Search the Community

The stall is one of the least explored and most feared aspects of flying. Avoidance of this flight mode causes many canopy pilots to be uncomfortable with flying slowly, and unpracticed in this important art. This article will discuss the governing variables relating to the stall, in hopes that this knowledge will help parachute pilots to become less afraid of this essential aspect of the flying experience. First we must explore what a stall is. The assumption made by most canopy pilots is that the stall is caused by slow speed flight. This is not true. It is correlated with low speed flight, but a wing can stall at high speed too. A stall is caused by an excessive angle of attack. When the relative wind flows over an airfoil, it is bent in the general direction of down. This causes an opposite force called "Lift". When the orientation of the airfoil is changed to a higher angle with respect to the relative wind, it is said to have an increased angle of attack. Air is quite cooperative. It is willing to be redirected and still flow in a fairly organized manner…up to a point. At a specific angle, all airfoils fail to bend the air into submission. This discrete angle of attack is referred to as a stall. It is coupled with a sudden drop in lift, and thus a significant increase in decent rate. Whether you are flying an F-16 or a Lotus 190, recovery from a stall is always the same: the pilot must reduce the angle of attack. On an airplane this requires forward pressure on the yolk or stick. On a parachute, we are simply required to let off the downward pressure on the toggles or rear risers that has increased the angle of attack in the first place. Each parachute stalls and recovers differently. Depending on several governing variables, some parachutes will recovery nicely from a stalled configuration no matter what the recovery technique, while others will require very careful execution. Let's take a look at these issues one by one. The characteristics of a stall on any ram air canopy are based on two main variables, and several lower order variables. The most significant governing variable is the flight mode when the stall is reached. If the canopy is in a sink, rather than level flight (zero decent surf), it will tend to stall in a more forgiving and docile manner. The second primary variable is the attitude about the roll axis when the stall is reached. In other words, if there is any bank angle when the stall precipitates, it will cause the lower wing to stall first, resulting in significant yaw energy, which can result in line twists. There are several other things to consider when testing the stall of a canopy, including: canopy design, density altitude, wing-loading, aggressiveness of the control input, and most importantly, recovery technique. This will be discussed next. If the wing is allowed back into forward flight quickly, it will dive aggressively toward the ground, causing a drop in the angle of attack, as well as the lift and therefore the overall line tension. This may allow the wing to surge below the suspended weight (you), and possibly cause a jumper/canopy entanglement. Further, if the release of the brakes is asymmetrical, the lack of line tension can allow the wing to surge unevenly about the yaw axis, causing line-twists. The key to stalling any wing is to enter the stalled configuration in a sink, with the wing level and static about the roll axis. As soon as the stall is reached, the toggles (or rear risers) should be released only a few inches to allow for only a slight drop in the angle of attack. As soon as the brakes are released, the jumper should be prepared for a sudden increase in toggle pressure, as the tail of the parachute is about to get hit with a pulse of relative wind. If the pilot is unprepared for this, the toggles will usually be pulled upward and possibly in an uneven manner, often resulting in an aggressive stall recovery that may result in line twists. When the brakes are released quickly to the full flight position, the wing doesn't have much drag. This means that there is very little to prevent it from surging forward in the window. When the brakes are released slowly, and then held down just above the stall point, the wing has a great deal of drag. You have two big barn doors at the back of the wing helping to prevent and aggressive surge. Further, as you become more familiar with the stall and recovery characteristics of your wing, you may begin to fly "actively" with respect to the recovery process. In other words, as soon as the wing begins to fly forward in the window, the pilot jerks on the brakes to dampen the forward surge. It is important to do this minimally enough to prevent re-stalling the wing. A well-timed reapplication of the brakes during the recovery process will significantly reduce the amount of altitude lost in the stall. This can be very useful in the event of a low altitude stall. This maneuver can be practiced in relative proximity to another canopy in deep brakes. Be sure to keep your distance when you do this. By definition, a stall is a loss of control of the wing. Rear riser stalls tend to be sharper at the onset, but quicker on the recovery. Therefore it is advisable to stall the parachute on the rear risers first before attempting to stall it on the brakes. Further, such maneuvers should always be performed at an altitude that will allow for a safe cutaway. Given all of these concerns, one must ask "Why should I stall my parachute in the first place". There are several valid reasons why each jumper should rehearse stalls at altitude. In high angle of attack approaches, such as may be necessary in a tight landing area, stalls can happen inadvertently while maneuvering. This is why it is also important to practice slow flight maneuvering by lifting the toggle on the outside of the turn, rather than depressing the one on the inside of the turn. In order to reach a (near) zero ground-speed on a no-wind day, the pilot must have full "Toggle Authority". In other words, if the toggles are set too long, the pilot will be unable to access the slowest possible airspeed, and therefore will be forced to land with more ground-speed without the advantage of a headwind. Being able to finish the flare completely and then let up after landing to prevent the stall from pulling you onto your heels in an essential part of any no wind landing. When you decide to practice stalls, I suggest taking the process step by step. Simply honking your brakes down with your eyes squinting in negative expectation usually results in a wild ride, and sometimes a cutaway. Try hanging out in slow flight for a while. Bring your toggles down to a bit more than half brakes and leave them there. If you are above the stall point, it isn't going to just stall all by itself. Watching people fly in deep brakes is usually similar to watching them light a firecracker. Your parachute isn't going to explode…promise. When you get your canopy into the deep brake mode, take a deep breath in and let it out slowly. Relax your muscles. Let your legs hang limp. I find that nervous pilots can't connect with their parachute because it isn't touching their bones. If you soften your muscles, your will allow the leg straps to sink into you so that you can feel what is happening with the newest addition to your body: your wing. By truly relaxing under canopy, we begin to sober up from the adrenalin that is blurring our vision and skewing our perspective toward the negative. Stalls are an essential part of flight. If you are to be fully in control over the wing, you must explore all aspects of your parachute's performance envelope. Ultimately, flying slowly is the most important aspect of flight because we land in slow flight. The more comfortable you are with your slow flight skills, the better your touchdown will be. Remember, the definition of a good flight is one that ends well. BSG www.BrianGermain.com BIGAIR SPORTZ

Exit separation has become a point of contention at many DZ's lately. Years ago, when belly flying was the rule and the Cessna 182 was the aircraft at most DZ's, exit separation wasn't too much of a big deal - you gave the other group (if there was another group) some time and then you went. With the aircraft in popular use 15-20 years ago, it was hard to exit very quickly to begin with, and so the issue never came up very often. Bill von Novak started skydiving in 1991 at a small DZ in New York. Since then he has become an S+TA, an AFF, tandem and static line instructor, and has set two world records in large formation skydiving. He lives with his wife Amy in San Diego. Since then, several factors have conspired to make exit separation more of an issue. First off, there are more people freeflying. Freeflyers, especially head down groups, drift differently than belly flyers, and thus need different considerations when planning for exit separation. Faster canopies mean that people who open facing each other need more distance to deal with a potential collision. Large aircraft with big doors can hold several larger groups, and those groups can get out those big doors more quickly. Finally, GPS spotting has removed some of the delay between groups. It's rare to see people even check the spot before beginning their jam-up. I first became aware of this issue in 1994, when I started jumping at Brown Field in San Diego. We went through a series of aircraft as we grew, from Cessna 206's to King Airs to Beech-99's, none of which had GPS. In addition, we were less than a mile from the US-Mexico border, which meant our jump runs had to be east-west and our spots had to be dead on. Several instructors were "designated spotters" and we would argue over 100 yard differences in jump run offset and exit location. After a while we got pretty good at spotting. As our aircraft became larger, exit separation became more of an issue. We had a few close calls, and so we agreed to start allowing more space between groups. At first it was essentially trial and error - we would leave some amount of time (10 seconds or so) between groups and increase that time whenever someone felt they were too close to someone else. After a while, we began to get a feel for how much time was required. We knew that if the upper winds were strong and the plane was just creeping along the ground, we had to leave more time. We also knew that if we let the freeflyers get out first, we had a problem almost every time. We ended up with a system that worked for us, and had essentially no problems with collisions or close calls after that. During this time I was also traveling in the summers to different boogies and I noticed a wide variety of exit separation techniques. By far the most common technique was some amount of fixed time - the next group would pause, then climb out and go, without knowing what the upper winds were doing or what the spot was. The next most common technique was similar but they added a "leave more time if it's windy" clause to their delay. There was also a class of jumpers who looked out the door to tell how much separation to leave; these jumpers either looked at angle of the departing group or the ground to tell how much space to leave. This got me thinking. What really works and what doesn't? I tried a few methods on my own, from the "45 degree" method to a purely ground-based method. After some experiments, a group of skydivers collaborated via email and internet and came up with the actual math behind separation, the physics that determines how far the center of group A will be from the center of group B after they open. But before diving into the math, there are a few basic concepts to cover. What we care about. When we're talking about separation at opening time, we don't really care about where we are in relationship to the plane or even the ground - what we care about is how far we will be in the air horizontally from the next group that opens. So for our purposes, the airplane and the ground don't really matter, and someone watching from either of those places may not get the same "picture" of things that we get. (Of course, we do care about our relationship to the ground when it comes to spotting and landing on the DZ, but that's a separate issue.) How we fall. In most freefall (tracking dives and wingsuits excepted) we fall essentially straight down with respect to the air. If there's wind, the wind blows us at whatever speed it's blowing. If the wind is doing 30kts at altitude, a group of skydivers will be doing 30kts as they drift with the wind. It's also important to realize how your trajectory changes after you open. At a freefall speed of 100kts, a 30kt wind will slightly deflect your trajectory, because it's a small fraction of your total speed. Once under canopy and descending at 10kts, it will deflect your trajectory a tremendous amount, since it is now a very large part of your speed. Of course, under canopy you have much more control over your own horizontal speed, and the winds may add or subtract from your canopy's groundspeed depending on the direction you are facing. Speeds. When discussing speeds, it's important to define units. There is feet per second, which is very useful for people who are trying to figure out how far they want to be from another group. At 100 feet per second, 10 seconds gives you 1000 feet, which is about as easy as it gets. You may also hear the terms indicated airspeed, true airspeed, and groundspeed, in both knots and miles an hour. These can all be converted back and forth as needed .Now that all that's out of the way, the math is pretty simple. The distance you will get between group centers is the speed of the aircraft plus the speed of the winds at opening altitude, multiplied by the time you leave between groups. That's it. So if the aircraft is flying into the wind doing 80 knots per its GPS, and the winds at opening altitude are 10 knots from the same direction, and you are waiting 10 seconds between groups, you are going to get (80+10 = 90 kts, which is 153 feet per second) 1530 feet between groups. It gets a little more complicated when the winds are not from the same directions. If the winds at opening altitude are opposite jump run, you have to subtract them rather than add them. If the winds at opening altitude are from the side, it's the same as zero winds at opening altitude when it comes to separation. If you put these equations into a spreadsheet and play with the numbers, some basic patterns emerge. If the headwinds at altitude are strong you have to leave more time. If the plane is slow (i.e. it's indicated airspeed on jump run is low) you have to leave more time. If the winds at opening altitude are strong as well, and from the same direction, you can safely leave less time. (Or, preferably, just leave the same amount of time and you'll end up with even more separation.) If the winds at opening altitude are opposite from jump run, that's the worst case, and you have to leave even more time. Some people have a problem visualizing how winds at opening altitude can possibly cause them trouble if they leave enough distance on exit. The question is usually phrased as "don't all jumpers follow the same path out of the plane?" And they definitely do. To visualize why this can still cause you problems, take a look at the separation diagram shown below. Drawing showing exit separations In the first drawing, there is no wind after exit, and the first group breaks off, tracks, opens, and flies their canopies away from the center for the first few seconds, which is what they should be doing on most formation skydives. (After that, it's a good idea to turn away from line of flight once you're sure you are clear of others in your group.) The second group arrives 10-15 seconds later, shortly after the first group has opened their parachutes, with some room to spare. The second drawing shows what happens when there are winds are the same all the way down. Notice that the "cone" caused by the breakoff and the canopy flight has shifted strongly to the right. This is because (as mentioned before) once their parachutes are open, the wind affects their trajectory more strongly. As with the first example, it is assumed that everyone flies away from the center for the first few moments. That means the jumper flying into the wind makes no progress and comes straight down, while the jumper flying downwind gets a boost in groundspeed.. The third drawing shows where you can run in to problems. In this drawing, the winds after exit are from the opposite direction. You get the same skewing of the cone, but now the edge of the cone is getting dangerously close to the trajectory of the next group. This is a case where the same separation at exit led to trouble because of opposite winds at opening altitude. This leads naturally to the question "how much separation do you really need?" That depends on the group. 1000 feet should probably be an absolute minimum for any belly formation skydiving. That means that two four-ways can exit, fall straight down the pipe, track 300 feet from center on breakoff, and then still have 300 feet to deal with avoiding a potential collision after opening. With the speeds of today's canopies, that's a bare minimum. If the group size grows to two 10-ways, 2000 feet might be a wiser separation. If a low-time RW group backslides a bit, again, 1500 feet might be needed to be clear of them at opening time. So how does a jumper who doesn't want to carry around a calculator figure out how much time to leave between groups? One very simple way is to just look out of the plane and wait until it has covered 1000 feet, then go. This method, originally suggested by Skratch Garrison, takes much of the figuring out of exit separation. It can be hard to determine how far 1000 feet is on the ground, but fortunately most DZ's come with a handy ruler - a runway. A 3000 foot runway allows you to put 3 groups out along its length with a bit of margin thrown in. This method also has the tremendous advantage that it requires people to look out the door, and that means they are more likely to see traffic, high canopies or clouds that could pose a hazard to their skydive. Another simple way is time-based. There are several tricks you can use to determine how long to wait. One common one is to always leave at least 7 seconds, then if the upper winds are strong divide them by 2 and wait that number of seconds. (Faster aircraft sometimes use divide by 3.) So if the winds are 30kts you wait 15 seconds between groups. This technique uses some math but isn't too bad. A third technique that seems to be popular for some reason is the 45 degree method. In this method, jumpers wait until the previous group passes through an imaginary 45 degree line before they exit. The problem with this method is that the jumpers never pass through that 45 degree angle, or pass through it so quickly (under 1 second) that it's not useful for determining separation. The numbers confirm this. What you see out the door depends purely on speed of the aircraft, fallrate of the jumpers and type of exit. If the plane is going slower than freefall speed, the group may start out above the 45 degree line, but will drop below the line in less than a second and never rise above it again. If the plane is going faster than freefall speed (which is rare) the jumpers stay above the line and never cross it at all. A good head-down exit will tend to move jumpers lower in the picture. Winds will not affect the picture; an exit in 5kt uppers looks the same as an exit in 50kt uppers. There has been some friction over this issue. The 45 degree method has a lot of supporters because it's so simple and makes a sort of intuitive sense. Beyond that, it actually seems to work for some people - although it's likely that the extra time it takes to locate and stare at the previous group has something to do with the reason the next group usually leaves enough time. To show that this doesn't work, two cameras were fixed at a 45 degree angle and mounted on a boom outside an Otter's door (see pictures below.) Pictures and video of several jump runs both into the wind and downwind were taken and magnified to determine how close each group was to the imaginary 45 degree line, which was essentially the center of the images. The pictures confirmed the basic problems of the 45 degree rule. RW groups, falling a little faster than the aircraft, never quite passed behind the 45 degree line. Freeflyers, going much faster than the aircraft, stayed well below the 45 degree line for as long as they were visible in the stills (about 30 seconds.) Some version of the 45 degree method may work for some people. It may be that the simple act of looking out the door delays them enough, or their subconscious may see the group moving slowly along the ground (because the aircraft's groundspeed is low) and send a warning message to the rest of their brain - "hey, hold up a minute." But waiting for a true 45 degree angle simply does not work. Another issue that has become more important lately is exit order. Some places still put freeflyers out first, and that doesn't make much sense. In 30kt uppers, a belly flyer who leaves 10 seconds and gets out after freeflyer will open 100 feet from him, but if the belly flyer goes first and the freeflyer leaves the same time he will open 2200 feet from the freeflyer. RW groups, since they are in freefall longer, drift farther downwind before opening. It seems like a no-brainer to choose an exit order that used this to your advantage and increased, rather than decreased, separation distances. You can certainly wait 20 seconds after the freefly groups before the belly groups exit if there is some other reason why the freeflyers have to exit first, but at most DZ's it's hard to ensure that 20 seconds, especially since waiting so long almost guarantees long spots or a goaround. Below are two diagrams that show how exit order can affect separation. Belly out first diagram Freefly out first diagram One reason given at DZ's to explain a backwards exit order is that freeflyers open sooner and therefore are beginning to descend before the next group gets there. Bryan Burke of Skydive Arizona has pointed out that you simply cannot trust vertical separation - one premature deployment or malfunction and all that vertical separation is gone. Even during a normal skydive, when you add up altimeter error, pull timing and snivel distance, you can easily get a jumper opening 1000 feet from where he expected to be open. In fact, Bryan points out that at Skydive Arizona, the primary reason high pullers get out last is not for separation but rather because they are the ones that can make it back from a bad spot. Every drop zone is going to have a different set of rules and a different approach to exit order. Some work well, some don't work as well. Jumpers have to understand the factors that can reduce group separation so they can make informed decisions about when they want to exit and what kind of exit orders they are comfortable with.

Prompted also by the sale of the Durban based factory, Aerodyne Research Corporation in Tampa, Florida, has decided to move forward and find new investors for its expanding sport parachute business. "The previous owners were operating at a distance and could not provide us with the support we need to channel the growth of our sales", reports President Edward "Bushman" Anderson. "We have found a positive group of investors who are actually interested in developing Aerodyne Research into a stronger and more cohesive unit with a concentrated focus on sport parachute products." Anderson sees this change of ownership as an opportunity to put together a new and modern manufacturing facility, which will not have a mix of military and sport products. This means both engineering and production can focus on common goals and objectives. "It will allow us to concentrate our efforts and become one of the bigger players in the sport market", predicts Anderson. Aerodyne's sales so far this year have been above projected forecasts and the company attributes this to the ability of providing stock canopies at a lower price than custom, as well as to the carefully maintained stock levels. Over the summer the company will run a pilot program to sell stock Icon harness-container systems. These will have fully articulated (hip and chest rings) harnesses, which will be custom finished for the customer's body size. Anderson: "We believe we are one of the few manufacturers capable of doing this due to the unique geometry of the Icon harness. It is also important to recognize that the Icon comes standard with all popular features, so there is no need to order additional options. These stock Icons will have everything from stainless steel hardware to spacer foam back pads." For the most part it is business as usual. Aerodyne anticipates strong sales of stock over the summer again, as experienced in past seasons, and this will give the possibility of ramping up the new facility so as to address custom orders later in the year. It would seem that in the summer, when the weather is good, people want their gear as soon as possible and only "now" will do for them… We believe that our typical Pilot, Smart & Icon combination from one source and with a single order from stock, will present customers and distributors with the best alternative when choosing their new equipment this summer.

ELOY (September 14, 2005) - Skydive Arizona, an Arizona-based company that is one of the world's largest drop zones and skydiving centers, announced that it has filed a lawsuit against Cary Quattrochi and Ben Butler, the principals in 1-800-SKY-RIDE. The complaint filed in federal district court in Arizona alleges violations of federal law prohibiting false designations of origin, false or misleading descriptions of fact, and false or misleading representations of fact in commercial advertising. According to the complaint, the named defendants misrepresent the nature, characteristics, qualities, and geographic origin of their services and commercial activities. The complaint also alleges claims of consumer deception, unfair competition, and trademark infringement. The complaint alleges that the defendants have more than 900 websites purporting to offer skydives and related services at locations in Arizona and elsewhere, which are allegedly used in a common plan or scheme to deceive consumers and to perpetuate a scam on the public. The defendants are alleged to have a website that misrepresents the defendants as "Arizona Skydiving," "Skydiving Arizona," and as the "Skydiving Arizona Center" in the State of Arizona. According to the complaint filed by Skydive Arizona, the 1800Skyride represent that their facility at "Skydiving Arizona" is "the busiest skydive center serving Arizona," that they "run multiple turbine aircraft," and that they have "multiple large screen TV's in our hanger for you to use and watch your video for the first time," when in fact the defendants have no such aircraft, hanger, large screen TV's, or skydiving center in Arizona. Skyride allegedly have websites for fictitious skydiving centers in Phoenix, Tempe, Scottsdale, Mesa, Glendale, Gilbert, Yuma, Flagstaff, Chandler, Peoria, and Tucson, which are alleged to falsely represent that defendants have a skydiving center at each such location. Skydive Arizona has alleged that the defendants have one or more websites that include photographs of Skydive Arizona's aircraft which are misrepresented to be photographs showing defendants' aircraft. The complaint also alleges that many of the defendants' websites include a photograph of skydivers taken at Skydive Arizona, which is allegedly represented to be a photograph of the defendants' experienced staff of instructors, and the same photograph is allegedly misrepresented as the staff at defendants' fictitious skydiving centers in Green Bay, Wisconsin; Springfield, Illinois; Nashville, Tennessee; and Atlanta, Georgia. The complaint alleges a nationwide scheme to mislead consumers with websites for fictitious skydiving centers throughout the United States, while it is alleged that the defendants have no such physical facilities, instructors, or aircraft at the locations represented on the websites. Consumers are allegedly provided with a toll-free number to call to make reservations to skydive at the defendants' fictitious skydiving centers, and the telephone calls are allegedly routed to a telemarketing center in Georgia. The complaint also alleges that the defendants on at least one occasion fraudulently diverted telephone calls from a legitimate skydiving center to the defendants' telemarketing center after the owner of the business died, and while the decedent's widow and children were attempting to sell the business. Also named as defendants in the suit are the Atlanta Skydiving Center, Casc Inc., 1-800-SKY-RIDE, and 1800SkyRide.com. Skydive Arizona is represented by Sid Leach of the Phoenix law firm of Snell & Wilmer, L.L.P. About Skydive Arizona, Inc. Skydive Arizona has grown from a business established in 1978 by Larry and Liliane Hill, at a time when they owned a single Cessna 182. Operating under the name "Skydive Arizona" since 1986, the business has grown significantly, and is now recognized as the world's largest skydiving center. Skydive Arizona tallies over 150,000 jumps annually at its facility in Eloy, Arizona. Skydive Arizona provides state-of-the-art training, world-renowned instructors and staff, pilots, videographers and coaches, and has established an international reputation in the skydiving industry. For further information, contact Betsy Barnhouse at Skydive Arizona, 4900 Taylor Road, Eloy, Arizona 85231; telephone: (520) 466-0493. Also see: The SkyRide Virtual Network Scam What can we do about Skyride?

DENVER, CO (April 21, 2005) – After sixteen years in business, Sky Systems, Ltd. finds new ownership with Carey Whitley, Yvonne Gnirss and Doug Park, where the business will find its new home in DeLand, Florida. Troy Widgery, former competitive skydiver with Airmoves, and also founder of Go Fast Sports & Beverage Co., established Sky Systems, Ltd. in 1988 with the invention of the Tube Stoe®. In the years to follow, Sky Systems’ designs revolutionized helmets in the world of skydiving, and the company established and owns several patent/trademarks in the skydiving industry. The change in ownership is for the benefit of skydivers worldwide, and for that of Sky Systems. “With my need to focus my energy on Go Fast, I figured who better than Doug and Carey to carry on the innovation and quality production of Sky Systems – and to help Sky Systems remain the skydiving helmet and accessories leader worldwide,” said Troy Widgery. “With their experience and passion in this industry, they have the ability to take Sky Systems to an entirely new level, and to continue the original mission to develop new trends and products based on skydivers’ demands.” The change in ownership will move the Sky Systems headquarters and production facilities out of Colorado. Sky Systems headquarters and production will be moved to Florida later this month. About Sky Systems, Ltd.Established in 1988, Sky Systems Ltd. was founded by Troy Widgery with the premise that skydiving equipment should be designed for skydivers by skydivers. Troy's experience includes performing in several world-class teams, including Air Moves and Vortex. As a result, Sky Systems Ltd. has been able to maintain first-hand knowledge of the trends and current demands of this dynamic industry, and in turn, produce some of the most innovative, unique, and highest quality products available in the skydiving market today. About Doug Park/Carey Whitley/Yvonne GnirssWith nearly 22,000 skydives between them; this new ownership team will bring a tremendous amount of first-hand industry knowledge to the production, growth and marketing of Sky Systems brand products. All three ownership partners come from independent small business backgrounds, and have made skydiving an integral part of their personal and professional accomplishments. Doug Park / DeLand Majik 16000+ skydives 2004 World Champion 4-way, Croatia 2004, 2003, 2002 Anton Malvesky World Cup Champion, Russia (WR ave. 23.1) 2004, 2003 US National 4-way Champion 2004, 2003 US National Overall Champion 2004, 2002 Shamrock Showdown Champion (WR ave. 22.7) 2003, 2002 National Skydiving League Champion 2002 World Cup Champion 4-way, Spain 2002 World Cup Bronze Medalist 8-way, Spain 2002 US National Bronze Medalist 1998 World Cup Champion, Portugal Multiple US National Silver Medals Former landscape company business owner, Vermont Carey Whitley 4400+ Skydives Current Manager and Chef at the Perfect Spot, DeLand AFF Instructor Competitor at Nationals Former owner of one of the “25 Fastest Growing Companies and Best Businesses” in Richmond, VA – Sharper Palette catering company Small Business Consultant Yvonne Gnirss 1500 skydives Owner and Artist of Fused Image (www.fusedimage.com) Marathon/Multi-Sport Endurance Athlete – training for 2005 Florida Half Ironman For more information, please email [email protected].