peek

Derek, Drew, and Bill, I probably should have given everyone a better definition of "inexperienced jumper" in my comments about downwind landings. I agree that by the time someone has enough jumps and has a high enough wingloading that they are landing at the same time as many other jumpers, that they need to land the same direction even if it is downwind during light winds. What I was thinking as I wrote earlier was the very inexperienced jumper or the student that hears the very experienced jumper or instructor say "Everyone must land the same direction as the first person." This person might be landing 1 to 2 minutes after everyone else has already landed, and if the wind has picked up, I would hate to see them biff in because they took such a statement too literally. This could be the case if it is not explained to them well enough. In other words, I hope we are teaching good judgement as well as rules or statements made by experienced jumpers. Possibly our conversations will increase awareness of this. For those of you who have mentioned small landing areas that everyone must land in - How small are you refering too?

I am not all that thrilled with the idea of "following the direction of the first person landing". 1. The wind can both change AND _pick up_ from the time the first person lands to when the rest do. If the first person is jumping a small canopy and the rest are jumping larger canopies, the amount of time between the two can easily be long enough for this to happen. 2. The first person down can _make a mistake_ and land downwind. 3. The first person down can deliberately land downwind, knowing that they can easily do that if the winds ar low. (Not even to mention that the first person down can land crosswind, thereby _really_ confusing everyone else.) 4. Some inexperienced jumpers, even if using larger parachutes, simply do not have the skill to land very well at all, and asking them to land downwind is asking them to risk injury to an even greater degree than they already are. 5. Inexperienced jumpers have been known to do sudden turns near the ground, and I have to believe that this is more likely when they realize they are going to be expected to land downwind. They can change their mind at the last minute and turn too low. I hope we all recall some of the "I'm having a difficult time learning to land well." threads. Some of these inexperienced people have so little confidence in their ability to land that they are "choking" on landing and biffing in. I don't think we should add to that pressure by asking them to land downwind. We all know that _physically_ we can easily land downwind in light winds, but skydiving is a very _mental_ sport. Some people are unable to land downwind mentally. And above all, I hope we all remind ourselves and our fellow jumpers that it is OK to land in whatever direction they want if they land well away from everyone else, and encourage them to do so.

I'm looking for a _very_ basic CRW tape. Not a professional training program (even if there is such a thing), and not anything competition related. Just some shots of people docking, so that some people I am describing some of this stuff to can see what I'm talking about. I just put a split slider on my canopy and hope to video a bunch of my docks, so you get the idea. Maybe the top person in a 2 stack videoing a third person docking on the second person from that view, etc. Possibly some of you have some video around that I can talk you into copying for me.

Like this [attached photo]. Thumbs up / smiling = not nervous / no need for extraordinary measures. Head jammed back/hands tightly gripping (anything) = "time to be scared/oh-my-god, don't do anything wrong" position = tense on exit. Hit elbows on King Air door? Not when I tell them to grab the side of the door and _pull us out_ when I say go/arch! I teach them _skydiving_ exits, not passenger exits.

What does "World Class" mean? In recent years, all kinds of skydiving organizations, drop zones, etc. have begun using the term "World Class" to describe their instructors, coachs, load organizers, etc. What does this expression mean to you? Does it have any effect on your opinion of the skill, knowledge, etc. of the people described by this expression? Is there an "official" meaning to the expression, or a formerly "official meaning"?

TRAIN YOUR STUDENT Although the change to FAR 105 refers to the person up front as a "passenger", remember that they are your _student_, so train them as such. They are a student just like an AFF or S/L student, and deserve the best training you can give them for the amount of time you are allowed. And if you don't have time, make time. Teach them to be a _skydiver_, not a passenger. And they will act like it. You are a TI, not a TM.

The spring winds here in the Midwest, and the early summer winds, along with the turbulence caused by heat, has caused me to revisit some canopy issues. So I have a comment/suggestion for some readers, and a questions for others. Over the years I have seen a number of canopies, when either flown in thermal turbulence, or accidently flown in the burble of an obstacle, partially collapse for a very short time and then reinflate. Often this is an end cell rolling under somewhat and then quickly snapping back, and in the process, making a very noticable sound. Canopies that are lightly loaded seem more susceptable to this, and it is not hard to imagine why. Lighter wing loadings usually mean less speed and the cells not being rammed with air as hard. To me it seems that non-zero-porosity canopies do not exhibit this unless the wingloading is _extremely_ low or the cells are very short. For example, back when Strong Tandem Master 520 (square feet) tandem canopies were common, I saw a number of end cell rollunders and snap-backs, simply when there were thermals, and not downwind of obstacles. My suggestion for the less experienced jumpers (bear with me, it doesn't hurt to reiterate this): If you have a low wingloading you need to be particularly aware of where you are landing in relation to obstacles, and how much thermal activity there is when you jump. (Also how close you are landing in time and distance, behind another canopy.) Please be careful, and study up on where to expect turbulence. It can't be seen, and usually we can't even see the effects of it unless something happens to us. And for the more experience jumpers and instructors: Suggesting to less experienced jumpers that they keep their wingloading low is a very good idea, to reduce the rate of descent in general and to be more forgiving of slight canopy control errors. However, in doing so we might be giving them another set of problems, since most are going to have _high performance zero-porosity_ canopies. We should remember to tell them about the disadvantages of light wingloading too. Leading up to the question: My first few jumps on a Sabre 230 were spooky. I am about 230 pounds and there were some thermals that day. It did not feel very firmly inflated at times. Today an experienced instructor told me that he though the original Sabre canopy, when lightly loaded, had a tendency to not be firmly inflated, and that this was considered common knowldge in his area. The question is: Do any of you experienced jumpers know of any other canopies that you have heard of from _a number of sources_ that exhibit this. Note! Note! Note! We already know about the Nova! No need to rehash that. And this is not intended to be a Sabre bashing event. Although some of them open hard, they also fly well, so quite a few novice skydivers will be obtaining them for quite some time to come, since more experienced jumpers will be going to even higher performance canopies.

Just like USPA, AOPA is an organization that I would never consider NOT being a member of. Because of its size, and because skydiving is tied so closely to General Aviation, AOPA probably does more to help us than USPA does (in strictly aviation issues). (Of course there is no one other than USPA to help with strictly skydiving issues.) It also does not try to be a trade organization by representing FBO's or flight schools, so it can concentrate on its main purpose-representing individual pilots. (For those of you with some time on your hands, Google for "general aviation coalition".)

The short answer is: The advent of Tandem jumping. (However, it became much more than that, see below explanation.) I had thought of getting my instructional ratings for a while but had not gotten around to it. When Tandem jumping was being developed but was not common, I thought that was the most incredible way to instruct, and I knew that I wanted to do that. I said this out loud to a very experienced jumper and instructor, and he was kind enough to me to admonish me for even thinking about it without yet having any other instructional ratings. He said, "Gee Gary, taking someone up on a Tandem jump is going to be reserved for those with only the highest instructional ratings, and you have none!" This is one of the biggest favors any skydiver has ever done for me. I knew he was right, so I immediately set out to get my Static Line Jumpmaster and then Instructor rating, and by the time I had them, the local DZO had purchased a Tandem rig and gotten rated himself. So there I was, prepared with other instructional ratings and ready to become a Tandem Instructor. Here is the "however"- The journey from no ratings to nearly all of the ratings (S/L, AFF, and Tandem I/E) has been a fantastic one, and I have enjoyed teaching skydiving using ALL of the instructional methods. I literally do not have a favorite. My idea of a great day skydiving is to do a couple of Tandem jumps, a couple of AFF jumps, a "coach" jump of some kind, and jumpmaster a S/L student or two. (Flying the 182 jump plane somewhere in there, and an 8-way would make it even more perfect, of course.) I must also add what many of you have said is the reason you became an instructor- My instructors. These were my skydiving role models. I was taught well by a number of really great people that gave back to the sport by helping me, and of course, it feels great to carry this on.

Chris: It doesn't make any sense to me to shorten [Tandem] training. How does this improve turn times? Turn times are made by people showing up to the plane on time. If you aren't showing up to the plane on time then there is an issue with manifesting. You were put on the wrong load. Other up jumpers should have been put on that load and you meet the next one. [stuff snipped] So basicly, my point is that we are talking about apples and oranges when discussing training and turn times. They have nothing to do with each other. Gary: Thanks Chris, a very good point made. I see many Tandem students rushed through training, only to see them sitting around for an hour waiting their turn. If an instructor is not doing anything else, that is a great opportunity to do some "elective" training. And I often do this. I've even thought of writing up a document to give to Tandem students after their "required" training to give them a little more detail about a skydive, which might make them even more comfortable. Of course, the required training needs to be done efficiently just in case an _occasional_ Tandem needs to be expedited. But if they are all being hurried through, something is up with that. Note to Jason: Nothing critical of your question, just praising Chris and his SDC attitude toward Tandem students, which I have always liked!

Tom, I don't see an email listed for you so hopefully this message will cause an email to be sent from dz.com. I wanted to send you an email. What did your reply to me mean?

Skymamma said: So what makes a metrosexual man? He's been defined as: straight- G: I'm OK here sensitive- G: I need Chapstick once in a while well-educated- G: I'm a smart ass urban dweller- G: no dogs under the porch who is in touch with his feminine side- G: the side with the mustache? He may have a standing appointment for a weekly manicure- G: with my clippers he probably has his hair cared for by a stylist rather than a barber- G: sure, back when I used to get it cut at all He loves to shop- G: Oh, yeh, at Home Depot his bathroom counter is most likely filled with male-targeted grooming products G: like Irish Spring? He may work on his physique at a fitness club- G: how about the community rec plex? his appearance probably gets him lots of attention G: Yeh, you don't see too many left like me

PackerBarry: 2. measure the slider and maybe get with a rigger to build you a larger slider "that is within design parameters" but will slow down the elapsed time between the slider being dominant and the canopy taking over What parameters are those? Something published somewhere?

I have been thinking about this for some time now, and have come to the conclusion that we skydivers need "psychological" help. By this I mean that we need professionals in psychology to teach us _what it is about the way we think_ that is causing us to do the things that are killing us. I think much of this is ego related, but it's not that simple. It's not just people with big egos that are doing intentional hook turns that are killing themselves. The ones that bother me the most are people that, for example, have a long spot, don't make it all the way back, and kill themselves landing somewhere inappropriate when they had much better options. We need to know what it is about ourselves that cause us to do things like this, and how to prevent ourselves from making bad decisions. Possibly the cause of accidents like in my example _are_ ego, but obviously of a type that is difficult to recognize by one's skydiving instructors, or difficult for one to understand _in themselves_. Are there any psychology professionals out there that can shed some light on this subject? Are my ideas about this valid? You know what bothers me most right now, and is related to this topic? In a couple of weeks I'm going to be sitting at a USPA BOD meeting, and sitting in on an S&T committee meeting where a bunch of highly experienced instructors that think they know a lot will be trying to use their skydiving instructional experience to solve these problems that I don't think can be solved solely with their knowledge and experience in skydiving. Like I said, I think we need professional help.

No, I was just looking for opinions in general, whatever I got. That of course is the problem with open-ended questions like I often ask. It sometimes seems like I am asking for something specific, because most people's questions are more specific. Some of the best answers I have seen so far are ones that say "it depends", and gives an example. These examples are helpful.

posted to rec.skydiving and dropzone.com forum At USPA BOD meetings (and at other times I recall) I often hear a statement used by BOD members and others present. "What is good for drop zones is good for skydivers". (I take this to mean individual USPA members and other skydivers not neccesarily involved in the business of skydiving.) I would like the opinions of anyone wishing to comment. Do you agree or disagree?

I'm absolutely sure this one won't be controversial or cause a flame war... Yeh, right. This is a question about your preference as to when you dirt dive when you are jumping with a load organizer. This question is oriented to those of you who jump with a group and have someone "organize" it. It is not to ask those who are load organizers how they do it. (I'm not ignoring those of you who do, but I'm looking for the regular jumper's opinion of how they prefer to be "handled".) Method A, let's call this the more traditional way. 1. Tell everyone to meet for the dirt dive with jumpsuits. 2. Dirt dive. 3. Tell everyone to meet back with gear on XX minutes before final call to go over it again with gear on. 4. Go to the boarding area. Method B. My thoughts are that it is easier and more efficient to meet _once_ before going to the boarding area, that way both the LO and the prompt jumpers don't have to wait for stragglers _twice_. 1. Meet xx minutes before the final call with gear completely on. 2. Dirt dive. 3. Go to the boarding area. (Method B assumes the LO knows how long it will take to dirt dive considering the complexity and size of the skydive.) Other notes: I use Method A at the WFFC because it seems to work OK there. Most people I jump with there are eager to crank the jumps out, and they don't usually mess around. Not so at the local DZ. It seems like there are always stragglers no matter how you do it. I'm just trying to figure out how to minimize their effect without being a dictator and scolding those who are not prompt.

peek: I'm really curious as to the extent of this. Was it nearly everyone that did one of those 2 things, or like, what percentage? crutch: As far as percentages go, I would have to say ten to twenty percent. peek: I would have never thought that it could be that high. Maybe I just happen to do certain things during the instruction that has prevented that from happening to me much, I don't know. I do know that it has been a continual learning process for me. It seems like every season I learn one more thing about how to make it better. Some of these things I learn from other instructors. Just simple little things that work for a number of students. Oh, well, that's why it's good to discuss this stuff.

Starting with some humor, I have a long time ago that there is a certain male segment of the population that as a Tandem student would much rather go with a woman because they don't want to be strapped to a man with their booty so close! Now, to continue with a comment from the other thread. You are right, you don't want to be trying to muscle your way in or out of anything unless absolutely necessary, which is usually isn't. Bill Morrissey from Strong Enterprises did the now famous study about the "side-spin" phenomenon, and determined that it was caused by instructors trying to arch to get stability when the student still had their kness down- it made things worse. First and foremost, figure out how to get your student in the correct body position, and the rest takes care of itself. Do this mainly by getting to know the student and making them feel comfortable with you. Hell, you are stapped tightly enough to your student that you can feel when they are tense, so then do something to relax them. :) Most students (of any training method) will react quite positively to your noticing that they are tense right before exit, and reminding them to relax. With a Tandem student you can just feel them relax. (Some of them even laugh at themselves because they realize they were not relaxed.) As to your size? Many years ago when I had done only a small number of Tandem jumps, I went to a DZ I had not been to and did some Tandems. I met a guy that I knew from the Symposium, and he was on the small side. A bunch of Tandem students walked in, and one was very big. We all commented on this and acted like we would prefer not to take him. All of us except my aquaintance, the smaller instructor. He said "I'd rather take big guys. Once you get them in a good arch, it's like having a belly-wart (front mounted reserve for you youngsters), it just pulls you stable without you hardly trying." I was in awe of this guy because I didn't understand that at the time, but now I do. I had so few Tandem jumps at that time that I was concentrating on me instead of the student. I look at videos of some of my early Tandems and am appalled, they look so bad. Not dangerous, but not relaxed either. Take care of your student and they will take care of you. By the way, your friends can help. Where I jump, the whole airplane full of people do things to make the students laugh and relax. We hand out mints, stating, "sorry, no flight attendant", etc. The video people are very good to do things right before exit to get them to smile. (In case that reference to "side-spin" prompts any conversation, I suggest another thread. It could get long!)

I'm really curious as to the extent of this. Was it nearly everyone that did one of those 2 things, or like, what percentage? A number of us do all of training you describe, and only have 1 student do that in a whole season. Could there have been something else the students picked up on that made them do those things?

skyyhi: I am a STUDENT so therefore not really qualified to post a response. . . peek: Well, you are obviously qualified to bring up a point that I had not yet considered. So keep the posts coming. skyyhi: .. was downsized. . .and my landings have been MUCH better since this small downsize. . . .is it easier to get a full flare on the smaller canopies? peek: Generally, for the same design canopy, yes. It's less force because there is less of the tail to be pulled down and less airflow to have to push on with the flared tail. Thanks for asking.

The only reason I can think of that it would not be is wind related. Same with a "medium performance" canopy over a high performance.

I'll try to make this brief, but I may not be able to. The people we strap onto the front of ourselves are "students", and deserve every bit of instruction we can give them considering how much time we are allowed (by various constraints) to give them. I continually have to fight for adequate time to train my Tandem students, because some of the other instructors do not care to train as much. Where I do Tandem instruction the students are shown the John Bonham video, which isn't too bad, and at least efficient for giving them the basics. They are then briefed by one of the Tandem instructors on aircraft and video specific procedures, which is about 10-20 more minutes depending on how efficient the instructor is. I am known for wanting to spend additional time with my students so management usually tells me long enough in advance so that I have time to do this. The reason I do this is so that the students spend enough time with me to feel comfortable with me. The more I teach them, the more they realize I care. I putthem at ease, something that is supposed to be the first step of all instruction. Reduced nervousness in a student means better performance on their part, and this means a _safer_ skydive because their permormance is more assured and predictable. I teach then turns, how to pull and what I will do if they don't recognize pull time, what I will do if they never look at their altimeter, I put them on the creeper and rotate them around in response to their turning body positions. (Their friends with cameras love this part too!) I teach them the _specifics_ of the exit, meaning relative wind and why it may seem like we are flipping over. When I tell them that because of the way the wind is coming, that we will be skydiving "sideways" for the first few seconds, their eyes just light up, because they understand that, and it reassures them that everything will be OK even if it feels odd. Sound like a lot? All of this only takes about 5 minutes! Much more of the training is done as we go. We go over the freefall sequence in the plane just like most AFF students do. Why not? You've got the time and it reinforces to them that they will perform well, giving them even more confidence and making them more comfortable. After opening I show them what they would do if they had just opened their own canopy and were steering it by themselves. I teach them complete canopy control, the pattern, running, holding, crabbing, etc. Why not? We have a 5 minute canopy ride with nothing else to do. If they have brought their small camera along I show them how to hold it down below so as to get a picture of both of our faces and the canopy. We do practice flares until I know they will do it right on landing. Do I need to add that we flare and land together? When we land, and if they are not too involved with distractions like frineds that jumped or in the landing area, I ask questions about how they likes the manuvers they did and what some of the things felt like. "Did it deel like we were flipping over?", I ask. Without fail they tell me they really enjoyed doing turns themselves and that they could tell it was them doing it. All of this debriefing can be done while gathering up the canopy. All of this just doesn't take a lot of time. We go inside, do the certificate presentation, take off the gear and fill out the logbook. (All Tandem students get logbooks don't they? They are _students_ after all. S/L and AFF students get them.)

dfk1979: Would a delta position cure an uncontrollable spin? Skratch: Deltaing out of a spin was once a standard technique. Maybe it's emphasized less now because AFF instructors are reluctant to have their students deltaing away from them. Gary: Believe it or not, I've seen it work! Worked really well too. Disclaimer: No one told this student to try this. It is something he picked up on his own from reading more about skydiving than actually skydiving (and consulting his instructors.) I would think that few instructors now would suggest this to a student, althought like Skratch said, it used to be commonly recommended. My thoughts are that it works/worked mainly because the student will be concentrating on the delta position and not concentrating on stopping the spin (which often makes it worse.)

mjosparky wrote: The [intentional cutaway] system I have used in the past was a TSO'ed torso harness under the test item harness/container. A chest mount is attached to the torso harness. It is not the most comfortable, but my last chance is on a harness that is not part of the test. Gary: I developed one that is exactly the opposite. The first canopy is attached to a harness that is worn under your normal rig. It is made from an old conventional system harness and has a container for the cutaway canopy attached to the rings where the belly reserve used to be attached. The cutaway canopy container has bungee cords to retract the flaps so they don't interfere with the handles on your normal rig. You do a sit-fly type exit and deploy. When you cutaway you have your normal rig and its two parachutes. Just like Sparky's arrangement, a bit uncomfortable, but rather straightforward. It also looks kind of wild, but when you study it a bit, it all makes sense. The cutaway harness releases are inboard of your normal rig's harness, so this would not work well for someone with a very narrow rig, like a small person. An advantage of this system is that if you abort the cutaway canopy deployment, you can just flip over and deploy your normal main. We have used everything from a Para Commander to my Stiletto 150 in it (different containers), and used both spring loaded pilot chutes and throw-outs.