Scrumpot

And here's the thing... Those WILL get to 200 jumps (or whatever #, for whatever discipline you are using) soon / "quick" enough. I really don't see WHAT THE BIG DEAL (i.e. RUSH/HURRY) IS. Seriously. Nobody is holding any of these "mad skillz" set back. I mean, what's the deal? Gotta hurry up and get that camera (or wingsuit, or swoop, or whatever) on RIGHT NOW no matter what?? - Gotta hurry up before you get to jump #199 right - - - after all, you may even just have flat out QUIT and moved on by then. Right? This sh** gets old otherwise, right - after (or any longer than) jump #100 easily. 150 at the latest. Better get ALL OF IT out that you can NOW - before you're ready to just hang it up and move on anyway. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

The problem with using the driving analogy / comparison is total net exposure time to the element. So many MORE people regularly and routinely drive (or even just ride in cars), and your total life net time exposure to it is so much more / longer that there really is no DIRECT correlation / comparison. In comparison, even if you are a regular/routine skydiver, your RELATIVE net exposure time to the element is so much LESS - that if you do an accurate "comparison" (correlation between the 2 activities) - and accurately correlate the active participant(s) #'s, then skydiving - using that comparison/correlation is clearly MUCH MORE DANGEROUS, period. As John says - Sorry to burst your bubble on that one, mate. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I can vouch for this 1st-hand guys. NOT "FAR FETCHED" BY ANY STRETCH AT ALL! Please - please... as is being advised. PLEASE - Reconsider the tether! It can cause you more problems EASILY - than clearly, you have even considered. BS, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

BILL BOOTH ON MAGNETIC RISER COVERS coitus non circum - Moab Stone

And there we have it. ...PeteJones dispensing salient pre-posting (good) advice. I don't know about all of you, but my world here at least, just went all fricken "catty-wumpus"! Fo-Sho. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Bev "hot-bod" suit. - +1 to Matt's suggestion. Edit to add: And Laura's suggestion now as well. Sorry didn't read all the way down the 1st time before hitting "reply". There ya go - my .02 on the other half of the Original Post equation after all! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Okay, fine. If we accept that statement on its very surface, and its own merits ...then, ...why bother / for what possible conceivable good purpose is there, to even add a wingsuit to a STUDENT tandem at all, in the 1st place? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

And the first time you are (as in my 1st hand experience/witnessed case - luckily only nearly) TAKEN OUT by just such a person, who was only using it "to log his own jump" - (supposedly) "didn't care about the quality" of the video, was ONLY for his strictly 1st person, POV "logging" - you will change your newby tune too. Please. Sheesh. NOBODY IS TRYING TO HOLD YOU (or anyone) BACK! ALL WE ARE SAYING IS (please. ...please, please, please, please, *PLEASE*) - JUST GET THE MOST VERY BASIC (basics!) EXPERIENCE IN PLACE AND UNDER YOUR BELTS 1st. Really - that's all. Yes - in some cases, like mine (ours) as illustrated above sake, but really and truly for YOURS (and yes, your own "good") as well. "Whenever you feel like it", no matter what - is just such an asinine, and so much of a completely selfish statement (all rules and reccomendation #'s debates even aside) - that I would also absolutely refuse to jump, or even have on my jumps anyone making any such statement - if they stated that in my presence on the DZ. REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER THEIR JUMP #'s EXPERIENCE. If they truly meant that. FWIW. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Hi Pat! ...The idea of them watching and assessing as to whether he cleanly pitched within 3 seconds, was not to get him to/put him at 3,500 ft. Rather, it was to "simulate" that he successfully deployed "in time" (as if at 3,500). I just happen to know a few DZ's that take this position/philosophy. They feel that for the 1st time a student is actually exiting the plane to "simulate an emergency" - that somehow, this is "safer". So they will sign off on their "low-pass / hop-n-pops" regardless, at 4.5, 5, or even 5.5! "Whatever they get" (and is most convenient for the pilot/his pattern, I suppose)... ... Not defending it, as I too agree with you/John. The card says 3,500 ft. Friggen-A DO IT AT 3,500 FT! What are "we" scared of? ...And then, by OUR actions then (as instructors going along with this) - probably even further transmitting this way, to the student - to be scared of? To the OP on accomplishing your 1st "low" H&P - congratulations! But as I'm sure you can already see/read between the lines here ...there are some of us that don't fully feel/necessarily agree that this methodology (of doing it from >5k and still signing you off on it - if that is what you are saying is getting done) is fully serving you here either. FWIW. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

You're jumping a Pilot 188, in an out-of-manufacture Reflex. Trust me, no amount of "liquidsky cool" customization is gonna be sufficient to help you successfully overcome that. Sorry. I just could not resist. Edit to add (hopefully before I get too badly flamed): P.S. - You did, after all, actually ASK FOR: I've just happened to herein now, provide you with only the latter. Again: coitus non circum - Moab Stone

And what was the very title itself, to the thread/poll, in which this quote was extracted, and to which - directly, you were replying? Hmmmm... coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Actually - Phoenix/Sky Harbor is one of the few airports I have ever really had ANY difficulties with my rig(s). Just FWIW. Good luck. Let us know how it goes! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

In other words, 200 jumps is not just an "automatic qualifier" for WS jumping, about the same as it should not just necessarily be as so for camera flying either. Rather, it is just a minimum threshold, that must be attained - at which time whereby IF as well, - all the OTHER additional required skillsets are also exhibited (or trained) the additional activity can then be started. I truly don't understand all the consternation of some of the "mad skillz" group subsets. I mean really - IF indeed they do posess all those mad-skillz already, and claim they (supposedly) have obtained them all in a total of sub-200 total jumps, and they feel they are "ready" - BIG DEAL. It really won't be that much longer at all (I mean how many jumps, sub-200, # can you REALLY have attained all the skillz/aptitudes you need?) - - - that they will just SOON ENOUGH get to that 200 # anyway. And heck, as they seem to already assert - when they do, they ARE ready & will be good to go!" The other side of that though, is again - that the jump # component, just in and of itself is not just stand-alone "automatic qualification". Many jumpers may in fact take even longer/need many more jumps to attain the skillsets needed, ALSO pre-requisite to doing camera or WS jumps. No one is holding back those mad-skillz subset group(s). IF you've (supposedly) got the skillz - fine. Remember too, that NOT ALL 200 # JUMP JUMPERS NECESSARILY JUST AUTOMATICALLY QUALIFY EITHER. To Julio_gyn: The progression already IS individual "student (ability) dependent". Just get the 200 minimum jumps too is all. I mean really - Big Deal. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Right. Aren't there still several OTHER pre-requisites (other than JUST raw jump #'s) as well? I think you are assuming that JUST BECAUSE someone has attained 200 jumps, they are automatically "qualified" to jump a WS. - I don't think that is the case. - - - Is it? I am not a WSI, so you would have to ask one of those, but still - it would be hard for me to believe, from those that I at least know of - that someone showing up on the DZ, with say jump #201 exactly under his belt, is going to necessarily just have a wingsuit just handed to him, and told: "here you go kid, you've earned it ...go on out there and have at it!" Your analogy therein is flawed. But then again - I could too still, be completely wrong. - Any wingsuit instructor(s) ...wanna correct me/chime in? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

The difference, in these cases/comparisons is INSURANCE, and insurance/indemnity policy availability that protects the vendors/business activity proprietors of those other activities, that just does not exist/is not available, for skydiving. Waivers do not just necessarily "stand alone" and are not sacrosanct in their protection in other high-risk activities we otherwise routinely see minors actively participating in either. It is just that those activities, for at least purposes of their mainstream perception, are more "acceptable" - and therefore (more accurately) as a result, are more (economically/feasibly) INSURABLE. FWIW. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Didn't mean to offend. Of course you did these things, and as a mod you wouldn't allow it to remain otherwise. But mods don't always get to things completely instantaneously necessarily either. My comments were more meant as an observation overall. Just ask Eric how many Spoof/Spammer ID's he has to jump on and clean up out of here on a (probably better than) semi-regular basis. And how quick/soon effective can any of you consistently get to them too? That's all. I apologize. I did not mean the post to be taken as an insult, in any way at all. I can see now in re-reading, how you could. - Mea Culpa. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Wow - now doing THAT took some real balls! I hope you at least DL'd it to a segregated drive/location and scanned it 1st - at the very least before executing it. Dude with NO PROFILE, NO POSTS, NO HISTORY - NO NOTHING comes on out of nowhere and says "click my link here" ...and a bunch of us apparently do? - - - coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Careful. Even as with using an "s-fold" method, it still takes some practice. It is also very easy (much easier in fact) to lose tension on your lines when rolling, and cause "slack" inside that roll-job you just did - that you cannot see - but you might... in the form of line-burns on your canopy appearing from the lines being pulled to tension, while all still inside that roll at line-stretch! Just be mindful to keep tension on your lines while rolling, and don't allow them to go slack inside of the roll-job/canopy material as you "roll it up". coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Wasn't there some conversation in here, some years ago - about an actual incident supposedly caused by a lead-seal jamming a grommet? I seem to recall such, however - cannot locate the exact thread (no pun intended) I am referring to. I also seem to recall people advocating a "figure-of-eight" safety-thread / seal tieing / routing method (similar to the BPA document being referred to) to be used, in response to the incident - designed to eliminate any chance of this thread-routing possibility from occurring. I too, cannot envision any way this was just "accidentally" done - as it seems it would take some real attention/effort to actually route the thread through the closing loop, under the seated pin. Have you checked with the rigger that packed this to find out if this is: 1. His/her normal practice? and if then... 2. Why? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

That's because you've "grown up" now / matured maybe just a bit Doug, in the sport. Good on you! - Those days of: "ooh, everybody... look at me, and see how cool I am - I'm a skydiver" about to board your plane, have finally been effectively weighed against /given-way to the risk of all the potential increased TSA (and other security agencies) scrutiny that could incur. There really is no other (good) reason, to carry your rig openly over your shoulder, completely exposed and out in the open - unprotected as well at least in some way, otherwise. Here is what I use. Rarely even a second-glance. And that is (especially now adays) how I like it! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Why? From what I've been reading of his recent posts, he should (or at least, I'm sure he thinks he should) be WRITING it! WTF do any of us, possibly think we know? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Another "instant expert" on absolutely everything amongst us. sniper1rfa/petejones45 - should get together! Just imagine, with their clear and obvious combined braintrust and guidance/advice being provided to us all - skydiving could become instantly both exhilarating AND 100% absolutely safe! I can't wait. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

For the "search impaired"... How to pack a sleeved-canopy in 2.5 minutes coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Right. *(other than getting your "to" and "too's" exactly opposite/mixed up ). No one has said (including Brian in his video) that you have to do this such that it causes a shorter/fatter more pregnant "short but thick" result! For those that are doing that - write to Brian, or call him, or find someone on your DZ now, who does this now - and can show you method (the one I like personally in particular, is called "the taco" method) of folding/rolling the excess PC material, so that it does NOT cause this. Just saying "it causes this" as a bi-product and therefore summarily dismissing this as a valid method as a result, is incorrect. For some, maybe it will take just a little bit of practice on technique is all - but I can show you / assure you by packing both methods myself, side-by-side, that this doesnot have to be so at all. Whoever is stating that, is just simply not taking the time or the (extremely minimal) extra attention/effort to get this right is all. That then becomes their choice. I personally do not think it is too much extra effort, or time/trouble (in assuring/attention to the details) to actually get it done (right). Again, just FWIW. You've asked (the OP) if the PC Packing method is "valid". Yes it is. Is it also perhaps possibly too, just a little bit more time/effort, and requires just a bit more attention to detail to get right? - Sure, I suppose it probably does that too. Once you have gotten it down, and into a "routine" though - I personally anyway, don't really see any big detriment to it (including apparently for some, it making their PC pouch "fatter") at all. I think it is worth it. And at least if then for nothing else, to answer the OP's concern over just taking for granted anything found on YouTube (a good double-check for sure to do!) - in this case, yes - - the method is "valid", and is coming to you from a source that has earned/recognized credibility at least. FWIW. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Yes. Probably over 2,000 total jumps worth. No. None at all. In fact, I will rebut as well, any claims that in any way, it can cause greater wear. I will contend actually the opposite. Because bridal does not need to be "stripped"/pulled from being folded tightly within your PC material itself each & every time you deploy (as it does now with your current method), and it instead with this method - all has its own clean access/release to the relative wind once the PC is extracted - I would submit this facilitates actually LESS wear. On the PC itself, and/or the PC mesh in comparison - depending upon which method you currently use to pack your PC with, to compare it against. Zero friction on other materials = zero wear. Not personally, but... I HAVE SEEN IT 1st hand HAPPEN / WORK! - On the other hand too, I have also personally seen 1st hand several times, where a PC packed as how you are saying you do now ("exactly the way he says not to") - has caused a monkey's fist and hard/impossible pull! - FWIW. I think Brian Germane has got some credibility/validity. I have seen at least one horse-shoe occur live, in-air where the PC did NOT extract, and also caused exactly as has been illustrated: A "Monkey's Fist" of the PC in the pouch as the S-folded INSIDE the PC bridal all crammed-up into a big ol' unextractable wad. Even on the ground putting a foot up against the rig as leverage and yanking on the exposed bridal could not extract it! On the other hand, I have also seen personally live, in air also - a jumper who DID employ this method's main container come open on a jump - and right as the bag got to that "horseshoe" arc of extension over his back, the PC simply extracted - and "just as advertised" - nice, simple (but unplanned/high) clean deployment. So I can tell you 1st-hand, this is not at all devised to address a ghost, or otherwise at all "non-existent" potentiality/concern. Yes. In my opinion, and observations anyway - it is. coitus non circum - Moab Stone