be an issue. Again, "the procedure" is designed to specifically AVOID / preclude such exposure. Yup - again, all this is clearly "Monday morning quarterbacking", but I still contend that instead, executing the proper established procedure - for the most part (was this single jump possibly the/an exception? - I don't know - but I still think maybe it wasn't) - is probably best. Hopefully, on at least still this much, we agree. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

We agree! So Jen - THANK YOU for "playing" / participating / being willing to SHARE!!

Okay - I missed the part about him (not?) looking at you. I saw that you've stated he was "glazed" or otherwise (clearly) unaware. So you do not think that you 'showing him your feet' would have "woken him up"? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

He was back on his belly again & looking at you at 4,500 Jen - you said so yourself. You began to then flash him signs and signals. Further down to 3,500. My contention is, that if you instead gave one good affirmative/solid/assertive waive, turned, tracked - BURNED and deployed ...he would not have then continued all the way down to 2,300. And THAT is the prescribed procedure, which also should have been adhered to, IMO. Again - not trying to be either disparaging or adversarial - just trying to take advantage of the valuable OPPORTUNITY you have presented us, to deeper evaluate, consider - and yes, because I think it is in this case appropriate to do so: "Monday morning QB" even, just a bit. You are absolutely right that the Cat-G dive flow states that normal diveflow calls for the coach to remain in place to observe the students track. However - (Coaches Rating Course IRM Section 8, Para E {7}): "The Coach observes the student execute the planned breakoff without signal (from coach) - UNLESS NECESSARY, and track. IOW - if/when (as in this case) the student (for whatever reason) fails to recognize his planned/assigned break-off track altitude himself - your "job" then becomes CLEAR... ...and that is that then YOU DO IT! It shows him (her) - it "wakes them up", and it is (or should be) very clearly defined (and pre-planned) that if/when they see you do that - they then DEPLOY IMMEDIATELY. That procedure has been tried, true, and PROVEN TO BE EFFECTIVE (sometimes, sadly - even) IN BLOOD. I see no reason (even in your case illustration given) to have deviated from it. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

All depends upon what Drop Zone(s) you frequent. But then again, with your location being so far out in the ocean there, I suppose that's gotta be pretty tough on you too! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Wow. I do not know about this. ...Cloud TOP altitudes, can vary much more greatly and wider than cloud base altitudes, don't you think John? They can also dissipate much quicker too. Meaning, that those cloud tops you gaged at being say 4,000 during your climb up to jumprun - could be entirely different (read: surprisingly much lower) than you expected on your way back down, - no? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Video, or it didn't happen! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Which movie was it again now? ...The one with Wesley Snipes - "Dropzone" maybe, I think? ...I can see it now... "GIFT-WRAP"!! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Do you mean "container lock"/PC in tow? Otherwise, I cannot correlate how having a tight closing loop would affect/create/cause a bag-lock at all. ...??? Your malfunction type description here (either that, or the piece of gear you are referring to causing it) is confusing. EDIT TO ADD: Just re-read. Apparently, you are either suspecting or trying to correlate IF the closing loop were too tight, it "stuttering" the launching PC at "bridal-stretch", and therein collapsing the PC which it wouldn't, and/or slowing the otherwise normal/expected "snatch force" for the bag to be stripped from the canopy? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

+1. Then - still, hang around the DZ/stay overnight/do the bonfire/social aspects of an entire weekend as well. Also - Does your DZ rent you the gear strictly "by the jump", or, is it possible for you/them to provide a flat, per-day package? Then - how about if YOU are packing it, rather than DZ packers (often, gear rental fees INCLUDE the re-pack) - negotiating a gear rental fee on a per-day, rather than per-jump, and with you yourself repacking it between jumps can also make a meaningful financial consideration difference to you as well. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Right. Now, remember your training that you received, during your (Coach's in this case) rating course, for what to do when the STUDENT FAILS to recognize his break-off altitude and does NOT waive-off (and subsequently begin his/her track) on their own, when they are supposed to? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Your "mistake" here, in this case - as a coach (and jumping in the role of a coach, in a coach jump) was even "being there" with/in proximity to him, BELOW his assigned break/track altitude. Then, at 5,500 all he should have seen from (and of) you is the bottoms of your feet... tracking distinctively, definitively and purposefully AWAY FROM HIM! Let alone, further... this signal, or that" ---Should have been your feet fading even FURTHER and FASTER into the distance! You're STILL there? - - - See where this is going (went)? Not being disparaging. Just maybe emphasizing/illustrating a little more is all. Your post gives great illustrative and anecdotal value as to precisely WHY the roles are what they are, and are so clearly defined, and I think you would agree - (and I think you yourself are saying): be adhered to. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Freeze at 21 sec., then advance by frame. You will then see the OP's canopy in straight/level flight nearly directly below the spiraling one. I'll agree that yup - absolutely, that was indeed, quite "close enough"! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Lat time I heard it uttered, it was at Perris. ....And, by a Perris local. - Just sayin' coitus non circum - Moab Stone

What - exactly - do you mean by "practice"? All you need is to catch your thumb in that d-handle one time inadvertently too... and: OOPS! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Like this? Couple shots from an AFF Jump I was a part of, from a couple o seasons ago... coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Not taking a position as to whether it is necessarily good or bad - but just observationally, I regularly/routinely see (and even jump with - in my case when instructing AFF) videographers who are quite skilled, and extremely capable in both their craft (including their safety/awareness) and performance in flying video - without holding any such actual instructional ratings, themselves. coitus non circum - Moab Stone