brettski74

This happened to me on jump 32. I managed to get it out before my decision altitude, but it certainly took me by surprise. I spent jump 33 practising several different ways to potentially resolve this situation should it happen again. My guess is that for one reason or another, the toggle got sinched up in the eye on the brake line, or perhaps on something on the riser. It's easier to deal with if you can get two hands over there. Using the one free riser, steer the canopy in a relatively safe direction, giving to consideration to traffic and where you need to go to get home. Now pull the free toggle down enough to straighten up the canopy flight. Check your altitude. Look up to the stuck toggle before placing the free brake line in your mouth to hold the canopy straight. Now get both hands up there and work the toggle free. If it takes more than 5 seconds or two tries, stop to check altitude, heading and traffic. If you can't get it out by your decision altitude, I'd chop it. While it is possible to land on rear risers: it sounds like you haven't really practised this skill, so this may not be the best time to learn While it may be possible to re-stow the released brake somehow, you probably won't be able to do so properly while flying and with load on the brake line. This is not something you want to suddenly release when you're 30 feet off the ground on final and preparing to do a rear riser flare. This happened to me again on jump number 40. I handled it much more easily.

I can't speak for everybody, but the subject of the thread has been who is responsible, hence my posts addressed that. I've nothing against configuring the plane for exit. I agree with you that it's a good idea, is a better way to do things and enhances safety for everyone involved. I'm just not convinced that the pilot or dropzone is at fault for the injury in this specific case, based on the information that I've read and assuming that that information is accurate. This was a point that wasn't clear from your first posts in these threads. Some of your earlier posts seemed to imply that you believe that there was some degree of responsibility on the part of the pilot for the injury in this case. Thanks for clearing that up.

This analogy implies that the pilot did something that the person exiting the aircraft had no reason to expect. If what's been posted on here is at all accurate, that is inconsistent with the incident being discussed.

I agree that this approach works well in skydiving, but the question is not whether you agree with how Bill pilots his aircraft or runs his dropzone. You might want to use an AAD, but there are still people who choose not to and yet more people who while having an AAD in their rig, choose to turn it off on certain types of jumps. If a jumper should die from a low pull or no pull incident due to no AAD or an AAD turned off, do we blame the jumper, or do we find someone else to blame like the pilot, dropzone, aircraft owner, AAD manufacturer, etc? You should be mindful of the tail of the aircraft and exit accordingly, however, you might also want to do your jump from an aircraft with a higher tail and with a pilot who agrees to give you a cut and level the plane for exit just in case you screw up. However, if you choose to get on a plane where you know the pilot will not give you a cut or level the plane for exit... If you choose to get on a plane where the dangers of certain types of exits and the correct way to exit from an aircraft in a climbing configuration have been explained to you... If you choose to get on that plane and do that exit with a reasonable level of experience to be able to understand what a diving exit is and how to do one, then who is responsible if an injury happens?

My first 4-way team was called Airbiscuit. There were at least two guys on the team that made sure we lived up to the name.

Really? Oh well.

I'm curious as to where these dropzones/boogies are. I've jumped at dropzones in Latvia, Sweden as well as several different dropzones in each of Canada, the US and Australia - sometimes during boogies, camps or other events, and sometimes just visiting as a fun jumper. Everywhere has wanted to see licence, log book, reserve data card for an in-date reserve re-pack. They will often want some kind of proof of insurance.In Australia, I'm required to buy a temporary APF membership to ensure that I have liability insurance while jumping in Australia. There is generally also some kind of registration/waiver to fill out and sign. Some places also do a gear check on top of checking the reserve data card. In terms of your concerns about places that don't do that, I would share your concern and I'm not sure that I would be willing to jump somewhere that didn't want to see at least my licence, logbook and reserve data card before jumping.

The chest strap is also there to keep you in your harness during deployment. It prevents your main left webs from spreading apart enough that your shoulders can squeeze past and you fall out of the top of the harness. People have had chest straps come undone and not fallen out of the harness on deployment, so it's very possible for the harness to stay on your shoulders without the chest strap, but I wouldn't like to rely on it.

I'm not saying you will have a problem. All I'm saying is, be prepared. Plenty of people have taken rigs as carry on through LAX. Just because one person on one particular occasion had a problem doesn't mean that you will. I've travelled with my rig as both carry on and in/as checked baggage and it's always gotten to the other end just fine and I do travel a fair amount, both domestically, across the US border and internationally including multiple trips to Europe and Australia. The only time I was ever worried was when I was forced to check my rig about a month ago and I did not have a bag in which to check it at that point - my main bag had already been checked in. That, and more importantly, if there's a hook knife on your rig, take it off and put it into your checked baggage before you travel.

The force they use!

Not only did I travel with my hook knife in my carry on because I wasnt checking any bags (25 dollar check bag fee!?Shocked) I had a fairly large pocket knife get though the xray some how. I even told them it was in there because I couldnt find it before i got up to the xray. Found it in my bag when I got back to Ohio (2 cross country flights). Feel safe people! This is another one of those things that may work out just fine for you sometimes and may cause you a problem at others. I recently flew from Buffalo to LAX on my way to Perris. I took my rig as carry on without a bag. I went through security in Buffalo without too much trouble. They did x-ray it twice, swabbed it for explosives and used it as a training experience for several of the officers on duty, but other than that it was no different to any other time I've travelled without the rig. My rig had at the time, and still has a hook knife on the leg strap which nobody asked about. On my way back through LAX, they told me I had to either open the container so they could see what was inside, or I had to check it. At the time, it never occurred to me that there was a hook knife on the leg strap. I hardly ever think of it there because I rarely have need to use it. In hindsight, I'm thinking that is probably what concerned them on the x-ray, but I didn't think of it at the time, they wouldn't show me the x-ray so I might identify the object and their description of what they were looking for did not make it obvious what they were concerned about. In the end I was left with no choice but to go back and check the rig. So, two different checkpoints with two different results. Like I said, you *should* be fine taking it as carry on and you may even get through with your hook knife on the rig, but it pays to be prepared in case things don't go as you planned at security.

You can do a search on tipping. It's been discussed before. Generally, the official line in most places in North America at least is that tips are never expected but always appreciated. I can't speak for everyone, and I'm only a coach not an instructor, so I have a lower level of responsibility, but I would not accept a tip. I would far rather you spend your money on developing your skills, buying beer for all your firsts and coming to play with me when you get to an appropriate skill level.

The final decision rests with the TSA officers at the security checkpoint. If they see something they don't like or decide they need to see inside the container, it won't matter what you're carrying with you. They won't accept documents you're carrying with yourself. There would be nothing stopping someone trying to smuggle a weapon or bomb onto a plane to get an x-ray image of it, print up a fancy looking card saying that it's a parachute or a dildo or anything else. It may be that the majority of times you will go through with little or no problems, however, one day you may have a problem and on that day, you'll wish your rig was in a bag when they make you check it. To the OP, if you have a hook knife on your rig, don't forget to remove it.

The most widely used helmets in skydiving that were not specifically designed for skydiving are the Gath and the Protec. The Gath was originally designed for surfing. The Protec I believe was designed as a general purpose sports helmet and is about as cheap a helmet as you will find. A couple of years ago while I was overseas and without a helmet, I did some jumps with a snowboarding helmet that I borrowed from a whuffo friend. If you are going to go out on a limb and buy something not widely used, I'd be looking for a snug, secure fit and no snag points. You may be able to address potential snag points with duct tape or other workarounds. I'd avoid things like bike helmets as they tend to be too light and loose for my liking and often have things like visors on them that are goign to be more trouble than they're worth. On the other hand, if you buy something already widely used in the sport, then you have less to worry about and most skydiving helmets will also have features such as pockets for audible altimeters and camera accessories that may be available. If cheap is ahat you're looking for, buy a protec. You shoudl also find good quality used helmets for a reasonable price in the classifieds.

Note that malfunction and cutaway are not the same thing. As stated above, a malfunction is anything that is not a normal opening. There are malfunctions which you may be able to resolve without cutting away, so line twists, premature brake fires and broken lines are all malfunctions. Whether end cell closure is a malfunction or not is debatable. Some canopies such as the Sabre2 are well known for end cell closure, so it may be considered normal for that canopy, however, it may sometimes require some corrective action on the part of the pilot, particularly if they're inducing a turn or a dive.

Tension knots, anyone? I'm no rigger, but I'm thinking that attaching free-hanging streamers, string or anything of that nature to your lines is a recipe for trouble. I can see them potentially getting tangled in your suspension lines during deployment.

I would also say that it did not seem particularly noisy. It's certainly nowhere near as loud as a Skyvan for those worried that the engine and prop would be loud.

According to the plaque at Skydive Burnaby, the St Catherines Parachute Club celebrated their 50th year in 1998, which means they started in 1948. I'm not sure where they jumped, however, as according to the dropzone history, they only moved there in 1962. I'll ask around the DZ and see if anybody knows.

According to the history of my home DZ, the St Catherine's Parachute Club is the oldest skydiving club in North America. I'm not sure if that's supposed to be qualified with a statement that it's still operating in some form today. Either way, 1962 is a long time ago in skydiving years.

Jump run is typically upwind, which means that higher winds require longer delays, not shorter as you suggest.

You did start by stating that such tactics have the opposite effect on you and then went on to suggest that a calm and well reasoned explanation of the risks might be a better approach. It certainly sounds like you think the latter approach would work better on you than the former approach. Good job! There are also a number of reasonable and constructive posts on the topic such as this post from billvon. The information is out there if people want to look. In a lot of those threads, you'll also find posts outlining the reasons for the attitude in the responses. For one thing, it doesn't help when people keep seeing the same questions being asked by newbies touting their mad skillz and how the normal advice doesn't apply to them. That's going to set some people off. For another thing, there are plenty of examples of posts out there where the OP had reasons and answers for why every rational argument provided didn't apply to them. I'm not sure that the lack of attitude in other response would have changed that, but you may have a different opinion. So far I've seen plenty of attempts to provide calm, well-reasoned arguments as to why certain choices may be bad ones, but I'm not sure that there's much evidence to suggest it was any more effective for many of these people than any other approach. Perhaps more specific feedback might produce better results, but I also think that the effectiveness of any given approach is as much dependent on the recipient of the advice or feedback as it is on the person giving and how they go about it.

So you're claiming that logic and reason would work better with you than scare tactics. I suspect that neither is going to work. Here's why... This is a topic that has been beaten to death on DZ.com. I think if you were likely to listen to logic, that would make you logical and rational in how you are thinking about this. Since some people have raised some concerns about your plans to fly a large katana loaded at 1.6, you could have used that logical, rational thinking to do a search on here and you would have found enormous numbers of posts and threads on here discussing the relative merits of downsizing rapidly, including many logical and thoughtful posts on what might constitute a reasonable canopy progressions. You would have also found a good number of threads in the incidents forum where people have hurt or killed themselves which would describe in relative detail what kind of things can happen when things go bad under canopy. Instead of doing that, you've instead come here with a post about how it's really everyone else's fault why you want to make a poor canopy choice. I also think that the fact that you've chosen to conceal your true jump numbers while making such posts says a lot about what you want to do. Are you worried that if your profile says you only have 73 jumps (or however many it actually is) that you won't get the answers you're hoping for? It sounds to me more like you've come here to find someone to say what you want to hear and while it may be annoying to have people use scare tactics, it sounds like you're trying just as hard not to listen.

This exact thing happened to me not long after I started jumping my Rawa last year, only my incident happened upon opening, which was quite disconcerting at the time. After a few failed attempts trying to pull my head away, I managed the presence of mind to grab the harness at the shoulder, lift it up and get the slack required to free my head. In my case, I'm guessing that the spring snagged the edge of the covering over the 3D foam on my Vector 3. As soon as I was back on the ground, I covered the clips and spring with duct tape. The clips are still perfectly useable this way, but not everything is smoothed over and no snag points.

That's a fair point. I hadn't thought of it that way. They can come close in space, but they're highly likely to still be separated in time, hence this probably couldn't have happened "just as he was opening".

Maybe not explicitly, but he may as well have. The OP was pulling higher but his buddy was planning to pull at around the same altitude as the freeflyers. Aside from that, contrary to the post I was responding to, it is very possible for a belly flyer group that follows a freeflyer group to catch up to them around deployment altitude. In the 10-15 seconds between deployments, the freeflyers will descend perhaps 300 feet at canopy descent rates. Given variations in reaction time, instrument precision, canopy opening distance and human error, 300 feet is far too small a buffer to expect there to be no chance of them being close vertically on opening.