mathrick

Why'd PD mind people jumping an Optimum as main? "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Having the same idea is not "stealing", we need to get rid of the backwards thinking promoted by broken "intellectual property" laws. The only people who reliably benefit from patents are patent lawyers. For everyone else (including inventors), patents are a net loss. Patents don't work, have never worked, are based on wrong assumptions about economics and very disagreeable ideas about ownership and fairness, and persist despite the fact that the only actual data we have points towards them hurting innovation and productivity. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

You should look into ski underwear. You can get some very thin and warm layers that way. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

It's not plagiarism, it's using what works, and the fact there are only so many ways you can arrange a piece of webbing and some metal to make it do what you need. Nobody gets points for being least similar to others, quite the opposite, any self-respecting rigger will tell you to stay away from untried novelties. Inventions don't happen in a vacuum, and skydiving is all about polishing and refining good ideas until they have no remaining warts and are least likely to kill you. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Number of jumps is never the reason to reline, the actual condition of the lines is. The number is a proxy for that information, which might sometimes be difficult to obtain without detailed inspection, but it's always the condition of the lines that decides. If your lines have 50 jumps on them, but are in a bad shape, you should still reline. A rigger will be able to determine whether, and to what extent, you need to reline. Spectra lines age well with regards to wear, but go out of trim because they're not dimensionally stable when exposed to friction heat. Comparing to the trim chart for the canopy can be used to determine if a spectra lineset needs to be changed. Sometimes only the brake lines, which are subject to most friction and thus shrinkage, can be changed to restore acceptable trim; your rigger will also be able to determine that. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Nothing is too simple to fuck up for a dedicated person! I don't remember the thread now, but someone mentioned the other day finding a DZ where the local rigger figured it'd be more "secure" to tack the Skyhook to the bridle not with the red thread, but with a piece of fishing line. Thankfully nobody had any totals before it was discovered. You'd think it'd be blindingly obvious why you want the Skyhook loop to slide off the hook piece easily, but clearly not to everyone. I'd attribute Booth's MARD's success less to inherent technical simplicity, and more to the strength of Booth's rig-making brand and business, the fact it was first to market, and the fact they have a patent on the Collin's lanyard and won't license it separately from the Skyhook, even though there's absolutely nothing tying the two together on a technical level. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

I have no idea or opinion about the containers they make, but they should definitely have their video-making privileges revoked. This is the worst turd of editing I've seen in quite a while. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Uhh, I must have all the things backwards about how digital cameras work, because I'd expect slower shutter to result in more jellocam. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

'Cept they're widely regarded as being confusing more than anything, and quite successful at getting in the way of people actually learning anything. This is very much second-hand info I have, but I've heard quite a few horror stories of people doing AFF in USA or Spain and then getting back to France only to find out they're not allowed to spot or pack their own canopy (!) until they have some ridiculous number of jumps (I think it was 100 or 150). For reference, DFU allows 500g/ft² (WL=1.1) for jumpers with

Curious, are SBs legally binding for anyone? I thought the determination was that after the certification is issued, it is solely FAA-issued ADs that can add or remove any further restrictions on the gear, so manufacturer issuing an SB wouldn't change the legal situation in any way (within FAA's jurisdiction). Or am I misreading something? "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Not sure if CX405 has one, but if so, disabling the image stabilisation might help. Not all Sony cameras have a stabiliser up to the rigours of freefall, and for those that don't, enabling it results in the dreaded jellocam. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Sure, but the same could be expressed without being full of machismo assumptions and casual sexism. That's the part I was objecting to. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

We could do without the uncalled for casual sexism and stereotyping. The OP's case and this discussion are helped by neither. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Is it just me, or is the landing on rear risers not actually discussed? From listening to it, I didn't really get a clear outline of "this is a safe way of progressing from up high rear riser flares to actually executing it on the ground that minimises the risk of injuring yourself". "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

SWS rigs don't have a TSO either, because they legally cannot: FAA doesn't have a permanent representative in Ukraine, therefore no Ukrainian manufacturer could possibly obtain a TSO. They have E-TSO however (a corresponding EU certification), and have physically passed the tests they'd be subject to for a C23d. Lack of FAA TSO is only a problem for people living and jumping in the US, or people otherwise jumping on a USPA licence; anyone else, including foreign jumpers in the US without a residence there, can jump these just fine as long as their licensing organisation recognises the gear. It's quite likely that it's the case with these rigs too, Serbia and Montenegro might not have an FAA representative, but the type certificate was issued by the national aviation authority based on the criteria outlined in TSO C23d. That's what the intent of the scan of their award of type certificate seems to be. Whether it's actually the case however, and whether they're trustworthy equipment is not something I can answer. Gear not made in the US can be perfectly fine and just as good as US-made whilst being cheaper. SWS and Parachute Systems demonstrate that well. But you need to make sure you can communicate with the manufacturer and existing users to gather opinions, which might be a real issue for gear made in countries where English is not a given. Skyblue's site is definitely sparse on info if you don't speak Serbo-Croatian. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Probably both. Skydiving is small enough that there's an actual person trying to be nice behind each company, and at the same time, your reputation is the make or break of your business, so it pays off to go to extra lengths to be nice. Case in point: I ordered a Vortex because of the recall. And with the sport being small, if you travel enough (as most gear manufacturers do), you will likely know both the customer and the competitor personally. Which makes Mirage's behaviour strange, the last thing you want is people talking on the web about how not only did your ripcord fail in 3 years, but you also tried everything to show that you don't care. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

I started jumping Spectre 190 around jump 25, with WL of 1.0, down from a Nav 240 and jumped it mostly until I got my licence (Danish, at jump 40). I would definitely not recommend braking approach as a rule, Spectre already has relatively little flare compared to a newer 9-cell, so bleeding off more airspeed is going to put you in an uncomfortable spot where you don't have enough to work with. That said, it has a very forgiving flare, so you will be able to stand it up in most circumstances, once you get used to the timing, which is quite different from the 9-cell Nav (as a 7-cell, Spectre sinks a bit faster and has its flare start deeper in the control range, which results in the whole flare being "compressed" into a relatively small portion of the toggle range). "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

I snatched a demo Pilot7 167 at Z-Hills the day it was released, I believe it was the ZPX version. I put a total of 14 jumps on it over 2 days, in variable (1m/s to 11m/s) winds. I'm around 87kg out the door, which puts my WL at 1.12. My impressions: It opens fast at terminal. Hop'n'pops give you a nice long snivel, but terminal openings are, uh, "positive". I had the packers pack the slowest openings they could manage, and it was still just on the edge of uncomfortably fast. Great thing for a wingsuit canopy, which Pilot7 clearly is, but I fly belly, and that's not as great. Don't believe the claims about openings being great for infirm, elderly and pregnant women. Not the one I jumped. But at least it slams you on heading. It flies very well, and wasn't hard to adjust to (I fly Sabre2 170 normally). The "flies like a 9-cell" claim is generally borne out and not much of a stretch. The flare is really impressive for a 7-cell, and it responds very well to a full 2-stage flare. It still levels out pretty deep in the control range though, deeper than is usual for a 9-cell. Landings are pretty fast, expect to run a couple steps in very light winds. Glide is noticeably steeper than in a Pilot, somewhere between Pilot and Sabre2, closer to the latter. Toggle stalls are twitchy. It gives you plenty of warning so it's not in any way abrupt, but if you stall it, it will dive on recovery. No matter how gradual your input. So don't stall it I guess. I don't swoop, and fly a conservative WL, so take the following with a grain of salt, but: front riser pressure is very high. I can normally do a 360° with no braking on my Sabre2, on Pilot7 I could maybe get a 90°, barely a 270° with braking. Interestingly enough however, the recovery arc seems longer than in Sabre2. It's pretty weird, and very possible that you can get a decent swoop out of it in smaller sizes. Harness input is decent, though not super responsive. No canopy is likely to be at my WL. All in all, seems like it'd be great for wingsuiting, and in LPV you can probably pack two sizes up. But I wouldn't choose it for regular freefall, and would definitely recommend anyone who can't take a harder opening to stay away from it. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

That's a terrifying job description. If I were you, I'd also have taken up skydiving for the safety it provides. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

This makes it slightly newer than the container I bought and am currently jumping. Mine is '95 Vector II with '90 Cricket packed inside. Put together by one of the most senior riggers in Denmark. Reserves only really care about repacks and jumps, not years. Yours had a 16 year break, which means 32 repacks it didn't suffer (for you keeping score at home, repack cycle is yearly in DK, which is how a '90 Cricket can still be airworthy). "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Some places have a swappable practice harness where you can hook up actual rigs by the rings. That'd totally work there, as long as you think through PC's flight path and collecting the resulting mess afterwards. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Back when I was learning about landing approaches, "canopy over your head" took absolute priority over "exactly where you want to land". I don't believe HP approaches change that. Hooking an extra 180° you didn't plan seriously sounds like a great way to make it into the incidents section. It was only 3 months ago that Dubai had a fatal incident where the competitor apparently set up his approach wrong and ended up too high and too far, and rather than land straight in, he did a low altitude 360° and went in. We will never know why, but developing reflexes that tell you it's OK to improvise when you fuck up would be the first step. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

Which is another area where stronger enforcement would do good, and where some organisers at least have moved towards acknowledging the issue, with various degrees of formal attention (from "remember to drink responsibly if you intend to be on the morning load" to actually showing up with a breath tester and screening for obviously hungover people). "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

I'm dying to see the beginner rig which has all the right components and can house all the appropriately sized canopies, but somehow has a Katana installed in it. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."

I don't swoop, but... wouldn't this kind of thing be asking for trouble and a reason to abort the approach? My understanding is that swooping is all about repeatability and making sure you can execute exactly the thing you intended, at an altitude you intended. Adding 120° to your turn would seem to throw the whole thing off and risk a vigorous contact with the ground. "Skydivers are highly emotional people. They get all excited about their magical black box full of mysterious life saving forces."