nwt

Are you sure that isn't how it is structured?

It will be interesting to see how this independent contractorship holds up.

I'm sure PD has a wealth of this data, they just aren't sharing it. They do tons and tons of test jumps.

This could be measured with GPS, flying a square pattern to average out the wind. Might be a fun project.

Okay, you might be right that it isn't technically incorrect, but it doesn't make any sense to use this notation in this context. Do you drive 55:1 or fill your tires to 35:1? Look at the examples in the link you gave. They are all comparisons of a count of "things" to a count of other "things" and none of them can be described by standard units of measure. Boys:apples, girls:oranges, wins:losses, etc.

no shit

No, it isn't. Neither is miles per hour or pounds per square inch, etc. Pounds per square foot is no different. When the cop asks you how fast you were going, do you respond with "50:1"? Do you fill your tires to "35:1"? An example where this notation is actually appropriate is canopy aspect ratio, which is the ratio of width to length, is unitless, and will be the same value regardless of the measurement system in use.

Not in Poland!

Yeah okay.

Here you go nerds, have at me!

Well shit I don't know how I'm going to live with myself

Oh thank god I finally have earned your approval

I addressed this in my last response but somehow you missed it. I even put it in bold so you would know it was important: Okay, maybe after several mis-steps you've finally found someone who actually agrees with you. Or, maybe we are missing some context here. I personally find it hard to believe that he's recommending everyone perform high performance landings. I also don't know who made billvon the supreme authority on all things canopy--I've already told you who my coach is. No, I blamed myself for not looking at the toggle and clearing the excess line looped around it. One could easily interpret your statement here as meaning I've blamed my packer for my chop and I really don't appreciate that. It's funny that you bring up ego now, because even before you did, I was going to say: The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that cutting a toggle instead of chopping is an ego trip more than anything else. Not everything has to be fixed.

I didn't ask about taking a knee, I asked about playing the anthem at sporting events.

I'm not refuting that. Where does he say rear riser landings are a downsizing criteria? Not here and not in his downsizing manual. Where does he say that landing a main without the option to bail to toggles is preferable over chopping when you have plenty of altitude to do so? Personally, I think it's likely that had I been proficient in landing on rears, I still would have chopped. I think landing on rears without the option to bail to toggles is more dangerous than landing a fully functional reserve. Do you agree? That's exactly why I posted here, but my mistake was not looking for the problem before unstowing my toggles. Chopping was certainly not a mistake and I think the advice you're giving is dangerous. edit: My other mistake was misidentifying the wind direction and flying downwind of the landing area before chopping instead of upwind. This mistake was more of a financial one, though.

No, you answered a question I didn't ask, which was something about taking a knee.

If you think that he means we should demonstrate landing on rears as a downsizing criteria, that's your own personal interpretation that I haven't heard from anyone else before. I don't know why you're continuing to throw this in my face as if I haven't acknowledged and accepted it several times, or why you're so heavily criticizing me for decisions that seem to be more about finance than safety. addendum: "You look really comfortable on this canopy" - Curt Bartholomew

Ok, I'll ask again: In your opinion, why should the anthem be played at sporting events?

If by that you mean get regular world-class canopy coaching and follow the advice of my coach, then yes I will. Thanks.

I've understood and accepted that this whole time, and I'm happy with my decisions. Thanks. None of my decisions have been in conflict with anything expressed in this video Dude, now you're getting ridiculous. You think you have a better understanding of my coach's opinions on my own personal progression than I do?

I can't speak for Curt, if you want to know what he believes you can ask him. I only know what I've heard him say and what he has taught me. If he had a problem with me being on this canopy, he would have said so, and would not be teaching me to swoop.

I'll add that this was during a canopy course with Curt Bartholomew and he had some orange course students that day. They were doing drills on some of the exotic solutions discussed in this thread, and he said that the main point of doing the drills is to show you how unstable and dangerous they are.

Well sure that's true that I would be thousands richer if I hadn't spent so much on gear, and on gear that I'm more likely to have to chop. But so what? I don't regret those decisions one bit. If I had gotten hurt or had a close call then I'd see your point.

I considered it, but I've never trained for landing on rears and I just wanted to land safely above all else.

I agree completely, I just chose deliberately to maximize my practice time at the expense of the main, to lower the risk of injury as much as possible. If I had flown the PD126 at least once before then I would have chopped much lower. It was my first time flying anything smaller than 135. The landing was great, though.