waltappel

An opportunity to experience the thrill of risking your life, personal reputation, and the reputation of our sport in front of sponsors, reporters, FAA reps, friends, family, and lots and lots of other people and, if all goes well, have the crowd's unwavering worship for up to 5 seconds after you land! Of course if all doesn't go well it can kind of suck. Walt

You have brought up some very good points in your posts and I think it is undeniable that demo jumps are in no way *ordinary* skydives. There is usually a lot going on and always some unknowns to deal with and a casual attitude can be disastrous. I think the most important factor for doing good safe demo jumps is the attitude of each member of the demo team, and the most important part of that attitude is having the courage to say 'NO' when the situation warrants it. That is something that raising fees and requirements cannot instill in anyone. I am all for some sort of apprenticeship or formal training, but that is something that is not readily available to a lot of jumpers and may not ever be easily available, because there is just not much of a demand for it in the skydiving community. I agree with a lot of what you have to say, but I don't think raising requirements and fees is going to prevent demo accidents caused by poor judgement. Walt

Why do you feel the requirements are too low? I do not mean this as an attack on you but I must ask whether your motivation is to reduce the number of qualified demo jumpers so you get more contracts. A PRO rating is not all that easy to get and I see no reason to make the requirements more stringent. I could *possibly* see an advantage to having two levels of PRO rating--one for those who organize demos and another for those who simply do the jumps but are not involved in the organization, but even this seems a bit questionable. Walt

Whoever made that jump has some seriously big balls!!! walt

A few years ago I put 50+ jumps on a Sabre 170, loading it at roughly 1.2. Normally, I jumped (and still jump!) a Triathlon 175. One day, I made several jumps in some moderately gusty conditions and noticed that the Sabre had a tendency to "breathe" a little, but it was nowhere near collapsing. Can you be more specific about the collapsing you experienced? On the Sabre I jumped, I was seeing the 2 or 3 cell openings breathing, but not completely collapsing. I didn't consider this any big deal, but it did make me appreciate my Triathlon's stable cell pressurization even more. Walt

I've had my Oxygn for several years now and I like it quite a bit. The only issue I've had is the face shield. It is treated with some sort of (I think) anti-fog coating that, in my opinion, can be a real annoyance. If you get an Oxygn, pay attention to the face shield cleaning instructions, because if you simply try to wipe it with a wet cloth or paper towel, it will create a sticky mess on the face shield that will block your view. The coating seems to deteriorate with use--maybe from the moisture from breathing and condensation during freefall. I've had to replace the face shield a couple of times. I still think it's a great helmet, though. One other thing--the Pro Track factory mount fits in a recessed slot it the helmet, which is great for protecting it, but it also makes it kind of awkward to remove the Pro Track to change batteries or whatever. Also, I put 2 rubber bands around the Pro Track and the mounting bracket to keep it from popping out during freefall. This is probably unnecessary, but it satisfies my paranoia.

How about going to the source? Here is the e-mail address for the Relative Workshop. Doesn't matter what kind of rig you have--they invented the three-ring release system. [email protected]

I think the description of "aggressive design" refers to the tradeoff of canopy stability vs. maneuverability. For example, elliptical canopies seem to be quite a bit more sensitive to harness input than rectangular canopies, so they are less stable, but they can turn quite dramatically.

I think you will be pleasantly surprised and quite amazed with the new gear. PCs had a tendency to open a bit on the hard side, and the typical harnesses we used back then did not help much. There are also canopies that are specifically designed to open softly, but keep in mind that the packer has a great deal of control over the opening speed. Student canopies are generally considered docile-to-medium in their handling and opening characteristics, but they are very high performance compared to the PCs. No worries about openings or transitioning to the new gear, though, because the teaching methods have improved quite dramatically. I hope you do get back into the sport. Most skydivers (and DZs) these days are more civilized than back then, but the fun is still definitely there. Walt p.s. You would be quite surprised at how many skydivers have never seen a round canopy in the air!