LloydDobbler

Bummer, Ori. I guess the only thing I can say is, hope someone else will step up to the plate and give the old DZ a run for their money (in spite of all the complications and grief associated with that...yes, for those experienced in DZ management, I know that tandems are where a DZ makes its money in the first place...). Best of luck. Signatures are the new black.

I'm surprised by that statement, I've used my on every jump since the beginning of 2004 and never had a problem hearing it. Not saying that this isn't your experience, just that I haven't had this issue ever. Have you compared your unit to other units to verify that there is not a problem with yours? Hey, Ian - haven't been able to compare mine to other units...but doing so would be a logical step, I suppose.

... You may not understand this, but you have to be a competitive swooper to understand what's going through our minds when we're on the airplane. If I knew you, I might talk to you about the WX and tell you what I had already analyzed and exactly what my plan for the jump was ... and if you were a face on the plane I didn't recognize ... who knows I might just tell you the same thing these guys said. We are a competitive group ... we have to be. It's the only way to perform up there. Sorry dude but you have to walk a mile in our shoes before you understand our mindset. Here's the problem I have with this statement - from what it looks like (although memories can always be deceiving, and Squirrel's is certainly not immune from that), it seems like Squirrel posed a question. If he had said, "Dude, you shouldn't be swooping now," that's one thing. But to ask, "Is it okay to be swooping?" seems to be a request for information, more than an imperative demand. Seems to me, whoever responds negatively (in the way Squirrel described) to a question like that is obviously overcompensating for something. But back to the topic, howI have real issues with the "you can't understand unless you're me" response to anything. How, pray tell, are non-swoopers supposed to "understand what's going through your minds" when their attempts to learn to relate to you are met with condescension? (note: the "you" in this isntance isn't specifically "you," Canuck...but since you've lumped your individual self into the same boat as the all-encompassing "we competitive swoopers," I'm using the second person. I think your post is very well-thought-out, in some ways...but I think you're missing the very important point that saying "you can't understand unless you're a swooper" is only going to serve one useless purpose: to alienate more non-swoopers. If I can't understand it, even when I want to better understand it (and when I'm shut down for trying to better understand you), then ultimately how can you expect me to want to keep trying to relate to you or accomodate you?). Whether it's racial discussions or skydiving disciplines or office politics, that sort of divisiveness - the sort that shuns/mocks people for asking a question, because "you can't understand it anyway" - gets people nowhere. Signatures are the new black.

I have a Neptune, and I certainly like its menu system better than L&B's (I just find it much more intuitive)...but if you're looking to use it as an audible, I'd recommend against it. I've tried to use my Netune as an audible, and a lot of the time, I just can't hear it. While I have no experience with a Skytronic, for what it's worth, I can verify that the Protrack screams like a banshee. I think you'll also hear that L&B's customer service is second to none. But I'll let others with more experience with both of the gear items you're asking about give you a recommendation that will undoubtedly be more informed than mine. Regardless, it's been my experience that a Neptune doesn't work too well as an audible, no matter which way I turn it. Of course, we're talking a Pro-tec helmet, here, which may influence things...but the Protrack is loud enough in the same helmet. (edited because I'm a grammar nazi) Signatures are the new black.

Hey, Pikzee - a lot of good advice given here. In spite of low jump numbers, I'm going to chip in with advice from my experience, since the 'Door Demon' is something I think all of us have dealt with. As I was going through AFF, I soon realized two very important things: 1) The time from the moment the door opened 'til we exited the airplane was the scariest part of the skydive. and 2) Once I got out the door, everything got a whole lot better.

There no road in the country with legal 3x differentials in speed. I don't think you can even find a 2x. Closest I know is a steep downhill with trucks at 35 and cars at 55. And the reality of course is that both trucks and cars are going faster. You're missing my point. I was using another poster's analogy to point out that different roads have varying conditions requiring different speed limits, just as different DZs have varying characteristics that may make it difficult (and inefficient, and not much safer at all) to, say, separate the landing areas. I don't think this proposed BSR is very viable, unless it's very broad, leaving the control in the DZO's hands of how to implement separation...and some opponents would argue that "That's the way it is now, so why bother?" Since all DZs don't have the same number of planes flying the same number of daily loads over the same uniform landing area, it just doesn't make sense to try and force them all to adhere to a BSR that specifically dictates one specific rule, one specific standard. Some DZ's might not be able to make separate landing areas happen, for instance...and for some of them, there's nothing wrong with that (because they already have rules in place, such as "nobody swoops after the first person enters the standard landing pattern.") And yes, I realize that the last option I quoted above is one of the options in the proposed BSR...but in the cacophony of people weighing in on the matter, it seems like everyone is talking about it in terms of mandatory prodcedures for separating landings, instead of saying "it's mandatory that each DZ figure out the best way to do it at that particular DZ." That's what I'm in favor of. What works at Perris might not be the best thing for a Cessna-182 DZ. Signatures are the new black.

So you agree that a driver weaving through traffic at high speed is a danger, then... that's a good start! I'll just chime in again with my thoughts on the matter here...while I appreciate the motivations of Bill & his supporters, I think they're ultimately misguided, if for only 1 reason: the fact that you're looking for "uniformity" of some sort across all USPA dropzones. Problem is, there IS no uniformity across all USPA dropzones. A turbine DZ in, say, Maine is a heck of a lot different from a Cessna DZ in the middle of the desert. I recognize that option 2 of the BSR proposal was to make the requirement simply that every DZ would set its own policy for landings...but that potential option seems to have been set aside in recent discussions, in favor of finding a "uniform policy." It's similar to the anaology I quoted above: A driver weaving through freeway traffic in Atlanta at high speed is a danger, yes...but what about a driver passing a semi on a 2-lane road in the middle of Utah with virtually no traffic? Why do we not have a uniform speed limit for all county roads, state roads, US routes and interstates? Because each road's unique conditions warrant its own individual speed requirements. We should not be attempting to set specific rules for every DZ's landing patterns, just because they work out well for our DZ's, or for boogies. Even if our suggested requirements work out for most DZ's, I'm sure there are still other DZ's (that are completely safety-conscious) who shouldn't be forced to meet the proposed BSR's just to satisfy the wants of people who regularly jump at places like Perris, Eloy, and De Land. The only reasonable option, as I see it, is to allow each DZ to decide its own traffic patterns (which, to my knowledge, most already do.) Otherwise, we'll be forcing DZ's who are already operating completely safe landing patterns to change their patterns to match policies that will offer them no significant benefit in safety. Signatures are the new black.

Dang. Mad props, Bushman. If you keep going at it like this, you might wind up giving L&B a run for their customer-service-money. Signatures are the new black.

Echoing what everyone else said - you rock. After getting my 'A', I got a loaner rig from a friend who wasn't using it at the time - jumped it for the last 30 jumps or so, before finally getting my own gear. Can't tell you how much less I would have been jumping if not for his generosity. Once you're better, if you're ever out in SoCal, look me up - I'll buy you a jump just for being darn good-hearted and giving back to the sport. Get back on your feet soon! Signatures are the new black.

Even though chileanXaos has hopefully gotten his Micron by now, I've been waiting a loooooong time to post my rig to a "Post your ___" thread...so I'm gonna post it anyway. Gotta show it off. Almost-new V310, Skyhook, freefly handles, loaded. Fits me perfectly. Bummer is, it first arrived at my rigger's a little over a month ago...coincidentally, on the same day I broke both my wrists snowboarding. (I'll never cheat on you again, skydiving. Promise.) I'm finally healed up...and getting a repack now, so I can finally jump it next weekend. Darn excited. Just thought I'd share. No more borrowed gear! Yay! 'Skies! Signatures are the new black.

Forgive the long post, but I've been lurking here for a while, and it's finally time to chip in. I obviously don't have as much firsthand experience as the other posters with thousands more jumps...but at this point, it boils down to logic - something I know a lot about. Well if you happen to know where my dropzone is (I think its been posted on here) then maybe. Hey, Jarrett - I don't think he's threatening to sue you, but rather pointing out that liability affects us all. I can guarantee you that, were you to accidentally take out a tandem passenger with a premature deployment while backflying (God help us that you won't), it wouldn't matter if we knew where you jump, because their family would definitely know where your DZ is. Their family would easily find out that your name is Jarrett (it would be all over the police report, anyway). And that family's lawyer would undoubtedly look for skydiving information on the internet, where they would undoubtedly stumble upon a thread on a well-known skydiving BBS where the vast majority of experienced jumpers were telling you that backflying under a tandem was unsafe. If your actions were to lead to an innocent person's death after you had been warned about them - and especially if you had appeared to brush off the concerns in the discussion - it would undoubtedly be admissable in court. Because it shows that you knew the risks, and you scoffed at them. And that would be a gold mine for that particular lawyer. I think what most people on this thread are trying to say is this - your dad might not be 'in the right' on this one. What you're doing has the potential to be very dangerous. And there's no way you can eliminate that danger. Even by checking your gear. Rule #2: sh*t happens. I won't go into all the possibilities of how you could wind up having a premature deployment, even on a brand new rig, straight from the factory...because you probably know more ways than I can think of. You've got a lot more time in the air than I have. One thing that hasn't been said: Let's flip it around and do a cost/benefit analysis: what do you gain by backflying under a tandem? Not much, IMHO. Not to downplay your video, but I didn't think the backflying underneath added much - in fact, I thought it took away from the video. I agree with the above poster who points out that most tandem videos should be pretty boring for the vidiot. Why? Because they're not paying to see you fly all over the place and do kickass freefly moves and fancy camerawork. They're paying to see themselves, taking their first leap into an amazing sport. (It would be like hiring a videographer for a wedding who ran around getting shots of hot girls (occasionally catching the bride and groom), then edited it to a gnarly soundtrack of Nine Inch Nails and the Cure. Was it a good video? Well, it was well-edited and shot. But that's not the same as "good," in this case.) So what do you gain? Not much. OTOH, what does backflying under a tandem cost you? Nothing...unless something goes wrong. And if it goes wrong, here's the kicker: it's gonna go wrong BIG. To the tune of millions of dollars, bankruptcy, the probable loss of everything your family has worked for for a long time, possible jail time for manslaughter. Why? All because you took an unnecessary risk, after having been warned about it. And what did you gain from it? See above - not much. Nevermind all the other stuff - just think for a second about how it would feel knowing that your actions had led to the death of an innocent person. Say, somebody's wife? Somebody's mother? Somebody's daughter? And then add the stigma that you were warned about it previously, but laughed off the warnings and did it anyway? Wouldn't that be the worst situation in which to hear the words, "I told you so"? I'm not saying that any of that will happen. But it could. And the only way to ensure that it doesn't is to not backfly under tandems. The law doesn't say that you can't backfly under tandems. But it could one day say that, if you were to kill someone by doing it. We're a self-regulating sport right now...but if we start ignoring the responsibilities that go along with that (and if our negligence leads to innocent death), we stand to lose our freedoms pretty quick. The law also says very specific things about liability and negligence. Yes, but how about the tandem pax? They accepted the risk of the skydive - did they accept the extra risk that you added by doing something that lots of experienced jumpers warned against? Rule #1 - Kill yourself, but don't kill the innocents. --------- Anyway, man, I'm darn impressed by your jump numbers. Taking on a sport like this at your age, you're bound to have to work a little harder to gain acceptance, and to get as far as you have. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't occasionally bite your tongue, and quit working so hard to show your knowledge and skill. Especially when so many people's thinking is diametrically-opposed to yours. I think you should really open your mind and consider what these people are saying. Consider the alternatives, weigh your choices and the possible consequences...or maybe ask a tandem passenger to weigh the choices next time. Explain the risks, and how small you think they are, and why it will be better for them if you backfly under them. Somehow I think you'll have a hard time justifying that one. Good luck, KC Signatures are the new black.

Don't know about your area, but reading the posts, I thought I'd share my story. One DZ I jump at has a policy like Jerry81's DZ (see above) - if you bring in a group, they can either get the group rate discount or you can get the referral bonus. I called another DZ I've jumped at before, who told me they offer a free jump ticket for every tandem you bring...AND then listed out their group rates, which looked pretty good for 15 people. Needless to say, the first DZ lost out on 15 tandems. Granted, they would have made less money per tandem...but I think they would have come out ahead, given the number of people. Bummer for them (and I felt bad for a second, for taking the better offer...feels kinda "selfish," given that I know, contrary to popular belief, that most DZOs don't make a fortune in the business)...but ultimately, I decided I had to take the other offer. Everyone had a blast, for cheaper than the other DZ, and I got a reward for bringing them a couple of loads' worth of tandems. Ultimately, I suppose if you're gonna run a commercial DZ, you've gotta run it like a business...which means there are times when you're gonna have to choose when to cut your margins and compete. As long as you can do it profitably, of course. All capitalistic musings aside, if I ever do another group tandem outing, I'll be taking my friends to the place that scratches my back (and gives my friends the best value) while I'm scratching theirs. Signatures are the new black.

I voted for yes, but would have voted for no had I read the thread first. D'oh! Tom, your points (as usual) are well-thought-out, and well-taken. I especially like the idea about training with a rescue squad. Search & Rescue does all sorts of mock-up operations during training to simulate potential incidents they might be called in for...but I've never heard of anyone doing it for this sort of scenario. I think your suggestion makes a lot of sense. (Especially, as you mentioned, having seen how some of the rescue ops sims turn out due to lack of contingency plans...and knowing that most DZ's are located away from big metropolitan areas, where rescue personnel might be more trained for local "passenger-loaded airplane down" incidents). Practice definitely makes perfect...or at least gives a frame of reference, in case the "God Forbid" event ever actually does happen. Gonna have to talk to the DZO about that one... Signatures are the new black.

I thin that's an excellent idea. I've seen firsthand how much better the tunnel can make you fly...but I think you hit the nail on the head - it's all about confidence. First off, you may correct any stability issues you might have had if you hadn't flown the tunnel...secondly, if you're less worried about the stability issues in the first place, your jumps will go that much more smoothly. You'll be able to focus more clearly on the objectives, instead of worrying so much about them. Of course, that's just my 2 cents...but I think most of the people on this board will agree that flying a tunnel can't hurt. If you've got the financial resources to get some time in, I say go for it. Signatures are the new black.

Hey, Kit - At this point, I'm totally out of my league, so I'll step back & let those with much more experience answer your question. But I'll keep following the thread to see what you figure out. Best of luck. Blue skies, Kipp Signatures are the new black.

With 45 jumps you're ready to give advice on a canopy purchase? If you can open your mind you might learn something from others who actually have experience with these products. I'm impresses with what I've read here. Ah, yes. But then again, perhaps that's why he prefaced it by saying "It's been my experience" instead of saying, "I've been all over the world skydiving, flown all sorts of canopies, racked up X jumps, and this is what I think. Learn from me." The "in my experience" disclaimer sums it up quite nicely. For what it's worth, that's been my experience in the world of skydiving, too. Of course, my experience isn't all that much, but hey, from what I've seen from people buying certain containers/canopies that cost less and then realizing what they weren't capable of, it seems a valid point. That being said, I have little re: the Skylark stuff to add to this conversation myself...I, too, am enjoying the info, having never heard of the company before. I just found it funny that someone was chastising someone else who attempted to contribute about "opening their mind...". Seems very...close-minded. Signatures are the new black.

Hey, kpipes - First off, sorry to hear of your loss. Sounds like an excellent idea, provide ou can find someone who can do it safely. There are lots of different ways to transfer and image to another surface, from "analog" image/emulsion transfers to digital printing. The dilemma comes in, what's going to be the easiest way to do it without f***ing up the canopy fabric to the point it's unsafe. (Lines, etc, also cause a problem). That being the case, my recommendation would be to talk to the company that manufactured your canopy - tell them your situation, and ask what they'd recommend. Chances are, they have the most experience printing on their canopies...and most wll tell you if it's doable, or not, and can tell you what process to use. (Then you'll ust have to find someone who can print using that process, and get an estimate from them). Best of luck, KC Signatures are the new black.

I'll echo what everyone else has said - damn fine post, stratostar. I remember the first time that it really hit me, how cool the cameraderie of this sport is. When I had around 40 jumps (a ways back - injuries grounded me for a bit), a buddy of mine & I were down at Skydive San Diego for a day's jumping - first "road trip to another DZ"-kinda thing. End of the day, a guy named YoYo comes up to us and asks us if we ever track, and if we wanted to get in on a tracking dive for the next load. Having done a few tracking dives before, we said, "Sure." Then we asked, "By the way...how many people are gonna be on this thing?" "Meh...looks like 10, right now." (Bigger jump than either of us had done before). By the time we had dirt dived the exit in the mockup, the group had grown to 12. The load went up just before sunset, and the jump was awesome. Little bit of a funky exit, but then it formed up nicely. Flying back to the landing area and yelling out to the other canopy pilots...just a great thing. Interestingly enough, I had had my pre-second cutaway earlier that day...the guy who invited us on the jump was actually the rigger who had packed the reserve that saved me, IIRC. So given the earlier cutaway, to be pulled into a jump like that? It was a real confidence builder. To get a high-five from the people on the jump afterwards? Best feeling in the world. I think that was the day I realized what a big family our group of people is - and that I could find "home" at most DZ's, not just my "Home DZ." Like any family, I guess we have our share of dysfunctional moments, and our share of unappreciative/deadbeat relatives. But ultimately, it seems like we're all cut from the same cloth. From my limited perspective, it seems that the key is to remain humble...and remember where we came from, and that we were low-timers too, at one time. (Or in my case...I still am). Anyway, regardless, I'm looking forward to paying that jump forward, one of these days.... Signatures are the new black.

I'd also recommend paying with a credit card. Yep, the seller will probably incur some extra fees, and he/she may pass them on to you...but think of it as 'insurance'. Paypal itself doesn't give you much protection...and it certainly doesn't give you as much protection as you'll have if you put it on something plastic. Do it that way, and if something goes wrong, your credit card company will be darn sure that your (& their) interests are looked out for. Good luck! Signatures are the new black.

Indeed. True. But I'd trust an instrument more than my eyes, at this point...and I'd prefer not to break these eyes in on a 'trial by fire.' I mean, true, it's not like it's a life-and-death situation...or wait. Nevermind. It is. I don't think I ever recommended watching both altimeters. If the one on my wrist is working, great - I trust it. If for some reason it goes out (battery dies, whatnot - easy to see on a digital alti) at 9000 feet during a solo sitfly jump, forgive me if this is 60-jump naivete, but I'd rather have another backup altimeter up there to rely on, instead of dumping high, or spending the entire jump worrying about pulling too high or too low, then pulling when it *seems* right. Neither really floats my boat, when there's a much simpler solution in the form of the second altimeter that would otherwise be sitting in the gearbag. That way, I don't lose out on a whole jump because equipment went out...and I don't lose out on my life because I was trying to trust my eyes to tell me when I was too low, and found myself thinking, "not quite yet." That, to me, sounds idiotic. I'll train my eyes to know when I'm low by having an altimeter to measure my estimate against, thanks, rather than waiting for ground rush to set in. Sh!t happens with altimeters...I long ago learned not to rely on them too much, when 2 of my student jumps involved an alti needle getting stuck at around 6k-5.5k (not the best of altitudes for it to get stuck at, on a student jump). So I trust an altimeter about as far as I can drop it when standing firmly on the ground. But I trust 2 altimeters much more than I trust 1 altimeter and my eyes, at this point...and possibly anyday. Doesn't mean I'm not actively trying to get better at eyeballing altitude (useful skill to have, sure)...just means that, in the meantime, I find an instrument much more reliable. And this is my life we're talking about. Since when did eyeing the ground and deciding when to pull become safer than looking at an altimeter, anyway? Seems that in our training programs, we teach students exactly the opposite... Signatures are the new black.

contact the manufacturers with this info. they can give you the best answer on how they can build a container to fit your needs. This is what I was going to recommend. Or if you're looking for used gear - they can give you the size/model number of a rig that will best fit your needs (ultimately allowing for your planned downsizing), so you canstart scanning the classifieds on here. (You'll just have to be sure and ask the previous owner how big they are, to make sure the harness stands a chance of fitting you). That's what worked for me (building it piecemeal), and I wound up with a rig that has all the features I want (including a main and reserve that 'm darn happy with), and fits me beter than any I've ever jumped. (Of course, I can only say that from the ground, as the rig was finally completed 4 days after I broke both my wrists. But wearing it around the house, it's a darn good fit.) Signatures are the new black.

Hey, Eric - Just wanted to chime in, and add my vote to the 'bad battery' explanation. Had the same thing happen to me (though not right after replacing a battery - but the Neptune was less than a month old, at the time, so I assume the batts were fairly new). Changed it out, and everything has been working fine since. (Especially since I put my analog altimeter on a mudflap mount on my rig...) I'd say chalk it up to a bad batch of Duracells. And since I've now dealt with both a failing digital altimeter and a failing analog altimeter, I'd say throw in some redundancy by adding a backup altimeter. The mudflap mounts are awesome.

The same problems that RSLs fix. People not pulling the reserve in time after cutting away. But it does it faster. Dont get me wrong, I think it is an improvement on the RSL functionality wise. I still think it adds complexity to a system that works well when used in its simplest way: 2 handles. I really hope this doenst happen, but, with more and more rigs out there with Skyhooks, from RWS and others under license, we'll probably see instances where the skyhooks will cause an issue. Same as with RSLs. That doesnt mean they are bad add-ons, but they really arent the end all be all. Another low jump #-type here (so attach all aforementioned disclaimers - I have 1 cutaway, no RSL), but my research also shows that it also allows for a more consistently-clean deployment in situations where, say, you're spinning on your back. That sort of thing. Which is to say, there may be some benefits besides it just opening faster. As for the instances where the added complexity of Skyhooks might cause an issue, I'm sure we'll see an instance of it at some point. Human error will always be a factor. But statistically, to this point it's already been shown to save exponentially more lives than it's taken (well...sort-of. You can't calculate a power of 0 that isn't 0, right? Argh. Math.) Be that as it may, I completely agree with what you said: it isn't the end-all-be-all, and should not be relied upon any more than a standard RSL or a Cypres. If you listen to the Skydive Radio episode with the Bill Booth Q&A on the issue (I think is was #16-17 or so), he talks a little bit about the complexity issue, and why he waited so long to license it. (Or perhaps Bill would care to comment on it again here? Somehow I doubt it, as he's already addressed most of these concerns in previous posts.) Ultimately, when all's said & done, for my money (& life) I'd rather have a reserve open in 100 feet than one in 400 feet. No matter how high up you are, more time under your reserve gives you a better chance of fixing any issues. It's not really an expensive option, overall...and if I trust my rigger to inspect my gear, install a Cypres and repack my reserve, I'm pretty confident trusting him to pack it safely. For me, the benefits far outweigh the detriments. To each their own, though. Signatures are the new black.

An instructor/rigger would be able to answer this better than me, but it's my understanding that it's an option on ripcord-based (spring-loaded PC) student rigs (as you surmised). That way, the primary or the secondary JM can pull for the student if the student doesn't. At least, that's the way it was on the student rigs where I trained. Not sure how many places use a spring-loaded PC versus how many use a hand-deployed system on their student rigs these days...but I don't think it's uncommon on ripcord-based student rigs. If you look at the Vector SE ads in Paragear (don't have a copy handy, at the moment, to scan), you'll see that they offer (or at least at one point offered) a dual ripcord system, similar to the one in the photo. Now that I've rambled on about that...anyone who's an instructor or a rigger want to comment/add/dispute? Signatures are the new black.

Not to mention that if you do the "quit your job and live in a camper at the DZ" thing, you're gonna really NEED that 401k a lot more one day than you do now.