JohnRich

That assumes that the deceleration is at a constant linear rate over those five seconds, or an average over the five seconds, which my not be true. Some openings could have very little deceleration at first, followed by a very violent opening shock at the end, giving a peak that would equal far greater G's.

Quote: "Our image of adrenaline junkies usually involves people with the kinds of bodies that look amazing in jumpsuits and wet suits. However, an analysis by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) of more than 50 years of data from almost 2,000 people found that excitement seekers are more likely to be overweight or even obese. That's probably because when they're not jumping out of airplanes, they can always get a small rush by sneaking out for a midday margarita or blowing off the treadmill to go to a rock concert."I call bullshit. Of all the "adrenaline" sports I can think of, it's rare to find any participants in them who are fat. Skydiving, dirt bike riding, surfing, white water kayaking, whatever, those are all sports in which the participants are generally in pretty good shape. There might be other types of adrenaline junkies who get their kicks doing things other than sports, and maybe it could be more true there. But if they're actively involved in a sport, then they're probably not going to be fat, so that group should be left out of this. The example of skydiving might have made for a eye-catching introduction, but I don't think it's true at all.

Only if the health insurance mandate also allows for exceptions by those who morally object to government mandates...

As soon as Obama starts forcing unarmed citizens to buy guns, then I'll accept his forced health care insurance.

You go from about 170 fps in freefall to 17 fps under canopy. And that's about the same from the moment the canopy opens and afterward. Some canopies are faster than others. And jumper input can either speed up or slow down the descent rate. How many G's you pull *during* opening depends upon how fast the canopy opens, which is highly variable, from one canopy to another, even with the same canopy, and from different packing techniques.

You say that like size matters. Beside, everyone ought to know it's not length that matters. It's girth. And it's going to 'enter' the gulf. All very symbolic. And if Iran messes with them, Iran will definitely get fucked over.

John, you and I don't always agree on everything, but I have to agree 100% on this. Also the best C-182 paint job and interior.

Pecos Parachute School, Truman Sparks proprietor.

Oh my, that's embarassing. I can't believe you didn't reel it back in in mid-air and flip it around right side up!

You keep your wife in the garage?

That would have been the 60's and 70's. Nice ass attached. "Barbarella" had some very explicit sex scenes for its time. Ted Turner apparently thought it was pretty hot stuff as late as 1991.

Wow. Thanks for the compliment, Chuck. You're making me blush!

Would you agree that swooping is similar to putting on a camera or flying in a wingsuit; very few of the "instant gratification" culture follow that line of proper progression? I would not. If you have a problem with a camera or wingsuit, you still have time and altitude to save yourself. Not so with swooping. (This does not mean, however, that I'm in favor of banning swooping.)

News:Senate votes to kill long-gun registry "The Conservative government vowed during the 2011 election to eliminate the long-gun registry. On Wednesday night, the bill to officially end the registry had its final vote in the Senate — leaving only a signature from the Governor General needed to officially kill the registry. That signature signing Bill C-19 into law should come Thursday morning. By a vote of 50-27, senators approved the bill, marking the last political hurdle needed to kill the registry..."Full story: Montreal Gazette Quebec isn't quite ready to admit defeat on this failed scheme yet though: Destruction of long-gun registry records halted at eleventh hour by Quebec court "The destruction of records from the now defunct long-gun registry has been halted at the eleventh hour by an injunction from a Quebec court. Judge Jean-Francois de Grandpre of Quebec Superior Court granted a request by the Quebec government for an injunction to stop Ottawa from trashing the gun-registry records Thursday afternoon. As a result, Ottawa has been forbidden to destroy documents in the registry... Quebec has asked Ottawa repeatedly to hand over records on the 1,560,359 long guns registered in Quebec so that it could use the information to create its own registry..."Full story: National Post

Isn't it interesting how the left and the media were in such a tizzy trying to get hold of George Bush's National Guard records, but they don't seem to be the least bit upset that Obama has never released his college records?

And yet the reason for the new rule at San Marcos is that an old fart with decades of experience died when he took it in at terminal without an AAD on his rig. I don't personally agree with mandated AAD's, but facts are always facts. All the experience in the world won't help when you are unable to get something over your head. Right. But every experienced jumper who chooses to jump without an AAD does so because they knowingly accept that risk, and are willing to live or die by it. And as far as the drop zone's liability goes, those jumpers sign the waiver and accept personal responsibility for their own safety. So it's unnecessary and unwarranted for the drop zones to implement mandatory-AAD rules. I believe in the personal responsibility model. not in the "I want the drop zone/USPA/government to make me safe" model.

News:Ill. top court revives suit on assault weapon ban "A legal challenge to Cook County's ban on assault weapons got new life Thursday when the Illinois Supreme Court reversed lower-court rulings that found the ban constitutional. "The unanimous decision sends the case back to trial court, where the two sides will present evidence on whether assault weapons qualify for full protection under the Second Amendment..."Full story: Seattle PI

News:Pilot turns back after snake pops out of dashboard An Australian pilot said he was forced to make a harrowing landing reminiscent of a Hollywood thriller after a snake popped out from behind his dashboard and slithered across his leg during a solo cargo flight...Full story: WTOP

Ding ding ding ding! You hit the nail on the head there. If jumper safety is important enough to implement rules for mandatory AADs, then the most effective rules of all would be wing loading restrictions and bans on hook turns. But that ain't gonna happen, because hook turns are cool. Back in the old days low pull contests used to be the cool thing to do. But we eventually realized the folly of that, changed the culture of acceptance for it, and recognized it for the danger it was. And nowadays, hook turns are the new low pulls - hurling yourself at the ground only to pull out and save yourself at the last possible fraction of a second. Cool, man! Meanwhile, let's force those old farts to buy an AAD, even though they have decades of experience proving that they're heads-up on altitude awareness, and have never been known to go low or mishandle a malfunction. Yeah, that's what we need to improve safety!

What issue?

Worse for who? If you prefer to be defenseless in the face of a criminal attack, you have the right to be that way of your own free choice. Others have the freedom to choose differently. Ain't freedom great?

Update:Folks fired up over gun shop The idea in itself is simple: allow one unit at Woodbridge's Selden Plaza to be zoned for retail. However, some in the quiet town are taking issue with Frank Kloss' plan to sell guns. "It's very frightening to think that this may happen in our community," said long-time resident Tina Brogadir. Brogadir would rather the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the use, even if it means a loss of tax revenue. "I don't care, not that way," she said. "No thank you!" Before the meeting began, there was a small protest outside of Memorial Hall. "There are a number of gun stores in the area that are quite accessible, they are not in areas that are in high traffic with people on foot," said resident Suzanne Rosenberg. News 8 asked Brogadir about her viewpoint of this debate in relation to the Second Amendment. "Come on, that was colonial times, people don't need to bear arms in that way," Brogadir said. "Not to be argumentative," said News 8's Jamie Muro, "but it's still the law of the land that you are allowed to legally purchase a firearm in this community." "That may be, but we do not want a gun store in our community," Brogadir said. No vote was taken Monday, the issue will be brought up again during the May meeting.Full story: WTNH Funny stuff. I hope the commission approves the gun store. Imagine if the press was interviewing a conservative and he said; "It may be the law that Jews and niggars are protected under the Constitution, but we don't want 'em in our neighborhood!"

Are you paranoid for having a reserve parachute? Are you paranoid for wearing your seat belt? Are you paranoid for having a fire extinguisher? Are you paranoid for having a spare tire? Are you paranoid for having life insurance? What's wrong with being prepared for emergencies?

What you want as a skydiver is likely different than what you would want as a base jumper. Learn to skydive first. Along the way, hang out in the base forum, and learn everything you can there. Once you've become a proficient skydiver, then you can start worrying about a base rig.

There was another feeling I was getting from the previous thread that I wanted to address, but the discussion was shut down there, so I'll throw it in here. At least one person seemed to be implying that MARD's/Skyhooks are so great that NOT having them on student gear was negligence. And from that, you could imply that the student operations are guilty of killing their students when those students perform low cutaways. So let's be clear on this. Just because a drop zone doesn't have the latest and greatest parachute inventions does not mean that they are being negligent with the lives of their students. They train the students on how to respond with the gear that they have now, to save their lives in emergencies. The students need to follow those instructions, and not activate cut-aways below 1,000 feet. It costs money to retrofit a bunch of student gear, and not all drop zones have the dough to go redesigning their gear every time something new comes out. You get to jump what's available now, not what you might like to have in a world where everyone has more money than they need. If you're not comfortable with that, don't jump. Student gear, and even experienced gear, is often a bunch of compromises. What might solve one problem, often has a downside and can create other problems. How someone chooses to address those compromises and configure their gear is a personal choice. They shouldn't be called negligent just because their decision process is different from yours. How about an automobile analogy? Do you go out and buy a new high-end car every year in order to have the latest and greatest safety gimmicks that the manufacturers dream up? What, you can't afford that? Well, why not retrofit your existing car? That's too expensive too? Does it mean that you are negligent because you own an older or cheaper car that doesn't have side airbags? Should you be sued if you loan your car to a friend and they run a stop sign and die in a side-impact collision because you chose not to buy a car with side airbags? Is everyone who doesn't drive a Cadillac Escalade an unsafe motorist who is just asking for trouble?