airborne47

last post. I'M happy to look like an idiot if it gets someone with 488 jumps to say this. I'm not at all sure it would be the correct thing to do, but I believe I would have cut away as the jumper in the video did. I say this because I have not had to use my reserve yet and think I would cutaway as that is how I have practiced my EPs over and over. Sort of a react to the high rate of decent on "autopilot" thing if you will. It will (with any luck) be interesting to hear the thoughts of the jumper involved after some recovery time. My question to the more experienced jumpers would be.... Now that you've had time to think about it would you cut away and deploy reserve or just deploy the reserve and why? I'm glad he's wondering about that now. And wants to address it now! As for me there is no doubt what i would (want) to do or why. Yes she did get her reserve out. And i said she did a hell of a job. I also stated that i'm sure her experience level made a world of difference. But i would not want to wait that long. I wont bother addressing the numerious statements since i was last on line. Since some would just say (i) was talking about it to much. And looking like an idiot. I've done what i wanted!! Hopefully that jumper will pursue his question? And have an answer firmly in mind before he's in that situation!

Normiss. I agree with you 100 percent. Which is why people with jump numbers in the thousands. Saying that it was an accurate article is so alarming.

Roflmao! If your idea of talking to yourself is responding to statements or questions of others. Then i'm nuts!

Sorry popsjumper. I forgot to answer your question as to what she had out. And all i can make there is an educated guess based on what i saw. As i was to for away to really make out detail. But i did see another cut away canopy in her general proximaty. But at a higher alltitude. Which you can hear people discussing in the video. So i can only assume that was his as she still had a canopy above her. Which is why the she had a good canopy above her statement confused me. Especially after i was told the writer was a jumper with thousands of jumps. And that it was an accurate and factual story. And she also appeared to be struggeleling. So i can only guess that the collision must have caused her canopy to wrap up or entangle with itself somehow. With perhaps lines snagged on her somewhere? Sorry if the terminolagy is wrong! But the point is it was a big ball of shit. I know eyewitness acounts are often wrong. And i don't have a lot of jump experience. But i do have experience in other stress enviroments. And am positive of what i saw.

By the way i did see your post about EPs for wraps/entanglements. But it did not state what they were. And am honestly curiouse as to when you would chop a (good) canopy? Meaning there are no rips or tears. Nothing entangled with it etc. I can imagine doind so if a kamikize pilot is trying to fly his aircraft into you. Or if you were in a severe updraft like the ballon pilot in Georgia who got sucked way up and died. But seriously can not think of any other time to just chop a good canopy? This is not a bash but honest curiosity. As you are right. That statement was a generalzation. Based on common skydiving malfunctions though.

Like i said think for your self and make up your own mind. I was taught not to cut away below 1000 feet. And will stick with that. I've watched two experienced jumpers die so far in emergencies that i believe to have been salvagble. One cut away a mal and never pulled his reserve. The other made a downwind hook turn in 20 plus mph winds to avaoid a tree landing. (below 200 feet) I do realize that it is possible to cut away and survive lower then 1000 feet. So as i said i wont argue that point. But i do believe she was out of time. And got extreamly lucky. But also am sure her skill level made a world of difference! Even so by going that low she played the odds as there was no quarantee she would cut away and get a reserve out in time. Just like deploying a reserve while still with a malfunction is playing the odds. But at my skill level. I want to try and remember to pull silver at 1000 if i'm still falling like that? Not to get more material out as previously asked. But to (hopefully) get an open canopy above my head. And i realize that might not happen. But i also realize you might not clear the malfunction if that's all you try and do.

No i'm pointing out that it's bullshit for people with thousands of jumps to do so. Just because of who the article claims to qoute. And the experience level of the person who says it's bs.

The only reason i had any interest in the article was becasue it stated that she had a good canopy. Which is not what i saw. But as i said i did not see the collision. Just her falling straight down with nothing but crap above her. So i asked if what i saw streamering above her may have been his canopy after she cut away? And then asked why would you chop a good canopy if wrapped? And stated that did not make any sense. At which point i was told that the writer was a jumper with 30 plus years. And thousands of jumps. And that the article was accurate and factual. Which the video clearly shows it wasn't. But what bothered me was comments such as. I'll believe what Dan says over a novice etc. Based on nothing more then a newspaper article. And there were two other eyewitnesses who reported seeing exactly what i did as well. But the important part is that people with thousands of jumps seemed to just except the article as fact. And make statements such as. I'll believe what Dan says over a novice. I hope no newby reads that and believes it's true. And that if a newspaper article claims to qoute him. But a novice disputes the article. Then the article must be correct. Becasue people with thousands of jumps said so. I might not be an expert. But i know hero worship when i see it. And how dangerious it is. And have gotten one pm from another eyewitness agreeing with my assecment. Who does not want to post and take the public bashing. And that's sad!

Sorry that you're confused. but i think it's pretty straight forward. Hopefully others will be able to figure out that just because a newspaper article claims to qoute someone? It is not good advice. And that in saying so is in no way an attack upon the person it claims to qoute. No matter how experienced they are! Nor should they just cut away a good canopy while wrapped with a deflated cut away. Get a reserve out before impact!

What has me annoyed is the number of people who seem to think my saying the article was wrong. Is a direct challenge to the wisdom of Dan. And no i do not think she should have wasted any more time trying to clear it! I also said she did not have a good canopy above her that she had any chance of landing. And that i thought she should have deployed her reserve sooner. Even though she did beat the odds and get it out before impact. And that in the situation described (in the article)chopping would be a bad choice. If you want to say like others that she is such an expert that she did not need to deploy a reserve sooner? Then that's fine. I won't argue the point. But i hope i would do so? But i will never believe that chopping a good canopy while in a wrap is a good choice.

Exactly! What has me bothered is the number of experienced jumpers who seem to think that because i said it was bullshit. That i am questioning the wisdom of Dan. It appears that because it has his name attached to it that many feel it is beyond reproach. And that kind of thinking is dangerious!

Sorry but my computer skills suck! I have tried several times to do a direct link. As well as copy and paste the entire article. But every time i highlight it and right click. The highlight goes away. But here is the section which i say is bullshit. If you want to read the entire article? It's on page one about half way down with a link. posted by padraigbrowne. But roughly five seconds after opening their chutes, Sinitsina and a male skydiver collided, said Dan Brodsky-Chenfeld, manager of Perris Valley Skydiving. “He is fine. He says (Sinitsina’s) foot brushed his head,” Brodsky-Chenfeld said. “That (initially) was the extent of it.” But the parachute of the male skydiver, whose name has not been released, wrapped around Sinitsina’s body. So the male jumper jettisoned his deflated chute and landed safely beneath his emergency chute. Sinitsina then faced a choice: She could land her fully inflated parachute, towing her companion’s deflated chute as if it were a banner, or she could jettison her main parachute and use her emergency chute. Notice the last paragraph? It says nothing about trying to clear the wrap. Just try and land like that? Or cut away? And what i dispute is THE ARTICLE. NOT DAN becasue it's a newspaper article. So i have no idea what he actually said. Nor do i care. I think that's extremely bad advice!

Ok you are apsolutly right!!!!! I should have said without at least trying to get a reserve out. Which is what i said earlier. And have edited my second post to say. You should NEVER give up! But you should attempt to deploy your reserve if you are to low to safely cuy away a malfunction. And keep fighting!!!!

Want bullet points? I'll state them once again as i just did at the end of this post. Do not cut away a good canopy in any emergency. Especially if you are wrapped with another one! Do not fight a malfunction until impact. Without at least trying to get a reserve out! Now if you still can not understand that? Then i do not know what more to say? As for contacting Dan directly? I'll (once again) explain that i do not feel any need to do so. Because unlike so many. I do not believe that just because a (newspaper article) claims that he said something. That he actually did. Thereforth i have no dispute with what (he said) And have a real hard time understanding how so many can take what a newspaper article (claims) he said as fact.

Beware of the (experts!) I witnessed an incident last weekend and commented on it in the incidents thread Along with two other jumpers who saw it firsthand. Unfortunately there was also a (newspaper) article which claimed to quote a highly experienced and respected jumper. Which led more experienced jumpers to make comments such as. I’ll believe what Dan said over a novice etc. What happened was that during a wing suit big way (around 100 including video) two jumpers had a collision right after deployment. One cut away and deployed their reserve right away. While the other one fell straight down under a collapsed canopy which was entangled with the cut away canopy. Until finally at an extremely low altitude they managed to cut away and get an open reserve at approximately 100 to 200 feet. The newspaper article claimed that the jumper had a good canopy above their head. But that the deflated canopy was wrapped around their body. Streamering behind them like a banner. And here’s the scary part. It then said that their choices were to try and land like that. Or jettison their parachute and use the emergency chute! I did not see the collision. Nor its immediate aftermath. So thought maybe I was confused as to what I had seen her streamering. Was it her canopy? Or had she cut away by the time I saw her and was still entangled with his? Or was his canopy entangled with hers? But even as a novice realized that the idea of cutting away a good canopy with a deflated cut away canopy wrapped around your body. And then going back into freefall while still wrapped and trying to deploy your reserve through the mess. Just so you could (hopefully) get a clean deployment. And once again have a good canopy above your head. While still wrapped in another. At a much lower altitude. With nothing left to put out. Was an extremely bad idea! So I said so. Several times. But not one single (experienced) jumper said that they agreed with that. Instead I was told why someone might do such a thing. Disorientated etc. I also said that as I watched her get lower and lower my thoughts changed from her needing to cut away. To her needing to just get her reserve out. At which point more (experts) explained to me that the idea of not cutting away below 1000 feet was basically an aff minamum for amateurs such as myself. Basically what it came down to was that because a newspaper article claimed to quote such an experienced jumper. I was not qualified to comment. And what me and two others claimed to have seen was suspect. Even though not one single jumper claimed to have seen anything else! Well here’s a video of the incident. You can watch it for yourself. And ask yourself if you think fighting a malfunction that long without deploying your reserve is a good idea? Yes she did get lucky and get an open reserve before impact. But not by much! And she did do one hell of a job of fighting her way out of a nightmare situation and getting her reserve out. But she did not get control of her canopy before landing. And is now in a coma with a severe brain injury. So please THINK for yourself. Do you think cutting away a good canopy while your body is wrapped with a deflated cut away is a good idea? Because if you listen to (the experts) in this sport you can easily kill yourself! Yes novices should ask questions of more experienced jumpers and take advice from them. But that does not mean you should not think for yourself! Because you are the one who will die if you listen to the wrong EXPERT! So here’s my non expert advice. Do not cut away a good canopy in any emergency. Especially if you are wrapped with another! Do not fight a malfunction until impact without at least trying to deploy your reserve. Set a hard deck and get a reserve out at that point! Do not believe what you read in the damn newspaper. No matter how experienced someone is which it (claims) to qoute. You can take that advice or ignore it. But please think think think for yourself about what you would do in various emergencies now before they happen. And don’t (just rely) on what (the experts) say! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nVF1IvKqLc

Thanks almeister112 I've allways been fairly conservative. But made a huge mistake by not listening to that voice in my head. So i got (a little) wake up call and hope it can help someone else make a smarter choice!

Thanks popsjumper. Yeah i decieded to post this one after hopefully convincing someone. That maybe they weren't ready to downsize if they were having problems landing what they had. So i pointed out my own mistake to him as an example. I'm sure i could keep jumping that same canopy and safely land it (most) of the time. But (most) of the time ain't good enough! Rather it's because of my own mistake. Or another reason. If i'm ever in a bad situation again i'll still have to deal with it. So i'll use rental gear until i can upsize.

Yes i posted awhile back. And it says in this post (please read. Please learn from my stupidity. In this thread) And it was a bad situation which (i created) by a stupid choice to (go for it) and not (take the out) at alltitude. So i'm not blaming my gear. Just pointing out that once i got myself into a bad situation. Which i had to try and salvage despite my lack of skill and experience. Being under a canopy i was having a little problem with became a big problem! This post resulted from a conversation from someone right at 100 jumps who wanted to downsize. And was allready having problems landing what he had.

Just wanted to share my thoughts with other less experienced people looking to buy a rig. I just returned to the sport this past summer and got (a real good deal) on a rig that was (just a bit) smaller then what i wanted. And did something real stupid which put me in a bad position. (read please learn from my stupidity. In this thread) I wanted a 190 or maybe even a 210. But was jumping a 170 when i left so when i got a (good deal) decieded i could (grow into it) BAD BAD CHOICE!!! Now i'm going to be useing rental gear until i get a 210. That's what i started on and was a lot more accurate with then the 170 i later went to. (after putting a few jumps on a 190) Now i want to go back to a 210 for better accuracy (and) because (hard landings hurt!) I know i can safely land my 170 in (most) situations. But what about if there's a loud bang and the plane starts vibrating real bad. And the pilot yells get out! And there's nothing but crap below? Landing safely then is just as important! And i don't want to be under a canopy i'm not compleatly comfortable with! How about you? I'm positive the only reason i walked off of the DZ is because i do PLFs so good after having them drilled into me to where they're second nature. Yes my hard landing was a result of a stupid choice on my part. Which put me in a bad situation that i had to somehow try and salvage. And i really did think i was smarter then that. But still made a dumb choice. Are you capable of ever makeing a bad choice? Or haveing to make an emergency exit? PLEASE don't try to (grow into) a canopy! Hell you're jumping out of an airplane. You have nothing to prove!

Oh yeah and for S turns. I bought my nieces husband his 1st tandem this summer at a small Cessna DZ. So i just filled out the load. As it was only my my 3rd jump since getting current i went 1st and pulled at 4. Watched the camera girl land and followed the tandem in from a good distance. So there was no one else in the air besides the tandem way in front of me. And it was my 1st jump on that rig. So i did S turns to land within a few feet of them. But there's a world of difference between that and being somewhere like Eloy or Perris! Like i said. I want to (start) focusing on being able to land where i want without doing S turns. Just want to do it safely!

I never had no intention of trying to cheat the requirements. It would be easy enough to just pencil in if that was the intent. But as i stated due to the (fact) that i don't get to jump very often. My skills will not increase as fast as they would if i was jumping on a more consistant basis. And i do not have a home DZ but just jump where i get the chance. So my focus has never been on accuracy. But just landing safely. I don't mind walking a bit! Now i want to (start) focusing (more) on accuracy. But not at the expense of safety like i did on that jump! Which is why i plan to upsize (and) take a canopy course. And learn from my mistake and share it with others. And i believe my biggest mistake was ignoring my thought to take the out at alltitude. And (go for it) Next time i'm not liking what i see. IM TAKING THE OUT! When i can honestly and safely meet the reqiurments i'll get the license.

I know people are born the way they are. How else do you explain people born with both sexual organs? Did the creator just screw up becasue he's to stupid to get things right? Not mine! And i know it's not a choice. If it is then that means that (YOU) are capable of (CHOOSING) to hold someone of the same sex in you arms. Looking into their eyes and (FEELING) a DEEP DESIRE to have sex with them. Can (YOU) really choose that? If so you're not straight! But things were a lot different when i grew up. I don't recall one single kid ever (comeing out) Mainly i think it was because the price was just to high. It would have been sort of like a (nigger) showing up at a Klan rally. Especially for guys! So those who were different just learned to hide it. That way they got to have friends who would be seen in public with them. Or find and keep a job. Or find a landlord who would rent to them. Or be able to walk down the street without getting jumped and beaten. Or haveing their homes or vehicles vandilized. Or kicked out of public places. Or being beaten because people (thought) they might be gay. Like the night 29 years ago when i was 21. I was in a local bar and there was a guy people (thought) was gay. So they started hasseling him just for kicks. As that was kind of like a sport back then. Finally i said they should leave him alone. Which of course instantly made me a (little faggot) as well. Why else would anyone stick up for (one of them?) So i was told to (get the fuck out of here you little faggot) And being how i have a problem with authority and don't like being told what to do. I replied FUCK YOU! I'm also not real smart because there was 3 of them and 1 of me. And i had just given them all the reason they needed to kick my ass! And they did so without anyone saying anything except. Take it outside! Which they did. And proceeded to beat the hell out of me. Back then the cops weren't likely to do a damn thing about it. It was just the way things were. And if you didn't like it. It was just to damn bad! There were no support groups in the schools. Or any talk about acceptance and diversity. Well things have changed a lot! And there's (LOTS OF TALK) about diversity and acceptance today. And not to long ago i was in a truck stop and some idiot was spouting off about faggots and how he licked kicking their asses. I finally got tired of hearing it and thought of what i had seen another guy do. So i looked at him and said. So why don't you kick my ass? You little punk assed bitch! He looked around and couldn't find anyone to back him up like in the old days. It was just him and me. And i wasn't backing down an inch! So he stomped out of there muttering some shit as some people laughed. A few guys looked at me funny but i just looked at them and shrugged and they looked away. Yeah some things have changed a lot allright. But some have remained the same. Just put on a new mask. because while i still see idiots like him around. The people who hate me the most nowadays. Are the young generation of GAY ACTIVIST who speak of diversity and acceptance! Right up until i disagree with them! Then they want to do JUST LIKE those guys in the bar who beat me like a dog. They want to JUST ASSUME i'm something and slap a label on me. And hate me because of the label they put on me. AND ATTACK ME! Just because I FULLY SUPPORT my young great niece being able to openly say who she is. And live her life as she sees fit. AND WANT her to be able to say or do as she pleases. Which is to be openly gay and support gay marriage. And i will defend with my life her right to do so!! BUT i will oppose her (objective) Because i can see both sides of the argument. And I BELIEVE that words do have meaning. Even if we don't like it. Or it keeps us from haveing what we want. Just like no means no! So when i look at the debate. I find myself agreeing with those who say marriage is a word which for 5000 years of recorded human history has had a (specific) meaning. And that to (some) the religious aspect has an extreamly deep meaning! It doesn't to me and i think it's a joke! But that doesn't matter! I still believe to legalize gay marriage would be to redefine the very meaning of the would itself. And (force) others to accept that redefinition. And in my view that is wrong! I do not believe (they) should just (have to) accept it. I do believe we need to have (some type) of civil unions to protect the (HUMAN RIGHTS) of all people. But do not agree with a (my way all the way) attitude! I know some people of faith ARE TOLERANT of others. Because as a kid 35? years ago. A friends younger brother once stood up for me because some guys were picking on me because (they thought) i was (different) I NEVER forgot how that kid stood up to that crowd in a time when THAT JUST WASN"T DONE! Now he's a grown man and (found) god. But he still RESPECTS me as a person and could care less about any label. All he sees is a person! Which is all i am! I could be straight or i could be Bi. That doesn't change the fact that he respects my right to an opinion. Even if it's different then his. But somehow the tolerant and accepting GAY ACTIVISTS do not seem to want to (ALLOW) me that same right. Without slapping a label on me and attacking that label! So i'll look at both sides and deciede that the opponents have a better argument. And support some kind of civil union and defend with my life the rights of the man who once stood up for me to have his opinions. Without him and everyone else like him automatically being labeled something that they are not! Not all people in (a certain group) think the same! I know he looks at me and sees a person. I don't need to tell him a label to put on me. But apparently i do so i can (have the right) to an opinion by the tolerant and accepting gay activists. So here's the label. This is what i am. A PERSON!!! Maybe if we all dropped the damn labels and started looking at each other that way. We could then talk to each other as people and find a solution? I don't know what the answer is? But know we need to start TALKING to each other as PEOPLE And quit attacking LABELS!!!!!

I'm still in my early days. (165 jumps.) But! #1 I am responsibale for my safety! Do not do things i'm not comfortable with! #2 PLFs #3 Admit and remember how little i know. And ask questions and LISTEN to the answers of those with more experience! #4 I am responsible for my safety!

And if it's a guy talking to a female. it's normale to try and sound/look cool. So while no harm is meant. It can be very harmful!

Ok i'll keep em in mind.