hoym

I was on one load this last summer where I was last out of the Porter with a Tandem. I checked the spot and it was okay but a bit on the short side. I was in the door waiting for the plane to go further. The pilot was giving me that look, you know, "let's go". I was still waiting to get farther accross the DZ but it wasn't happening and the Pilot was REALLY giving me that Look! "Let's Go". During this time of 'communicating' with the pilot, he realized something and we talked about it on the ground later. The moving map on his GPS had done a 180 and the plane (while it was flying forward through the sky), it was actually flying backwards over the ground. We talked about it and switched to a crosswind jump run upwind of the airport. On that day, jump run worked much better that way.

I will VERY RARELY talk to wuffos about skydiving and then only if they bring it up first and even then I keep it short. Every now and then a co-worker will ask, "Jump this weekend?" And I'll say something like, "Yea, made 5 on Saturday." Never much more than that and only if they ask first. They know I do it. But I guess co-workers realize that it's something I don't talk much about. Now if they express a sincere interest in trying it, I'll tell them all they want to know and more. And, I'll go way out of my way to help them experience it but that doesn't happen much. The last co-worker that asked about jumping, I paid for his first jump course. He liked it but he works part time and is still a student and funds didn't let him continue.

What ever they are doing, someone thinks that they must be doing it right. Click to see a 2 year stock price chart. I think they are up over 350% over the couple of years. Starbucks Stock Chart

One of the main points of my post was that the DZ/DZO needs to check out and confirm the credentials of a visiting TI. If you have let tandem masters drift through and take commercial/paying customers on a tandem jump and later realized that they were going to hurt someone, then you have not checked out and confirmed that they are qualified to be a tandem master at your dz. Now you have exposed the DZ/DZO to added risk of a law suit because you have not done your due diligence to protect your customers. You are now negligent and liable. Because a tandem skydive is not just another skydive, a DZ/DZO may want to go a few extra steps to confirm a visiting TI level of competence. This may include letters of recommendation from the TI home DZ(s) or from more than one DZ that the visiting TI has done tandems at. Maybe videos of their tandems or maybe they should take a DZ staff person as a tandem passenger first. I don't see any problem with a DZ asking for items like this and a visiting TI should be happy to jump through 'resonable' hoops to provide them if they really want to make a tandem jump at a distant/new DZ. I simply think that a TI traveling to visit friends/relatives in a distant city should be able to visit the local DZ and take their friends/relatives on a skydive. Do you think there is a difference in a visiting TI taking their own friend/relative on a tandem jump and getting into the DZ rotation and taking DZ customers on a tandem jump. Do you think there is a difference in the amount of exposure/risk to the DZ for these two different situations? Your comment about money must have been for the other guy. I have no issue about money. A DZ can set what ever rate they want to charge for what ever type of activity they want to sell. Different types of jumps, packing service, training/coaching, whatever, that is up to them. Then I can decide if I want to pay that price for that service. I don't think the qualifications or number of jumps of the passenger matter at all in this discussion. The responsibility for accepting risk does fall on the passenger as they agree to in the waiver (the same as anyone who jumps from a plane.) The TI is responsible for that jump just like the pilot of the plane is responsible for the flight. The responsibility for safety rests on the TI and the DZ/DZO. My issue is that I would like to visit a drop zone and make skydives that I am qualified and rated to make.

My question that you replied to asked 'where is the higher incidence of injury'. I've seen more solo jumpers carried away on a stretcher than tandem jumpers. But I have not seen a study that will show a higher incidence of injury for tandem vs solo jumpers. So, I still don't know what type of jump has more injury. Of course a tandem jump has far more responsibility and there are potentially more components and aspects to the jump for the TI to manage and be aware of and be capable of handling than there is for a solo jumper. But I think level of risk is a relative thing managed by many variables. Given a new 'A' license holder with 25 jumps and a seasoned veteran with 10,000 jumps and 8,000 tandems. Where is the greater risk of injury? Add in other variables, higher winds, off dz landing, landing area traffic, etc. Which jumper is at a greater risk of injury? And thus greater exposure to the DZ/DZO? Yet a drop zone will often let the first jumper buy a jump ticket but will not let the second one buy two tickets and make a 'tandem' style jump. There are a lot of different types of skydiving that add different types of risk. Tandem, wingsuit, tunnel, base, aff, head down, swooping, crw, camera and more I'm sure. That is the great thing about this sport. We can continue to learn new disciplines. Each discipline adds new things to be managed and if they are not managed adequately there is added risk. If there is appropriate training and then a certain amount of experience and practice, risk is minimized. Again, I was trying to focus on exposure to the DZ/DZO. I'm not sure yet that a qualified (visiting) TI will expose the DZ to greater liability (especially carrying their own friend/relative/student), than some unknown newbie who swoops himself into the spectator area.

This is an interesting thread. There are a couple folks who talked about added risk and added liability to the DZ. If a skydiver travels out of town and stops into the local DZ to make a jump. Someone at the DZ should check their gear, USPA membership card, log book, maybe talk to them a little bit, have them fill out a waiver before selling them some jump tickets. Basically the DZO will do the best they can to limit their exposure due to negligence by making sure that this unknown jumper is carrying all the the credentials necessary to authorize them to make a skydive. If the checkout of the credentials includes confiming an appropriatly rated tandem or AFF instructor, I don't see how the DZ has added any greater exposure to themselves or any greater liability or risk by allowing a skydiver to make a skydive within the scope and authorization of their ratings and documented experience. Now, if the DZ let a new arrival make any kind of skydive without checking out their credentials first, then the DZO could be found negligent and add risk and liability to the DZ if the DZ let an unqualified and/or unrated skydiver make a jump that resulted in an injury to themselves and/or someone. As long as the DZ does their due diligence in confirming that the newly arrived (unknown) jumper meets a certain level of currency and ratings shouldn't they be allowed to make any type of jump within the scope of their ratings and abilities? Are those with the opinion that there is added risk implying that there is a higher incidence of injury or damage with a tandem skydive than a normal fun jumper? Is this why you think a tandem type of jump would subject the DZ/DZO to a higher likelihood of a lawsuit? Or are you saying that the waiver filled out by a visiting tandem passenger is less valid for the tandem passenger than it is for the visiting tandem instructor? Doesn't the DZ/DZO rely primarily on the waiver to limit their exposure to a lawsuit by anyone who takes a seat on the jump plane be it fun jumper, instructor, student, observer or pilot? I'm just trying to understand how the DZ is exposed to a higher level of risk and/or liability with an appropriately rated skydiver making a tandem skydive.

Alright, Here's a thread I can't be more proud to reply to... Here are a couple of pics of Nathan and Sara both now 5. A couple of the pics were from last year. A few weeks ago, I left work a bit early on Friday. Picked up my son, borrowed a mooney and flew to Longmont, CO from Iowa. On Saturday, we hiked up to the top of the Royal Arch near Bolder. It was a great day. I think Boulder is already over 5,000ft and the hike was another 1,700 ft vertical. HUGE 'attaboy' award for a 5 year old. He had a great attitude during the entire hike.

You have a lot of information there. You also referred to the 'Pilot' canopy. A re-wording of the question... Will a skydiver who weighs 150lbs wearing the same jumpsuit, falling at the same freefall speed, at the same opening altitude elevation, typically have a softer opening on a Pilot 104 or a Pilot 210? Actually unrelated to this question, this is a very short video clip of a brisk opening I had on a Set 400. http://manifestmaster.com/video/mike.wmv

Okay, maybe this is a 'duh' question but... All other variable being equal, will a canopy open faster or slower if it is highly wing loaded or lightly wing loaded. Or, does wing loading have no impact on the opening shock or how fast a canopy opens?

Damn, My very first post in Gear and Rigging and I got yelled at. Anyway, there is a great cross reference on the JumpShack web site with regard to pack volumes... http://www.jumpshack.com/Read/Tech/canopy_volume_chart.htm I guess that I can concur with councilman on his advice for contacting the manufacturer. John Sherman from JumpShack gave me a VERY prompt reply, first thing this morning from the questions that I had emailed to him last night.

I've got a Flight Concepts Cricket reserve. Their web site says it has an approximate pack volume of 360. I might buy a used Racer. The label says the reserve container size is 350. I've heard that 'no one measures pack volume the same way under the same conditions so comparisons are vauge at best'. Its going to be several days before I can get to our rigger's place to try this combination and put these two components together. Are there any rigger types here with Racer experience who think that we'll be able to get this reserve into this container? Thanks much.

I'm still amazed that you found your main, in a bag lock with no fabric out in a corn field in so short a time when no one had a clear view. And then found the freebag to boot. Must be living right.

I've hear that there are some other reasons that women live longer than men. See the attachments for examples of another persons research into this phenomena.

One of the biggest advantages from a skydiving perspective is that the 550 is able to fire off a small number of flashes in rapid succession while the 420 will fire only one flash and then need a moment to re-charge. The 550 is much more configurable for specialized applications. It is easy to manually set the flash for half power, 1/4 power, etc. The 550 is able to act as a master in a multiple flash environment. The 420 can act as a slave but the 420 can not fire other remote flashes as the master. Con: 550 is about $300, 420 is about $180. I've got one of each. I've got my camera helmet mounted with both the 550 and 420 but so far, I've only jumped with the 550 and not both at the same time. In hind sight I would have only bought the 550. Now that I have two, I wish I had two 550's.

16) "Stay away from those cans!"