Search the Community
Showing results for 'sangi'.
Found 460 results
-
Yvan, the problem is, most people think they are above average. Kind of impossible. Finding out where one falls on the bell curve takes some time. So starting out expecting everyone is on the left side of the curve hopefully prevents those that are from injuring themselves. The fact you are asking these questions is a good sign. When starting to skydive, there is so much that you don't know that you don't know. There are quite a few people on here that pushed the limits on canopies and got away with it. They will also tell you they were damn lucky. There are also folks that pushed and got bit. Here is a thread about Sangi, only jumping a WL of 1.2. If you read threads by/about him, he felt he was above average until the ground told him otherwise. Taking your time to learn to fly what might feel like a tug boat will build skills that will translate to smaller canopies. Jumping a smaller canopy where you will be OK "if you fly it conservatively" can lead you to injury when you get cut off in the landing pattern and have to make an evasive maneuver. A hard toggle turn on a boat will turn you. A hard toggle turn on a heavier loaded zippy canopy could turn you into the ground. Natural ability only goes so far, then experience has to kick in. The only problem is, it takes experience to know where that is. 50 donations so far. Give it a try. You know you want to spank it Jump an Infinity
-
I'm familiar with Sangi, and with the low-jump highly-loaded reserve dude. Scary stuff. I'm also familiar with super-experienced jumpers who think they don't have to pull their cutaway handle, because they can fix it. Seems the more experienced you are, the more likely you are to go in by not cutting away, but I have no data for this. Why doesn't somebody just write, "No, we have no data to support this"? The plural of "anecdote" is not "data", and I just get anecdote after anecdote whenever I ask this question. Nobody has written, "No", yet nobody has provided the data, either. If this myth is not true, it wouldn't be the first thing that "everybody knew" that wasn't true. Everybody knows that cold weather causes colds, yet it doesn't seem to hold up when tested. Everybody knows that sugar causes kids to get hyper, yet that also doesn't hold up when tested, etc. How hard is it for the USPA to compare fatalities (I know data for non-fatal accidents are not necessarily kept) among the various experience levels and compare it with the number of licences in the various categories? It's not perfect, because you can have 1,000 jumps and an A-licence, but it would be a good start. "So many fatalities and injuries are caused by decisions jumpers make before even getting into the aircraft. Skydiving can be safe AND fun at the same time...Honest." - Bill Booth
-
No joke. And it's not necessarily about jump numbers. It's more about attitude. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect I only stumble on this a few years ago, but it explains so much about some of my former coworkers. So do I understand that there are no data suggesting that intermediate jumpers have more accidents? The Wikipedia article about the effect does not translate into real-life accidents without some more evidence. Do we have any support for the idea that intermediates get into proportionately more accidents or are more hazardous? If not, why not? Shouldn't somebody be keeping track of this if it's truly so dangerous? The idea of the "100 jump wonder" isn't a myth or a joke. It's a well known phenomenon in a wide variety of activities. Pilots (100 hour wonder) & motorcycles (Squid) are the two I know of personally. The "enough knowledge to get into trouble, but not enough to stay out of it" isn't new or unusual. Remember the line "Your ego is writing checks that your skills can't cash"? It doesn't affect everyone, but it's definitely out there. And USPA has taken steps to address it. Camera recommendations (C License) Wingsuit rules (200 minimum), canopy card for B license, all of those are in response to incidents or near-incidents caused by confidence exceeding actual skills. There's a thread in Swooping & Canopy right now about low timers on Stillettos. One guy is posting about a reserve loaded around 1.4 with fairly low jump numbers. He doesn't seem to think it's a bad idea, despite what others are saying. And then there's Sangi. He wanted to downsize & swoop. Despite being told he wasn't ready, he was pushing too hard too fast, he refused to listen. He came up with all sorts of rationalizations why he was different. He was better. The ground didn't recognize his extraordinary abilities and he's now in a wheelchair for the rest of his life. He at least had the courage to come back and admit that he was wrong and should have listened (and I give him a huge amount of respect for that). A good friend of mine was similar. He wanted to swoop. He wanted the "rush." He got a Xfire loaded at about 1.4 and started pushing it. He was told to dial it back some. He didn't. So he spent an entire summer watching from the sidelines as his bones healed. I've read your posts before, and in the past you have expressed doubt or disbelief that someone "could be that stupid." Yet they are. I've reached the point in life that I'm no longer surprised by the stupid things I see people do, but I'll never cease to be amazed. I drive truck for a living, and volunteer as a safety officer at my local shooting range. I see amazingly stupid things on a regular basis. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
-
Well, most of the time, incidents that are reported as "Distracted by camera and (insert bad thing here) happened" are related to the camera. Most of the stuff in the "Small Camera Incidents" thread are pretty clear that the main, or a significantly contributing cause was "camera fixation." I'm open to you pointing out which ones are being incorrectly blamed on the camera. It's actually the lack of experience, combined with the distraction, that create a situation where a simple, low risk situation goes bad. Or the distraction creates the bad situation (chest strap undone is one example). And the attitude of "I'm different, I'm special and I don't have to listen to those stupid recommendations" has gotten pretty old. Visit a few friends in the ICU or go to a few funerals. You will realize that those rules and recommendations are in place for good reasons. Alternatively, ask Sangi, Dan Kulpa or Ted Nelson. Only one will answer. And he will freely admit his ignoring the advice was a bad idea. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
-
USED CYPRES DOM AND LIFE CYCLE VS COST OF NEW
likestojump replied to katzas's topic in Gear and Rigging
No--his reply was not "a little bit sarcastic" it was an attack on me--with no dispute as to the analysis itself. I believe I mentioned that I used the Cypres online calculator to determine the true value of that AAD in question. It is a useful tool as you point out. One of the most useful words in the English language is "why". I, and presumably many others who read the attack asked the question, "why would someone go to such lengths to attack a simple financial analysis--a reality check if you will--of an ad that clearly overpriced a piece of equipment" The answer to that question may be that the attacker has a motive that we do not understand. A bit of research reveals a possible solution. He sells used gear. A monger of any product salivates over an uneducated customer. The irony is that at least one potential customer has expressed a reluctance to deal with him based on his response. Education is a wonderful thing. As to your suggestion about beer and make-up sex--I am quite prepared to receive and accept an apology from him. However, carnality goes beyond the pale of tolerance. I don't deny or hide the fact that I sell gear. The fact that I have moved tonnes of nylon makes me extremely knowledgeable as a buyer, as as seller, and as a rigger. I don't cheat people, and I don't dwell on uneducated customers. If you've ever dealt with me and started asking me uneducated questions I'd either do my best to educate you, or send you off to an unbiased party, s.a. an experienced jumper or rigger at your local DZ. now, again, let me spell this out for you : You have no demonstrated any credibility to give advice. Having made your first jump in Orange in 1966 is undoubtedly an awesome bragging point, but it does not automatically make you an expert in anything. For the record I have made my first skydive from a Beech 18, but that's just another useless fact. You have on multiple occasions referred to George Galloway's private statement to you about unwilling to pack gear over 15 (and later you flip-flopped that number to 20) years old, and you repeatedly tried to sell that as a fact, rather than an opinion given to you in private. You have on multiple occasions stated incorrect data (Cypres service being $200, Cypres2 life being 12 years). Lastly, in this thread, you took a very uncommon problem (someone advertising a life-limited product as NEW, without regard that it had been on a shelf for a very long time) and asking an unrealistic price for it. This does not deserve it's own thread. This is not a recurring problem, and anyone with half a brain asks for DOM on an AAD, and most other things. Additionally, I have never stated or suggested that you should not be posting on the forums. I do however have a very firm belief that people should not be giving advice about topics they are not an expert on. If you have the time, please see the threads where username ChrisD had posted. He is another old(ish) timer like you claim to be, who came in all internet-(un)educated and started posting pages of letters filled with no value. If you have time after that, read some posts by a username "Sangi". His story did not end well. "Common sense ain't too common nowadays" -
When is it OK to make/receive phone calls during a skydive?
Krip replied to NeoX's topic in General Skydiving Discussions
Hopefully he is just a troll, and finally got his rocks off. if only sangi had listened when everyone was telling him not to. I still feel sorry for Sangi. At least he's still alive and didn't hurt anyone but himself and his family. The ability of jumpers to invent new ways to kill themselves and now take others with them. Almost surprises even this one jump wonder. -
Sangi said almost the exact same thing. He was getting aggressive under canopy, doing everything the "Old Guys" told him not to. But he was 'different.' He was part of the "New Generation," who 'learned faster' and didn't need to be held back by those "Old Guy" rules. He learned that he was wrong. Unfortunately the price he paid for the lesson was pretty damned high. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
-
Well, here it is folks... Definitive look-back illustration of approaches, and posters in here who have approached things from totally polar-opposite sides of the equation. On one side, Sangi Then the other, here with Krisanne Great thread resurrection here, Krisanne! You all can decide for yourselves which side of this equation you would like to be. coitus non circum - Moab Stone
-
I sincerely hope so too. ...and I think Sangi would be the 1st to agree ~ Where he is now, has more to do with the path he chose than any hand he was dealt. Something to think about. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
-
well not that im any better than any noob or person with my jump numbers, but ive had two reserve rides with standups on this reserve. and i think that it helps that i routinely jump a seven cell, into nasty little landing areas the size of a small trail with lots of obstacles in my way. though thats with a 305, not a 126. and for the record, im NOT gonna pull a Sangi. i sure hope hes doing better and is trying to make the best of the hand hes been delt. everyone that knows me knows my wingloading, and reminds me that its not when everything goes right that youre gonna have a fucked landing on your reserve, its when it all goes wrong, which it does. at the end of the day its my choice. someone brought up a very good point via PM in regards to my original question, so please forgive my drunken rant yesterday. as long as were all having fun who gives a fuck. cheers gravity brings me down.........
-
Be careful, remember Sangi. Sparky http://i397.photobucket.com/albums/pp55/mjosparky/Skydiving/Sangi1.jpg But then we both you will stay safe.
-
Be careful, remember Sangi. Sparky http://i397.photobucket.com/albums/pp55/mjosparky/Skydiving/Sangi1.jpg But then we both you will stay safe.
-
It's been done, I dont think its fake. I've seen videos of this kind of jumps. With someone on top pole riding like in this picture, another jumper hanging under the passenger like a hybrid, and several stingers docking everywhere. That video showed up a few years ago. Sangi thought it was a cool stunt and wanted to see it. Jump was done in Europe, IIRC. The discussion in that thread was very, very similar to this one. Including some of the same people with the same opinions. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
-
Holy shitballs I love this. You come in and state that anyone who dies or gets hurt in this sport is a "weakest link" or a "biggest moron." You disrespect the sport and everyone in it and yet expect us to respect you and your opinions? That's rich. That was my response! He essentially said "oh, I see the rules were made for all the dumb people, but I'm not one of them and know everything so I should be able to do what I want." It's to the point where I just have to laugh now! If this guy isn't a troll, he needs to be served up a piece of humble pie. Hopefully not as bad as the slice that Sangi got, but enough to make him realize he's just another one of the bunch that doesn't know what he doesn't know, smart or not, and the rules are there for a reason. Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)
-
if all goes well you will be able to report back us one that one...just ask Sangi Have you seen my pants? it"s a rough life, Livin' the dream >:)
-
meh, why don't you send me one? you're the ones who wanna see it. I could spend that money on jump tickets. Sangi, I am sorry for being an arrogant cock on here. A lot of it is just taking the piss. I'm not trying to swoop thinking I'm not going to get hurt, I'm expecting it at some point, I already hit once. It satiates my ADD or something I like it that's all. My main concern is not hurting or hosing anyone while I'm doing my dumb shit. I think I have shown though over the last few months though that I can fly and land my parachute safely without hurting other people. There have been a lot of high profile deaths in this sport over the last few weeks. People with huge numbers, experience, talent and ability. That doesn't mean that people should quit skydiving. I just don't believe that the awareness of the realities should mean you give up and walk away from your ambitions. I'm trying to do this safely and still feel like I'm challenging myself and enjoying the journey. When I feel like landing a parachute becomes overly easy that's when I want to downsize it because I get bored. I wanted to downsize the 111 not because it wasn't fast enough I just flew the 103 and I liked the overall characteristics of the parachute more. Lighter fronts, and felt like more bottom end flare too, maybe because it was going a little faster? I dunno. As for all the negativity, me personally if I read about something I find it very difficult to form a definite opinion without first hand evidence. I feel it would be ignorant on my part.
-
GoPros right off of student status?
wolfriverjoe replied to Tetrahedron's topic in Safety and Training
I can't decide if you actually believe the garbage you are posting or if you are a troll (FWIW, trolling is the posting of materiel deliberately intended to provoke a response). You want statistics? There aren't any. Except for fatalities, there simply aren't any statistics available. Injuries? AAD fires? Reserve rides? Two outs? No stats available. Even basic stuff like total jumps or even total active jumpers? (you'd need those to generate percentages). Not available anywhere. In your troll poll (hey, Billvon called it that), 'Twardo had a pretty good response. (paraphrased) Go do what you want, but don't be surprised if something bad happens. When it does, don't expect much sympathy. We've seen you too many times before. If you are foolish enough to think that mistakes due to distraction, even simple ones like forgetting goggles, are "non-events", then I suggest you rethink your participation in this sport. If you don't understand risk assessment and mitigation enough to realize that this stuff is "caused by the camera", I suggest you rethink your participation in this sport. The consequences of a minor mistake may be negligible. But they can easily stack up with other minor mistakes and end up a catastrophe. It's called the "chain of events." And if you don't realize that the presence of the camera was a rather large link in the chain of all of those anecdotes, then you really need to get a clue. Like 'Twardo (among others) said, we've seen you before. And all the other "youse" just like you. It's funny that the only people arguing against experience for cameras or small canopies or wingsuits are the ones who lack it. What's not funny is how many of them realize how wrong they were. Some have a close call that wakes them up. Others have to get hurt. Some have to get really hurt. A few only realize their mistake a second or two before it kills them. Ask Sangi. He was jumping a small canopy, but had all the arguments you are using. He had the courage to come back and admit that he was wrong. Unfortunately, his mistake cost him the use of his legs. Others weren't so lucky. Ask Ted Nelson about self appraisal of canopy skills (something you suggested). Ask Dan Kulpa about wingsuiting too soon. Ted had all the same arguments you do. Dan didn't come on here and argue about wingsuiting ahead of schedule, but he got turned down by one instructor, then went "shopping" until he found one who would teach him at around 100 jumps. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo -
Yet another newbies-with-cameras thread
wolfriverjoe replied to -Joey-'s topic in Safety and Training
That's it. They're "special." They are such a gift to the world that there's no way that fate would take them. They might say something like "better to die young than to grow old" or "a life so much sweeter for it's brevity" or similar bullshit, but they don't really believe it. They simply can't conceive of their own death. It's not gonna happen. They're immortal, at least for now. Sangi freely admitted this after his accident. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo -
Yeah yeah yeah and I need to go watch Sangi's bounce video... already seen it. I'm not planning on initiating any 270's at 200 feet and not pulling out even when the sight picture looks wrong so I think I'm okay there besides that has nothing to do with cameras. I still stand by my observation that camera-related issues are not a significant contributor to incidents. Just browsing the first couple pages of the incidents forum there are no camera-related issues at all. Just a bunch more no pulls / low cutaways / low turns. This camera thing is being way overblown and the hype is disproportionate to the actual number of incidents. Skydiving is serious business
-
Dealing with the "Crossbrace at 300 jumps" crowd.
DocPop replied to DocPop's topic in Safety and Training
My own opinion to this is that, similar to BillVon's downsizing checklist, there should be restrictions on what canopy can be flown and what type of HP landing can be undertaken until proficiency has been reached on a certain goal. For example, 1. Fly a consistent landing pattern and achieve consistently accurate landings. Demonstrate flat turns and flare turns. 2. Land downwind and crosswind safely and practice HP turns and low-turn abortion >2,000' on at least 50 jumps (HnP's recommended). 3. Use double fronts (straight) for landings and consistently plane out at a safe (not too low or crazy high) altitude. 4. Perform HP landings with a turn of up to 90 degrees and consistently plane out at a safe (not too low or crazy high) altitude. 5..... 6..... etc,etc.... This is not an exhaustive list, obviously. It could then be used in the following way to deal with hotshot canopy dude: "You're staying with straight in landings on your 190 until you can do 1 & 2 with it. You can then downsize a maximum of one size to a 170. You stay on that canopy until you can demonstrate 1,2,& 3. ....." Every downsize starts the jumper back at #1 so it forces someone to go back and learn the canopy from double fronts. The highly skilled guys can move through this progress much faster than the slower learners. Obviously there will be some who try to beat the system but at least there IS a system and I believe that having a structured progression with specific performance goals gives guys like me, Sangi etc something to aim for. This is sadly lacking currently and people start to make up their own goals such as "I want to be doing 270s on a cross-braced wing by the end of the season". The other point is that someone needs to be in the landing area consistently to assess/enforce this system, but frankly that should be happening anyway. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA -
With 700 jumps total, and jumping a 170, how many jumps do you think it would take to get down below 100 sq ft safely? Let's also keep in mind that they don't make anything but HP canopies below 100 sq ft, so it's not like he was a big-boy on with a higher WL on a Spectre or somthing of that sort. With only 18 months to make the transition from a 170 to a sub-100 HP canopy, I'm not sure there is a 'safe' way to do that. You're either skipping sizes, or shorting yourself on time on each size. Either case is not the preferred method. That said, just to be clear, I don't have any ill-will towards to guy. I don't even know him personally. I do feel badly to hear that anyone is injured in anyway while jumping. The reason I'm posting the things I am is to illustrate that there are consequnces to the choices you make as a jumper. Those consequnces become very real very quickly, and sometimes they stay 'real' for a very long time. He's not the first 'big shot' we've had here was 'too cool for school', and he probably won't be the last. At least one of them I can remember is dead, and another is in a wheelchair for the rest of his life (Sangi, who had the balls to come back and tell his tale). Now we have another one who's fate is still to be determined. The point is that everyone else can see where it get's you, and maybe the guy in the '400 jumps on a Velo' thread will take notice, or maybe not. Hopefully the next guy in line will wise up and end the cycle before it comes around again and takes out another 'big shot' jumper.
-
I started to respond by posting all kinds of links here like this one.... [url]http://www.dropzone.com/safety/Canopy_Control/Downsizing_Checklist_47.html Though at 126 jumps I'm sure you've learned a lot and have spoke with your jump masters / wise ones at your dz and have already received some kind of input? In addition, this website is FULL of information regarding downsizing, too fast, and the real life results of what happens if you push past your abilities (search Sangi)... I'm looking forward to flying a faster canopy as well and enjoy that portion just as much. However, as you'll quickly learn, well, look around, the answers are there. Jack
-
Yep. Sangi used to say the exact same thing. Have you thought that you may well end up paralyzed and in a wheelchair for the rest of your life? "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo
-
Sure~ Got into it because I lost a bet... Stuck around for 38 years because of all the easy money & hot chicks! ~you're looking for the 'adventure' 'challenge' 'excitement' answer...all of that is available in this sport. Wanna experience those things for a LONG time? Slow the fuck down, approach it as a long-term investment in your happiness. NOBODY is as good as they think they are, it's only logical to make a mature decision and step it down a notch when the majority of your peers give warnings and express concern. Failure to do so is nothing new, I've seen that type of mentality come and go often during my involvement with the sport. Usually when they 'go' it's on a stretcher...sometimes the face is covered, sometimes not. One thing I HAVE noticed over the years though - usually when someone forewarned breaks themselves they mire in the woe is me self-pity. Gotta kind of hand it to Sangi for not doing that, he acknowledges his errors and seeks to hold himself up as an example with hopes of preventing others from making the same mistakes. I can't imagine the courage that must take...ya wanna talk about facing a challenge? Look at that kid! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
-
Then why are you short-cutting your canopy progression? You're not putting in the work, you're tyring to skip right to the gravy. See the 'hooked it low' thread in the swooping forum to understand the scope of the mistakes you're making. A guy 2x or 3x your jump numbers almost did himself in on a JVX 99 because he 'misjudged' a turn from 800ft. 800ft fucking feet and he could tell he was low until the last second, and narrowly missed damaging himself badly. I can only guess he had 500/600 swoops min, and he lacked the basic judgement and familiarity with the sight picture to see his problem any sooner than the last second. He dug a couple chunks of meat from his leg and I think meesed up his knee. What that means is that if he 1/2 second slower on his reaction, he would have broken both of his legs. One full second and he would have broken his pelivs, suffered internal injuries, and probably done something to his spinal cord. Anything more than one second longer, and he would have been a stain on the asphalt. What you 'think' about your skills is of no consequence. The assertion here is that you don't know enough to be doing what you're doing, so if you're going on what you think you 'know', you're already two steps behind the curve. You're not even close or anywhere near 'borderline' for doing what you're doing. Making the decision to fly this canopy, in that way that you are, with the experience that you have falls directly under the heading of gross negligence. In a bittersweet turn of events, we have the Sangi story to use as a prime example. Look at his story, and his posts, see the things he was told and the things he replied, and then look at him now. To his credit, and due to his HUGE balls, he's back here and willing to admit to his mistakes and try to presuade others not to do likewise. On top of that, you have a guy (Vader) who's posting out of genuine and personal concern for you, and said very kind and acring things about you and the friendship you share, and all you want to do is shit all over that. My brief summary of the situation - lose/lose.
