ufk22

Since you were trained in Canada, I don't know your program, but if you have or download a SIM from USPA, look at the Cat G lesson plan. It talks about "performance turns", but does a poor job of explaining it. The line twists were induced, like others have said, because you unloaded your canopy, but going into brakes (pulling down the other toggle prior to raising the first one) to hold line tension is not the best answer. Doing this puts you out in front of the canopy rather than underneath it. The idea is to keep the canopy over your head (a relative term if the canopy is diving) and yourself centered underneath it. USPA talks about a 90 turn then a reverse 180 but I think it's easier to figure out doing 180 then reverse 180. Initiate a 180, but ease into it,taking about a full second to bring the toggle from full up to full turn, hold the toggle down, but about 2/3 through it start to gently ease up on the toggle, being at toggle full up just prior to 180. As you feel yourself swing under the canopy at level flight ease into the opposing turn (not just jab the toggle all the way down), getting the toggle all the way down about 1/4 way into the opposing turn. As you get better, you can transition from raising one toggle to lowering the other with no break in between. When you get it right, you'll know. The turns will have a smooth but more aggressive feel, especially in the second 180. The exact points to ease in and out of the turns will vary with the canopy and the wing-load, but this is a place to start. Remember to do this stuff up high. 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.

Speaking of douched, I see you've gotten around to "rinsing out" YOUR profile. Getting tired of people seeing your wingloading (1.76) at your jump numbers (350) at your currency (less than 100 jumps a year)? I actually respect and admire DocPop for figuring things out prior to injury and am relieved that Sangi figured things out prior to being dead and hope he recovers. You, on the other hand, are just another stupid accident waiting to happen, and aren't even smart enough to shut up. 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.

I would be very careful recommending this because this can easy lead to target fixation. The way I have always heard it explained is to "look out at the horizon" not specifically at a single object. That's why I said to set up for a landing 50-100' downwind and to look at the top of it AFTER they have started final. It's also why I suggested a wind-blade that is out in the open rather than a tree, building, etc. It's easy to say "look at the horizon", but low-time students have a tendency to look straight down at the last second. Having a definite thing to look at that is far enough away so as not to be able to hit it sometimes helps. This also gives them altitude reference for starting their flair. I've used this many times over the years, only with people that seem to have dificulty judging when to start their flair or people that look down. A student that talks about how much faster the canopy is flying at flair time is looking down rather than out "at the horizon". 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.

I warned that it was the "ANAL-analytical" version. 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.

First answer, ask your instructor...... but.... you seem (based on this and all the rest of your posts) seem to be an "anal-analitical" kind of guy, so here is my "anal-analitical" answer. The hardest part of skydiving is to put your faith in what you're taught. In order to do this, you have to use the "smart" part of your brain to overcome basic reflexes and learned reflexes. Basic reflex=we all want to stand up. We are upright, bi-pedal creatures, have been for thousands of years. There is something deep in your "lizard brain" that says "keeping myself standing up is a major priority". In skydiving, falling down properly (the PLF) is the major priority. Your intellectual side can overcome your reflex, but you need to understand the conflict and have faith that falling down is the best answer. The only answer. Sliding or running it out shouldn't even be an option at this point in your skydiving. This also applies to putting out a hand to stop your fall. This is a learned reflex to try and accomplish the "want to keep upright" reflex. When I teach students to flair, the last part of the flair is bring your hands into your crotch, cupping one hand over the other and that hand grabbing the other hand, elbows in tight. With one hand holding the other, a reflexive reaction (putting out that hand to stop the fall) can only happen after first making a conscious decision to release the grip. The fact that you seemed to have a lot of forward speed and some downward speed means two things. 1. You flaired a little late. This can easily happen with only five jumps, especially if you're jumping a smaller canopy on that jump. 2. You were looking down rather that out at the horizon. Another reflex thing. While in reality most of your momentum was forward, because you were up in the air even a little, your reflex was to look down because when we are normally off the ground, we'll end up straight below where we are. I don't know your DZ landing area, so do NOT do this without discussing it with an instructor, but a technique that has worked well for me teaching student landings is (if possible and safe) try to land 50-100 feet downwind of a wind blade or wind sock. Keep your eyes on the top of the windblade once on final, and use it in reference to the horizon to time your flair. Once again, DO NOT do this without discussing it with an instructor. Depending on wind speed, direction, etc, this may not be a safe thing to do at yoru DZ. 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.

+1 This has been discussed before in these forums, but to repeat it. Trying to deal with linetwisted/possible toggle fire on highly loaded (or even moderately loaded) ZP canopies is NOT the same as it was in the old 7 cell F111 days. If you're on your back and spinning, especially if you're in a wingsuit, what do you do??? (just like quizzing a FJC student). Look red, reach red, ......... 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.

Of the three of us; Sangi learned his lesson (I hope) the hard way and I have learned in a less hard way (but it still took too long). Virgin-Burner, it seems, is now the last of the three "cool kids" who is still pushing the envelope and refusing to hear what others are telling him. Maybe I have forfeited my right to preach on this subject given my previous posts, I am not sure. Or maybe Sangi and I are just the right people to speak up on this having been "that guy". I think that where you have been and where you are now gives you every right to preach. Anyone who can't accept your change in attitude isn't worth worrying about. I'm glad you are where you are. You even post like a grownup now. 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.

Re: [Sangi] FIRST CAMERA AND EDITED VIDEO [In reply to] Quote | Reply -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems that the skydiving community likes to judge everyone absolutely the same regardless.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah, yeah, now tell us about your Mad Skilzz. I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, Sangi. They are judged by the laws of physics. The old, the new, the cool and uncool, on a bad day, they all hit the ground at the same speed, with pretty much the same results. As for me, I know how to take care of myself. Judging by your shitty attitude and your moronic writing on this site, you do not. I am always happy to instruct and advise anyone who has a good attitude toward learning about skydiving. You seem to have a hatred of all who have put in the time and effort to learn about this sport and how to survive it, simply because you have not. So, as far as advising you, I could not care less if you ever learn a single thing. You are a textbook example of a DGIT (Dead Guy In Training). There is a crater waiting somewhere with your name on it, and dude, when you fill it, all that will mean to me is that I won't have to read your silly shit around here anymore. See the sig line below? You don't even fucking qualify. Kevin Keenan Florida, USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____________________________________ Dude, you are so awesome... Can I be on your ash jump ? QuoteFrom an earlier thread. Couldn't have said it better 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.

I've put out hundreds (maybe thousands, I don't log student numbers) of S/L students over the last 20+ years. How easy it is seems to depend mostly on your level of confidence in yourself and your instruction. If you believe that your training has been thorough and you are ready, it's a lot easier. The most important thing in a S/L jump is to hold the arch, no matter how much some part of your brain wants to panic, flail, swim, go fetal, etc. Holding an arch will eliminate about 99% of the potential for malfunctions when doing S/L. To quote the preacher "YOU'VE GOT TO BELIEVE!!!!!" Good luck and have fun. 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.

CONGRATULATIONS That it one of the smartest comments from any skydiver (especially someone with your jump numbers) posted on this forum. 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.

About 140# without gear would be the most I'd want to load this canopy for a student. The Skymaster is a great student canopy, very docile, almost impossible to stall (if not overloaded). I've put out tons of students under the 290's. We usually kept 1 230 around for the very-very lightweight women. We sometimes let the bigger guys jump it late in their student career (over 20 jumps) but not take it to 1/1 loading. By the way, there are right and wrong answers to this question and most any skydiving question. There may well be more than 1 right answer, but there are definitely wrong answers. Anyone who tells you that sub-20 jump students should be flying any canopy loaded at or over 1/1 is WRONG. Period. 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.

Yup, 74 jumps, a 150 loaded at 1.3 will be perfect....... And we wonder why newbs say dumb stuff. At least their excuse is ignorance rather than stupidity. "I did it and lived, so it must be a smart choice..." 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.

and the unasked question.... What size canopy??? 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.

Silly question.... 'Cause that's what all the cool kids do...... It wasn't that long ago that a 190 Sabre loaded at 1/1 was considered high-performance canopy loading. Now this is a student canopy????????? Now we have sub-100 jump newbs wanting 150's for their first canopy so they have the option to downsize further faster. It isn't them. It's what they see us do (or at least some of us. You know, the really cool jumpers). 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.

Had the same thing happen last year down at Sebastian. Only, this gal got right in my face about it. She was never within 500 yards of me under canopy. I had never heard of this either. Neither had a number of people I talked to at Sebastian. Seems to be, if I can see you, I'll wag my legs, not just if there is any chance of a canopy collision. No problem, I'll use it when necessary. 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.

So, you only weigh 105 pounds? 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.

Sorry, but this is not a realistic scenario. If a semi-functioning canopy the needs to be flown with one toggle all the way down will reach land, a cutaway with RSL deployment of reserve will reach land, skyhook even more likely. Even if not, why attempt to land something that could get real ugly down low. Hitting water in freefall, or even 1/2 freefall, is a lot like hitting the ground. It's not "soft". There is no reason to even discuss landing a line-over. 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.

Can some of the more experienced skydivers critique the Coaches Course? How well is the instruction that the coaches receive? Would you consider it adequate, unsatisfactory or stellar? At this point in your skydiving, everything you learn can be considered a "life saving skill", but coaches don't teach advanced canopy skills, that is done by an Instructor. There are more things I could list and I don’t want to drag it out forever. But to me these are topics that merit input from experienced jumpers who ‘been there done that’. I personally would rather get instruction from the guy who looks worn, smells like vomit and alcohol but has the experience, rather than an jumper who is certified with 200 hundred jumps. Yep, you could The only thing I learn everyday is how little I actually know. Good luck with your goal, I just don't know if I'd want someone like you, unless you smell like vomit and alcohol, working with students 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.

Quote it just doesn't make sense to my to buy a 210 for a 100 jumps and then downsize to a 190. Quote Actually, it makes a lot of sense. The only reason against it is $$$$$. I am about your weight. I made my first 150 jumps under a 225, my next 300 under a 190, my next 300+ under a 175, then got down to a 150. If you buy used canopies, you won't have a lot of costs by following a logical and safe progression. Your line of reasoning is one of part of why the injury/fatality link to open canopies has become so skewed. 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.

That's the citical difference. The one grip is used for building an established formation, and if you're trying to pull a piece out of the door, you need that grip. If the exit goes bad, the plan is to drop the grip and rebuild after everyone is stable. A harness grip on a two-way with a student where you are not launching a piece is there for stability and control over the student. If the exit goes bad, the grip is there to allow the instructor to correct things in short order. The problem is that some coaches, unless prohibited from doing so, will begin to blur the line between coach and instructor, and start to do 'instructor things' when they have no business doing them. In essence what happens is that the coach ends up gaining experience at the expense of the student, and that's the exact opposite of what the coach is supposed to do. The whole point of the coach program is to enhance the students learning post-AFF, not subtract from it. Of course, the natural extension of that is that if the coaches get used to that type of interaction on the exits, they'll begin to adopt it later on. Using a harness grip to dock and stabilize the student, which leads to them feeling responsible for the stability of the student, and of course, a harness grip puts you right in the neighborhood for deploying for a student. I can easily see a coach docking on a unstable student with a harness grip, and when the student doesn't become stable, what do they do? The PC is right there.... Coaches are like any other jumper. Just like every newbie who buys too much canopy for them, and insists they'll be careful with it and aren't going to swoop, sooner or later they swoop it anyway. Coaches have a defined job and set of responsibilites, and that needs to include what to do, and what they're not allowed to do. It's simple - follow the book, and do the dive the way it says. It's nothing more than a structured two-way with a newbie. Plan the dive and dive the plan, to include freefall manuvers, break off and opening protocols. Don't deviate, don't make shit up as you go, the best dive you can do is one that is 100% representative of what the book says. And that is what I do. "The book" does not prohibit a harness grip to launch a formation. It does prohibit a coach (or any non-AFF rated jumper) from using any grip, not just the harness, to control a student beyond just keeping them close for a second on the exit (no spins stops, no roll overs, etc). To tell a coach that they absolutely cannot do something that is NOT prohibited by USPA, just because someone might possibly go beyond what IS allowed does that coach a disservice. I always assume that anyone I sign off on a rating to will follow the rules. If I find that they don't, I'll work just as hard to suspend the rating as I did to help them get 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.

To clarify, I'm refering to post-cat G or H exits. Coaches make a lot of student jumps after Cat H. 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 I tell my candidates is that they can take any grip they would take to make the same exit with an experienced jumper. If that means taking a harness grip, fine. For example, if they're launching a stairstep, they can take a leg-strap grip. They are not trained to use harness grips (or any grips) to control the student and should not do so. 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.

But, standing back from the emotional content of it, what MEL said is essentially true. It was a recalled cutter, and that's said in the letter. Quote The cutter was scheduled to be replaced in August 2011 as per PSB SB AMMO050910/3 revision 2. I had requested replacement cutters for a number of Argus units back in September 2010 when the initial SB was issued. Due to the lack of cutters in the U.S. and Revision 2 SB we were holding off. 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.

I have to agree with what Sandy said, but would add that in this case, my guess is that you forgot to cock the pilot chute. A good pilot chute will give enough drag to take you from "belly to earth" to pretty much upright. If you had to look over your shoulder to see this, there was not the normal drag from the pilot chute. When you brought your hands in and looked down at your handles, you went head down and accelerated. The additional speed is what finally gave the deflated pilot chute enough drag to open the bag. I've had both a complete bag-lock after dumping my pilot chute to try to clear a horseshoe and the kind of delayed bag opening you describe, and the difference in what the pilot chute drag did to my body position was very obvious. In the second case, mine also opened just after I brought in my hands and was starting to look at handles. 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 most common cause of this type of entanglement (or any tangled-in-lines situation) on S/L exit, assuming this was a hanging off the strut style of exit, is the jumper "pushing off" rather than just releasing. I've put out 100's of S/L students out of 182's and 206's using the hanging exit. Some people, usually stronger guys, will do a sort of pull-up and then push themselves off the strut. This usually results in them doing a partial back-loop as the canopy is coming out, which can lead to entanglement. I stress during the first jump course that the release is only letting go. Hang with elbows straight, look in at the instructor, get the signal to go, then look up and just open the hands for release. On the EP side, I teach to try to clear any entanglement until 2500', then cut away. I tell my students that cutting away the main will usually relieve the tension on the lines and allow the main to clear whatever body part the lines are around. 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.