nigel99

Thanks guys. We took H out for all rounds (funneled it once) and end result was Silver medal for State championships

All true, but it's still not the same as the type of distance/separation you can get on a simple diving exit. Leave the plane literally one second after the base, you are dealing with distances far greater then the height or diameter of any tunnel. Two seconds, and it's even further than that. The tunnel is applicable to certain parts of the freefall, and for those parts it's a dead-on simulation that can really build bodyflying skills for both in and out of the tunnel. For other parts, it's just doesn't have the capability to replicate the actual freefall with enough realism to really be used as a training tool in those areas. You can't pull off exits and fly points on the hill in a tunnel. You can't swoop down to a formation and learn the fine art of 'stopping', and you can break off and fine-tune your max track position. By far the biggest issue that I have seen is the false sense of proficiency that comes from the tunnel. It is a recipe for disaster, and people rapidly forget that the guy with 20 jumps, but is a tunnel instructor, may well be capable of being on that complex dive, but he is still a 20 jump person and their canopy skills are those of a 20 jump person. In a way we have seen the argument before in terms of 'I'm a pilot/glider pilot/paraglider' and therefore way ahead of the curve of other jumpers. Sadly, it boils down to the people who resist the measures to improve safety are almost always those that need them most. I just don't get the mindset that is in such a rush to bypass the journey of learning. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

***So did you get a nice, unanimous response to your question? You did not. You still don't know which canopy suits you best. That's my point. But really, don't get all wound up - it's just a chat room.[/qu You don't need a unanimous decision, all you need is someone to mention a characteristic that is important to you and its helped the decision process. By the way next newbie that asks why not a Katana for their first canopy, I assume the correct answer is shut up and demo it? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

If you weren't on the wrong side of the country and half my size I'd let you try my canopy Thanks, NZ Aero are actually bringing a few canopies to the boogie in 2 weeks time

It's very difficult to get demos here. Our canopy choices are largely lead by the experienced canopy pilots, so for a while it was PD and recently it has swung heavily towards Icarus. I've not has the opportunity to demo a canopy and have only recently experienced a Crossfire, rather than y normal Sabre 1 and 2 jumps. I am in the market and am going to be jumping as many different canopies as I can (although my mind is pretty much made up already).it is difficult though as it means borrowing gear. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I've not jumped a Pulse, but as a general rule, the flatter the glide the less power available for the flare. But flare power is only half the picture, the flatter glide can make it easier to judge the landing and also is probably a bit more forgiving. I used to love my Sabre 2's, but recently discovered that I much prefer the flatter glide that other canopies offer. As a result I will be moving away from Sabre 2 in the next few months. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Ok thanks for the feedback guys. BTW the plane is a Caravan. I can see Bow being a good one. If the rest of the team agrees, I'm going to push for us to go with the one exit (Bow - H). We are unlikely to get more than 5 rounds in, and I am sure that swapping exits around is going to result in a 50/50 funnel rate. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Vegemite is Marmites poor cousin, I much prefer Marmite, but vegemite is ok. calling sweets lollies takes getting used to. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I'm curious to see what the consensus is. This weekend we have competitive 4 way, but due to a couple of issues we have ended up with a scratch team. Experience in the team ranges from about 250/300 jumps to 1500 jumps. Conventional wisdom says you take out the first point, but it means that every exit is going to be different, and the likelihood of a funnel is high. What is the view on taking out a solid simple exit and then just transitioning to the first point? The reason I like this approach, is that it will build consistency during the day and is less likely to get messy. Specifically I'm thinking of something like the stairstep diamond or meeker. Coaching novices the stairstep holds on the majority of the exits. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

So your wife believes small and fast is better? PS the OP covered the all else being equal aspect Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

What is your feeling on the value of the APF Crest system? I like the idea of the Crest system, I think it's a little to strict in the Freefly area. What i dont like is the progression of the sport from a club (mates helping mates) mentality to a more business model. i.e. the costs to do B Rels is horrendously more expensive than when i did them. I agree on the commercialisation and as someone who started off in a club environment, I really struggle with the commercial basis that modern skydiving operates on. Sadly and this isn't the thread for it, due to the legal landscape we operate in, I don't know that you can afford to not charge above and beyond your slot in Australia anymore. I can't comment on whether the Freefly crest is to difficult, but I'd like to see the Starcrest kept as it is and people should only pass if all the requirements are met and that is including everyone being in the right slot. So the big roundie type starcrests with no designated slots shouldn't be allowed. Despite my criticism of the Crest system and how various people implement it. I think it is realistic and considerably better than having no gauge. Anybody getting into a new discipline should be getting coaching, so I don't accept coaching costs as an argument against crests. If anything I think it reinforces the need, as those who feel they don't need coaching and assessment probably need it the most. The cost of registering your crest is minimal in the scheme of things (about 1.5 jump tickets). On a similar note, I'd like to see jumpers tested on ops regs and practical aspects of the sport. I know I'm a book worm, but I am shocked at the complete lack of knowledge so many jumpers show. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Having that much air sense makes all that tracking, swooping, etc. pretty easy to learn. In fact, I see the tunnel instructors doing bad ass swoops, forward motion, etc. in the 14' tunnel at iFlySeattle all the time. One tunnel rat that I took on a Level 7 this month had, by his second tracking jump, better form that 75% of the people I jump with every weekend. Our kid's first dive to dock? Nailed it. It's amazing what those tunnels are doing to the sport. John I see your point, but I'm also reminded of the recent fatality where the tunnel flier was jumping a tiny sponsored parachute. Once off B license I am a strong believer in the Australian system, despite it's flaws. Individual skill licenses (Crests) allow for the skilled and provide a baseline performance measurement. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

What I have found is that a huge amount depends on your currency and genuine proficiency (not how good you think you are, but how good you really are). Even though people say it is less pronounced at the lower wingloadings and this is true, it still makes a difference. If you are jumping every weekend and doing a few jumps then it is far less of a consideration than if you are jumping once a month. Some people 'get' canopy flight and others don't. If you get it, then I would say you are consistently landing within 10m of a target safely on your jumps. No excuses, no blaming traffic or the spot, but consistently within an accuracy circle designated landing area. But so many factors come into play that in reality, your best bet is to get the input of the most conservative and grumpy instructor at your dz. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Oh yea, reality of implementation is a whole other can of worms that, frankly, bores the hell out of me. :) Not that it's not worthwhile, but the problems there to me are fairly obvious; you mentioned a few and of course there are many others. What does the WS crest entail? Here I have only seen two kinds of WS training. A two jump method, where a couched tracking jump is made to mimic WSing, and then the student is put in a WS and off they go, and a one jump method that leaves out the tracking. Sorry I've got no interest in Wingsuiting so I haven't read the requirements, but the apf.asn.au has all the manuals online. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

A very important distinction between USPA and BPA, APF. USPA talks about container opening i.e your pin has been extracted, whereas BPA and APF talk about Canopy opening. APF is 1800ft. Initially I missed the subtle difference, but I seriously doubt that very many people are literally pitching at less than 2500ft. I think the wording should be updated to have canopy open by 1500-2000ft. That way you avoid issues with hop and pops, and also account for the canopies different opening characteristics. So container opening as per USPA wording, no difference whatsoever, but on 8 ways I am almost always under canopy between 1900 and 2100 ft (as reported by a Viso 2) Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

What is your feeling on the value of the APF Crest system? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

The principle of individual skill licenses is very good. We have a form of that here in Australia with our Crest system. Starcrest - Allowed to do FS with more than 10 people Freefly crest - Allowed to freefly with 3 or more people Wingsuit crest - certain wingsuit privileges CRW crest - certain CRW privleges Night rating - allowed to do RW at night. All of the above have a specific training table and set of skills that need to be demonstrated in order to gain the crest. I highlighted the fact that the principle is good, because in practice it only provides an entry gate and the following flaws exist. 1) There is no accounting for currency, so you can get your Starcrest at less than 100 jumps, never jump with any other people for the next 10 years and technically you are still legal to jump on a bigway. 2) Typically there are only 3 jumps in a descent table. Like AFF people believe that you should be 'passing' all the training jumps first time. This attitude extends to a reasonable number of tutors providing the crest training. So rather than a high standard of proficiency a highly variable level of sign-off exists. I'm not suggesting people are rubber stamping the application with no skills shown, just that it would be better if a higher standard was held. I see the evidence of this most often when we do Starcrests and people WITH their crest are the ones that don't make it into the formation. To me that is inexcusable and highlights the flaws in the system. Despite all of this it is a good system and has minimal administrative overhead. People complain about costs, the bulk of the cost is in the coached slots which you should be doing anyway. If people properly logged their jumps so that you could use a Crest and logbook I think you would have a good basis for judging skills. Ultimately it fails, because people don't see the value in the system. Like virtually all preventative measures the more successful they are, the less value people place on their effectiveness. Last year was a terrible year for fatalities in Australia, and besides a couple of medical deaths, many of them had at least 1 rule that was broken. So sadly it comes down to the fact that the people who need training and guidance the most are those that are least likely to take it or value it. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Your argument about jump numbers is why I like the Aussie crest system. The principle of the system is good, but sadly as jumpers don't see the value ans logic behind it, too many people are signed off without the full skill set. The crests are discipline specific, so even though I've got hundreds of jumps I'm not allowed to do more than a 2 way freefly. We just need people to understand the reasons why. BTW, in line with the main article a newbie posted on facebook about a very near freefall and canopy collision this weekend, between him.and another low jump number person. As is almost always the case existing rules had been bent/violated leasing to the incident. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Doesn't the term "cutaway" come from days when you did, indeed, have to use a knife?? Firstly I don't get why skydivers think it is funny or odd that people assume cutaway means with a knife or scissors. To me that is not a silly or funny whuffo question. I'm not sure of the origin, but very early canopies (and in fact the C9/T-10's I learn't on), there was no need to cutaway you simply dumped your reserve. My favourite silly belief, especially that it is my daughter who is 17 and should know better is that if you fall from a height you will die before you hit the ground. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

You've already had a number of good answers. As Squeak pointed out the Australian Parachute Federation has an excellent manual for our B license requirements. You could work through those 2 way drills with someone. If you go ahead and jump with your friend, a word of warning, really watch and plan for the break-off. Just off A license your tracking skills will be quite low, so don't just give it 5 or 6 seconds, give lots of time and make sure you both know to track away from each other and hold the heading (I've seen quite a few low time people track in a circle) Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Number 4 is a joke that has been going around for years. Still funny though. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

No comment on helmets, but I agree with the Altimaster Galaxy. They are solid altimeters with a good track record, no batteries to go flat etc. When you get around to spending more on a digital, I'm sure you find that you still use the galaxy on occasion. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I believe in the right tool for the job. So as you so first step is a suitable jumpsuit, and proper body position. I think too many people try and use the arch as the only 'fix'. I like weightbelts, but am not entirely sure how soon they should become a tool. My gut tells me that pre A license they should only be used in exceptional circumstances. Would be interested in your thoughts? Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Personally I don't think people should be putting cameras on full face helmets. Having a cutaway on an open face means that as soon as you cutaway the helmet will clear. This isn't necessarily true on a full face, even with a cutaway. Use the right tool for the job! If you want a full face great, forfeit the camera. If camera is important, go with an open face with a cutaway system, people like 2k do really affordable open face helmets with a cutaway. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

I remember chatting with a chief instructor, his least favourite category of jumper was visiting jumpers with over approximately 500 jumps. By and large they don't listen to dz briefings properly, they are an unknown often on higher wingloadings. To add to the problem they are experienced enough that it is hard to justify something like a qualification or check dive, to weed out the problem children. I feel great sympathy for people like Bryan who have to make these calls and it is an excellent article by the way. Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.