jdfreefly

You continue to beat this horse as a smoking gun that makes him unelectable. I think we should present what was actually said: You can read that a number of ways, and certainly I think listening to it is important and I urge people to listen to the entire debate. While you could certainly translate his first comment to mean the report does not exist, I think the final comment clearly shows an admission of the reports existence, but calls into question both the report and Bachman's understanding of the report's finding. Methane Freefly - got stink?

He did not say the report didn't exist. He said the report didn't make the statement that they were months away from acquiring a nuclear weapon. He then expounded on the point by stating that the report implied it and that the implication was baseless. Methane Freefly - got stink?

The irony of your username for me is hilarious. She proclaimed that the IAEA report said they were months away from a Nuclear weapon, and therefore we should be gearing up to engage them in war. He said the IAEA report didn't say that, it only implied it and it implied it through shoddy and suspect logical reasoning. Again, you disagree philosophically with his philosophy that we should stop being the world police. Fine, then say that, but call him stupid. I for one don't think that a nation being in possession of heavy water should ever be grounds for an act of aggression by the United States. The men and women who are on the front lines of these wars we are in overwhelmingly support this man. The established political entities in this country seem to be determined to convince us that he is un-electable. And even if you challenge those assertions, you cannot deny that of all candidates, Obama included, Ron Paul is determined to avoid another war. I will vote for Ron Paul for that reason alone. The blood of too many innocents in on all of our hands, when our government takes our money and wages war in our name and kills innocents, the blood is on our hands. Say no to war, say yes to Ron. Methane Freefly - got stink?

"He looks less than smart" - opinion If you could point out something he said that was wrong or stupid, and not just a philosophical difference you disagree with, I would be open to hearing it. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I'm very interested, some of these accidents are terrible...people paralyzed, limbs amputated. The reality is we don't really track that data very well so it wouldn't be a reasonable request that someone advocating a BPA style WL restriction produce it. Maybe the BPA does track it and could produce it, and if so, I'd love to see it. As far as my feeling on WL restrictions. I do think a WL BSR would harm DZOs by putting more responsibility on them to regulate things and thereby increase their liability. I do believe that slowing people down and giving them time to learn more before they progress, as well as giving them the resources to learn (quality coaches and education materials) will reduce both the accident and fatality rates in the sport, as well as decrease canopy collisions. I'm just not sure that a jump number based regulation is the the way to slow people down. I think I'd rather see us change the culture in the sport than change the rules. I realize that I seem to be in a shrinking minority. Methane Freefly - got stink?

It's the first line in the group member pledge for DZO's wanting to join USPA. That's the first bullet item in the pledge. As soon as you step on the DZ and try to jump from their airplanes, if it's a BSR it's their problem. I've heard they've got rules in other countries, but I don't recall anyone ever presenting statistical evidence that over time it actually had a positive impact on the number of fatalities, or even the number of fatalities related to canopy flight. If I may paraphrase the great skydiving scholar and philosopher Bill Booth, you make the sport safer, skydivers find a way to inject risk back into the equation and the fatality rate stays the same. If you believe that to be true, when you add regulation to the sport you end up with less freedom, less personal responsibility and the same number of fatalities. I'm all for better training. I'm all for changing the attitude. We should all feel like it's our responsibility to educate and protect each other. I'm not for pushing it off on some central authority and asking them to legislate my safety for me. Skydiving is a dangerous activity, I don't think we can change that. Methane Freefly - got stink?

The downside is that it puts responsibility on the DZOs to enforce it. The argument from DZOs is that skydivers should be capable of making this decision on their own. If you make the BSR, and someone lies to circumvent it and then dies, you put the DZO in a bit of a sticky spot where they could be held liable for not doing enough to make sure the person was qualified. In the end, this will make it harder to be a DZO, and as a result, raise the cost of jumps. That's the argument I would give you if I were a DZO. Also, if I were a DZO, why should I need USPA to tell me what wing loading requirements to make? Why can't I make that decision on my own? One more argument; every time you create a regulation, you remove a little more personal responsibility from the individual. Over time, this eats away at the feeling that we are responsible for our own safety and results in a mind set that USPA will protect us from ourselves. This in turn leads to carelessness and more accidents, as well as a belief that if you get hurt, someone other than you must be to blame, accountable, liable, financially responsible. Just some arguments for you, don't assume I believe any of them 100%, or that I think any of them are 100% bullshit. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I posted there with about the same frequency that I post here....that is to say not very often. Methane Freefly - got stink?

Missed your reply, 2005 it was. I know my attitude about these parachutes and this subject changed over the following years, and that specific accident had a lot to do with that. I can't speak for Glenn or any of the staff at CK, but my attitude didn't change that day, or the following weeks, but over time it did change. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I'm guessing the date was July 4th and the year was 2004. 2004 was a very different year for canopy flight than 2011. Also, the senior member you mention was relatively close with one of the deceased. He and all of us were in quite the state of shock. I think today most of the people in your story would handle it differently...maybe not. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I used to have friends that got mad when I skydived, but not anymore. Methane Freefly - got stink?

The porter isn't a vertical take off and landing aircraft, but it did land in a suite at the holiday inn express last night. ftfy Methane Freefly - got stink?

The Family Values politicians have certainly found a need for condoms in bulk while serving their moral majority constituents while they are in office. Way to throw the first partisan stone into what I tried quite hard to build as a bi-partisan discussion about the pay and other benefits of office are attracting the wrong type of people. I find it disappointing. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I think many of you miss the point. Franklin's hope was that the people attracted to public office would view it as a great honor and would be happy to make the personal sacrifice. 170K is in the top 95th percentile of incomes in this country, you could cut it in half and it would still be around the 80th percentile...and yet most of us are so brainwashed into believing that our oligarchs deserve to live so well. We're so far removed from what happened in 1776 that we no longer think it's even reasonable to expect that public office be a noble sacrifice, but more of a golden ring to be chased by those with the most greed and lust for power. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I've been reading the book the 5,000 Year Leap. I recommend that people read it; I find the author's desire to tie a Christian God more than a little disturbing but I enjoy political sparing with my father, and understanding his point of view is critical to a reasoned discourse....but that's not the reason for this post. Last night I was reading this book and came across a few quotes from Benjamin Franklin on the subject of pay for our politicians. Franklin felt that it was imperative that our political offices be filled with people of the highest moral character. He felt strongly that making political office a position of profit ran contrary to that goal, and he expressed this on more than a few occasions. What follows was a speech he gave at the Constitutional Convention in 1776 with regards to payment in the executive branch, but I think it is safe to say he would extend his thoughts to all public office. I beg you to read this quote in its entirety and think of those on both sides of the aisle who have backed this country into a corner: Today the base salary of our "Leaders" are: President - $400,000Senate & House - $174,000Justices - $208,000 In addition to the rather generous salaries, they also receive incredible benefits and pensions. And since we have the government so entrenched in corporate affairs we see jaw dropping deals where former members of congress responsible for passing laws that directly effect corporate or union interests "retiring" to sweetheart positions with the very interestes they were positioned to regulate. I believe this is core to the problems we as a nation find ourselves in. Do you agree, disagree? If you disagree, why; more importantly would you argue that the people who have been elected to public office are cut from the cloth Franklin hoped, lovers of peace and good order and fit for our trust? If you agree that this is an issue, what could possibly be done to fix the issue? -daless

I would agree with that if it were small business friendly. Large publicly traded corporations have all the breaks they need. It's the small and medium businesses in this country that need help, not walmart and exxon. Methane Freefly - got stink?

You talk out both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, it's all the tea party's fault because they refused to raise taxes, but then you admit that "until both sides are willing to give up their sacred cows it will continue to be a clusterfuck." As much as I am for smaller government and lower taxes, I agree that it's insane to think we're getting out of this without "raising" taxes...raising in quotes because I'm not sure that's really necessary, closing newly added loopholes doesn't really mean raising taxes to me. Still, we need to get the spending under control. Start with the war machine and then follow up with the defunding of government agencies that have become extensions of the corporate interests they are supposed to regulate..FDA, EPA, SEC and the FCC. Then, it's time the baby boomers paid the piper. They've elected and supported the fools that got us where we are. That's right, social security, medicare and medicaid will need to be cut. Once you make the first slew of changes it might not be so bad, probably have to unclose the donought hole closed by Bush (which he neglected to pay for anyway). Those sacred cows need to be sacrificed. With all of those changes, that should take us back to a surplus and we could start paying down the debt racked up by previous generations. Methane Freefly - got stink?

The same people that paid into Social Security voted for the people and the policies that looted it. If the insured voted people into office that traded SS funds for government IOUs, they get what they deserved. If you are counting on the government to take care of you in your old age you are setting yourself up for a disappointment. Methane Freefly - got stink?

My wife's infinity had a similar issue. We sent the riser that had the fraying back to have the loop replaced. A month later it was fraying again. Took it into action air and the rigger figured that the lug on the end of the cutaway cable had developed a bur, most likely from striking the hardhousing mount on the riser. Took an emery cloth to the lug and had the rigger replace the loop again. She hasn't put many jumps on it since but it's probably good to go. All of this maintenance was paid for by us, but I don't really mind. The rig is 6 years old. If it's happening on brand new rigs, I would call it a design problem. If it's happening on rigs and risers with over a thousand jumps, I would call it a maintenance problem. You're supposed to check that shit, and you're supposed to fix what you find wrong. Methane Freefly - got stink?

yes, more than once. No sir, I don't like it. Methane Freefly - got stink?

For those who may find this thread later and be looking for similar information... I upsized from a velo 103 to a velo 111. The 111 had noticeably lighter pressure on the rears and toggles, but also had noticeably higher pressure on the fronts. Methane Freefly - got stink?

Short answer; yes. Long answer; with my hands all the way up, the canopy is in full flight. When I pull on the front risers, the tail is not deflected. And if I hold a full extension flare for a second or two the canopy stalls. I think the brakes are set correctly and I'm not looking to muck with them just because I'm not at 100% right now. I'm just looking for something to jump in the mean time while I build my strength back. I figured some input from the people that know more about the dynamics of canopy might help me figure out some good candidates. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I'm a bit obsessive about the length of the brake lines. Where I have it right now is right on the stall point. I'm sure if I lengthened them it would make it easier to flare, but I might not be able to stall it any longer. Methane Freefly - got stink?

Maybe some of the more knowledgeable folks out there can weigh in here. I'm in the midst of rehabbing from a shoulder injury, and I'm looking for something with a bit less toggle pressure than my 2.1 loaded velocity 103. Any suggestions on canopies I should try? What aspects of a canopy effect the toggle pressure (wing loading, shape etc..) and in which direction (increase/decrease)? I did a jump on the velo yesterday and while I can flare it, I really think I need to switch to something easier while I get my strength back...either that or quit jumping. Methane Freefly - got stink?

I had a similar thought, but my idea was that you could put up a whiteboard that was basically a spreadsheet next to the loading area. Jumpers walk up and fill in their name, canopy + wingloading along with the group they are jumping in, for ex: | Daless | velo 103 | 2.1 | 4-Hd | SL | | Shannon | xfire 119 | 1.2 |4-hd | MF | ... ... It's a message to other jumpers on the load: I'm Daless, I jump a velo 103 loaded at 2.1 lbs/sft, I'm on a 4 way head down and I intend to land in the swoop lane. I'm Shannon, I jump a crossfire 119 loaded at 1.2, I'm on a 4 way head down and I intend to land in the main field. etc .... I think one of the larger benefits of both ideas is it reminds people to spend the time in the loading area thinking about canopy flight. Of course, it also assumes people are actually in the loading area 5 minutes prior to the plane.... Methane Freefly - got stink?