livendive

Had to? As in it's in the rules? I don't think so. There's certainly nothing in the USPA Skydiver's Competition Manual (section 10) that even hints that this is required. Look here http://www.uspa.org/Publications/Governance%20Manual/Gov_Manual_April_2002.pdf It's on page 11. The addition was championed by Mullins in 2001 and has been fairly strongly opposed by Larry Hill. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

This translates into an income tax for those who only make enough money to live month to month, while exempting the savings of those who happen to make more than they spend. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

534.55 "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Had that happen to me a couple times. First time I was married, in the Navy, and had been deployed for 6 months. She admitted to it when I was in Hawaii on my way home and I asked if the 2 weeks prior to my arrival home would be enough to ditch the guy. She didn't, even though I wanted to at least try to save it, so we got divorced. The second time was 5 years later, a girlfriend of a couple years who lived with me and was cheating with a so-called "friend" of mine. Given my frustration at not previously being allowed to try to save my marriage, I gave this one a decent effort. She did pretty much everything in her power to regain my trust, but 6 months later I realized I would never trust her again and asked her to move out. I've been in my current relationship for nearly 3 years. I'm as certain as I think a guy can be that I want to spend the rest of my life with this woman. Still, if she were to cheat on me, I doubt that I'd even try to fix it. It's painful work and I think the odds of success are remote at best. I'm sure some people are better at forgive-and-forget than I am, and you may be one of them. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

My friend just called me and said they had everyone in for 7 or so seconds on the first load today. Of course he could be wrong, and video review is necessary to ensure no slot/grip problems. He said they got a late start this morning after cutting several folks and replacing them with ringers who didn't want to start paying for slots till it was close. If they had everyone in for 7 seconds, I'd say that CERTAINLY qualifies as close. :-) Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

and yet we wonder why we depend on foreign energy. this makes me sick. bastads! like i said, "this isn't about oil" Why is a Texan so pissed off about a California court ruling regarding the protection of California coasts? Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

No kidding. I watched a huge pileup (10+ cars) in my rearview mirror once, just south of Huntington Beach, caused by a guy doing exactly that, then trying to pass me on the left shoulder despite a broken down car there. I (and the rest of the traffic) was doing between 85 and 90 at the time. The most frustrating thing about moving back up to Washington from S. Cal was the traffic...more specifically the inability of people to drive in it. In southern Cal, it could be heavy traffic but we'd still be moving right along. Up here it seems like if there are 3 cars within a hundred feet of anyone, they slow down to 35. "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Well between jumps 52 and 75 or so, I never jumped the same rig twice in a row. Some were BOC, some ROL, some ripcord. Some had a CYPRES, some had Astra's, a couple were with Sentinels, and some had no AAD. Most were dual-handle emergency systems, but a couple were SOS. Sometimes I had an RSL, sometimes I didn't. I really had to concentrate before getting in the plane each time, and that ended up working at least to some extent, as I never reached for the wrong place to pull a handle. Oh, you wanted *good* advice for low-timers? :-) umm...don't do what I did. I'm pretty sure it dramatically increases the odds of a mistake. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

You? Opinionated? Come on now! Hey, did you wear that t-shirt with your bib overalls and kasa? Anyhow, I agree with regard to Winsor. Of all the candidates you can spend a vote on, he's one of the best. Blues, Dave ABG#1 "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Could you do us a favor and not make us go looking for them? Could you just copy and paste the URL that you might already be looking at? I just looked and can't find the Summer 01 or Winter 02 meeting minutes on USPA's webpage. It appears they're no longer available, however I know they were at one time, as I've referred to them several times in the past. I wonder why they've been taken down while other things from those timeframes remain? Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Good job Buzz. It ain't as much as I'd like to see you do, but it's something. "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Actually, the tandem age limit and the 18-year-old age limit for single-harness jumps are both waiverable by the full board. The 16-year-old limit for single-harness jumps is the only one that's not waiverable. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

If you're falling slower than 78 mph, above 2000 feet, is an AAD misfire really gonna do any harm? In freefall, an AAD misfire *could* be fatal, but the big sky theory suggests it probably wouldn't be. In CRW, an AAD misfire that sends your reserve through someone else's lines has an extremely good chance of being fatal. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Excellent...however you still seem to be considering the cert course as a source of business. One of my points is that it's not. It is a benefit of individual membership. Whether or not it makes money for any particular dropzone should be irrelevant. I feel the same way about Nationals, but that's a different discussion altogether. a) How is the GM DZ losing business? If they were hosting the same course at the same time, I'd understand your point and grudgingly admit that yes, there should be only one and it should probably be held at the GM. But how often do you think this really happens? b) If a group of candidates or a cert course director want rating course "x" at DZ "y" on Dates "s-t", and the same course isn't scheduled for that timeframe in nearby vicinity, can you think of one good reason USPA should charge them $400 more than the next group? Plain and simple, it's a way of GM DZ's trying to prevent non-USPA DZ's from hosting courses because they want to make money off them. It could very well be that you and I are just looking through completely different eyes on this issue. You jump at Perris. I jump in the middle of nowhere. You see AFF cert courses with 20 people spending a grand apiece. I see S/L courses with 3 candidates paying next to nothing. The nearest GM DZ to your home DZ is Elsinore. The nearest GM DZ to my home has one Cessna and puts up *maybe* 1 load per week average. Probably more like 0.8 loads. Now I thought about what I said earlier and realized I made an honest mistake (really). When I said the nearest Group Member to my home is nearly 300 miles away, I was wrong. There's one only 7 miles away. It's just so small and rarely in my thoughts that I forgot about it. In any case, the DZO was a student of mine and opened up his own place when he had 50 jumps. It's widely agreed that he doctored his logbook to get his S/L JM rating (i.e. he made up some jumps to reach the 100 jump minimum). It's also generally agreed that he doctored his logbook to get his D, and thus have his JM rating grandfathered to an I last year. Regardless of whether he fudged his numbers, he certainly has less than 250 jumps. In the span of running his own DZ for 3 years, he's put himself in the hospital twice. A student of mine who got the "take up golf" speech headed across town and was accepted despite the fact that I warned the folks there...a few months later he was on a lifeflight. Now the DZO of that Group Member has very little experience, yet he's an S&TA and an I, and thus theoretically qualified to host a S/L rating course (for candidates more experienced than him). I guarantee you that I wouldn't want any of my instructors learning from him. So next year, if the two coaches at my DZ want to get their S/L ratings, should I a) suggest they go get it across town or b) make them pay $200 extra each? Why has USPA taken away door number 3 (let them get it at their home dz for the same price everyone else pays)? Have I had any success in convincing you that a DZ's affiliation should be a non-issue for rating courses, as they are (supposed to be) a benefit for the individual jumpers, not a revenue source for the drozpones? Rating courses aren't supposed to be about who gets to make the money from them...they're supposed to be about teaching candidates how to teach and ensuring they're capable before turning them loose on students. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Simple economics Tom. Those GM dz's aren't actually supporting USPA, their customers are. The GM fee is built into the dz's overhead, which is paid by the fees they charge for slots. If we eliminated the GM program, USPA could continue to do most of the things they are doing, but the individual membership would have to more clearly bear the cost. Either way, you and I are paying those costs, however in the current environment, GM DZ's act as a middleman. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

What teeth? It's not the only regulation there is. Haven't you seen individual jumpers be kicked out of USPA for not following the BSRs? DZ's don't break BSRs, jumpers/instructors do. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Let's not limit ourselves to AFF certification courses, but rather all instructor certification courses. Instructor certification courses are a benefit for the individual members. You only need to look back and see that they existed long before there was a Group Member program to see that. Those courses "belong" to the jumpers who pay their USPA dues, regardless of where they jump. Now, with the advent of the Group Member program, someone got the mistaken idea that hosting certification courses is a benefit of Group Membership. Plain and simple, it's not. I jump at a non-GM dz. We have a S/L and IAD cert course every few years. The closest GM DZ is nearly 300 miles away. The possibility exists that I will want to host a course for some of our up and coming jumpers next year. Since I'm USPA and the candidates are USPA, why should I have to pay $400 to USPA just to host it locally? The bottom line is that the Group Membership stole this benefit away from the Individual Jumpers and claimed it for their own financial benefit. "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Please be careful with what you're saying. It would suck for someone to take what you said at face value and then try to follow your lead when they're deep in the beeps. Deciding whether to unstow brakes is gonna be canopy/situation dependent. The ability to unstow brakes is gonna depend on a few things too (e.g. riser length). The safety of landing a high-performance main without a flare or with a 1 handed flare is marginal at best. I encourage everyone to give serious thought about their procedures for such an emergency, and if they come up with any questions, to practice their proposed solutions while there is no emergency (i.e. fake a dislocated shoulder.) What was your canopy and wingloading? Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Not to hijack the thread, but I've heard people say they have a smaller reserve as a safety issue (because it's more compatible with their main in a 2-out). Is that the case when one has a cypres (and thus 2-out is more likely) or is it still better to have a largish reserve when one has a small main?Quote It appears to me to be a "different strokes for different folks" scenario. Personally, I like have a decent-sized reserve regardless of what size main I'm jumping. Therefore even with a 99 sq.ft. main, I've stuck with a 170 reserve. My personal opinion is that prudent jumpers will try to get some CRW experience early in their career. If they like it, they can continue to do it, and if they don't, they can stop. Either way, they'll have developed a better understanding of how canopies fly together (even incompatible canopies) and thus be able to keep a sensibly sized reserve in their container regardless of how far they downsize their main. I think many times folks downsize their reserve with their main just because that's all that will fit in the container of their choice. I don't see the sense in that. What would you rather do...get a container custom made to fit a 170 reserve and a 99 main or find yourself under a 107 reserve loaded at 2:1, for the first time, over trees, at an altitude of 800 feet? The phrase I've read here and elsewhere is along the lines of "I've never seen someone look up at their reserve and wish it was 20 feet smaller." Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Actually, this is something I was thinking about. How likely is one to survive a no-flare landing under a reserve (say, unconscious or dislocated shoulders)? Is there a wingloading you would consider the maximum for that? With the dislocated shoulder scenario, I'm quite confident I could plf a brakes stowed landing under my reserve (loaded ~1.4:1) without breaking any bones. I could probably even do so with the brakes unstowed, though I might get a few more bruises out of the deal. Unconscious, all bets are off. It was only a year or two ago that a guy died from falling down under his main and having his chest-mounted altimeter pop him in the throat. Wierd stuff can happen when you're falling, especially if it's an uncontrolled (unconscious) fall. Then again, as I don't have an AAD, it's highly unlikely I'll ever land unconscious under a functional reserve. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

As USPA couldn't very well make a map of every beer line and landing area at every dropzone in the US, that particular portion is not really relevant. As for x jumps before jumping a camera or hotrod, I don't know if any current DZO BoD members have such rules, and if they don't, why would they try to make USPA have them. In any case, such things are qualifications to be achieved, not blanket requirements, regardless of experience. Buzz doesn't think skydivers should make up their own minds on whether they wear an AAD, he wants to make up their minds for them. I personally don't want a director who thinks he knows better than the people he represents. Sure, in some cases, it will be necessary for a representative in any government to vote his conscience rather than popular sentiment. But if a candidate lets you know upfront that he considers his opinion (on a controversial subject) to be more important than yours (even if it's your life on the line), he's probably not someone who will defer to your opinion on other (less controversial) subjects either. Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Tish "Mama" McMahon Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

But you do have to be 18 to sign a legally binding contract (waiver). USPA keeps skydivers skydiving. Beyond everyone's petty politics if the USPA didn't represent the sport, inclusive of DZ's and gear manufacturers and skydivers, it wouldn't take much before there were severe government restrictions on the sport. Protecting the sport from litigation and government regulation keeps America free enough for skydivers to skydive. BSR's service the USPA's end goal of keeping skydivers skydiving. Ken So why is there one age limit for true student jumps and one age limit for tandems? And how is the protection from litigation a Basic Safety Requirement? Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Are you serious? Over one post out of 117?! What if we do a group (((hug))) or something? !barf! Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)

Yeah, what the hell...it's just business as usual anyhow. Ask Bob Ingoldsby. FYI check out http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3A03CD61.E3422369%40spurgeon.net then dig up a November 2000 issue of Parachutist and see what they ran as his statement. It may very well be that Don's been a bit too vocal in his indignation, but I for one appreciate it. There are far too many USPA members who don't understand that USPA has 2 sets of rules...the ones other people must comply with or be punished and the ones they can comply with themselves, if they feel like it. For what it's worth, I'd bet it was just grammar and punctuation changes they made to Don's statement, however this problem came up two years ago (as is clear in the two references). Instead of someone changing the rule in the interim, they just ignored it again. In my line of work, if we have a procedure that doesn't match how we do a certain task, we either change the procedure or we change how we do the task. What's the purpose of having rules you don't follow? Blues, Dave "I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew)