peek

I think that graphic could use a lot more swirls with arrows downwind, and actually, making the drawing longer to include area further downwind. The drawing as-is would seem to cover only low winds. Even smooth ditches that are only a few feet deep can cause turbulence when the winds are moderate to high.

So who did this? And why? https://www.facebook.com/tandem.net

Mike, you were the last person to post in this thread some months ago, and I see that you live locally to the discussed dropzones... Any updates on the issues that you know of?

Perhaps some of us that have jumped a number of canopies of various designs and sizes might think that the design difference in a Triathlon and Spectre is slight, but I think the Spectre is the first slightly elliptical canopy that he has jumped. And mainly, he admitted that he did not study up on the differences, no matter how small they might be. As far as I know, Dave has no vision issues.

"...yell at me [JP] at the top of your voice that I don't know what I'm talking about as an instructor in front of staff and customers..." It is not clear to me at all. Chuck, did you really do that? If not, why would he say that you did? I have never known JP to BS. So you did do this then? "...yell at me [JP] at the top of your voice that I don't know what I'm talking about as an instructor in front of staff and customers..." I'll take that under advisement.

"...yell at me [JP] at the top of your voice that I don't know what I'm talking about as an instructor in front of staff and customers..." It is not clear to me at all. Chuck, did you really do that? If not, why would he say that you did? I have never known JP to BS.

I'm glad you mentioned that. I would like to point out [to everyone] that most complaintants, when they have weak accusations or evidence, quit posting here rather quickly. The fact that "theforkguy" continues to explain as much as he can to us tells me that he is serious, and perhaps has legitimate complaints, (whether they have been presented well or not). Personally, I am going to continue to read, and to try to not place judgement. I encourage him to continue explaining, (and also to try to "clean up" or modify some of his early descriptions of his complaints.) Modifying his descriptions of what happened will of course be considered as "changing his story" to many, but that's the way it goes. Again, I'm listening.

John has been an excellent moderator. I don't really think that there would be a conflict of interest with him working for a manufacturer, but, hey, his decision shows the level of his integrity. Thank you John.

Actually my itemized deductions are less than the standard, but my skydiving income is a 1099 form as a contractor. All my expenses are deducted from that before getting counted as income. At least that what it appears my accountant does.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but that looks like a Strong Dual Hawk with the student drogue release handle placed on the student harness main lift web near the chest strap, and is being operated by the instructor. If so, it is a rather poor location for the drogue release. Sooner or later he could expect to be accused of groping a student. The instructor's leg position looks rather odd.

And the pilot is charge with knowing the rules himself, not just relying on what someone tells him. Agreed, although it is amazing how many pilots trust experienced skydivers in matters such as that. I think that many pilots get taken advantage of. I've seen it happen numerous times. . .

"Draves, a skydiver for 13 years, is not surrendering what he sees as his rights so readily." and "The balloonist had his certificate that authorizes him to operate his balloon suspended for 180 days, according to the FAA." His "rights" to get a pilot in trouble, huh? Lovely. I wonder what he teaches his skydiving students about the FARs, pilots, etc.

The jumper's movement, even though it was minimal. It doesn't take much sometimes.

Open reserve container in C-182. Very experienced jumper, rig type unknown. (I forgot to see what kind it was although I recall it was not a type with an exposed or partially exposed pilot chute). He was sitting with his back to the instrument panel, there was no "back rest" type device to keep rig away from the panel. His movement was minimal. He could tell when it happened, announced the problem, and stayed in position, holding the pilot chute trapped as we descended. The door was never open with the pilot chute out. There are multiple bad things that can happen when a container makes contact with an airplane: 1. The airplane can a.) damage the container or b.) cause the container to come open. 2. The container can damage the airplane, especially some of the more fragile controls on the dash of a smaller plane. Ideas for prevention: 1. Make a "back rest" to keep the container away from the panel. (Don't count on this as a for-sure fix, but it can help. Especially helpful for if you have student rigs up against them, because new students are more clumsy about their movement.) 2. Use continued vigilance to prevent your rig everyone's rig from rubbing against (anything). 3. If you are sitting in that position, ask the pilot to look at how your container and its flaps are interacting with anything on the panel. All pilots are more than happy to check this for you because they don't want their controls in jeopardy. Some combinations of jumper size, rig size, and flap/pin position just happen to line up to make this kind of thing possible. It doesn't always take much movement. In a way, it is a fragile environment in which we skydive. Please be careful.

Oh, my! I didn't know there was one of those in containers of ashes. Do the people who provide the service tell the relatives about that tag?

Did you slo-mo a different video than the one you pointed us to? Because I can't see any line stows, or hardly anything to do with the deployment. Got any stills or another video format that shows what you are referring to?

Say what!!!??? Let's try that again: www.parapublishing.com

At this point, what really keeps the fun in it is working with students. I'm not sure what is going to happen when I some day let my last instructional rating expire, but I'm going to keep doing something until I can no longer physically skydive. I guess you can say that I "got hooked".

Just a reminder to everyone to not get in too much of a hurry to skydive when the winds are high. Last year, during the springtime, and even well into the middle of the summer, the winds were sometimes high in the Midwest and people were doing tandem jumps anyway. There were some really rough landings and some damage to both rigs and bodies. I guess tandem instructors felt like they needed the money, or something. Yesterday, I did 2 tandem jumps at a DZ where the winds were somewhat high, but were acceptable for me. (I load up a tandem canopy rather well.) I spent considerable time in the landing area to see what the winds were doing where I would be landing, and to find the area of least turbulence. The first jump was uneventful, although I'm glad we had shaggers. The winds were slightly higher on the second jump, but again, me and the video guy spent time in the landing area evaluating the wind. This time, the video guy had a landing that was severely affected by turbulence, and his canopy dropped him out of the sky the last 10 feet. No injuries, but by the time he got his canopy under control and avoiding the mud, and considering that I landed far enough downwind of him that he could not run to us, he wound up missing the video of the landing. (Me and the student had a soft landing but had to wrestle with the canopy.) Afterwards, he said, "That was stupid of us!", because we missed part of the video and the landing scared him. Perhaps we should have skipped that jump. (Neither of us do it for the money, so what were we thinking?) My advice: Be conservative! Be as safe as you can be. Especially with students. Please be careful and have a nice summer. It has only begun, so pace yourselves so that you don't get hurt.

I prefer to use the "standard" (e.g. TYPE IIA SLEEVING, ParaGear W9680) unless I specifically need to use something else. The reason is that I do not pack extremely tight rigs and that the friction of the Type IIA Sleeving with the ripcord pin is appropriate for these rigs. Does anyone know if any rig manufacturer specifies anything but Type IIA Sleeving for rigs that don't have an AAD? Or do they specify any material at all any more? (I have not done much of a search in newer manuals.) I realize that it has become very common to use "Cypres loop" material, and that no one seems to have a problem with it, but it also seems like a lot of people use it because rigs have become so damn tight that some people probably think they need that much strength.

Here is an updated version of the one I wrote many years ago: http://www.skydivestlouisarea.com/boogiesafety.htm

Well isn't that a coincidence! I was thinking of requesting that it be made a "sticky".

A definition, from Wikipedia: "Crowdsourcing is the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people, and especially from an online community, rather than from traditional employees or suppliers." This is a message, and some advice, to those who may post to dropzone.com for the first time, or for those who seldom post until there is a perceived problem. On occasion there is a person who posts a question or comment that seems a bit suspicious to those of use that have frequented dz.com for some time. The wording of their question leads us to believe that they are posting the question for a reason that is different than its outward appearance. Often this person does not identify themselves by filling in their dz.com "profile", therefore making us suspicious of their intent. Usually when someone does this, it creates many questions for the poster, from people trying to determine the reason for the post. The questions and attitude about the questions have been "crowdsourced" so to speak, by taking the collective knowledge of the dz.com community. And there are some pretty darned smart people here, as well as being very knowledgeable about skydiving. If you make such a post, please do not get offended if people ask a lot of questions, and question your motivation. The collective questioning and suspicion is legitimate and reasonable. What seems to be the questions of an individual are most often the questions of the community. That individual just happens to be the first person to ask those questions. .

If you think "confirmed cynical sarcastic bastard" is asking a lot of questions, well, you ain't heard nothin' yet. (From me and from others.) 1. "Some people say..." Who says? experienced skydivers? tandem instructors? drop zone operators? 2. Are you an experienced skydiver? student? tandem student? attorney? etc? 3. Are you confusing state law with our national association's (USPA) rules? 4. Who in authority have you contacted about this concern? "Safety regs should be clear and unambiguous." Actually, they usually are, but one needs to identify the regs first. (By the way, when someone talks about rules and their possible violation on their first post to dropzone.com, they are of course suspect. Sorry, but that is kind of given around here.) .

This seems to be a recipe for creating a downplane! Why do this? I have done numerous CRW side-by-sides (me in a large 9 cell and my friend in a large 7 cell) and steered that way (with toggles), pulling the canopy being steered away from the other canopy by as much as 2 feet, and watching the other canopy follow it. No instability or tendency to downplane. (Might be different with 2 small canopies.) When I tell people about this method I always emphasize keeping a good watch on how the canopies are reacting to each other, and steer only a very little close to the ground. No flare on landing.