xavenger

What is this international Hard Opening Month?? Until these last few weeks I had never considered hard openings as a particularly serious problem within the sport although some of the things I have been reading and hearing of late have been pretty scary. Apart from the occasional grumble and almost "laugh" about it they've never really been high on the agenda at my dropzone, in fact most places I have jumped. Am I just imagining it, or am I just plain wrong but it seems a lot of these are on Sabre 2s? The paralysis of the young Brit guy on his 30th jump whilst out in Spain, due to a hard opening, is just so tragic it's crazy. I realise that body position is a factor in hard openings, dumping in a full track etc is not good but this and the important of quartering the slider properly and packing properly needs to be stressed to people. A lot of people don't consider hard openings to be that much of a problem and this needs to be addressed because just one is enough to maim you.

No .. I'll have you know .. we have the best sodas over here in Blighty ... coming it at number one .. without question ... Dandelion and Burdock and at number 2 a firm favourite ... Irn Bru - Made in Scotland from Girders!! and coming up in third place ... Tizer!!

Cark in the UK is now £21 per jump ticket. Thats the equivelant of $36 to our American friends!

Yes Pincheck a canopy piloting course is a good idea, it's a good idea for most skydivers. I have already done Scott Millers course out in Deland and had a day's coaching with someone else .. within a couple of weeks of getting back in to the groove again - I will do another one.

Hi there Just over a year ago I broke my leg badly whilst jumping. However, within a couple of weeks I will be fit enough to start jumping again and I am really looking forward to .. but .. well .. you know the whole landing thing is doing my head in a bit ;-) My last canopy (Pilot 168) was too fast for me and because of some stumbles early on I never got confident flying it. I got it shortly after AFF and had a number of landing problems all the way through to jump 200 when I did my leg in - my ability to handle the speed of the canopy were a contributing factor in the accident. My stupidity in not having got shot of the canopy earlier are covered in detail elsewhere. My next canopy is going to be loaded at 1 - 1.1 maximum (the Pilot was higher). I am happy to stay at this level for a zillion jumps. I need to get to a position where I am 100% confident piloting and landing a canopy safely. I need to get to a stage where I am not worrying my arse off about the landing – before I even get in the plane etc ;-) A number of people have suggested I that I get a Spectre or a Triathlon - that these tend to be more "forgiving" and generally a much easier canopy to land than their 9 cell brethren, with a powerful flair and much less forward speed. Can anyone provide me with some feedback as to whether they think this is the case and whether they think the above canopies are suited to a pathetic scaredey cat like me? Thanks people :-) J

Gravitygirl. I think your comments - on reinforcing the appropriate habits from day one are very valid. Whilst not having a non-collapsible pilot chute to start with may be sensible, if there is a strong likelihood of a jumper moving on to a system with a collapsible a later date it may be difficult for someone to change routine. James

> You gotta love this country! > http://www.girlsonbulls.com/ You know .. I'm not even American .. but yes, God Bless America!

> Quite simply, those people are > sheep. I did my own homework Good for you that you did your own homework. This doesn't detract from what reality of what I said though - which is practically all new skydivers rely on recommendation from someone else without *really* knowing what they're buying and whether other options might suit them better or even exist. This is pretty much just how it is to the best of my knowledge. It's the same in most areas of expertise, the expert makes what they believe to be the best recommendation and the newbie goes along with it. Many times the "expert" doesn't even consider a different approach because they're so used to doing something a certain way. Going back to the original topic everyone's so used to collapsible pilot chutes practically no give thinks about or considers the merits of not having one (if any exist that is)

> A quick perusal of the "options" page > of any manufacturers website will show > what can/can't be put on a rig. I have hardly ever, ever seen someone come off student status, go to buy their first rig and go through the options like this. Nearly always someone's first rig is recommended to them and even if a new rig a large part of the decision making is done for the newbie by the person at the gear shop. Options are not offered and explained - you're told what you want. Look what I was trying to ask was is there some mileage in having a non-collapsible pilot shoot if you're on a low wingloading anyway .. if there are no downsides, even the tiniest removal of something else to go wrong it has to be a good idea. However, another poster had contradicted the notion that there are no down-sides, which is v interesting and likewise billvon who thinks there is a noticable change in canopy characteristics.

Excellent information and exactly the sort of stuff I wanted to read. A very different take to billbooths comment to think about. Thanks.

> If you don't want to use one, don't. > No one forces anyone to use a kill-line > PC just like no one forces anyone to > use mini-risers w/mini-rings. I realise no one is forced to use one .. but I wonder how many newer skydivers (exactly the sort of people who are - or should - be on lower wingloadings) even realise it's an option NOT to have one. > How many PC-in-tow mals really happen? I don't know but they clearly happen enough for people to be worried about them and hold a huge conversations as to how to best deal with them. Prevention is the best medicine. > they can't remember to cock it when > they are packing, they probably have > other issues as well I'm not sure I understand why what other issues someone may or may not have matters at all. No one "deserves" to die for mucking up. If someone has others issues then surely minimizing their risks is a priority and this could be one thing that helps them do that.

Can you run this by me again .. what do you mean by a "bungeed pilot chute"? How do you bungee it? > Not even the worst idiot could > forget to "cock" a bungeed pilot chute This idiot doesn't even know what one is! ;-)

Hi Further to a conversation about how to deal with a pilot chute in tow malfunction in the thread entitled "Red or Silver" I got thinking about what the best way would be to eliminate or massively reduce the likelihood of having a pilot chute in tow mal in the first place .. then Bill Booth came along and said: "if you jump around 1:1, and aren't into "swooping", a non-collapsing pilot chute is just fine. I jump a 190 silhouette with a non-collapser, and I see and feel no distortion." So yeah, pretty obvious really. A number of PC in tow mals could probably be avoided if we weren't using collapsible PCs in the first place. A significant percentage of the skydiving community probably sees no benefit from them, just additional risk. If a collapsible pilot chute offers no discernable benefit to the tens of thousands of people flying quite happy at low wing loadings and who are not interested in performance flying - they it would make sense to me that these people could mitigate the risk of a very serious mal simply by changing to a non-collapsible. I don't mind additional complexity in life, when there is benefit, but I can't see that there is one for a lot of jumpers using collapsible pilot chutes - all I can see is unnecessary risk (ok small) and something else to go wrong. Am I thinking straight? What are your thoughts? :-) James

> So, if you jump around 1:1, and aren't into > "swooping", a non-collapsing pilot chute is just > fine. I jump a 190 silhouette with a non-collapser > and I see and feel no distortion. It seems to me that PC in tow is something that, quite rightly, scares the bejesus out of most skydivers myself included. I was just about to write a post asking the question "Can't we go right to the root of the problem and just eliminate the PC in tow malfunction?" Then I read Bill's post, which is absolutely staggeringly, staggeringly obvious. Thanks Bill. That is as close to a solution as anyone needs. I am about to get new gear, not interested whatsoever in high performance canopy stuff, quite happy to stay at 1.1 forever (appreciate this opinion might change in the future) ... I am now getting a non collapsible PC. I hadn't even considered that is was available as an option because apart from on AFF rigs I don't think I have ever seen someone WITHOUT a kill line. It's amazing how stuff so rapidly becomes the norm even if it isn't in the best interests of most people. MOST PEOPLE DON'T NEED A COLLAPSABLE PILOT SHOOT WHATSOEVER - SO WHY THE HELL INCREASE THE RISK OF A NASTY MAL BY HAVING ONE. Responsible gear sellers should make this clear to people happy to fly lower wing-loading, thus further reducing the likelihood of a mal.

Hey there I have an annual policy with http://www.axatravel.co.uk purchased with optional "Hazardous Activities" cover - which includes skydiving. Also, I can vouch for it! I broke my leg bad Skydiving in Spain a year ago .. and after a couple of days in the local hospital they rescued me and brought me back to the UK because *THEY* weren't happy with the care I was getting in Spain. They paid all my girlfriends expenses to come out and be with me and her return flights. They sent a kick-ass no-nonsense nurse/wonder-woman out to sort everything out with respect the journey home. Incredible service largely because they outsource their emergency medical rescue stuff to a specialised company called Cega who were and I presume still are awesome. Well there you go. regards James

Altitude is your friend.

In my opinion the most **cost effective** way of improving your basic free fall skills would be to go to a wind tunnel and get some coaching there. You can learn more there in a couple of days about body position and close relative moment than weeks or months jumping. Note that tunnel flying does not not improve your general "awareness of what's going on" in freefall which is **paramount** to your skydiving safety - only jumping (ideally with someone more experienced) brings about that awareness. Tunnel coaching is brilliant but if you intend to lob yourself out of planes it needs to be complimented with in-sky tuition. Other thing I would look at straight away - is canopy coaching. Do everything you can to develop your canopy skills so that you are confident about putting your canopy down safely even when the environment around you changes.

I "do see" - of course one size doesn't fit all. That's not the point of what I was saying. The purpose of recommending a canopy size to a new AFF graduate using fixed criteria was so that they have a conservative reference point from which to work. If they then want to go off and get something faster or someone recommends something faster to them they at least KNOW what the guidelines are from day 1, it should immediately make them more cautious when choosing a canopy because they know the guidelines. They should be educated as to what the very real increase in risks are by going beyond those guidelines to enable them to make an informed decision. This stuff should be done the moment someone qualifies AFF for their safety and the well being of the sport in general.

I agree that broadly speaking people should take personal responsibility - but what a person perceives as "responsible" can be moulded by the advice and education they receive over a period of time. You can't expect someone to make a good decision if they have been given bad information and then are constantly told it was right by lots of different people. "I think I might need a bigger canopy" Response "Noooo there is nothing wrong with your canopy, you just need some more jumps, maybe some canopy coaching, you just need to build your condfidence" When you hear that 50 times you begin to believe it. I think one important point is that wing-loading is discussed quite a bit here on Dropzone.com and in fact whenever there is an accident or someone has repetitive problems one of the first questions always asked is what is/was that persons wing-loading? In the physical world I have only come across 1 person that seemed to actually have cared to work it out for themselves or worked it out for those people they were making gear recommendations to. Sure, everyone sort of eye-balls you - considers your canopy for a second and goes "yeah that sounds OK", but if people were to sit down and work it out pound for pound - they might be surprised. People should move away from "guessing" it and really get in to the habit of working it out exactly. Also, at the end of AFF I think there should be a 30 minute brief on wing-loading and canopy selection, where a specific size is worked out for a student using maths(!) and a FIXED SET of criteria (i.e. not open to intrepretation by the AFF instructor). Then, whatever happens the student has a conservative reference point. Even when I had worked out my wing-loading *exactly* towards the end - because I asked people with 1000s of jumps made over a long period of time who were used to flying small canopies - it always sounded OK to them. It sounded slow to them. I think a lot had forgotten what it was like to be "new" and didn't consider that someone like me hadn't had 10-15 years worth of experience in the sport. regards J

Hey Lindsey It wasn't until just before the time of the accident that I began to truly realise that my wing-loading versus experience level might be the "root" of my problems. At that point I genuinely had it in my head that I would try "just another" handful of jumps before considering different kit. Yeah, stupid in retrospect. When I asked their advice about my problems - other people would ask me what I was flying, I'd tell them and they'd nearly always say "yeah, that sounds about right". Even when I worked out the wing loading and told people it was 1.33+ everyone said that was absolutely OK. 100s of people thought this was fine. On this overwhelmingly agreeable feedback about my gear and canopy size - I just began to assume that it was entirely a problem with my own ability and that I was a useless canopy pilot. Of course there may be some truth in that last statement, but I now sure my wing loading was the greatest factor in my problems. What little "battle on and succeed" instinct I have - made me absolutely (in hindsight stupidly) determined to figure out and get to the bottom of the problem landing my canopy - despite the fact I'd started to become quite scared of flying the canopy. I thought at one point I had sorted out the problems - only to find that, I had merely learned to land the canopy in a particular set environment. When that environment changed, well that’s when I hurt myself. Despite the fact I always thought to myself "sheesh - this thing comes in a lot faster than I would like" - the sad thing is I didn't really even consider that I should be on a bigger canopy. Why? Well I'll try and list off the main points .. 1/ Everyone I asked seem to think it was me and not the canopy (and of course depending on your perspective my skill level was of course a contributing factor) 2/ Reinforcing the first point - the friends I made at dropzones around the world with similar experience levels and jump numbers seemed to be able to land their canopies with much fewer problems. In addition to making me think it was all “just me” it made me to say to myself “if they can do it – I’m SURE can do it”. I only now realise their canopies were loaded less than mine and this made a substantial difference. 3/ As a result of the points above I became determined to resolve the problem by jumping lots - in a perverse way - so that I would gain experience of the canopy faster and also to prove to myself I could do it. This accelerated me towards an accident. 4/ I really did not know enough about wing-loading issues until towards the end - partly because I did the last 150 jumps in a relatively short space of time (a few months) so perhaps hadn't been around enough to naturally accumulate that knowledge in the absence of me having directly been given it. 5/ I knew that smaller canopies etc flew faster from day one but as I was recommended the canopy assumed this was the size for me as a new skydiver. Also, even when I began to get wise to the issue - I didn't fully appreciate that a 1- 1.1 would have been **substantially** more docile than a 1.33-1.45. The cost of replacing the canopy/rig was not an issue at all and neither was trying to impress anyone. I *thought* I was being extremely conservative and the only thing I ever wanted to do was land the thing, safely, on my feet with a nice straight in landing. I WAS however constantly trying to meet the expectations I had of *myself* that I had accumulated from talking to other people about my canopy – i.e. that I should be able to fly and land the canopy absolutely OK. I was never "bothered" about meeting their expectations (i.e. I didn't ever keep jumping the canopy to prove a point to anyone whatsoever) but I did jump it thinking I needed to learn it and meet my own expectations of what I "should" be able to do. I hope that makes sense. You know us Brits, all the rain stops us from thinking straight. :-) James PS. For the benefit of anyone else in a similar situation as me - wanting some extra incentive to upsize .. Just found some post operative pictures (aside from the breaks I had a thing called Acute Compartment Syndrome which wasn't good whatsoever) - will give you a feel for what both sides of my leg now look like after my accident.

Flyexis One of the reasons I ended up with gear that was TOO FAST for me is because my instructors thought I "was a natural canopy pilot" and because they knew I was going to be jumping a lot that year thought I would master the new canopy quickly. Their assumptions were wrong. (Also, as it happens they never actually worked out the wing-loading and neither did I because I didn't really know what it was and how it effected flight) You may be different to me, sure - you may have a much greater natural ability. But you may NOT and if not - the risk of hurting yourself like I did is probably **significantly** greater on the 170 than the 190. Go with the slower canopy, what's the rush? Did you actually read my original post at all??? J

I've done 2 hours + in one day. However, I couldn't move my left arm above my head the following day - it stopped me from jumping for a few weeks :-/ It was still worth it though! J

The reserve was a Smart 160 (1.48 lbs/ft²). I know, I know, it doesn't bear thinking about. J

Hi I've just read a thread in Incidents about a fatal low turn and much of the debate has turned to the wing loading of the jumper in question - which seems high for the number of jumps they had. There is some discussion along the lines of "should he have ever been sold the canopy" versus "his gear purchase was ultimately his decision" and it's this I want to comment on with my own experience: I started AFF and got my A licence a week later. At about 35 jumps I went and got my own kit. I was buying new kit and my instructors recommended something to me that they reckoned would be just fine - perfect in fact. It turned out with this new kit (Odyssey with Pilot 168 main) I had a wing loading of 1.33. I didn't know this at the time and even if I had I wouldn't have known what it meant. I accepted the judgement of the guys with 1000s of jumps that this was a great bit of kit. I had a lot of problems landing it. Oh yes. This went on for a very long time and in fact I hurt myself several times - but nothing *too* serious (though ask me again when I'm an old man!). All along my instructors, the guy that sold me the kit and practically every other person I ever encountered at dropzones all over the world told me not to worry and that I would get the hang of it. It became a bit of a "running joke" that I couldn't land the thing reliably. My landing problems actually got progressive worse, to be honest - as I became more and more scared of landing! If you’ve ever been there you’ll know what I’m talking about. There were some jumps when I was terrified of landing. I should have just stopped then and realised there was something fundamentally wrong - but, I thought all these other people must be right, I'll get the hang of it. I always just thought "I'm crap", need to get better and will get better very soon so long as I keep jumping lots. Lot and lots of these people I mentioned tried to help me - some spending hours with me. Although there was some humorous banter about my lack of landing skills .. of course .. no one wanted to see me hurt. But you know I think a lot of them just eventually must have thought "Hmmm he's crap at this by nature" (and maybe I am!). I also went on a Scott Miller course - that was great and that helped me get a better understanding of the canopy etc, but you know, it still always felt a bit too zippy for me on landing. I didn’t land it once stood up – on Scott's course. The person that sold me the kit busted a gut to help me to solve my landing problems, they spent a whole day with me one-on-one training and actually fixed my landings - they were awesome and I can't thank them enough for their time. Also, I should add that without a question of a doubt they would have taken my gear back off me and given me a refund or something different had I asked or they thought my wing loading too high. No doubts about this. This was at about jump 130! Finally I could land the thing. Wippeee! Now, I couldn't land it every single time on my feet - maybe 4 out of 5 times - but that was a whole lot better than 1 or 2 out of 5 times. Right!? Cool. I felt like I was getting somewhere. I then went out to Spain to jump, which was very hot and the dropzone is about 1,600 feet above sea level. The first time I'd ever jumped higher than sea level. Crikey!!! It was all of sudden very scary again. I couldn't land it properly. I'd been there a week - had done about 40 jumps and had only landed about 10 of them on my feet, though I landed 5 in a row towards "the end". The wind conditions were practically identical on all those 40 jumps. Then something nasty happened - I made some extremely bad decisions on jump number 200 whilst setting up for landing and my canopy just did not do at all what I expected. The wind was coming from a direction I’d never landed in at that dropzone and I messed it up. Trying to avoid a fence, I landed cross wind and ploughed in to a metal pipe at leg height that, well, gave me all sorts of interesting new joints in my leg (broke it in several places). It wasn't a good day. That was July 13th last year and I haven’t jumped since. I'm going for some more surgery in a couple of weeks to have some of the metal taken out / tweaks. I really made some bad decisions in the air - but in hind-sight, my wing-loading did not help matters whatsoever. This is only really clear to me now after the event. With one exception NO ONE ever asked me what my weight or wing-loading was throughout the whole year of jumping and asking for help. It was only until I went out to Spain that someone there mentioned that he thought my wing-loading was a bit high for my jump numbers (unfortunately the accident came a few jumps later). I told lots of different people what my weight was and canopy size etc and towards the end my wing-loading itself and they just seemed to say - "yeah that sounds sort of about right - don't worry you'll get the hang of it". I am not blaming anyone, I bought the gear - I chose to press on even when it didn't feel right .. but only one person of the countless highly experienced skydivers I met and asked for their advice even seemed to think for a second that hell, the canopy might just be too fast for me. It turned out that by the time I went out to Spain, I'd put on about 14 pounds in weight since originally buying the gear (damn all that beer and dropzone food!!) so when I had my accident my wing-loading was well over 1.4. My gear has now gone and when the time is right I am buying something at a wing-loading of 1. Hopefully I'll be able to land the damn thing. What's my point? You know I’m not really sure there is one now – sorry ;-) Ok, I suppose it’s that I don't think as many people as you might think consider wing-loading whatsoever when making gear decisions. Either because they don't know what it is until it's too late or if they do they just listen to the advice of their peers - which may not actually be that great, or that their peers/instructors are so confident in their student that they give them something a little nippier than normal “to grow in to”. My other point is - if ever you are so scared of landing you're canopy that it gets to the stage where it clouds your thought, just stop jumping. It doesn't matter if other people keep on telling you that you'll get the hang of it .. if it really seems like you're not, don't do what I did and keep on going because you may get hurt. I saw a post on here months ago that said "listen to the voices" inside .. I wish I had more. Hope to jump with some of you again in several months - I'll be the guy with the 500 sq foot canopy ;-) regards James

I recommend getting a policy from http://www.axatravel.co.uk/ You must get the Hazardous Sports option. I was covered under this policy last year when I had an accident jumping in Spain. I broke my tib, fib, foot, knee and pride etc. I needed some surgery, their people (outsourced to an emergency medical response company called CEGA) tried to talk to the hospital in Spain but were not happy with the level of care I was getting. They flew someone out from the UK and rescued me, bought the last 4 rows on an Iberia flight and had a stretcher put at the back, arranged ambulances, the hospital in the UK - the lot. It was frankly, incredible. I reckon they spent £10k getting me home and didn't so much as quibble for a second about it. Regards James