Divalent

That ChrisD2.0! He knows everything about everything!

IMO, a "rating" is a rating. "Green" isn't a consideration. Any AFFI is ready to go to work right out the door, otherwise why would have someone given them a "rating?" That said: You make a sound argument though. IMO your highlighting the difference between experience, and the real world results. If you want some additional reading I suggest the lengthy and comprehensive IRM and the many pages outlining the duties of the reserve side AFFI. Basically with this BSR you have literarily ripped out pages of safety and procedures all designed and tested over the years to maximize performance and safety, in favor of opinion. IMO, just read all of what is required, or used to be required of any second AFFI and now all of that is "Optional?" Folks, Be extremely cautious about relying on anything ChrisD2.0 says. He is clearly the same ChrisD who appeared for a while about 5 years ago, with a phony profile of inflated jump numbers, and posted as if he was a seasoned instructor, with a cock-sure attitude quite often contradicting actual seasoned instructors on all sorts of issues by stating things that were wrong, particularly about training and safety. So much so that it prompted several to find out who he actually was, and expose the fact that he was a phony masquerading as an knowledgeable and experienced expert. He then posted a sad mea culpa, and then disappeared. But clearly he is back, doing the exact same thing. He is as much an expert in all that he claims now as he was back then. The end of ChrisD (1.0): http://www.dropzone.com/...rum.cgi?post=4581656 So beware. Despite his authoritative tone, he's a low time jumper who has no ratings and no actual experience or actual knowledge about anything he pontificates on. He's a phony that is best ignored.

Folks, Be extremely cautious about relying on anything ChrisD2.0 says. He is clearly the same ChrisD who appeared for a while about 5 years ago, with a phony profile of inflated jump numbers, and posted as if he was a seasoned instructor, with a cock-sure attitude quite often contradicting actual seasoned instructors on all sorts of issues by stating things that were wrong, particularly about training and safety. So much so that it prompted several to find out who he actually was, and expose the fact that he was a phony masquerading as an knowledgeable and experienced expert. He then posted a sad mea culpa, and then disappeared. But clearly he is back, doing the exact same thing. He is as much an expert in all that he claims now as he was back then. The end of ChrisD (1.0): http://www.dropzone.com/...rum.cgi?post=4581656 So beware.

Jeeze, after 6-7 hours of tunnel time, one would think you would have a pretty good ability to adjust your fall rate to maintain a level. I mean, that's about 400 skydives worth of free fall (but you're not distracted by other important things, like deploying a parachute before you smack the earth). A skydiver would have to learn this skill do be able to jump with others that may fall faster or slower than they do, and in general it involves shrinking or expanding the cross-sectional area you present into the wind. I've never been in a tunnel, but level changes would seem like something you'd work on by now. Maybe focus on that ability so that you gain the confidence that, regardless of the wind speed, you are able to position yourself anywhere you want? (Maybe have the operator first vary it for you, and you work to keep yourself at a relatively low, but constant, level. Then work on changing levels with a constant wind speed. Do it until it becomes instinct.) Alternatively, as someone else suggested, take up real skydiving: you start high, but gravity will ensure that you get down to where you want to be.

Sorry man, but I have a big issue with your home brew opinions and training ideas. So will any family, First Responder, or any individual responsible for another's treatment that isn't in the book. You want to "train" others to follow your point of view? AGAIN, your all alone on this one. You have neither the experience or training to create your own treatment protocols, nor do you have any authority to do so. But yet you persist in framing your opinion as some kind of sanctioned activity in a vain attempt at creating some kind of plausible conduct that does nothing to help the injured person. Again, your eloquent attempt to shift the care of the injured to protect gear is insane. You have your priorities messed up. Spend the same amount of time elsewhere, because believe me, I have seen the result of this kind of insanity many times,.... you will end up in court, alone. Attempting to explain why the damage you caused to a defenseless individual was so important. And when you start to explain you felt that saving the Gear was more important,.....Good luck with that. Again, prioritizing gear instead of caring for a casualty sends an insane message. Your priorities are screwed up man! Why do so many of you persist in saving gear, the can be easily repaired, is just a heap of nylon, Why do you continue to place such a high value on equipment, that isn't even yours, as compared to the pain and suffering, potential irreparable damage to someone else's health, and a delay of care? All to protect gear??? The logic is inane. ESPECIALLY when this same amount of effort could be spent on actually doing something good? And your comments about First Responders, and Medics don't know anything about skydiving is just irresponsible and irrelevant. Knowing how to care for an injured person has nothing to do with the activities of skydiving other than the MOI. Like I said, my scissors cut nylon like going thru butter. And if in my opinion a harness is in the way of actually caring for a fellow skydiver that harness is history and you will end up arrested if you interfere. You have NO RIGHT to interfere with another's care to save a nylon strap. Folks, ChrisD2.0 is clearly the same ChrisD who appeared for a while about 5 years ago, with a phony profile of inflated jump numbers, and posted as if he was a seasoned instructor, with a cock-sure attitude quite often contradicting actual seasoned instructors on all sorts of issues, particularly training and safety. So much so that it prompted several to find out who he actually was, and expose the fact that he was a phony masquerading as an knowledgeable and experienced expert. He then posted a sad mea culpa, and then disappeared. But clearly he is back, doing the exact same thing. He is as much an expert in all that he claims now as he was back then. The end of ChrisD (1.0): http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4581656

No one ever questions the identity of Concrete Rebound Hammer, so doesn't need no stinking fake passport or fake ID.

Not in the US. In fact, in general patents are written to be as general as possible, with none of the detail that would allow you to copy a product using the concept embodied in the patent. That's on purpose._ This is false. In fact, if you can prove that a patent is insufficient for someone "skill in the art" to replicate the invention, you can have the patent invalidated. The whole theory behind patents is that the inventor discloses to the world how to practice the invention, and in return the government gives the inventor an exclusive right for a limited period of time. If the patent doesn't disclose the invention, then they don't get the exclusive rights to it.

Actually, if it contains an element covered by a patent, you can't even make one for yourself. If it is not covered by a patent, as long as you didn't break the law getting the information to replicate it (like, say, stealing the instructions on how to make them from the WS mfg), than it is lawful. But I agree with what others have said: you probably won't find it worthwhile doing it.

FWIW, I have a standard wings d-bag which has 4 closing bands (which go through the 4 grommets on the bag flap). I probably replace one of those 4 bands about every 6th jump or so (which means each individual band is lasting ~25 jumps).

It's been a long time since I had line twists on my canopy, but recently had an opening that twisted up nearly 3 full revolutions. I simply twisted my risers/lines to bring the twisted part down onto the risers, and that was sufficient to allow the canopy to get my body rotating to undo the twist. Thought I'd share the video. Does anyone know if USPA has added this technique to the SIM? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YYaz0MriNI

A youtube survey of skydiving mals will be massively unrepresentative. The fraction of video'd skydives by sport jumpers that get uploaded to Youtube is probably way less than 1% of those recorded, and the ones that do are more likely to be the interesting mals. Even then, the outcome is almost always a routine cutaway and reserve landing. Fear is useful if it motivates you to approach the sport with a mind to reduce the risk. IMO, you can likely lower the risk 10 fold from the "industry average" by how you approach the sport and by the decisions you make about what what gear you use, how you care for your gear, what activities you engage in, and what weather conditions will cause you to stand down. As a student, those decisions will be made for you, but hopefully you will come to recognize what are good practices when you are licensed.

A woman got married and had 13 children. Her husband died. She married again and had 7 more children. Again, Her husband died. But, she remarried and this time had 5 more children. Alas, she finally died. Standing before her coffin, the preacher prayed for her. He thanked the Lord for this very loving woman and said, "Lord, they're finally together." One mourner leaned over and quietly asked her friend, "Do you think he means her first, second or third husband?" The friend replied, "I think he means her legs."

Classic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j3_iPskjxk

I'll guess that their theory is this: If the bridle is routed the "standard" way and the pin is oriented with a smilie-face, then when the bridle pulls on the pin and makes it "stand up", the end of the pin could (possibly) be pushing into the segment of the bridle that is still being held down with some force (due to a tight stow) above the pin, potentially piercing that segment. But if the pin is in the frownie-face orientation, the portion of the bridle that is below the pin and loop has already been cleared out of the way by the pull of the PC by the time the pin is forced to "stand up", and so less likely to pierce that portion of the bridle.

I would think another important consideration would be the length of the jump run. Unless they drop in two passes (which would require the difficult task of ensuring no one on the first pass had to open high), how many DZs could accommodate a jump run nearly twice as long as a typical otter jump run.

How will your device communicate it's location, and to what receiver? If via bluetooth, forget about it: bluetooth range is too short, and so the benefit would be only marginal. A searcher that got within bluetooth range very likely will be in visual range. (Maybe very useful in a tall corn field, but that's about it.) Your search pattern would have to be quite tight, and no different than one based on visual location. If you can get over 100ft, then we're talking, as your search pattern can be more spread out, and so more efficient. So anyway, if you can fill us in on the details of how it communicates, we can better help you determine if your device would be useful or not.

Three engineers and three accountants are traveling by train to a conference. At the station, the three accountants each buy tickets and watch as the three engineers buy only a single ticket. "How are three people going to travel on only one ticket?" asks an accountant. "Watch and you'll see," answers an engineer. They all board the train. The accountants take their respective seats but all three engineers cram into a restroom and close the door behind them. Shortly after the train has departed, the conductor comes around collecting tickets. He knocks on the restroom door and says, "Ticket, please." The door opens just a crack and a single arm emerges with a ticket in hand. The conductor takes it and moves on. The accountants saw this and agreed it was quite a clever idea. So after the conference, the accountants decide to copy the engineers on the return trip and save some money (being clever with money, and all). When they get to the station they buy a single ticket for the return trip. To their astonishment, the engineers don't buy a ticket at all. "How are you going to travel without a ticket?" says one perplexed accountant. "Watch and you'll see," answers an engineer. When they board the train the three accountants cram into a restroom and the three engineers cram into another one nearby. The train departs. Shortly afterward, one of the engineers leaves his restroom and walks over to the restroom where the accountants are hiding. He knocks on the door and says, "Ticket, please."

An Catholic priest and a Rabbi found themselves sharing a compartment on a train. After a while, the priest opened a conversation by saying "I know that, in your religion, you’re not supposed to eat pork... Have you actually ever tasted it?" The Rabbi said, "I must tell the truth. Yes, I have, on the odd occasion." Then the Rabbi had his turn of interrogation. He asked, "Your religion, too... I know you’re supposed to be celibate. But..." The priest replied, "Yes, I know what you’re going to ask. I have succumbed once or twice." There was silence for a while. Then the Rabbi peeped around the newspaper he was reading and said, "Better than pork, isn’t it?"

A sobbing Ms Murphy approaches Father O’Grady after mass. He says: “So what’s bothering you?” She replies: “Oh, Father, I’ve terrible news. My husband passed away last night.” The priest says: “Oh, Mary, that’s terrible. Did he have any last requests?” "Certainly father," she replied. “He said: “Please Mary, put down that damn gun.”

Okay, you win the internet today, lol!

It's more of a community thing: 1. DZs are a bit more financially stable if they run a full load, and a financially healthy DZ is more likely to stay in business and to be more generous with occasional perks (like, running a light load at the end of the day, buying paper towels to fill the bathroom dispensers, etc.) 2. the penalty for keeping the solo on the load is disproportionate to the error made. Yes, the team screwed up not manifesting 4. But either the DZ takes a hit running a light load, or the team takes a hit either wasting jumps or paying for slots not used. 3. Bumping the solo impacts only him, vs a team of 4 (or vs the DZO) That's why I think the solo takes the immediate hit, but gets compensated. The team is happy, (and presumably they will also be grateful to the solo guy), the DZO is happy, and the Solo benefits from getting a free slot, and hopefully is at least not disappointed in the outcome.

Kick the solo off, but 4-way team pays for his slot on the next load. (It the team doesn't agree with that, go as originally manifested.)

LOL! Ya could have just said "892"! http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4767693#4767693

The video show a very nice stand-up walk-out landing.

OK. Here's one list from one person (DSE) compiled through 2014. 47 incidents. I could add another ~10 if I was good about writing down local (Perris) incidents, but I'm not. ... {snip} {sigh} It's like this list is like some sort of talisman to many people. Just cite it's existence and you apparently win the discussion. I broke down that list here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4565386#4565386 I can create a list that could support imposing a 200 jump minimum on each of the following, and I would wager that each would improve over all safety much more than a 200 jump minimum on camera's: 1. wing loading >1.1 2. jump in >18 mph ground winds 3. >90 degree turns below 1000 ft