Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Wingload BSR.

 

First page Previous page 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 20 Next page Last page  View All

Ron

May 30, 2003, 8:52 AM
Post #151 of 493 (1480 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jlmiracle] [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There has to be enough video out there of bad incidents that can be complied.

It sucks to see that stuff but that's reality and sometimes just hearing about people's mistakes aren't
enough, you need to see them.

When I used to pull low....I had a guy come up to me and ask if I have ever seen a bounce...I told him no. He told me to not do them until I have seen one...Now that I have see some...I don't like to pull low.

Of course back then I didn't listen...So, two guys came up to me. One said If you bounce I will piss on your body while it is still warm. The other said...Pull low again, and I will kick your ass. Then about 6 others said they would help him.

I stoped pulling low....Well below 1500. Now that I have almost 3,000 jumps...I pull at 2,500...Funny huh?

Ron


rhino  (D 22500)

May 30, 2003, 8:53 AM
Post #152 of 493 (1479 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jlmiracle] [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I think before anyone downsizes they have to watch a video. "Down Sizing Gone Bad", also to include "Hook Turns Gone Bad". I think when ANY jumper decides to downsize, and or try hook turns, they have to watch the video, blood, guts, bones, and all.

That is an idea. Although watching it and actually bouncing are no where near the same.

Rhino


jlmiracle  (D License)

May 30, 2003, 8:58 AM
Post #153 of 493 (1478 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm willing to try just about anything to keep people uninjured, whether it be video, threat of bodily harm, or whatever.

This is going to sound very selfish but tough shit, it's not fair to the rest of us who want to keep jumping when someone who knows better goes out and jumps something beyond their experience, gets hurt and now we have to shut down for a while so the helicopter can land and take them away.

Judy


Jimbo  (D License)

May 30, 2003, 9:16 AM
Post #154 of 493 (1466 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhino] [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Quote:
That is an idea. Although watching it and actually bouncing are no where near the same.

I agree. Maybe if someone could capture the screams, and the crying, and the horrified looks of the witnesses of the accident, maybe that might help to pump up the realism level.

Just a thought.

-
Jim


(This post was edited by Jimbo on May 30, 2003, 9:17 AM)


Zenister  (A 42)

May 30, 2003, 10:52 AM
Post #155 of 493 (1438 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jlmiracle] [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm willing to try just about anything to keep people uninjured, whether it be video, threat of bodily harm, or whatever.

This is going to sound very selfish but tough shit, it's not fair to the rest of us who want to keep jumping when someone who knows better goes out and jumps something beyond their experience, gets hurt and now we have to shut down for a while so the helicopter can land and take them away.

so you wont mind when someone with 602 jumps causes you the same delay then?? or will you join th crowd once again and say the restrictions are to low and need to be raised to protect people from themselves even more??


rhino  (D 22500)

May 30, 2003, 11:01 AM
Post #156 of 493 (1433 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Jimbo] [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I agree. Maybe if someone could capture the screams, and the crying, and the horrified looks of the witnesses of the accident, maybe that might help to pump up the realism level.

Bouncing was good for me actually. Slowed me down and smartened me up.

Video wouldn't have done anything I don't think.

Rhino


jlmiracle  (D License)

May 30, 2003, 11:04 AM
Post #157 of 493 (1430 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Zenister] [In reply to] Can't Post

If they did something stupid, yeah, it will piss me off. I don't care if they have 10,000 jumps - then it will really piss me off because they definately should know better.

When I have jumped with people who do stupid shit, I tell them that when they get hurt for doing stupid shit, where you land is where you lie. I suggest you jump with a cell phone so you can call 911 yourself.

The problem with attaching a jump number to a wingloading is some people have 500 jumps in 1 year and some have 500 jumps in 15 years.

Not every landing injury is the "canopy pilots" fault. Funky winds come out of no where and we can't see them, but when you seem someone jumping something too small and frap in, I don't feel sorry for them one bit.

As far as restrictions and trying to make this a BSR, I would love to see it, but there are too many variables to make it happen. Canopies fly differently at different elevations. Everyone I know that has flown a Nitron said it flys big.

The DZO, S&TA, and instructors and just going to have to ground the dumbasses of the world. Yeah the DZO is going to lose a little business, but you lose alot more money with lawsuits and dead skydivers.

I've always looked at the Darwin award winners as natural selection. I love my skydiving family and I don't want to see ANYONE get hurt or die.

Judy


(This post was edited by jlmiracle on May 30, 2003, 11:09 AM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
May 30, 2003, 1:06 PM
Post #158 of 493 (1391 views)
Shortcut
Re: [samp76] [In reply to] Can't Post

>But what is there to keep skydivers from keeping their current
>canopy loaded @ 1:1 for 500 jumps and then go to to a w/l of 2:1??

Nothing, but it's better than the system we have now, where they stay at 1:1 for 39 jumps then go with a loading of 2:1. The 500 jump guy will survive that a lot more often than the 39 jump guy will.


livendive  (D 21415)

May 30, 2003, 2:28 PM
Post #159 of 493 (1366 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So regulation will work...
Peer pressure has not, in fact it most of the time is the reverse.

One need not look to regulation to make a safety program become popular. Consider the treatment AODs got in the 80's then look at the CYPRES. If you can design a canopy control progression system/class that *works well*, eventually, taking it will become the norm.

Forcing another money-sucking class or tiered wingloading requirements both go against what skydiving is all about. How many more requirements does USPA have to implement before the FAA would be the lesser of two evils?

Establish a system that works yet remains voluntary and you will eventually accomplish your goal. Try to cram it down people's throats and all you'll get is resentment.

Blues,
Dave


crewkeith  (B 24861)

May 30, 2003, 3:19 PM
Post #160 of 493 (1349 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Wingload BSR. [In reply to] Can't Post

i have been jumping three years now i got a job at the dz so i could watch the swoopers land. i worked this job for almost two years. i watched 5 injuries in this time and luckily no deaths.i have seen the really bad pilots get lucky and the good pilots get unlucky. yet the need remains to go fast and take chances. what regulation could take that out of someone?


(This post was edited by crewkeith on May 30, 2003, 3:21 PM)


rmsmith

May 30, 2003, 5:07 PM
Post #161 of 493 (1331 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhino] [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
That is an idea. Although watching it and actually bouncing are no where near the same.
Actually, you don't have to see it...hearing the impact and the crys, moans, call 911!, etc. is enough for most folks.


rhino  (D 22500)

May 30, 2003, 7:15 PM
Post #162 of 493 (1310 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rmsmith] [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Actually, you don't have to see it...hearing the impact and the crys, moans, call 911!, etc. is enough for most folks.

True.. But it means more if you have actually bounced.

Rhino


nathaniel

May 30, 2003, 7:49 PM
Post #163 of 493 (1299 views)
Shortcut
Re: [livendive] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Establish a system that works yet remains voluntary and you will eventually accomplish your goal. Try to cram it down people's throats and all you'll get is resentment.

Amen.

I can guarantee to you the more regulations we have the less injury there will be because with more regulation there will be fewer people in the sport. IMO the USPA would be foolish to squander the freedom and trust it has earned for its members by micromanaging them...I for one get enough of that between weekends.

I distinguish different points from this debate

1. some people take more risks than others
my opinion: error #0, no error. we all stand out from the mainstream b/c we participate in a risky sport

2. some people don't respect others' choices about risk levels
my opinion: no one should be forced to accept a higher risk level than s/he prefers. so for instance we should keep designated swoop alleys or separate landing areas to let people interested in high risk landings do so with minimal impact to those not so inclined. Likewise we should not impose a rarified whuffo attitude on people willing to accept more risk than us

3. people sometimes misjudge the risks they take--some people consistently misjudge the risks they take
my opinion: the right way to address this is education, and it is unfortunate that some people won't learn before they hurt themselves. but there are steps we can take to improve risk awareness, like encouraging coaching, safety day, etc. While the USPA is still popular it could try excommunicating members that take too many dumb risks...but I don't think it would be popular for very long if it did so.

4. regulation is not the USPA's trump card
my opinion: Heavy-handed regulation is the last alternative and is seldom justified, imo. keep in mind that the USPA is a very democratic organization in the sense that its regulatory power is directly linked to its popularity. it becomes irrelevant if it makes too many unpopular rules as people and dzs start dropping out and forming rival associations or just leaving the sport.

nathaniel


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
May 30, 2003, 9:20 PM
Post #164 of 493 (1285 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nathaniel] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

>no one should be forced to accept a higher risk level than s/he prefers.
> so for instance we should keep designated swoop alleys or separate
>landing areas to let people interested in high risk landings do so with
> minimal impact to those not so inclined.

Agreed; many DZ's do this, and I think it's a good idea.

>Likewise we should not impose a rarified whuffo attitude on people
>willing to accept more risk than us.

We do this now. We tell people they can't jump with just one parachute; they can't repack their reserves unless they are a rigger; they can't open below 2000 feet; they can't jump at night without a light or without a certain license; they can't do demos without a PRO rating. I don't think that's "imposing a rarefied whuffo attitude on people"; I think all those regulations have done more good than harm.

>the right way to address this (misjudging risks) is education, and it is
>unfortunate that some people won't learn before they hurt themselves.
>but there are steps we can take to improve risk awareness, like
>encouraging coaching, safety day, etc. While the USPA is still popular
> it could try excommunicating members that take too many dumb
>risks...but I don't think it would be popular for very long if it did so.

I agree here. But if you're talking about essentially permanently grounding people who do stupid stuff under canopy, wouldn't requiring those same people to simply jump larger canopies be a better solution? Aren't we better off with too-aggressive new jumpers under larger canopies rather than kicked out of the sport?

(I realize that kicking them out of USPA would not really ground them, but in some places it would essentially have that effect, and that would be its only purpose to begin with.)

>4. regulation is not the USPA's trump card

I agree here too. Education is their trump card; the trick is how to get jumpers to take advantage of that. How do we encourage compliance with the ISP, which is the first step in learning to fly a canopy? How do we get the jumpers who need it to get advanced canopy control training? Peer pressure doesn't seem to work. Regulation would work (i.e. require it if they want to get out of a conservative mandatory size progression.) A lot of the ways we use now for other skills don't work - there are no "canopy organizers" who won't let you on the dive if your canopy control skills aren't there, as there are for RW and freefly.


Michele  (B 26874)

May 30, 2003, 9:57 PM
Post #165 of 493 (1281 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
How do we get the jumpers who need it to get advanced canopy control training?
How do you decide who "needs" it? I was seen throwing myself all around the ground, sometimes having difficulty standing back up...and only one suggested I take the training...(and that was via a pm and really rather nasty...and my response to that person was if you saw me, why didn't you bother to come help me??? To which there was no answer...).

So how and when do you determine who needs it? To give quade his due, he did spend a morning with me helping me understand basics, as did John Brasher - and I learned a ton from both of those men. But if there was ever a femur waiting to break, it was me. For christ's sake, I was on the bet list of how soon I would break....and told only after I had taken the class that this list even exists.

You know, if it was that obvious, why was I never encouraged - in fact, harshly discouraged from - taking the class???

So what do you do, Bill? Wait for someone to downsize and break, and then tell them to go take a class? Or help them arrange it? Introduce them to those canopy pilots who are willing to help? (oops, sorry, I'm ranting a little, but I am still furious about this)...

I was not even told about the canopy control class during AFF. At no point was it ever recommended to me that I do it immediately off student status.

Quote:
Peer pressure doesn't seem to work
peer pressure is not "take the class", peer pressure is "go buy all new kit", "you'll grow into it", "you'll be color coordinated, you'll look cool", chicks dig scars". Peer pressure is being invited on an 8 way when you're right off student status; peer pressure is "learn to sit fly right now - c'mon, let's go"; it's "a load in 10 minutes? Sure, I'll be there" without ever once considering your ability to land in those specific conditions...

You know what? There is no peer pressure to take a class. None. Matter of fact, the pressure I experienced was "don't take the class"...I still get given some grief about the number of HnP's I have in my 64 jumps - 11 to date, soon to be more - because that's not "fun"...well, maybe not the same kind of fun, but it will provide me the way to have more fun.

I mean, how fun is a hospital bed? Or coma? That can't be any fun...the sky will wait until I learn...but there are people given grief about actively seeking canopy control instruction, and therein lies the problem.

O.K., I just read this over. I am indeed ranting....and it's not directed at anyone in specific, I promise. Just don't know what else to do. There will be people who read this, think "oh, not me", and end up in the incidents.

Some people who I admire for chasing canopy control? Rhino. Clownburner. Am I proud of it? Absolutely. Do I need much more? Without any kind of doubt. I spoke with Clint at the boogie, and told him It's time for a check-up, and he and I (or one of the instructors) will be getting together soon for that.

Education works. But it only works if one gets it, and one can only get it if one knows it exists.

And with that, I think I will try to step off the soapbox....sorry....

Ciels-
Michele


(This post was edited by Michele on May 30, 2003, 10:17 PM)


nathaniel

May 30, 2003, 9:57 PM
Post #166 of 493 (1281 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
if you're talking about essentially permanently grounding people who do stupid stuff under canopy, wouldn't requiring those same people to simply jump larger canopies be a better solution? Aren't we better off with too-aggressive new jumpers under larger canopies rather than kicked out of the sport?

I had a great economics professor; she insisted that car manufacturers are not encouraging safe driving since they put things like airbags and seat belts in cars that make it easier to survive a crash. drivers willing to take a certain amount of personal-risk now can drive more crazy-like at the same personal-risk level.

How will influencing a jumper's canopy choice affect the jumper's risk preferences? could bigger canopies provide a greater illusion of safety (in SUV-style) and make jumpers more risk-loving?

btw I wasn't serious about excommunication...that would lead to holy wars.

nathaniel


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

May 30, 2003, 10:11 PM
Post #167 of 493 (1276 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
So how and when do you determine who needs it? To give quade his due, he did spend a morning with me helping me understand basics, as did John Brasher - and I learned a ton from both of those men. But if there was ever a femur waiting to break, it was me. For christ's sake, I was on the bet list of how soon I would break....and told only after I had taken the class that this list even exists.

This is an excellent post. All of it. Because it addresses part of why people don't take canopy control. It's not always easy to get.

You can go to the DZ and get an FJC. But getting canopy coaching can be a whole lot harder. People talk about you, but there isn't as much information about what's a good teaching structure.

Read Bill Booth's story about his first jump course for an example of how canopy control class is for some people now.

Yes, they're clueless. But, you know, some people are. If you give them a clue, they'll figure out what to do with it, but they just weren't born knowing where there should be clues.

Wendy W.
(born clueless)


mustard  (D 14580)

May 31, 2003, 6:04 AM
Post #168 of 493 (1261 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I was not even told about the canopy control class during AFF. At no point was it ever recommended to me that I do it immediately off student status.

I agree with Wendy, this was an excellent post. Here I am catching a few minutes to see what has been posted here since yesterday, I'm on my way to the DZ. But I can't help but respond to this (above).

Michele, I am an older and wiser version of you under canopy. Even with hundreds of jumps, I was an accident waiting to happen. There was no canopy control class for me back in 1991.

What puzzles me is why you were actively discouraged from taking the class. Did anyone actually desire to see you get hurt? I had a sense of that about me when I was first learning to fly a canopy. Nobody ever offered any instruction at all to me, even when I asked. What's going on here? Are there skydivers out there who are waiting for what they see as us inevitably getting hurt? If so, this is really sad.

Michele, you are getting an education about how to fly a canopy because you recognize the need for it. There's really no other way to educate people, if you know you need it and there's an avenue to get it, then you'll get it. That's what you are doing. I believe that your posts are educating others as well. This is the beginning we need, and small beginnings can change the world.


diverdriver  (D 19012)

May 31, 2003, 9:19 AM
Post #169 of 493 (1246 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rmsmith] Wingload BSR. [In reply to] Can't Post

Was he an aerodynamicist? Or just "some genius scientist type" as you put it. Assuming he must have known something more than anyone else inately is the wrong assumption. Anyone, at anytime, can mess up. What are those results going to be when that mess-up comes? Under a lighter loaded wing the results may not be death. With a heavier loading the chances that it is not death are diminished. Education specificly geared towards handling these canopies during our formative period (student status) is the key to setting life long good habbits in this sport.

Chris Schindler


Michele  (B 26874)

May 31, 2003, 9:44 AM
Post #170 of 493 (1241 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wmw999] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Morning, Wendy

Quote:
People talk about you, but there isn't as much information about what's a good teaching structure.
I don't know about anyone else's experience, but those who I took from do have a well developed syllabus and if I'm not greatly mistaken it was developed from someone else's writings. I received a handout (which I read often), and there were drawings and everything (which, for me, was excellent). There were video tapes which were dissected and explained, showing things necessary (like the deflection of the canopy, in full, partial, and flared flight). There was discussion on planforms, cord and span, and so on (which went over my head, to be honest). Talk about lines, which were which, what did what, and why common things occur (like end cell closure) (and again, some of this was beyond my understanding at the time.)

Quote:
Yes, they're clueless. But, you know, some people are. If you give them a clue, they'll figure out what to do with it, but they just weren't born knowing where there should be clues.
I'm clueless, too. Repeated ground throwing got me a glimmer of one, and I decided I needed to see what the shining light was all about. I don't want people to go through that, if possible. I would rather see someone not get hurt and take the time to get instruction then to go through a long and painful recovery (if possible) and then get some. I'm a wimp, I suppose...it took one serious crash with massive deep tissue bruising to make me strong enough to get the help. I didn't wait to break something (and the only reason I didn't break on that jump was because I'm short, fat and flexible...). So all you clueless folks, this is directed at you: If you see someone repeatedly crashing, coming off the field bruised, bloody, sore, hurt...take them aside. Teach them a little bit, or better yet, introduce them to those who do teach it...and if those guys aren't available, take the person's hand and walk them over to the most senior jumper, and get some sort of conversation going about how to land...and not kill yourself.

Ciels-
Michele


Michele  (B 26874)

May 31, 2003, 11:35 AM
Post #171 of 493 (1224 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mustard] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi, DJan.

Thanks for taking the time to respond before you went to the DZ....I wish I was heading there. Sigh...work calls....

Quote:
What puzzles me is why you were actively discouraged from taking the class
As best as I can recall, the comments were along the lines of:

~"Don't waste your money - you don't even have your own gear yet".
~"You're not ready to learn to swoop; for god's sake you can't even land yet"...
~"You won't understand that stuff. You don't have anything to base your understanding on"...
~"You're gonna waste their time"...
~"All you want to do is talk about skydiving, not actually skydive"...
~"Throw your money away on that? You don't need it...you need to learn freefall stuff, not that!"...
~"Here, I'll help. I'll video you"...and then not being anywhere near the landing area to do it. 4 times.
~"You're just scared of it is all"...
~"Maybe skydiving isn't really for you?" (which, at the time, was a consideration...)
~"Lose some weight, and then you will be able to handle the rough landings better"...(WTF did that have to do with anything? Those're my bumpers!)

Quote:
Did anyone actually desire to see you get hurt? I had a sense of that about me when I was first learning to fly a canopy.
I don't actually think anyone wanted me to get hurt. I really don't think there was that intent. What I think was happening was that I was struggling, people were watching, and not reaching out for whatever reason. And while that was a contentious time at the DZ for me and others, I really don't believe there was any desire to see me actually get hurt. (And to be brutally honest, there were a lot of folk who did encourage me, too...)

It's just they were "too busy" to assist. And who'm I to think anyone would actually want to help (aside from those who did, in fact, do so...). They weren't too busy to watch me crash, or too busy to hand off a passing comment, but they wanted to jump - and so they did. And of course that's why they are at the DZ...so they can jump, not teach me, which is why I went to those who could, did, and will for anyone around. But what about those folks who don't?

My point was that if I made it onto a list which tracks projected femuring in, taking bets as to when/what jump number, how bad, etc. (I am not sure what the qualifications are - I've never seen the list, only heard about it), and not told about the canopy class, then there is a group of folks who were aware that I was seriously endangering myself, and others, by not knowing what I was doing. If they were so aware, why was there no help - and discouragement actually?

Quote:
What's going on here?
I would be willing to bet that there are several things going on here...

1. Peer pressure and the lure of freefall is stronger than the realization that the ground will kill you. (Biggest one)
2. There is a misconception of what Canopy Control Class is about; the thought that it is for HP landings, for learning to swoop, for "dangerous" wingloadings, not for beginngers. I heard a lot of "you'll get the hang of it"...I just wanted to get the "hang of it" before I broke myself...and wasn't instinctively picking it up.
3. There is no clear instruction of what needs to be learned for a safe landing.
4. The folks who write the ISP/AFF syllabus don't remember, or never had a hard time with, learning how to come down safely on today's canopies.
5. You leave student status, turned loose, and told "live free and prosper"...with very little follow-up (at least at a big DZ).
6. Folks think, because their friends and skygod rolemodels didn't, they are "stupid" for needing to take a class to learn how to land straight in. No-one wants to feel like the doofus...
7. Excellent freefall skills are perceived as more desireable in a jumper than adequate landing skills...you get invited on more jumps and get to play more with friends...and that is far more fun for the beginner...landings are, mostly, considered superfluous unless your entire reason for living is the swoop...When folks come down, they are gabbling about how great freefall was, not how great their landings are. They are laughing about how fun the fruitloop was, that sit went so well....but they don't talk about "man, my set up was perfect...right there!" or "geesh, I gauged the winds properly, and tippytoed it...yay me! BEER!". What we hear is "o.k., you had a bit of a spin, here's how to correct that", not "you flared a little bit high, here's how to correct that"...

I sat back and assessed the danger points in skydiving. I put them in this order, and it may be wrong for some, but it's right for me...(there are others, such as altitude awareness...but where the injury risk is highest is here)
A. Parachute malfunctions/deployments
B. Landings
C. Exits
D. Freefall
I am working on these, in that particular order, to minimize my risk in skydiving. AFF left off at A....

If education is the key, then we need to get education out there. Let people know that it's there. It can be had. It needs to be had. And I will always encourage everyone I know to take it. There is something to be learned from the experts...

Thanks for taking the time, DJan, to read and understand where I am coming from.

Ciels-
Michele


(This post was edited by Michele on May 31, 2003, 4:17 PM)


jceman  (D 19212)

May 31, 2003, 2:03 PM
Post #172 of 493 (1205 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Michele] Re: [In reply to] Can't Post

Michele, (and DJan, too)

I wish lmore people had your attitude regarding what they need to learn to not only have fun in this sport, but just to survive. You are hitting the nail right on the head when you talk about what people expect of a canopy control course -- yes, you can take such a course to learn high performance landings, but you can and I think indeed, should, take one earlier especially if you are having problems landing.

Michele, you aren't the only one to take a course simply to improve your landings. Remember Andrea (SkyMama) did exactly the same thing with Scott Miller for the same reasons. You have proven that you have a good head on your shoulders and would like to keep it there!Wink

I just wish I had had the sense to do the same thing, maybe then I wouldn't have all this titanium in my leg.Blush

It seems you have embarked on a crusade to get more people to take canopy control lessons and I salute you. Where do I sign up for your campaign?


sinker

May 31, 2003, 10:42 PM
Post #173 of 493 (1167 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rhino] [In reply to] Can't Post

a mostly educational post... thanks to all for contributing. Being a low timer, I'm all about being conservative and being under a forgiving canopy. I think my first new main will be a mild seven cell, spectre or tri, that is conservatively loaded. After all, I still get a little spooked doing spirals under a 265 (1:1 loading).

my question is, the talk of videos of folks burning in... where are they? Please, I mean no disrespect and I don't ask out of morbid curiosity. But, seeing the possible benefit of such video, does anyone have any?


Steel  (D 23585)

Jun 1, 2003, 7:54 AM
Post #174 of 493 (1150 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] [In reply to] Can't Post

>Nothing, but it's better than the system we have now, where they stay at 1:1 for 39 jumps then go >with a loading of 2:1. The 500 jump guy will survive that a lot more often than the 39 jump guy will.

Lets try to be realistic over here and not use exageration. I have yet to see somebody with money in hand seriously intending to downsize faster than I did. And I had over 50 jumps before going down to a sabre 150 (1.4 pounds per square foot for me at the time) After that I had well over 500 jumps before getting into some serious downsizing. Anyway the point is that when I hear people talking about newbies with 39 jumps wanting to go to a 2.1 wing loading it sounds like spin. Like they are going to throw out this situation that never happens because they don't expect anybody to question it. Because if it really did happen it might make a good arguement for their agenda.
If I am wrong, I ask prove it. Show 1, just ONE, student (because that is practically a student in my book) with 39 jumps that seriously wants to get a canopy which he would load at 2.1 pounds per square foot. (with wallet in hand I mean not just somebody talking crap)
The only person I ever remember hearing say stuff like that was a whuffo co-worker of mine and that was because he knew what I was doing but didn't understand the time it took to get to where I was at. But after he went to his face on his first on a 300, on his first AFF I don't recall hearing anything stupid after that.


(This post was edited by Steel on Jun 1, 2003, 8:01 AM)


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Jun 1, 2003, 7:59 AM
Post #175 of 493 (1147 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Steel] [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.dropzone.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

Hook


(This post was edited by Hooknswoop on Jun 1, 2003, 8:02 AM)


First page Previous page 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 20 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)