chuckakers

Look at the Tony Suit Pit Special and the Bev Suit Comp suit. They are nearly identical in design. IMO the Tony Suit is a bit more durable but in fairness it will be about 50 bucks more expensive given the same options. For a guy with your build I would go with the following. - Nylon front for speed. The back will be spandex to keep the body snug. - Spandex lower arms. - Small or medium grippers. Grippers create a lot more drag than many think, so keeping them small really helps. - No inside leg gripper unless you plan to do competition. They add drag and (arguably) they don't add much benefit in fun jumping. - Regular (small) booties. Booties create a lot of drag and mega booties can be a bit tough for younger jumpers to fly with. - Fabrics - beyond the nylon front and spandex arms for speed, your options are 4-ply or supplex for the cotton areas. This will be for the leg area. These two fabrics are very similar in strength and durability. Supplex is a slightly lighter fabric often preferred by folks in warm climates. As far as fall rate, there's no real advantage in either. - Bootie fabric - options are supplex, 4-ply, parapac, cordura, and ballistic nylon. IMO supplex and 4-ply don't create enough drag to be truly effective. For slow falling jumpers I like parapac. It's a "nylon-like" material with a weight closer to cordura (the stuff most rigs are made of). It's a bit less "grabby" than cordura and slightly faster. Gripper fabric - options are supplex, 4-ply, and cordura. Cordura will create added drag. Go with supplex or 4-ply. Either is fine. Options: Unless you have really small feet, I would get inseam zippers. Makes getting the suit on and off much easier. Be sure to get fitted by a dealer. Measurements for bootie suits must be accurate to make the booties work well. One last thing. Buy the Jack-the-Ripper hook knife option. It's only 20 bucks. Get it mounted on the thigh on your strong side - left if left handed, right if right handed. You may never need it but if you need it and don't have it you may never need it again. Message me if you have any questions. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I think you should post the threats. Might show the world her true colors. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Dude, you can bet she is already reading every post. Even the donkey stuff. Hell, maybe *especially* the donkey stuff. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I don't think the number of new A license holders listed in Parachutist is a good barometer for your statement. First, I think the mag sometimes limits listings when necessary for space and then lists more new license holders in a month than actually got the license when they have space to catch up. Second, you don't know what that 600 number represents relative to the number of people who started jumping and didn't graduate, so saying student retention isn't an issue seems to be made from a position of incomplete knowledge of the real stats. The raw number of new A license holders doesn't tell the story. Whether we have 6, 60, 600, or 6,000 new A's in a month, the truth of success would be in stating the percentage of new starts vs new A holders. I agree that we could do a lot better retaining students. I also believe that there's room for improvement in retaining licensed skydivers in the sport. Since 1994 when I got my A license there have been well over 50,000 new A licensed skydivers. As Gary pointed out, there are a whole lot of issues with retention that "we" can't do anything about, mostly external pressures. The "Sisters" program is geared to overcome some of the things that we can do to maintain female skydivers as students and as new A licensed jumpers. We're running a program at Skydive Spaceland that is doing great things in retention. We call it the "Transitions" program and it is available to any licensed jumpers from any DZ with 100 or fewer jumps. Each weekend we offer our noobs mentors that they can jump with 1 on 1 or in small groups at no extra cost. The mentors are all coach rated or better and jump with a camera for more effective bebriefs. Also, one weekend each month we host a "Transitions" event, with mentored jumps focusing on a specific skill area like flying the hill, launching exits, tracking improvement, etc. These events are also offered at no extra charge. The DZ picks up the tab for the mentors jumps and the mentors volunteer their efforts. The program has been a supreme success. Spaceland graduates an enormous amount of students and we saw too many folks fading away after graduation. The Transitions program has done a great job keeping the noobs engaged and excited about each visit to the DZ and the formal training is producing terrific skill improvement for them. These jumps are augmented with fun jumps with load organizers or with others to help the young folks feel like they are part of the experience jumper base. I know many DZ's aren't able to offer slots for such a program, but there's also a fantastic retention method I've been using for years - our time. I have found that young jumpers have a million questions that they don't ask or maybe don't know to ask. I try to spend as much time with our young jumpers as I can, and host impromptu seminars on every topic imaginable. Just last weekend I missed jumping with the Mayor of Houston because I was tucked away in the snack bar discussing aircraft weight and balance and the role of the fun jumper in aircraft emergencies and didn't hear the calls. As it turned out I had more fun anyway. By far the best retention method I've ever seen in skydiving is making people feel included and safe. We try to get and keep our newly licensed jumpers engaged and draw them into the social side of our community as quickly as possible after graduation. I have found that new jumpers are nervous about jumping in what they perceive as an unsupervised environment, and socially many of them feel intimidated interacting with the more experienced jumpers. We figure it's up to us to break that ice and help them get over the "noobie" hump. When a guy with 5,000 jumps approaches a noob and invites them on a skydive it makes their day. They just don't realize it makes our day too. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I don't think the number of new A license holders listed in Parachutist is a good barometer for your statement. First, I think the mag sometimes limits listings when necessary for space and then lists more new license holders in a month than actually got the license when they have space to catch up. Second, you don't know what that 600 number represents relative to the number of people who started jumping and didn't graduate, so saying student retention isn't an issue seems to be made from a position of incomplete knowledge of the real stats. The raw number of new A license holders doesn't tell the story. Whether we have 6, 60, 600, or 6,000 new A's in a month, the truth of success would be in stating the percentage of new starts vs new A holders. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

More than being ok, hanging at the DZ is encouraged. You can learn a bunch just being exposed to the environment and experienced jumpers. Also, be sure to introduce your self to DZ management and explain your situation. There are countless odd jobs at most DZ's and you may able to trade some work for jumps! Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I'm no rocket surgeon, but that sounds like a coach can get in the act anytime beyond the first hop n pop. Do 10 second delays come after a single clear n pull? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Hi Chuck, Do you know which year Sandy made his tuck tab riser covers? The earliest rig having those I've seen is an Atom from '89. The Talon Tongue (main pin cover closing tab) was introduced in '86 or '87 and the concept was adapted for riser covers a short time later. Pretty sure Sandy holds the US patent for parachute tension-type locking tabs. Not sure what all it covers. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

1. A deployment of EITHER canopy at tandem terminal could prove to be a problem. 2. Tandem belly terminal = 135/140 mph? Sounds a *little* slow 3. Why would you advocate slowing down to belly terminal first after being head down and then tossing the drogue? The drogue can be deployed as soon as the tandem pair is belly-to-earth and doing so would result in reaching drogue-fall terminal much quicker. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Yes. From USPA website as of 12/29/14... Richard Winstock USPA Member # 114434, D-19054 National Director richardwinstock68@gmail.com 65 Ridge Rd. Hackettstown, NJ 07840 (310) 750-7767 (908) 850-1047 (fax) Committees: Membership Services, Safety and Training (Chair) Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

My operation was ramp checked several times. In our case the fed knew exactly what he needed to see and was pretty well-versed in skydiving ops. Always checked a handful of cards and seals, and then focused on the pilot, the plane, and documents. Our feds always enjoyed a ride in the right seat too. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

You can.... Just you can't pay someone else to do it for you. You personally can jump with a garbage bag or bedsheet for a main, if you install it and jump it yourself. That's the catch. I don't think that's correct. As far as I know there are no FAR's regulating the manufacture and sale of main canopies. Hey regulation hawks, is that correct? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Awesome, a Christmas day rehash of this age old argument about who can do what to a main canopy. After that maybe we can rehash the theological discussion of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The reality is the it matters not one tiny bit what the regulations say if there is no enforcement of them. Please, anyone, cite one small example of any legal repercussions to anyone making any modifications to any main parachute at anytime, anywhere. No theoretical examples of what COULD happen, but real world examples of what DID happen. We live in the real world, not in an FAA circular. I wasn't talking about enforcement actions. I simply said that every fed I've ever worked with stayed strictly with the FAR's to reach conclusions about any particular subject. As we know, there's often a mile-wide gap between FAR violations and enforcement actions. BTW if you have something better to do than rehash age old arguments on Christmas day, knock yourself out. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Maybe to you and me, but I have yet to meet a fed that would agree with straying from regs. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I don't think we can guess the motivation behind any particular reg. The FAR's are filled with parts that have been changed, tweaked, removed, added, and twisted, often to patch a previous version. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Not to mention technically a Senior rigger can't legally modify a canopy. I know....I know...riggers do it all the time....blah blah blah. That's why I said technically. I may be incorrect but I don't think that applies to main canopies or other non-TSO'd components. it absolutely does. I don't like it any more than anyone else but only a master rigger, the manufacturer, or any manufacturer deemed competent by the FAA Administrator can alter a main canopy. Edited to add the text of the law.... So I can design, build, and jump my own main canopy but if I want to alter it I need a rigger. Perfect. Or if I build my own main I am considered the manufacturer and therefore can alter it even though I may have no idea what I'm doing? Does the FAA distinguish between a modification and alteration? Would a slider swap be considered an alteration? What if the manufacturer provides more than one slider with a main canopy from the factory? What about RDS systems? Are swoopers altering their canopies by removing the slider during flight? I'd like to hear a fed's take on the above regulation. As usual, it seems a bit ambiguous. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Not to mention technically a Senior rigger can't legally modify a canopy. I know....I know...riggers do it all the time....blah blah blah. That's why I said technically. I may be incorrect but I don't think that applies to main canopies or other non-TSO'd components. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I'm guessing you didn't get my meaning. My point was that most mals have little or nothing to do with how the canopy is packed, while nearly every line over is induced during packing. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Contact the manufacturer. Only the manufacturer can say for sure whether modifications like slider size changes are safe. Some canopies behave well with mods, others don't. BTW, your rigger is very likely not a canopy designer and thus probably not in the best position to modify your canopy. The manufacturer is in the best position to help you. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

The question isn't what to downsize to, but whether to downsize at all. Do you have a reason for wanting more performance or do you believe you should downsize because you see others doing it? Before downsizing I suggest you consider all the changes you will face and not just the changes you seek. When you downsize you will do more than increase forward speed and overall performance. You will also: - reduce available reaction and maneuvering time when avoiding a collision with canopies and obstacles - increase altitude loss during maneuvers, including those performed at low altitude - experience greater dynamic forces and more rapid loss of altitude during malfunctions - reduce the time and distance to getting mentally "boxed in" - increase the risk of injury during all landings - reduce "hang time" that brings you home from a long spot - decrease the amount of nylon overhead during worst case "land what ya got" scenarios The list could go on and on. The point is that many jumpers don't consider all the things that will change when downsizing. The truth is we only need a wing loading sufficient to generate enough forward speed to penetrate jump-worthy winds. Performance beyond that is performance for performance sake. Extra performance isn't a bad thing. Just understand that in most cases it's not necessary and in all cases it increases risk. In all my years of skydiving I have never met a single person that got hurt or killed because they didn't downsize. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Line overs are almost always induced during packing by allowing a brake line to come off the top of the line stack and end up on the wrong side of the nose, often during the "cigarette rolling" or compacting of the canopy before placing it in the deployment bag. This causes the canopy to inflate with the brake line over the top of the fabric. That said, I agree with another post that it's probably best to have a deep understanding of packing and the causes of various mals before packing for others, paid or otherwise. Going a bit deeper, I wonder why this type of mal (and others?) wasn't covered during your basic packing class. The line over is typically covered in detail because it's the one mal that is almost always caused from packing error. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Yes, flat packing. Very few people do it these days and it's not really taught to the noobs any more. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Adding to what TK said, be sure to line up the drifting canopy in a straight line with two stationary points - the way you would aim a rifle - if possible. That's the best way to be sure you have a good line that can't change. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Not that I know of. My best guess is fast enough to fire and low enough to get an ass chewin'. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Start by buying the brightest freakin' canopy you can find. Cut away canopies are notoriously difficult to spot, even from above, and especially in areas with woods or tall weeds and brush. As mentioned earlier, there are several ideas on tracking devices but none that I know of that are offered turn-key for our purposes. Best bet is to get a visual on it, and for that you want something annoyingly bright. Also helps reduce the possibility of a canopy collision on all jumps. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX