captain_stan

Then maybe being a coach is not for you. You must have taken it seriously though, or it wouldn't have felt like so much work. I think it's an even trade-off for those who do it well and appreciate the paid slot. But from what I hear about training in the UK, these requirements have raised the students' cost out-of-reach for many. The program seems to beg for a cost-effective solution by considering models used in other countries.

Says what? I missed the part where he became politically active and damanded looting the assets of the affluent. Aren't you confusing him with Robin Hood? A clergyman decides he'd rather be a political activist, and a church decides it doesn't want to be used as a political platform. What's the problem with that?

Sure. Huh? Would a 1:1 wingloading be way too extreme for someone with 82 jumps? BTW, double front risers can be used to make slight adjustments in glide angle while still high on final, enhancing accuracy. When performed above 100' on a light W/L, short-recovery-arc canopy, this hardly constitutes a high-performance landing. And this can be learned in a coaching enviromnent without the cost of an extra slot. Less so than tracking, which Justpin is evidently already doing per OP. Exiting last on a solo with plenty of delay and then pulling high to make it back adds to the separation.

Other fun things to learn during solo, with the aid of books and video: 1) Back-flying 2) Sit-flying 3) Free-fly transitions 4) Different exits including the above 5) Landing a higher W/L than your listed .76:1 6) Front-riser approaches (per #5) 6) Accuracy landing, possibly from lower altitude. Maybe you really are done...

Predicting the future again, eh Dreamy? I think it's more likely that the 1% will just make another payment to the corrupt politicians that were elected by the less-intellegent majority within that 99%. And it will be business as usual unless the 99% ever wise-up.

I want to see the polls that show how many Americans support those who are breaking the law and the polls that show how many want the police to stop enforcing it. So you admit that your posts are speculative and not factual.

Or even more simply, for the trig-illiterate, think of it as a matter of leverage. If your center of gravity (fulcrum) is near your navel, the longer the distance away from this point that you create extra drag, the more this drag will be multipied by the extra leverage. Longer lever = more effect.

Jesus never ran for political office and even distanced himself from such authority, so this behavior is inappropriate for anyone who wants to emulate him. Of course not all self-proclaimed Christians want to emulate Jesus. As for religion in general, I wouldn't vote for anyone who publicly advertised these, because religion is a private, personal matter. Anyone who expects to gain popularity this way has a perverted motive. OTOH, I wouln't disqualify a candidate solely on his personal beliefs; I wouldn't expect an apology from one who had a record of attending a church/mosque/temple.

You're at an even greater disadvantage when you let "someone else" do this for you, because they may leave out some inconvenient facts. I find it difficult enough to be well-informed when taking in the actual reported news because of how this is edited to include or exclude selected stories. To me, the mainstream media is only a starting point to stimulate more-inclusive research. And the op-eds have even less value than the news. I say that we'd be better-off learning to winnow our own news.

When the media provides factual data, it is no longer opinion--it is news. Who we think will lose the next election is not news, but conjecture. The problem with op-eds is that although they may be sprinkled with facts, they are a product of the writers' bias, which can take us farther away from reality. The electorate has largely surrendered their intellect to the media and lost their ability to distinguish opinion from fact. Op-eds are a personalized version of the news for those who aren't thoughtful enough to make sense of current events. They can provide a warm, fuzzy feeling for those who want to be validated or stir up anger in those with an opposing view. After decades of reading this BS, I find it nothing more than a form of entertainment and would be happier with knowing "just the facts." That's just my opinion, but it's as good as anyone's.

OK, I admit to a short attention span--If I want an opinion, I can reach a perfectly good one on my own without haveing to recycle someone else's. As far as the "Obama/toast" tagline, it sounds like an attempt to spark reader interest in a slow-news market by predicting the furure of a race that probably doesn't matter much anyway. But my answer would be, "I hope so." A voter-imposed term limit might make me feel a little better, but anyone who is electable won't be much of an improvement.

If your post is so lengthy that even you have to copy/paste it instead of typing, you can't expect many of us to put forth the effort to read it. Did you really type that mess by hand? Sorry, it still doesn't seem important enought to read.

If I may clarify my previous post, this is not something that necessarily begs to be "rectified." If you lengthen the brake lines you negate some of the benefit you might have wanted. While the toggle stroke is indeed lengthened with longer risers, at some point this can exceed its usable control range. At my W/L with standard 21" risers, the primary range that I use doesn't go any lower than my chest, and I only pull them to the bottom to be sure I've milked all the lift (and drag) out of my canopy as I touch my feet down. I'm guessing that the bottom .5' or 1' of toggle stroke does nothing for me because it's below the stall-point of my canopy. But a person with longer arms might want to feel the usable range in a higher, more-comfortable arm position by lengthening the risers to raise the toggles (and dive loops). Although you can vertically lower the control range by lengthening the lines, you are limited by the riser length in how much you can raise it by shortening the lines. When you reach that limit, longer risers come into play. OTOH, the total length of stroke might be an issue with a heavy jumper under a big, docile canopy. When we put chubby, short-armed students under big 300-sq-ft F111 canopies, we used some 26" risers so that they would get full-arm extension (up and down) for the control range required to fly and land these monsters. They might not have been able to reach the slider, but all they needed was the toggles anyway. Flare, flare, flare!!!

Sure. The good way is to separate yourself physically and emotionally enough from that person so you can move on with your life---whatever distance that may require. Like quitting a bad habit, the problem lies in mustering the self-discipline to do this, for which there is no substitute. The good way is usually not the easy way.

But if you're gonna buy these from the mfr, then you're gonna end up with some of those "inferior" single-throw zig-zag stows as pictured.

See photo of Sunpath-supplied OEM safety stow. Very obviously single-throw stitched as can be done on a 20u.

Yikes! Fortunate to have survived the reserve landing, obviously in an unobstructed area. Imagine how this could be affected by obstacles, uneven terrain, or tall trees nearby. It makes an RSL look like a good idea; I want the highest probability of being able to steer and flare before landing.

Well, Tony, what # are you?

Is it alright then to vote for a Democrat or Rebublican who merely sits on his hands and allows the problem to persist, hoping to gain the support of the future block of 2nd-generation voters? Is it alright then to vote for a politician who wants to open the border and legalize this drain on the economy? Would it be any easier for the struggling American middle class to take responsibility for lifting foreigners out of poverty if they had legal status?

Yeah, it is--waaaay bad. But maybe the mfr is indicating that this canopy has undertaken the task of out-flying all others. American Heritage Dictioinary defines "undertaker" as (def #2) "One, especially an entrepeneur, that undertakes a task or job." Somebody better tell the marketing boys over there in Germany that thier trade-name has lost something in translation. And also that the skydivers have gotten ahold of their speedriding wing!

Dunno if they specifically nixed this for the Sabre 1. While it is certainly unsuitable for many newer canopies, it was a standard-enough practice on old-school square canopies that at least one other mfr. recommends it for similar application. Anyway, it works really well. I appreciate that, Nigel. Sabre 2 is a way different animal than Sabre 1 and opens more softly anyway. I'm a little disappointed that PD kept the same name, but the original was marketed very successfully, hence the follow-up.

Then this would be one and the same "Farmer" who shared his rigging tools with me one day in 1998 (or so) at the old Skydive Illinois in Morris? Sorry, I only remember him by that name. RIP bro.

For clarity and for your benefit, I followed my question with a question mark; it's not an accusation. It was based on my own experience with many packs and jumps on canopies that tended to open as hard or harder than the Sabre 1. Discussions like this may help those who need packing tips. Sorry, I didn't think you'd be so sensitive. You'll notice in the thread that many w/ higher jump #'s and more years than you have a higher opinion of the Sabre 1. That could be due to packing skills. OBTW, Let me guess--when you rolled the nose, you didn't stuff each half into the center cell? [rhetorical this time]

From the pilot's perspective, it will feel different because you have raised the operational range of the toggle-stroke a few inches higher.

You do realize that the OP title is a direct reference to Gilda Radner? Just for clarity, I remember her fondly as a sweet, funny young lady who wasn't even close to being politically or ideologically controversial. IIRC, she and Gene Wilder were married at center-court durnig halftime at a Knick's game. Later she died of cancer. If she were alive today and read this thread, she might just dismissively say (in perfect character), "Never mind." Miss ya, Gilda. Edit to add: Incorrect character name in thread title--it's "Roseanne Roseannadanna ."