excaza

I've been happy with my Pelican 1620. It'll fit a rig (started with a V3 350) & G3 without much of an issue, if you don't have a super big rig you can probably get a jumpsuit/odds & ends in as well. See if there's a dealer around your area, you can bring your stuff and try cramming it in cases of various sizes to see which one fits best. Works pretty well for traveling too, though I'll carry on my rig & use the space for my usual luggage. One caveat is that the case weighs ~22 lb empty, so that can take a good ding out of your packing.

Given that premise I don't disagree but that's not the pitch. It's a towed system. Granted it's not unlike a glider, but you (hopefully) can't fall off a glider at low altitude and die.

Looks like it would be fun, though given my inability to stand up on a wakeboard I probably wouldn't give it a shot because I'm a fan of not dying. Definitely understating it. I'd be curious to see how, if at all, this clears the FAA.

I like to tape it to my face.

Exit weight. Max for a T-10 is 360, not 300. Good luck telling people to carry less weight.

You're going to be a target with broken ankles too.

Vegas must love you

If it's the one I'm thinking of, it's been floating around for motorcycle helmets for a while. Hard to pin down a supplier for them that isn't some bulk thing from China, I got a couple off of ebay (just an example, this is not the seller I used) to play around with.

I mounted my hard case on one of the wrist sweat bands from the PD shop, works fine.

Pretty cool looking helmet. The buckle looks like the one I was thinking about modding for a G3.

As much as I love SDAZ and Sebastian, right now it's pretty balls hot in Arizona/Florida so I'd probably go with somewhere in New England (SNE, Cross Keys, The Ranch, etc.) or Chicago.

Well he does need to stay toned enough for his competition pants.

I've had good luck just mounting the hard case onto a sweatband.

Probably because the belly guys are folks whose shit don't stink and want to s-turn and oscillate themselves around with toggles for the entire pattern and the freefliers just want to race to hook themselves into the ground.

Solo hop & pop. That way you can reflect on all the knowledge you're about to gain as you hit 100 jumps and know everything about skydiving.

Perhaps your approach should be to ask these questions of your instructors before going on with the attitude of "I've taken three canopy courses and haven't been told this so it's wrong." You may not be explicitly stating it, but it's what's coming across. Quarter brakes, half brakes, 3/4 brakes, full brakes, it doesn't matter, they're all fine. The jumper just needs to be aware that he is taking energy away from his flare (and potentially approaching a stall) and plan accordingly. Except, you know, where it says braked approach. Listen more, talk less.

On final? Never had an instructor tell me to do that. Going full flight kinda defeats the purpose of a braked approach.

The purpose of BMI is as a relative metric for populations, not an individual guide. Of course it's much nicer to have specific body composition data, but good luck getting a data set comparable to what we can get with height/weight.

I hope not, you're taller and lighter than I was. I'm 5'8" and was around 220 when I started and had no issues.

No sense discouraging inquiry so casually. There is nothing wrong with wanting to understand what you're being taught. Though this isn't one of them, there are more than a few examples of modern scientific dogma that have gone quite far with little to no backing. Military training is not exempt.

How would that help?

They migrated databases in October...

The air density is lower but you're falling faster. At terminal, your dynamic pressure (and therefore indicated airspeed) is going to be the same, so you're still moving by the same amount of molecules in that time. However, your true airspeed is higher so you have more kinetic energy to bleed off during the opening process resulting in a higher total shock. There has been a good amount of testing done, starting with the Army & Air Force post WWII through the 60s-70s with NASA joining in for the latter portion with their development of canopies for various spacecraft, landers & crew modules. I don't have specific references on hand but if I get a chance I can see if some of the historical work is online somewhere.

Not true. NASA has deployed at lower air densities for its Mars missions. It's also important to remember that the majority of the opening forces on a gliding parachute come from bottom skin inflation, not full canopy inflation, because it's the largest change in drag area. Even a partial inflation is enough to cause serious issues, on Kittinger's ~75k jump his drogue deployed too early, caught around his neck, and spun him fast enough to G-LOC him.

Part of it comes down to the fact that making a parachute smaller while retaining familiar flight characteristics, particularly in those performance envelopes, is a lot more involved than just saying "shrink everything by x%." It takes a lot of time and effort to ensure you're not compromising the characteristics of the wing and turning out an unsafe product.