• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Community Reputation

22 Neutral


  • Main Canopy Size
    Skylark Odyssey EVO 105
  • AAD
    Vigil 2

Jump Profile

  • Home DZ
    Skydive Vancouver
  • License
  • Number of Jumps
  • Tunnel Hours
  • Years in Sport
  • First Choice Discipline
    Canopy Piloting
  • First Choice Discipline Jump Total
  • Freefall Photographer

Ratings and Rigging

  • USPA Coach
  • Pro Rating
  • Wingsuit Instructor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Totally not in the loop as far as how these qualifications work, but here’s one “out there” idea for a high-tech age. Develop a database with login credentials, save a video for every qualifying jump for a AFFI candidate (not only successful but failed ones as well). Then if something goes wrong down the road - it’d be easy to review if that instructor actually passed all requirements and who signed off for that. A step further would be to make a system where X number of independent examiners have to review the videos and ‘pass’ the candidate (e.g. 5 to review, 4 out of 5 to pass, or 10 to review, 6/7/8/9/10 of of 10 to pass). This would ensure a permanent record, a more unified approach towards standards required to pass and virtually eliminate any questions regarding qualifications of any given AFFI. It may or may not be difficult to implement for reasons I don’t know. As I said, just poppped into my mind, decided to share.
  2. Almost any mal that has ever happened could have been avoided one way or another. That’s not the point.
  3. One more reason to jump with bigger reserves, in case when every square inch of fabric over your head counts..
  4. I agree with all of that, but was wondering if I am missing something. On that note, I am looking for recommendations for a 'best' modern rig brand/model/size that would hold 90 crossbraced with a 143 standard reserve (not an LV)? If such combo is hard to come by, then perhaps 126 reserve? I have not done much research yet, just want to get a general feel and opinions from anyone who happen to jump a similar combo. Edit - I am currently jumping a 105 main that packs a little bigger (maybe a 115) with a 150 old(ish) Microraven reserve. My rig is sized so that I can't go any lower on the main and my reserve fits tight, so looking to switch pretty soon to something that would give me room to downsize to a 90(ish) crossbraced with a 143/126 reserve that isn't packed too tight (but not loose either).
  5. What’s everyone’s opinion on small reserves? I get it it’s all relative and I heard an opinion that ideally reserve should be close to the size of the main, which supposedly should be easier to deal with in the event of double out, but personally I’ve been reluctant to downsize my reserve, rig specs permitting. I’m flying 105 main with a 150 reserve now, I’m a smaller dude so might consider 126 in the future, but overall my attitude is that my reserve is my last line of defense and so far I can’t justify the benefit of a smaller and slicker rig at the expense of reduced safety (i.e. spinning linetwists). I guess it also is somewhat discipline-specific?
  6. Need more info to answer. “Swooping” is a broad term these days. Short answer is Ody EVO. The wing loves to be loaded though, I’m flying 1.8 and it’s arguably it’s starting range. Katana will dive more (probably) due to steeper trim, but EVO is a another generation, dives are super consistent and (again, an assumption) will carry the energy better and longer due to a number of innovative design elements.
  7. Yes, I would. Directly from their website: "Odyssey Evo is a great example of how Evo platform raises the bar for non-cross-braced canopies to the level of ultra high performance wings". I have to note here that what they refer to "ultra high performance" mainly applies to high wingloading over 2 and even closer to 2.5. This wing is a great stepping stone to CB canopies and flies great at lower WL around 1.8-2.0 (I fly it at 1.8 and that's exactly why I went with this canopy). IMHO there is no point in loading it lower than that. From what I know so far this wing loves to be loaded though and full potential is realized at high WL.
  8. No they don't and pictures they have are not at an angle to see the planform, but it is schuemann -
  9. ??? Really? Did you actually try to stall it? I find some wings give you much stronger “toggle resistance” earlier than others but often it’s deceptive and the wing wouldn’t stall till much deeper/later. Also doesn’t it mess it with your FR inputs? Sorry never flown a fully CB wing yet, just curious
  10. Thanks a lot for the feedback man, really helps!
  11. How does it perform on a lighter wingloading (around 1.8)? I am currently jumping the original Odyssey 120 at around 1.55 and feel like it's not loaded enough, flies great and overall great canopy, but I would like a bit more oomph out of it. So considering either getting another Odyssey 110 (1.7 WL) or Odyssey EVO 105 (1.8). How would these two canopies compare? This season i started to dedicate more jumps specifically to canopy flight and taking canopy courses, next season's plan is to dial in those 90's and make a transition to 270's by the end of the season, so looking for an appropriate canopy for the goals. My thinking is that Evo 105 should be a good transition canopy to a crossbraced canopy after a couple of seasons (as in Evo 105 - crossbraced 90 for example) as getting anything over 90 would mean WL less than 2.0 which is not optimal for crossbraced. But I am not sure if Od-120 to Evo-105 is a good step. Would love to hear your opinion.
  12. Had the same problem with magnetic keeper. Put slider tabs on the risers but they only hold the front side down (and still not ideal). After a bit of research went on with the ball/elastic band approach, but a bit modified - I have a ball on the top of the yoke and installed a small loop on the bottom of my slider (at the center) to put an elastic band in (regular stow band cut in half to be able to easily break in case of a chop) - I am loving it! I don't even collapse my slider anymore - after opening pull on the center of the slider, roll it around itself 2 or 3 times and put the elastic band on the ball behind your back - very tight and I practically forgot about that annoying slider. Plus, don't need to do anything with the slider before you pack - just take the band off the ball - ready to pack. Ordered my new canopy with a removable slider before I tried this setup, now thinking I should have gotten a regular slider and simply do the same thing.. Here's a recent video, just scroll to 1:04 to see what I mean: Edit to add: I understand you are talking about detachable slider, the setup I'm explaining will solve the issue without needing to collapse it.
  13. I am wondering what is a good camera for recording landings from LZ? With so many available I'm looking for something affordable but don't want to miss out on required specs. I know it has to have a good optical zoom, anything else? And for the zoom - what is good? X5? X10? X40? Don't want to overpay for features I don't need.. Every life comes with a death sentence. Until then, who's in charge?
  14. Interesting topic. When I first moved from rounds to squares, and before I learned how to PRO and eventually psycho pack, I used to flat pack. In that packing sequence, the entire canopy was folded into a d-bag wide "sausage" with its top end into the d-bag before I even move the slider up right before s-folding everything into the bag. While I did quarter the slider and tucked its center into the pack job, I used to grab its quarters sticking out in between the line groups and WRAPED THOSE AROUND THE BOTTOM OF THE PACKJOB pulling those upwards a bit to ensure slider grommets are against the stops at all times. So, essentially my slider was covering the bottom of my pack job and not the other way around, so the slider was always the first thing exposed during the opening. Can't remember having any problems with openings with that method. Not taking any sides here - just something I forgot about and this thread brought this up to my attention. I do find it interesting though that PD explicitly shows SE pack job as "WRONG" - given their unparalleled reasearch and testing capacity I never questioned their recommendations.