peek

Yes, but as someone else posted already, it needs to be much more than just packing... Actually, much more effective if you find the right rigger to work with.

I put this in the Instructor forum instead of gear because it is more related to working with the student than just about gear. For those student rig with adjustable main lift webs only, what are your gear up steps as far as the adjustments? (Let's assume for now the connections that hold the container against the body are fixed.) I know how I do it, but I'm seeing some interesting variations. MLW first or second? Made with the rig off or on?

So I sent this email to Ed Scott: So after you have admired your picture on page 52 of the April 2008 AOPA Pilot magazine for a while, turn to page 137 and see who else is in that issue. (And you all thought I was just going to tell you about Ed didn't you?)

Perhaps I should have asked that differently: "Why only Tandem jumps?" Does that change your comment?

Now wait a minute. All I'm going to admit to is "goofy".

So I visited a drop zone this weekend that I had never jumped at in the winter with its 15 MPH northwesterly winter wind patterns blowing across the hangars before reaching the landing area. (Funny how I never noticed anything in the light southerly winds of summer.) So my first jump was on my small canopy, and I did a 90 degree turn to landing and swooped in, but unfortunately the wind had changed enough that my calculations about where the clean air were wrong, and I couldn't recalculate and adjust quickly enough. I got that "sinking feeling" that one gets when they have flared all the way, but the canopy still has a significant rate of descent due to the turbulence. I thought I was playing golf, as I had a divot to replace. Then I jumped my large canopy on another jump, landed in a completely different area, but when I was flaring it suddenly turned off heading about 20 degrees, and there I was going sideways and falling down, just like I had seen a number of students do earlier. A different hangar this time. Just a reminder to keep your guard up. You don't want to look as goofy as I felt. I guess they were going easy on me. Nobody said a thing.

Why only Tandem jumps?

When I wrote that script I couldn't find anything else that was public, and I vaguely recall emailing someone with the ADDS and confirming this. If you find a source please let us know. The screen scrape has been reliable for me, but I know what you mean by preferring another source. Hey, if it breaks I just get to do some more fun programming.

Kelly, did you follow that link and read what was on the page?!!! The raw data from NOAA is referenced.

I did this a while back and people seem to like it. There is info about the raw data too. http://www.pcprg.com/cgi-bin/windsaloft.cgi

A domed slider? Is that all? - a domed slider the same size as the original slider? - a domed slider bigger than the original slider? Reference please?

The industry part of the sport has indeed. Plus, so many people are not comfortable looking past their own small world and considering the multiple ways of helping student and novice skydivers. Some may have never even been to a club type drop zone.

They look like freefly/formation jumps to me....

OK, it's 250 jumps later and no noticeable change in the trim.....

Oh, come on Sandy! I'd bet you have a story or two to add to this thread.

N/A

N/A

I think I'll just let this thread develop first. I think you will see some examples. My post was to see how many other had that funny feeling I get when I hear about some of this stuff. BTW, I am not against innovation.

If you are referring to dropzone.com, well, you might ask Sangiro how that happened. He has never seemed frantic to me.

Making Your Mark on the (Skydiving) World Why are so many skydivers so intent on "making their mark" on the skydiving world? To me, some of them seem almost frantic to prove that they have created something new and wonderful. Some do things that have been done many times and attempt to re-label it as "new". Some create solutions for things that are not really a problem, (or create poorly thought out solutions because they did not do the work required to understand the real problem.) Some create "new" skydiving disciplines Some create "new" instructional techniques Some create new products that have questionable value Some create new products that have an incredibly limited market Why do these people think that they have (so easily) created the "next great idea"? Is it because they see skydiving and its related industries as "small" and think that makes their goal more attainable? What ever happened to working hard at something that one enjoys, and (possibly) reaping the benefits if this activity (or the knowledge gained from it) is truly helpful to others? It's as though many people think that if they market their new idea/product sufficiently that it will actually be wonderful. Why are they trying so hard to "make their mark" on the skydiving world?

I agree that fabric condition will influence performance, but it is still just one part of the performance. I'm sorry your friend broke his wrist, but a proper Parachute Landing Fall does not allow a broken wrist.

Well, as skydivers, we are used to thinking of the purpose of a slider being to slow the opening, but they can do some other things too. They can help organize the skirt of a canopy and may actually speed up the initial canopy spreading. (This is the idea behind the Sombrero Slider on Butler parachutes). Sliders can also prevent inversions. From the test drop work we did with true cruciform parachutes (the standard ones with the arms not sewn together) we definitely found that the inversion rate was lower.

The original Sabre is a high performance canopy, and that is a likely canopy to be used (at a low wing loading) for someone with few jumps.

Bill, before you get too excited, the word "may" (I think) had a lot to do with their statement. A low wingloading on certain high performance canopies can cause trouble in some wind/turbulence conditions, (as we have discussed before.) Of course, this should not be used as an excuse to use a higher wing loading. (It's good that you point that out though, because some people might take it wrong.)

And what would those be?