ufk22

"You are a small child, without a degree or any experience, so what you have to say isn't worth listening too." This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

"You are a small child, without a degree or any experience, so what you have to say isn't worth listening to." This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

This did not come straight from the manufacturer. It came through a dealer who assembled it. Wait, what? Someone actually rigged this up after receiving it from the manufacturer? Yes, that is correct.I would have doubts about the judgement of any rigger that didn't catch this obvious mistake. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Ok, I'll ask again. What instructional ratings do you currently hold? How many instructional jumps or recurrence jumps have you done? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Ok, I'll ask again. What instructional ratings do you currently hold? How many instructional jumps or recurrence jumps have you done? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Ok, I'll ask again. What instructional ratings do you currently hold? How many instructional jumps or recurrence jumps have you done? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Not really. Like people said, it varies by DZ and often the instructor's discretion as well. Single-sided release jumps (similar to an AFF level 4) are far more common based on what I've seen for a heads-up student (or even licensed jumper) that became uncurrent after an abbreviated ground school. I've even seen people with fewer jumps than me just go on a random freefly jump with an AFF-I as their recurrency jump. While this might make some people's heads explode, it probably isn't uncommon in the real world. I love you guys ufk and matt!!! I really do,

And for the 14th consecutive month, the winner of the "Why does everyone call me Richard?" award is......... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

As you can see, a wide variety of answers, and there is no one right answer. First, definitely call ahead and set things up. Be very honest about abilities, time frames and problems. Being a year uncurrent, going through the FJC is good and will be required at most places. After that, it comes down to many things; How well he does during the FJC, especially with the practicals. What his log book tells me. His attitude. If everything is positive, I most likely wouldn't require a 2-sided AFF jump, probably more like what Ron mentioned above, single side with release for him to prove what he can do, but most of this is up to the Instructor and DZ policy. After that jump, things will move forward based on how the jump goes. If he shows up with a good and humble attitude about things, it's a real plus. I had 2 somewhat similar in the last year, both about a year uncurrent. First was "A qualified" but never paid for a license. She was a bit put off by having to do a AFF release dive, but went up and did well. The second was confident but a total mess. You just never know. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

finally, something we can agree on. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

'whoa...... Someone must be off his meds (again). To get back to the original question. for belly, get a full face helmet. Having your mouth enclosed isn't a bad thing. Most visors are coated for fog-up, if not just get some anti-fog and apply it once a day. My preference is the Mamba, but everyone has a different shaped head. Best bet is try on a few different helmets before you buy. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

You had a potentially serious gear malfunction, no one aparently saw it, and you went to dinner rather than discussing this with an instructor at the DZ and are now looking to the internet for advise. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? I would ground you for a month just based on how you handled this (nothing to do with the "why it happened", just the "what you did after"). And if going to dinner really is a higher priority for you than dealing with this, OSB. And if you really think the lesson you should learn from this is about free-fly friendly gear........ This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

What matters is not height, it's your torso. I'm only 6', but have only a 31" inseam, so I need a larger harness than a lot of people that are much taller. For a rig to fit me, it needs a 19 1/2" MLW. If you're 6'6" with a 36" inseam, you may well need the same size. This dimension is on the manufacture tag on most rigs. What you need to be concerned with is the length of the main lift web. As others have said, with assistance of someone who know how, measure yourself according to a manufacture's instructions, then find out what size they recommend. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Yes, but for the the S/L I, you also need to get all the prerequisites on the card done. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Sounds like a lot of $$$. As an instructor, I used to run jumpmaster certification courses from time to time. The candidates purchased their materials, paid their USPA fees and paid the evaluators' jumps, but that was it. I don't recall charging a dime for my own time. Just seemed like the thing to do. But skydiving isn't about giving back to the sport anymore. It's become a very big business, with a lot of people making their living at it. I used to do JM and I courses for nothing or next to it, but then USPA decided I had to take the I-E course to maintain the ratings. That cost me way over $1000 ( airfare, car rental, hotel, course cost, etc), so now I charge enough to cover expenses and make a little to pay for what I've spent. Usually about $200 for a coach course if we have at least 3 or 4 and I don't need to get a hotel room or travel far. I split that with one or two others. But I'm not doing it for a living. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

If you have to travel for the rating, add $$500-$1000 (hotel, air ticket or driving, extra time off, rental car, etc) If this is at your local DZ, done over two nights and a weekend, you don't have to take off work, the C-E does the travel and pays for hotel, quit your whining. Too answer your question, yes , you're missing something. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Biggest thing-remember the relative wind! The common mistakes I see from low time jumpers on H&P's are too relaxed an exit (not arching right away) and trying to get belly to earth right away. Leave with a solid arch and keep your head up with your hips forward, arms back. For the first few seconds after you leave the plane, the relative wind is horizontal, not vertical. You shouldn't be belly to earth right away, and if you are, you're actually dead low/head down to the wind, not a real stable position. I've done H&P's from under 2000', from 5000' you've got over 10 seconds to get stable above your minimum deployment altitude of 3500'. Don't sweat it. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

this looks just like the RSL on my old V-2 Hate to ask, but have you checked with UPT??? This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Hardest thing was figuring out who was telling me something that was true/right and who was clueless as to what had happened on the dive/giving wrong advice/covering their butt at my expense. As to the awareness thing, somewhere between 100 and 200 jumps the awareness comes, usually not before. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

depends ion the jump AFF 6, 4.5, and 2.5 RW small 4.5, 3, 2 RW large 5.5, 2.8, 1.8, This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Ok, since no one else has asked.... Where was the boogie and where/who is teaching this to students and or low time jumpers? This is so far beyond stupid..... This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

"The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes." CLASSIC EXAMPLE RIGHT HERE This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

My biggest concern would be three-ring/cut-away cable maintenance. I can't believe the number of jumpers that are clueless about this aspect of normal rig maintenance. I wonder how many of the low chop fatalities could be traced to hard pulls on cutaway because of the lack of maintenance. I have always pulled, cleaned and oiled my cables monthly. I exercise my three-rings every two or three months. With the new 6 month cycle this can be an issue, let alone if we go a year. As far as the repack goes, I would not expect 1year to be an issue on actual reserve performance. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Landing downwind is harder than landing into the wind, so yes, it's more dangerous. My guess is that your instructor was troubled that you didn't know which way the wind was blowing more than that you downwinded it. As others have said, a radical low turn is more dangerous than a downwind. The reason for the 14 MPH wind limit for students is the fact that student canopies are generally large, docile and slow. Landing a canopy that is moving backwards relative to the ground is not a good thing. Jumping in winds that you cannot move forward relative to the ground is not a good thing. This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Obviously Holding the "world" to a standard is best...and that has nothing to do with what your standards . This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.