peek

All, In case he is talking about steering line length, here is a drawing to reference when asking and answering questions. Mario, is this what you are asking?

Unfortunately, as the years have gone by, there are fewer and fewer people volunteering to give presentations, and many of those that do are rather tardy in committing, and in getting the information about their presentation to the speaker coordinator, who this Symposium is Terry Urban, "councilman24". And the speaker list and all the information about it is changing right up until the last few days before the Symposium. Being the speaker coordinator is a tough job, like herding cats. Most of the work that PIA does is volunteer work, and quite a few of them work very hard throughout the year to make the Symposium happen. It is a labor of love for sure. As far as your knowing whether you want to go? You do if you have never been to one before. Especially if you are a rigger. Paying the full registration and having all of the presentations available to you is worth it if you have never been to one before. There are more presentations that you have time to go to. If you have, perhaps the presentations will seem repetitive, and in some case they are. The rig manufacturers will have presentations on packing and maintenance of their individual rigs, and much of this is repeated from one Symposium to the next unless there is something new. If you want to forgo the presentations, and just pay to get into the exhibit hall, that is great too. There is a lot to learn going to the manufacturer's booths and talking to them. A lot of business and socializing goes on at the Symposium. You can even spend some quality time with Dan Poynter. (Who?)

Our soldiers put themselves in a lot of risky situations on our behalf. I'm just glad someone thought up that system. I think that when the Jumpmaster decides to use it that they try to determine just how securely entangled the jumper is. And I don't even know what the state of the jumper's consciousness or unconsciousness has to do with that decision. I'm thinking that they evaluated the risks to that option and decided they were greater. If one of the parachutes inflated just as they got him back up to the door, it could maybe entangle with the tail. Scary stuff. Makes skydiving look tame sometimes.

They keep special parachute systems on-board just for that purpose. They connect it in some manner to the static line before releasing it. The system has a name, but I don't remember it.

Put the bag around it, blow it up until it is full, twist/tape the opening of the bag really tight around the cable, and (this is the trick) smack the bag from both sides (between your hands) really hard. This creates a pressure increase quick enough to simulate a rapid descent. I have successfully activated one in the past like this.

Yeah, that's little stuff isn't it? Sorry, I can't suggest anything easier. I'm so used to soldering tiny stuff that I just get the stronger glasses, and use a magnifier too.

You mean you downloaded the data and looked at a detailed graph? If not, then it is my opinion that you don't have enough information to be sure about anything. One explanation could be that you were tense while being expected to perform manuevers for the coach, and fell slower, then when that was over you relaxed and started falling faster right before pull time.

Your input is appreciated especially since you recently learned the stuff we are discussing, hence my questions below. What do you think is missing in the AFF course (assuming that much of the canopy control stuff is taught on the later Categories (Levels) when a student is not so overloaded from the freefall part? Simply missing things that are not in a "canopy course"? Missing the repetition and review? Did your instructors tell you to practice those things? Most of those things are normally covered sometime in your student instruction, probably during the "coached phase". When you say your "AFF course" are you including the coached phase?

Does anyone know anything about this company? I got an email from them asking about one of my company's products, but their web hosting has been suspended. That tends to not instill confidence. Are they a skydiving center? I got the following info from www.bird-man.com, and they appear on the Icarus web site as dealers too. PARACENTAR DOO BEOGRAD www.paracentar.com Mestroviceva 6/1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro, Europe Ana Kablar, Boris Vukadinovic

The SIM has been "scrubbed" so many times now, and by so many people, that it is in decent shape. Of course, most documents could be written better, but another pass at it would just generate another set of errors that would need to be scrubbed. Skydiving is very technical, so I don't know how to make it less technical so that it would help. We all need to learn a lot of technical things to stay as safe as we can. And every time a new safety issue is realized, something gets added to the SIM, usually including some recommendations. It's huge isn't it? I can really sympathize with a skydiving student needing to read so much of it though, and needing to find things in it. Sometimes it takes me a while to find what I need in it. Personal note: SIM is not plural. Drives me crazy when people say "SIMs".

Thank you, and good job.

I'm not sure what USPA should do. The point of my post was to suggest that perhaps large aircraft should be doing multiple passes. An interesting example is that Jan Meyer once told me that she downsized to a smaller canopy because with the larger one she used to have, she would have jumpers from a later aircraft passing her up and landing before her when she was jumping at a busy DZ like Perris Valley. We are creating very busy skies with all this activity. Perhaps it is time to pace ourselves and spread the jumpers out a bit.

Not only are they relevant, they are related. While I don't have the statistics in front of me, I would guess that people are seldom colliding under canopy after having jumped from a C182. (Someone correct me if they have statistics that show otherwise.) As a number of previous posters have pointed out, canopies have changed. In general they are faster now. The way loads are flown has changed too, but in a way that results in less safety, not more. I remember the days of multiple passes, but we don't seem to do that anymore. Combine the two changes and it is no wonder that there are more canopy collisions.

Good for you, Mike. Tell "jvtandem" to go away.

We articles for that and other things: http://www.pcprg.com/student.htm

Sorry, no.

You might do some research on the currently available software packages to see if they are able to create files that can be imported into QuickBooks or Quicken, and import equivalent files. (Disclaimer: I have used manifest programs only superficially, but have used Quickbooks for my business, and have found it to have everything a business should need, including files that can be sent to accountants with their satisfaction as the result.) It seems to me that trying to include all of the accounting functions in a manifest program is trying to re-invent the wheel, and may not give an accountant what they need in the long run. A manifestor needs a manifest program to help them juggle people and loads, but for invoicing, crediting, etc, DZ management needs an accounting program. There can be some complicated situations of course, but you could design for the "average" DZ without all of those possible situations. For example, linking 4 team members together to manifest their 4-way team as a group is nice, but not used by most DZ's. Someone please correct me if I am wrong or being naive, but it seems that once a load has gone and you know what you are charging each person on the load, an accounting software package could do the job.

Oops, I forgot to say something about pulling it out of your jumpsuit and trailing it from your foot. It sure does look good attached to the canopy though.

These were pointed out to me by a PPG pilot. Apologies if they are a re-post. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Xj_2QRj1co http://www.youtube.com/user/dorondekel Has anyone tried this with their skydiving canopy?

Submitted. Abstract of proposed presentation for Symposium 2011 by Jean Potvin and Gary Peek of the The Parks College Parachute Research Group Presentation Title: "Computer programs for inflation modeling, opening shock, and design" This presentation will describe a number of computer programs the Group has written over the years for simulating the opening characteristics of parachutes. Some of the programs are available for download on the Group's web site at www.pcprg.com/research.htm. 1. PIMS, the Parachute Inflation Modeling Suite, a Windows-based computer program for the inflation simulation of several types of parachute used by the military as well as by sport parachutists 2. OSCALC, the Opening Shock Calculator, a free Windows-based computer program for the computation of parachute opening shock. 3. PIFCALC, the Parachute Inflation Calculator, a free Windows-based computer program for the computation of the opening shock of manned parachutes, including sport parachutes. A related document is paper AIAA-2007-2551, Testing Without Load Cells - Can Opening Shock Be Estimated From Video Data Only? 4. TCDCALC, the Truncated Cone Decelerator (TCD) parachute design calculator, a free program to help calculate the characteristics of a TCD. The presentation will include live demonstrations of the computer programs running on a laptop computer. (If time permits the audience will be invited to provide input to the programs to produce results desired by the audience.)

That's exactly right, Jerry. http://www.pcprg.com/stiltabs.gif But I don't think it is that hard to grab the seams of a parachute without packing tabs. Some of the first ram-air canopies didn't have packing tabs and they managed to get packed.

That reminds me of a saying my friend (girlfriend of a skydiver) told me many years ago. I don't know if it is an old saying, or some of the lyrics to a song, but a search doesn't reveal anything. One part angel, one part whore, the other part owns a liquor store...

They could have been, but think I recall seeing a manual showing a stack pack. But I don't have a manual. Thanks for the drawing. That also helps people understand that a stack pack is actually rather symmetrical.

And it is amazing how many jump planes lack this simple safety feature. One of the most important reasons to have one is so that if a jumper is doing something goofy, the others on the load who know better can point to the sign. Case closed (hopefully). Does your aircraft have spotting lights? Red and green? Red and yellow? All three? What do these mean? Do they mean the same at the next DZ or in the next aircraft? What is the default exit order? When does this change? (Personally I like Mike Mullins' King Air method even better than a sign. Tell them what to do over a loud PA, and have a mirror to verify what they are doing.)

That is a great example, thank you. This type of thing is what I try to encourage tandem instructors to do. Not to force them to do anything, but just to present the information, because most students will make good use of it. (And the instructor will have more fun too.) If a tandem instructor treats it like a carnival ride, it will be.