jerm

configuring sendmail? aww dude.. yer killin me.... apt-get install qmail-src Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

hmm.. free beer... i'm 40 min south of albany.... c'mon by! Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Nice video!!!

Xp pro Debian 3 i386x2 Debian 3 sparc Mandrake 9 is installed.. but it doesn't like my geforce4 very much.... redhat IS user friendly... but is not sysadmin friendly if you ever wanna do stuff manually.. gak Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Hmm.. i heard Ricky Martin stops at local DZ when he's on tour to do tandems. The guitarist from Diamond Rio is licensed and stops at various DZs while out on tour (my home DZ has a thing going with a local country station.... win a tandem, jump on the same load as this dude, and get backstage passes to the show) And i dunno about Patrick Swayze's brother, but supposedly patrick is licensed and jumps fairly regularly. And yes. baldwin and berringer both got licensed for cutaway (with a bunch of tunnel time to speed things along) Still pissed i missed Kristin Davis at the ransh last year.... saw pics, though... DAMN she's cute in a freefly suit Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

you Ron...why? J/K heh.. i HOPE you were kidding.. between ron's zillion jumps and how deserving he is of tunnelwhore.com, i think he'd be the one circling both of us put together on our bellies, at least *smirk* Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Well then don't make it the same spot for everyone. acutally i agree with this.... apparently my sarcas didn't come through in that last post... it was merely possibly solution to kallen's issue of there being no performance standards by which to judge night jumps. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

exactly.. and not ANY canopy will let you get away with yanking on a toggtle when you're low. Most wont. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Nothing is wrong with it. I'm all for it. I just don't think it needs to start in the 288 range for the majority of jumpers. Agreed. So put a non collapsible PC, slider and dacron lines on a sabre and lower the brakes a bit and you're got a much more forgiving canopy for a given wingloading. Then their "transition" off of student could be something of the same size and they'll see an immediate performance boost, while not actually decreasing the fabric above their heads. me too! so we're in agreement! I'm NOT saying put them on cobalts or stilettos....I know this is in the cobalt thread, but i'm chiming in in favor of more modern equipment than many DZs seem to provide, not cobalts specifically. In general, i'd rather see sabres/safires.De-tune them as stated above and you have quite the docile canopy that's not as over-bearing as a Manta. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

ah... so we should teach them early on that they can do a full-on toggle turn low and get away with it? This goes back to my SOS argument..... if you teach them the right thing the first time, then they're more likely to do the right thing when the fit hits the shan. So on jump 10 2 students on sabre2-190s at 1.1:1 get cut off at 100 ft.... who is in a better situation, the student who has been jumping that canopy since jump-1 and everything they know about sport-canopy flight has taught them that a ltitle bit of toggle will turn them enough to avoid an impact, or the student who just moved down from a manta280 who for their first 5 jumps had to bury a toggle just to get the thing to move? In times of crisis we tend to go back to what we learned first. If you tach them RIGHT in the first place.. and really TEACH them, don't just glaze over canopy control... they'll get it.... we've been doing it for years where i learned, with excellent results. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

guy i know has video of his 1069th jump and her 69th jump.... i think it fits all of your criteria....should i ask him for it and send it to ya? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

jumped it perhaps, but i'm finding it really hard to believe he landed it.... can someone correct me on this? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

your not like one of those "urine freaks" are you? YICH! LOL Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

1) which post of my many are you replying to? 2) are you talking about you? IF so....christ.... did you REALLY just try to turn this into a pissing contest?? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

You're absolutely right. I'll begin lobbying for an amendment to the D license requirements (see below) ... e. made two night jumps (one solo and one in a group) with a freefall of at least 20 seconds (1) with verification of prior night jump training from a USPA Instructor (2) with the advice of an S&TA, in accordance with USPA BSRs (3) and performing a stand-up landing within 20 meters of a predetermined target. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

depends on the dz-direction, etc as other have said. In good conditions i'd say 25ish on the ground.. up top i don't care so much so long as the pilot will let me do course corrections if i don't like their spot. 60kt uppers? why not? so long as you spot for it and the ground winds are ok, it can be a lot of fun... specially watching the ground whiz by at 90mph heading downwind Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

the way i see it you were insulting my intelligence. so my statement stands. I was brazenly insulting the intelligence of anyone who thinks it's safe. I don't THINK that applies to you. You're welcome to correct me. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

you are forced to do them to satisfy requirements for a "D" license. And getting a D license is a choice, so my statement stands. i could have never survived if you had not brought this to my attention. thank you. And your sarcasm was not nearly as necessary as my statement. People keep trying to convince themselves that this sport is safe and it's not, hence my reminder. I thought we were in agreement on this, which makes the pointed sarcasm quite perplexing, but to each their own. Blue skies, soft landings... in any lighting conditions. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

So this was just post-whoring, then? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Why should they? No one is forced to do night jumps. Oh yeah, and night jumps or not, IT'S NOT SAFE!!!!!! Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Barely. I don't know what a beanbag light is, but if it's anything similar in intensity to the runway lights i describled prevlously, i consider that a MARKED, but unlit landing area. completely un-lit, i agree. The issue of the original post has to do with what i stated in the previous paragraph vs having cars and/or floodlights actually illuminating the landing area. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

But not in this context. The DZ in question has runway lights which mark the airport but do not light up the ground. THAT was the central issue of the debate. Some DZs are difficult to find during the DAY w/o knowing the surrounding geography really well (grass strips, private stips, etc...), having nothing to distinguish the DZ from its surroundings is just cruel and unusual and even i'm not that much of a hardass. The original debate (I was the one arguing with heatherB before she posted) was illuminated landing area vs non-illuminated landing area, not one of lights merely marking the DZ in some way (ie: lights that, if turned of when you were at 50 ft would not change the light-ed-ness of where you're about to land a discernible degree.) Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

That's generally incorrect, at least within the PD line. According to John LeBlanc of PD, "Wing loading is the biggest determinant of speed. A Stiletto 190 is not really faster than a Sabre 190, or even a PD 190! Other aspects of performance will be different, however. (Turn rate, glide angle, etc.) These differences may influence a person’s impression of speed." [ http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/wingload.pdf ] Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Perhaps, technically, but this thread is referring to a landing area that is illuminated vs one that is not (however there ARE runway/taxi lamps on the dz (the dim blue ones.. enough to find the DZ and figure out landing direction, but not enough to actually light up the ground)) gak Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

I would like to do the RAGBRAI, too. Ok, 2 reasons... but i don't have a road-bike. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time