davelepka

I'm surprised too. I've tried my hardest to insult you every way I could think of over the years, and yet it seems I've missed one. Don't worry, I won't make the same mistake again.

That's because they're going faster. Control surface effectiveness increases with airspeed. The faster you go, the less deflection you need to achieve the same result. I'm 99% sure nobody is letting the canopy plane out on it's own. It's just not the way to get the power of the dive down into the swoop. On a shallow trimmed canopy, like a Stiletto, you can let it plane out on it's own because it will do so rather quickly, minimizing the loss of power in the roll out. On a steeper trimmed canopy, like any of the modern swooping wings, it's just wants to keep plowing toward the ground for too long and you lose too much power. If you want to go fast/far, you need to bring that power down to ground level, and 'fly' the canopy out of the dive. When you're talking about rear risers, you're deflecting about 2/3 of the canopy when you add input. When you're talking about the plane out from a dive, you're talking about the fastest point of the swoop. Put the two together, and you can see how you end up only needing a 'touch' of input to set the canopy into level flight. It's not much, but it's there.

Hold your breath (figuratively) for a few months, and the whining from those people will fade away. Wait a year, and you won't hear a peep. Wait 5 years, and pulling at 2k will be a story 'old timers' tell around the bonfire. Anyone remember when they upped the D license requirements to 500 jumps? There was an uproar from anyone within 50 jumps of the old requirement (200 jumps), and the rest of the sport sort of looked at it and said, 'Probably a good idea'. When was the last time you heard anyone complain about needing 500 jumps for a D license? Years for me, and I'm sure the same for everyone. This too, will pass. Like it or not, the sport and the gear is constantly changing, and if you take a 20 year break, you'll see a lot of changes. I know that 2k has been the D lic pack opening altitude for at least 20 years, and look at the differences in that time. Smaller faster canopies that open much slower. Freefly friendly rigs (meaning tight and secure) with more tightly packed reserves. Like it or not, these are the facts of what the vast majority of skydiving rigs looks like today, and we need rules that reflect those realities. So you jump an older rig, with an older canopy, and you can dump at 2k all day with no problems? Good for you, you're in the minority and can't reasonably expect the USPA to cater to you when there are 14 other people on the plane with you DON"T match that description, but more closely match the description of the rig/jumper I described in the previous paragraph.

Most of the hop n pop incidents have been tail strikes, and that is on the pilot/dzo, not the jumper. If they do not give the jumper a full cut jumprun, they are asking for problems with certain types of aircraft. As to the 'why', the answer has already been given in the other thread where you posted the same question verbatim. The fact is, an exit with a short delay is the same from 3500' and 13,500'. The student may have a psychological block that makes them think otherwise, and they need to get over that and see the truth of the matter. In case they need to exit low in the case of an emergency, they shouldn't be worried about the 'low' exit, they should be confident in their abilities to exit safely, and that comes from real world experience. If you really have been jumping for 30 years as your profile suggests, you would realize that there was a time that every jumper made their first freefall from 3500' or lower. The static line progression involves several jumps with a static line, and then moves to a clear and pull without the static line, but from the same static line altitude. Jumpers would move on to slightly higher altitudes with slightly longer delays with each subsequent jump, but their first jump where it was 'pull or die' was from the lowest altitude they would be jumping from, typically 3500' or less.

Interesting comments. Any chance you're using an incorrect email address? Any chance they check the automated message system on a daily basis? I check my voicemail every day. No US number? What a shocker from a company that's not based in the US!

That thread was a guy who bought a very old, used ProTrack, and was told that it would not be supported, then he pushed the issue, and they agreed to have a look at it with no promises. Turned out they were right, they could not support it. As far as the two complaints in this thread, they are way too vague to be credible as of yet. All we know for sure is that they each sent a single email, and that's it. Any sort of technical hang-up at various levels can cause an email to get bounced to junk mail, or just not make it all together. If they had followed up with a phone call (or several) during regular business hours, and never got a person on the phone, or did and left a message that was never returned, that might be something, but I'm not about to hitch my wagon to two guys who sent an email and didn't get what they wanted from it. The fact is that L&B has a great reputation, and after all, is a skydiving equipment company. They are not AT&T, and they don't have a staff of customer service agents waiting to handle your issues. It might take a little more effort on the part of the consumer than just shooting off an email. Truth be told, I have NEVER placed a phone call to a skydiving equipment company that didn't get to the bottom of my problem and end up in a nice conversation about jumping.

What is your concern here? It sounds like your husband jumped from a plane and landed without injury, what more are you looking for? Did you (or your husband) read the waiver he signed? It explains that skydiving is dangerous, and nothing anyone can do can eliminate all of the risk in making a skydive. Despite that, and what sounds like some complications on your husband's jump, the gear and his instructor were able to get him safely to the ground. What's the problem? Edit to add - I'm sure if they had a choice, the drop zone owner and the instructor would have preferred for everything to go as planned, with a perfect landing on the drop zone a high-fives all around. Needing to use the reserve chute is never something a jumper 'wants' to do, it's something they have to do when things don't go according to plan. In addition. it costs money for the required inspection and repack of the reserve chute, money for lost components that separate from the system in the event you use the reserve, down time for the system while it gets inspected and repacked, and down time for the instructor while they get a ride back to the drop zone from landing off-field (instructors are paid by the jump, and the added time might have put them out of the schedule for a jump or two). The point is that nobody 'wants' things to go wrong or poorly on a jump. What we 'want' is for everyone to make a safe, injury-free landing in the event that things to go off-plan, and in this case it sounds like that it what happened. Instead of calling the drop zone owner to complain about the jump and accuse him of some sort of 'cover-up', you should be calling the instructor and thanking him for returning your husband safely to the ground when things didn't go as planned. Their training and professionalism allowed a good result from a bad situation.

Yes. There was the one in Lodi a few years back that put the kid in a wheelchair. There was the one that ended in a Cypres fire and a landing in a parking lot somewhere. There was a recent tail strike in Hawaii, and while I haven't heard that it was a low pass with no cut, I did hear it was a Caravan, and it's tough to catch the tail on a properly configured Caravan. There are planes where it's a confirmed risk of a tail strike with no cut or level-off for jumprun. With those planes, there is simply no reason not to take the 20 or 30 seconds you need to configure the plane, wait for the exit(s), and then resume the climb. The fact is, the more weight you shed on the low pass, the quicker you'll get to altitude with the rest of the load. Even if it's a even trade, you get the safety of the full cut jumprun with zero penalty to the turnaround time. Even if you didn't get the time back, it's a 30 second penalty for a huge safety margin. If an improper exit by a jumper could cause a tail strike with no cut, the solution cannot be to tell the jumper to 'do it right'. The jumper is human, possibly low time, and apt to make mistakes. The pilot and aircraft, on the other hand, is another story. The pilot is a higher time, commercial pilot (all of the planes in question are turbines), and the plane is a machine with reliable gauges and published performance specifications. If you tell a pilot to fly level at 85 knots, they can do that with a very high degree of reliability. Given that the proper configuration of the AC can limit or eliminate the possibility of a tail strike, the solution is simply to properly configure the plane. End of story.

182/206 pilots get anywhere from $10 to $15 per load in normal operations, meaning jumping all day and working on a regular basis. Sometimes when our DZ is 'closed' during the week, the staff will get together from some hop n pops, and what we generally do is have everyone kick in $10 or $15 to pay the pilot, but we usually have 6 or 8 people jumping. If there are 4 of you splitting the costs, I'd say everyone kicking in $15 or $20 should cover it. The price per jump should still be less than regular DZ prices, and you get the luxury of your own private DZ/plane/pilot.

Quick question, what about your rigger? Why didn't you just try it on in front of him/her? You should never buy any used gear without it being inspected by a rigger. Don't just 'guess' it's OK, don't jump either the main or reserve pack jobs without your rigger opening up both and making sure you got what you paid for, and that it's all airworthy.

On all counts. It's clear to see the loss of awareness below (where there turned out to be a jumper), but the other point it illustrates is that you can't see shit above you when you toss a barrel roll during a track. Watch the video, and see if you think you could do a 'complete' scan of the sky above you during that maneuver?

The container appears to be overstuffed. If the canopy was sized properly for the container, and the closing loop was that long, it wouldn't be tight enough to hold the pin or (most likely) trap the bridle. As it sits, it appears to be tight and far longer than it should be, so my bet is that someone was looking for a smaller container, or got a 'good deal' on that rig, or whatever, but in any case the canopy/container appears to be a mis-match.

More like if the container was the correct size. If the rig was tight enough to trap the bridle and and cause a PC in tow, I'm betting that the shortest closing loop they could fit and still get the rig shut. Poor equipment selection, poor equipment set up, poor rigging/packing. The jumper got what they deserved with that chain of easily preventable mistakes.

Two questions - how good do you expect to be able to scan the sky above you during the course of a roll? Next, what would you do if you did indeed see someone up there, but you were at the end of your track and at your pull altitude? Seems to me the quality of your scan is going to be very low, and even if you did spot someone, you've tracked yourself in to a corner where all you can do is suck it down further while you (or the other guy) clears your airspace. If you really feel the need, and truly have the skills, the MUCH better plan is to transition to a back track about halfway through your track. Take a look around, and take advantage of the time remaining in your track to deal with anything you might see above you, so you can arrive at the end of your track with clear airspace and ready to pull on time.

You didn't really mention memory cards at all, but I do know that at some point the Rebel memory card slot did migrate to the bottom (just like the CX line, weird). One solution is to use quick release plates to mount every thing, and just cut out enough of the QR plate on the camera to allow you to open the access door. Makes it easy to swap stuff. I have an older Rebel with the card slot on the side, but the battery loads from the bottom. I actually cut a battery shaped hole in my helmet and liner so I can change the battery without removing the camera. The battery drops right down into the helmet, and I can just load another one nice and easy. Along those lines, keep in mind that no store bought camera gear (helmets, mounts, etc) is going to be 100% the best option for you. Plan on doing some customization on whatever you buy to make it work the best way possible with your combination of cameras, and the work you're going to be doing.

I'm not 100% sure on the different CX models. I know the 100 is a winner because that's what I have, and I think it's the only one where the memory card loads from the side and not the bottom. So if you need to switch cards for every load and have to take your camera off to get to the bottom, maybe a used 100 (off ebay?) is the way to go. I'll let the more informed comment on the image stabilization on the other models. For the still camera, I recently saw the new Canon SL1 in person and it is sweet. It's a 3/4 size Rebel and it uses the standard EOS lenses. If you're buying new, get one of those. I've had good luck with the 18-55 kit lens for everyday tandem/student work. It's light weight and cheap to replace (under $100 on ebay/craigslist). It's fairly wide and will match up with a .45-ish wide angle lens on a CX video camera.

I've heard of all three of those being used, or some version of those. A pond is a huge magnet for every low time swooper, and a bunch of jumpers who are not swoopers, but for some reason want to fly over it and land right next to it (on purpose). Target fixation comes into play, and people have a bad habit of being extra stupid when there's a pond around.

Look for a used rig that will hold the canopies you want, then get measured for that model rig as if you were ordering one new. Take those measurements, and the serial number, and contact the manufacturer for a quote on a harness resize. For between $300 and $500, you can have a new harness built for the rig that will be made to your specs, so it's essentially a custom fit. Even if you found a used container for $1000, for $1500 total you would end up with a custom fit rig with a new harness, which is still $500 to $1000 less than you would pay for a brand new rig. That savings is enough to buy a used reserve.

Longer brake lines are good, but the longer risers cancelled some of that out. Provided that the rest of the lines are within spec, your steering lines are too short. Spectra line will shrink over time, and the lowers need to be let out now and again. Jumpers who don't swoop will never notice the buffet, and jumpers who don't do a full flare don't mind the rising stall point and actually think the short lines make the flare more 'powerful', because the canopy responds sooner in the flare stroke. Check the rest of the lines, and then let the steering lines out 2" at a time until you lose the buffet. Keep in mind that your stall point (and flare) will get lower and lower each time, so be ready for that on the first jump after an adjustment.

You have no 'rights' in that regard. Ask whatever you want, but you have no right to any answers at all. I guess the only 'right' you have is to walk away and take your business elsewhere, or nowhere. To add on to the other reply, what do you hope to garner from these reports? As a non-jumper, how do you plan to asses the true cause of any incident, if it's related to the DZ student program in any way, if it was avoidable or foreseeable in any way, or if they have taken any steps to resolve the problem (if any). I think the best you can do is to observe the operation for a busy weekend afternoon and how you feel about the proceedings. Make sure the school is affiliated and in good standing with the skydiving governing body for whatever country you live in, and then make sure that you are happy with your training, instructors, equipment and aircraft before you make a jump. Aside from those things, there's not much a non-jumper can do to evaluate the safety of a given student program.

The real problem is the hooks. They can catch a line in the case of an unstable (or premature) deployment, or a canopy collision/wrap. That's the reason that old school 'jump boots' don't use hooks like work boots or hiking boots, they have eyelets all the way up. Lose the ninja shoes, or find some without hooks. That said, there's a real benefit to wearing some sort of 'real' or 'substantial' shoe when skydiving. You never know what sort of landing you're going to have, or where you're going to have it, so a thicker sole and substantial upper will provide far more protection for your feet. Some go as far as wearing high-tops for the ankle support, and some still actually jump lace-up boots. How far you want to go is up to you, but jumping in what sounds like nothing more than a glorified slipper doesn't sound like a good plan.

Same model and size, and the old one had a fresh line set with the latest trim specs? I've gone through more than a handful of high time canopies, and each and every one of them flew like a totally different canopy after a new line set was installed. All of them smaller, high performance wings, where I really didn't have the 'luxury' of losing much in the way of aerodynamic performance. I'd say that ZP is fairly 'robust' and that you need to get into some very worn material before new lines won't make it into a 'new' canopy. The exact numbers depend on the environment and care, here in Ohio, a well cared for canopy will last for thousands of jumps. In dusty Eloy, it might be half of that.

I took it as aimed more toward the 'experienced' jumper, with regards to how to use and view the hard deck, as opposed to the student jumper who might need the overall concept defined. More of an 'upper level' class, as opposed to primary training. In either case, it's such a fundamental concept in this sport that the clock is ALWAYS ticking, and you cannot, cannot, cannot allow yourself to get so distracted with anything that you lose sight of that.

Here's part two of the series - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1a7W_k2RSw

Before tandems, and when fuel and student gear were both much cheaper. The problem becomes that people want to freefall, so you would have to give them a reason to go with SL. If that's the lower price, how low would you have to go to beat out tandems for $200 (or less), and still turn a profit? How many of those people would you have to attract at the lower price to make up for the difference in revenue between that and a tandem? Are there enough people out there willing to make that trade-off on a regular basis to keep the DZ in business? Things change, it's just a fact in business. Look at record or book stores, practically gone from the brick and mortar marketplace. What about cloth diaper services? There are still some out there, but Huggies took that industry and reduced it by 99%. Anyone been to a roller rink lately? I think tandem and AFF are just what people want/expect these days, and S/L seems like a 'lesser' jump because there's no freefall.