FataMorgana

Here are some pictures of the black hardware from UPT (Vector) after 5 years of jumping and ~1000 jumps. It still does look cool IMHO. Also, there is absolutely no damage to the webbing that came in contact with the oxidized surface of the hardware.

 

Another benefit of pulling the slider down is an instant unobstructed view in the front and above you

Quote

my recent tunnel crash has caused condition called Bursitis

Typically bursitis is considered to be a repetitive motion injury. Therefore, it would be rather unusual to get it from a single "event" (tunnel crash).

Hi Skytrooper,

You mentioned that you were doing a lot of free flying. Then you cannot go wrong with a Vector which has been embraced by free flying community for a reason (skyhook , Collins lanyard, magnetic riser covers and ton of other options). I used to jump Icon and it definitely worked fine(got ~600 jumps on it). But I like my Vector way better. Plus it provides an extra peace of mind at higher free fall speeds (Vectors seem to be a primary choice for serious angle flyers). Just my opinion.

Apologize for my ignorance but could you elaborate on the source of your information regarding supposed "10%" skyhook releases (for skyhook assisted reserve deployments). Seems a bit high.

Okay I will bite. I have seen some very experienced organizers sticking to the same flying techinques year after year and some other also very experienced organizers changing their flying techinques quite frequently. It seems to me that massive tunnel experience leads to noticeably similar angles flying styles/techiques that are different from angle flyers with massive “sky” experience. Plus different styles appeal to different people. At the end of the day the only thing that seems to matter is whether you can get quickly to your slot and stay there for the whole jump

Quote

Why not make the license mean something more? Why not ask the applicant to demonstrate knowledge and skills relating to other relevant safety issues...

- Aircraft safety
- Gear knowledge
- Exit order / separation
- free fall / tracking skills
- Emergency procedures
- Canopy skills
- Visibility (here are your night jumps)
- others? (*)

Lol. Knowledge of all but one of the listed areas is actually part of the D license exam. Or perhaps you are just trolling .

Quote

Irrational notion that a night jump is some sort of skill that must be acquired in order to get USPA's highest license, drives me nuts. Unfortunately jumpers will have to continue to take this pointless risk until enough of the old farts die off

Well, it seems to me that skydiving is all about taking unnecessary risk. So, I ams not sure why it is bothering you that one of the licenses requires candidate to perform 2 night jumps. People are skydiving voluntarily because it is simply fun. Why would you want to sanitize this sport? Do you really think that somebody trying to land a parachute first time in their lifetime (cat A AFF jump) is taking less risk than the night jumper? Yet, there is endless supply of people that really want to do it. I do not understand where you are going with this “irrational risk” argument.

Also, not everyone needs to have a D license!

I have seen videos of the cutaway and reserve handles (modern “bulky” pillows) flipping back and forth in a free fall with amazingly high frequency. The said “oscillation” of the handles was mainly observed for the handles that were not seated very well/deep in the corresponding Velcro pockets. Also, it seemed like it was happening mainly during belly jumps.
I am not a rigger and do not know the exact details of the construction for pillow type cutaway handles. However, I am always wondering whether the constant flipping of the handles could lead progressive weakening of the attachment point between yellow lolon cable(s) and the pillow.

Of course in the case of D-ring handles the the above potential failure mode is much harder to imagine.

Hi Mirino,

Since, one of your AAD choices is M2 I wonder whether you could provide some more background info on the immediate ban on MPAAD issued in the Czech Republic on Sep 23 .

http://www.caa.cz/file/7994

Quote

Hmmm...well let's see.
Target depth of dive: 1200 feet
Ambient pressure at 1200 feet: 36.4 atmospheres or 535.1 psi.

So, at target depth, the diver has over a quarter of a ton of pressure on the body. ......
.....There are some challenges that are over the "limit line" not even the "experienced" should attempt...

So... I have to admit that I am failing to see your point regarding feasibility of the attempt (scuba diving to 365.76 meters or 1200 feet).

Current world record for the technical dive seems to be set at 332 meters (or 1,089 ft) which is not light years away from the attempted depth https://www.deeperblue.com/ahmed-gabr-breaks-scuba-diving-world-record/.

I do agree, however that we should test our limits wisely and with a sufficient amount of experience.

https://www.chutingstar.com/skydive/replacement-icarus-main-canopy-lineset

Quote

I can imagine someone doing multiple barrel rolls, maintaining rotational movement during accidental deployment and having the lines wrap around the body (oh please not the neck). Has something like this every happened?

It almost happened to me! On my jump # 32. I was planning to repeat the dive flow from my A license check dive, so back barrel rolls were included. At 8400 feet my PC come out of the pouch and initiated the deployment sequence. Luckily it happened before I got to my intended barrel rolls. Scary shit. I was jumping rental student gear on that jump. Once on the ground I realized that the BOC pouch was seriously worn out. This issue did not catch my attention prior to the jump. However, the idea of wrapping myself in a bridle (and possible consequences) would not leave my brain for many weeks. That incident got me started on learning about gear and "getting my own rig" projects real quick ...

Be careful out there...

Quote

The part I never see is how they exited and/or transitioned into the standing track.

It seems that how you exit does not matter as much. The enclosed video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caFJxmJzITY) shows transitions and flying style that you are interested in (1:34). The level of flying in the enclosed video shows pretty well free flying proficiency that is required. Tunnel time and good coaching will get you there sooner .

Quote

How would we test/practice if we could do it, without killing ourselves?

Training may be easier than it appears to be (aside from the massive ball that will be needed to execute this stunt).
Remember Jeb Corliss training for the Flying Dagger stunt.
He actually used a visualization software allowing him to fly through the virtual replica of the crack.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRBXF_Unwm0

http://vimeo.com/102971415

Awesome jump.....

Quote

Are there any dangers to being below the recommended wing load?
How is being at 1.2 going to affect the performance of the canopy, if any?

Replay to the similar question, that I asked Icarus some time ago, did not seem to leave too much room for interpretation. Of course this is a bit contradictory to some opinions that you will find searching this forum
"It is absolutely not recommended to go below a 1,4 WL on the Crossfire 2. Because of the shape of the nose, and because it is not crossbraced, in the event of turbulence, it can behave erratically and potentially collapse. If you load the canopy a bit higher, than you would get the typical performance expected from an elliptical, non-crossbraced canopy."

Quote

I've never seen any discussion about how the air behaves over hot ....

Searching this forum for "thermals" will lead you to the relevant information

ZHills has regular High Altitude Loads for experienced B License and higher skydivers only. You jump from from 22000' for $60 (price does includes the altitude and the oxygen and a near two-minute freefall).

I have ~100 jumps with the roller mount and it is awesome.
Easy to adjust (but rock solid), easy to remove camera when you do not need it and most importantly it really does minimizes the snag hazard. As for drilling the helmet there is nothing to worry about. With all kinds of unavoidable scratches and discolorations pretty soon you will not even remember that you drilled holes in it .

29

Quote

It's (Bill) Booth's law- the safer you make skydiving, skydivers will come up with dumber shit to do to cancel out the higher level of safety. So as a jumper gains skill and experience, they jump smaller canopies in more challenging conditions to cancel out the benefit of that skill and experience.

Could not agree more, especially that this is kind of what I was indicating in my original post. And I do not really have a preference whether we call it the Risk Homeostasis Theory or Booth's law. The basic point is the same though: acquired experience will never catch up with our propensity for increasing risk (inherent urge to downsize comes to mind as a prime example) and being current only slightly tips odds in our favor.

Quote

Experience tends to allow for a better evaluation of potential risk...

This is what common sense would suggest. However, statistics are telling a different story (see below the most recent incidents from 2013 USPA fatality report). Recorded number of low turn accidents and corresponding high levels of experience levels seems to be a good example. One would assume that accumulated experience should prevent jumpers from attempting low turns. Yet, year after year highly experienced jumpers continue to go in while performing low turns. Seems to me that the common sense approach is not really grasping the problem here.

Part of USPA Fatality Report for 2013
[inline uspa.jpg]

Quote

Experience should be a real advantage in facing the challenges of skydiving, but overconfidence and complacency are killers.The average number of jumps for the people who died in 2010 was 2,083. In 2010, 83 percent of those who died were D-license qualified. Eleven of those had anywhere from 1,000 to 9,000 jumps. The average for those who died landing their main parachutes was 3,071 jumps. It is obvious that experience will not offset equipment choices and jumping conditions.

Hmm...that is pretty consistent with the Risk Homeostasis theory that states that humans optimize their level of risk according to four utility factors:

• The expected benefits of risky behavior
• The expected costs of risky behavior
• The expected benefits of safe behavior
• The expected costs of safe behavior

The level of risk that provides the greatest net benefit is termed the target level of risk. The theory predicts that people will compare their target level of risk to the perceived level of risk and adjust their behavior until the two are equal. So, it is not totally unexpected that more experienced jumpers are getting themselves in all sorts of troubles.

Assuming that this theory is correct it appears that human nature can override any experience level and will continue leading jumpers down the dangerous path no matter how current and experienced they are. Statistics seems to support this….

Quote

As an owner I'd want final say in whether my rigger used a non-traditional approach in dealing with my equipment.
I'd be furious if he'd guessed at something that might potentially degrade the materials.

+1