pilotdave

I did a checkdive on someone's 18th jump last weekend. He was finished with Category H. Why wait? Hopefully he'll get his A-license this weekend. Dave

No copying of another local DZ going on there. No sir, none at all! Another original idea by Jumptown! Dave

Umm, was he wrong? Does the SIM say the checkdive must be completed after 25 jumps? Cause I did his checkdive... before his 25th jump, I'm sure. Should I take away his license? I think I better, just to be safe! Dave

The Vector's pinned toggles work great. Just run the excess through the loops on back of the risers and then put the pins through them and into the riser. The excess can't get out. On my sabre2 there's just enough excess... but on some canopies like spectres there can be too much and it might still be possible to reach through the excess when unstowing the brakes. Dave

Our DZ has very few outs on one side. Luckily the spots are nearly always on the other side. But on days with strong upper winds, students can really screw themselves by flying past the airport (or failing to hold into the wind) if the spot isn't really far out. Those first couple minutes are often very important for getting them steered in the right direction. We basically always have someone on the ground doing radio. Basically if nobody is available on the ground, students don't jump. Only exceptions are made for more advanced students (all students are required to at least wear a radio until they have an A-license at my DZ)... the radio will usually be held by a non-instructor and handed to them when they land. But that's pretty much only done on occasional weekdays. So here's another question. As far as I know, USPA is silent on who is allowed to talk students in. What's your DZ's policy? Instructors only, coaches, anybody? Dave

Always a great feeling riding up in a plane you haven't jumped before when you realize you forgot to look at what it's got back there. I've scrolled through pictures I took before boarding trying to find one of the camera step and handles before.

I don't have a mamba but i have a Z1, which is like a cheap copy of the mamba that came out first. My glasses do fog more than the visor itself. They'll fog if i close the visor too early in the plane, or after opening. Generally not in freefall. Just don't close it until you're about to exit, and then as your canopy opens you can pay attention to your breathing and make sure you're breathing through the vents. After opening, I just crack mine open a little and everything clears right up if it fogged at all. The biggest problem with visor or glasses fogging can be in the winter, when the fog freezes. Preventing the fogging is the key, because getting rid of it might not be so easy once it starts. Haven't used anything on mine for anti-fogging. Dave

CPI in Connecticut is having a season-end blowout on the 30th. Member jumps are just $15... might be worth joining just for the day.

Crabbing doesn't require any (constant) input. Just aim a little into the wind until you have the desired path over the ground. As for getting back from a long spot, nothing changes. All that matters is the tailwind or headwind component. Crabbing will probably decrease the tailwind component, so it will be equivalent to flying back from a long spot with less wind helping. If it's a pure crosswind you're correcting for, you'll crab into it causing a headwind component. Chances are you won't want any input that'll slow your canopy down in that case. Dave

I think the training could be better. But I don't think poor student training is the reason fatalities and injuries are up. The training now is FAR better than it was when I was a student. The ISP has done a LOT to make new A-licensed jumpers better canopy pilots. I'm not saying it's perfect, but I am saying there's only so much you can ask of someone with under 25 jumps. Better student training is not the only answer to reducing canopy accidents. And I absolutely don't believe that canopy training used to be better than it is now... even in the static line days. Modern canopies are fast and many jumpers are over their heads without even knowing it. They can land just fine. But then they make poor decisions or reactions when things don't go as planned. What they learned when they had 15 jumps has little to do with it. Dave

Some Classic canopies have a B-line attached lower on the right front riser, for easy reach. You can see a couple people using them in the first picture, and you can see that B-line on the second picture. Dave

They wear seatbelts at lodi now? Dave

Took yesterday off work and made 8 jumps... finished my weekend off with 19 I think. Weather was great most of the weekend. Got too windy for a while on Saturday so I went over to an off-DZ accuracy competition to watch big canopies in squirrely winds. Great entertainment!

Demolished? Wow. How did I miss it? I just don't agree with your opinion. I don't believe the order matters. In fact, I think it would make things worse to focus entirely on canopy training first. I've explained my reasons earlier in this thread. Can I take credit for demolishing anything now? Dave

I'd rather go in myself than be responsible for taking a plane full of people down. An AAD failing to fire when it needs to is unfortunate. An AAD firing when it shouldn't is catastrophic. Failing to fire means an AAD didn't make a bad situation better. Misfiring can mean making a good situation horrible. The odds of NEEDING an AAD on a bailout below 1500 feet are tiny. Has it ever happened? Misfires have killed. Dave

I didn't generalize at all. AAD put the warning right in their manual. I have plenty of other concerns about Vigils (how's that for generalization?), but I only mentioned a specific one in this thread. I'd never say the cypres is perfect. Did I even mention the cypres or any other AAD in this thread? But the vigil's philosophy of arming itself inside its firing range is one particular design decision that I think is a mistake. When a door suddenly opens at 400 feet, a cypres will "see" the same sudden pressure change, but not fire. Why? Because it isn't armed yet. Dave

I'm fine with that. I personally like the night jump requirement (topic for another thread), but I'd be all for adding a canopy course requirement in addition to, or instead of the night jump requirement. I'd have no problem swapping a canopy course instead of live water training for the B-license too. Many DZs offer canopy courses more often than water training as it is. Or better yet, require both. We had 3 canopy courses at my DZ this year. The first was Flight-1's essential skills course. One person that took the course had about 2 years in the sport and about 1000 jumps. Extremely current. He nearly got kicked out for falling asleep and not paying attention. Turns out he was so bored because he did all the things being taught in the course when he was an AFF student (which lasted 3 whole weeks, BTW). Even though I was pissed at how he behaved in the course, I was pretty happy to hear he wasn't learning a thing! Dave

Damn, I was hoping this would end up making for some really cool video. It'll still be cool, but not REALLY cool. Dave

They don't do hop n' pops or sit in the back to practice spotting? Anyway, the problem affects all vigils. I hope the problem gets fixed before there's a reserve wrapped on the tail of a plane. Dave

Ive had my Vigil II all summer. Not once has it fired when we opened the door at 1k. Obviously. If Vigils were firing every time a door opened at 1000 feet, they would be banned from all DZs in a heartbeat. The point is that it CAN happen, when a door opens suddenly, and more likely at an altitude lower than 1000 feet. It's probably unlikely, but a rollup lexan door could blow out. But I have no idea how fast a door has to open to spook a vigil. I've visited a DZ where jumpers would commonly open the door at more like 800 feet on those really hot summer days. And I doubt anyone can tell me with certainty that opening an otter door can't spook a vigil. Dave

A vigil might fire if the door suddenly opens at low altitude. Why is ANYBODY comfortable with that? Dave

300 fps is over 200 MPH. What kinda test you doing, and what kinda car ya got??? Dave

If you ask me, pulling is about the most basic survival skill in skydiving. Your system removes it from the basic training and puts it with the "fun stuff." Listen, if AFF students were dying left and right under good parachutes, I'd agree with you. But it's experienced jumpers dying and killing each other. Initial training is not the cause. Dave

I think the order has little importance in the big picture. You won't lower canopy accident rates among experienced jumpers by front loading canopy training while they're students. I believe spreading it out is a good approach for learning. Teach more advanced topics to more advanced students. Early on, let them focus on just finding the landing area and flying a pattern. I also think the already poor student retention rates would drop if it took a long time to get to freefall. Dave

Interesting concept... but all I can see is it'd put students on smaller, faster canopies more quickly. It has the benefit that downsizing would be monitored and based on demonstrated skill. How many jumps do you assume the "default" course would take before freefall? Guessing far fewer than a typical student has now when they reach the point of downsizing to 1.0. It would also force DZs to offer more sizes of student rigs. Personally, I bet there'd be more injuries, not less. You can't teach experience. Dave