matto765

PA's are not permitted on this site. Cool off guys ~ Ian

If there was a movie made about you two guys, it would probably look something like this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHL-PmoQGoQ

Its called the Tonysuit XS, and it flies very well

That is too funny. I remember watching that happen, being about 20 feet to their left. It surely was a "death defying moment"

I can't fix your pants for you, but I will buy you a cheeseburger.

Any business (Walmart, sports venues, dropzones, etc) that invites people to come to its premise must show a certain level of care. That is required by law. The business CAN NOT relieve themselves of that responsibility through a waiver. A waiver is more or less designed to relieve the business of any liablity that they may incur because of a negligent action on the customer's part. The waiver typically will not cover the business's negligent actions. That leaves it up to the employees of the business to show the required degree of care to avoid liability issues. An example of this would be that when you go to a supermarket, and a jar of liquid falls and spills in an aisle. An employee will show up very quickly to clean up the mess and put a sign on the ground signifying a wet floor. This is all done to prevent a slip and fall because the store would be held liable for that if it were to happen. If the store did not see the mess, or chose to not clean it up, that would constitute negligence on the store's part which would open themselves up to liability issues and potential lawsuits. I would assume that if a tandem master gave the wingsuiter permission to do a flyby, and there was a collision, that would constitute negligence on the tandem master's (and therefore, the dropzone's) part, which would not be covered by the waiver signed by the student. The concepts of risk, liability, and negligence are very poorly understood not just by the general skydiving population, but by most people on this planet. Many dropzones I have been to seemed to have the mentality of "you signed the liability waiver, so we are absolved of any liability." That cannot be any further from the truth. Liability waivers should always be considered a back up in the event of an incident. In my opinion, dropzones should be run with a mindset that there is no waiver, and they need to take an active approach to mitigate any liability incurred by the inherent risks of the sport. The waiver is a nice thing to have to fall back on, but it isn't bullet proof by any means, and should never be a dropzone's first and only line of defense against liability. Lawsuits (especially in the US) are unfortunately a part of life. People are as willing as ever to sue for even the most minor issues. In a sport such as ours where risk is always present and very high, we need to be responsible with our actions to keep ourselves and others out of trouble. That goes for dropzone employees and fun jumpers alike. I am really not looking foward to the day where I go into the incident forum and see a new post that reads Triple Fatality: Tandem-Wingusit Collision. That will signify the end of what we consider fun. The general sentiment in the wingsuit community seems to be against regulation and for self policing. If thats the case, then lets get off of our asses start self policing. Its up to us to prevent the next wingsuit incident.

I've seen it done many times. Yes, there are people in the skydive community out there that are stupid enough to do it.

I have done flybys, but I do think that they are dangerous. Too many inexperienced wingsuiters see flybys done and think they can go out and do them as well. Flybys should NEVER be done without the TI's permission. I personally know a couple of wingsuiters who will go out and flyby a tandem whenever they can find one, with or without the TI's consent/knowledge. That is fucked up. If I was a TI and that happened to me, I would go meet that asshole out in the landing area and pop his reserve. If I was a DZO, I would not allow tandem flybys at my DZ. There is too much liability involved with that. Contrary to what most skydivers (and a lot of DZO's) believe, liability waivers are not bulletproof or absolute. I also think its irresponsible for a TI to give permission for a flyby. They are putting their student's lives in someone elses hands. The only person who should ever have the responsibility of keeping the student safe is the TI. I know a couple of TI's who will try to get the wingsuiters on their load to give them flybys. No matter how cool it may be for the passenger to look and see the flyby, it is an unneccessary risk to take. Being a TI, it is your responsibility to give your passenger a fun ride as well as minimize the risks involved with the jump.

I think that the only problem we have in wingsuiting is that people are starting too early without the required experience. The 2 main enablers of this are: (1) Too many instructors (I'm using that term loosley) that are overly willing to take up people without the prerequisite experience, and (2) wingsuits are readily available and very easy for an inexperienced person to obtain. There really is no way to fix number 2, because even if manufacturers refused to sell wingsuits to sub 200 jump pilots, wingsuits can still be found here on DZ.com from people willing to sell to anyone. The remedy to number 1 is not very easy either. You will always be having someone willing taking up people who don't meet the requirements, wether they have some special WSI rating or not. Other than the USPA instituting some form of disciplinary action for offenders (which would be laughable at best), the only thing we can do as a discipline is to pretty much blacklist those instructors. I think that idea sounds stupid as well, but I can't think of anything else other than to tar and feather them, or burn their names in the grass in the landing area at Z-hills.

I think we've covered all we can with this. In my opinion, if you want to surf puffies, go for it. The people with the authority (USPA, FAA, etc.) to bitch about it have no way of knowing if you were violating the limitations. Their vantage point from the ground only provides a 2 dimensional view of your jump. I think the regulations are fine the way they are. I still get to surf plenty of puffies under the current regulations. Besides, the regulations are pointed more towards aircraft than skydivers. The FAA only uses it against skydivers when they need leverage (such as the proposed control tower in Deland).

1) You did bring up a stupid subject. There is no debate going on in the US about our rules regarding clouds. You are just trying to stir up shit. 2) When you present a viewpoint with no argument, that is stupid. 3) When your viewpoint is challenged with logical facts and information, and you respond with a 3rd grade level counterpoint... that is stupid. 4) You smell like poo poo 5) Apparently you didn't even have a full understanding of how the Australian system works with regards to clouds. The information DSE supplied showed that there is regulation with regards to clouds, and that if you want to jump in them, you must have special training and the required endorsements. So, you passing on information to support your argument that you apparently know nothing about is stupid 6) If you have such a hardon for jumping inside of clouds, then move to Australia and jump there. I've been there. Its a really amazing and beautiful country. Just have fun wasting your money on jumps where you can't see anything and have no idea of where you are (cause your inside of a cloud). 7) lol: Sorry for hurting your feelings Edit to add: None of this is personal, dude. Don't take it the wrong way.

That should clear up the air then with regards to the apparent belief that anyone can jump in clouds in Australia. I believe that it is a general consensus in the wingsuit community (and the skydiving community in general) that flying in/jumping in a large cloud mass is not a safe thing and should be avoided. There are too many safety issues involved, such as skydiver to skydiver collisions (canopy and freefall), skydiver to airplane collisions (including the jump plane), and ending up a long way from the DZ which could result in an off landing injury. Surfing large puffies is a nice thing to do(one of my favorite things to do in a wingsuit), but actually wanting to make a flight in a cloud layer, zero-zero conditions, is pretty retarded. And Butters, when someone makes a counter point to your initial statement (just like I originally did) it is typically considered stupid, asinine, unintelligent, and thoughtless to come back and say "well this country over here does it, why cant we" instead of actually making an argument for your stance with fact and reason. Just a nice little tip for you there, buddy.

No, I don't think that Australians are stupid, asinine, unintelligent and thoughtless. If their aviation regulatory organization wants to allow their skydivers to go through clouds, then thats their decision to make. The main difference between Australia and the US is that the US has a much greater amount of air traffic than Australia. We have more air traffic in our skies than any other country in the world. This could cause some major issues with regards to skydiving in IMC. Butters, if you want, come down to Deland sometime and make a couple of jumps with me there, you will quickly be amazed at how much air traffic there is in the Daytona Beach area. Try to count the amount of planes you see in the air while flying to altitude. Then think about how shitty it would be if we were in the clouds the entire jump, basically zero-zero conditions. You wouldnt know if a CRJ was about to turn you into the largest birdstrike ever to be recorded. Also, why would you want to do anything but a solo wingsuit in the clouds? Big flocks suck in the clouds cause most of the flock can't see each other and that could pose a safety issue. Doing a small 2 or 3 way "wingsuit freefly" isn't safe because its easy to get a lot of separation on accident, resulting in losing to other guys and potentionally having a head on. Hell, even doing a solo in zero-zero sucks cause you have no way of navigating, you could be going in cirlces and never know it, or you could be miles off from the DZ. Did I mention that this also poses a severe risk to all of the other skydivers around you? And, not mention the fact that it would be impossible for the jump aircraft to see where its skydivers are after they exit. GPS is an amzing tool to spot with, but thats about it. The rules are in place for a reason, Butters. I know your personality is to buck the trend, but sometimes you got to realize that people much smarter than you and I, with more expertise in this area, make the rules they make for very good reasons. Don't worry about weather holds for clouds. God invented beer for that.

The cloud regulations are not there to pick on skydivers. They are there to maintain a safe environment for skydivers and any aircraft in the air. In order to fly under visual flight rules (VFR) the aircraft must be able to maintain 3 dimensionally a specified distance from the clouds, which varies depending on the airspace they are flying within. Typically the clearance is 3 statute miles visibility, 1000 feet above the clouds, 500 feet and below, and 2000 feet horizontally. If the aircraft cannot maintain this spacing, then they legally cannot go. As we all know, we can't exactly measure our distance from the clouds, and sometimes we bend these clearances a little. Thats not the point. The point is that if the cloud clearances were removed completely, and skydiving operations were allowed in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC, anything below VFR cloud minimums), there would be some major safety issues going on. First, and obviously, is that skydivers can't see the ground and could lose altitude awareness. Second is that you would have VFR traffic (the jump plane) flying in the clouds. This poses a hazard to IFR traffic that is depending on ATC to maintain their separation from other traffic in IMC. VFR traffic is not required to communicate with ATC, except in certain circumstances such as class B airspace and so on. Skydiving operations typically are conducted in class G airspace, which is not under ATC control. So, if you have some asshole flying a jump plane in IMC, not talking to ATC, they are posing a serious collision hazard to other air traffic. I know, it sucks when you go to the DZ and you get weathered. Thats a fact of life when it comes to skydving. There is no reason to change the rules because of it. I don't even think that this thread should be in the wingsuit forum anyway. You are just trying to pull attention away from all the regulating wingsuit BS. Edit to add: I almost forgot to say... Probably one of the more stupid, asinine, unintelligent, and thoughtless comments I have seen in this forum in a while. This definately qualifies as verbal diarrhea.

I wonder to what extent the fabric will heal itself. My reason being is that my RDS has been rubbing holes into my tail, and the ZPX material may be a nice thing to have if it can fix holes half an inch or under. It is a real pain to have to constantly be worrying about the line burns and holes from the RDS lanyard, but I guess thats part of having one. If the self healing properties of the ZPX material are that good, it could be a worthwhile investment. Do you have any information on this, Les?

Buy a shitload of these things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJnn-wMPU9w On second thought, they probably wont really help out your mouse problem. In that case, give Richard Gere a call. I hear he's always happy to help out when it comes to small animals.

Allow me to quote Tupac Shakur: "Work is fo suckas." All the cool kids start wingsuit at 120 jumps. The even cooler kids start wingsuit at 120 jumps AND do it solo without a first flight course. I guess the question is "How cool do you want to be?"

I'm suprised that no one posted this pic yet since we got on the topic of midgets http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=111424;

I thought it was a Super Awesome video! Keep up the great work guys! See ya later (in the incidents forum)!

You lose all credibility when you speak due to the fact that you still use a protec helmet

I just recieved my new Wings container and I'm really happy with the way it came out, except for the fact that they charged me $35 for a hook knife on the mud flap and give me one of the little orange plastic ones. That is absolute bull shit. I can't believe any manufacturer is willing to assume the liability involved with promoting this type of hook knife in the skydiving environment.

I second what Drake said. Learning to slide in landings (properly) has really helped out my knee as well. It reduces the chances of reinjury no matter how fast you are going (up to a certain limit, of course).

After my first knee surgery, I was out for about 4 months. My first jump back was with a wingsuit and it went well. I had a fairly large amount of wingsuit jumps before my injury, so I knew I would feel comfortable dong a solo wingsuit for my first jump back. Start flying the wingsuit when you feel comfortable that you can be safe to yourself and others. You don't really get as rusty as you would think after 4 months. Just don't rush back into it too quickly (thats part of the reason why I had to get a second knee surgery last December).

That wasn't really an inflation issue with that flappy legwing. One of the zippers on Steve's legwing blew out on that jump. He still held his slot nicely

I asked them about it yesterday when i was there and they said that my canopy won't fit in any of their rigs, so I had to rent one of Dave's personal rigs and put my canopy in it. So, Phil, can I borrow your dirty pond rig? I will pay you in money (or back rubs, if thats you kind of thing).