tdog

I looked around for a while and could not find on UPT's manuals anything saying the drogue was TSOed, or discussed the proper selection of replacement parts for the drogue. Can you cite anything definitive? I am not being argumentative, just trying to find the source and I can't.

I am curious... Why? A tandem student can't do much on a skydive other than enjoy the ride... What danger do they pose by having the camera on their hand? I have a few thoughts, but I am curious to yours.

This is an example of someone who jumped until the end... I know he jumped a few years ago, making him 83 or 84. Deserves respect.

I also teach/jump/have fun at a DZ where this happens. During the jump day things do get rushed, especially on busy days. But: 1) At any time a student shows signs of needing a slowdown - or asks for a slowdown - we slowdown. 2) Once the beer light comes on, those students who stick around, often find themselves laughing, smiling, and sharing food with said instructors at the local eating establishment or in the hangar with the beer brought in by someone else who thought it nice to share. At the other end of the scale - you could end up at a very small DZ that has a single Cessna, where you will be waiting 45 minutes per plane ride, with two instructors, thus only jumping once in the day, etc... You may or may not get any more time between plane loads... You may be doing static line... You may not have as many people around to find one or two you really like... Pros and cons to each scenario. I have been to a lot of DZs, and it seems that if this is your goal, you need to stick around after the jump day and make friends. You just might find yourself a year later traveling nationally/internationally with one of these instructors to a real cool place to jump together as friends... Or be invited to their wedding or something like that. It does happen.

And I saw with my own two eyes a guy hanging from the skid by his chest strap all the way back to landing...

Nice audio content... Good reminders/concepts to learn. However, the video track is completely unrelated to the audio track... (Video of sitflying and head down freefly while discussing digging out on brakes when under canopy). I ended up minimizing the window as it was nearly impossible to think about or process concepts like "pitch before roll" while watching head down freefly. ;-) Perhaps re-edit to have illustrations of the concepts you are trying to educate on (videos, slides, graphics, images), so the video tool will be more useful???

All... I emailed the USPA a nice little ditty with my opinion. I did not get a reply or acknowledgement, but I assume they read it. If you feel concern, I would, instead of arguing here, send your own opinion to the decision makers. For the record, I am against shortening the six hours with tunnel time. In fact, I would support 10 hours of total freefall, with no more than 3 AFF specific coaching in the tunnel counting towards the rating (backflying in the tunnel is not an AFF skillset), plus mandatory continuing education hours (most likely in canopy control, but with open ended options). But in the short term, this poll was not about increasing the required experience, but the first step in increasing the rating is to hold firm on the current requirement. In my letter to the USPA I gave a few examples of what has happened in real jumps to support my claims, I tried to keep passion and emotion out of it. I don't want to influence your opinions by expressing my concerns, but I encourage AFFIs to share with the USPA real examples to support their opinions.

Here is the problem - the math does not work out. If you want to jump more than the simplest BASE sites, you will want a lot more jumps than the 75 you have to acquire the canopy landing/accuracy/comfort skills. Some of the best BASE jumps have very tricky landings. A BASE canopy lasts 300-500 jumps before it starts getting worn out and BASE jumpers replace the canopy with something that has more lift for those tricky landings... Or more glide to get over the trees to the nice open field. Older canopies lose glide and lift... They are not skydiving canopies, they wear out quicker... So, say you want 400 good skydives before you do some of the harder BASE jumps.... Your BASE gear (canopy) will be worn out before you even do your first technical BASE jump if you use it on 325 skydives before your first BASE. Of course, you could do those technical jumps prior to 400 jumps, you just increase your risk of getting seriously hurt. Or, you could do the technical jumps on a worn out canopy, and again injury rate would go up. You can move these jump numbers around to your risk/reward tolerance levels, but, I don't see the math working out well... Buy a cheap skydiving rig, keep jumping, and when you are ready to BASE, you will be able to jump a nice new (or nice used) BASE rig that is not worn out...

I have a few videos in my private library that show why six hours is a good bare minimum. I say 10 hours total, no more than 4 in the tunnel. That way everyone gets their way!

Jumping the Eiger is awesome, it is probably my favorite BASE jump ever... But, down in the valley (Lauterbrunnen), there is a helicopter business, Air Glaciers. They fly two or three heli every day all day long. They will make a cargo trip to the Eiger or some other place, land and then fly a tourist flight, then land and fly a search and rescue flight, then land and fly a skydiving flight, etc. It is amazing to watch them and how versatile their operations are. They are flying around all day long. In the hangar next to Air Glaciers, there is the skydiving operation. The tandems are expensive, but I think they allow fun jumps too (at a price). I have been on the exit point for BASE in the valley and looked up to see a skydiver opening above us... It would be an awesome skydive. I think this is the operation posted above... I have walked thru their landing area, they always seemed nice. I don't think I ever have seen them land anywhere other than by the assigned landing area near the heliport. EDIT: I hope that they have not closed down. If you want to call Air Glaciers to see if they are still partnered with a skydiving outfit: http://airglaciers.ch/lauterbrunnen/airglaciers.htm. I have their number in my phone as +0338560560. (It is a good number to have if you are a BASE jumper as you call before a jump to make sure the airspace is clear, and they would be a good search and rescue call too... They always spoke English when I called, enough to communicate.)

I had a friend send photos on facebook of the explosives expert opening and disassembling her rig, with a photo of the rig being stuffed (parachutes out) in clear bags and being taken away for inspection... The skydiver was knowledgeable about the TSA rules, had the letters, cypres card, and even a FAA parachute rigger certification card she showed the TSA. It appears they did not follow the http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Other_TSAletter.pdf. I was not there, I don't know if fuel was put on the fire or anything, but it appears she asked for supervisors, et al - and she was denied by the explosives expert until she raised a stink. She was eventually told by a TSA manager that at O'Hare that you should not try to carry on a rig at that airport. Apparently the USPA (Randy) has already been told and is working with the TSA - but until that happens, just FYI, this airport is not skydiver friendly. (Or in BASE jumping terms, "the object is hot.")

My post is like 4 years old, reborn tonight... So here is the update, years later... I have a M0 with a 143 OPT and a KA120. Jumped it over 1000 times since I posted the question and purchased the rig, and as a rigger packed it a few times and had a reserve ride. Fits nicely. Like it. Want another. I packed a reserve on a smaller mirage a few weeks ago, that was a repack after I assembled it prior, and I had to shake the **** out of the reserve to get it to fall out of the container packtray when opening it... So I am a believer in not over-stuffing it. I am actually worried about how hard I had to shake it...

First, my post was not to proclaim fact, but instead to say, "if you change this variable, you cannot assume all other variables will remain the same." And, who is to say we are not? More and more DZs got twin ottters and other large planes in the last 20 or so years. Our sport has gone from a Cessna club environment to a highly commercialized industry, thanks to the Tandem. So you have to take into that consideration. Statistically, we may have a lot LESS collisions considering a lot of other things have changed. Also, you have to take into consideration who is involved in the collisions... The two I saw first hand, it was the lightly loaded canopy of a 200 jump wonder. But our sport lost a highly experienced coach, who was my first 4way coach, at Perris, so I know not all collisions are low experience/big canopies. Anyway, Bill had some good points, I am sure you do to. However, I am "just sayn'" that everyone jumping the same canopy size could increase traffic, and with increased traffic, I strongly believe there will be more accidents due to canopies colliding on final.

I lost two good friends, one that was very special to me, in high performance landings in the last two years... I say this so you understand that I take this seriously and am not blowing off the need for safety. That being said, I don't know if I agree with you... Because, by your own process of delivering safety, we will eventually be eliminating wingsuiting, freeflying, more than one person out on a pass, high pulls, low pulls, cameras, groups larger than 2, etc... Also, this is going to get me flamed... But swooping and/or smaller canopies on experienced jumpers does have an advantage. It gets a group of skydivers down first giving vertical separation between groups. If everyone had 1.1 to 1 WL canopies, you will have 23 people at an Otter DZ landing at about the same time... Those of us who fly smaller canopies (I am closer to 2 to 1 WL, but don't go big on swoops, I just like a sporty canopy), get down first and are out of the sky when others are setting up their landings... Also, I use the speed of my canopy to help. I know I can get in front of a bigger canopy in the landing pattern (with a lot of exta room) by entering the pattern in front of them and quickly get out of their way because I will be going much faster than them. In other words, I know I will not be rear-ended by another canopy. If you force everyone to fly a 1.1 to 1 WL canopy, the pattern will be more busy, and there will be a higher chance of collisions between skydivers. (Since I talk students down on radio on AFF, I tend to look up a lot to see how the 1.1 WL canopies all land at the same time and there is a moment of real busy airspace.)

I went there when I had 30 jumps for coaching and enjoyed it a lot. The tunnel is right on site and they have places to stay onsite.

In general, every school has good and bad instructors. And in general, every school does a good job. Some times, the generally good instructor will be bad for you because you don't "jive" with them. Some times, the generally bad instructor will be good for you because you work well together. So, I am sayin' - this is highly personal and there is nothing anyone on the Internet can help you with. You may hate any one of those DZs you put on your list. You may love them all. Your opinions will be different than mine. All are good on your list (except the one in New Zealand I know nothing about, so I can't vouch for that one). There are many other good schools. Heck, I think just about all DZs do a good job. It is hard to find one that doesn't, although I could be negative and give you that this, but I won't. So, my advice... Pick one and go jump. As someone else said, you will learn about 10% in AFF of what you will need to know. The 90% remaining will be learned over the next 10,000 skydives and will be what you make of it, as you travel around, meet new people, and try new things. However, if I was going to make a trip out of it, I would pick a city with a windtunnel. Not required, but you learn so much in the tunnel it is a good tool. Eloy (Skydive AZ) is a good example of a DZ with a tunnel on site, but my home DZ has a tunnel 1 hour drive from the DZ. There are tunnels all over the world, so you can pick one close to you.

Fun videos... I don't see any reason why you cannot keep skydiving and having fun. I have seen a few people who should not skydive, but you are not one of them. As already said, your body position is less than perfect, specifically your hands and legs are stuck nearly straight out, but something you can fix. I thought I would share a photo I found on the internet, as photos say 1000 words. Look at your body position. Then look at these "pros" http://www.flickr.com/photos/31261446@N07/3691297785/ The airspeed guys have booties on their feet, so they have bent their knees more than you will need to, so your goal should be to split the difference between what is on your video and what you see in this photo.

I am glad you said it, but I was thinking it.

I know of one DZ that will let you pay your rig off over a period of time, however you must store your rig in their loft until it is paid in full.

It won't help. Don't waste your time... Last year I lost two friends to swooping. Real good friends. One had thousands of jumps and was a well respected canopy pilot and swooper that no one thought was pushing the limits. He was a go-to guy on canopy control and coached others and was the first to jump on someone else for doing something stupid (landing the wrong direction, etc)... The other died on a jump while being coached (video of landings) by a world champion. Both were USPA pro rated pilots on small canopies. The USPA, nor any of the world experts, could make a signoff form that would have helped with the highly personalized coaching these jumpers had received. I know in my heart many factors that contributed to the incidents, but these things are very personal and cannot be regulated. There certainly is a group of skydivers out there that are swooping "way too young", who everyone talks about around the DZ, or flames here online. Some of them get hurt. Maybe of the S&TA or DZO would ground these people (with the possible help of a signoff form to justify their actions) - we might be able to save these people from themselves... But the DZO and S&TA should be the ones doing this already and I question if a new form will inspire them to do it when they are not doing it now. My home DZ would ground someone in a heartbeat (I have seen the pilot, turn around, and tell a jumper the DZO just called up and said to not let the person out of the plane when the DZO found out the canopy they were jumping), but a DZ I know of nearby follows no rules and could care less about USPA paperwork, and lets people do what they want. The DZO, not the USPA, sets the attitude. There are many, many swoopers dieing or getting hurt, who would be the ones qualified to write the standards that USPA would use for any signoff. Unfortunately, the USPA, in my opinion, will not be able to help much with swooping injuries, as the coaching is way too advanced for some check off paperwork. However, there have been some pretty serious canopy collisions in the last few years, and that is something that could be addressed with licence-specific coaching... And maybe some of the toggle-whip low turns...

I totally agree. I think the best way to do that is to continue to completely fill out industry standard paperwork, such as the packing data card even when not required, so the FAA in case of a fatality or other investigation does not find holes in their own rules.

Wow... I just read online a few FARs (§ 65.131 Records) and the Parachute Rigger's Handbook, and actually, the SN is not required in the FARs I read... However, without a serial number, the packing data card has no way to be linked to the gear, and can be moved around. Thus I think the FAA could argue it is not an official card for that rig. As a rigger, I would never want that liability, having a card that is signed with no gear linked to it. It would make me liable for every packed rig on the planet (or if the manufacture and model is listed, every rig of that design). Further, I think the FAA kind of assumes all blanks on an approved form (as shown in the handbook and owner's manuals) should be filled out, and they might still not be happy even if the FAR does not say the record keeping required at the time of packing requires an SN. Thus I wonder, why do you not put the S/N on your cards? If anything, in case of theft, it helps you, not hurts you to have these things documented.... The card is not a proof of ownership in any way, and the SN are not private info like an Social Security Number... Unless of course, you just like to have one card that covers all your rigs so you can prove everything you own is in date at all times.

Nearly impossible. The IRS will want to see the actual transaction on your credit card statement or bank statement where the money was spent. A packing data card does not prove you spent money on the thing, just that you have seen the thing. I suspect the DZO is simply documenting their files to make sure, if you got hurt in a few months, and the packing data card was not with you at the time of impact, he could still prove you had it at one point and it was in date at the time of jump, even with a lost card.

My BASE rig with black hardware has over 100, under 500. Mostly in daylight. No water landings, but I often am finding myself landing next to water and getting stuff wet. ...And there was that torrential downpour in Europe we tried to wait out, but decided to jump anyway because we were not getting any drier and we wanted to jump before the rigs were soaked. By the time we landed we might as well have been underwater. I wore my rig with the canopy in the stash-bag for a walk thru the storm, then hung it up to air dry. By the time that jump was done, everything was saturated. I have washed my container and let it air dry twice in the bathtub. A few weeks back I landed on a little patch of sand in a riverbed in a tight landing area. The canopy fell back into the water and got part of it wet, and I stuffed the whole thing in my stashbag and let it sit for 3 hours in a wet bag for the hike out and drive home before I got back to a place I could air it out. I put the container in the bag to separate the dry canopy from the wet, so it was in a moist environment. No signs of rust or discoloration. Yes, it turns a very dark gray and dulls out, but that is part of the "look". The finish is not glossy or shiny. Long story short - my BASE rig has seen abuse my skydiving rig will never get. Although I don't swoop the pond in my skydiving rig, it is clear I "swoop a lot of rivers" in my base rig.

FYI The chances are pretty darn good this is either the exact same hardware, or to the same mil spec as the hardware infinity uses: http://djassociates.thomasnet.com/category/black-hardware So, you could always buy a cheap part and kick it around the dirt and sidewalk for a while, soak it in water, etc, to see how well it will last.