Scrumpot

Ooh, man... how do you guys do that? Write something in ONE SENTENCE that took me a paragraph (or 2 ) to portray!! Someday, I'm gonna have to corner one of you guys, sit down and take a few lessons on just how to do that. ...To think that Mark could even actually "see" that vein that was popping out of my neck (which I have to admit it was ), well, all I can say is: WOW! And I've jsut really come back on here after about (what I thought was) a good 2-3 months "rest"! HA! Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I've always been partial (and have myself) the "old" icarus team colors. All neon green with bby (purple) ribs. Hey, thanks for the levity! ...For understanding, and not taking offense at any "just student" type comments. If I may, let me apologize here too if that in any way seemed condescending. Which it in no way was meant to be. We've all had to "be there" at one time or another. Except of course for those of us who just came out EXACTLY LIKE THIS! Hey, I at least really LIKE your inquisitive nature! Keep on asking, and keep on LIVING! Good luck on nailing down that "A" this weekend. Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I too was only replying based upon the ORIGINAL POST, and IT'S SCENARIO at hand! ...Sheesh. Semantics. What did you call it Chris, "getting cute"? ...I like that. Bill, neither of us said anything about just any "oops, smaller canopy" - immediately cut-away! ...We were replying to a SPECIFIC "HP 96" scenario given. Although to you & I this may not seem like "real world", apparently, to this jumper ("Jackpunx") it is! So I submit that answering in ANYTHING ELSE BUT HELL YES trying to land that vx96 SURE AS HECK WOULD BE DANGEROUS, is actually quite irresponsible! Please re-read his initial post. Then, re-read his further response too, to my post after yours in which he says: and then... (emphasis added) PLEASE DISPELL THIS AND CLEAR THIS UP!! ...In this case too, I do not think we are talking about your one-in-a-million wunderkund who is also "lucky enough" to only weigh like 100lbs soaking wet too! Like that is real "real world" either! The way I read it, this kid now thinks he just MAY be able to land that 96 canopy now, because he would be "cool" enough (meaning calm, not "hip") to potentially handle it. Even as a "thought excercise" this is IRRESPONSIBLE! Unless you are disagreeing and you too are asserting that he possibly (and reasonably) can? I'll bow to your greater experience with students than mine, but personally I just don't see it. Do you really disagree and even remotely think that he CAN? Granted, a VALID controllability check up high SHOULD tell him differently. But please also look at what he is posting here and be CLEAR! Like Chris, I have no desire or need to argue semantics (be "cute") with you. We can certainly do that BETWEEN US, but if there is any possibility (as it appears to me there just may be) that this could be in any way become misinterpreted by OTHERS, I think we should put the semantics aside, and just answer the question. He asked about landing a 96. ...Is this something, even remotely (not a non-applicable 100lb wunderkund scenario) you think he can, or anyone EVER (really) at a # 22 jump (student) level should even consider? If so, I stand ready to stand corrected. Let me (us) know. THANKS! -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Actually NO! ...I (personally) would NOT recommend that either! If you already have and have chosen to jump with an RSL in the 1st place, disconnecting it once you are under good canopy has JUST TAKEN THAT AWAY FROM YOU, from even being available during the time it will most likely even matter/make a difference to you! ...And that is, when you get down low (lower). Better advice: If you are jumping in high enough winds that you fear possibly being dragged upon landing, then: best to probably not be jumping at all that day! My (additional now ...it's racking up! ) 2 cents. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Bottom line, and to answer this (which also hopefully helps) ...a difference in just flare pressure from one toggle to the next of only even about an inch or so will put you in a turn with this canopy (a HP 96) the likes you probably have not even seen with a FULL, ONE-TOGGLE TURN purposefully initiated on your student gear! You will hit the ground and you will hit the ground HARD under such scenario, and I'm sorry, I just don't see ANY way you could successfully do it without having had significant experience (which at just 22 jumps simply does not exist) and PRACTICE. Even if all 22 of your landings under a student 190 were stand-up's. A 190 canopy is just so MONUMENTALLY MORE "FORGIVING" in comparison. ...There really is no comparison! It really is (IMHO) just that much "night and day". As Chris points out, the ONLY comparison really, is that they are both canopy's. At you level though, that's pretty much where ALL other "comparison" ends! Just don't "go there" any time soon, okay? How's that? Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I was being somehwat rhetorical actually, and facetious with that part of my response. I was just somewhat surprised to see Billvon's posting on this, keeping in mind that we are talking to here, a 22 jump student! As now also said by Chris, in ACTUALITY, I think, this complete neophyte who does not even "understand" his even student canopy yet is gonna (and probably literally) crap his pants, probably immediately upon trying to unstow his toggles on this canopy! ...Let alone have ANY (relative) chance at all of successfully landing it! Now that being said, an equally smaller reserve being not even a "good" situation for him either, granted; in the place of say a VX96 or something, a 7-cell 109 PD Reserve would at least give him a CHANCE. My .02: 1. Never EVER get yourself there in the 1st place! But if you do: You are NOT gonna be able to land a "spinner"! And I next to guarantee before even both toggles were let fully up from the above (hypothetical - THANKFULLY) scenario, that is precisely what this 22 jump STUDENT would have... 2. Chop and go to your 7-cell (at least will be slightly more "docile" regardless of size) reserve. Better to have SOME chance at that point rather than NONE, which I submit in reality, under the circumstances of the scenario given at least is more likely otherwise. I just don't see any way ANY 22-jump # level jumper is gonna survive the former AT ALL. But that's JMO. Billvon has much more experience than I, and is an instructor, (where I am not) so maybe my perspective on that is all wet? DO you really see students now Bill, that you think after having a grand total of only 22 total jumps really CAN have even a chance of landing (successfully -even once by shear "luck") a HP 96 canopy? -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Are you kidding me Bill? Can you see a 22-jump student's even "controlability check" procedure, having NEVER even touched a canopy even REMOTELY close to this before being performed? Hmmmm.... Let's see: - Deploy and opening (lets assume "normal" and on-heading) - Reach up, release toggles (how many 22-jump students actually do even THAT smooth and evenly? ...but again, lets ASSUME they do)... - (Student) Controllability check: Pull down right toggle ...OH SHIT!!! They are now in a SPINNING DIVE the likes a STUDENT has NEVER seen before! Guaranteed! You think they can/could handle (even) that?? I highly doubt it. Although arguably chopping and thereby (most likely) going to only a 109 reserve might not be much better either! Best course of action? ...Definitely don't ever put yourself into a situation where you have screwed up THIS BADLY! I think that was the entire point of that other post being referred to too, in the 1st place. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

The difference between a 190 STUDENT SQUARE, and a sub-100 HP Fully Eliptical? Even with just a "controlability check" that you, as a 22-jump student upon opening would employ, WOULD SCARE THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF YOU! Yes, you would IMMEDIATELY upon deployment KNOW (or should) you were F*CKED with that canopy, and I highly doubt you could survive even the most "conservative" of landings / landing approaches, again at your level, as you would "know" them. It takes a highly skilled and EXPERIENCED (through much time and concentration in PROGRESSIVELY downsizing) HP Canopy pilot to be able to successfully land a sub-100 fully eliptical HP. Absolutely! Hope this helps answer your question! I'm sure others will jump in here for you too, in order to give you maybe even a clearer explanation to all that as to more specifically why. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Someone else in here can (please, feel free to) correct me if I am wrong, but I have always been told that the cutting of A-lines would (probably) be a BAD idea. Have no personal or practical experience with that, but the thought of whipping out the hook knife on an A-line (step-through?) would have never occurred to me. I wouldn't trust the canopy as being "landable" after that. IMO you did just right by performing the EP's and I would NOT at this point "second guess" that. Personally, my hook knife is pretty much there in case of line-over on my RESERVE, which I hope I will never have a hesitation to go to if my main by my hard deck were in almost any way, unlandable! In many ways, it is the LOW SPEED malfunction that gives me greater concern than the high-speed (mor obvious) ones. IMHO, do yourself a favor, and put away your "second guesses" there. You appeared to perform your EP's fully properly, and when indicated. GOOD JOB! -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Reserve container will open, because the reserve pin will have been pulled by the RSL. But will the reserve (chute) itself actually even leave the free-bag as a result? The one time I have seen this done, it didn't. Once the main separated, the dragging pretty much immediately stopped. When the person then got up, his reserve pc launched (it was pinned on his back to the ground) and the freebag just dropped straight down to the ground. You can say that again, because of not only the 50 bucks reserve repack (which should really be the ONLY expense otherwise I would think - no?), the one I am referring to occurred in one of the muddiest fields you could imagine. Cost him all new reserve pc and freebag on top of that too. Not to mention cleaning of his entire rig and jumpsuit as well. Lesson learned for that jumper on RSL's! -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Not so. Or I don't think at least as 'technically' as this part of your statement may imply. You do not need to be 'damaged' in order to show right to due compensation. Then again on the other hand, deprivement of that DUE COMPENSATION can be found, in of itself, to be 'damages'. The 'sticky' part is quantifying in ANY case, the value of either those damages, or those (deprived) "due (compensation) rights", and then determining if whether or not, that is worth pursuing, to you. Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Would belly bands such as those really be that effective on more "modern" gear with their pack-trays (ie: actual container size and orientation) being so relatively smaller (and up much higher on the jumpers back) than those you have pictured here? How would just a belly-band mod on a CURRENT Jav TJN or Mirage/Micron (or any rig designed to hold today's preponderance of sub-150's canopies) for instance, make the "hole" between the bottom of the main container and lower harness (leg straps juncture) any smaller? Also, knowing that it has been shown in some incidences that some jumpers have had problems with their EP's by pulling on lift-web, when they had THOUGHT they were pulling on their "stubborn" handles, would you think that going BACK to something like this (adding yet again a belly band or some other form of front strap) might also cause a potential HAZARD trade-off, somehow more complicating or hampering consistent & effective EP executions? Just some thoughts that come to my mind as I listen to this debate and look at these pictures. Especially as I compare those now too, to most current gear anyway, both in-use and on the market. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I know somebody who did. Or who at least decided pretty affirmatively NOT to take up base after all (who WAS PLANNING TO), after watching this (or similar) ...if we are talking about the same tape. Long time no see/no talk to Yuri! Ran into your brother last season up in Pepperell. Didn't know that you actively posted here. Good to "see" you! -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Maybe with a non-collapsible though, it might?? At that point where the main has mostly inflated, but not "found" its full forward momentum into the relative wind? ...I dunno. Just trying to picture this and wondering. Interesting you mention spring-loaded/launched main PC's. Seems I remember a fairly "regular" occurance of PC's over the nose back in the days of using those, and nearly none now with hand-deploys. A correlation there, or just coincidence? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

My old Buddy Steve White (aka: "Hammerwork")? Man, I haven't seen or heard from him in quite a while! ...Tell me that he has moved on out there now to the left coast! ...?? It's gotta be him (one in the same with who I am thinking of) as that story was actually, just totally regular everyday, if not quitessential Steve! -Good going buddy!

Zig-Zag, Zig-Zag, Opposed Diamond (so all are in-facing), Round. Simple, tight, keeps all (again) in-facing and really WORKS for ALL levels. Have fun! -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Can't relatively decent separation be gained even with a rapid succession of hop-n-pop's occurring, by simply: 1. Having a "plan" and that ALL the exits are going to be TRUE HOP-N-POPS (that 3rd guy out taking a delay instead NOT throwing a wrench into those works! )? ...ie: head high, "forward facing" CLEAR & PULLS? 2. 1st guy out upon deployment turns right of line of flight, 2nd guy left (45-90' MAX) and evenly alternating from there? 3. KNOW your "assignments" then, go, go, go, go, go... I could envision under such (even in an "emergency exit" scenario calling for such) being able actually to put people out in a rather rapid succession, -no? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Sure! ...Absolutely. Why not?? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Also, where we're on the subject of gear preparedness and (potential) emergencies... For those of you who do NOT put on your helmets for at least take off roll and initial climb, please at least be sure they are SECURED (through your CONNECTED chest-strap is a viable option), rather than just either laying in your lap or loose in your hands! ...Those things can become nasty PROJECTILES and cause injury to OTHERS who otherwise have taken the care to be ready, even properly belted, geared up AND secured their own shit. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Agreed! ...I do the same. No way you need to be fully cinched down, but at least not be so loose (or completely disconnected as in the case of a chest strap) to the point that you could NOT exit in an emergency situation is all. ...Again, I've seen 1st hand the effects of that! Thanks also Bill, for moving this thread to S&T where it belongs. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Okay, I really did not want to sidetrack this thread, but you mis-understand. As cut-n-pasted now from SEVERAL PM's (and in an effort to cut down on my blistering fingers from rebuttal typing), here is what I meant: ----- Maybe this is not what goofy does, but what I was referring to are the folks who get on the plane, promptly "lounge out" with their chest straps fully loose (if connected AT ALL), their leg straps at full loose position, and then just regard the whole operation completely and totally non-chalauntly. Again, I did not think that this is necessarily what your friend does, and I definitely did not want to side-track the subject matter of that thread (thus my PM now to you instead), but what I was trying to get people to think of here were those that DO do this, and what it would be like as the plane just passes say 1,500 ft and an engine flames out. I don't have to idley just think about this. ...I've been there! Those GOOFS (no pun intended on goofydiver) then have to try to stand up, put their chest straps on, tighten their leg straps, "dance" all around (while OBSTRUCTING THE DOOR FOR OTHERS) -and doing this all while the rest of us are trying to EMERGENCY EXIT with the pilot screaming "get out, get out, get out, ...everybody OUT *NOW*!! Follow? Ever seen those people? Do you wonder? (again, I don't have to, I'VE BEEN THERE!) Thus yes... and voila, -Pet peeve! NOT for re-checking and adjusting your gear prior to exit, but for those who don't even (properly) put their gear ON prior to boarding. Hope my clarification to you (all) now helps. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

That is one of my pet peeves, and I really hate when I see this! IMHO you should be fully geared up (as a sport jumper) and "ready (FULLY CAPABLE) to exit the plane" by the time you are boarding it. Not picking on you personally, as maybe as you seem to indicate, you yourself also learned something from this (your personal experience) as a result too? This is not strictly germane to the incident at-hand though in this thread, so I also do not want to further distract ("hijack") it off its pertinent subject matter. My heart and my thoughts go out to all those affected by this tragic, tragic incident. BSBD, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Good points. I've always considered myself both "proactive" and "inquisitive". Especially when it comes to gear, and in particular with this sport. Here's an anecdote for you based upon that: Back when I first was starting in this sport in fact, and when I purchased my very own 1st brand new rig (a reflex), I INSISTED on assembling it WITH my rigger, so that I could learn about its "inner workings", functionality, etc. etc. ...all 1st hand. Pretty good "initiative", huh? Well, as my tag-line says ...sometimes (even still) there are things you DON'T know that you don't know. -And those are the things that may just someday bite you in the ass! My rigger at the time (who is no longer my rigger for reasons that will soon become obvious) proceeded to "teach" me this "intriguing technique" that he thought he "understood" about tucking ALL of the reserve pilot chute material "securely under the decorative cap". ( -I know NOW!) As "smart" and inquisitive as I even think I am, I still missed the dire potential pitfalls of this entirely, and proceeded to make probably a couple-hundred jumps with my gear in this configuration! It wasn't until another very near incident occurred, just luckily enough (for me) to somebody else I know who cut away from a mal, and who used the same rigger and with identical gear in the exact identical configuration pulled his reserve, and TOWED his reserve PC only until FINALLY (what seemed like FOREVER to us observing on the ground) until his "catapult" (secondary reserve PC used in this set up) inflated and opened his reserve. At first it had seemed to observers that this jumper had "waited" a perilously long time too, and had he impacted, would we ever have KNOWN? My point is, that even if you seek out knowledge (as I thought I had), it's probably a good idea every now & then too, to question it, revisit it, "freshen it up", apply some further reasoning to it or what-have-you. I didn't even know what I didn't know, and I'm sure glad (or more likely supremely LUCKY) that it didn't bite me in the arse as a result. This "incident" and this experience for me only acted to redouble my commitment to learn and UNDERSTAND (and more thoroughly -for SURE!) my equipment. But until something like this actually happens to you, most of us will otherwise just not go that far, and sometimes just "accept" that they THINK they already "know". -That's what I did. I am with Sparky, and Dart, and Derek on this one. If this jumpers ATTITUDE is to be either "defensive" of what happened or not to take it seriously or sluff it off, then ground her until that changes. If it is instead a WAKE UP CALL, then respect that, don't just blindly "critisize" that, and instead use it, take advantage of it and encourage further LEARNING (and consider further learning and teaching techniques!) not only for just this (directly affected) jumper, but for us ALL! Sorry for the long post. Hopefully some of it makes some sense. Maybe not all directly related, but... Just a personal experience it reminded me of, and that I thought worthy of further SHARING, under the circumstances. BSBD, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

A "wake up call" then for both sides of the equation (student/novice perspective, AND instructor perspective) to be taken away from this case, and this posting string perhaps? Thanks again Derek, as always for your valuable insight(s). -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Sure it is, as it brings up at least in my mind still, a LEGITIMATE "thought process" none-the-less for AWARENESS. For instance, I was gear-checking a just off AFF novice this past weekend who had JUST bought his own gear. It was an original Vector (IIRC). The RSL on this set up was (IS in this case still) an "exposed" length (about 4-5" in my estimation) of RSL attached (or supposed to be 'attached") by velcro over the RH shoulder portion of the harness/yoke. The velcro was worn & the RSL between attachment point was looped and again, "EXPOSED". In that instance I too felt better that the RSL be disconnected (or not jumped at all until) & the rig looked at by a RIGGER. Not everybody jumps absolutely the MOST modern of gear even still, and it is incumbent upon ALL OF US to know/understand thy gear! ...The very gear we are supposedly "relying upon" to save our lives! I'm glad you posted this!