rss_v

Hi. Obviously the initial cost of skydiving training is well-defined by the DZ and you know what you're getting for the money. But then after the AFF, or whatever, is all done and you've got an A licence, how is it meant to work? Through the BPA we need CH2 and JM1 certifications to get a B licence, and both of these require at least some input from an instructor. JM1 in particular requires ground- and plane-based training. In addition, there are things like being taught how to pack which take up a lot of someone's time when they could be packing for money or doing jumps. Who pays for these things and how does the instructor get paid for it? I've never seen a sort of price list or had anything mentioned to me. Do I expect these things for free if/when an instructor has some pare time (never) or do I need to cough up some money and pin them down to a particular time so I have their undivided (as if!) attention? I'm keen to make every visit to the DZ count and I want to learn how to pack really right away now, and get started on JM1 instruction as soon as is appropriate. Thanks!

Let's say £800-1500 or about the same number of US dollars. Are there complete rigs available, second-hand, at that price point any more or has the arrival of compulsory-AAD rules doubled the cost of any beginner's rig? Are those numbers just fantasy, AAD or not? I want a rig for two main reasons: 1) avoiding rental and packing costs 2) being able to jump the same canopy and get used to it Apart from that, I don't really care what it's like. £1000 all-in would be great, is that even possible today? All second-hand rigs I've seen so far around here are more like £2500 for low-end stuff. Can someone give me a quick summary of where prices are today and if I'm being completely unreasonable? It's hard to get an idea for these things, at first, even from browsing classified ads - since I often can't tell how "valuable" one product is compared to another. Thanks!

Fair enough. Any idea why they're so cheap compared to other plastic-and-elastic types of goggles? I assumed the DZ student/rental ones were crap but they're a more expensive type than Kroops.

I read it somewhere *shrug*

QuoteAre you a student?Quote Not AFF, but perhaps soon FS and so on. I'd want something clear anyway, for eye contact at other times than in the air (on the plane etc) and just for visibility. Though I suppose, I like I said, I tend to pull them off under canopy.

Hi - basic question: I see that people wear all kinds of different goggles or glasses. Is it pretty much that you can wear whatever you like so long as it stays on? Then there may be concerns about shatter-resistance and so on, but in the first instance can you really wear anything basically? I have none of my own kit but gloves and goggles are at the top of my list, since the rental ones are pretty disgusting. Krrops are pretty cheap but apparently they fall apart after ten jumps... I want anything either clear or very lightly tinted/shaded - but not coloured. I nearly always pull my goggles off once under canopy, because they mist up easily and I have poorer view of the ground for landing, so something I can slip down will be necessary. That's possible just by routing the strap across the middle of my ears rather than over/behind them. Sorry for the stupid question, then - but, within reason, basically can I just wear whatever I find that fits?

What altitude do they normally go to? Are they basically hop-and-don't-pop-too-soon?

I've seen both B and C required, depending on the organiser. I've not come across low jump number A license holders being allowed (I know someone with 800 jumps and an A license, and am pretty sure he's jumped helicopters) Damn, OK. I probably wouldn't be allowed, then. What makes heli jumps more "challenging", as it were?

I'll be contacting the DZ directly soon, when I get a chance, but in a few weeks there are some heli jumps being offered at a DZ I could get to. They're about twice the cost of a normal jump ticket but could be worth trying. I'm wondering if there are any usual experience requirements, i.e jump numbers, for taking part in heli jumps? Thanks

A very small proportion, it would seem. I think the competition is over now, not sure how they did.

oops, thanks!

A local university skydiving club is in the running to win some cash for itself. If you have a moment then click through to this video to help them out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xArRNkhlvk0 The winner will be the entrant with the most views, apparently.

Fact

Is this process based on accident statistics and a cold comparison of them to other activities and areas of your life, or a "it seems quite dangerous" kind of thing? With regard to having family, the main "risk" skydiving poses is probably financial.

I get the impression that we're trying to describe the same middle-ground, but coming from different directions and so appearing to disagree.

Good. Everyone has strong points and weak points, so if you learn from one instructor, yours will match theirs. Jump with a variety of instructors and you'll pick up something different from each one. I don't think this is valid for the very first stages of someone's skydiving training. At that stage, the first few jumps - basically your AFF course - I think consistency and continuity is essential and having loads of different points of view, techniques and ideas coming at you from different instructors is only confusing, not helpful. There are already a million things for a new AFF student to remember - adding another million doesn't produce a better student or a better "graduate" - just one who is less certain of what is right or best, and less confident. Later on, yes, definitely - one can look for ideas from other sources, but for complete newcomers it's a great way to end up with "paralysis by analysis" and start mixing things up. Ideally an instructor and his course will provide the student with a coherent and compatible collection of skills and knowledge. A different instructor might provide a different but equally-correct collection, when taken as a whole. But when you mix them together, taking some from one and some from the other, you lose the whole point of it and no longer can the student be sure if it all fits together and works as intended.

Good replies so far. I'm a new jumper and during my AFF course it did feel a bit rushed and fragmented at times. I can count around six instructors who were involved in my ground training, briefings and jumps. Often I was passed between them and received contradictory information, which was never good. For example, being briefed by one instructor for a level to be taken with a different instructor, then having to try to unlearn specific details about the jump and over-write them with the new info my actual jump instructor provides afterwards. That kind of thing annoyed me. I think each level must really be briefed by the ACTUAL instructor who will jump with the student, because they all do things slightly differently and trying to drill a new plan in over the top of another one you just hammered into your head, is really tiring and confusing. That sort of thing would be my only criticism of my DZ's AFF provision, I suppose. All of the instructors are great and I felt that they were very capable, but it was at times a bit rushed and with very little time for good debriefing afterwards, too.

Kindly state, concisely, what your "General view on life and death" is? I am sorry for the repetition but you and others have written so many things that I am confused what your views are. (I want to learn about other cultures and your views are highly celebrated) That's a bit too much of a tangent and I want the thread to stay on track as much as possible. From what I've said already you can infer enough about it for this particular application (i.e. skydiving and risk)

No, no, no, yes. I do know this is a "controversial" thing to discuss in skydiving. Not so much because it's especially dangerous compared to other activites, but because it's so "obviously" and overtly a take-a-risk-then-save-yourself situation. The layered and somewhat convoluted attitude towards safety and danger in skydiving, and of the public to it, is something that's interesting me more and more recently. My general view on life and death is highly celebrated in many cultures, but not in the West. I'm fairly content with it, in any case. Thanks for the replies, everyone!

Surely the vast majority of first-time jumpers do really enjoy their skydive, BUT the vast majority of those people have chosen to take part and so clearly wanted to do it and are clearly more likely to enjoy it. I imagine that if you took 1000 random people from the street and took them skydiving, a much lower % would report enjoying the experience, with a really very low % being happy with it before the jump. I wouldn't pressure anyone into doing a jump who didn't clearly want to and take some initiative themselves to prove it. You know your boyfriend better than us so can judge how much encouragement is appropriate, but I'd say don't push him into this (or anything else) he doesn't especially want to do. Simply because the expereince will be directly tainted by being "forced" into it, regardless of how much he might have otherwise enjoyed it. If you really want to do a skydive together one day then you need to pull some inception shit and grow the idea in his mind...

It's more about just having a quick and good death, really. I'd rather live doing what I love but I don't care what I die doing, as such. Getting hit by a meteorite while watching paint dry would be just as good. I'd be missed by 5-6 people, half of whom will be dead themselves in 10-20 years. I can see that other people's deaths may be considered by others to be a waste of an appreciated person, so I'm definitely only talking about my own skydiving and risk. ***I'd much rather die as my parents did, at a very advanced age following a long & happy life full of wonderful experiences, painlessly and surrounded by loved ones. Risk management is what you are speaking of, and knowing how far you can push your personal limits without recklessly endangering yourself is the key. It really has nothing to do with using an AAD...I've never owned one, yet most people that know me will tell you I'm one of the more safely conscious and methodical jumpers they know. My risk management precludes me from making certain types of jumps with certain types of people because the 'safety factor' of my equipment limits my logical involvement...and that's fine with me. About half of my annual jumps are low level hop N pops with various professional demonstration teams, I have 1/2 a dozen rigs and would dump an easy 10 grand in ADD's setting them up. The cost/benefit doesn't work for me right now, however I'm slowly getting away from the demo circus world and will likely be getting one for a rig I'll jump as I move back into the 'sport' side of things...it makes sense to me to have one when doing RW with people I don't know. I understand what you're saying, but even with an AAD this sport can kill you in a hundred ways you'll never see coming. There is nothing macho or romantic about skydiving without a device that 'might' cut a loop in your reserve container if low enough goin' fast enough. It's a last ditch back-up that just might allow you further participation in the adventures life has to offer. No...at this time I don't have one, trust me it doesn't make the sport any 'better' for me ...it in fact limits the things I can/will do.

Thanks for the replies so far. Opinion is, predictably, split - and clearly people jump for quite different reasons. Or combinations of reasons, I should say. The "complete safety" group is clearly the loudest voice in this and most (but not all) supposedly dangerous activities, and I have no doubt that that is the direction skydiving will continue to move in. I was going to post this as a separate thread but it might as well go here: Originally mentioned in another thread, this has been playing on my mind: ------------- This is actually a huge part of the attraction for me. If I had the choice I would never use an AAD but, for better or for worse, they're now compulsory in a lot of places and sort of "unofficially compulsory" everywhere else. I have an unusual (but not exactly rare) attitude towards life and death and I would actually rather I honestly did have to pull or die each time. Knowing that there's a safety net kind of makes it less beautiful. Do you think many other people have this sort of view or should I keep it to myself? I'd never mention it at the DZ for fear of being grounded as a suicide risk or something silly like that. ------------- Does this make sense to anyone or am I off my rocker? I've mentioned gentler versions of this to people and it SEEMS that younger jumpers object most strongly, I guess because they “grew up” in the age of really quite excellent safety in the sport, and indeed see it very much as a sport, with specific performance goals. One gets the impression of some that if wind tunnels were big enough they’d never go up in a plane again. A couple of older jumpers seemed to share my idea that a lot of the appeal was in that “philosophical” side of things where you intentionally put yourself in great danger and use your wit and skills, along with a certain level of technology, to try to get home safely. All adventure of all kinds over history can be described in those terms. I guess I basically don’t see safety as the paramount objective, or the most important thing to be concerned with. Neither do any of you, for that matter, or else you’d never leave your houses in the morning. We all just have different tastes for risk in different situations, of course. In some potentially very dangerous sports I stay as safe as can be, for example I do a bit of rock climbing and I never do any soloing or anything that exposes me to more than the baseline risk for that activity. Because what I enjoy there is just the feeling of climbing, specifically, perhaps like some people just enjoy the feeling of flying (body or canopy) and have no wish for it to be any more dangerous than is absolutely necessary to experience those sensations. An in-between example for me would be hiking/camping mini-expeditions that I take, and I intentionally neglect to take several common modern safety measures, such as carrying a mobile phone or a GPS, or telling people exactly where I’m going. In my mind, such things dilute my own responsibility for the outcome of the trip and it makes it all a lot less interesting. Again this is an arbitrary “safety point” to settle upon, though – I could even go out under-dressed and without a map, and be even more at risk, but that’s not to my tastes. Some people do actually do that, striking out into the woods with just a piece of string and a pen knife, so to them I am probably boringly safe. Hopefully that sets the scene and explains that I acknowledge how arbitrary our individual “safety points” are in a given activity. It seems that in skydiving more than most other activities, WANTING there to be a certain level risk is seen as deplorable and utterly unacceptable. I guess it makes sense in the context of skydiving’s complex safety image (at once trying to persuade people that it’s super dangerous... yet really very safe) and constant fear of increasing self-imposed regulation and restrictions. Anyway, turning to the obvious possible consequence of jumping without an AAD. I’ll just be really blunt and say that staying alive is not at all my top priority. I’m going to die one day, and that day isn’t really a very long way off. With that in mind, and knowing that it’s unavoidable, one should surely hope for the best death possible. I really can’t imagine a cleaner, quicker, and nicer way to switch off than being hit by a planet. Can you? If one day I accidentally – and it would be an accident – died during a skydive then, wow, how incredibly lucky I would feel (if I could feel anything) to go that way rather than one of the several far more popular and immeasurably more horrific ways to check out. I also don’t think it’s any more trouble to others, tbh – I bet it’s not great for the DZ staff and spectators, but it’s a whole lot less of a burden on fewer people than, say, rotting in a hospital bed for several months. So I’m really not as afraid of dying on a skydive as many people are, perhaps, and there are lengths I will go to to avoid it (e.g. pulling all my handles) and lengths I would rather NOT go to (e.g. installing a device to deploy for me). If some unlikely accident happened to me that rendered me unable to deploy then, fair enough, I'd count that as my time to go quietly back to the source. Again, all these considerations exist on scales and degrees, so it’s very subjective and arbitrary where we stand. But to me there is just a huge difference between “pull your handle(s) or you’re definitely going to die” and “pull your handle(s) or your reserve will deploy anyway and you’ll get told off by the CCI” And taking that further to my hypothetical 100% safety idea even more clearly shows the difference there. I, for one, would lose a lot of interest in skydiving if it was made even more regulated and safe than it is today.

Hi. This came to my mind recently so I thought I'd ask you guys. Imagine if we had perfect and flawless intelligent AADs that completely eliminated any risks surrounding deployment, plus "ALDs", if you will, which can land your main or reserve for you if it detects that you won't manage it safely. Basically, somehow, technology that removes all risks from the activity itself until the jumpers are as safe as the spectators. Don't worry about how that could ever be acheived, but just entertain the hypothetical notion that no one could ever die or be seriously injured during a skydive. Would that please you? Would it encourage or discourage your own skydiving? To what extent is the real risk of obliteration into Mother Earth an attractive or repulsive qualitiy of this sport? What sort of risk do YOU want in YOUR skydiving, if any? That is to say, not for students, tandems, your friends, or other people - on whom we shouldn't force danger. But, come to think of it, should we force safety on them either? That's another topic, haha. Stick to this one. You get the idea - feel free to explain your position either way. Thanks,

Very nice.

Haha, that yawning bright door is terrifying at first, swallowing the passengers one by one with a great roar each time. The jump master, with inexplicable calmness, checking they've been fully digested before signalling for the next sacrifice to move into position.