Bazza

OOps....PMs now turned on Thanks for the response. I am an experienced belly flyer who is interested in 4 way/8 way as well as 'big way'. Does the bunk house fill up on a usual weekend (in October) or is it pretty much hit and miss? I would most likely be traveling out on a Friday by train, I guess, and hopefully hitching a ride from there. They won't let me travel with small furry animals...Some kind of vicious vermin threat or something

Hi, Does anybody have an email address for Sydney (Aus) Skydive? I have some general questions as an experienced jumper and will be visiting the area in the near future. Their website has an automated response area if you want to book a tandem but no general email contact. Thanks, Bazza

Okay. I had foreseen a more theoretical thread with points spread around at what may or may not be done. Let's set up a hypothetical situation. The student has done a couple of tandems and has done one AFF or PFF (for those north of the 49th) jump. The person weighs 170 pounds and has average athletic ability. The dz elevation, say, is 2000 feet. Now, would any instructors allow him to jump a new 210 sq. ft. zero-p 9 cell? If yes, why? If no, then why not?

Perhaps you are under the assumption I will be jumping the canopy. Since I'm not, my weight is not relevent. One can see why I'm asking by re-reading my original post (to get opinions).

It would be a new zero-p 9 cell (a pilot?)

I was wondering what the maximum weight instructors would consider reasonable to put an AFF or PFF student out under a 210 sp ft. canopy? What other factors or conditions (dz altitude, wind speed, etc.) might factor into a decision to allow or not a student to use that size canopy for this aspect of training? Thanks in advance.

I am looking at making some home made weights for a weight belt and am wondering what the best material to use in place of lead. I don't know all there is about it but I have been told lead may not be the best on the environment or whatever. Any recommendations?

I have done a search for info on the topic below. If I have missed something please accept my aplogies now and point me in the direction. I have heard a couple of different accounts of how and when a Cypres fires. Some have suggested that a 'count down' starts and the unit becomes 'armed'. After a certain point if the algoritim conditions still exist (seven parameters through the one sensor?) after the arming sequence and at the proper altitude the unit fires. Yet another version, and the one I tend to subscribe, is that the software algoritim is simply 'pass/fail' and will fire if the 'fail' parameters occcur at 750 feet above recognized ground level. Can anybody shed some technical light on when and how the cypres software activates the hardware? Thanks, Baz

Yes, I believe it is functional. However, I have another rig where the kill line and bridle are independent of each other from the bag to the canopy apex. Therefore when the PC is cocked the excess bridle, while slack, does not bunch up and can be s folded into the bag or stowed on a small elastic if one would prefer. the new one looks messy and is bulky.

Contacting the manufacturer is in the works. I am soliciting others' opinions and experiences.

I have put together my new R.I. Talon FS container and have a question concerning the kill line configuration. The pilot chute with the kill line can assembled to (through?) the bag ready to link to the apex of my main. When I cock the pilot chute to the point of where the green is in the window, the bridle from the bag to the canopy bunches up. All items are connected as per manufacturer's instruction (even looks like the picture in the manual!). Is the 'bunched up' bridle totalling about 3" in length normal and the way it is suppoded to be? Anyone else have this happening? If this is the way it is supposed to be then I would suggest that portion of the bridle will wear much more quickly on the kill line. Comments anyone?

I think if you examine the difference in wages between Australia and the U.S. in the respective industries where tipping is common you will understand why tipping is not common in Australia.

I think it has been touched on here by others but if a woman is self-assured, confident, assertive (not aggressive), and intelligent she is not at all 'scary'. In fact, most men would find this to be very attractive. However, if she was obnoxious, resorted to put downs, rude, and had no problem putting men down for that sake only in a 'femiNAZI' manner then she would be scary and would not be someone most would want to be around.

Didya hear about the spectator who jumped into the diving tank after one of the competitions? His sentence seems a little harsh to me, at least much harsher than your average streaker or soccer hooligan! http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/OtherSports/2004/08/17/587682-cp.html

I think a point that is being missed here is that the institution of marriage was born out of religion, most of which denounce homosexuality. It is this sanctity along with the solemn vows and promises to God that people think and feel are being marginalized by allowing gays to marry when the religions do not favour homosexuality. Also, one of the reasons for marriage is for the couple to 'legally' or 'legitimately' procreate the species. That is, the natural biological process between a man and a woman through intercourse. If gays want to live to gether in peaceful, common law harmony there wouldn't be as much of an uproar