• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


pchapman last won the day on May 22

pchapman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

75 Good


  • 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
  • License Number
  • Licensing Organization
  • Number of Jumps
  • Years in Sport

Ratings and Rigging

  • Tandem
  • Pro Rating
  • 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. Hmm. I guess one would have to look at each countries' training system, or indeed what particular DZs teach. Certainly new jumpers are taught about airspace, weather, equipment technical info, etc, and there are lists of such things in training manuals, so that each phase of a jump is considered. Skydiving doesn't have as much money involved like in say commercial or military aviation, so the progression systems are more casual (after the initial licence) and more dependent on the jumper learning the skills themselves, and they and their buddies evaluating their own skills to do a particular jump. (The UK is more stringent than the US & Canada, with some sort of more formal allowances to do RW or freefly or swooping, something that would be handled more at the local DZ level on the left side of the pond.) I'm not sure whether 'airmanship' is just something that's there when none of the individual pieces are neglected, or whether it is some separate concept. Certainly, it is often used to apply to things "beyond the letter of the law", beyond the basics of the rules, to include a more nuanced appreciation of all the factors including how to interact with others in the air. Perhaps a little more Human Factors stuff can be introduced. For example, one thing I'd like to see pushed a little more in some places, is the idea of a self-evaluation of the risks, potential risks, and challenges on any particular jump. Go over all of that and see whether the jump still makes sense, or whether something about it should be changed.
  2. "On all other tandem container systems, the main container closing and the drogue attachment are two separate systems, at two different locations." Ah thanks, I mistakenly thought the question on the test would relate to potential dangers of Sigmas in a test for Sigma instructors on how to jump Sigmas. That answer about system design was "too obvious" to me, given that I rigged the DZ's first Sigmas 18 years ago... Still, if they ask for "primary causes", I'd like to see a list of all tandem accidents say in the last 10 years and have causes listed by frequency....
  3. Non-US DZ but US registered Caravan: Skydive Burnaby, Ontario Canada. N806JA. (Yes it is a short Caravan, not a Grand Caravan.)
  4. 96- List the primary causes of tandem incidents that resulted in a fatality That last one has always thrown me. The Sigma manual (at least the last I checked) has nothing listed under "incident", "accident", or "fatality" that is in any way relevant. So "read the manual" seems not to help?? I always came up with some B.S. generic answer that seemed to pass. Duh, 'not following proper procedures' for example. Luckily the DZ I'm at took that question out of the tandem exam in recent years. We have customized versions of the exam that are still really long, but cut out some of the less useful stuff, and add in DZ specific stuff. (We're in Canada, so we don't care as much about US lawyers. We still try to adhere to industry best practices.)
  5. Looks like a run of the mill raft dive. Plenty of those done over the years. Not suited to most DZ aircraft but there are tailgate planes out there too.
  6. That's an interesting one! I have heard (somewhere on dz.com years ago) of a hook knife becoming unsecured, flying up on opening, and cutting a line.
  7. Or put a domed or pocket slider on it. (I think we've had this disagreement before! :-) )
  8. @ bokdrol: Like with a static line or IAD progression in North America, it does lead to getting licensed, even if static line or IAD alone is not the only thing one has to do. You're trying to be misleading. If you really don't like RAPS as a progression method, fine. Your statement is like saying, "You can't become a Commercial pilot by getting a Private pilot's license." Because, duh, you also need a Commercial license after the Private. Moving along now. [Edit: And the British poster above is clarifying that RAPS seems to encompass the whole progression system to a license, not just the actual initial RAPS jumps. Just like 'static line progression' includes freefall jumps with coaches or instructors past the initial static line jumps.]
  9. For Skydive San Diego: What's that all about? Afraid of bad publicity if one person out of a load pulls their mask off for a minute? Can freefliers even jump without something on top of their helmet to tell them which way is down?
  10. I don't think I can help but can only comment a little for anyone else wondering about this: That document is a lot to digest, especially when it isn't like there's a 60 day comment period but they want nearly instant replies. And it isn't clear when all that was published. Maybe there's a date there some place in the 200 page document. (Even if big parts of that are sections quoted from regulations.) It is hard to comment on any one part of all that without understanding the rest. It was confusing that in the initial graphics they showed the RSA and OFA, and then had a table showing that even the Class III experienced jumper landing area was 44.8% within it --- yet the graphics showed that the Class III area was completely outside it. And on the map of where LZ's and RSA/OFA intersect, marked it 100% in a bright red that doesn't correspond with the rest of the graphics. However, far later in the document there a map which also adds a taxiway TOFA safety area -- and that is what they are referring to. So the initial annotated maps were rather deceiving. Late in the doc there's a response from Start Skydiving's DZO. I see the focus is on the idea that the FAA never intended the RSA/OFA/TOFA to apply to skydivers landing or crossing runways, and that the DZ is compliant with FAA regulations.
  11. To anyone who says, "No exceptions because it's about SAFETY! ": The FAA is in the process of publishing a list of temporary exemptions for pilots -- especially commercial pilots -- who haven't been able to get flight tests to confirm their proficiency, haven't had enough current experience, etc. Over time, more and more pilots 'time out' from their requirements. Therefore, for those who condemn ANY possible change to USPA requirements, the USA's entire aviation system must now be declared UNSAFE. Oh, the humanity! From some FAA news bulletin: (Canada has already implemented many similar measures. "Blame Canada.") And now, back to a more reasonable discussion of what changes might or might not be appropriate in the USA for skydivers....
  12. Well, that's what's up for debate. It can be for governing organizations to agree on. If there are new rules, technically none are being bent. :-) I wasn't implying that. Fair enough, I wrote something about "the whole industry" for convenience, when it really is a 'significant part of the industry, that can only be solved on an industry-wide level'. Unless affected DZO's just ignore USPA rules. It doesn't help some small northern DZ if a bunch of people at some big southern DZ were still jumping regularly in early March, unless all of their instructors vacationed at the southern DZ too. In some places, most might not have jumped since October. Although I have jumped a bunch in snow in winter, it isn't uncommon for some northern DZ's (eg, in Canada) to be closed end of October until some time in April. Not having jumped for 150+ days, in a regular non-pandemic season, is not seen as a big deal here in Canada. (Although some refresher jumps might be done, tandem recurrency jumps, Safety Day, that type of stuff.)
  13. @ 20kN You opinion on the rules is valid. However, it isn't the possible valid one, and I don't buy into the background reasoning. The 'no exceptions because of safety' is just BS, because rules are to some degree arbitrary. A jump after 59 days isn't perfectly safe while a jump after 61 days is criminally unsafe. If some country had a 90 day rule instead, is their entire skydiving system 'unsafe'? Some countries may not have any specific rules, and leave it up to the DZO to decide whether an instructor is current or not. Because "the instructor literally has the life of another person in his or her hands" is pretty much crying, "Won't somebody think of the children!" (i.e, hysterical woman from The Simpsons) The drunk driver argument doesn't hold either, because the idea is that nearly everyone's car has crashed, and it is a problem for the whole industry to get current again. Small compromises can be made to ease the process. But I'll leave the USPA people to argue out the specifics of what best applies to the USPA situation.
  14. So in the USPA you have some currency requirements for everyone, not just students? (In Canada for the CSPA we have currency requirements for students. And annual currency for instructors and coaches to keep those ratings active (X jumps per 12 months stuff). But nothing about 'after 60 days without a jump you need to...'.)
  15. In one earlier thread I was involved in, I mentioned an Australian study that did some tests and extrapolations. Their results suggested only 1.5% strength loss per decade in storage at 20C. Ref.:https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/22664-expected-life-of-a-canopy%3F/ A Sandia labs paper from '94 perhaps similarly noted: I just have a few random papers on the issue, nothing really modern, and don't have a good overall handle on the issue. But I get the impression that nylon, especially if not stored at high temperatures (and not around any harmful chemical contamination) degrades only very very slowly over time. Making arbitrary 15 or 20 year life spans on gear rather silly.