pchapman

Members
  • Content

    5,655
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2
  • Feedback

    0%

pchapman last won the day on May 22 2020

pchapman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

88 Good

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. I tried what I guess are some skateboard shoes (DC's) but don't like them --- Seemed to have very little padding to absorb any vertical shock. Just the harder rubber outer sole & an insole. Maybe that's something about keeping feet close to the skateboard without thick shock absorption? So running out a landing on hard ground. Maybe someone with more experience with either skate shoes or using them in skydiving can comment. A bunch of people do use them, but didn't work for me. Maybe I'm just more sensitive to that. Running shoes with flatter soles and no big chunky treads, that worked for me for sliding in, both for Sigma tandems and for swoops.
  2. Yeah not very practical. It just gets complex. (Just like this reply did for me...) In theory if there were a DZ with tons of funding (eg military) you could be lent a reserve canopy set up to use as a main. "You have a Smart 150 in your rig? Well, we have a PD 143 set up here, that would at least be similar." There would be complexities because a reserve doesn't normally have the deployment bag attached. (So you need a specially built reserve, or static lining the jump, or removable deployment system, or someone else chasing the d-bag.) Sometimes there are big boogies where manufacturers bring reserves set up to be tried out as mains, but then you need to be around such a big skydiving event. But if you want to actually cut away from a parachute, then you need a 3rd canopy, a reserve, on the system. You can have the reserve to test in its proper place on your back -- which makes putting a real reserve on your belly more complex, especially to have it fully legal. Or you could have the reserve to test on you belly, which keeps your 'last reserve' in your rig as normal, but then the deployment for the test canopy won't be like a real reserve. Either way, having 3 canopies makes the gear and handles and procedures and crap that your wearing more complex and less suited to a newbie. Maybe more dangerous than a real cutaway after a mal! (There was even a World Champion doing a stunt jump for a commercial about 25 years ago, with 3 canopies, who screwed up the order he pulled stuff and died. An unusual case but 3 canopies does get complex.) And even if you set up everything to cutaway to a reserve to test flying it, there won't be nearly the same stress level as if you were having an actual malfunction. So then ideally you'd at least do something like pop one toggle on the main to get yourself spinning around before cutting away. Reserves do fly a little different than the ZP canopies people are used to today. A small F-111 style canopy will tend to have a shorter, sharper flare motion, not a long gradual flare motion. It used to be that people were used to F-111 style canopies from their student days, but now they don't get that. So I do get a little concerned about newer jumpers these days knowing how to properly flare their reserve. At least people learn that they should do practice flares under their reserve when actually flying it after a malfunction. All in all, it gets complex. So in the sport it is considered reasonable to just spend one's time practicing on the ground. Hanging harnesses are good, handle checks on all jumps are good. And you don't buy a reserve that is way smaller than what you are used to jumping as a main.
  3. You're also adding the drag of the wingsuiter (at what body position?), and it is way down low on the whole canopy & pilot system, which also tends to angle the canopy more nose down. So I think that's a different situation overall; it is about more than just more weight There are unmanned military canopy systems that fly just fine at wing loadings of 5 or 10 without dropping out of the sky. "And now back to your regularly scheduled novice wing loading arguments."
  4. You're also adding the drag of the wingsuiter (at what body position?), and it is way down low on the whole canopy & pilot system, which also tends to angle the canopy more nose down. So I think that's a different situation overall; it is about more than just more weight There are unmanned military canopy systems that fly just fine at wing loadings of 5 or 10 without dropping out of the sky. "And now back to your regularly scheduled novice wing loading arguments."
  5. That's almost troll like over-simplicity, typical right wing thinking that I see so often. "Let's never talk about racism because it could be taken as an excuse, and never talk about the USA's failures because then it makes us sound 100% evil and weak, let's never talk about...[whatever]" Something can exist without being the cause of 100% of all effects. Many factors can affect how things happen. You might as well say, "Let's never talk about workers being sick because then workers can blame any issue they have at work on being sick. It gives an excuse for failure". Sure, someone can be silly and can blame all of their problems on X,Y, or Z, but that doesn't mean X, Y, and Z don't actually exist. Yup, troll... on the level of "If the Jewish Holocaust were real, why are there still Jews around?"
  6. You've had a bunch of crap here Brent but I do find one of your comparisons more interesting: North Carolina (apparently locked down) vs. Tennessee (apparently not locked down) I don't know the actual lockdown conditions; I'm just taking it as you presented it. Tennessee did have a higher peak than NC -- the last big peak for both of them being early in January (presumably from xmas holidays), but Tennessee has indeed brought the cases down by a greater fraction, AND has a slightly lower case load now. (I won't show all the numbers but the two states are #9 and #15 on the list at the moment using Johns Hopkins 7 day average case loads, viewed at this news site: https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/covid-19-in-the-u-s-how-do-canada-s-provinces-rank-against-american-states-1.5051033) So yes Brent -- NC vs. Tennessee is a valid situation to ponder. Both states have a somewhat similar rural/urban population (I looked online), and they are neighboring east-west (which gets rid of some of the 'very different climate' issues with other comparisons), but other details are unknown to me. Also remember that us non-right-wingers do have plenty of issues with lockdowns too, as there are so many variations of both lockdowns and non-lockdowns restrictions and actual behaviour. (E.g., "Why can a giant box store selling some food stay open when a small store that doesn't, has to stay closed?" or "Why are ski slopes closed here but not elsewhere - how bad is the risk outdoors even given that one has to share chairlifts to some extent?" ... with the usual caveats about all indoor places restricting capacity / distancing / not having people lounging around indoors for long periods. )
  7. Yeah that's the quick answer. Especially at a high level, the fundamental question of "what is a license for?" gets even bigger than it is at other levels. Would the E license actually be useful in selecting people for something? (e.g, "You want on this 40 way head down? Oh, you have an E license, great, you're practically automatically selected." That's unlikely to work when skills get so specialized at higher levels.) At lower levels, licenses can be more useful for selecting people. (e.g., "C license or higher for this very tight landing area") Is it about being an expert in at least one thing? Or a broad range of stuff? (e.g., fulfilling at least 10 out of a possible 20 qualifications) Or is it just a sort of a big scavenger hunt for bragging rights? (e.g, "You were world champion in a freefly team? Haha, but you never did a wingsuit jump in your life so you can't qualify as an Expert. I'm an Expert because I've done a bunch of different things including my night CRW water jump using oxygen equipment with gear I rigged myself!") Canada's CSPA used to have an E license until maybe 25 years ago before it was discontinued. While it did cover some useful and broad ranges of experience (like instructing, rigging, being in competitions, and the important-in-the-old-days disciplines of RW and accuracy), it was a bit of a scavenger hunt thing (e.g, 5 water landings), so only a dozen or so people ever got them. They can keep the license but otherwise the license no longer exists.
  8. I’ll join in on the pedantry: I accept that people say things like “1.5 to 1” or write “1.5:1”. Yes we understand what they mean (so their language has worked), but it is a messy way to state things and shouldn’t be encouraged in formal use. It is entirely redundant to say something like “a wing loading of 1.5 to 1” when one could just say “a wing loading of 1.5”. Either way, units are missing and we assume that one is using US standards. It isn’t a true ratio of the same units on both sides of the equation -- you aren’t comparing square feet of one thing to square feet of another thing. The units are different, pounds vs. square feet. Using a ratio in this situation is as dumb as saying that you inflated your car tires to “32:1”.
  9. "Better pick the right day of the week, and hope you get lucky with the statistics" Because I'm seeing 7 day average cases per million, as of Feb 4, of 430 for Florida, and 394 for California. (California = better) But yes the 1 day figures are 359 for Florida and 371 for California. (California = worse) On the other, hand go back 2 days, and you get 490 for Florida on the 2nd of Feb and 465 for California. (California = better) I think the 7 day averages are better than the daily numbers that bounce around a lot. I'd say the two states are doing similarly, with a slight edge for California. (My source was a Canadian news source that used this data: "U.S. data is collected daily from the COVID-19 Data Repository by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University. ") I haven't been active in this thread but just wanted to do one of those checks, where you see whether the "other side's" numbers are bullshit or not. Yours aren't a lie, but aren't the best choice, so turn out to be somewhat deceptive. Perhaps inadvertently; but most of us know by know that 7 day averages are generally better measure of trends. Edit: I haven't looked into other factors like length of lockdowns, prior peak case loads (California did have it worse), etc.
  10. There are so many different factors involved, it gets confusing and I don't know the answers either. Some variations: 1. RiggerLee mentioned, "In terms of toggle pressure nose down means lighter toggles and flatter canopies heavier pressure." I can't say how it is in general, but I recall one counter example. Have an old, large F-111 canopy (Titan 265) that I used to use for accuracy. It had high toggle pressure. I added an extra rapide link at each front riser (and even played with using 2 extras), so the canopy trimmed flatter and flew slower. The toggle pressure in turn went DOWN and was more pleasant to work in deep brakes. 2. Sometimes comparing a steep and shallow trimmed canopy is confounded by different styles and sizes of canopy. For example, one doesn't normally get to compare a (non-existent) Katana 280 against a Navigator 280. And is one comparing how much force it takes to pull a front riser down half an inch, or is one thinking of the final effect of pulling a front riser down? After all, even if a small and large canopy have the exact same front riser forces, you might think, "Ugh, this big canopy is a boat, I'm hauling down the front riser and almost nothing is happening", while on the small canopy you whip nearly instantly into a sharp diving turn and even if you need a solid pull, you only need to do it for a second.
  11. But of course you are OK Mr Mullins if some of us individuals out there happen to ask on-topic questions and you provide thoughtful replies! Thanks.
  12. Interesting stuff on the website about the whole issue of 28,000' vs 30,000' and current rules for aircraft. Plus about bringing all the training & gear in house rather than organized by another group as it was years ago. @michaelmullins What is your take on the foreigners using TSO gear, when it comes to gear modifications? You're being strict about that issue, which most places don't. What is your understanding of a situation like this: I for example am a Canadian living in Canada. I jump a rig with harness and reserve that were US made with a TSO. The rig, however, has had rigger modifications to it, legal in Canada, but not done in accordance with the TSO or by FAA riggers. That would invalidate the TSO. That then makes it legal for me to jump in the US, with a non-FAA rigger's pack job? Does your interpretation agree? Indeed, I tell people that if they ever have a problem with a CSPA pack job in the USA, just deface the orange TSO warning label. Voila, no longer a TSOd rig. :-)
  13. I did watch Scott & Bailey. The two women were compelling main characters, although especially in the middle seasons, it was too much of a soap opera, with them always having to deal with some family crisis or something, outside of the detective work. If one liked Silk, one should also look for the slightly earlier "North Square", that dealt with a chamber of criminal lawyers, most trying to climb over the others to greater success, while also dealing with their cases. The show (just 1 season I think) had the same writer and a couple of the same actors.
  14. Good beverage? For a Canadian, a Timmy's coffee box works. Less competition in the morning than with cases of beer around the campfire. Welcome at other DZs? Around where I am, southern Ontario, people might trash talk or slight other DZ's from time to time ('They're too small / too big & impersonal / too casual / too uptight / not well organized' or whatever) , but that's about the overall setup, not the jumpers. Jumpers themselves are welcome all over. So it is common enough for a jumper to be from one DZ but visit friends at another, and then go to a special event at a third, and be welcomed at all.
  15. There's quite a variety out there. I'll include 'mysteries with private investigators' here too, not just ones with police. Season long story arc shows allow better story telling, and get all the attention these days for being quality tv, but I have tended to stick to the 'one set of crimes' per episode shows, so it is the latter that I mention here. British crime shows can also be ones that try to be all modern and super gritty (with the nastiest sexual crimes & worst looking dead bodies), or the ones which try to be more genteel, including the ones that only seem to involve rich people doing each other in while showcasing all the big country mansions of England -- whether in modern times or period pieces from bygone ages, and so on. Vera is a really good show I'd recommend. Plenty of seasons. Still ongoing. Good leading character. One crime per show. Not trying to be super gritty but also staying modern. Father Brown is indeed good. Lighthearted 50s (?) period piece, but engaging, with a good lead character. Midsomer Murders is a little slow paced but decent light entertainment and popular for many seasons. Not gritty, although they do have their bizarre murders to add variety. All small town England, lots of old buildings and big estates. Lewis was good, finished up a few years ago, and was a bit like Midsomer, but I liked it for being a little tighter on the pacing and set in Oxford. Endeavour is good - someone playing the young Inspector Morse, a current show set back in the 60s. It's not just about the murders, but also his life, so there's a bit more of the soap opera compared to shows that don't deal with the characters' lives as much. A couple classics from around the 90s are Inspector Morse, and A Touch of Frost. Typical British shows with good quality, as they only did a small number of shows each of their many seasons. Prime Suspect. Not a lot of shows of the latter, more like specials spread out over many years, but the shows are very well done. Helen Mirren is indeed a good lead. There were plenty of shows from the 80s that took 3 or 4 episodes to finish one crime, and it sometimes seemed like one had to spend an hour learning all the relationships between people before anyone even died. "Somebody PLEASE get murdered and get the investigation started!" I kept thinking. (PD James' Dalgliesh was like that, decent but only if one could stand how long things took. Pacing has definitely picked up over the decades, although the old long shows were able to go into more detail about characters. Campion is also older and slow paced.) The actor in the latter, Peter Davison, was also in the lesser known police detective show, The Last Detective, in the 2000s. Decent investigations with a bit of lighthearted character background added in. A couple shows I didn't like so much are the recent Queens of Mystery and Agatha Raisin. They're in the category of quirky private investigators, and while some were fun, some got too silly. Many of the Agatha Christie's Miss Marple (2000s roughly) were good, but sometimes overly long. Agatha Christie's Poirot was very enjoyable, the one with David Suchet's take on the main character. One of those very engaging quirky characters that makes the watching fun. Earlier seasons were more light hearted, lighter comedic aspects with a bigger cast of characters, while the later seasons were more serious, leaving aside the minor characters. Slightly odd ones with more bizzare plots would be the well liked Luther, or Wire in the Blood ... but it's been a while since I saw them. More gritty, and more likely to deal with some super-genius serial killer over multiple episodes if I recall correctly. Touching Evil had the same lead actor as Wire in the Blood and I think was more straight forward but still gritty. The older DCI Banks was watchable but sometimes the lead character did dumb things and was just generally a little too simplistically angry, although the show later improved. While I watched all the regular Law & Order shows from the US, the Law & Order UK show (that ended some years back) wasn't nearly as good. Decent at times, but a bit too much trying to be over dramatically emotionally caught up with the crimes -- reminding my of the Simpson's meme, "Won't somebody please think of the children!". I'll mention one great show in a slightly different category: Babylon from 2014 or so. t was pretty much a mini series of 8 or so episodes, not a police procedural, but more about the politics and back stabbing at a London police HQ, with various police operations thrown in. I don't know others' tastes, but I found it super intense, fast paced, and absorbing, something the best British political shows are good at. Reminded me a bit of the way the US movie L.A. Confidential had a lot of different stuff going on at once. There are a whole bunch more out there, especially older stuff, but that's enough. Don't know what's on what channel, or where to find older shows now, as I have torrented lots of stuff. Sometimes funny having a huge flat screen TV yet sometimes be watching 404 line 4:3 aspect ratio shows from the 80s...