Scrumpot

Relative to wing loading BSR recommedation opinion statements in every incident post... It is not (necessarily) helpful, IMHO. Nor is it respectful. Go ahead & post that "this BSR recomendation would NOT have affected the outcome of this incident" in the Hazelton, PA incident thread then if you truly beleive this. Again, I submit instead that would serve no purpose other than to be disrespectful, at the behest of (attempting to) further one's own personal (and debatable) individual cause. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

You can always trade off (or balance considerations for) one perceived risk vs. another. We do it every day! How much more likely is it (to you) for one risk over the other to occur? Which one do you want to feel more prepared for? ---Just some (devils advocate type) thoughts. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Slut, For some people (like in my case) it's just NOT a (personal choice) goal is all. However, to be otherwise completely "DISALLOWED" (from jumping with low-timers from time-to-time) ENTIRELY doesn't seem to make much sense either. We seem to keep straying off of that one central discussion point. Certainly not a "sitting & complaining" thing. Just something that I thought (in initiating this string) that might be worthy of some discussion & consideration. Why does ANYBODY "HAVE TO" get their D's? Why does anybody "HAVE TO" get their coach's, or JM or AFF/I or I/E ratings for that matter, JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT THERE? My contention is simply that they don't. Does that make these people any less a jumper (or qualified to jump with a low-timer)? Maybe in your eyes, but not mine. Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

And you call THIS getting what you have paid for? Yet again you have made precisely MY point! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I have also seen plenty of "D" license holders who can't jump for jack-sh.... too! You have just made MY point exactly! ...License holding JUST for the virute of license holding doesn't (in some cases in of itself) mean SQUAT! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

To stay within context (where did AFF JM/I enter the coaches arena debate?) -if in comparison to going to some 100 jump "qualified" simply by the virtue of holding their B-License and a "coaches rating"? Then YES, it is my contention that jumper is better off with the entirely "non-rated" 800 jump veteran. Absolutely. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Here's the problem with your statement Rob, and therefore the basis of your entire "argument" (not that we are "arguing" )... This "wannabe coach" does NOT really "wannabe" ANYTHING (necessarily "rated"), and why does he "HAVE TO BE"? Sometimes, friends with 23 jumps or what-have-you are standing around the dropzone looking for help. Maybe this 800 jump jumper just wants to be able to give it to him. Skydiving is a HOBBY and an escape for this jumper. He/she may very well be very qualified (and a damn good teacher too, I might add ), but simply has absolutely zero interest in ever making skydiving "work" or more precisely: a job. Why shouldn't this jumper be ALLOWED to jump with the low timer and impart some of his/her clearly otherwise earned experience? I think Bill has answered this and in actuality, his point HAS indeed been implimented in practice (local S&TA has no problem with it). Just thought it might be worth a little debate/more generalized thought & consideration in here (mission accomplished in that regard) is all. Blue Skies, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Good luck! ...Hope it all comes in/gets put together in time for you. Congrats on the acquirement of your own gear. Learn it (help assemble if you can) and be safe! Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

It very well may have been simply hooked up backwards. It's been done before (not "upside down"). It is impossible for a pilot chute to otherwise pull a canopy completely over (under?) itself once inflated. Most it could do would be to simply "bow-tie" the canopy due to where it's attachment point is (only 1/2-way span-wise) on the TOP skin. Physics tells us it would be (or should be) impossible for it to pull COMPLETELY therefore ALL THE WAY AROUND to fully inverted in of itself. Student either did not know what he was looking at -(could have even had line twists -I've seen a student fly 2/3's of his pattern backwards because of a 1.5 line twist & when he got down he said simply that the canopy was "backwards" ...But it somehow straightened itself out -thank goodness- before his final & landing!). Student will "see" & therefore sometimes report "wacky" things! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

What's your opinion Bill, on an "A-only" licensed jumper with 800+/- jumps wanting to help out a 20-30 something jump wonder being regulatorilly

Acrobatic maneuvers are limited based upon their proximity to spectators & certain airspace, not by strictly AGL measurments I believe. Chris would (or should) have better knowledge of the FAR's than I however. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Aren't you still using arbitrary #'s with no particular canopy skills tied to 'em with this? You're just "labelling" it differently is all. A license = X # of jumps , etc. (depending upon the "old" or the "new" standard I guess)... Or does the new licensing progression/requirements now in of themselves incorporate demonstrated canopy skills with it now? I guess I am uneducated in that arena. Further, what about the jumper who, has 100's or even 1,000's of jumps but doesn't care to get his C or D licenses? (or even his "B" for that matter -I personally have been jumping for years with nothing more than my "A") ---Does this mean I'd better trade back in my Safire or Stilletto for a 1-1 PD230? It's late in the (work) day right now, and I was supposed to be OUTA HERE for a boogie, but the bad weather has taken a BITE out of that & I am tired , so maybe my comprehension is also low. Maybe I don't get it at all, but I don't see canopy wingload BSR restrictions being usefull as tagged to "optional" License holdings as the criteria at all. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Glad the freebag apparently did it's job in letting that reserve go (and separate from the main it had apparently got into) for you! Any of that on film? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Careful Andrea, I've never formally introduced myself in here. And by now we all know what kind of lengthy diatribes I can go on! You don't want me going & perceiving this as any sort of "challenge" now do you? Welcome Justin! ...To both the sport and the forums. Have fun, stay safe. Blues, -Grant coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Maybe so, but how many times have you seen: -Student Gears-up -Instructor/JM or coach goes over gear (straps, 3-rings, bridal routing, etc) -Then depending on rig (reflex for instance where Cypress is not visible without removing rig) simply ASKS: "Cypres on"? If the "student" ansers YES -who's "fault" then? My gear check for that "student" is now complete. But then again personally, I would NOT have stopped the jump altogether either, JUST for the Cypres having not been turned on. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

It sounds as if she was pretty "aware" & seems like a pretty "heads-up" jumper, this is great. And this is fine for you Bill, you have what now ...approaching 3,000 jumps? I think you even state in a later post here that you did not develop this until at least 500 jumps & then really only too once you started to get into bigger-ways (1500 jumps?). Now, I'm not advocating by any stretch that people be "staring" at their altimiters. However, this jumpers profile indicates she has @65 jumps and I do think that is probably just a little too early to not even be aware of your altimeter until it is close to break-off/pull time. At this stage in the game IMHO you are just now beginning to more rapidly be involved with & getting absorbed into your RW skills (if you are RW -actually more applicable if you are head-down). Way too easy to get caught up in those "last attempts to make that dock", etc & lose track, if at only 65 jumps you have ALREADY built a habit of not to look until "20 seconds in" to your skydive. I do think this still bears a little more thought. No one has commented either on my observation or query on the other end of the skydive though too. I don't think I see the purpose in the alti AT ALL on "FINAL APPROACH". ...Anyone have any comments or feedback on that? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Why not? She said she did it immediately as she got into the plane. Do you know of something further that could cause concerns that we should consider? Even if it did have nothing to do with THIS one particular problem/experience? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

From your original Post: Couple o' questions. So, are you saying that from exit, all the way to 5k you had NOT yet as of that time even glanced at your alti to notice it was not moving? From your last post: So, are you saying that on your "final approach and landing" is when you DO look at/use your alti.? Serious questions here. ...Does anybody else see where I am going with this? Please don't take me wrong. I am not going to disparage/flame. However, I do think some further discussion & thought for yours (& perhaps even others) benefit should be had here, based upon whatever your answers turn out to be on these. Thank you for taking the time to share your experiences!

BINGO! ...You win the prize, Zen. Another (and the "real" one I was hinting at) good point to also keep in mind. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Maybe you only go to 12k BECAUSE you move, ever think of that? I'm only kidding, and I see in there that you say your "moving" portion only takes place later. Seriously though, if you want more altitude you need to better coordinate when everyone is "getting up & moving around". Just automatically getting up & moving around (too early) will LOSE you some altitude at some DZ's if you ever do any travelling. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

My point is that if you are going to 13.5 say, wait until you clear at least 11. ...You don't really need 3 full minutes to do gear checks now do you? Now if their A/C was only going to 10 in the 1st place, fine. See where I'm headed here? coitus non circum - Moab Stone

I don't know that this maneuver is "formally taught" anywhere. It used to (I think -again back in the "olden" days -and I aint that old) be in the SIM under available EP's, but I do not know that it is (even there) anymore. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Also, what kind of aircraft was this? ...The reason I am asking is because your original post states: WTF is everyone all moving around in the aircraft at that altitude for? ...Is all you get only @10 grand to start with? Me would think you would end up with some pretty pissed off pilots if they're constantly having to fight with trim, then re-trim settings for the most difficult portion of their climb on your behalf (because you all want to get up & check each other & move around at THAT alt.) in the 1st place! Hope you all also look to check your spots too. I'd be concerned pilot would be kicking you out early as I know I would if you were doing that to me! coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Well, if it was their policy then for him to ride down, it should be their policy to refund him the gear rental fee (at least). ...Oops, am I now arguing THAT component too? ---DOH! I'd still like to know. I wonder if what was meant by "HAD TO" ride down because that was his (or her) decision. coitus non circum - Moab Stone

Had a canopy collapse while turning into the wind (from approx 120ft AGL) in an off-DZ landing in "MARGINAL" wind conditions in the 1st place (back on jump #87). Okay, so I "buried" a toggle too... but that is another story Compression fractures to all 5 of my lower lumbar (L1-L5) vertabrae was the result. 1/2 an inch in height shorter later, very VALUABLE LESSONS LEARNED for sure. Partially why you see me on here jumping into the incidents forum more than anywhere else now adays -especially when off DZ landings &/or high wind decisions & "get-back-itis" issues are present. Best to learn WITHOUT my injuries if you all can! coitus non circum - Moab Stone