JohanW

For you may be. It's quite interesting to have a strict opinion about something even you don't know all important details like elevation or density altitude.... OP said he has a 1.25 WL under a 150. At density altitudes normal for XK (they can be looked up, you know), at 38 jumps, I'd agree with her that's aggressive. *Very* aggressive. Maybe Finland has different rules, but that does not make it less aggressive. There is so many things you can learn about swooping even with 38 jumps. Yes, like don't even think about it and work on your landing pattern, accuracy and flare first. Edit: OP had his W/L wrong. It'd be 1/1.25 ~0.8. Then again, ISTR he was not calculating total suspended weight, he was forgetting his gear. Make it 0.9. Then wanting to downsize to 1 135 at 100 jumps. But I'm not going to read the whole thread again, if only because I've read it a thousand times elsewhere. So maybe "*very* aggressive" is too much, and she's just right with "aggressive". Not immediately bounce bingo material. Just an accident report waiting to happen. "He always flew his canopy very carefully, only landed straight in, never turned low - until he was cut off on final." Johan. I am. I think.

And in spite of that, we just bought our second Grand Caravan. Or maybe because of it .. because not having one available was even more expensive .. Johan. I am. I think.

Maybe not flamethrowers, but we've blown up two PT6s in our Caravan. In two years. I (heart) n=1 experiments. Johan. I am. I think.

Bit difficult to recommend anything if you don't tell what you're looking for. Using Outlook Express with IMAP. Works for me. Johan. I am. I think.

Shall I jump your suits and your ponies for you? Beterschap joh. Johan. I am. I think.

3m20 ..? That vid is going to be boooooooring ..! Johan. I am. I think.

Have you asked your favourite instructor if he would sign your new logbook with "jump 1-286" as the first entry? Johan. I am. I think.

A ProTrack or Neptune, with software, make this a lot easier .. but Google Docs has the advantage of being backed up without your having to arrange for that yourself. Do they do versioning? Otherwise you might still lose everything to user error. Johan. I am. I think.

I keep a paper logbook *and* an electronic log. And backups of the electronic log. (Maybe I should keep the paper log in the car against the possibility of a fire, actually.) Losing anything sucks, though. Johan. I am. I think.

I have a Neptune myself, but I disabled the canopy alarms. No need to run down the batteries for alarms I don't use. Might use them for swooping, but I don't see you doing that. Might use them for flying your pattern, but you don't need them for that. So you're left with using them 'because you can.' If and when eventually selling the thing, it might fetch you an additional 2 bucks on the price. Johan. I am. I think.

nah saskia, totally wrong, ask henny: THE answer should be: thunderbow I'd say she was correct though Johan. I am. I think.

Uhm .. depends on the coach? Johan. I am. I think.

You set alarms to remind you of something, or to time something for you. What do you want to be reminded of? What do you want timed? A swooper wants to initiate his final turn at a certain height within reasonably small margins. I could see a canopy alarm being useful. But frankly, what would *you* need them for? Just fly by eye, if you initiate your last turn to final 20' low or high it doesn't really matter to you, does it? And from your videos I got the idea you have your accuracy down none too shabby. You land right next to your wheelchair. Would you use your Optima canopy alarms just because you can? Turn them off, save the batteries. Freefall alarms are an entirely different matter of course. Johan. I am. I think.

people like Lurch.

Learn to pack and strike a deal with a DZ to do chores. You'll work hard, but jump hard as well. FJC (static line) - couple hundred bucks decent second hand gear - less than two thousand bucks 200 jumps - not even five thousand bucks (but you'll make money from packing) becoming a DZ bum - priceless You can be wingsuiting at the end of a single summer. Johan. I am. I think.

I like the picture of the bride leading the ox on the bottom of the cup ..

Yes it does. Someone else does not have to see your face. Johan. I am. I think.

The Dutch teams that were on Triathlons are now on Storms, BTW. Johan. I am. I think.

My preference is a full face helmet. Please note I have more than 2 jumps; as a student, you will probably not be allowed to jump one for quite a while. Less wind, less noise, better protection (against knees and elbows, not against the ground). Some people claim they restrict their vision, but I've never found that to be a problem for me. And some people get claustrophobic in one. They do tend to fog up sooner than open face helmets and goggles, and they can freeze over in extreme circumstances (~-20°C at altitude). It may take some practice before you can open the visor with one hand, with gloves on. Taking the visor out and wearing goggles is an option when you know opening the visor is going to be a problem. Your nose won't be as warm though ..

It's the most simple mostly adequate indicator of good performance. Not having to clean my rig and suit. Not damaging my wingsuit. Looking cool for the chicks. (Oh, wait .. ) Somewhere between any landing you don't walk away from and any landing that leaves room for improvement. Depends. No permanent damage to anyone or anything goes a long way towards a good enough landing. Good, well, better than that.

Ground effect starts at a height of twice your wingspan, I believe. Maybe 3 meters. I doubt you're going to feel the effect in the 1/7 second you have between ground effect and ground. Forward speed, at a reasonable glide ratio of 2:1, would be 90 mph. In a flare, I could get descent rate down to 35, maybe 30 mph. There have been people (with bigger suits and more experience) getting it under 10 mph, and one claims he had it climbing momentarily. Difficult to time the flare though. I am not a volunteer. Johan. I am. I think.

I'm guessing that was not a fly by?

Students have a really low fatal accident rate. I'd like to see hard numbers, for AFF and SL both. Anyone watching AFF students, even for short, will get the hell scared out of them watching near disasters and close calls. They get two chances to fuck up: freefall and canopy flight. And canopy flight can never get all the focus it gets with SL because attention has to be paid to the freefall part as well. (Can you tell I was reared on a static line and enjoy canopy flying?

We've been through this before. The canopy doesn't know what the ground is doing, so weathervaning both the canopy and its pilot towards upwind or downwind relative to the ground is not applicable. But a canopy definitely has a tendency to weathervane into the relative wind (making its pilot follow, too). Which means that (as long as your hanging in the harness symmetrically), you won't be seeing sustained yaw. You won't be slipping the canopy. You (normally) won't be flying into linetwists, which would happen if canopies were unstable yaw-wise. (My English, and my aerodynamics, seem insufficient to express the aerodynamic reality clearly and concisely. I don't know if it's static or dynamic stability that makes a canopy weathervane into the wind. And weathervaning 'out of the wind' sounds strange. Perhaps BillVon can explain what he and I mean in better words.) Johan. I am. I think.

Twents. Johan. I am. I think.