peek

S/L instruction requires instructors that care about the sport than about themselves and their pay. This type of instructor is becoming harder to find as our poor sport is becoming more and more commercialized. One DZO I know gave up on S/L instruction because his staff was too cool to go dispatch a few S/L students and do a clear and pull after them. They wanted the freefall and the pay the AFF instruction provided. Don't even get me started on Tandem .... Oops, changed my mind! We have 2 training methods that 1. use/require more turbine aircraft support, 2. are oriented toward longer freefalls and "more fun", and 3. generally pay the instructors more, than S/L. They kind of "gang up" on S/L instruction don't they? Once a dropzone has a turbine aircraft that they can barely afford (because they have to "keep up with the Jones'" and won't admit it is sucking them dry), it's "all about" the turbine. More tandems, more AFF, (and more freefall video too.) Although S/L instruction can make them more money if done from more affordable aircraft, it doesn't fit in as well with the turbine aircraft.

Currently, on the main page on the Time magazine web site, there is a poll about helmets while skiing, no doubt related to Natasha Richardson's unfortunate death. I'm quite surprised to see how many people think that helmets should be required. It seems to me to be similar to head protection while participating in many activities, in that it affects only the person wearing a helmet or not, (assuming the person is an individual participant and not in an instructional position, etc.) If a well known person who was skydiving had a hard landing, hit their head, and died later, do you think there would be a similar reaction?

"Flat" is a poor name. There are (2 or more) pack jobs done while laying on the floor, "stack" and "roll" are 2 named packing methods. You can pack any parachute any way. It is a matter of convenience and "cool factor". Packing tabs are not required for either "flat" pack job, but make it easier.

Mike, I think you meant to use the term "generic" proficiency card. There is no "short" card, at least as far as the items on the card. The number of pages is not a reflection of the content, due to filler space, graphics, notes, etc. There continues to be a belief among many skydivers that the ISP oriented card is "superior" to the generic card, but this is not true. Actually, the generic card describes in more detail many of the items to be learned.

When it is cold I think it helps make the student more comfortable. Other than that, in case wind conditions changed, an off-field landing happened, and a landing were to go so bad that the student's head were close to the ground. If a pilot lets a larger aircraft stall when a large formation is getting out, and the jumpers remaining in the plane are tossed about. (Granted, these are rare, but head protection is simple and easy.)

Maybe someone has done this already? I'm looking for multiple pictures of accuracy approaches that show a variety of brake positions. I'm trying to put together a tutorial for people to learn how they need to get set up on an accuracy approach depending on the wind conditions. I have found some videos that have great shots of landings, but what I would like is some pictures or video of a larger part of the approach to show the angles involved. Multiple angles and brake position would be great.

Extremely well done, Peter! I was thinking of jumping something really small but since you have done it, no need. I may jump the 30 foot cruciform we having lying around here, but I'm not going much more radical than that.

Well, then I must be too, for spending a Sat. night reading posts about skydiving instruction, and liking what I'm reading. (Granted, it's winter and I won't be doing it this summer though.) Because a lot of people see it as that, but I'm not sure why. I don't like it myself. The FAA has Part 141 flight schools with progressive examination, why can't skydiving? Likewise! (and described so well I thought I would quote the whole thing).

If it was me I would use 3/4" square weave at 1000 pounds, but hey, maybe Chris can maybe get back with us after a certain number of jumps and let us know about the wear. And then there is the stitching. Depends on how that is done.

So what does everyone think of this guy's statement (assuming it was reported correctly)? "So what's skydiving? Just another notch in the pole," says the 23-year-old Trevor. "We've done a lot of crazy things." I was about to create a new post titled "Just another notch in the pole" until I saw this one.

OK, Dave, enough already! How many times are you going to use the word "modern" in your posts? Not everyone wants to "progress" to swooping. Please contact John LeBlanc for a copy of his presentation at the 2009 PIA Symposium, which describes two different paths to which to "progress". (Funny thing is, he said he gave this presentation at the 2007 Symposium, but I missed it, and evidently a lot of people did, or they wouldn't go around assuming a progression toward swooping.) Check out PD's newest canopy, the "Pulse".

I understand, but our students, after becoming experienced skydivers, and if the exit altitude is anything but "low", no longer need to worry about "stable" exits. They can just "fling themselves" from the aircraft (while avoiding the tail) and have fun. Very good idea. My thoughts, (and the thoughts of my friend who makes nearly all of his larger aircraft jumps from a low altitude), "Leave with your knees on the floor".

I knew there was something wrong with you Michael! Not only are you skydiver, but you have mechanical and electronics thought running through your head too. I have been following his articles. He really puts a lot of effort into the parachute part of his project. I'm impressed. Pyrotechnic cutters are common. They make them with whatever delay you want. When you pull their firing pin as the load is pushed out the aircraft, it starts a timed burning, and at the end it fires a cutter like in an AAD. Reliable but expensive. I think several hundred dollars. At Yuma Proving Grounds I saw a nichrome wire type of cutter, but I don't think they are common. I don't know what it was based on and don't remember who made it. I was thinking of making a similar one controlled by the usual microcontroller and pressure sensor circuitry, but the pyro cutter is just so common and reliable I don't think it would be worth it.

QED Aha, "that which was to be demonstrated", now I understand. Do you suppose that customer will go to a non-GM DZ? Perhaps, but in some areas they are few and far between.

You know, there are a lot of different kinds of people on USPA's BOD. Not all of them are fond of having USPA members pay a lot for the meetings the BOD has in person. Having any other kind of meeting besides in-person would not be "taking one for the team" for me, because I don't consider it an advantage over other means of communication. About the only thing I can say I benefit from is a winter meeting held where it is warmer than the midwest. And we don't go to them to skydive. We are lucky if we see anything besides the walls of a boardroom. To all: I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet, but it has always been assumed that BOD meetings should be moved around the country so that more members can conveniently attend. If you do not agree, then by all means tell the BOD. It is not written in stone, but has been done that way for a while. If you really want to see the USPA BOD work efficiently, contact your favorite committee Chair and ask them how much of their committee work gets done between the meetings, where much of it should be done.

Do you suppose AOPA loses money? I'm kinda thinkin' that they make enough profit to have some in reserve for the next new government related issue they need to deal with (on behalf of pilots like you and me).

Very interesting to hear about the success you are having with that! What do you tell them to touch? Do you have them practice on thew ground with a handle so they know where it _would_ be? Yep, in some case this is true with ripcords too.

Seems rather meaningful to me, dear! Jan went way out of her way to explain things to you, and other USPA members willing to read and learn. She will continue to do that regardless of how a few members continue to bash her. Huh, I had to check to see what thread we were in. I'm beginning to see a pattern.....

May I change the subject for a moment? How often does that happen, and what are you finding results when that takes place?

I can't think of any disadvantages! FYI: http://www.pcprg.com/hardop.htm Having a local rigger make you a slider might work better.

Did you just happen to stumble upon them coming home from grocery shopping? Got agenda? The agendas for the next BOD meeting are on the USPA web site. I don't see anything in any of them about the discussion of the lawsuit.

Let's be careful shall we? In case someone takes the word of someone they hear on dropzone.com. We should add that USPA individual members volunteer to follow the BSR's on every jump they make, including students/instruction standards. Only if neither a dropzone nor it's jumpers are USPA members can they "do anything they want", (as far as USPA "rules"). (I am not suggesting that this is good or bad for USPA to have that much control over skydivers.)

For me too. The results of the poll are not surprising, just troublesome, because it indicates we will be continuing the debate in the future, perhaps here, perhaps not. I reminds me that I was never able to contact Rob Laidlaw. Oh, well the Symposium is close.....

Scott, for the "record", I am certainly not one of the "most". Good idea. (800) 435-1975

I know what you mean. That quote is just my observation of what I have observed going on, not my opinion of how I think it should be.