rendezvous

I would say show it to a good rigger. If he feels good about it then he knows better and you can sell it without guilt even if you aren't comfortable with using it. Everyone has a different choice and yours may not be this one. If the rigger says it's not safe and a bit ify then it's your own moral call. If you don't sell it make a tent or a cool looking wind sheeter out of it.

How many of you use a full face helmet without the Visor i.e just for jaw protection. Which helmet do you use for it.

thanks for all the input from all of you. This definitely clears up the questions I had.

I understand that. My question is more to do with, if I want to just continue to do some drills with BASE in mind but not really as a preperation for going off to BASE jump immediately after, in that case does it matter if these drills are done under a ZP 7 cell or ZP 9 Cell. What I'm really asking is, at 1:1 loading does a ZP 7 cell really simulate a F111 7 Cell base canopy or that if it's a ZP at 1:1 it doesn't really matter whether if it's 7 or 9 cell as far as learning something about the flying characteristics of a BASE F111 are concerned.

I jump a 7 Cell ZP triathlon loaded at 1:1 for Skydiving. Do the flying skills that I develop on it help in anyway towards those that are required for F111 BASE canopies or is it that a ZP 7 Cell means that I might as well be flying a ZP 9 Cell from a F111 BASE canopy point of view. Basically, if the experience that I gain under a ZP 7 cell helps me understand BASE canopy flying better than that under a ZP 9 cell then I want to keep the 7 cell else change to 9 cell. I not into BASE yet but plan to sometime in the future.

And who in this whole debate is trying to single out a "A reputable operation with professionalism " The whole point of this debate is what if you come across total unprofessionalism at a DZ. Unprofessionalism to the extent that it's malicious in intent and you don't know about it or haven't been made aware of it but are made to sign a consent in the belief that you are signing for that very professionalism. If such a case were to indeed happen, ofcourse in your wisdom it will not, but should it happen then is the assumption of risk on the waiver that you consent too valid as an argument to shield such an operation. Does this waiver in theory and in practice mean that the DZ has absolutely no responsibility towards malicious intent and intended malpractice. And please, stick to making an argument not a judgement. Last when I checked with my instructor the definition of being a Skydiver was still something to do with passion towards the sport and not jump numbers and frequent flier miles. Ofcourse if that's changed since I jumped last I withdraw my statement.

I get your point and I think the issue here is more to do with whether the coach rating in it's current form adds any value to how Skydiving is conducted. Is it actually geared and positioned to serve the purpose it's intended for. In your view what should be the purpose of the coach rating. Is it really required, and if so then how should be it designed or atleast what should change in it ? Will any of those changes defeat the motivation behind having a coach rating as it is right now ?

Well then you are consenting to carlessness and bad standards and to that extent you assume the risk. But you are still not concenting to malpractice. I think one of the examples quoted was about some prop that was stored for 20 years in a manner against prescribed norms and then put onto the plane resulting in 12 people dead. Would you call that carlessness and part of the waivers assumption that you consent to bad maintenance or would you call the intentional negligence with a possibility of profit making being the priority over basic norms of safety. It really comes down to what does the waiver really mean in terms of what you are consenting too. In essence when does assumed risk stop being an assumed risk. An air plane goes up and developes engine fault, that is an assumed risk. The engine failed even though some basic standard was met, that is an assumed risk. The mechanic was a bit careless, that could be an assume risk. But an engined failed inspite of the mechanic or the DZ operator knowing fairly well that it would but let it pass any way to make the extra buck on the strength of a waiver, now do you consider that assumed risk or some sort of malicious intent ?

Well, I don't think there's a need to be condecending about people with low jump numbers trying to get a coach rating to teach. 3 or 4 coach jumps with a coach isn't going to make a student a kick ass skydiver who won't need your experience. I have about 200 jumps and I would kill for an opportunity if someone with your experience was to come up to me and ask me if I wanted to practice something with him. Unfortunately, except for a few experienced guys there aren't that many who are willing to have some "50 jump wonder" spoil their jump. For most low number jumpers it can me quite intimidating to ask someone with a ton of experience to jump with them. If you think you have the experience and want to share it step up. You don't need a coach rating to take on an A license jumper. As for the those "wealthy 200 jump wonders " well atleast some of them are making the effort to be available to introduce students to Skydiving. Next time you are at your DZ walk up to student with a handful of jumps and ask them if they want to learn. I'm sure they'll more than appreciate your gesture and if you are already doing this then why feel bad that you can't get a coach rating. All the coach rating will do is may be get you some free jumps and money. If that's what you are looking for then fine, say so and don't be condecending towards the so called "200 jump wonders," If you don't want to be a coach for the money or the free jumps then I don't think sharing knowledge requires any kind of a rating. All it requires is for you to walk up to a freshly coined jumper and ask him if he wants to jump with you.

I think it's more to do with what the DZ is making you consent to in the assumption of risk. If a DZ is making you sign a waiver you are consenting to some min. standard of maintenance. If that standard is not explicitly stated then at the very least the implied standard becomes whatever is required legally. If that min. is not met then the assumption of risk does not apply since it means that you were misinformed. I do not think you assume misinformation to be acceptable risk in any business. You may choose to continue to avail the service however you haven't consented to this lowered standard unless it was stated on the waiver and you've signed for it. Unless stated on the waiver any negative history against the DZ remains purely theoritical from the waiver and assumption of risk point of view. To that extent I would think the onus of keeping risk assumption in perspective lies on the DZ not the jumper and the jumper will have the right to sue morally and legally inspite of the waiver and inspite of his or her decision to continue jumping even if they are aware of the negative history. If it's not stated on the waiver the problem doesn't exist and that is what you consent too. I think there's a fine line here between implied and assumed risk and that due to concealment of information or misinformation.

What does a typical coach course cost and how is it structured ? How many days does it run ?

from what I hear, they haven't even started.

throw in the ocassional tunnel time as part of training and you are done for.

Not really. The acceleration is x and y coordinates would be more of a function of energy transformations e.g potential to kinetic and drag etc. The value of gravity or acceleration on the Z axis only affects the potential energy at a point on the z axis.

I'm looking for a good RW DVD. How does the DeLand Majik DVD rate in your opinion.

the BASE forum has tons of info on this.

357 is truly amazing ! congratulations to all of you.

Factory Diver or anyother ...

Do the non flip up RW helmets fog up ? If so how do you clear the lense. Do you just wait to get out. Do they also fog up under the canopy, if so then how do you deal with it ?

I agree with you on it.

I wish there were more AFF instructors or DZs that looked at it the same way. I paid full price every time I repeated.

I don't see the point behind why it should matter. 3 or 4 min here or there doesn't really matter to me as a jumper. Unless you are talking some 10 odd minutes faster in speed difference I don't really care who's the fastest or the point behind competiting for the title.

great. Thanks.

Well, to begin with, get used to it. It'll be happening a lot. Infact there will be times when you'll be required to determine for yourself if you should sit out or go. Sometimes when you haven't jumped for a while and are etching to get up but the wind is just bodering your comfort level, it can be a tough decision. So use this time to learn how to mentally surrender yourself to weather. It might save your bones and may be even your life someday. You can ofcourse use this time to learn some packing. You can talk to the instructors and riggers more about the gear. Evetually you'll be looking for one. It helps to know what you are looking for. You'll alaways manage to find a copy of The "Parachutist" or "Skydiving", good time to look at it. You can use the time to feel great about all the money the weather saved you. Atleast for now. Eventually you'll get quite broke , Make friends around. If you have a girl friend who needs your attention, this is the time. You don't want to be caught on the ground not Skydiving on a nice sunny day with no winds. Nothing feels worse than that.

HI there, I was pulling up some old posts and I came across this one. Looks like you attended the AA57 camp. I've signed up for one too. Wanted to know what was your experience like. What was your objective and did it help and where did you stay ? Would appreciate any info your opinions you can give me. thanks Ankur