chuckakers

He was an early tandem test jumper. He also worked as a delivery guy for Jimmy Johns Subs. He won employee of the month for always asking customers “Do you want Coke with that?” Wow, that's rich. Shall I "super-size" that? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Hit the phone and call some drop zones. Many DZ's - especially bigger ones - replace student gear on a regular basis, moving out gear before it's junk. Gear with 260+ mains are most common in student gear inventories. I can't speak for every DZ, but I know Skydive Spaceland in Houston rotates gear regularly. You might see if they have something. I would also suggest trimming down. Your skills will improve dramatically by getting to a more "medium" build. I speak from experience. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

They haven't said it's illegal because it's not. Stupid maybe, but not illegal. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

That my friends, is what you call "a leap". Manufacturers placard their equipment with limits they have determined to be safe and/or maximums for TSO purposes. Enforcement of individuals who choose to exceed those limits would be impossible given the number of parachutes in use and the uncontrolled and undocumented nature of distribution among private owners. Saying that manufacturers failing to attempt to enforce the impossible is the same as encouraging the behavior is absurd. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Apparently not qualified for night jumps. But hey, he brought the party supplies. Even dropped some off for a few friends in the mountains. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator? A boat? A bungee cord? A zip line? A climbing rope? No? Then why would you even consider over loading your last chance at survival while skydiving???? This perplexes me. Your own statement should answer your questions for you. Over loading a reserve is sport death. I personally know someone who died when he blew a reserve to shreds due to overloading. Manufacturers limits are there for a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences. Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing.. the max exit weight it that what is listed in large print, there is a do not exceed weight aswell and that is far above what i weigh. From checking pics vs PDs websites it seems they rate their max exit weight the same as their lowest recommended weight or student weight although the do not exceed on the right side of their chart is far higher. If i was even near the do no exceed weight i would not think to jump it. Its similar to this pic from classifieds where the max exit weight is 134 but then under is another advanced training weight that is higher. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/classifieds/jump.cgi?ID=120981&view=Image;d=1 My bad, sort of. I was replying thinking you were talking about absolute TSO limits as opposed to recommended limits for the flying and landing. With that said, it is a really bad idea for young jumpers to push weight limit on a main or reserve canopy. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator? A boat? A bungee cord? A zip line? A climbing rope? No? Then why would you even consider over loading your last chance at survival while skydiving???? This perplexes me. Your own statement should answer your questions for you. Over loading a reserve is sport death. I personally know someone who died when he blew a reserve to shreds due to overloading. Manufacturers limits are there for a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Washing machine, hell. I have an urge to get on the next load! The next load of laundry? Either my grammar is poor or you're gay. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Washing machine, hell. I have an urge to get on the next load! Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

He's flying in Florida for Desert Sand. E-mail - twiotter@msn.com Cool as ever. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Just the Otters though, not the King Airs. I don't think anyone wants their plane to crash, but if Bill thinks an Otter needs one level of maintenance, and Dehaviland and the FAA say otherwise, I've got to go with the canucks and the FAA as they might know a hitch more than Bill about Otters. +1 I find stayhigh's post quite ignorant and revealing at the same time. Assuming he means what he says, he's assuming that Bill knows more about maintenance than the manufacturer, whose requirements are backed up by decades of historical evidence, accident report analysis, and best practices. Amazing what people will convince themselves of for a cheap ride to altitude - right up until it all goes to hell................... Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Do they use seat belts? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I can't speak for the student programs at either location, but from what I hear they don't wear seat belts for takeoff at Lodi, and if that's true I wouldn't even get on their planes, let alone support the operation with my cash. If you want to be a skydiver, you owe it to the sport to vote for safety with your money. Federal Aviation Regulations REQUIRE that everyone onboard an aircraft where a seat belt during taxi, takeoff, and landing. If a drop zone knowingly and repeatedly busts FAA regs they don't deserve your money. We make a lot of mistakes on our way to getting safer in this sport, and wearing restraints was one of our toughest lessons. None of the jumpers in the story below had on belts and most died from being crushed by their unbelted friends when the plane smashed into the ground. The few who lived were in the back of the plane - and therefore on the top of the pile of bodies. If my sources are wrong and they are wearing restraints these days at Lodi, I applaud them. http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/23/us/16-die-in-california-crash-of-plane-full-of-sky-divers.html Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

That's like asking why you can't use a cell phone while taking driving instruction even though you have a driving instructor in the passenger seat. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I totally agree. I think the best way to do that is to continue to completely fill out industry standard paperwork, such as the packing data card even when not required, so the FAA in case of a fatality or other investigation does not find holes in their own rules. Sure. Go ahead and give 'em an inch.... Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

While it may not be ok by today's gear standards, we had a little trick back in the day to deal with downsizing canopies. When a container got too big to safely accommodate a canopy, we would tack a piece of foam padding into the bottom of the pack tray to help fill it up and keep the container sufficiently snug while packed. It came with the side benefit of making the canopy really easy to get into the deployment bag too. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Maybe... But: Everyone has to land in the pattern at the end of the jump (where most of the really bad collisions happen); not everyone has to also do crw before. That being said, yep, a crw wrap or entanglement is easier to deal with: plenty more altitude (and training to deal with it). Would you rather get in a warp at 8k on a crew jump, or at 100 feet? And my point about being in the pattern is that regardless of what happened in the jump, you may end up in a pattern with other jumpers and deal with traffic (yes, even with the far away spot and delay in landing.. I jump at a DZ with loads every 5 minutes: you will be in traffic on landing) I think you're being a bit disingenuous. Nope, just pointing out ALL the facts. You are discounting collisions on deployment and those that happen above pattern altitude, both of which happen on a regular basis. Of course many collisions happen in the pattern, but that risk exists for ALL jumpers, not just those doing something other than CReW. Additionally, not all CReW problems happen at higher altitudes as you continue to suggest. In fact, crusty old CReW dawgs will tell you that they often happen in disproportionate numbers at the bottom because jumpers sometimes push a little harder trying to get a last formation together or complete a transition before break-off. We can do this all night, but my initial point stands. Statistics clearly indicate that CReW jumpers, who do in fact have a higher overall risk of wraps and collisions, are injured and killed per capita at a vastly lower rate than people participating in other disciplines, even though the risk of a wrap is higher during the actual CReW, and THE SAME AS EVERYONE ELSE after break-off. This is even true if you remove the low altitude collisions you are so stuck on to make your argument. You are right about one thing. The training CReW jumpers perform DOES make them less likely to be hurt or killed in a wrap. Of course that also means that jumpers in other disciplines are more likely to be hurt or killed in a wrap because they DON"T train for it. When you're right, you're right. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Maybe... But: Everyone has to land in the pattern at the end of the jump (where most of the really bad collisions happen); not everyone has to also do crw before. That being said, yep, a crw wrap or entanglement is easier to deal with: plenty more altitude (and training to deal with it).Quote If you think CReW wraps are "easier to deal with", you haven't seen very many CReW wraps. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Wow... I just read online a few FARs (§ 65.131 Records) and the Parachute Rigger's Handbook, and actually, the SN is not required in the FARs I read... However, without a serial number, the packing data card has no way to be linked to the gear, and can be moved around. Thus I think the FAA could argue it is not an official card for that rig. As a rigger, I would never want that liability, having a card that is signed with no gear linked to it. It would make me liable for every packed rig on the planet (or if the manufacture and model is listed, every rig of that design). Further, I think the FAA kind of assumes all blanks on an approved form (as shown in the handbook and owner's manuals) should be filled out, and they might still not be happy even if the FAR does not say the record keeping required at the time of packing requires an SN. Thus I wonder, why do you not put the S/N on your cards? If anything, in case of theft, it helps you, not hurts you to have these things documented.... The card is not a proof of ownership in any way, and the SN are not private info like an Social Security Number... Unless of course, you just like to have one card that covers all your rigs so you can prove everything you own is in date at all times. FAA officials are obligated - and routinely hell-bent - on following the FAR's and their guidance, no more, no less. Except for the occasional over-bearing type, every FAA official I've ever worked with (and there have been dozens) only wanted to enforce the letter of the law. I have seen very few that try to reach beyond the regs, and when I have they were easily backed down with their own documentation and rules. The packing card is not the important document. The rigger's log is. If an FAA official wants verification that the card goes with the rig, he/she need only to contact the rigger whose seal code is on the data card. The rigger can confirm he/she certified THAT rig as airworthy per the FAR's and can also confirm that the card goes with the rig with the following REQUIRED information from the rigger log: (1) Its type and make; (2) Its serial number; (3) The name and address of its owner; (4) The kind and extent of the work performed; (5) The date when and place where the work was performed; and (6) The results of any drop tests made with it. Push come to shove, I suppose the fed could request ID from the jumper who claims it's his or hers to insure it matches the owner listed on the riggers log, but I think that would only happen if the fed suspected foul play with the documentation. These FAR's have worked just fine for years and aren't "broke". Let's not over-think things and invite the feds to scrutinize us more than they already do. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

While the overall "risk" of wraps in general may be greater while doing CReW, the statistics are pretty clear. The VAST majority of injuries and deaths from collisions and wraps happen to people NOT doing CReW. It could be said that only a small percentage of jumps are CReW jumps, but per capita or per jumps in-discipline there are still far fewer (as in almost NONE) injuries and deaths from CReW wrap incidents than in any other discipline. So for the newbie asking the question, I would be MUCH more worried about getting hurt or killed from canopy collisions and wraps during formation skydiving than I would be from CReW. Hell, most people that don't do CReW don't even know what to do in a wrap! Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

That is true, but if the gear isn't legal and the pilot in command of the aircraft allows a skydiver to use it to "conduct a parachute operation", the pilot can definitely lose his ticket. Uh, yeah. I know that. That wasn't my point. I was addressing a post where the poster INCORRECTLY said the pilot is responsible for "checking" gear to make sure it's legal. No such requirement exists. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Yeah, yeah - that was mostly in jest. However there was also a point to it. Over the years I have known more than a few guys that could be much better skydivers if they just shed a few pounds. They all say the same things - "I'm just really muscular". Yeah, uh me too.. Yes there are suits that can slow people down, but I have yet to see one that can do so significantly without causing some kind of problems. I speak from experience, too. When I started jumping I weighed about 210. At 5'9", that was pretty heavy. Of course I was just really muscular, but the suit I had to wear was flying me. Now at 180 I wear a slick suit and sometimes even slap on a bit of weight if I'm in the base on a big way. I think some of the "muscular" guys would be surprised just how much slower they fall by losing even just 20 pounds or so. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

And... if your gear ever gets stolen, I bet you'd be happy to have a copy of your pack card? Seems to me the positives outweigh the negatives. Besides, even this seems a small price to pay for a chance to jump out of someone's airplane. A smart rig owner already has all that information recorded and kept in a safe place. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

clicky Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I've never heard of a FSDO requiring ANY ongoing documentation of gear being jumped at a DZ. With that said, if the DZO requires it, that's about it. If you don't like the rules, you have the option to jump elsewhere. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX