base311

Nice Boat. How 'bout: Namenlos (Nameless) Clewless Mast Confusion Some Assembly Required Batteries Not Included Jäger (hunter) Fallschirmjäger (paratrooper - parachuting hunter) Knot Too Particular (not to precise... ((cheesburger in paradise)) Mango Man Barmaid -gardner

also commonly referred to as, "The Recent Unpleasantness" For those who are interested, there will be a symposium on "New Interpretations of the American Civil War," titled, "Robert E. Lee: The Man, The General, The Legend," to be held Friday and Saturday, 12-13 may, 2006 at the Kennesaw State University Center, Room 400, 3333 Busbeee Drive, Kennesaw, Georgia. Keynote: Dr. Gary Gallagher of UVA other distinguished speakers: Dr. Peter Carmichael of UNC/Greensboro Mr. Troy Harman of Gettysburg National Military Park Dr. Earl Hess of Lincoln Memorial University for more info contact Dr. John Fowler, Dept. of History and Philosophy jfowler2@kennesaw.edu

Maybe try to contact Will McCarthy at: http://www.zappage.com/contact.htm ...just a suggestion. Hope you're doing okay, Lee. -Gardner

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=314540#314540 gardner

Climb? Yes, I'd say you can likely climb. I doubt you could fix bolts without drawing the ire of the area manager and the climbing community. But much of this is probably open to debate and is going to be so specific to location that it really doesn't do much good to try to debate it here. Perhaps this (copied straight from Congressional Research Service report #94-976 ENR) gives a better idea what we're dealing with when we're talking about 'wilderness': "WHAT IS WILDERNESS? The Wilderness Act defines wilderness as an area of generally undisturbed Federal land. Specifically, section 2(c) states: A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean . . . an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value. This definition provides some general guidelines for determining which areas should, or should not, be designated wilderness, but there are no specific criteria in the law. The phrases "untrammeled by man," "retaining its primeval character," and "man's work substantially unnoticeable" are far from precise. Even the numerical standard -- 5,000 acres -- is not absolute; smaller areas can be designated, if they can be protected, and the smallest wilderness area -- Wisconsin Islands in the Green Bay National Wildlife Refuge -- is only 2 acres. One reason for the imprecise criteria for wilderness is differing perceptions of what constitutes "wilderness." To some, a "wilderness" is an area where there is absolutely no sign of human presence: no traffic can be heard (including aircraft); no roads, structures, or litter can be seen. To others, sleeping in a van or camper in a 400-site campground in Yellowstone National Park is a "wilderness experience." Complicating these differing perceptions is the wide-ranging ability to "get away from it all" in various areas; in a densely wooded area, "getting away" might be measured in yards, while in mountainous or desert terrain, human developments can be seen for miles. In an attempt to accommodate these contrasting views of wilderness, the Wilderness Act provided certain exemptions and delayed implementation of restrictions for wilderness areas, as will be discussed below. At times, Congress has also responded to the conflicting demands of various interest groups by allowing additional exemptions for certain uses (especially for existing activities) in particular wilderness designations. Ultimately, "wilderness areas" are whatever Congress designates as wilderness, regardless of developments or activities which some would argue conflict with the definition of wilderness. PROHIBITED AND PERMITTED USES In general, the Wilderness Act prohibits commercial activities, motorized access, and roads, structures, and facilities in wilderness areas. Specifically, section 4(c) states: Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designated by this Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area for the purpose of this Act (including measures required in emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the area), there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area. This section prohibits most commercial resource exploitation (such as timber harvesting) and motorized entry (via cars, trucks, ORVs, aircraft, or motorboats) except in emergencies. However, section 4(d) provides numerous exceptions, including: (a) possible continued use of motorboats and aircraft; (b) fire, insect, and disease control measures; (c) mineral prospecting conducted "in a manner compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment;" (d) water project developments; (e) continued livestock grazing; and (f) commercial recreation activities. In addition to these exemptions, the Wilderness Act extended the mining and mineral leasing laws for wilderness areas in national forests for 20 years, through 1983.(9) New mining claims and mineral leases were permitted for many wilderness areas, and exploration and development were authorized "subject, however, to such reasonable regulations governing ingress and egress as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture." Despite this authority, no permits for on-site exploration were considered until James Watt became Secretary of the Interior in 1981.(10) Litigation halted a drilling application in Montana that year, and Congress enacted a moratorium on wilderness area leasing and exploration in the Interior Department appropriations laws for FY1983 and FY1984. However, mineral rights existing on or before December 31, 1983 (or before the area was designated), remain valid, and can be developed if the right-holder chooses, under "reasonable regulations" determined by the Secretary of Agriculture, and some mineral exploration has occurred in designated wilderness areas under such regulations.(11) The Wilderness Act also directs that the Act not alter existing Federal-State relationships with respect to State water laws or State fish and wildlife responsibilities. Specifically, section 4(d) (as codified at 16 U.S.C. 1133) states: (7) Nothing in this Act shall constitute an express or implied claim or denial on the part of the Federal Government as to exemption from State water laws. (8) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the several States with respect to wildlife and fish in the national forests. However, the extent and nature of Federal water rights that might arise from wilderness designations continues to be an important issue for Congress.(12)" There's a huge amount of useful (and useless) information in the following CRS Reports 94-976 98-848 -gardner

This statement is true as long as the public lands are not designated as "Wilderness Area" or the USACE-controlled "Falls of the Ohio National Wildlife Conservation Area, Kentucky and Indiana" or the "Presidio Trust" or the "Padre Island National Seashore" (towing a parachute). Generally Tom's statement is true... but mind you: You pretty much can't do anything (bike, drive, carry a compass, radio, fart, etc.) in 'Wilderness Areas' a.k.a. 'WAs' And that goes for any lands officially designated as 'wilderness', regardless of the public lands management agency that has oversight of said wilderness, be it NPS, BLM, USFWS, USFS, Reclamation, USACE, Bureau of Mines, Minerals Management Service, blah blah blah... you get the point. Just a few references, to wit: 36CFR327.4 36CFR331.14 36CFR1002.17 43CFR6302.20

91% (Dixie). Is General Lee your grandfather? YEEEEEEE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWW!! Gardner

Generally speaking, most states treat all 'wild' animals as state's property to be managed for the public good. These animals are then subdivided into game and non-game categories. Generally speaking, non-game species (those for which there aren't hunting regulations promulgated) are protected from possession unless one applies for and receives a 'wild animal permit' or some form of collection permit (you'd almost have to be some sort of wildlife biologist or a researcher to obtain such). In Georgia, since a corn snake is not among those animals enumerated as game species, it is by default illegal to possess without a proper permit. YMMV. Gardner

Good lawd... I thought I was gonna puke in a committee meeting monday afternoon. Forget sunday; monday wasn't much better. What the hell was brandoleum mixin'? She put butter in my beer.... Seeking: hot blond female base jumper wannabe... single and no older than 20... wanna get trained? snicker. gardner

That would depend on the park. Pm me some details and I'll try to help you out. Gardner

I figured some sort of giant waterslide-like structure with a large field that approximates the glide angle of the WS pilot's approach, preferrably being constructed of HDPE. The WS pilot, whose underbelly is covered in beaver fur or similar, would make approach to this HDPE structure and match the glide slope with the structure, eventually alighting upon it. Gradually, the slope of the structure begins to go flatter and flatter until it ultimately turns upward (imagine a luge course at the end) to dissipate energy. The added benefit of this type of structure is it would be a co-generation facility to produce static electricity generated by the friction between the beaver fur and the HDPE surface, allowing for cost-recovery. snicker Gardner

A TRIAX T-STAKE AND A PULLUP CORD! -Gardner

And there ’s a lust in man no charm can tame Of loudly publishing our neighbour’s shame; On eagles’ wings immortal scandals fly, While virtuous actions are but born and die. -Stephen Harvey

The object of the game should be to survive. :) I'd buy it for sure. Best wishes, Gardner

okay... here's one: *** Two Paths Cross *** Since I can remember, I have always been fascinated with flight. As a child my father and I built model airplanes and went to airshows all of the time. All I ever wanted to do was fly. When I was about 10-12 years old, I saw the National Geographic Special about Phil Smith and Carl and Jean Boenish doing their jumps from the Captain in Yosemite. I can distinctly remember uttering aloud that I would do that someday. Then, during my sophomore year in college - in the first class of my major course work (a biology class) - I was sitting in a desk waiting for the professor to start when a long-haired lanky fellow hobbled into the room. He was favoring one foot as he sat down in the desk in front of me. I asked him what had happened to him and he said, "I had a bad landing off of the Promenade lattice crane last night... ...you ever heard of BASE jumping??" And, of course, I HAD heard of BASE jumping and thought to myself, "I'm on my way!!!" This guy's name was Lyle Murphy. Good Ole Murphy. Lyle and I talked a good bit about BASE jumping over the course of the next few days and he was surprised that I had even heard of it, much less that I wanted to do it. This was fall of 1989 and few people had ever even heard of BASE jumping. Most people, when you mentioned it to them, just shrugged and looked at you like you were from outer space; I learned very quickly to just shut the hell up about it as it only drew blank looks. Anyway, Lyle eventually introduced me to Earl Redfern. I remember my first impression of Earl: here is this guy - who lives in a small commercial building inside of which he has set up a number of sewing machines and cut tables and various other implements of manufacture - who does tree-cutting work by day and sews a line of outdoor clothing and gear by night. His place was very disheveled... all kinds of neat stuff was lying around everywhere. Earl had huge boxes full of climbing gear: ropes, harnesses, all kinds of pro, crampons, ice tools... you name it, Earl had it. Earl also had parachutes. I remember the first time I saw a square parachute up-close and personal: I was bewildered. Mind you, I had never been to a dropzone… never done a skydive. My only experience with parachutes were the games I had played as a child with flat rounds sans lines in grade-school recess. So I suddenly found myself in the midst of two BASE jumpers and lots of cool gear. Over the course of the next few months, I'd drop by to see Earl - party with him, watch BASE videos, trade stories about our respective childhood and not-so-childhood escapades. Invariably, Earl always had the better story to tell. And that was okay, because I loved to hear him talk and he loved to hear himself talk. Earl would talk endlessly about his endeavors - his climbing, his paragliding, his women. We'd share beers and stories - sometimes until dawn. I remember the first time I witnessed a BASE jump. Earl and Lyle had decided to go jump a tower nearby and I went along to ground-crew. It was at night, the moon was out and the field around us was akin to a description in the story: _'Twas the night before Christmas_. The moon on the breast of the dew-covered field gave it a luster of mid-day - with dancing sparkles of light beaming off of the blades of grass. It was cold and our breath condensed in the crisp air. The wind was still. My existence seemed surreal. It took an eternity for them to climb the distance necessary to jump (in those days, we'd go to at least 600 feet to feel comfortable for a freefall - this tower is nearly 1200 feet and this night they chose to climb to the top). They finally made it to altitude and after a few minutes yelled (what? no radios?) that they were about to jump. The adrenaline surged through my body in anticipation - I thought it was strange that I was so nervous and it wasn't even my butt that was on the line. I couldn't believe my eyes when they leapt... just a few breathless moments and it was all over. They were both laughing and grinning and congratulating each other. I was happy to have been there. We drank some beers back at Earl's place and talked about their jump. Over the course of the next several months I watched hours and hours of video (lots of Mike Allen and Bryan Scott video with the Brothers Harrison, Hoover, Payne, et al. - those were some of the guys I looked up to as I was coming along) to learn what to do and what not to do, learned how to pack a BASE rig, practiced emergency procedures over and over and over. Then one day Earl announced that we were going to West Virginia - that this would be a 'BASE trip'. I was terribly excited. I knew that on this trip I would see a dream come true. We headed off to West by god Virginia in Earl's van. It was packed with me and Earl, Lyle and Janice (Earl's girlfriend at the time). It was also packed with rigs and ropes and video equipment and lots and lots of beer. It's still a strange thing to tell people that my first parachute descent was a 230 foot direct-bag from _____ _____ Bridge. And so it was... it was like jumping into the arms of God. I basically said, "Here I am!" - did my count and went. I didn't un-stow the brakes and I riser-turned 180 degrees into the wind to land, according to plan. I didn't stand it up, but I didn't care - I had done it! I believe this is about the time that Earl earned the nickname 'The Wild One' from his peers. News spread of his putting students off of objects with no prior skydiving experience and it made others in the BASE community cringe. Neat thing about it was there wasn't anything anyone could do. Hell, we were renegades - we didn't care! As far as I know, there were only a few minor injuries to any of us and I'm aware of at least six people who did their first jumps under Earl in this manner. Only a couple of us actually went the distance to earn our BASE numbers - the rest bowed out after their first and second jumps. Back to the 230’ S in W.V. Janice was next and she was not so lucky (she, like me, had no prior skydiving experience). She had the misfortune of missing a toggle (this was the old zoo-toggle system which required a sort of wrist-rotation while un-stowing) on the left side. She managed to un-stow the right side and, with no canopy experience and while struggling with the left toggle, let the right side fly. She frapped-in after about a half rotation of the canopy and ended up with deep scratches on her left shoulder, elbow, forearm and palms (no elbow or kneepads back then - we did wear helmets, though). Earl had to scrub out the bits of coal (there used to be a coal yard there where the big grassy berm is now) that had lodged in the scratches... we did get her really drunk prior to the coal lavage. The plan for me the next day was to freefall The Bridge. The next morning I ordered a huge breakfast at the 'ern Pancake H' and ate none of it. I was so anxious and apprehensive. My biggest concern was taking a delay long enough to fall past the steel before pitching the pc. I was very apprehensive about how I'd perform during freefall - having never done it before beyond the db I’d done the day before. The landing was of some concern, but I had some time in cessnas and lots of radio control airplane experience, so I figured I could manage that portion of the jump. I just needed to fall past the steel first, then pitch. The time came to suit up - I would be the first jumper off that day (it was Saturday, September 15, 1990 - one month before Bridge Day). I was wearing a t-shirt, a sweatshirt beneath that, a pair of blue jeans and tennis shoes, and a camouflage jumpsuit over all of this. The rig was a black talon with rainbow colored tuck flap - the canopy was a mesh slider-up astrobe packed in a deployment bag. We did have the appropriate nine foot bridle with a 45" f-111 pc. The closing loop had been loosened for reduced pin tension. That's just how it was done, then. This was it. I went through my procedures again while riding in the van as we approached The Bridge. We weren't aware of the existence of a catwalk in those days... we went from the rail - how else?? I remember feeling every expansion joint until finally the eighth one bumped under the tires. The van came to rest right in the middle of The Bridge. I got out, climbed up onto the rail, said my prayer, gave my count and jumped. The freefall engulfed me. Warp factor five, Mr. Sulu. I remember looking outward at first, then straight down below me. What an incredible rush!!! I saw the horizon of the gorge engulf me in my peripheral vision. The swoosh of the wind picking up in my ears. I did maintain my count, but I got into the freefall so much that I held the pc until four and a half seconds (planned 3 second delay). I ended up getting open about halfway to the water. I had a 180 opening, which I quickly corrected with riser input, got turned around and un-stowed. I had the canopy lined up on the lz but thought I was going to overshoot, so I turned 90 degrees left out over the river to bleed some altitude. Once I completed the turn I realized that there was no way for me to make the lz and I ended up landing right in the middle of the big whirlpool there beside the lz. Fortunately for me, Earl had chosen to shoot video from the ground. As soon as I hit the water I cutaway. However, I was unaware of the dangers of parachutes and water (of course not having had water training) so I tried to save the parachute by dragging it behind me as I swam. It didn't take long for me to realize that I was getting nowhere and abandoned the Astrobe to save myself. It was about this time that the reserve container on the talon began to waterlog and, shortly, I was no longer able to hold my head above water. I could see Earl making his way out to help me and once he got to me, we were buddy-breathing; he'd hold my head up while I took a breath then I'd go under while he took a breath. We did this for what seemed like minutes. It wasn't long before my muscles were spent and we still weren't touching bottom. I finally resigned to myself that I was going to die and I remember telling Earl, "Go ahead, leave me... I'll be alright." He shouted, "SWIM MOTHERFUCKER OR WE'LL BOTH DIE!!!!" ...so I swam some more. Finally our feet touched the bottom and I dragged myself to the shore and collapsed. I couldn't move. After a short while I managed to drag myself up into the woods and stash the gear, as planned. So, I have Earl to thank for saving my life! ... and I did thank him. Even up to the last time I saw Earl, he always talked about how that was the closest he'd ever come to dying. Thankfully, that still holds true for me. Blues, Gardner

DUDE!!!!!!!!!!!! Gardner

We used to have a Tom F in the ATL. He was in Boise last time I heard anything out of him. gardner

To jumpers from the Montana area: Please contact the Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists at: gardner@backcountryparachutists.org to discuss potential issues regarding federally managed lands in your state. We just wanna make sure of a few things before a comment period expires, and we need your help to determine if backcountry parachutists would be affected. Thanks,

What the ABP is counting on is the already-stated and published word of Interior Department assistant secretary P. Lynn Scarlett and NPS director Fran Mainella, who have made clear assurances in a July 1, 2004 correspondence to Congressman Tom Tancredo that backcountry parachuting will in fact be given a fair hearing and a place at the table in the backcountry management planning process. Moreover, NPS Intermountain Region director Steve Martin (whose territory includes most jumpable NPS units other than Yosemite and Kings Canyon/Sequoia) stated in an email sent last year to all of his superintendents that, “It has come to our attention that some of you have recently received letters from the Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists requesting that they be involved in any existing or future planning efforts with a stated goal of ultimately permitting their activity in your respective parks. In addition to their letter, you should have received a copy of a July 1, 2004 letter to Representative Thomas Tancredo (R. Co.) from assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget P. Lynn Scarlett which addresses this issue on behalf of the National Park Service. I agree that it is appropriate for parks to encourage all citizens who have an interest to participate in our planning processes. Responding to this group, and inviting their participation in any current or upcoming planning exercises is appropriate and encouraged.” (See the ABP chronology section for details and links to the letters archive at: http://www.backcountryparachutists.org/chronology.php). Thus are we not ‘back to the way it was prior to 2001’ as was blankly stated above... we are far, far beyond the pre-2001 hostility that stalled progress for so many years. In the course of fighting for access, the ABP has nurtured relationships within the NPS: from unit-level managers right to the very top, and even within NPS’s mother agency DOI. And we’re beyond the need to rewrite 36 CFR 2.17, which does in fact allow parachuting pursuant to the terms of a permit which can be issued routinely on a pro forma basis without an application process of any kind. NOTE: Many jumpers may not be aware of the fact that overnight hiking in the Yosemite backcountry (and most other NPS units where wilderness is a concern) is also PROHIBITED EXCEPT PURSUANT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A WILDERNESS PERMIT - it's just that you get your permit by walking up to a window and asking for it (or reserving it online). The permitting process is used as a management tool so NPS knows: a) how many people are in the backcountry at any given moment; b) who they are; c) where they generally are and where they are going; d) when they plan to return, and; e) to provide an avenue for the NPS to dispense basic backcountry information and last-minute advisories to backcountry users. Consequently, there is now nothing within the current regulations that we cannot live with nor work through; it is now up to the ABP to work with individual NPS units to establish a means by which backcountry parachuting can be integrated into a given unit's overall backcountry management plan. The details of this integration will vary from unit to unit but the path is now open - policy-wise and regulation-wise - for us to work with (instead of fight with) NPS to gain and maintain the fair access we have sought since Carl Boenish first filmed backcountry parachuting from El Capitan. And while the ABP moves ahead with its ongoing initiatives already underway within several jumpable NPS units, jumpers motivated to do some writing can do two things right now: a) send in comments supporting the deletion of the policy prohibiting backcountry parachuting AND THANKING NPS for ending its institutionalized access discrimination against backcountry parachutists (please note that when it comes to national parks and other areas, it's ‘backcountry’ jumping we're talking about, NOT "BASE" jumping – backcountry has a very specific bureaucratic and management connotation – so it is important to remember that we are backcountry parachutists when we are talking to backcountry managers); and b) send a note to Congressman Tom Tancredo thanking him for his efforts on our behalf - and perhaps make some showing of support for his re-election campaign (even $5 is a nice gesture). If you want to get more involved, please go to the ABP website (www.backcountryparachutists.org) and either join the organization as a bronze, silver or gold member, or become a RAM (research action member) and help us as we move on to the next step - dealing with individual units to gain fair access in exchange for responsible use of jumpable cliffs in U.S.national parks, monuments and national recreation areas. More from the ABP soon.

What it means is the new edition of Management Policies: a) rescinds/deletes/axes the system-wide prohibition of backcountryparachuting and its declaration as inappropriate b) restores the ability of superintendents to make a unit by unit choice to allow jumping (or not) without getting permission - or waivers - from national headquarters c) eliminates the institutionalized discrimination of backcountry parachuting by NPS; and, most importantly, d) signals to every superintendent in the NPS that when Director Fran Mainella says she expects them to give backcountry parachuting a fair hearing, she means it. This is indeed a good day everyone, and we all owe a big thanks to Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo and the ABP's founder Robin Heid for getting this ball rolling - and MOST ESPECIALLY to all ABP members and other jumpers who stepped up to the plate by supporting our efforts - and who amplified our message through the hundreds of letters they sent through the ABP letter system. This doesn't mean there still isn't a LOT of work to be done in presenting our case to individual park managers (yes, you will still be arrested and have your gear taken in Yosemite if you jump there today) but THE major hurdle to progress has been removed, thanks to your friends at the ABP and all the jumpers who joined our efforts. Well done and now it's time to move on to the next step, so we hope more of you will join the ABP and send in donations so we can further amplify our message and improve our effectiveness even more. Thanks,

The Draft Proposed NPS Management Policies Document has been released for public comment. You can view it here: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?projectId=13746&documentID=12825 As the Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists had hoped and had consistently requested, the BASE jumping prohibition originally set forth in the 2001 edition of the Management Policies has been completely removed from the new draft document. As the ABP clearly pointed out to the NPS, there is plenty of authority to regulate backcountry parachutists within Section 8.2.2.4 - Backcountry Use. It appears that the NPS has heard our rather boisterous appeals to strike the old Section 8.2.2.7 in its entirety. IT IS GONE! Well, not completely... 8.2.2.7 now deals with equine use and is re-titled: Recreational Pack and Saddle Stock Use. The ABP will be reviewing the current draft in greater detail today to verify that nothing sneaky has been done, but on an initial quick review we're unable to find anything specifically related to parachutes or jumping. The ABP will also be monitoring the draft as it moves forward through the public comment period to make certain that nothing slips past us. For now, though... score one win for BASE jumpers and the Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists. All I can say is wow... politicking really does work. Stay tuned for more from the ABP. To our members: Thank You for your continued and unwavering support! Yay!

Please see: http://www.backcountryparachutists.org/utah.php The ABP is currently working with the Utah State Parks Board to work out a plan for backcountry parachutists at Snow Canyon. The notice you posted is an agenda item that is not an action item; it is an informational update to the Utah Parks Board relating to this issue. There is not going to be a vote on the matter at this meeting. Thanks,

possibly... possibly not. It's also possible that the same issues were present but just not nearly as pronounced at the lower W/L, therefore you might not have noticed them. Was that pd190 a 9 or 7 cell (2.5:1 aspect vs. 2.1:1 aspect)? and what is the difference in aspect ratio for either canopy and the sabre (2.5:1)). I'm just trying to collect more info. I'd say more than anything the changes in the towpoints have affected the outboard cells' trim relative to the inboard cells' trim and the whole thing is out of whack

Looks like a trim problem to me. I've experienced this (more than I'd like to admit) behavior in kites that are not properly trimmed and/or the airfoil/overall design was flawed. It can be due to a number of environmental issues, but in the absence of severe turbulence I think mainly: trim and airfoil type (which you won't be able to change at this point). Since your canopy attachment points are at your hips, I would assume the tow point (for lack of better nomenclature) spacing now relative to a normal skydiving arrangement has changed to become significantly wider... add to that the removal of the slider (which would bring the line groups back together - thus maintaining the design's dihedral) and you're probably pretty severly out of trim. As to which direction to tell you to go? you're on your own. I will say this, though... you're a test pilot: proceed with extreme caution and maybe consider doing some of this stuff with a little more altitude and a lot more reserve fabric close at hand. Not sure what the rib x-section looks like on that sabre or how much it is reflexed (if at all), but that nose-diving behavior is exactly what a reflexed airfoil is supposed to prevent. Read THIS for interesting info on reflexed airfoils for tailless designs. Talk to some of your paraglider design gurus for advice... you don't want that sumbitch bowtying on you at 100' agl... it'd ruin your day. Gardner

Some true history of parachuting on public lands controlled by the National Park Service: Two years after Carl Boenish filmed backcountry parachutists jumping from El Capitan in 1978, and two years after the National Park Service instituted a policy of prohibition and prosecution against backcountry jumpers, the NPS decided to create a “legal” program of jumping from El Capitan modeled on its successful hang glider permitting and regulation system. A three-month test program began in early August 1980. This program failed because the NPS, the U.S. Parachute Association, and the jumpers themselves had no idea how to integrate jumping with other backcountry activities. NPS reacted initially with prohibition because it didn’t know how to integrate the activity into its backcountry management model; instead of approaching its management the way it would climbers, hikers and other backcountry users, it looked at jumping as part of the special use/aviation model, and it was from this initial misperception and miscategorization of the sport that all of our current problems arise. However, NPS was not alone in embracing the aviation model: jumpers themselves and the U.S. Parachute Association in particular, tried to apply the aviation regulatory model to the activity with no reference to, or understanding of, backcountry management and ethics. Witness the July 1980 Parachutist Magazine headline: “El Capitan Opens For Skydiving” – as if it were just another airplane or ride at the local amusement park. Moreover, the USPA requirements – USPA membership, D license, hard helmet and square main – failed to in any way address the need for jumpers to act responsibly in the backcountry. And therein began the next set of problems – wilderness-ignorant jumpers running around the backcountry like hooligans who showed no respect for the park, its wildlife, or other visitors. To top it all off, El Capitan is the only major cliff in the entire U.S. park system with a paved highway running past its base, and Yosemite Valley in summer is its most congested venue outside of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Bottom line: Yes, there were individual jumpers who made everything worse with their actions, but the real problem stemmed first from a fundamental misperception of the nature of the activity, which resulted in an administratively untenable test program that was conducted at the worst place in the system (El Capitan) at the worst possible time (the height of summer) using the worst possible model (aviation/special use instead of backcountry). Fast forward to 1999, when Jan Davis died during a protest jump against the discrimination NPS had practiced for 21 years. NPS used Jan’s death to validate its prohibition of wilderness jumping by deflecting the discussion from access discrimination to safety and, about a year later, NPS finally put in writing the 23-year-old policy prohibition it had previously denied existed: Section 8.2.2.7 of its 2001 Management Policies manual prohibited parachuting from cliffs in all national park areas as a matter of policy, and was not a discretionary matter for individual superintendents. Since then, The Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists, Inc. has worked with Congressman Tom Tancredo and reasonable members of the NPS management family to establish a dialogue based on fair access and responsible use based on the backcountry management model rather than the aviation/special use model. That process has borne some fruit already, with the most problematic of the policy ban language having already been deleted from the proposed new manual. There are three specific reasons for adopting the backcountry regulatory model for parachuting on public lands – and as a USE model for its practitioners: Backcountry parachuting is what it is – parachuting in the backcountry, in the wilderness, away from people, and streets and wires and cars (and hospitals and paramedics), up close and personal with trees and rocks and lions and tigers and bears (oh my). Consequently, “E” jumpers need to have exceptional parachuting skills and backcountry-specific knowledge, equipment, and ethics. “Backcountry” has a specific bureaucratic meaning in public lands management that aids the access process. The administrative, managerial, bureaucratic problem with “BASE jumping” is: “Where do we put it? How do we classify it? We don’t know, so… NO.” With backcountry parachuting, on the other hand, the very name describes the activity, its venue, and its classification. And as the ABP demonstrated in Utah on July 8 http://www.backcountryparachutists.org/utah.php, public lands managers “get” backcountry parachuting and thus were able to take informed action to include it in their access process. It’s important for technical and political clarity to separate backcountry parachuting on public lands from BASE jumping, which often occurs illegally from private property. “BASE jumping” conjures up images of buildings, antennas, bridges – and people running from the cops, thus muddling the issue of parachuting access on public lands. This was demonstrated recently on television in Australia, where the jumpers argued for legal access to Oz national parks. The problem was, they called it BASE jumping instead of backcountry parachuting and so the reporters flashed pix of building and tower jumps and then said, “this is what they want to make legal!” The situation at New River is unique in that the issue revolves not around managing parachuting as a recurring recreational activity in the backcountry but administering a one-day special use event governed by a local agency that starts on state property and ends on NPS-controlled land. Accordingly, much of the financial and operational burden faced by Bridge Day organizers does not originate with the NPS. Consequently, the ABP takes no position on the current situation, other than to remind readers of this thread that in 2002 New River superintendent Calvin Hite and chief ranger Gary Hartley put their careers on the line by initiating a waiver request of the 8.2.2.7 policy prohibition so that jumping could continue at New River, and then followed it through to a successful conclusion. In so doing, they completely demolished the legitimacy of the policy prohibition, and for that they deserve our continuing thanks, even if they do add a few more rangers to the festivities than may be necessary. K. Gardner Sapp Executive Director Alliance of Backcountry Parachutists, Inc. http://www.backcountryparachutists.org