MakeItHappen

First off - I am totally against using any tunnel time to count as freefall time in any rating requirement. I think HQ implementation of a request from the S&T Comm did not get executed the way the committee directed HQ to do it. The discussion at the last BOD mtg was a 'consideration' of some 'tunnel time' to replace 'freefall time' - akin to simulator time that pilots get. My understanding was that the S&T comm asked HQ to ask the question of: How many tunnel hours could be substituted for x many freefall hours? IOW - some sort of question of 10 tunnel hours = 1 freefall hour or 20 tunnel hours = 1 freefall hour or 30 tunnel hours = 1 freefall hour and could this be used in the rating requirement? That poll that USPA put out does not reflect the intention of what the S&T Comm asked them to do. That poll is set up to fail. I can't think of anyone that would equate one hour of tunnel time to one hour of freefall time. But I can think of people that would say x many hours of tunnel time equals one hour of freefall time. (That's the sad part of this whole thing.) . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

same story different day..... http://makeithappen.com/spsj/newbie.htm . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

What definition of 'size' are you using? something based on canopies that are available today or something well defined? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

To the OP & Brian, I am aware that the fall out issue on individual sport rigs is small. The hazard probability of occurrence strongly depends on the jumper-gear match. To ignore that the hazard exists is to bury your head in the sand. The butt strap that I show in my article can be made by any rigger. It's not complicated and only needs one or two measurements. Steering the canopy is facilitated by the butt strap. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

What units are they using for canopy size and WL? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

The stuff I have is related to specific incidents and is generally work product done for others (some related to lawsuits). Thus, it cannot be released, except for the article already cited. General trends can be stated. A larger projected surface area perpendicular to the relative air stream will slow your velocity component in the direction of the relative air stream much faster than a smaller projected area perpendicular to the relative air stream. Collisions between an aircraft and jumper occur when the trajectories cross. The trajectories cross when the individual vertical velocity components of each body do not provide sufficient separation during the time that the jumper is supposed to pass under the tail or equivalently when the differential between the horizontal velocity components of each body is such that there is insufficient time for the bodies to separate vertically. In jumper speak, if you present a huge surface area to the relative wind on exit you are more likely to hit the tail. Also with WSs, the lift coefficient of the jumper needs to be assessed, even if the projected area perpendicular to the relative air stream is 'small'. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I remember it being a 110 way load. The 10way base was eventually 'let go of' to create the starfish round. So the actual round was only 100. I do not have a picture of it. I don't collect skydive pics on my walls because they remind me of all the dead friends. IIRC Skeff and Raoul were some of the photographers. There should be a picture of it at the BombShelter. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

It was the 100-way starfish done at Perris in 1997. I was on it. And everyone was facing in. The previous record was a 64-way star done in 1996 at Skydance, that I was also on. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

If an AFFI or Coach falls below their appropriate pull altitude without pulling & while chasing a student, an argument can be made that they are negligent. An AFFI or Coach pulling in view of a student is a strong signal to the student to pull. Staying around in freefall may indicate to the student that 'everything is ok'. Giving hero status to someone that goes down to AAD fire altitude to 'save' a student is bunk. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Here's my opinion on 'Free Demos', written some +20 years ago, but still rings true. http://makeithappen.com/spsj/freebies.htm What was said at the Summer BOD mtg and what has proven to be true, are not one and the same. The BOD really cannot do anything about this until the next BOD mtg. You can bet that the way this has been implemented - so far - is NOT what I agreed to. There is a concept in there that can work, but if it turns into a good-old-boys or 'special people', it needs to shut down or diverted from USPA support. Keep writing the BOD members, some of them have a 'well I have to get at least x many emails about this to consider it an issue' . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

My account agrees with the minutes. The editorial makes no mention of using other highly qualified skydivers. That is the big bone of contention that many demo jumpers have asked me about. There are a lot of demo jumpers here in SoCal. There are several team leaders that arrange demos using the same roster of demo jumpers. These demo jumpers are part of the other highly qualified skydivers that are supposed to be used by the US Demo Team. The concept, as it was explained at the BOD mtg, would work in a similar way, but would NOT encroach on the existing demos that the team leaders anywhere in the US have had for years and years. The concept, as it was explained at the BOD mtg, would be very similar to how the GK demo team works. They have one group out providing publicity for the US Army and another group doing competition jumps. If the plan is implement and only uses US Team members for demos, then it will fail. The Coors/Vision team used to do demos for Coors all over the US. It took time out of their training (back then most every team was a weekend team). If you look at the training schedule of most competitors, doing demos across the nation would interfere with their training and other coaching duties. FYI the US Parachute Team is a separate organization than USPA. The BOD is the same for each organization. Selection to the US Parachute Team is fully explained in SCM Sec 11. No where in that section is there mention of a Demo team. Yes it will be, if it fails. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Wow--- I can understand all the posts objecting to this USPA Demo team if you are going by the Ed Scott editorial in Oct's issue of Parachutist. If the program will work like that then I am against it. However, at the July BOD mtg, I grilled Jimmy Hayhurst about all of these issues you are bringing up. His answers were completely different from the way the program is described by Scott. I said it sounded like you were going to lend $10,000 to 15-20 guys that were/are National Champs to allow them to form a demo team and finance their demo team. Hayhurst said oh no that's not how it will work. We will recruit all the local demo jumpers from each area. We will use demo jumpers that have not been on the US Parachute team. Then I said it sounds like the profits that the existing teams get today will be reduced because they'll have to pay back a loan to USPA. No again from Hayhurst, it's supposed to allow the existing teams to make as much money as they do now and provide additional revenue. What about encroachment on venues already performed by existing teams? oh we won't touch those. Then there is the part that Scott says this is a fund raiser for the US Team Trust Fund. That part I don't get either. This program was supposed to raise money for the USPA DEMO team, nothing was said about funds going into the US Team Trust Fund. In Scott's editorial he uses the same name, US Parachute Team, to mean the real US Parachute Team and the USPA Demo Team. At the BOD mtg these were two distinct operations/teams. In fact, the demo team cannot be part of the US Parachute Team. I will corner both Ed Scott and Jimmy Hayhurst, in person, at Nationals to get clarification on this new USPA Demo Program Team. Ed Scott's editorial is NOT what was presented at the July BOD mtg. I want to find out which way it is. Thanks for all the emails and phone calls on this. If this program really is as Scott says, I am loading my torpedoes. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

It is a stupid requirement that is a holdover from the 1960s. If you send me an email requesting that the requirement be dropped, I'll bring it up at the next BOD mtg. The past two times this has been brought up it was defeated. Another friend on mine wanted a waiver to the rule. USPA gives out a lot of waivers to rating requirements, but it is anal on this D-licence for the awards. Email me at aerosoftware_AT_makeithappen.com . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

see http://makeithappen.com/spsj/gethome.htm http://makeithappen.com/spsj/highwindpatterns.html . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I researched this question with the altimeter mfgs several years ago. The jist of the answer is that both analog and digital altimeters have the same uncertainty in measurement. You can create a calibration curve for any altimeter with a more precise aircraft altimeter and an altitude chamber. Most altimeters are more accurate closer to MSL as opposed to 'altitude' 13k AGL. The error is greater at higher altitude (as a trend). The amount of error is around 10-15 ft at lower altitudes. The error can be significantly greater at 'altitude'. You also need to account for reading accuracy. (in addition to the measurement accuracy) With analogs you may have parallax errors. With digitals you may have misreads or transposition of numbers. Generally digital displays are more sensitive to illumination issues. Digital 2 may look like a 5 etc Analog - shadow of indicator arm may make it harder to read. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Would you mind citing your sources and posting links to a sub-plethora of the complete plethora you claim? I have never seen any studies so I would like to read. Years ago I was paid to do this research. I do not have access the my report any more, so I cannot tell you what articles I used then. What you need to do is do research on human factors and instrumentation. I guarantee that there are many articles in this area. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

There are a plethora of studies that show analog is better than digital. Kinda reinforces the 'a picture is worth a thousand words' adage. I would suspect that your personal reaction time is more about paralysis by analysis. As the old engineering joke goes, you are trying to measure a pipe to the nearest tenth of a millimeter and then cutting it off with a hacksaw. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Our three way was first out of the van, not sure how I have control over the next groups separation time. I even tracked opposite of jump run. Her canopy was open as I was flying back, this is clearly visible. If her canopy did not go into a spin with her burning off fast altitude, there was no separation issue. Being first out, i'm not sure if I can scan over a mile ahead of me and account for over twenty canopies in the air and then land in every time. I can scan the air space that I will be going through and make sure it is safe to travel, like I was doing. I was looking 360, up and down, and I did see her above and behind me. I understand that you were in the first group out and your group cannot fix the exit separation. What I wanted to impress is that once you open, you need to look up & down the jumprun line and make sure that the groups before or after you are open AND HAVE GOOD CANOPIES. Once that is a check ok-good to go, then you can start flying to get back to the landing area. You also said that this happened about 20 seconds after you opened and that you tracked opposite jump run (which would mean your track was to the north). The photographer usually takes the center area of the formation at break off and his POV is N of the barn and N of you. I find those things to be inconsistent. IOW, I find it difficult to believe that you were tracking to the N of the photographer and then 20 seconds later finding yourself S of the photographer. Perhaps, your timeline is off or the photographer was not in the center of your group or you thought jumprun was S to N? The video and my 10 years of jumping at Skydance would lay odds that jumprun was N to S. I want to stress upon you and others that making a beeline back to the landing area right after you open is not always a good thing to do, especially if you are short of the target and first out. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

All of UPT rigs are designed such that the grommets are NOT supposed to be 'lined up' or 'on top of each other'. There are a number of reasons for this. So I would say that your closing loop was adjusted to be too short and you need to lengthen it. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Then I would then suspect that the canopy is too large for the bag and has a hard time getting extracted from it or your bag stop is improperly placed that would inhibit the canopy from being extracted. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Your exit separation between the groups may not have been sufficient. You stated that you looked around for 'your' group after opening. You also need to look for the groups before and after you open. After you see those folks and they all have good canopies, then you can arrange yourself for approaching the target. (the field S of the gun range) There are two issues to look at: 1. exit separation 2. flying back towards the landing area under canopy before the next group is open There was a recent fatality in Australia that this may have been an issue. There was a fatality, also in Australia, several years ago where this was also suspected to be an issue. Both of those accidents had people from different groups colliding shortly or during opening. FMI Search Fiona McEachern and Lee Loncasty. As for the idea of 'cutting away because you think someone from above and behind is about to hit you' --- that's one of those you'd have to be there in order to decide. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I would suspect the line stows - type of stow and length of the line bite past the stow band. I see a lot of pack jobs that would allow the closing stows to fall over another stow or visa versa. The bite length needs to be uniform and not long enough to hang up on an adjacent stow. If you have changed stow bands are you using ones that will break at the same force as before? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Rick's Memorial service will be Saturday, June 25 · 3:00pm - 8:00pm at Perris Valley Skydiving. Blue Skies Rick. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I *think* what you are seeing is a difference in CD/now IE who have or not have taken the AIC/ now IEC. The section on biomechanics was introduced into the USPA doctrine when Rob Laidlaw was developing the AIC, c2004. USPA has mandated that all CDs/IEs need to take the IEC by a certain date. (I think that date is the end of this year. Don't quote me on that cuz I'd have to go look it up.) The gist of understanding biomechanics is to explain why small finger motions are suitable for typing and getting your whole body into the motion is suitable for a free throw from half court and why the converse (small finger motion for the half court free throw or using your entire body to type are inappropriate to get the job done.) . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Can you give me a link on this? THanks . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker