jerm

Now posting something like that without attaching photos is like waving a beer in front of a recovering alcoholic. if i don't have any arial shots of it by the end of the day i'll post the ground shots :) Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Signature series 120 in my colors.... mmmmmmmmmm just felt like sharing. now opefully we'll ahve enough people to get the plane up tomorrow

hmmm.. some of us were going up for an atmophere chicken jump... we had one of the noise-making rubber chickens.... well someone got annoyed at it in the plane and tossed it out the door. blue skies, mr chicken. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

actually.. that was 2003. er.... i mean... bra??? what bra??? Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

hmm.. here are a few from zhiils... Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

dude... i'm dissapointed..... flux capacitor needs an INPUT of 1.21 gigawatts..... sheesh!! Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

i counted 26 names, but mine was strangely absent confused Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

add jerm that list...... i wouldn't miss the christmas boogie for a whole beer. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

because 3 training jumps is a minor inconvenience and 30 days off is a pretty big deal. I agree that they should get the training. that's good after the fact, but it's not a deterrent. you plan sound good for people who've done it, the time-off is supposed to get people more aware before it's done. 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 assuming the same size and model of reserves. If i were to go test jump the reserve i just got it'd be in a rig with a larger reserve. YMMV. as for bridle attachment, have someon who knows what they doing IAD you out the door and keep hold of the bridle.... or learn to spot. 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 not what i'm saying and you know it. You should go into politics with debate logic like that. I'm considering what is more likely to produce results BEFORE they have a cypres fire. I'm not saying there shouldn't be training, i'm saying that the threat of training is less likely to keep people aware than the threat of grounding. Sure people should receive coaching IF THEY HAVE a cypres fire, however i would rather people not have them in the first place. So how do we deter people from performing the reckless behavior? Set up rules with consequences. You can try to pre-emptively train people, but i've found that outside of low-timers who know they need it, the people who really need the training are they ones who don't show up to safety day, don't go to the free seminars on the DZ and already know what they need to know. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Maybe it is..... so long as the person has to pay for their jump AND the instructor's. Money can be a motivating factor and provide them with consqeuences, to their actions. I still don't think it'll hit them as hard as sitting down, though. The problem that i see with it is that it'd be quite easy for people to rationalize these as training jumps and pay extra attention cause they have an evaluator and no audible. Sure they can perform under supervision, but where's the incentive to really change? I think it's more about attitude. Driver's ed is not gonna stop people from going back out and speeding. The threat of 30 days (enforceable) suspension if they get caught just might. As i said above, i think downtime re-institutes consequences for losing awareness. With most breakoffs at 4-5k, a cypres fire due to unawareness is a HUGE fuckup, and needs an aittitude adjustment, not just education. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

what bothers me is that the fear of getting grounded is more likely to motivate people to keep better track of their altitude than is the fear of hitting the ground at high-speed. The cypres has removed many people's fear of death. In that regard it's almost a shame the cypres works so well. If a few more people were bouncing due to cypres failures the problem would probably go away pretty quickly. take your pick if you think better awareness or quitting the sport would be the cause, but too much faith in the device is what i believe to be the enabler here. People have already been trained with "don't rely on your cypres, it's a backup, it can fail" then they hear about how it's the only viable AAD cause all the others have problems.... and they hear about all the cypres saves... so they basically get programmed into cypreses not failing. what training would undo this? shall we shart cataloggin cypres failures and keeping it posted at the DZ? Perhaps the plan IS suboptimal, but i have yet to hear a better one. Look at it this way: It can appear that the cypres has effectively negated the consequences of losing altitude awareness. So where's the motivation to keep aware if there are no consequences? Sub-optimal as the plan may be, it provides consequences to the (in)action, and i think it's far superior to lessening the reliability of the cypres in order to make the point. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

certainly, but at issue in the perris case, and most likely in windsor's post (i apologize if this is wrong, W), is the case of the cypres fire due to loss of alti awareness. Sure some people notice at 1200 ft and would probably have had their main inflated before impact and end up with 2 out... but the people with only their reserve from the cypres cutter? borrowed time, no question. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

so because people can get around rules we shouldn't have them? i debate this on the grounds that most of the people who get complacent about alti-awareness are the types that won't jump w/o their cypres. As someone said above.. i'd much rather have someone pulling low on purpose.... at least they're prepared for it and likely evaluated things.... the phrase "go kill yourself on someone else's DZ" comes to mind. Getting frounded at my DZ may not stop them from jumping, but my dz won't be under the microscope if they crater. i know that ultimately we agree on the larger issue, just debating the details. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

i think most other states have electronic record keeping systems so they can just look up who's overdue on a payment and start sending nasty letters & sheriffs i once thought i had 30 days to deal with a speeding ticket, turns out i had 10.. hm.. so 20 days after i got the ticket a sheriff showed up at my front door with a bill in one hand and an arrest warrant in the other... i got to take my pick. that was PA.... in NY you just plead not guilty, you go to court.. they plead you down to something that you still pay a fine for but get no points and you go about your merry way. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

HeatherB is alive and well, though without power and therefore unable to post about it. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

how's the trim on it? I had a viper170 that took forever to open (spectre and crossfire got nothin'). I went to sell it to downsize and it turns out the thing was 8" out of trim. Opened more reasonably bust still nice after a re-trim. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

could that not then fall in line with the previously asserted theory that women have more accidents but men have more expensive accidents? after all, it's all about $$ risk. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

re-thhhppptttt i don't wanna hear about your 'lack' of sleep.... i might have gotten 2 hours..... Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

thhhppttt!! i resemble that remark. let's be fair, though.... sex on the beach has more alcohol in it, and i was finishing #3 when you were just starting the second one oh yeah, and you should have seen me later... went to another bar where a friend was serving Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

it's basic logic.... if you weren't implying that TMs have it easier, then what was the point of this statement? It wouldn't be necessary because they'd be held to a higher standard of skill in stability. in fact it's HARDER to gain stability with someone strapped to you, and the drogue should not be tossed until it's achieved. that's how they know they can be stable w/o the drogue out. the problem you observed was a personal one most likely linked to poor technique. I don't believe it's indicative of guys who do only tandems, but do them properly. Now, if you wanna talk degradation of RW skills, i'll likely back you completely. Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

What TM would admit that they need a drogue to be stable? How do you know you can be stable if you don't ever jump without someone attached to you or with a drogue? try doing a tandem with a tiny person and go drougeless for t bit.... small people will teend to make the tadem top-heavy and make it really easy to get on your back, and tough to get off of it. have you ever made a jump as a tandem master? you don't have TI in your profile, i notice it's usually the people who have never been there who prattle on about how TI's don't know how to be stable. i still funjump, but the impliction that TIs have it easier in the stability department just annoys me, and is utter bullshit Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

tthpppttt.. she's away for 2 weeks Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

Look up http://welcome.to/skydiving and give them a call. They have both and have 'em tricked out to climb like monsters.... excellent planes. their 182 is a widebody and has an otter-style-door... dunno how the 185 would take it.... but it's quite cool Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time