• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


fcajump last won the day on October 20 2020

fcajump had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

46 Neutral

1 Follower


  • Container Other
    Jav Ody
  • Main Canopy Size
  • Main Canopy Other
  • Reserve Canopy Size
  • Reserve Canopy Other
  • AAD
    Cypres 2

Jump Profile

  • Home DZ
    Skydive Orange (http://www.skydiveorange.com)
  • License
  • License Number
  • Licensing Organization
  • Number of Jumps
  • Years in Sport
  • First Choice Discipline
  • First Choice Discipline Jump Total
  • Freefall Photographer

Ratings and Rigging

  • Tandem
  • USPA Coach
  • Pro Rating
  • Wingsuit Instructor
  • Rigging Back
    Master Rigger
  • Rigging Chest
    Master Rigger
  • Rigging Seat
    Master Rigger

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Looking back on this, I'll bump it up with the question as to whether anyone else has recommendations beyond Paralog. While I now have my jumps over to it from JumpTrack, and it is (mostly) working, the lack of documentation, inconsistencies in how some of the features are supposed to work vs how they actually seem to (mostly not) work is frustrating. I'll keep using it for now, just wanted to see what other software y'all are using (if any). Among other features I'd like to have would be something that would link my video to the decent graph so as to easily see the graph move with the video. JW
  2. Ok... I'm familiar with pull out, and throw out... is there a pic/diagram of the hybrid setup?
  3. Anecdotal story told to me by a DPRE when working on my Masters rating was of a Master Rigger that had just done the major repair of replacing main lift webs/risers on a rig with the proper thread (cordage) only to have a catastrophic harness failure. Cause was traced down to his thread being stored where it was exposed to daily sun through a window. Testing of his thread found it was brittle/degraded with the conclusion being the degradation being due to UV. But when properly stored, does it breakdown in the absence of UV/chemical/heat sources... not that I know of... (and yes, for many reasons I am one that refers rigs over 20-25 years to other riggers) JW
  4. I don't recall who it was, but one of the sport mfg's was offering (a few years back), a very quick turn if you would take a stock container size in all black except for a custom center star-burst flap. Meant they could produce them 90% done in bulk and during slow periods, and you still got the custom center and harness sizing. JW
  5. This discussion originated on another site, but it seemed as though it would be appropriate to post here as well. My e-mail to SE: The question is: As SE has long placed non-reusable heat shrink covers over the French links on its PEPs, which once removed could only be replaced by disconnecting the line-to-riser connection to thread on new heat-shrink tubing, is it SE's intension that the rigger: - only inspect the links through the existing cover, - remove the cover, decouple the system, thread on new covers, inspect and reassemble, or - remove the cover and inspect as per industry standard practice, and leave them without covers? We specifically note that (as an example), the 304 Manual dated March 2021 indicates that one should: Section 5. Pre-Packing Inspection • Check the barrels on #6 Rapide link for cracks. • Check that links are tight. This would imply that the covers must be removed in order to perform this inspection. If the cover is not supposed to be removed, does this mean we must ground a rig that comes to us without the heat shrink cover? Do you allow other types of link covers (such as the slide-able vinyl tubing with a retaining tack loop, common on main skydiving canopies utilizing hard links)? As a follow-up/related question: Some who understand the instructions to mean that the covers are to be removed, and who have concerns that the then loose lines on the links could slide around the link exposing them to uneven loading during deployment, have suggested that, as with other manufacturers instructions on similarly rigged PEPs, the lines should be tacked as a group. (see pg 9 of the Butler "Personnel Canopy Packing Instructions" for example) Does SE endorse, allow, or not allow the tacking of the lines into a group for this purpose? --------------- The response from SE: In order for the links to be properly inspected you must remove the heat shrink. While the heat shrink can be replaced in the field as mentioned by decoupling the system we do approve that the heat shrink be left off. In this case we recommend that the link be hand tacked as close as possible on the riser end to prevent side loading and that the lines be tacked into groups preventing them from sliding out of place. We also approve the use of the mentioned vinyl tubing with retaining tack loop as an alternative link cover.
  6. According to this: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-woman-mowing-the-lawn-at-a-canadian-airstrip-is-struck-and-killed-by-a-small-plane-making-a-landing/ar-AALQtk7?li=BBnb7Kz The plane was a Nanchang CJ-6, which looks like it is not a tail dragger. JW
  7. One airport I jump at, all we have are taildraggers (and most without radios) and a grass strip that needs frequent mowing. So, standard procedure is a pass down the bean field next to the runway prior to making your final landing pattern. It was done that way when these planes were new (1930-40's), and it still works for the most part. Your pass both allows for a pilot's visual check of the entire runway and to visually announce your intention to land on the next circuit. The visibility for a tail dragger on landing is not much different than in a tricycle, but on taxi, initial TO, and roll-out the visibility can be from limited to completely obscured depending on the plane. If you are around them, remember if you can't see their face, they can't see you. (I've known of one case where one taxi'ed in front of one just starting it TO roll and they met nose to firewall to nose.) Best wishes to those involved... RIP. JW
  8. (PD reserve pull test is at 30 lbs last time I looked, though the PIA standard is 40lbs... When first included as an annual test on their reserves, IIRC they said there was too much potential for fiber distortion past the elastic rebound at 40lb and they felt 30 was sufficient to prove suitable strength.) JW
  9. #1 PChapman has it right. BUT,,, keep asking this question, studying, learning, and talking with your rigger (especially if (s)he has experience with it...) I was right there with you when I started jumping, I was asking this exact same question. At this point (30 years later) have >12 intentional cutaways in addition to 3 real reserve rides. From my experience with both real and planned, I will echo some critical points: - can you, yes* (*start with PChapman's info and then seek out professional help) - any system setup to do so safely is by definition more complex and I would NOT hand it to a newer jumper (thinking 'C or D' license minimum) It DOES give you more chances to F-up and get hurt. - does it give you additional feel for what a cutaway is like and confidence? oh-yea... YES!! - does it tell you what an actual emergency is like? oh-H3LL no... For me, the journey was worth it, and I'm looking for more options down this road, but PLEASE proceed with great care and caution. JW PS - this is an unusual enough jump, you'll need to be prepared for several things beyond just getting the rig put together: - practice/practice/practice... know by feel each handle and the pull order for every possible scenario. If the rig design permits it, make a "normal" jump or two with the gear before the intentional. (I've seen designs that require the first canopy to be deployed/chopped (or landed) before the real main can be deployed. Mine allows the dummy canopy to be left undeployed. - who is going to gear check your one-off gear? prepare to train your DZ rigger/S&TA on how to pin-check your gear. - is the S&TA and DZO going to allow you to use it at their DZ? - what are the DZ procedures (if any) for doing an intentional (I literally wrote the manual for my local DZ - wonder if they can still find it? ;-) ). - make sure Manifest and the Pilot know what you're doing, good idea for manifest to announce it to those on the ground (some like to watch and it will keep other's from freaking) - be prepared for someone off DZ to call 911 on you (I've been met by the ambulance on one occasion)... another reason to make sure manifest knows before you go.
  10. Actually, it is not only not stupid, it is specifically correct and even what you yourself asked for... "express wingloading as pounds per square foot".... "1.2 pound per 1 square foot" is literally notated as "1.2:1" Often we use a short hand of "1.2" to express the same thing, but you _are_ being provided with _exactly_ what you're asking for... JW
  11. A friend still jumps a pair of Sweethogs... and they look factory fresh. (one was even retro'ed for a Cypres by SSK themselves) I'm thinking of putting my 1991 Vector II back in the air. On the other hand, I've known of some pilot rigs (same materials) that were forcibly retired by the factory after 2 years of use. ETA - these were a group of specific rigs, grounded due to condition (prolonged sun exposure) during inspection, not a categoric grounding of a make/model for age, etc... Example given to show how user treatment of the gear plays a critical role in how long they last. How old a rig I will inspect/pack for others, is a completely different question. JW
  12. for which we are all grateful! Please keep it that way. (~2000 I met one "young" lady that had a new Javelin with capwells... said she'd had something like 17 cutaways on them and didn't trust herself to reach anywhere new, so she spend extra to get the old stuff she was used to) For myself, I once told me instructor that between the out-board MLW main ripcord, a barrel chested build, and the over-the-glasses goggles I couldn't (and had never) seen the ripcord handle... he just about freaked... and now we have students reaching for a BOC handle that they will never see before deployment. (so, I was just a trend setter??) But it did start my thinking that one should always know what they feel like without visual confirmation. JW
  13. I think if you are going to do the two-hands-per-handle method, it is a good idea to look silver before punching the cutaway. As a heavier guy with a floppier suit, I am also cognizant of moving the material behind the MLW and ensuring the handles are clear to grab. For myself, I was taught and use the one-hand-per-handle method and I prefer it (and have needed to use it). It means that I _know_ where the silver is before and after I cut-away. It also means that when a PC-in-tow cleared and slammed me just as I was putting my hands on my handles... the reserve handle popped clear of its Velcro and I ended up with 2 out... so, there is that... I would like to offer a few related opinions: - whichever method you learn, stick with it... your reactions will be quicker than second guessing - when you need a reserve repack, arrange with the rigger to let you pull the reserve _every time_. There is nothing more reassuring than to KNOW what it feels like before you have to pull it in anger. (and know that when you do pull it in anger... its generally much easier to pull... something about adrenaline) - get a real reserve handle (metal). Remember you've got to be ready to have a hard pull, in the winter, with heavy gloves, when you're only 1/2 (physically and/or mentally) there because of the sh!t that went down bringing you to this point. - practice them (physically and mentally) multiple times each time you don the rig. And then practice with your eyes closed (your goggles flipped off during the exit or you visor fogged up), and then practice with one hand (do to the broken arm you experienced in the rush to exit the DC-3 to get into your slot in the big-way attempt) and then practice with the other arm (you know, because your other shoulder sometimes pops out of socket when dealing with a troublesome formation)... Just my $.02 JW
  14. Actually, I would figure that if the manufacturer was being driven by the lawyers the max weight in each category would be going down, not up. While I would never speak for PD, my _guess_ is that their comfort level has evolved over time as: - line trims have been adjusted to optimize (and are being replaced/fixed more often now?) - jumper's understanding of canopy performance is better (more experienced instructors, more industry knowledge at the DZ, canopy classes, etc...) for how these models perform. - factory's observations of how jumpers in the field are handling the limits (and over limit) behavior. - numbers of hours flown by x number canopies with minimal issues due to experience/weight combinations. Finally - maybe its just me, but I also never really correlated the canopy experience with license levels... However, if you do, then maybe you could argue that they were adjusting as the average jumper was conforming to the higher number of jumps/license. (ok, old folks... remind me cause I don't remember... when did they bump up the #jumps/license level?? I was already at 'D' and had 500 when they bumped it up to there...) JW
  15. (not a fan of slider straps of any kind... but...) So THAT's what the [email protected] ball in the beer is good for... JW