steelyeye

Great little Cessna DZ - Just up the road from you! Give us a little heads up and we may be able to scare up a wingsuiter to flock with! (Does 2 count as a flock?) Plus, I really want to check out your new camera helmet - you've motivated me to start working on my own! Blue skies! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Matt, Thanks for the edit - looks great! That photo was just raw from my DSC-V1, did not photo-shop it, other than editing for size. Clearly I need to get better at fixing the lighting! Photo was taken over St. Marys, GA (on the FLA/GA border) at "The Jumping Place" dropzone. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Took this one last weekend. Father and son on thier high hop-n-pop at sunrise. I liked how the sun still has not risen on the town below and the cool cloud formation to the right. They were seriously stoked when we landed! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Bill and Phree - Thanks a million (or at least a couple of thousand$$$ for the potential problems you saved me!)! Did not know where to look for such reviews, thanks for the lead! Good to know my instincts were right. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Anybody now about/dealt with this seller? bestpricecameras Their prices, at least on digital SLRs and HDV video cameras, seem REALLY low, which makes me wonder about them. Blue skies! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Thank you very much, that paints a very different picture of the video. With that information, especially the challenges of landing in the main landing area, I have a much better appreciation of the situation. Still leery of the proximity to people who clearly had no idea he was there (at the end of the swoop), but understand the picture. It is easy just to flame on folks, but you put the extra effort into the discussion and I appreciate it. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

It does provide more information and thank you for your calm and reasoned response. As I said, I was not there, and don't know the jumper. Clearly he is an superior canopy pilot and I have no doubt that his judgement is usually unimpeachable. Not meaning to attack him personally, just bringing up the question of why swoop into an area where there is any danger of hitting someone? I also changed the title to more accurately reflect my concern (from “Swooper near miss” to “Is this the right place to swoop?” – you are right – less inflammatory and more accurate). My concern for swooping into a crowded area (and your opinion and mine may differ on what defines crowded) remains. I still don't see that in this particular instance he had many opportunities to "bail out" if things went wrong. I'll confine my swooping (as junior varsity as it is) to very clear landing areas where I can only potentially hurt myself. Not sure that the fact that the people standing around the landing area are jumpers makes that much difference - One moment of inattention and they are in the swooper's path. Clearly there are up-jumpers heading towards the loading tent, but one instance of "Oops, forgot my goggles" and they could wind up in his path. Replaying it over and over, I gotta disagree with you on the distances involved. Maybe 10 feet (more like 4), but not 40, to the people sitting on the ground (and not in a very good position to get out of the way if something went wrong). But that is probably quibbling over distances that won't advance the discussion. Thanks again for the additional information, your reasoned posts and comments make me value your opinion and judgement on a variety of skydiving issues. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

AFFI - as always, your comments make me smile, even when I am grumpy! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Before I get flamed on too badly, I was not there and don't know the jumper involved. I am not in the camp of banning all the swoopers or relegating them to their own landing area in the back 40. I am just all for intelligent choice of where to swoop. For those of you that can not open this link, a summary from my viewpoint - highly wingloaded canopy pilot executes a blind 180 swooping into an area next to a tent crowded with spectators. Misses several groups of spectators by feet. Several spectators appear to not see him coming. By all appearances, the canopy pilot is a highly experienced and very proficient swooper. My point is - why do this? There were plenty of other areas to safely swoop and land. Other than going for the "cool" points, why would you endanger spectators in this way? If any of the spectators he closely misses had turned and started walking to his left, I highly doubt he could have reacted in time. I am all for swooping - swoop away, but do it in an area where a mistiming or misjudgement on your part won't hurt anyone else - especially a spectator on the ground. Can't we stop encouraging and glorifying stupidly risky behavior? Inflamatory language, I know, but with all the discussion about canopy safety, I think we need to condemn this kind of action. Not a big fan of rules and regulations, but as a community we need to control our own actions and point out where others make poor decisions. http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=6108 http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=6108 "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Back in my kayak building and repair days, we found that a REALLY sharp pair of high-quality scissors was needed. Fiskars or the equivalent worked well. Razor knives work too, and I would imagine that a rotary cutter would also work well. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Congratulations! Seriously, great find, very jealous! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

The only thing that bad about your videos is that we have to wait a year between installments! Great stuff, as always! The tunnel training alone is worth the price of admission! Maybe now I can talk my team into some tunnel time! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Tom, Great work! I like your summary much better than the explanation I had to endure during some of my military training on ethical decision making (attached), but it sounds like you are essentially talking about the "Washington Post Test". Thanks! I'll use it in my training! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Now that is something I would not have thought of! Thanks! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Anyone have any advice about where to purchase and what to look for in a pull force scale? All the ones I have seen/used have been of the old "spring" variety, but some of the digital fish scales on the market (fish scale) look like they would do a good job. I don't know if they record the maximum pull force. Thanks! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Actually, the question bank posted on the FAA website (http://www.faa.gov/education_research/testing/airmen/test_questions/media/rig.pdf) is only a representative sample of the questions asked. Here is a portion of an e-mail I got from the FAA on the subject: "The questions that are available on the FAA web site are valid questions and may be used on a test; however, the actual data bank is a secure system and not available to the public. Guidance for this test is found in the Parachute Rigger Knowledge Test Guide, document number FAA-G-8082-15A (the revision B to this document will be available soon). This guide states, among other things, that only a representative sample of test items are made available to the public. The questions provided are representative of the total bank, and should provide a sufficient general study outline." The parachute rigger knowledge test guide can be found at http://www.faa.gov/education_research/testing/airmen/test_guides/media/faa-g-8082-15a.pdf. Hope this helps guide the study of any future riggers. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

As far as I'm concerned, $85 for this book is a bargain! I orginally got it as an electronic copy and printed it out (very costly in full color with high res photos) and had it spiral bound. It has been invaluable as a training aid as I pursued my ticket and it is invaluable to have it immediately on hand, on the floor during a pack-job, on the sewing machine table during a patch, etc. Maybe I am a dinosaur, but for a primary reference like this, I much prefer the hard copy. You should see mine - all tabbed out, cross-referenced and highlighted with notes in the margins - can't do that with a PDF file (at least not unless you want to pay for ADOBE Acrobat). Great book, great reference, and no, I don't work for the FAA or USAPR! http://www.usapr.com/ Blue skies, Bill "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Johhny - Those are great, Thanks! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

D123 - That's it! Thanks! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Does anyone have an electronic copy of a photo of the results of a container coming open in the plane and the damage done to the side of the aircraft (presumably by the jumper going through the side vice out the door)? We have a really poor quality picture, and I know I have seen one on-line, but can't find it. My students are always stunned when they see even the poor picture. Makes a big impression! Thanks - Bill "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

I've got a 188 with about 150 jumps on it. Too old? I also contacted Aerodyne to get line trim info a while back and got nothing back. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Very true, and that prevented a lot of aircraft from being saved, especially the medium and heavy bomber fleets. But there still were many warbirds which made it onto the market (albeit often via other countries which bought our surplus birds). I just don't see that happening to our modern aircraft. I'm just glad there are a lot of great vintage warbirds on the market (looking at several Stearmen right now), and we still have the opportunity to see them fly. I will be saddened when we can no longer hear the Tomcat's growl at an airshow! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

This is just sad. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070702/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/shredding_tomcats;_ylt=Ai3JJtwu2_z63_Qg.5VDi66s0NUE Fifty years from now, there will probably be no warbirds from this era still flying, maybe just the lucky few static displays at military museums. Sure glad we did not take this policy with Corsairs, Mustangs and other WWII birds! (and I wish I could go back in time and buy a few of those cheap surplus aircraft!) "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Got mine in the mail the other day - AWESOME! "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."

Let's talk real numbers - Total killed by Provisional IRA (based upon CAIN research project at University of Ulster) - 1,821 prior to 2001. This is estimated to be 48.4 percent of the total casualties - so a total of about 3,762. To break the numbers down even further: 621 of these casualties were civilians. A total of 655 were British armed forces; 465 from the British Army, 190 were from the Ulster Defence Regiment (a part time local British Army reserve unit). 272 were members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, 14 were former Royal Ulster Constabulary members, six were British Police, 20 were Northern Ireland Prison Service officers, two were former prison officers. A further 35 were loyalist paramilitaries (21 Ulster Defence Association (UDA), three former UDA, 11 Ulster Volunteer Force). Six were Gardai and one was Irish Army. About 180 were republican paramilitaries, including 12 Official IRA members, one Irish People's Liberation Organisation member, 63 alleged informers and 103 accidental deaths of Provisional IRA members due to premature explosions. CAIN calculates that of 1706 victims, 340 were Northern Irish Catholics, 794 were Northern Irish Protestants and 572 were not from Northern Ireland. Note that the VAST majority of killings by "Terrorists who happen to also be Muslim" are targeted specifically against civilians. The numbers for the "Troubles" are not even in the same league as those killing people in the name of the "religion of peace", even when taken over a twenty plus year period (1969-2001). So, bollocks right back at you. "Better a has-been than a never-was. Better a never-was than a never-tried-to-be..."