skytribe

Packing a javelin or a Infinity is very little difference. I pack both and have no problems with either. The time difference to pack is minimal. The rig I hear riggers bitch about are racers - almost all the other rigs fall into two categories which are either Javelin like (Semi external pilot chute) or Vector like (Completely enclosed pilot chute). Spacerfoam on the legpads makes things comfortable. Whether single or double width - I never had a problem doing CRW and hanging in harness for long durations. If the harness is made to fit, you'll have few comfort issues with either. Speed of reserve deployment on both is comparable without skyhook. The semi-external pilot chute may potentially lead to quicker deployment as less flaps to push out the way BUT this difference is probably negligable. I've never had a problem with Sunpath customer service in 20+ years of owning javelin's. I havent had cause to speak to infinity but have no doubt they do good customer service. As others have said. Both a safe rigs that function great. I guess it comes down to personal preference and cost for you.

I'd be interested in some field trips to various manufacturers.

Coe canopies were made by PISA (Parachute Industries of South Africa). I believe there were basic PD designs but made under license with some minor changes.

Thinking about it the COE were probably 9 cell only. I'd take a look through Poynters manual 2 as this is around the 90's time period and covers many of the manufacturer no longer around. Something in there may help identify it.

Get it rigged correctly by a rigger. If all lines on one side are rigged to the rear risers it will not fly correctly (if at all) and result in a reserve ride. As to what it is - is there any indication on the data panel on the tail as to the manufacturer or any advertising name panels on the outside of the end cells. This picture of data panel may provide some clues as to manufacturer. Quite frankly from the description it could be a lot of things. A roughly 200 sq foot 7 cell canopy from 93 or f111 (ZP was around then) was a very common general design. From a dim distant memory of when I started jumping and I remember a COE canopy with flat Dacron lines. http://www.dropzone.com/forum/Skydiving_C1/Gear_and_Rigging_F6/Anyone_ever_heard_of_this_main_P39981/ I'm not sure how the serial numbers would match up but as I said the data panel may shed some light on the manufacturer/canopy.

That said - in my experience Tempo's tend to pack up a little on the smaller side when compared with some other manufacturers reserves.

They do this a Snohomish and it appears to work ok.

I have a lot of experience doing tandems and really don't like taking Old people and people clearly out of shape because its hard work and the risks involved are greater with it being easier for them to get hurt. Ie. you can't pick you feet up for landing or can't arch at all. People coming to do tandems despite signing all the waivers and watching training video are all to often still of a mentality that this is a fairground ride with no risks. Many of the DZ operators do little to weed these out and just because one instructor will take them keeps scheduling them. Its similar to the weight limits he sets that people clearly lie on there declarations because they want to jump. Perhaps telling people up front when they schedule they will be weighed on the day (or required to do a basic fitness test) to ensure they meet the requirements is one way of weeding people out, but that is income the DZO's see disappearing and don't want to offend customers. In the UK older jumpers require a doctors note. Again this may weed a few out as it takes a bit more effort and only more determined older jumpers would go through the efforts. There have been thousands of older people who have made successful skydives but each jump presents a unique set of circumstances. At another dropzone I worked at we would have them stand on a chair and jump off. Obviously this is minimal but for those that couldn't even manage this then skydiving may not be for them. Skydiving is not an activity that is available for everyone - some people really shouldn't be doing it. As with most thing there are always exceptions. People that are obviously in great shape that are slightly over weight or people with disabilities can be identified up front and special provisions made but these are not your everyday tandems and are treated on an as-is basis.

I've swwooped both as well and I would agree with Wendy wholeheartedly that the diablo is not a canopy for the inexperienced. I jumped and 88 and was probably considerably higher loading than wendy and the diablo came in screaming and planned out really nicely. Probably the most sensitive and responsive on toggles of any canopy I've jumped.

What if we said that we should give A licenses to people with time in the tunnel - say 1 hour in the tunnel in lui of actually doing the skydives. There would be an uproar. The tunnel is NOT a skydive. It mary substitute for part of the skydive. We are talking intructors ratings here but once you open the door then others use it as an argument for there own causes. Is the system broken that we are in desperate need of AFF instructors or are we talking a few tunnel guys want to avoid having to do 500 jumps opening the door to everyone.

I couldnt agree more wholeheartedly. The freefall part is just one part of the skydive. Instructors are about teaching the whole skydive and 500 jumps in reality is not that much experience. If you look at today's dropzone with aircraft availability it doesnt take that long today to get 500 jumps if you really want to put your mind to it.

Snohomish runs Caravan's in the summer season 2 in the winter 1. Also have a varierty of small cessna's to utilize when the weather is iffy.

Its been a long while since I've seen Craig bit if he's modeling I guess the sluttier the better. ;-)

Who's the best contact for this event. Havent done any CRW for ages but would like to get back into doing some and just no-one at my DZ up in Pacific Northwest. Spotty

To me (and its my personal opinion so dont crucify me for it) but none of those reasons appear to be particularly valid reasons for doing it.... Group wanting to jump together - seeing others jumpers so they dont fixate on the ground. I can't say I have the large number of of jumpers fixating on the ground and how close are you leaving to get on the level of other skydivers to make it worth it.... I'm not sure you talking other tandems / experienced jumpers or just anyone but to me if they are experienced jumpers they jump with me and no need to go tandem terminal - if they are other groups or inexperienced jumpers do I really want to be a sitting duck in the sky near them should someone have a premature or something like that..... I'm not afraid to flip out the door - heck with a tailgat its part and parcel of standard walk out exit. But do I let student determine what we are doing - no, I'm the instructor and they are the student. They can request but ultimately on a first jump its gonna be a well planned / briefed dive with risks minimized. Aerobatics and Drogueless freefall do not in my opinion fall into that category. Front float video - Again no real need - we have front and rear float from side door and you can get good video from front float without having to do tandem terminal... Sounds to me as though its more about you and what you want to do rather than any tangible benefits for students learning or safety. (and thats fine....) but for me safety is the prime motivating factor - I minimize unneccessary risks and tandem terminal / aerobatics and giving camera people opportunity to freefly with tandem (more for there enjoyment) are not high on my list of solid reasons to be doing it.... Having to repair torn up drogues is not a fun job - and for small operations this may not be a problem but with 20+ tandem rigs in operation in the summer and all getting lots of usage - shredding drogues in a shorter time period does not make you popular with the riggers or DZ Owner who has to pay for repairs or new drogues.... Doesn't the USPA tandem Instructor say to pitch within 10 seconds of exit or something like that on the written test. I'm trying to think of a real valid reason to intentionally doing tandem terminal (except for instructor certification) and I'm struggling but I'm all ears.....

Would it not be up to you to commission them to build you smaller canopies for your systems ?

I personally dont do it intentionally as it does tend to tear up the strong drogues more quickly so I'm reliably information by a DRPE on staff. On second or third tandems we do an AFP program so they are working skydives for the student. They are paying for maximum working time and not for me to test my own ability to skydive at tandem terminal. On a first time tandem - it is all about safety and getting stable and pitching the drogue is part of that. At start of season we were informed about what was acceptable. That included all having to redo the USPA tandem instructors exam so that they were on file..... Along with acceptable pull heights etc. It may seem rather unneccessary to have to go through this but sometimes when changes in management occur - different S&TA's or different philosophies from chief instructor. It requires that all instructors are playing using the same rules....

If you've started the deployment sequence, then cutaway first. Say you go to start the pull the pullout and drop the pud. You initiated a deployment sequence and therefore you have an unknown - So pull the cutaway and reserve.... Its a total malfunction as the container is theoretically closed. If you simply cannot find the handle - then you have a known condition - and therefore you can pull the reserve without a cutting away the main....

Look up the nearest college with a dental program. This is the best and cheapest way to get dental treatment in the US - you just have to give a little bit more time but a lot less money. To have a complete checkup with a hygenist and a goodie pack cost 10 bucks at local college in PA. All work done by student under direct supervision of dental hygenist/dentist.

I download the data and most of mine are tandems so one would think that they should be pretty flat graphs what with you hanging under a huge drogue. But the graphs do vary considerably but fast dives (ie. ones where camera person is in fast sit to stay up) do normally provide a higher airspeed readings on the graph. I graph them more for interest and to build up data - it also allows me to trace when the drogue was deployed and an approximation of the opening time.

I would tend to side with diablopilot here. A simple wave off from the camera person would indicate to tandem instructor that there was a problem. It could be floating handles - container opening but definately that the normal dive is over and that there is a problem which needs to be addressed. A simple recheck of handles and look around by instructor would then have found the problem. Having external jumpers assist (albeit with good intent) is really asking for a problem. On strong's you'd only need to move ripcord a couply of inches to get a deployment. A 3rd party being in wrong place at wrong time can be fatal for them or tandem. Its not camera persons role to start touching the tandem gear (and trying to help out) - its the instructors. Thats what they are trained and paid to do. As it was it all worked out good - so no harm done.

Aerodyne guys at Cross Keys this weekend. Drop zone has 20 or so SET 400's which I've found to be a pretty good canopy. In my opinion a better canopy then the EZ's but the Strong container does not look as modern or tidy as the newer other manufacturers. Functionality wise I've not a problem a with it. However, picked up a rig not realizing the rigger had swapped the canopy and only upon opening did I realise it was the Aerodyne canopy. Opened nicely - not too quick not too slow. Not sure about the square footage but glided pretty well - I was last out an had to make my way back to DZ. Stayed up with the SET's even though I was carrying a reasonable size guy on the front. Toggle pressure was lighter than the most of the SET's and appeared to be a little more responsive to toggle input. I didn't collapse the slider and it did flap around quite a bit making lots of noise. Collapsing a slider is not something I have to do normally with tandems - so wasn't really looking for the small pull tabs. Flew the landing very similar to SET's. Sit in brakes on approach - let up on the toggles and let it recover and fly and flare. It landed softly and was easy to get a standup landing. The conditions were pretty condusive to good landings with a 5 - 10 mph wind. Obviously only doing a single jump on it my experience was rather limited but it did leave a positive feeling. But I'd expect good performance out of any new canopy. The question comes how does the canopy fly after 400 - 800 jumps and/or a second lineset on them or if they go out of trim slightly. Perhaps a DZ doing a few tandems wouldnt be a real issue but extremely busy operations may have concerns if performance chnages quite a bit over time. Instructors like the new canopys and hate ones that are extremely slow or unpredictable openers, lack response and flare or are not 100% in trim. Overall opinions from some of the other instructors was positive although similar comment that need to do many more jumps on it to really evaluate it.

Cannot agree more with Daless. Tandem involves a lot of responsibility and as most examiners and manufacturers state "Its not just another skydive....." As far as procedure technique and procedure goes - we learn from mistakes (both ours and others) and expect the unexpected from the students. However much we train them its always a bit of a crap shoot when you leave the aicraft. Different aircraft have better techniques for exit. The DZ does have a policy of not backing out the otter or caravan aircraft - hanging on the float bar as it exposes the drogue to the wind and risk of premature deployment over the tail. An unecessary risk. However standard poised, seating or dive exit are perfectly acceptable from the otter/caravan and a 270 backloop or dive from skyvan are acceptable - a poised facing in may be used for tandems 2 and 3 as more akin to face into relative wind that they will encounter on later levels. But the actual exit chosen is the discretion of the instructor. Handles check prior to boarding. Handles check prior to leaving and handles check once out and drogue deployed are all good practice. Things get snagged in aircraft or move when blown about by the wind on exit. The time to go finding a handle and realise its not where you thought it was is not at pull time. If youve got video having yourself doing a handles check and giving thumbs up is good and may help in any litigation to show that you were not negligent. Sticking to a few simple standard procedures helps make sure that things are where they should be. Assessing the risks and formulating if the risks are acceptable. This is where the helmets issue comes in. Things happen, hats can help. How many tandem instructors have suffering ear injuries as a result of risers deploying. I know there have been documented incidents. How predicable are the conditions - a field in the mid west with not a tree in sight is less prone to turbulence than say a tree lined landing area on a windy day. Adjust where you land according to turbulence - again to minimize chances of getting caught in turbulence. Jump within you limitations - if you are unhappy with student/conditions etc. say so and dont compromise your safety for the dollars of an DZ operator. In essence - treat yourself as a professional and act accordingly. We have this spool - about 18 - 24 inches high that we make our student s jump off - my take - if they can do this unassisted then I don't want to take them up on a jump - as I can't be 100% gauranteed of a smooth landing. I have declined a couple of passengers that other instructors felt ok to do take - and we simply swapped. Again this may be the phyiscal size of students. All instructors are not equal. It doesn't matter what paperwork the student signs - if anything happens its the instructor that they will come after. And do you want to get dragged into a court case giving opposition easy ammunition to use against you. Litigation is a major fear in the US - students often sign the paperwork without realising the consequences and think its just a fairground ride - not that they have the potential to kill me as well as themselves by not listening and doing what I ask. Stark reality......

This was the the main point I was trying to convey in the previous posting. I was there at the time of the incident - I was about 4 feet behind waiting to exit last. Saying I'm a good jumper and it wont happen to me so I dont need a helmet is a sad delusion. We are jumping with people that have never done this before and dont know how they are going to respond until we are there. We are in an unpredictable environment with aircraft, winds etc. It is our responsibility to protect ourselves and them. If that means wearing a hat because something unexpected may occur then so biet. I can't think of any incidents with a tandem instructor and passenger wearing helmets that has caused an incident but can think of a few with hair and ears being damaged easily. I'm not going to stand and chastise those that dont but personally I do wear one and believe that I'm also setting an example to the new jumpers that safety is important - a helmet is part of that philosophy,

A new instructor last year was doing the 270 backloop out of the skyvan and the student slowed right up at the edge . Didn't step out far enough and during the back rotation smacked the back of his head on the tailgate edge. Split the back of his head open and the back of the students head smack him in the face causing a nose bleed. Although you may say "this will never happen to me". You just never know. Also aircraft emergency landings. Head protection may provide a degree of protection in this unlikely evernt. Again we dont anticpate this situation but it has been known to occur and any protection is better than none. Is a helmet not cool enough for you or your passenger. Is it not you responsibility to sufficiently educate and protect yourself and your student (who has no idea what is normal and acceptable on there first jumps).