mdrejhon

Maybe I should take that 4:00pm carpool offer from Simon anyway

Socket 939. It's dualcore compatible if you want to upgrade. (dualcore = having two CPU's on a single chip!) Some 754 versus 939 info: http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1743 Can't go wrong with an Athlon64. Just make sure you choose a good Athlon64 motherboard with Socket-939. Pay attention to your power supply. Make sure it is has a high enough rating. I don't know what lower end CPU/motherboard is currently inside your eMachines, but the Athlon64 may eat a lot more power, causing a power supply brownout, and frequent computer crashes as a result.

Going from a lifestyle of 2 bedroom lifestyle to a 1 bedroom lifestyle and giving up the car (Works if you live downtown, and you can always use a carsharing service for those occasional uses of car, such as Zipcar). Carpool to the dropzone like I do. Actually, I had already been in a 1 bedroom for 2 years before I started skydiving, but it is the circumstance that came to be, and I decided I could afford the course for my 31st birthday. You could shoestring it a bit, just a few hundred per month (for training, jumps, rig, etc), and spread it out.

Skydive Gananoque: CDN$20 per jump or CDN$65 per day (3 free packs) plus CDN$5 per pack. That's about USD$16 per jump or USD$50 per day (3 free packs) plus USD$4 per additional pack.

I think that on first tandems, people RARELY pull, if ever. I heard some of the best skydivers here, didn't pull on their first tandem. Just make sure you're pulling by your 3rd and 4th tandem

Not true. Rolling the tail too tight can do this under any canopy. Blues, Ian I'm starting to learn how to pack (at least being explained the steps in detail in preparation for when I have my own rig soon), and this brings up an interesting question I'll be asking the dropzone at some point. But I'll ask here too. Isn't it canopy dependant "how many rolls" is "too tight" for that particular canopy? I notice that Sabre's open very hard and its fabric feels very slippery, so I'd imagine extra rolls is okay and not yet too tight, isn't it?

Any other Canadians here?

My favourite exit was a backwards tumble while waving to my tandem first-jumper friend staring at me from the plane. Forward tumbles are a lot of fun too, rolling 2 times in a ball (total 5 seconds) before spreading into an arch, was lots of fun. This was out of a C182 and C206. I did a superman from a Twin Otter as well. Do check with instructor first, you don't wanna strike the tail.

Exactly. That was my jumping partner. The straight-in landing with the asymmetric flare, touching down about 2 meters outside of the peas, is me. Hm. Methinks I should edit-out other jumper's landings out of the video in the future... To avoid confusion. The video linked only to reply to provide an actual video example to somebody's posting about the aboveforementioned student mistake of an unintentional asymmetric flare. I thought the landing was surprisingly relatively soft one considering the circumstance of the asymmetric flare. (As far as I know, the only time I did an accidental slight 10-degree flare-turn) An instructor who saw me, told me to watch my flare symmetry for the next jump. I've never touched a front riser before except above 1500 feet. And I'm at jump 44.

************************************************* -> HOLD ONTO YOUR HORSES ... You got the wrong guy.

Very funny. Maybe for the season of '06* *Disclaimer: '06 meaning 2106, of course

I'm glad to see this legislation pass. I'm very happy to be a Canadian! However, I do also believe that churches should have their own rights and rules. The existing rights apply; a church of a certain religion has its right to not bless marriages by a church of another religion. This also translates to same-sex marriages too, and that they shouldn't be forced to bless same-sex unions. Sounds fair to me.

That's quite a low BASE jump at a really young age. Lessee. Is a fence a Building, Antenna, Span, or Earth?

Hey, how did this old thread get up to the top... I guess it "corked up" of a sudden. Okay...Lessee...For myself...It was Skyflyer Xtreme at Canada's Wonderland in 1996 that made me want to try skydiving someday, and I did my first tandem in 1997. I had my next tandem in 2002 and it still stuck in my mind. Then for my 31st birthday, I decided that I could afford a skydiving course (AFF style). I had mixed feelings about the cost but I told myself I would regret it less if I took it. So here I am. I did have an interest in heights (tree climbing, high diving board, flying in a plane as passenger, rollercoasters) and I had enjoyed the skydiving movies that came out in the mid-90's too as well, but the definitive turning point was Canada's Wonderland "Skyflyer Xtreme", a freefall type of a ride.

QuoteAnd my cell phone is at the end of the barrel. I swear to god I want to shoot this god damned thing!QuoteGo immediately, henceforth, to www.HowardForums.com. They'll be happy to suggest the appropriate ammo.

Actually, there's a far more realistic "Wright Brothers" version of the space elevator being envisioned. The most realistic proposal is the use of carbon nanotubes in a ribbon, and using compact climbers on it. Carbon nanotubes is a recently discovered material that is strong enough to be used for a space elevator ribbon. (If you remember your high school or university chemistry from the days before nanotubes were discovered, the molecular structure of carbon nanotubes is remarkably similiar to graphite rolled up into a tube. This makes this material shockingly strong.) The elevator line would not move; the climbers would use treads to climb the ribbon instead. You'd only need about 24 tons of ribbon just for a starter line that can then be built up by adding extra ribbon parallel to it. 24 tons is something doable with today's launch technology, as you'd need to launch it to geo (geostationary orbit) then lower the ribbon from geo, while raising the counterweight above geo to counterbalance the gravity/centrifugal force exactly and keep the centre of gravity of the space elevator in the same geostationary orbit slot. The spinning Earth would simply "swing" the elevator ribbon taut with the counterweight at the top -- the counterweight would use discarded climbers/discared construction equipment hanging at the top end of the ribbon, this being the counterweight above geo (If you studied physics, this is where objects tend to "pull away" rather than "fall inwards" if you try to keep the object above a certain point of ground as the earth spins -- this in itself compensates for the gravity acting on the elevator ribbon below the geo orbit. As a result, this keeps the elevator line taut as the counterweight pulls the elevator taut as Earth spins. Really simple Physics 101). Even after fully built, The wright brothers equivalent of a space elevator would have a total mass weighing far less than the total mass of a single Saturn V booster, which is amazingly lightweight for something 60,000 feet long. (Note: Length of elevator depends on the size of the counterweight planned. Some proposals say 70,000 miles is needed. However, all proposals require an extension beyond geostationary orbit for the counterweight). Best of all, it would all cost only a few billion dollars - far less expensive than many megaprojects currently accomplished. There are a lot of showstoppers, granted, but the newer proposals *did* sound far more realistic and even covered realism such as lightning storms, terrorism, safety of collapse, rebuilding, and other realistic real-life scenarios, in some newer articles I've read. It's still a "far-out" proposal, but engineers are apparently longer laughing at it anymore - actually now think it can be doable within our lifetimes. Amazingly, even NASA has provided the prize money for an upcoming small elevator-climber contest: Elevator2010. (Think X-Prize style innovation) This type of climber technology is the same type planned for the shoestring-budget space elevator. Yessiere, your taxpayer money already funds space elevator development (indirectly)... Some people think it's now "real" enough to warrant serious attention. Some more interseting information in Wikipedia's Space Elevator entry. I still doubt it would reduce launch costs massively (ie down to $100 per pound like those quoted), but I think it could still reduce costs to the $1000-per-pound range, after accounting for cost overruns and a couple of expected harmless-but-expensive collapses of the first couple of lightweight space elevators... And I think it'll probably take 30 years, not 10 years like some people say. (Note: 1 mile of nanotube ribbon weighs less than 10 pounds -- amazingly lightweight -- and flutters like newspaper, breaking up in the heat of re-entry... space elevator collapses will likely be relatively "harmless", it's amazingly only a few tons of material for the entire space elevator.) Anyway, it all made a hell lot more sense than the outlandish sci-fi proposals I've read in past years. It only recently started sounding "realistic" a few years ago, with the "Wright Brothers style" shoestring space elevator proposal... References: Wikipedia entry: nanotubes Wikipedia entry: space elevator Wikipedia entry: geostationary orbit

That happened to me on the 26th jump. I think it was after my first downsize (from student Manta canopy to Sabre canopy) if I remember correctly. The end of this video clearly showed an accidental slight asymmetric flare. As a result, I think I landed about 3-4 feet to the left of where I intended. I didn't know I flared asymmetrically until I saw the video, but it sure felt different since I was new to this canopy, first time landing a Sabre... (Fortunately, the landing was pillow soft standup) One of the instructors pointed this out, too.

This post is addressed to 'skydog': You're confusing me with someone else more annoying I gave her a very helpful tip because I tested a search on the two spellings and saw a lot of GREAT heartwarming success stories with the minor modification of the spelling. The least helpful "do a search" nitpick posts are the people who never test them out -- those are the smartasses. What I did was actually check www.merriamwebster.com thesarus, then I did a search on the original misspelled term, and then a search on the corrected spelled term, and found a lot of good news. So, I argue my point that I was definitely being helpful rather than being a smartass, because I actually did my homework. As proof that I did my homework, I present success stories: I'm not one of the persons who blindly tells people to search - I just doublechecked, and that the happy stories only occured here with the correct spelling. So, my post was genuinely helpful, as you can see from the proof above... I HATE the people who tells newbies to "PLEASE SEARCH" without TESTING it prior to see if it was simply a case of an unhelpful search engine. I genuinely simply avoided being one of those annoying smartasses. Next time, please make the distinction between a smartass and a helpful person. [nudge, nudge]

That's funny -- I saw a poster of Wil E. Coyote flying an ACME branded parachute with a mal. As a result, I'd think ACME parachutes are dangerous even at less than 1:1 wingloading. Anyway, your test is very interesting. I'm reading through Germain's "The Parachute And Its Pilot" which is probably required study material for a newbie taking your test... (Note: Flying at 1:1 and staying at that for now. I have still lots to learn...)

Hey Aggie, aren't you from Texas! No fair. I'll have to counter-post in your "What are your July 4th Plans" thread

Hey all... Some Ontario dropzones are having their respective boogies for Canada's Day. I know someone who's going to SWOOP's boogie, while myself and even more people I know are going to Skydive Gananoque's July 1/2/3rd boogie. (My home dropzone...the one I am going to...A real TWIN OTTER jump plane within driving distance of Toronto/Montreal/Ottawa!) What are your Canada's Day plans?

It can be done, but it may be soft looking. You must use a high quality progressive-scan framegrab. Easiest to do this is to use a very good PC based DVD player, and run it in VMR9 mode, screencapture it, then use a high quality scaling algorithm. A MPEG de-block filter to remove the JPEG artifacts may be a good idea (My Corel Jasc Paint Shop Pro has such a filter). A carefully adjusted "unsharp mask" filter may also help too. Depending on the artisticness of the image and whether it translates very well in a 'soft' manner. If it's an abstract image, it may look good and artistic. One can also make some adjustments (i.e. sepia, noise, color exaggeration, or other funky effects) then the slight 'softness' of the low reoslution source, can actually enhance the art of the image. It really depends on how it is done. If it is a portrait image or a skydiving formation image, or such, it may look a bit soft. I'd lower the size a little bit if possible. It has been done before. Heck, I project my DVD images using a projector in full moving motion on a 10 foot screen and watch it from approximately 12 feet away: http://www.marky.com/hometheater (older screen, only 92" rather than 120" inch. Still pretty good quality through a really good progressive scan DVD setup (Home Theater PC). I have a 3 megapixel image blown up to 36"x48" (3' x 4') and it looks amazingly sharp, thanks to some really good image reprocessing I did. It looks better than many 15 megapixel images! From normal viewing distance of 3 feet standing in front of it, it is remarkably detailed. Most people say, for example, 2 megapixel images can only scale to 8"x10", but in certain conditions and some clever retouching, you can scale an image about 3-4 times larger than the recommended size, if you use some paint software skill to keep it natural looking and relatively sharp instead of pixellated. (Using lossless TIFF helps a lot in eliminating noise during enlargement, but JPEG at max quality works too, although you may need an JPEG deblock filter found in some paint programs)

I'm looking forward to it. Still have those leftover Twin Otter lift tickets to spend...

True, but don't forget the occasionally visiting Twin Otter's at Skydive Gananoque. There's one visiting for 3 days on July 1st, 2nd, 3rd for the Canada Day Weekend boogie at Skydive Gananoque. If you wanna jump a Twin Otter in Ontario, this is the place to be 2 hours from Montreal, 3 hours from Toronto, 1.5 hours from Ottawa. I'll be there all weekend, hoping to reach jump number 70.

I'm in Canada. My dropzone is Skydive Gananoque (near Kingston).