Scrumpot

...And we're all STILL WAITING for the pics! ... coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I know exactly where you are at. For the record, for @ my 1st 100-200 jumps I did EXACTLY the same thing myself. In retrospect, I realize now that the only thing it accomplished (telling myself that I continually sucked -whether I really did or not mind you! ) is: held me back. If I can help you to realize that earlier than what I ended up "putting myself through" as a result of my sharing that with you, then GREAT! The sooner you "release" from that, the sooner you will also ALLOW YOURSELF to progress. It's a miracle occurance (or at least it was for me) for sure. I do love your perspective on all this. Continue to learn all you can. Try not to be too self-critical and have FUN! (while being "safe" of course). After all, isn't that what it's all about?

Although that does "authorize" an entry, it does not "authorize" a SEARCH, and only items in PLAIN VIEW which could be both readily and easily seen upon that type of entry would be admissable. Even if the "drugs" (cannabis) were in plain view (stipulated, apparently by the shear scope and amount), a further, more detailed search (and/or siezure -especially of other NON-RELATED ...to the entry itself) paraphernalia without due process (especially non-illegal ...like the rig, as alluded to in another thread) may NOT have been in fact, entirely "legal". This jumper needs a good attorney, not the court of DZ.com ...that much is also "evident"! Oh yeah, and just happening to state to your DZO that you know "Johnny XYZ's" house was raided, or that there is a warrant now (presumably) out for his arrest, or what have you ...without ADDING any further predjudices to that, I certainly do not see any issue with. Police "activities" after all, are supposed to be "public" knowledge. That is, unless all this transpired somehow in say, Cuba. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

A little bit off topic, but how do you prove either when you did, or did not 'get involved with drugs'?? This statement just struck me as a little odd is all. That said, there is some case law precedent for excluding certain assets which HAS been successfully used in some cases, and within certain jurisdictions in the past. However, depending upon the total value of all assets (let alone just this rig, supposing this were the only item being petitioned to be EXCLUDED) of the jumper in question ...the cost to successfully pursue this, versus it's actual value would RARELY make this worthwhile. Thread hijack mode now {off}... Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

His point, ...EXACTLY! -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I love reading your stories! ...Great perspectives to share. Ahhh.... the memories (although now long since dark & clouded ) Sounds like it was a GREAT jump to me, and CONGRATULATIONS! The only piece of advice?... GET THIS OUT OF YOUR HEAD! And I mean this LITERALLY. It will only hold you back. Accentuate and build upon the positive. Acknowledge the "errors" (although I did not "see" any -REALLY- from your description of this dive) and learn your techniques to correct them. Then go up again, correct them, and RE-ACCENTUATE THAT as ANOTHER POSITIVE! -You are on your way! ...Good for you!!

Naw, this is funny! ...We should continue with it. Yeah, let's debate those Radical, if even possibly downright EVIL, yet cutting-edge CReW Dawg flying antic canopy stacks! So, maybe instead this should be switched to a poll. CRW flying: Sport or Stupidity?? Time to EXCORCISE this CRAZY activity from our otherwise sedentary, pedestrian good-name (and natured/reputationed) sport! -Start a movement NOW! ...Before it's too late to save us all!! I think you're on to something here. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Fun? ... coitus non circum - Moab Stone

A common malaise within these boards unfortunately, it seems. Delete away.... -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Serial # 0014 is my understanding. Was also the FIRST Otter to be put out into public/commercial service officially in the states. That is, if you believe Robert's constant "one-liners" Definitely a CLASS operation, Cal City! Thank you guys, for within only 2 days "visiting", making this traveling jumper feel more "at home" than anywhere, ever! Cal City... My new "left coast" home away from home. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

With all due respect, base tracking and f/f tracking in order to break off from a formation falling at terminal velocity are 2 entirely different things AND (as you indirectly point out) techniques. Base tracking in this context definitely looks impressive (and IS); however, the speeds (prior to terminal with exception for some of the longer /higher base dives) are vastly different and non-comparable to each other. You will note even with base trackers that once their vertical speeds approach terminal, that their hands & leg positions will (only) then resemble F/F tracking. But they WILL also, and again only in situations where applicable ...after they approach terminal F/F, speeds (where applicable) get to a full track as well. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Sorry, but your file-link clicky does NOT seem to bring me (anyway) to a valid file. ....??? ...Oops, SCRATCH that. -I've got it now. I'll view and comment if you like, if I get the moment from here at work! -Grant ___________________ Okay, here you go: #1. Extremely hard to "judge", but clearly a "misjudgement" (pilot error) just by virtue of the outcome -eh? #2. Freeze-framing on the last 9/10's of the approach with the ground-shadow visible indicates to me: - Apparently "smaller" HP canopy - Approach "path choices" may have put this jumper in a "box" (ie: could have "bailed out" of this approach much sooner, but somehow ...again only supposition... seems to "fixate"/commit on ONE spot/path) - Based on shadow, ...and again this is tough to accurately "judge", so ALL is supposition without maybe the vid poster himself probably commenting), it looks as though this pilot expected a natural "recovery arc" (again an apparent mis-judgement) to occur on this one SOMETHING ABOVE impact, and a natural "plane-out" and probably smooth ground swoop to otherwise occur. I say this only based upon the apparent hand/toggle position evident in these frames, where if he had "properly" percieved his more correct "natural" path, he probably would have been seen trying to "dig this out" a bit more in these frames. Looked "recoverable" at several intervals, and therefore, I suppose just by THAT virtue could be said, yes ...to have been misperception, error in judgement, pilot error or what-have-you. Whatever you would want to call it. All it takes on an approach like this is a misperception by mere "inches", making the difference between skimming gracefully above the grass blades, and instead what you see here. And that is, quite simply, what APPEARS to have happened here. ...Maybe the vid owner might actually see this himself and be able to further comment? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

He is (most likely) simply taking a rubber band and placing it around the middle of the "stiffened" part of the tuck-tab (closing flap) itself. The rubber band provides just a bit more friction when it is "tucked" and keeps it closed under the circumstances. This is a "jury rig" though. I am not a rigger, and therefore can not (and will not) comment as to it's real efficacy (or safety/appropriateness), however, I would think that a more reasonable and fixed/permanent "modification" solution actually done by a RIGGER would be more in order than this. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Indeed. This was no "hook" really at all, by any real stretch. That's also why I am wondering now, from the original poster, after some retrospect (and as he himself says, some "learning" since) if he also even realizes (and can share with us) from his perspective, even more? I also don't think that he truly realized (at the time) how much FLIGHT his canopy really had left. Exactly the kind of stuff I am looking to extract from him on this. I know he even may have "thought" this was a "hook" (although you & I recognize it was not ) ...but from the experience level reference point, and for others who may be right along that same relative level -I kinda agree with him. ...Is there still (probably) even more to be learned (even by him) from this? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Hmmm.... The laughter by the videographer just as you were approaching a certain "impact", to me, was probably the most painful aspect of viewing this. That was a bit more than just a minor "obsticle" I'd say too... an entire tree-lined Berm! One POSITIVE feed-back observation I will give you, in case it hasn't already been communicated by others... THANK YOU for also having NOT "Panic turned" the moment you obviously KNEW you were going to hit. Although as best as I can see from the 3rd-party video, it does appear as if a flat turn STILL would have been possible ...It does also APPEAR as if you at least kept your "wits" about you, and flew-out your canopy, probably as best as you KNEW HOW at the moment, and for that situation. So in that respect, and aspect ...good job!

Correct. I guess I should be more careful with my sarcasm. Yes, I suppose you do know I know this. Especially considering the one girl I "got in trouble" for ragging upon who during an ACTUAL emergency bail-oout situation: 1. Climbed out 2. Did a poised/floating exit, then 3. Hit her head on the horizontal stab! Knocked herself unconcious, had a Cypres save, and EVEN THEN did not realize (at the time) what "else" she may have done wrong (and COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS ENTIRELY in the 1st place)! You're right though Bill. Perhaps in "topical forums" I should find a way to check my sarcasm at the door. My bad. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Okay, my profile is filled out... so take it for whatever you think it is worth, but... At 5k personally, I'm STILL "chunking" the exit, turning points and jumping the ORIGINAL dive plan! 5k is PLENTY of "room". ...Puh-Leeze. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Yeah, but only after 2:30PM when pretty much "automatically" they roll the Otter back into the hangar. Unfortunately, I found that out 1st hand this past Sunday with a c-206 Jump around 3:00. They really mean it apparently when they say they start their day, AND get a "FULL DAY IN" at 6:30AM. Next time, I will believe 'em. Maybe a "clue" too, should be all the regulars sitting about popping the beer light on as you are marching to the plane with some "lowbie" who "just had to go", and needed SOMEBODY to help watch out for him and help to spot! GREAT DZ though! ...Didn't mean to hijack the thread though. Just couldn't resist. Back to your regularly scheduled mayhem. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Remember too, that you first need to know where "the formation" is, and where YOU are relative to it 1st! ...Even if that "formation" is only one other person. "Popping up" blindly is never a good answer. The others have already advised you as to the proper technique (once you have at least spotted "the formation"). Now please see either one of your instructors, or a mentor on your DZ to give you some F/F practical advice on this too. "Not looking up" was not meant (as Sky One indicated) as you had apparently further taken it. -Grant P.S. ...ALthough I am replying to the last post available to me in the thread ...this is "directed" to the initial poster. Sorry Bob, for just choosing your post to add my little piece in for. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Good post! ...And absolute ditto to almost everything said. Always astounds me the one's who say they "premonitioned" the event, and just "knew" they should have sat that one out. Although there are LEGITIMATE reasons and indications at times NOT to make a jump, ...just "gut feelings" is rarely one of those. Your last line says it all: Advance worry to the extent that it will freeze you though, needs to be "gotten over". And usually the best way to do that, is to just "get over it". Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

As did you for me Michele! ...Thank YOU! After having flown all the way out from Maryland, only to have found the weather what it was (), I can hosestly say in the end analysis regardless, ...I did not in the least, leave "disappointed"!!

I've often THOUGHT for myself that # would be 600ft AGL. Although I've never actually "planned" on ever being there! Just this past weekend though, I had dinner with an "old" friend, and also a very "seasoned" jumper ...(yes Michael, by now if you are reading this, you know who you are ), and he imparted upon me an interesting perspective, that has given me at least, some pause for second thought on that now. His philosophy (and he can remain relatively anonymous hereby if he so chooses)? Very SIMPLE. And I'll quote: "I am not, ever doing rigging in the air." Meaning that (for instance) his main opens, and it can be immediately determined right then and there that "this is unlandable, ...chop it. REGARDLESS of altitude. Now here, is; if he likes, he can "chime in". Michael: Do I have this (understand this) right? It's an INTERESTING perspective, and it has, as I say, given me pause for thought. Given this jumper has been around for 25 or so (+/-) years, ACTIVE in this sport, also "gets my attention" (and RESPECT). ...Of course, he is also, his OWN rigger too! Just does make me think though, when it comes right down to it, WHAT really does make us "all" need to either hesitate, or think we somehow NEED TO for some reason necessarilly, "work through a mal? "Correctable", or not? ...Cost maybe? ..."Image"?? What are EITHER of these things if you happen to turn out instead to have been WRONG; and you go in?? (and with a reserve that COULD HAVE worked, HAD IT BEEN DEPLOYED using your EP's higher/immediately upon even recognizing a mal that is still instead at this alt clearly within its container ...doing you no good!) Hmmmmm....... ??? Okay, now I suppose 2 line twists at 3 grand you're NOT going to chop. Or closed end cells, or something "silly" like that. But maybe some food for thought? Let's say though that you've got what looks like a line-over. It's clearly UNLANDABLE as is, but you're over 2,500 (or whatever). ...You gonna choose to fight it? Serious question, because I am now reconsidering this now even myself. Right up until this weekend, I was (and would) be saying "YES". ...I even HAVE been in exactly this situation and done this in the past. However, let's say your 2 attempts at clearing this DON'T work (and actually, USUALLY they won't ...I just happened to "luck out" myself personally once), and things become on that second attempt (that you started even BEFORE your hard deck) rapidly and suddenly worse?? A couple of line twists and a collapse at 1,500 can become "HIGH-SPEED" and eat up your altitude now, right then & there, all of a sudden mighty quick!! It is indeed sometimes now in thinking this stuff through even more as a result of this encounter and conversation, the "low-speed" malfunctions that has got me RE-thinking. So what if you cut-away at 2,500ft a line-over mal?? ---Are your friends gonna laugh at you? Hey, my feeble mind at this point is almost outright saying (seriously) ...SO WHAT? -LET 'EM! Let em laugh at your ALIVE ASS all they want. I'm starting to seriously WONDER now, how many of our skydiving bretheren just MAY HAVE gone in already, as a result of just simple, and just plain vain (read: NEEDLESS) "pride"? Not unequivocally saying this is so, but having read MANY incidents over my 10 years here... (and I can quote several of them ...I'll bet you can too); it REALLY HAS, at this point made me have to simply at least stop and wonder. Further debate? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Looks to me from the video as if the PC must have come over the nose on opening, and snagged from the underside, either a C or D line/lines. This caused the configuration you see as the tension from the bridal was trying to pull it back-to-front and back over the top, in effect partially collapsing that right side. Going frame-by-frame the PC is seen JUST over the trailing edge in maybe 3 frames worth, and it looks to me as if it also has (probably a C) line caught on it ...which was being pulled around very much "as if" a lineover. That's my GUESS anyway. -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I think that is actually me you are asking this of. If I am mistaken, then my apologies in advance. What I mean by my hard-deck is 1,500 is, that this is the absolute lowest I will continue to try to correct, futz with, work-through, or whatever you want to call it, ANY sort of main malfunction. ...If I do not have it CLEARED and CONTROLLABLE/LANDABLE by 1,500 I am performing EP's PERIOD. That means even if I have "only a few" more line-twists to go ...ANYTHING! This is just my PERSONAL hard-deck. Whatever yours is, the point is to be unwaiveringly FAITHFUL to it!! Too many before us have already "thought" that perhaps they can still fight that extra little fight to clear something, but then they were wrong. That is exactly the point I think of the initial poster here too.... and BTW (edited to add): ------------------- "Oops", I did not mean to hijack this as if mine It must have been another post somewhere where I quoted this, and I MISTAKENLY thought goose, you were directing now to me. ...My bad. Turnlow deserves absolutely ALL the credit for this string, HIS actions, HIS taking the time to bring this reminder to us, and all the "accolades" accordingly. -------------------- It's the whole point of your hard-deck. Have one. Then LIVE with it. Literally. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Yeah, WHERE IS THE LOVE? I've done something like 15-20 head-down jumps myself. Maybe even 10 of 'em actually ON PURPOSE too! Agreed.... Best of wishes to all the participants! Incredible how far, especially how fast (no pun intended) the discipline has advanced. You guys really rock! Be safe. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone