3mpire

Oregon CRW-25; FS POPS-22; VR-9; CTRL-F like a boss

true however for a head on collision if one turns right and one turns left then you have not improved your situation. i was replying to a post that specifically cited the SIM incorrectly, which is dangerous. For a head on collision, both canopies should turn right. If coming at an angle, whichever path is shorter to clear airspace, that is the path to take. However the bigger concern is to incorrectly quote what the SIM says for a head-on collision, which everyone should know.

NO!!! You turn RIGHT. http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section4/CategoryG/tabid/243/Default.aspx#956 Grab a right-rear riser and pull down on it if you don't have toggles in your hand, otherwise a toggle turn but it doesn't really matter if a collision is imminent JUST TURN ASAP.

What are your tandems pulling at? I would guess around 6k? pulling at 4k should give you plenty of separation already. pulling at 5k is really high--why are you deploying at that alt? If you're the last fun jumper out and you know you have a tandem following you, pull at 4, clear your airspace, and sprial down to 3k where most people have already deployed and are making their way down. Safely enter the pattern with the rest of the stick, don't drag your feet. that way you should have several thousand feet vertical separation between you and the tandem(s). With your wing loading even if you spiral down to 3k you still won't overtake anyone else, who by that time should be below 2k anyway. if you're pulling that much higher than everyone ahead of you and you've got tandems behind you, don't just sit around after deployment and let the tandems catch up. it's up to you in that case to create that vertical separation since you're the one that's creating the proximity by pulling higher than normal. release those toggles and scoot down a bit and then you can float in all nice and slow without a pissed off TI breathing down your neck on final :)

I was assuming high dude went through low dudes canopy after premature deployment...?

probably not as bad as this one after a premature followed by collision in free fall... https://vimeo.com/36065919

Thank you!

Ask them how many jumps are covered under warranty, and about how many jumps you can expect before you need to reline. Tell them expense is no option and you'd like the competition lines to match the paint job if it's an option.

negative ghost rider, interior shots are of an Otter but on exit it's a Caravan

better to sit out questionable winds and make a currency jump a few weeks later than to break your ankle and have to sit out for weeks/months only to timeout and need to make a currency jump anyway.

SL Instructor to Student: So as you can see from the expression on my face, you didn't do so good. Repeat!

Awesome -- when you do make that available can you post that URL in this thread? I will bookmark it so I can find it later. THANKS!

Seattle got to experience their legal department's wrath when they got uptight about us having retired the number 12 in dedication to the fans, and to raising a 12th man flag before every game. it's really just a money grab. the seahawks cut them a fat check for the "right" to use the 12th man every year. by calling the lawyers all TAMU is saying to the broncos is "gimmie your lunch money". being in an entirely different league means that the use of the 12th man by an NFL team or teams doesn't cost the university a dime. It's not like someone is going to mistake a seahawks 12th man flag for an aggies 12th man flag and somehow the university is going to lose merchandise royalties. if it was truly about the "righteous" nature of the thing, they would be principled and say "this is our trademark because we are 100% committed to our team" and never under any circumstances let another team use their trademark. but they're total sellouts, anyone can use it if they pay up. legally it's their right to defend their trademark, and if you have a trademark you have to aggressively defend it if you want a court to respect it, but it's kind of like in software where some company tries to say they patented the idea of a button or something, and now ANYONE who uses a button somehow owes them something. So no, it isn't TAMU's "fault" that the law let's them be dicks about it, because it's all about getting a pay day.

fucking awesome so short of storing your rig like an idiot and not doing routine maintenance and visual inspections on your own, there are limited risks to the repack cycle. The far greater risk is the jumper not taking the time to regularly maintain their 3 rings or to store their rig appropriately. If I saw my reserve looked lop sided or I could see pilot chute poking out, I at the VERY least would ask my rigger to look at it before jumping. Being on top of your shit may not prevent every problem, but a hard pull shouldn't be one of them because you can do so much to prevent it.

this. my understanding is a hard cut-away would be due to poorly maintained 3-ring and cut-away cable. Meaning grime/dirt in the hard housing causing a hard pull or risers "curled" around the third ring maintaining their memory on cut away causing an out of sequence deployment or a hesitation if one was waiting for the RSL. neither of these maintenance tasks would require a repack. So I'm curious, what aspect of the repack could affect a deployment other than maintenance that can be done by the jumper? Is the issue the longer repack cycle, or poor maintenance on the part of the jumper that previously was compensated for by a shorter repack cycle?

The research I've been doing seems to fall into that same split. Either you get a basic first aid course or you really gotta just jump into it and devote some time and money. For a few years I've been kicking around the idea of getting a certification through the WMI (wilderness medical institute--part of NOLS). I'm in the mountains enough that it seemed like a good idea. Either way I'm going to take a basic course to get started and then probably move into something more substantial. I appreciate the feedback. This kind of knowledge is important. I don't think I could live with myself if I was in a situation where I was the only one who could help and I didn't know what to do.

Awesome, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. I appreciate it

Any you might recommend? I was looking at the american red cross for basic CPR and whatnot, but it would probably be good to focus on things like broken bones, etc.? Where could/should I start looking if I wanted to get that kind of training (I have no medical background/certifications).

Don't you have to jump to use your toggles, though?

i 100% agree with this, when I was saying "supposed to" I wasn't implying they are in violation of FAA regulations. I'm saying supposed to in the sense that all these things (NOTAMs, radio calls, map markers) are saying to pilots "hey dummy shit is falling through the sky you probably don't want to be there while it's happening" and yet the commonly just blunder through. Remember, my comments were in the context of VFR cloud clearance, where seeing what is in your airspace is very important. We all have to share the sky, which is why you really do need to see what's going on. One last thing: we haven't even touched on needing to see other skydivers. punching a cloud on a zoo dive is just asking for a jumper-to-jumper collision.

I don't trust pilots to have any idea that we are there. drop zones are on their charts, there are NOTAMs posted, and there are radio calls, and yet I've seen traffic fly right over our drop zone several times. One time it was a T-6 Texan directly below us in free fall. A whole tracking dive deployed about 1k above him as he flew diagonally through jump run. honestly I don't think he ever saw us (he never changed course or altitude). It was a perfectly cloud-free day. If I had been punching a cloud I wouldn't have known he was there. If I had not been on a tracking dive (and thus pulling higher) he would have been at deployment altitude. You become a believer in these kinds of rules (cloud clearance) when you realize that you have to assume a pilot will be exactly where he shouldn't be, because sometimes, they are.

I learned on static line. So I can only speak to that experience. And I will also say that you can't really go wrong with either, so don't believe that you will be a shitty skydiver if you do one or the other simply because of the method. It's up to you to do the work and learn the material either way. That said, I am happy that I learned on static line, and here are the reasons why: * learning in skydiving is incremental. The idea is that you only add one new ingredient to your skydive at a time so that you can focus on learning the new skill that will make you a safe jumper. Static line starts literally from the last part of the skydive and builds its way up to full altitude. Your first jumps aren't skydives. You're basically just a canopy pilot, and your only job is to make sure your canopy deployed correctly and that you fly a good pattern and land. Once you have done that, they add one new thing, practice touches, to get you started on learning how to reach for your pilot chute. Etc. Etc. By the time you get to your first freefall, you already know how to do everything else, so you are only focused on one new thing. * static line reinforces self reliance another thing I appreciate about static line is that from the very start you are 100% responsible for your own safety. it is up to you to identify a malfunction, it is up to you to pull, it is up to you to execute your EPs. This is not to say that you don't also have responsibility for these things in AFF, however with the analogy above about being in the deep end of the pool with life guards, you know that when push comes to shove they'll do everything in their power to save your life if you forget or lock up. I can't speak for what that knowledge does in an AFF student's head, but just like some people in an emergency lock up and just wait for the AAD to fire, I wouldn't be surprised if some people let their instructor pull for them (or in their mind think that that is an option--something like "i'm going to do this jump and pass but if i screw up they'll save me"). SL has zero room for that mind set, so I like that you are very aware that YOU are responsible for yourself from jump 1. This is the way it will be for the rest of your skydiving career, so it doesn't hurt that this mentality starts in your FJC before you even touch a rig. * static line teaches the vritue of skill based reward (progression) I never did a tandem before I did my first SL jump. So I did 13 "skydives" before I got to go to 13k. And let me tell you, I was SO HAPPY to experience free fall for that long, because I felt like I had earned it. You don't just pays your monies and gets the reward. You had to prove over several jumps that you were properly trained enough to conduct the dive safely. A big problem in our sport today is people progressing too quickly. We're like rats that were trained from the very beginning that if you press the lever, you get a reward. SL instills a different mind set, that yes you can do whatever you want, but you have to show that you know wtf you're doing. With each jump you get more and more independence to exercise your own judgement, especially once you're on solo status and you can do an "unsupervised" solo jump. But with each progressive step forward you make, you're aware that it's up to you to know what to do and how to do it. Once you are licensed you can basically do whatever you want most of the time. People might give you shit for it, but short of an S&TA grounding you, it's your call. Having the mentality from the start that you build up to things, and experiencing the gratification you feel for "earning" the right to do something is like training a rat to go through an obstacle course before they push the lever. You come out of your training not "hard wired" to just go for immediate gratification. Do SL trained jumpers say "fuck that shit" and go straight into rapid downsizing and all that? Sure. But that's on them, and their training was trying to teach them a different path SO WHICH IS BETTER? Neither is better. Like I said,I've never done AFF, i'm not an AFF instructor, and I honestly don't know all the details of how AFF deals with these same issues. I'm sure an AFFI could fisk my posts above and say how AFF deals with those same issues. So don't take this as saying that AFF *doesn't* teach you these things. but for me, the points above seem to be relatively unique to SL or were at least apparent enough to me to make an impression. Long story short, you can do either, and here is why I think SL is good, and don't let anyone tell you that SL is not applicable or somehow inferior. Thousands of skydivers learned on SL, including many of the icons of the sport. But make your own decision for your own reasons. Don't take my word for it, and don't take anyone else on this board's word for it. That's the first rule really of skydiving. Talk to real live instructors and ask good questions, then make up your own mind for yourself. blue skies

I agree, however Germain's chart also says that his formula is the *earliest* one should downsize, not that one has to. So Pop's statement about having a few hundred jumps to get a mastery is still true. The trick with newer skydivers (of which I am one) is to learn that these jump number recommendations (whether it is wing loading, cameras, wingsuiting, etc.) are the bare minimum. Hitting that milestone doesn't mean you make your transition within a jump or two, it means you can start to really think about it in a serious way and figure out what your strengths and weaknesses are so you can work on them and THEN pick up the new hotness. It's hard to resist that temptation, but many don't even realize that waiting is even an option in the first place. Commonly new jumpers eager to get into the cool shit think of the jump number recommendations as their deadline, like waiting for the bell at recess. (edited for clarity)

Deploying into your final is one way to get your S&TA's attention.

Mmm. Tasty.