chuckbrown

Excellent. Thanks for the feedback.

I've got a Lightning for use on bigways, but I'm looking for a smaller canopy for competition jumping. Right now, I've got teammates jumping 113 & 126s currently loaded at 1.6, so I'm looking to jump something at that loading while keeping the ability to increase the wingloading. I could do a 143 with lead, a 135 w/o lead, or lose more weight and fly a 126. Personally, the latter sounds better. It sounds like one has to fly the comp Tri just like a Lightning; as you say "flying it in."

I'm only looking at the Tri because the 135 is a nice fit between the sizes that PD offers.

That is exactly what I'm trying to get some more information about. I'm pretty confident about how Lightnings fly/land and higher WLs (the higher the better), but I just want to get some feedback on Comp Tri's, since it seems that getting a demo of a Comp Tri is pretty much impossible (anybody from Aerodyne, please feel free to correct me).

Don't worry, you were on my short list of people to call.

I'm looking at getting a smaller CRW canopy and my choices are either a Lightning 126 or a Competition CRW Triathlon 135. I know how Lightnings fly at high wing loadings (great), but I've heard that regular Triathlons land like crap over a wing loading of 1.5; I would be loading a 135 at around 1.6+. Can anybody tell me how competition CRW Tri's fly/land at high wingloadings? Can anybody tell be anything about these canopies?

You're leaving out IAD & Static Line training methods. I don't think anyone on student status should be paying for the repack. It should be priced into the cost of the jump (actuarially, that is).

I thought the same thing when I read that, too.

Where's the fun in that? It's much more fun to whine. Seriously, and with all due respect, I don't think dismissing critics as "errant and misguided" will win any arguments. There are some very prominent members of the skydiving community who have some very substantial disagreements with USPA.

The purpose of the poll is present an similar insurance policy to that offered by USPA. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence of an unhappiness with USPA. Yet, USPA continues to receive financial support from active US skydivers. I'm curious to what extent that is a product of the liability policy.

This poll may not be well designed, and will certainly make me some enemies at USPA, but .... it seems to me that USPA has gotten on the wrong side of the skydiving community in general, and small drop zones in particular. And what's worse is that except for some of the board members, management at USPA doesn't seem to really care. But, USPA continues to survive without much accountability largely because they provide a third party liability policy that every drop zone will accept. It seems to me that if USPA had some competition for your dues money they might be more responsive to the concerns of skydivers and small drop zones. So here are the questions: if there was a third party liability insurance policy available to cover up to $50,000 in property/physical damage for say $50 per year, and this policy was accepted by your favorite drop zone(s) would you be willing to purchase this policy? If you would choose to purchase this insurance policy would you renew your USPA membership? Edited to make the comparison meaningful. I think. Thanks.

I depends on what kind of CRW you want to do. On non-world record big ways, i.e., CRW boogies, I've seen WL anywhere from 1.3 - 1.5. On World Record camps, they're pretty strict about 1.3-1.38. Competition teams are generally 1.5-1.8. Personally, I prefer Lightnings at higher wingloadings because they land much better. Try a WL of 1.35. That's a nice middle ground & you can always add lead if you want to fly at higher WLs.

That's what I was wondering, because it sure looks like they are off the wind-line quite a bit from that smoke... Who's spotting this thing? I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they know what they're doing and the upper winds are different from surface winds and they're doing a cross wind jump run. Since they can easily calculate forward throw from a cross wind jump run, that just leaves calculating for the upper winds. The military has some fairly good formulae for that. Granted it's beyond my tiny little mind.

$50, $1 off a jump, right to use airplanes for demos (and be sent on demos), voting privileges, eternal admiration from other club members.

I've seen chest mounts ripped right off. I got so tired of losing altimeters doing CRW that I stopped wearing one for a while.

Altimeters are huge snag hazards. Many people will have a pocket sewn onto their jumpsuit, usually on the leg, with a clear outer cover. The altimeter is highly visible and has no snag hazard. Glad you're interested in CRW. Have fun.

Just curious, why were you two dropped? Did someone ask to be dropped? The reason I ask is that I was in a similar situation (being the one around whose foot a canopy was wrapped), and I was able to clear it by doing a 180 in my harness. This relieved enough pressure on my foot to allow me to pull it out of the end cell of the other canopy. This only worked because I had another jumper above me flying the formation, so I didn't have to worry about flying and getting a canopy off my foot. I'm a firm believer in having someone not involved in the wrap flying the formation so those in the wrap can focus solely on clearing the wrap. P.S., I don't think 1,500 is too low for a slow speed malfunction. If you were at terminal, that would be another story.

Why let the ground stop you from enjoying a good pie??? Haven't you heard of the 5 second rule?

Embrace the pie. If they like you, they'll by good pie. If your reactions are quick enough, you'll open your mouth and have a big first bite. Mmmmmm, pie.

Specifically, free falling cultures.

Yeah, and just who the hell are the Dawg Pitchers???? Oh yeah, thanks for the DVD.

We do have a teaching standard that's encompassed by the CRW Dog Safety Briefing ("Don't die!") and the CRW Dog Prayer ("Please God, don't let me f*ck this up!"). Seriously though, I understand your point, but beginner camps have a fairly standard safety briefing that covers various do's and don'ts and emergency procedures. As for who should be teaching, my personal feeling is that unless you can top dock you shouldn't be teaching. The ability to top dock allows you to control the jump from beginning to end. As for monitoring, that's a problem that I don't know the answer to. Being the laissez-faire kind of person I am, I prefer to keep USPA out of things & I don't think canopy manufacturers want to be involved in policing CRW.

That would mean USPA getting involved. The LAST thing I want is USPA telling CRW Dogs what they can & can't do, and who can & can't teach. When USPA gets involved it tends to unnecessarily cost people more money with little corresponding value being returned. My experience with younger jumpers and CRW is that they won't go near you as a tutor until they've seen you do lots of CRW and/or have a comfort level with your abilities and judgment.

With parabatic grips.

I do seem to recall a learning curve on landing a Lightning. But now, I love how they land. Of course, jumping at a 1.5+ wingloading definitely helps.