LloydDobbler

Hey, Ruddman (& all the others who asked about the pump) - Yep, I wear a Minimed pump. Have dealt with Type 1 for 17 years now. I only switched to the pump about 4 years ago...and now that I'm on it, I'm amazed I let my reservations about being "tethered" to something keep me from doing it for this long. (For those of you considering the pump, here was my reasoning: if you're doing a basal of Lantus or Ultralente in the AM and counting carbs to dose with Huma-/Novalog/Regular through the day, you're already working the same way you would with a pump. That's the way it was for me - and as a habitual snacker who prefers to work at night, getting the pump just eliminated the need for 5-7 injections a day, and allowed me to keep some odd hours. For those of you on the classic method of NPH and Regular, if you get the pump, you'll be amazed at how much better you feel, how many fewer lows you have, and how much more freedom you have. It's an amazing machine...in spite of its minor annoyances, the good far outweighs the bad.) As for jumping with the pump, here's my procedure: I always do a test before I jump on a load, just to be sure. I won't jump if it's below 90 (especially if I know conditions are ripe for it going lower, like if I haven't eaten something in a while) - if it IS at 90, I pop a few glucotabs before gearing up (4g of carbs/glucotab means that for me, 2 tabs will raise my BS by 20 mg/dL. With the pump, I can be that precise about it). Nonetheless, I always keep a vial of glucotabs in my jumpsuit pocket, just in case something goes wrong. Interestingly enough, sometimes I test after a jump, and find that my BS has spiked - anyone else notice that happening? I think the additional hormones in my system from jumping (epinephrine, anyone?) might be upping my levels. But that's only sometimes - I haven't isolated the conditions that lead to it yet (think it might have something to do with having carbs within an hour before going up, and the hormones in some way preventing insulin absorbtion). Nonetheless, if forced to choose, I'd certainly rather be high than low when I'm jumping. Depending on how stable my BS has been all day, on rare occasions I'll disconnect the pump when getting on a load - the pump gives me the flexibility to do that - but usually I just leave it connected, and make sure it doesn't get in the way of any straps. And again, I'll only disconnect if I have a good reason (flying in shorts on a hot day, for instance), if my BS has been stable, and I haven't introduced any variables that might upset the balance. Anyway, as I said, the pump has given me far more flexibility than I had without it. I never liked the idea of it...but since getting it, just the ability to not have to take time out after each meal to prep an injection is wonderful. That's my pump experience - anyone else? Signatures are the new black.

Excellent point. The man speaks the truth. Come to think of it, maybe I've just been lucky, since my best jumping bud happens to be a hot girl... I'll take what I can get. Signatures are the new black.

This is priceless. Sigh...if only I got a vote...I can hear it over the intercom now. Signatures are the new black.

Krisanne - that's one of the best explanations for the beer rules I've heard. Well said. MJJ, don't get hung up on the "rules" aspect of it all...like K suggested, think of it as contributing to the community, rather than "owing" something. You'll find that once you're off student status (and sometimes during), some of the most important lessons (not to mention, the best stories) come from the bonfire. You get out of it what you put into it. Signatures are the new black.

Was just discussing this today with someone, interestingly enough...we ultimately came to 2 points: 1) Between sex and skydiving as a whole, it's apples to oranges. Both are good. Alternating works fine. OTOH, 2) You know that moment after you've just had a kickass jump, and you get under a good solid canopy? Your heart's pumping, you've got a big ole' grin on your face, and tghe world just went from pure adrenaline to the pure, silent peace of canopy flight? Comparing that to the moment AFTER sex (cigarette, anyone?), we decided that skydiving wins out. Maybe it's that the 'glow' just lasts a little longer... Signatures are the new black.

Yep...and up at Cal City, most people are cool/laid-back enough that they'll jump with people just off student status. Look me up, if you're ever up that way. Not that I have all that much more experience, but once you get your A, we can at least get in a few and see what we can come up with. Signatures are the new black.

Not to get into the fray of the Racers-being-ugly discussion...I jump a 2003 Vector 3, with Skyhook. Or at least, I will jump it, once my broken wrists heal from a snowboarding accident that happened the day before it arrived at my rigger's... Remind me again which sport is unsafe? As to why I (will) jump it: Why? 1) It fits me like a glove. 2) It has all the features I was looking for (including a skyhook) at a really sweet price. 3) I, too, think that more $ given to Bill Booth will ultimately contribute to the sport. Even if I'm not giving it directly to him, I figure I'm contributing to mindshare by jumping a used one of his rigs. 4) Because I said "Vectors are ugly" the day before I found this rig, and it proved me wrong. Signatures are the new black.

I think in this case with or without the weight west is the right question. Actually, for the record, my original question (which I would consider the "right" question) was regarding downsizing a canopy to invoke higher wing-loading. Or is that what you're saying - that the answer changes depending on whether we're talking about flying on the same canopy with weights, or downsizing to a smaller version of the same canopy to increase the W/L? If that's what you mean, I agree. That is the question. Regardless, the discussion has been darn educational, folks. I've learned a lot (which isn't difficult, at this stage in my jumping career). Thanks again for everyone's contributions.

I agree, a BSR that just says, don't swoop in traffic, won't accomplish anything if DZOs don't enforce it. But a BSR (NW) that directs DZs to segment their traffic will result in change. Just to clarify, by 'segment their traffic,' do you mean 'separate their landing areas,' or do you mean 'bar swoopers from initiating HPL's into SLP traffic'? If it's the former, as I mentioned before, part of that change you speak of is that small DZ's, with canopy pilots operating safely (i.e. swoopers being the first ones down, and after the first person enters the SLP, the swooping stops - catch it on the next load), will be restricted for no good reason. I'll say it again - one size does not fit all. All DZ's don't operate the same way as Eloy or Perris. Signatures are the new black.

Great example, Rob - thanks for providing a concrete illustration. To complete the analogy (so I'll be able to better discuss it when the question arises), back to my original question - what if you hung those two identical twins under the exact same model canopy, except one was a 150, and the other was a 135 (or a 210 and a 190 - basically, one size smaller)? In theory, the glide ratio would stay close to the same on a no-wind day, but the twin under the smaller canopy would get down faster, correct? (And, as discussed earlier, if it was a windy day, they'd have more penetration into the wind due to increased forward speed)? Signatures are the new black.

Oops. I stand corrected. Got interrupted from reading by a quick meeting, and must've read the wrong one, thinking it was #3. Change my vote to #3. I like the sound of that. Obviously, even if one DZ is different from another one, we all benefit when there are established rules and everyone is made aware. I would agree that that's a given. Thanks for clarifying (& for including that option), Bill. Signatures are the new black.

Like DSE, I applaud you all for taking some action. I'll just add my two cents, as the only way to get something good is going to be to discuss all the different "what if's." First and foremost, I'm inclined to be cautious about implementing a BSR, for one reason (the same reason why I often have issues with the government overstepping its bounds) - that which works for one DZ may not work for another DZ. The question of local control versus national control, and the benefits and detriments of each, need to be considered. (For what it's worth, if we are to implement a BSR on landing patterns, I find option #2 to be the best of the above). Here's why: One of the DZ's I jump at, for instance, has a number of turbine aircraft, and at any given time of day, there always seems to be a load on jump run, and a load under canopy. This DZ has a separate, HP landing area, and I applaud them for that. It only makes sense, given the perpetually-busy sky. Another turbine DZ I jump at has a single plane that rarely (if ever) runs in tandem with another plane. The result being, even on a full Otter load, one almost always knows who's in the sky. This DZ lands tandems at the student target, and camera flyers for tandems are usually the first ones down so they can video landings. (There is an alternate "experienced" landing area as well, and many people opt for that one.) It would hardly seem fair to make someone flying camera with 5000+ jumps give up on a swoop in an open landing area (meaning, no one's touched down there yet), just because they were landing at the student target to capture the moment a tandem's toes touched down. Sure, they could fly in a nice SLP approach...but if they're being aware and safe, and if they know they'll be the first ones to the ground before others even enter the pattern, I don't support them being restricted from swooping. Let's not criminalize that which is not outwardly dangerous. If they were taking that same approach at the other DZ I mentioned, however, it would in fact be more dangerous, because a student from the previous load might still be in the air, for instance. But at the single-plane DZ (and, say, Cessna DZ's), it doesn't make much sense to force separate landing areas, when a good, solid head and some safety-conscious thought is what's needed the most. Personally, I think the best answer is to implement local guidelines/requirements (rather than BSR's) to encourage safety. DON'T pull a swoop in these conditions - if so, you'll be grounded. Swoopers allowed in this area only. That sort of thing...whatever works for that particular DZ. Laying blanket restrictions on everyone who's already safety-conscious, just because someone in a completely different situation, at a completely different DZ made a bad call smacks of a knee-jerk reaction. I'm a nut about safety at the DZ. But let's not forget - we don't all jump regularly at Perris or DeLand. Dropzones are different, and all too often, one size does not fit all. I think those at smaller DZ's should be particularly cognizant of any attempts to change the BSR's in this manner, for that reason. I hope we have the foresight to find a good solution to this growing problem without overstepping our bounds as a knee-jerk reaction to the unfortunate loss of Bob and Danny. KC Signatures are the new black.

'twardo, as usual, speaking loads of wisdom. LG, you'd be wise to listen to him. I just wanted to second what he said - it's supposed to be fun. Don't beat yourself up about it. I think going to the DZ to hang out would be a great idea - the lifestyle and ambiance being such a big part of the sport, it'll definitely give you something to focus on besides the fear. It's really interesting, the pressure we put on ourselves. Fear is a totally natural part of the process - and it's something that you'll have to come to terms with, if you keep doing this (Brian Germain's book, "Transcending Fear," is a good palce to start, BTW). Ready for the analogy? A'ight then: my g/f has been taking the--shall we say--"scenic route" through AFF, due to some health issues, changing DZ's, and getting un-current associated with both of those events. Along the way she's had a hard pull, an off-site landing (bad spot), and an unstable deployment - all of which gave her pause. She's always been SO scared when going to the DZ, up until she's finally out the door - and yet in spite of knowing she'll be scared, she really wants to go jump. I've told her that if she wants to do this, she has to do it for her - not because of any expectations she thinks others are putting on her, not for me, not for any other reason than she wants to. And she has wanted to - she's just been scared. Today, she called me as she was planning to go to the DZ to do her AFF-6, and told me that she dreamed about skydiving last night, and it actually made her feel peaceful, instead of nervous, as it always has before. That feeling carried on into today - work has been stressful, but just the thought of being in the air now calms her down. We talked about it more, and I eventually realized that her fear seems to be giving way to something else (very important): confidence. After 10 jumps and about 30 minutes in the wind tunnel, she's finally coming to trust her own abilities - whether it's to get out of a funky situation, or just to fly well. Confidence is key. (And this is in spite of my seeing her fly in the tunnel and realizing how much better she is than I was at that jump level. She has every reason to be confident in her abilities...but that's the thing. I guess we all get to that point in our own time. It cannot, and should not, be rushed. Took me a while, and there are still times when I'm a little freaked out by the whole thing. Of course, I'm still relatively new to this myself...)(. I think, for the most part, confidence comes with experienc). That first time you kick out of line twists, before it happens, they seem a little daunting. After it happens, they're not such a fear anymore. So I guess it might help to isolate - what are you afraid of? Then you can figure out what you need to do to prepare to conquer that fear. Something going wrong, and you not being able to handle it? - Practice your EP's. Then practice 'em again. Going unstable during the dive? Level 6 is usually about getting unstable, anyway (depending where you are - talk to your instructors), so you'd best be ready for that. If you want to trust your flying capabilities more, go spend some time in a tunnel. Fear is natural with this sport. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. It's all about figuring out what cocktail of techniques will allow you to best conquer it, until you get to the point that you trust yourself to handle anything that's thrown at you. (And even then, that toolbox of techniques will come in handy, from time to time...). Best of luck, KC Signatures are the new black.

So there I was - Friday the 13th, set to go down to the DZ with my g/f, who needed to get current again (I, OTOH, just needed to jump). Unfortunately, crappy weather rolled in that day, 3000' ceilings...so we decided to hit the mountain instead. Day 6 of snowboarding for me. Last run of the day, after getting cut off by two skier girls and going down hard on my bad knee at the top of the mountain, I proceed to get almost to the bottom of the hill, where I catch an edge and go down hard on my back. And we're not talking a nice, glorious cartwheel-of-a-crash. Oh, no. Not this guy. We're talking the most unglamorous, lamest of falls one could ever have. My pride is only now starting to recover. AND I sprained both my wrists in the process. So I came home & finished purchasing the used container and reserve I've been looking at (which will require me to buy beer as soon as I jump it, as I've been jumping borrowed gear all this time). This is momentous. This is HUGE. The rig is glorious - Vector3, 2003, 50 jumps on it. Fits me like it was made for me. I'm damn excited. I begin setting up demos for mains. ...Fast-forward to today, when (since the wrist is still hurting), I go in to the doc and discover that yeah - you guessed it - I've been walking around for two weeks with a right wrist that's fractured in 2 places. So here I am. New rig (well, new to me) waiting on me up at the DZ. The weather is finally beautiful again - supposed to be in the 80's all weekend. And I'm grounded for probably a month (at a minimum!!) Yep. This really sucks. So I just had to gripe about it. Thanks for commiserating. Signatures are the new black.

Ah-ha! Yes, I think you hit on it. That distinction is what's been giving me the headache.

Okay, folks. I know I've grasped this concept before, but for some reason my mind isn't zipped up right today and it's eluding me here at the office as I ponder some things...(and where I don't have a copy of Brian Germain's book lying around for reference...). So, specifically, here's the Q: Say I weigh 170 out the door, flying a Sabre2-170 at 1:1. Then I downsize to a Sabre2-150 (or any canopy, really...key being, it's the same canopy model, so as to remain constant). Still weighing the same, I'm now at a W/L of 1.13:1. What effect is the different w/l going to have on the glide angle of the canopy? Better penetration? Steeper descent? In my mind right now it seems to make sense that a higher-loaded canopy would sink more...but then again, it also seems to make sense that you'd get better penetration and airspeed would increase. Can someone give me a quick, easy answer to this question so I can free up my mind from thinking about it today? For some reason it's just not coming to me right now. Maybe it's that I've spent 4 hours staring at Excel. Ugh. I need to be in the sky....

I think you're again missing the point. When you get right down to it, that seems to be the underlying question behind her original post: should there perhaps be a "time in sport" requirement for more than just the tandem rating? I think in this case, it all depends. They could be on equal playing level. Skill-wise, the 800-jump person might be ahead...but there are undoubtedly some things the less-frequent, in-it-for-the-long-haul jumper has learned just from being there for that long. (I guess what I'm trying to say is, the question is a bit too vague). I think what the discussion above is trying to get at is that jump numbers don't necessarily provide the only relevant experience metrics. Sure, they can be a good indicator...but I still think there's a lot to be learned from being there, seeing what others have gone through, soaking in the lessons that come with time. Vague? Yes. But nonetheless, it has an effect. (And really - aren't jump numbers a bit vague, when you get right down to it? If someone made 200 jumps, then started exclusively flying wingsuits for 800 jumps, I don't think I'd consider them a great all-around skydiver based on their 1000 jumps alone. We can come up with a million devil's advocate scenarios like that, arguing either side.) And even if a person's been focusing on less-specialized stuff and knocking out 800 jumps in a year, I still don't think you can equate jump numbers alone with skill as a skydiver...or at least, equate it with the know-how to get oneself out of infrequent, tricky situations. I've seen it with my own eyes. I guess my main thought is that there are lots of variables affecting how good a skydiver one becomes, ranging from jump numbers to amount of coaching received to wind tunnel time to years in the sport...perhaps we should consider more than one of them when judging the aptitude of a jumper. Jump numbers can tell you a lot...but I'm convinced the other stuff has a definite effect on one's aptitude, too. Signatures are the new black.

Yup, I agree. Could be. On the other hand, I've also met a couple of skydivers going down that route (500+ jumps in their 1st year) who perfectly illustrate the anecdote about being able to throw a rock out of a plane 500 times...(and yet it still being a rock). I say the wiser, more seasoned jumpers are probably a good indicator. Most appreciate a younger jumper with talent, but get really annoyed with a younger jumper with a big ego that he can't back up. If they fly with him and think him good, he's probably good. If they fly with him and think him lousy, then hopefully they'll try and shrink his head down a little bit...for his sake & everybody else's. Signatures are the new black.

Thats 30. Add to the list: Skydive California City - 1 (with the snub nose, IIRC, I should add) Skydive San Diego - 1 That should take care of SoCal...anyone wanna chime in with the other FL DZ's? Signatures are the new black.

We do skydiving movie nights from time to time at my place, so I've been lucky enough to leech off the skydiving pals' collections & see some really good stuff. My top dvd's: - Crosswind. Some of the best cinematography of any skydiving movie I've seen. Put together really really well. Has a little bit of everything. - Soul Flyers. Just for sheer WTF? value, this one ranks right up there. Again, a bit of everything. Some really cool visuals. And of course the great/famous wingsuit swoop. - Good Stuff. Like everyone says, it's awesome. (& inexpensive!) I'd also echo the recs for Chronicle 3 (freeflying), Airspeed (great doc, also sheds some light onto the competition scene if you don't know much about it), and Parabatix (canopy flight, swooping). I actually find the PD Factory Team DVD more visually-stimulating and fun to watch than Parabatix, but problem is, it's too darn short!!!!! (Are you LISTENING, PD?) I also think the FlyBoyz Party Mix goes better if you've had some sort of, how shall we say, "external sensory stimulation" before viewing...otherwise, I find myself yawning. For freeflying, a number of my friends say the new DVD 'The Remedy' is pretty rad, too. For RW, there's also a video floating around somewhere of the Golden Knights demonstrating all the standard RW blocks and transitions that's pretty informative. Signatures are the new black.

And though I love the bit about the reserve 'A' license , I just wanted to add something that probably needs to be said (though it's almost always said after a cutaway, I think it's deservedly so): Tonto, congrats on saving your life...(again)

I don't have a Mindwarp to compare with, but I have put an audible in my Allsport and tried it out on the ground (I'll get to jump it tomorrow). On the outside of the main foam pad in the ear pieces are two thinner pieces of foam with rectangular cutouts. The audible fits into the cutout, so it doesn't create a bump in the ear piece. I can barely tell it's there, and only because it feels a tad different than the other side, not because it is uncomfortable. It is such a small difference that I am only aware of it if I think about it. If I ignore it I don't notice it at all. It is quite comfortable with the audible in place. Same thing with two audibles, it feels just a tiny bit different and is quite comfortable. BTW I am trying this with a ProTrack and a ProDytter. I'll try it with others on the weekend if I can find any to borrow, but I think my DZ is mainly a ProTrack crowd. Thanks, Brian! Yeah, that's my only hesitation in grabbing an All-Sport now: that the Mindwarp and Guner are SO darn comfortable.

Both sides are flat. It is completely symmetrical. Got my All-Sport for Christmas - 1 bake and it fits like a glove! I also can't wait to try it out. Yeah, that's what I had thought...and Bonehead confirmed it via email last week. Looks like you've got a Mindwarp, Jarrett (see above conversation). So the real question from me is: ...is it as comfortable as the Mindwarp when you pop an audible in it? Anyone done a side-by-side comparison? Signatures are the new black.

That sounds about right. Maybe 11 by 8 feet. I was in the chamber during construction, and it's interesting. Single door (to add in efficiency - so tunnel instructor doesn't have to keep bouncing back and forth to bring people in). Oblong/oval shape. All transparent (which is really cool). Up high it expands and gets a little wider, whereas down at the bottom (entrance/exit) it tapers off. My impression was that you can probably fly two people in there, side to side on their bellies, without an issue. There's no way you're gonna get a 4-way team in there, though - it's wide enough, but not deep enough. I'm also fairly certain that 1 person can do head down or sitflying in the chamber. But I probably wouldn't put more than 1 in there, just because there won't be enough room to really safely maneuver. As far as speed is concerned, I've been told it can handle higher airspeeds, so sitflying and head down shouldn't be a problem (I mean, come on - the TI's have to be able to do their rad demo, right?). Signatures are the new black.

Well said.