pchapman

Members
  • Content

    5,549
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Community Reputation

38 Neutral

Gear

  • Main Canopy Other
    75,88,135,154,265,265,282, & some rounds
  • Reserve Canopy Other
    2* PD143, 2* Phantom 24, Baby Cobra
  • AAD
    Cypres 2

Jump Profile

  • Home DZ
    (Ontario, Canada)
  • License
    D
  • License Number
    1014
  • Licensing Organization
    CSPA
  • Number of Jumps
    3700
  • Years in Sport
    25

Ratings and Rigging

  • Tandem
    Instructor
  • Pro Rating
    Yes
  • Rigging Back
    Senior Rigger
  • Rigging Chest
    Senior Rigger
  • Rigging Seat
    Senior Rigger

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. pchapman

    Fliteline Reflex Res. Closing loop

    While we are sharing Reflex loop info, here's more: 1. Basically the same thing but from the Trident folks who I guess took over the TSO later. At least that shows updated manufacturer info is the same. 2. A two page instruction set unlike the single sheet one seen so far. It has some early scribblings of mine all over it, which can either be distracting or useful. When I first had to build the loops, it was all a bit confusing what each of those A,B,C,D and other marks or sections would correspond to in the final assembly....
  2. pchapman

    My little project

    You STILL have difficulty jumping homemade parachutes? Still jerks out there trying to restrict peoples' canopy choice, beyond just wing loading and similar... Are they worried about liability? Plenty of people under normal parachutes hurt themselves. I recall the rigger rating thing was an issue of the BPA, an organization that is always fun to make fun of for its conservative stupidity, but it sounds like the current problem is more local. I guess I should re-read all 21 pages of this thread before commenting on the problems you face, but anyway. You've had tons of dedication to go through the whole process of designing and building your own canopies. Sorry to hear you aren't that enthused about regular jumping but you've put more time into the sport than some who come and go. There are other parachutes out there that are fun to learn to fly or rig up too, whether getting into swooping or putting vintage gear back in the air, but you've had your own thing going. (For example, I've had fun with weird canopies, whether jumping rounds or Rogallo wings or doing intentional cutaways or using belly mount reserves or modifying a canopy to make a tiny cutaway-only canopy. All these activities are enough to scare some DZ owners too!) By the way, what do you do in 'real life'?
  3. pchapman

    Bluetones skydiving music group?

    Nope, didn't get any off-thread answers. Just your one reply after 10 years! One could ask on the oldschool skydiving facebook group...
  4. pchapman

    Simple Video triming tool needed

    That Win 10 Photos app feature is handy to know about. Although it is set up more for editing videos together, so it takes a few more clicks to get to editing a video -- one can't just drag a video onto the app. Have used AviDemux but found the interface a little confusing and awkward. I like Free Video Editor, by DVDVideosoft. Quick and easy trims without re-encoding. Only for single videos, not putting together multiple videos like the Win 10 Photos app can. Great for cutting down the nowadays huge GoPro videos of a jump to keep just the good bits. Caveats are: 1. De-select the crapware it tries to install when installing the software, 2. Someone online said that the later versions wouldn't save without re-encoding, but the company still states that it does, as one of its features. Not sure what that's about or what is true. I'm running an older version 1.4.4 that works fine.
  5. Don't think it is an issue. Just the way canopies are made. Front and rear grommets are not always lined up at the same level. Given that canopies are built pitched down at the front, grommets certainly wouldn't line if there were no stabilizers, as the C/D's would be further from the links than the A/B's. With stabilizers, results vary. Ideally grommets would all line up so the slider would be better aligned perpendicular to the relative wind during opening.
  6. If it helps: Although advertising isn't technically allowed, a little bit of occasional product announcement tends to be tolerated. So it shouldn't be a real problem to mention a skydiving related book that is new to the market. But that's just my opinion. If someone from a company wants to mention their totally new product and let people discuss it (for better or worse), I think people are OK with that and the post won't be deleted or anything. If they want to talk about how they just released version 3.2.11a, or how they have a 5% sale this month, that's going too far. So it tends to be a "Just don't be a jerk about it" sort of rule. Although you are now tending slightly in that direction...
  7. Go ahead and buy a digital alti that you like. But just remember that we all used to have analog ones, and that was no problem. Altitude doesn't matter, except when you actually flare to avoid hitting the ground. There was never any big need to turn onto a particular part of the circuit at a particular altitude. We used to have suggested numbers for altitudes for the start of downwind, base, and final, but nobody expected to follow it exactly. Only nowadays are newbies fretting about whether they actually started to turn base at 600'+/- 50 '. Who cares. An accurate circuit is all about ANGLES not altitudes anyway. If there's lots of traffic, fit in with the traffic, which is likely to be approaching at a variety of angles and altitudes anyway. You'll get a feel for the circuit over time. Maybe 20-30 seconds on final, time to adjust a little and plan your flare and landing area. Maybe another 20 seconds on base, enough to judge drift and separate the downwind to the side of the landing area. I'm just making the numbers up, but you don't need an altimeter at all for a circuit.
  8. pchapman

    Audibles with adjustable volume?

    Even the manual for the older ProTrack says: LO: +110 dB +/- 2dB measured at 1 inch (2.5 cm) HI: +117 dB +/- 2dB measured at 1 inch (2.5 cm) But similar to what others are saying, alarm sounds are only that high so that the alarms can be heard in the first place over the wind noise. And such numbers were chosen when open face helmets were more common. So use earplugs if you like. Even the airplane noise isn't great. Maybe not at the 'clearly harmful' level, but it isn't bad to keep the noise level down when jumping a lot. (There have been studies published and some data presented on dz. ) If you have some fancy-ass closed face helmet, and the volume is too loud, and the helmet liner isn't enough to reduce the volume, and you don't use ear plugs ... it shouldn't be too hard to come up with a little extra padding or covering over the sound port on the audible to lower the volume.
  9. pchapman

    Riser ring

    Wow. So that's not just some odd reflection in the photo, but the middle ring is actually like top and bottom halves of a bagel stuck together, with the top half smaller? Or what is it that we're seeing?
  10. pchapman

    New SL/IAD "freefall" jump requirement

    I have no real involvement in all this, but: Really? Wow. That goes against the way we all have defined things in North America for the last 100+ years of parachuting. What counts as NOT freefall? Direct bagging from the aircraft? Pull-off from the wing? Getting pulled out the door by an accidental opening?
  11. pchapman

    Full-face helmets

    Don't get your certifications mixed up. The poster you quoted was quoting one sample airports helmet standard. The G4 helmet is certified to the French AFNOR "Skydiving and Wind Tunnel Helmet Standard XP S 72-600" The Tonfly TFX for example is certified to that same standard, plus EN966: 2012 + A1: 2012, category HPG for AIRBORNE SPORTS I'm not sure why you would be all against a hang-gliding/paragliding/microlight airsports standard -- unless you came up with some very specific technical objections based on actual facts. (Hooknswoop provided a link to some EN966 info) EDIT: Standards can be frustrating because one can't always download the actual standard (without paying a lot of money for them). More searching on the web would be needed to help understand how XP S 72-600 compares with other prior standards, what things are emphasized or not.
  12. I'm just trying to understand how the US system works, and a quick skim of the SIM hasn't clarified anything for me: Is anyone supposed to write a report if there's an incident or accident to a USPA member? A local S&TA has the responsibility? Are individual jumpers supposed to write anything up? Is any report writing requirement generally followed, or does that just depend on the DZ culture? For comparison, I'm in Canada where under the CSPA each jumper is supposed to fill out the Accident/Incident/Malfunction report form in case of an incident or accident, or even if they have a malfunction. At the national level, reports are summarized & anonymized and I believe destroyed -- Something like the US system I think. If a student is involved, the instructor would write the report. Some DZ's don't push the issue for minor stuff, so I'm sure plenty of plain old mals never get reported. Other DZ's are more insistent on having the reports handed in to be passed up the chain. A jumper's report on their own incident might not be all that informative, especially if they don't want to take the time or are inexperienced. Certainly if students are involved, and liability is higher, reports are highly likely to be made, or else the legal defense fund that a school may optionally contribute to, won't be in effect for that incident. At the DZ I'm at, the DZ takes the reports, passes them to the CSPA, and keeps copies of the reports, which are summarized at the start of next season, for the experienced jumpers and instructors to learn from. It is in effect a local safety feedback loop, a sort of Safety Day kind of thing.
  13. pchapman

    Russian paratroopers

    I'm not sure what their current system is, but the one I'm familiar with is the D-6 which is or was a common Russian paratrooper rig. There the drogue is static lined on exit, with the drogue attachment basically at the top of the pack behind one's neck. A rotating disc release mechanism can be activated by a KAP-3 style mechanical AAD, or by ripcord. The drogue then pulls the main canopy out. The whole system allows one to have a relatively light and large main canopy yet jump at very high exit speed. A few pics from my system are attached. (I posted years back on DZ, but the new dropzone.com system has made the old photos disappear)
  14. I would hope local DZ's wouldn't try to drag things out. Although there are no bad DZ's in Ontario, yeah I can see some being wary. Some people stick with the sport and some don't, some students need more jumps than others. So who knows what would be needed. In Canada, it is normal to have to do one other type jump before doing a PFF course. So you would in any case do a Tandem or Static-line or IAD jump first, to get used to jumping and demonstrate that you, like any newbie, could follow basic instructions. (Static line and IAD are similar.) There is the occasional DZ that has a waiver and does PFF from the first jump (eg SWOOP, Grand Bend I guess). Also some that do a Tandem Progression where one does a few tandems before moving to PFF with only one instructor (eg, PST, Burnaby, Gananoque I think). Others do what I described as the standard PFF, including the one jump before the full PFF system (eg Skydive Toronto, Niagara maybe). So there is a fair bit of variation in accepted methods. I remember doing PFF with someone banned from the UK system (above age 55 to start) while at Skydive Toronto, and we got him graduated, although the guy was pretty stiff, which made it take longer to learn to fly stable. As to what decisions an instructor would make with you, who knows what they would think after meeting and working with you. There is some concern in skydiving that harder openings are more dangerous for old people. While we all recover from things a bit slower as we age, a rogue hard opening can be rougher or more dangerous to a quite old person. Heck even I with 30 years in the sport wonder when "the right time" will be to retire. That said, there are certainly a bunch of 60+ jumpers out there.
  15. pchapman

    Downsizing as a student

    Certainly. Still, something being commonly accepted, even by DZO's, at multiple DZs, is at least suggestive that it meets current standards of acceptability, without being proof that it will stand the test of time. Humans, amazingly enough, are not infallible. Perhaps you could argue something more specific, such as suggesting a maximum wing loading policy for novices that you support, and the reasons for it? At how many jumps is a 1.1 wing loading acceptable, for someone flying their canopy competently? (@Rsaarson: 1960's style hand turns are turns made using only the hands, angling them but not not moving the arms... A waste of potential turning power.)