murps2000

Wake turbulence off the canopy is not nearly as pronounced as that which results from the burble of the pilot.

I almost think people are trying to get you pissed off, and maybe get you to go off on the same tirade that I've seen played out here by others before you. (All this talk about how people learn at different rates, and they pick things up quickly, and could be just naturally gifted.) I don't care what others say, keep that sense of humor. You may need it. I want you all to know that this book is opening my eyes a lot. again, the information being presented to me is what's shaping me, rather than being told I"m going to die over and over. this new information is making me re-think things. (not slowing my intensity towards learning and mprovement, just the plan in which I attack the obstacles of ignorance) In all honesty, this book may have extended my life-span *** Obviously, the above is from your now locked thread. You're not flying your wing at too heavy a wingloading, and you've gotten the book and read it. This is good. I hope you paid particular attention to the first few pages of chapter 5. As I said before, same message as here, but far more tact and less cynicism. You're obviously hungry, but if you read and understood it, I don't think you need it pounded further into your head. My only suggestion would be to back off of inducing speed at all in your landings, and focus on accuracy. Play all you want up high, and practice the excercises suggested in the book, but dial in your accuracy first when you land. (And I mean for more than just the next ten jumps) As Brian said:"Don't run before you are the best walker you can be." I would also urge you to take Brian's course if the opportunity presents itself. It's worth every penny. Good luck.

Very good point actually and can be answered as simply as, why do you think aerobatic planes are usually bi planes? *** Do you mean: Why do you think most aerobatic planes have symmetrical airfoils?

You mean I'm not tactful That's probably true, I'll try and find time tonight for a more reasonable response. Though I really liked the first one. *** Oh we all loved it. In fact, it illustrated the point quite well. It' just that I wasn't too sure that it would get through. You know, after only about a year in the forums, I'm amazed at how many threads I've seen like this. And I'm still baffled as to what approach will get the message accross. I remember reading an incident report five or six years ago where some kid with like 70 jumps hooked in under a triathalon loaded at 1.3. Everyone at his DZ had stated what a heads up pilot he was, and that he learned and progressed so quickly. I'm sure he probably was good for 70 jumps, but he's dead now. Him and dozens of others like him, before and after. It's a shame that they seem to die in vain. I think skyhighkiy might actually listen, though, so I'm a little encouraged.

It's kind of like when you get a really sweet car that you're excited about and want to tell all your friends about and they start pointing out flaws*** No it's not. It's nothing like it at all. A really sweet car is an object that can sit in your driveway and look nice whether you can drive it skillfully or not. A 90 degree front riser turn to final is a manuever that adds risk to your approach. It usually requires good judgement, discipline, and situational awareness, but it can also be accomplished with just luck. And once it's completed, it's over, gone. It no longer matters how well you did. All that matters is the next one. I don't mean to get down on you about this, because if you're interested in swooping, that's great. Swooping rules. But just consider carefully learning the boring stuff first. The flat-turns, braked approaches, etc. That stuff might save you one day under a more highly loaded canopy, and you will be one smiling skydiver if it ever does. You'll be glad you did your homework early on. Brian Germain's book is a very good place to start. I believe you'll find his sentiments to be similar to many you'll find here, just presented with a little more tact and a tad less cynicism. Good luck.

Um. In Maryland, is it OK to learn AFF drunK?*** Yes. Yes it is.

Pretty nice swoop. I'm no expert, far from it, but it looks to me like it was exactly what you said, an aggie-ressive harness input causing the spanwise distortion. I don't know how exactly that would affect your distance, but it changed your direction pretty quickly, and looked kind of cool. Now, if you look at 21-23 seconds in, it looks like you were on rears, then backed off a little, then got back on. It also looked like you might have been a little deeper with the left initially, and maybe countered the harness turn somewhat. Maybe not 100% efficient, but still a nice swoop. I sure need a lot of practice in this area, myself.

Sorry, but I'm with Goat. It's a job to me. Sure, a few passengers are heads up, get involved, and make my job easier, but that's not enough to make me purposely go skydive with a whuffo attached and an intentional pilot chute in tow just for the fun of it. I'm trying to pay for a habit. My three, 1)money 2)tips (I do try to show them a good time) 3)making back to back loads while owning only one rig

Are you using the old or new student harness? If improperly adjusted, the student harness can place your student's pelvis (and legs) far below yours, which will contribute to this effect. It can also tend to make you "potato chip" under the drogue, particularly with taller cargo.

Just felt I should point something out for the less experienced who may be reading this and are now ready to run out and try it. When stalling HP canopies to the point of collapse, be careful not to let up suddenly and completely on the toggles to recover. Your canopy will surge forward quite aggressively. This has resulted in one entanglement and ensuing fatality that I know of. Better to let up slowly until the canopy is flying in deep brakes, and then continue with the recovery to full flight.

Higher wingloadings generally yield a faster descent. In a (properly executed) swoop, you're hardly falling at all when you put your feet down. Without one, you're just falling faster when you meet the earth, hence a harder landing*** You sure about this? Landing straight in doesn't mean you can't flare, does it? Whether swooping or straight in, doesn't the canopy stop flying at the same airspeed?

I have a X-fire2 at almost 1.8 and it SUCKS to land straight in...*** Why? Just curious.

believe me, i'm doing my best to make sure that no one will have to miss me. hell, i just finished my physical chemistry sequence today so, i definitely want to get my money out of that before i fullfill the dz.com elders' prophecies. *** I have to say that after this flamefest, I'm impressed that you've retained a sense of humor. Just so you know, I didn't, and won't ever make such a prophecy. I just think it's in bad taste. And I actually think the odds are in your favor. I know skydivers that I would bet are far less competent than you with well over 1000 jumps. So you'll probably be fine. I am tired of all the new canopy pilots who think they possess some innate talent that the rest of us have to work for, but I will probably just have to get used to it. They are obviously not going away. And ironically, as much as Daskal expressed disdain for A license holders' canopy selections being regulated, he unknowingly does more than anyone else to bring such regulation into existence. I don't know what you fly, as nothing is listed in your profile, so I can't assess your canopy selection. I don't think you'd care about my opinion anyway. But please, just seriously ask yourself the question that I put to you previously. Because if you continue to jump for years to come, hear me now, and believe me later, you will find yourself in a sketchy situation under canopy. It may be during a sunset load after a bad spot, it may be at the the WFFC with 70 other canopies in the air, it may be after a bailout from an aircraft emergency, or just an accidental low pull. But when it happens you will have only the survival skills that you trained to have, and the square footage that you chose to have over your head. I know it's boring compared to swooping, but shoot accuracy often. Practice flaring from 1/2 brakes, flat turns, flare turns, and anything else about low speed flight that I might be failing to mention. Learn it, know it, live it. And as Yoda said," mind what you have learned, save you it can." Good luck, and try not to take out anyone else along the way.

You think you as good of a canopy pilot as me? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think I could land your canopy just as safely as I land my own.*** That's a bold statement. Could you consistently and in varying conditions land a 1.7:1WL stiletto safely in a ten meter circle surrounded by obstacles, and the consequences of hitting said obstacles are certain injury? I'd bet Ron could. Remember, under canopy, you only get one shot. Don't answer me here, either. I grow weary of the incessant buzz of the nameless rabble of newbies out there who are self-proclaimed prodigal pilots. They would all do well to show some humility and a modicum of respect to those who were in the sport way before them. Ask yourself the above question about whatever canopy you fly. And ask it in a quiet room away from the DZ, where you don't have to worry about what other people think. Do so because you do yourself no favor by dishonestly answering the question. Hopefully you've chosen a canopy with which you have the skill and reaction time to get yourself out of a jam. Hopefully your not flying a wing that you can only land when you're being careful or conservative, and have room for error. Hopefully you won't swoop your eye out. As you say, time tells all. It also makes fools of all of us.

Like every tandem, I feel out the student. I let most every passenger fly the canopy at altitude. If they seem attentive, and quick to grasp canopy flight concepts, and they're not one of those that wants to hang on the brakes, maybe I'll let them help. When doing pactice flares for landing, with much emphasis being placed on smooth input, if they do well, I'll let them help fly it all the way down. But passengers like that are rare.

You forgot one other option, that being "all of the above". I'll use all those techniques, depending on wind conditions, traffic options, spot, payload, etc.. When I'm doing tandem progression jumps, tho, I teach a regular student landing pattern, and a straight in, full-flight aproach.

To me, the safire 2 seemed like it recovered more quickly, and with less altitude loss, but not much less. The riser pressure was light, tho, and it was easy to keep in a dive.

I've jumped a safire2 129 loaded at 1.7, and a sabre 2 120 loaded about 1.8. It appeared to me that the safire2's only advantages over the sabre2 were a slightly better glide, and lighter front riser pressure. They both swooped pretty well, but it just seemed that the safire2 would run out of lift at a higher speed. I much preferred the sabre2 landings, and it was very responsive to rear riser input. I think it's a phenominal all-around canopy. Another thing, I had a rigger adjust the brake lines on the safire 2 several times in an attempt to be able to aggressively use the front risers without deflecting the tail with the toggles. I never could achieve a setting that I was happy with. I ended up having to pull the front riser above the dive loop, at the connector link to get good response. If I pulled at the dive loop, and the tail deflected, The Safire 2 would buck during the turn, just like old Sabre 1's will. This was never even remotely an issue with the sabre2.

To flip or not to flip. As in many other aspects of the tandem skydive, I try to read the passenger. If they are in the distinct minority that I take that are heads up and not very nervous, I'll do flips on request. I try to avoid it when there's video, but if they persist with the requests, I'll do it. Obviously, I'll let the videographer know. I like when the passenger remembers getting a good look at the aircraft after we left. And I don't really train them any different with respect to body position on exit. I'll also incorporate flips into higher level tandem progression dives.

I do think though, that sometimes newer jumpers think more experienced jumpers are trying to hold them back...but it's shortsightedness, because often the bigger picture calls for more rewards in a shorter period of time. There are ways to speed up some progressions, but they don't always offer the most IMMEDIATE satisfaction (hence the reluctance to pay attention to them), but in the long run the jumper turns out waay better, sooner, than if they'd rushed off and tried to figure it out on their own. *** This alludes to what I consider to be a big part of the problem. Look around. We live in the "on demand" world. Just like any yuppie with a credit card can get himself a Harley, and then think that he's a biker, so, too, can any few hundred jump wonder with some cake get himself a brand new, too small velo, and think that he's a swooper. You can't tell them any different, and you can't point out statistics or loads of institutional knowledge that suggest that they are pushing it too hard because they don't wanna hear it. They're too used to being able to "point and click" on what they want. I don't preach to them any more, I just get out of the way.

I have a few hundred jumps on a Batwing 134. I thought it was a decent canopy for its day, but there are better to be had. Still, at 1.4 WL, I think it would challenge most intermediate level canopy pilots out there that often seek out more modern designs. It's dated technology, but still worthy of respect. It will dive if you want it to. Be careful with it. Also you should note that if you tell other jumpers you fly a Batwing, it's very unlikely that they will think you are cool, despite whatever risk you may incur. Instead, they will probably look at you funny. In fact, like some that I have met, they may be unnecessarily cruel. Good luck and godspeed...

Nice story! Way to cheat death. Was it acid, or something? (On the reserve, not lysergic) BTW, I once met a 1st jump student who had a cutaway on all the jumps he ever did. All one of them. He left the sport with a 1:1 jump/cutaway ratio. Cutaways rule. I got to jump the Strong Tridem rig a few years back, and if I had one of those, I'd do a cutaway every weekend. Just like a balloon jump.

This brings up another point...why aren't people controlling their canopy after they land on windy days? No matter how windy it is when I jump, as soon as I'm down I pivot and start reeling in a toggle. The canopy dives into the ground and collapses. I've even done that with a demo canopy with airlocks.*** This is exactly what I've been thinking as I've read this thread. I've done this on a tandem (after flying into the landing area backwards, too). It can be done. You don't have to run around the canopy either. You & the passenger may fall on your asses, but the canopy can be shagged pretty quickly if you prepare yourself for it and reel in a steering line at touchdown. And I would make every attempt to avoid landing directly upwind of tarmac to begin with. Cutaway? Maybe if the canopy hooked a spinning prop or the bumper of a passing car, but otherwise I don't get it. But then again, I guess it is pretty windy in Texas..

Grappa. Anything else is okay.

1)My great grandfather used to hang out with Babe Ruth. 2)I was kicked out of the Webelos. Great thread...