jerm

My name isn't "Reverso Rodriguez" for nothing. BrianG gave me the name after i told him about landing my Samurai150 (1.6) backward. I had about 1000 jumps at the time. It turns out you can have your risers on the correct sides and still be flying backward. Lemme 'splain. I took my canopy off to demo another. I remembered "right on top" when i bungeed my risers together, lashed them to the bag so as not to twist and went about my merry way. I put them back on correctly BUT.. at some point, some how (still don't know how, unless someone was fucking with me) one 3ring passed through the V of the other riser. Everything looked ok, and the Risers were on the proper sides -- this is why it's important to do a full line check. What happened when i opened initially looked horrible. the lines form the right side extended over my head, across to the left side where they were somehow interfering with the left lines... i was reaching for my handles when the crossing point slid down the lines until it was right in front of my face. At that point the canopy was open & flying in what was effectively a permenant or locked-in 180 line twist. I'll see if i can find the video for anyone having trouble visualizing. At any rate, it was square, stable, slider down, and, sonofabitch, steerable! Truth be told, I'd had a dream of doing a backward jump for a while, but had never mustered the cojones to actually do it, but here was my chance, so i went with it. I've gotta say the sensatin of turns backward was definitely something new. instead of diving forward, you're diving backward... really strange. Anyway, i had done 4way video on that jump so i was open pretty high, so i wanted for most people to land, went down to the far end of the DZ to give me lots of space to land and flared when it was time to flare. It was a no-wind day, so i didn't even try to stand up/run out. I just slid in backward on my butt nice & smooth. Lots of fun, but I would recommend against it for most people, tho. (haven't done it again in 2000 more jumps ) Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Clicky Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

hmm, any jump my hands aren't encumbered i do a practice touch. I've never had a problem pulling either, but it's good to know things are where i left them now that there's a lot of wind. plausible scenerios that could change this: instructor is sick next time you go to jump instructor gets fired dz closes you break your leg mid-week and are out till next season and the instructor no longer works there your job relocates you instructor quits the sport or flees the country or gets injured or worse depending on the dz, some of those are less likely, but they've all happened at one point or another. My girlfriend's AFF instructor went in on a tandem midway through her student training, so yes, shit DOES happen. It's very likely that the instructor is going to go do something stupid like cross the street or huck themselves out of an airplane before jumping with you again. Giving yo a good record of your jump is the responsible thing to do. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

What do you mean by "create lift?" I assume you are saying that the wind speed in the tunnel is slower than your natural fallrate so you need to fly in a slower body position in the tunnel? this is an annoying misnomer that the tunnel world seems to have adopted, mean to increase drag, or more specifically, "increasing drag to lift you up" Does anyone else grit their teeth when they hear this used? I know it's just tunnel jargon, but damnit, if you're using "flying" and "lift" in the same context there should be come continuity. I know in relative terms it works, but people still think opening a parachute pops you up because of similar issues of relative speed/viewpoints, too. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

i tried the wristwrap a few years ago and have nver looked back... it's the most confortable hand/wrist mount i've come across Cloudflyer Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Yep, but there are way more accidents from people not cutting away and ending up under an main/reserve entanglement than cutting away and ending under an entanglement, so what is the safe option? STAY IN SEQUENCE i wasn't making a statement about either technique being preferable, i was just saying that he didn't necessarily go out of sequence based on the main still being attached to them in some fashion. Likely? sure. Definitive form the evidence? no. Nice attempt to start a religious war, tho Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Goign back through PC-in-tow history (i know it wasn't a pc-in-tow, but there are parallels ('activated', yet non-out main.. chop or !chop decision, risk of 2out, etc..)) there have been incidents where the cutaway main risers have entangled the reserve lines while the main was leaving... and the 2-out fouling issues are obvious, so i imagine it could have been either way. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

yup! Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

I was inside center.. what i THINK happened, after having viewed the video a bunch of times, was this: Point was nicely presented, but we have a floaty tail. Tail was either late or floated, causing (helping?) me to de-present into a (relative) headdown attitude which sped us up. that pushed point's leg forward, rotating her out of presentation and dragging her forward, into a side/sit position in the relative wind. second 14 of the video shows point in a fast-fall position and OC presented, putting torque on the front of the formation.. additionally you can see tail's legs off to the left side of me, adding torque to the back I held on for deal life, trying to muscle it into position and hold things together.... the muscling didn't so much work, but we flew it pretty well next time we're gonna try and keep the tail on to score the exit point ;) Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

like a navigator? a navigator is basically just a big Silhouette (elliptical wing.. i think moreso than a pilot) with tweaked line trim and dacron. You've been around long enough to know there's more to a canopy than the planform. Moreover, IIRC once upon a time people thought square parachutes were too dangerous for students, and there were experience requirements to get your hands on one. Sure they CAN be too dangerous for students, but they don't have to be. An underloaded Pilot is not a performance canopy. In this case, however, he was jumping a Navigator 200. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

not the right forum for demo questions, but in general they manufacturer will shit it to you for you to use for 2 weeks. they generally charge you shipping and a nominal fee, say $50 including shipping. the closest skyventure style tunnel to philly is currently Skyventure New Hampshire. depending on where in philly you are and when you're traveling expect an ~8 hr drive. if you want to rent a car and fly there it's ~35min outside of Boston. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

your hump? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

congrats daizey!! 0:17:1 started my first round reserve packjob -- first round ever, really. never finished it because the clouds got high enough to do hop&pops, but DAMN, i need to borrow a packing table next time. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

i feel the same way about my ex. she's getting married on saturday.... i hear you, brother. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

"we met briefly in the boarding area. You were wearing blue and shiny-silver pants with "Spacey Bitch" Tshirt and a black wings on your back. I was wearing bright purple and orange flowers. You held eyecontact for at least 3 seconds when asking me "belly or freefly?" I melted. But then we got separated on the plane. I tried to get your attention on the ride to altitude but, you know, it's the Ranch and the interstitial debauchery conspired to keep us apart. write me back. let's do a 2way... i'll go head down.. then later maybe a high hop&pop help me trade these blue balls for blue skies." Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

well THAT's borring. I think you were better off with my version. mmmm... Margaritaville. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

if loving sheep is wrong, i don't wanna be right! er.. i mean i always liked the insult, "Asshat".. if you take it as an insult, that is. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Semper Paratus.... Always a ParrotHead? I like Jimmy Buffet as miuch as the next guy, but that's a weird-ass shout out. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

YUP! An um.. friend of mine is a JetBlue Flight Attendant and, perhaps somewhat disurbingly, peruses the NYC craigslist. One day she saw a missed connection from some guy who was looking for a particular JB Flight attendant and she knew this girl. She called her up, gave her the site and the friend rememberd the guy. They hooked up and last i heard had been dating for a few months. so, ya never know :) Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

thanks cora! now come deliver my birthday kiss! Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

For What It's Worth Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

I've seen this done on side/pro-stacked reserve packjobs. Once you flake out the nose, clamp. Keeps the nose/A-lines from moving around while your stack and dress the rest of the canopy. I've personally never found it necessary, but i can understand wanting to ensure that level of control at the bottom of the heap where you can't always see what's going on. Any clampy-type riggers want to comment? I've trained under 3 different people so far and none of them use clamps, so all of this is my interpretation from having watched a couple of times before i ever started training. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Yup! One of my original instructors/riggers has a navy blue reserve-packing-mat that has the shapes of all of her tools outlined in white tape. She layes them all out there when she starts, and makes sure they're all there when she finishes. This is on top of flourescent pink (ala cypres temp closing pins) binding tape hanging off everything. Your way takes it a step further. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

exactly. the rears change the angle of attack by basically changing the trim of the canopy with minimal wing distortion and thus minimal increase of parasitic drag. it is not, however, conductive to low-speed flight and therefore has a much higher stall speed than flaring with toggles. by pulling down on the trailing edge of the canopy (toggles) you're more dramatically changing the shape of the wing, giving it different more lift for the given airspeed and allowing you to bleed off more speed before touchdown. this also causes a lot more drag, so the added lift comes at the cost of time/distance. so rears are best while you have lots of speed because they help you preserve that speed by giving you high lift with low drag. in the video, once Scott bangs the toggles, he's at a point in the swoop where he has used up most of his lift and uses that action just to stay aloft. any earlier and he would have popped up, he has just expended too much energy at that point pop up. there's lot more physics to this than i've gone into here... i suggest you go get a copy of Brian Germain's book at the pro shop. He explains it all far better and in more depth than i have. will you be around this weekend? i'll be there all day Saturday at the very least if you wanna discuss this in person (with visual aids) it's late... hopefully i haven't botched any of the major concepts above. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

if you haven't jumped the canopy yet, have you considered just returning it? (did you buy it new?) if you bought used, you can probably get exactly what you paid for it considering there's no more wear on it than when you bought it. if by the end of the season you're feeling like downsizing, you can buy another one, or if not, find yourself a 150. it might take a little while, but it's the end of the season.. lots of time. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time