brettski74

Peace of mind from what? If it's not the safety of the older gear that you question then what is it? Fashion? Style?

I never said there wasn't. What I was getting at is you shouldn't think that just because something is x years old, it's no longer useful. Retire a harness because it's webbing is worn and the hardware slips under load. Also not disagreeing with you there. I *have* a shiny new rig, *because* I think it's better. But my rig being better does not make me better. It also doesn't it make me safer unless I understand how it works, it's limitations, how to use it and exercise safe practices while doing so. The thrust of the one of the posts of the user to whom I replied was saying that new innovations are generally always *safer*, not just *better*. Canopies like the competition velocity and samurai encapsulate some of the latest knowledge and innovation in high performance canopy design, but I have no business under either and buying one would not make me or those around me any safer. Even advances that may have a safety benefit can backfire if not used correctly (eg. magnetic riser covers closed with the risers between the magnets) or outside of their designed operational range (eg. swooping incidents with the CYPRES from several years ago). And therein lies the reason to retire such a canopy. Sure - it may be an older design, but you'd retire such a canopy because it is hard to land. It has nothing to do with how old the canopy is. A shiny new Micro Raven made today from the original design and out of similar fabric would still have similar crappy landing characteristics, but it's brand new and flies worse than an 8 year old PDR. That's pretty much my point - well that, and make your gear retirement decisions on functional criteria that matter.

You are interpreting it wrong. When you get down to it, fear of old gear is just not rational. There are plenty of people out there jumping gear much older than 7 years. My first rig was 14 years old when I bought it and in great condition. I put 200 jumps on it and still keep it around as a backup and would (and have) jump it again if I have the need. You've stated that you wouldn't jump gear more than 7 years old and also gone on to elaborate that you feel this is a safety issue. I'm sorry, but the statistics just don't back that up. Gear failure just doesn't figure that highly into morbidity and mortality statistics for skydiving. By far, most injuries and deaths are caused by user error. Failure of the gear itself barely rates a blip. As far as the new innovations being safer point, that's not necessarily so, either. Magnetic riser covers... I've seen more than a couple closed incorrectly so that they're more likely to come open in a fast head-down attitude. That doesn't sound safer to me. Many of the latest innovations in canopy design have been about how to build better and better swooping machines, while swooping is the discipline associated with a disproportionately large share of injuries and fatalities in the sport. If you want to be safe, learn. Improve your skills. Learn about why we do things the way we do and know your gear, how it works and what it's limitations are. A shiny new rig won't save you if you're a clueless git in the sky and saying that you won't jump gear more than 7 years old because of safety is just irrational gear fear. Inspect it regularly and maintain it as per manufacturers recommendations, but to toss out a perfectly airworthy rig because it's passed some arbitrary milestone in your head is just silly.

Are you referring to the Mr Bill landed at WFFC, or something entirely different? I'll admit that I didn't think of that, however, the scenario painted by the following sentences was one of a double mal and someone swooping in grabbing them, deploying and landing them both alive. Are you saying that this has happened without any kind of special harness involved?

Ever seen one deployed at terminal? I've not heard of anyone holding on at terminal. Most that I've heard of are deployed within a few seconds of exit. I didn't think of the infamous Mr Bill landing at WFFC a few years back. I guess that could fulfill the requirements of the first sentence. In the case where it was unplanned and someone had a double mal, it's unlikely that someone could get to them in time or hold on to them during a terminal deployment.

No.

Trying to deduce the flight characteristics of a canopy from its name is not a great idea. A better approach might be to read the manufacturers information and recommendations for the canopy. An even better idea would be to discuss your gear selections with your instructors. A Sabre2 is a good entry level canopy at lower wing loadings and may be a very good choice for you. A Stiletto is a fully elliptical canopy and may not be a good choice for you at any wing loading at your current jump numbers, but I'm saying this with no knowledge of your current skills and abilities. Why? There's no rule that says you have to downsize. If you want to keep flying your Sabre2 190 until your 80 years old and done 25000 jumps, go for it. If, on the other hand, you get bored with your canopy, have the requisite skills and experience and you decide you want something a little more zippy, then by all means downsize away. Also, for future reference, crossposting in multiple forums is generally frowned upon.

What do you mean? Even your whuffo friends can line up behind the beer line and watch your mad swoops. Seems pretty social to me. Sky surfing is just you and perhaps a video guy and the only way you can share it with a few more friends is to show them some video at the end of the day. It also has that annoying board strapped to your feet that gets in yours and everybody else's way inside the plane.

Got the quote for the custom cable - $75 including international shipping. $60 for the cable alone. They also pointed me to one of their stock parts which is almost exactly what I asked for. Only problem if that the right-angled firewire plug turns the wrong way - towards the LANC port. Not sure how much clearance I need beside the firewire plug but I suspect that the 0.5 inches from the edge of the firewire port to the edge of the Hypeye plug may not be sufficient. Based on the image, it looks like I'd need about twice that space. For those with different port positioning, however, it could be a useful part for $25.

What about JOE? Jumpers Over Eighty? Admittedly JOE is a much smaller group, but they exist and there is enough of them to want to have a group, so...

Actually, that's not a bad point. I could almost do that now. I'd just need to elongate the hole I drilled for my Hypeye cable. I guess I got a little carried away by "cool gadget" thinking to see the obvious simpler solution. Actually - just looked again. It's probably more like $75, but still pretty cheap for a custom cable. The right angle connectors are standard cable ends. I imagine a custom end would cost a lot more. Check it out.

I have a Rawa helmet with an HC40 in it. One mildly annoying point about this setup is that in order to plug in a firewire cable to download footage after each jump, I need to unscrew the bolt that holds the box closed and turn the camera around since the firewire port and other ports face inwards. I do this after each jump to download the footage onto a DVD recorder with an inbuilt HDD. The DVD recorder can control the camcorder over the firewire cable, so there's no real need to open the camera box except to get at the firewire port. It would be much more convenient if I only needed to do this at the end of the day to replace a tape or battery. I was thinking that if I could find a short firewire extension cable with a right-angled male firewire plug on one end and a female plug on the other end, I could build that into my helmet so I wouldn't need to do this all day after each jump. I could just plug into my helmet, without any need to remove the camera. Has anyone else set up a camera helmet like this? If so, what cable did you use, where did you get it and how much did it cost? I have found a few places on the internet that can customer build me a cable like this. At one place, the information they had suggested that they could build a single cable like this for about $60. Per unit prices come down once you are ordering more than 10 units, which raises another question. Does anyone think that these kind of cables might be popular enough amongst skydiving videographers to warrant doing a larger run?

Dropzone.com says you've only done 99 jumps! This advice probably comes too late, now, but keep a copy of your logbook if you value it. I scan mine and keep a backup copy in case of hard drive failure. Once you go for your C licence, you will have to send it in to CSPA and they will verify your requirements there. Start keeping a copy now and you won't have so much to copy when you have to trust it to Canada Post.

I fixed it for you and perhaps that explains it.

Really? A step through is not something you can land. I suspect you're talking about a flip through. A step through is called such because one way to create this type of entanglement is to step through the lines on one side while picking up your canopy after landing. There are five different types of step through. A flip through - particularly if below the slider - will often deploy stable and may well fly normally and land perfectly fine. In such a case, you would see a complete 360 degree twist in your front and back risers on both left and right sides. A flip through is so called because one way to create it (and also fix it) is to simply flip your rig through the lines while it's laid out on the floor. There are two types of flip through (above and below slider). What you had here is a step through between the risers, below the slider. Look at the way that one of your left risers is wrapped around the outside of both right risers and the other left riser is going straight up. There is nothing you can do to fix this in the air. On the ground, you would flip the rig through in between the front and rear risers on the left. While it's not impossible (maybe you're an acrobat in your "real" job), it's extremely improbable that you will be able to do this in the air. I would suggest that you sit in on a packing course again. Pay particular attention to the sections on the different types of entanglements and how to deal with them. Not only might this help you pack better, it may also help you recognize different types of entanglements in the air so you don't waste time and altitude trying to fix something that you will not be able to fix.

As others have said, Nationals are on at Burnaby during August 3-8. I notice from your profile that you're a student jumper, although I'm assuming that you have reached self-supervised status? It would be handy if you could have your A licence by the time you come over. There should be a lot of jumps going on during that week, but if you're in need of coaches or instructors, I'm not sure whether there will be a lot of availability, since most people there will be there for competition, not work. The other dropzones in the area with turbine aircraft are Parachute School of Toronto (PST) north of Toronto up highway 404, and Skydive Toronto Inc (STI) north of Toronto up highway 400. They are both closer to Toronto than Burnaby and both have Caravans, however, as is true of all dropzones in the Toronto general area, most jumping is on the weekend, so you may have trouble getting jumps there during the week. Call ahead. If you're there August 3-8, then Burnaby is your best bet for weekday jumping - just be aware that there may be limited or no coaching or instruction available. As far as accommodation is concerned at Burnaby, you'll need to camp, which is free, or find yourself a local motel which will probably be something in the range of $40-60 per night. Not sure about PST or STI. I assume they also have free camping. Not sure whether they have a bunkhouse or anything else available.

The general concern with a camera helmet - particularly a side-mounted camera - and an RSL is that the camera and it's associated bits and pieces are a potential snag point and that in the event of a snag happening during cutaway, you probably want the chance to clear it before you pull your reserve. Having an RSL hooked up means that it could deploy your reserve while the left side riser is still snagged on your camera.

No. Subsequent waves pull higher. The first wave has the farthest to go, so they want to maximise the time they have to track, so they leave first and open lowest. Subsequent waves are fewer people and need to make room for even fewer people behind them, so they track less and open higher. I'm not Canadian. I just live here. Low pull contest? Let me save us both a jump ticket. You win.

The search function is your friend. This has been discussed many times before, so there's a lot of opinions out there for you to read already.

Yes. It's a safety issue. Opening too high can be just as bad or even worse than opening too low - especially when there are 100 other canopies opening all around you.

I'm not a dealer, nor have I ever been, so take my comments in that light... Given the risk you're taking on with such an odd order, I think a higher deposit is warranted and easily justifiable if you explain it to the customer that way. Another point about collecting a larger deposit is it shows a certain level of seriousness from the customer and their ability to pay the sums of money that may be required. It also provides a higher level of commitment from the customer. I'll care a lot more about losing a $3000 deposit than I will a $300 deposit. It would motivate me to make sure I find the final payment when it's due. As far as reporting these people, have you thought of using credit bureaus? There are "international" credit bureaus, now. I don't know how extensive their coverage is, but I would expect that it would cover at least most of the G20 nations and probably more. I know my mortgage broker can pull mine for about US$55. If someone has a poor credit report, it's higher risk for you, so ask for a higher deposit or even full payment up front if it's bad enough. As far as reporting late or non-payers, the same thing could apply. You may be able to get set up as a credit provider reporting into the bureaus, or failing that, you may be able to work with either a finance company up front - think 6 months no payment no interest type deal - or work with a collection agency after the fact to collect the debt. Either of these will already be set up to do credit reporting. Obviously there will be fees involved with this, though, which may affect your competitiveness if other dealers aren't doing it. This is just a thought, but it will probably be safer as I'm not sure, but maintaining our own list of bad payers may involve privacy (ie. legal) issues and someone is going to have to spend the time and probably money in maintaining it. Using established credit bureaus for this avoids any potential legal problems for you and the hassle of maintaining the list and the systems for reporting into it and retrieving information. The established credit bureaus also cover a wider range of commerce than just skydiving gear sales, so you'll know about people with a history of bad payments before they ever try to buy gear.

I've been to dropzones where opening above 3500' is considered a high opening. About the only people I see deploying at 4000' or above are students and novices (ie. pre A licence). 3000' might be more "normal". When I'm doing 4-way, we break off at 4000' and deploy at around 2500-3000'. On a bigway, the first wave break off is probably required to deploy no higher than 2500'. Hard deck for deploying your main for B, C and D licence holders in Canada is 2200'. I believe that it is similar in the USA and other places. If there's a chance that it doesn't need to fire, it should not fire. The AAD only knows what the barometric pressure sensor tells it, and from that it deduces what it thinks your altitude and vertical descent rate are. If you're descending at freefall speeds at 1200', the AAD doesn't know whether this is because you're unconscious, having a brain mal, or fighting to get your left riser to release after a baglock. It's not just a two out that you should be concerned about. I'd be more worried about it firing your last chance at survival into a ball of shit that you haven't had time to clear, yet. Aside from that, if you really wanted to have a CYPRES fire higher than normal, you could make it happen by setting an offset, but I wouldn't recommend it for the reasons mentioned above.

The FAA has no jurisdiction in Australia. That's a difference. How do you know that there's not some other arrangement for dealing with old reserves, such as perhaps a local agent that is set up and able to do the recertification?

No. You were right the first time. This might work great in the movies, but in the real world, this is not plausible even if it may seem remotely possible. You won't be able to hold on at opening shock. If somehow you do, you'll probably exceed the maximum loading of the canopy and thereby damage the canopy beyond its ability to fly. All of this assumes that there's not a malfunctioning reserve ball of shit to foul up the lines of the "good canopy" and make it "not good" - he did say it was a double mal... Need I go on?

Because they don't know any better. There are many examples of stand up landings that have much room for improvement. If done well, shows some understanding of canopy control principles required for landing in the current conditions and provides a minimum risk of landing injury. Late flare. Incomplete flare. No flare. Very early flare. Over-flare (pops up). Basically anything not good. Complete flare, started at an appropriate height, held until on the ground and stopped and canopy planes out level with the ground and with feet just touching or within a couple inches of the ground. Accuracy is nice, too. I'm a coach. It depends on what they need to work on. Keep it simple. Tell them what's good. One or two points for improvement. Fix what's broken. Don't mess with what's working. When you can't stand up the landing due to either poor form in your landing (eg. flare too high, too low, not to completion), unforseen conditions (eg. turbulence) or conditions you shouldn't be jumping in in the first place or a combination of any of the above.