nbblood

Yeah, what they all said. It happens. If you keep jumping long enough, that won't be the last time you get burbled and hit somebody. Try to avoid but anticipate it at the same time. Been there done that. I too would take a look at the other guys container and see if the closing loop might be loose. Not saying that you can't dislodge the pin even if everything is perfect, but usually a hit as you describe wouldn't cause that. Out of curiosity what type container did he have? Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Do you know that the slider was ALL the way up, against the canopy. If it slides, even a few inches you could potentially get slider rebound that may cause a harder than normal opening. On opening the slider initially goes the rest of the way up til it hits the canopy, then rebounds quickly down the lines, or shoots down the lines. This causes the canopy to inflate faster. If you don't control the slider while putting the canopy in the bag, or check to ensure it is still all the way up, it can happen. OTOH, I know of a couple people that had real trouble with their Sabre2's and hard openings. One of which had an opening very similar to the one you described, resulting in a cutaway. Another that resulted in compression fractures of vertabrae. The broken lines were on a Sabre2 210 and the canopy was eventually replaced by PD. I have a ton of jumps on Sabre2s and the only times I had hard openings were while pulling while still in a track. Then they were rather brisk. Anyway, good job handling the situation. Glad it worked out for you and hope you can figure out the problem. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

No, I don't think it's a good idea. . OK, so what IS your proposal to deal with a situation that you think is NOT a good idea. Well, MY proposal is let the DZs handle their specific issues and forget the BSR proposal as this one is stated. However, I've seen many good ideas that I think are reasonable and well thought out proposals and I may be in favor of some specific recommendation should it be proposed. However, the petition as it reads now is not useful. DZs already recognize the problem and many are making adjustments. A BSR that simply says to separate landing areas is unlikely, IMO, to be effective at all. So why? Again, if a recommendation that provided for different situations at different DZs were proposed, I may be in favor. However, right now I think let the DZs handle it. Apparently that's all the proposed BSR is saying anyway. So what would your "specific recommendation" be? What about the DZ's that do nothing? You seem to arguing that a BSR is too specific and too vague both at the same time. Well, I thought I clearly said my specific proposal was to let the DZs handle it and forget the BSR. However, I'm not closing my mind to well thought out recommendations such as have been discussed. Right now, though my proposal is let the DZs handle the issue. Many seem to be doing so already anyway. I'm not arguing that a BSR is too specific, not sure how you derived that. Really, I'm not against this petition as proposed. I just don't think it will change anything as written and see it as a waste of effort and time. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

No, I don't think it's a good idea. . OK, so what IS your proposal to deal with a situation that you think is NOT a good idea. Well, MY proposal is let the DZs handle their specific issues and forget the BSR proposal as this one is stated. However, I've seen many good ideas that I think are reasonable and well thought out proposals and I may be in favor of some specific recommendation should it be proposed. However, the petition as it reads now is not useful. DZs already recognize the problem and many are making adjustments. A BSR that simply says to separate landing areas is unlikely, IMO, to be effective at all. So why? Again, if a recommendation that provided for different situations at different DZs were proposed, I may be in favor. However, right now I think let the DZs handle it. Apparently that's all the proposed BSR is saying anyway. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

No, I don't think it's a good idea. I don't like the idea of putting my name to such a vague, and IMO, useless petition that doesn't have hope to solve the problem. If the petition offered a solution, I may or may not be in favor depending on what that may be. If scrutinizing a petition designed to cause action before I put my name to it is WHINING....so be it. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Bill, I've got all that. I understand. But that's not what the petition says. It is very vague and offers no real potential solutions. I've seen all the dialogue that's gone on and seen some pretty good ideas. I've read Brian Germaine's article. But what is this petition really trying to get USPA to do? Come up with their own solution? Or is it proposing these ideas you speak of. My problem is with the petition itself and not the proposed solutions you speak of (that the petition doesn't speak of). This is just passing the blame. What if the DZ says "our system works fine, it's other DZ's that have a problem", which you KNOW is going to happen at MOST DZs. But that's ok, because we can blame the DZ when an incident occurs for not following a BSR that says "establish safe landing areas". Yeah, no shit! Tell me something useful or don't tell me at all. Again, unless there's something about this petition that I am missing. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

It seems to me that this petition only indicates the problem with only a vague stab at any proposed resolution. What this petition says to me is "we have a problem, fix it for me please". Yeah, I got it, the BOD should help with solutions. Yeah, Ok, separate landing areas. What does that mean? How do you propose we separate landing areas? What about DZs that simply don't have the space to separate landing areas? What are the specific requirements that make landing areas "separated"? There's some pretty good recommendations, including diagrams and such on this site. But as far as I can tell, this doesn't include any specific measures to fix the problem. This petition just provides a whole list of problems with no proposed solutions. It really annoys me, people tell me things are all jacked up and they need to be fixed but don't have any recommended solutions. Is there something to this petition besides this that I'm missing? Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Hi, Skydive Ogden flies a Grand Caravan and Skydive Utah, I believe is using a King Air. Although I do have a favorite, both are very good DZs. Both have a great view of the Great Salt Lake and surrounding mountains. Both have some awesome people there. I'd recommend giving them both a try. Of course there's always the winter trips to Skydive Mesquite (NV). Don't miss out on those too. Oh, yeah, and they're about to open the wind tunnel in Ogden too. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Here ya go. See attachments. Red is the red squares, yellow is the given numbers. BTW, you could always go to http://www.sudokusolver.co.uk/ and figure out a puzzle. Just a hint for the Sudoku challenged. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Yeah, she does backflips on every 4 way exit I've seen. She's real good at them! Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Ok, fair enough. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

They sure do. And if your contention is that this is what we're preparing them for by doing night jumps, then why, when these jumpers do find themselves on a jump after sunset, do we NOT count those as night jumps toward the requirement? Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Is the retractable reserve ripcord available on Vectors now? I love the spacer foam on my Odysseys. It's the single option that got me to order another one. (Other manufacturers still didn't have it at the time). I like the Odyssey for a myriad of reasons, but there are also other great rigs out there. Spacer foam is what sold me, again. However, the Vector is a great rig too. I somewhat believe that different rigs feel more comfortable to each individual. Take your Mirage, for example. I know lots of people that love them and think they are comfortable. I think they're the most bulky, uncomfortable rig out there. But that's me. I agree with the "try it on" theory. Go with your instinct too. You can get an opinion on every rig out there on this board. You've already heard the Racer opinion. You can also hear the reverse side of every opinion. For example, I'd never even think about getting a Racer. The bottom line is, if you buy what makes other people happy, they will be, for about a minute. If you buy what makes you happy, you will be, as long as you own the rig. Take your pick. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Ok, so there is a miniscule chance that somebody might need to conduct an unintentional night jump. Our current standards say the B license skydivers are authorized to conduct intentional night jumps anyway. On every single jump a jumper is required to fly and land his/her parachute. So how is requiring 2 night jumps, as opposed to say completion of a canopy control course, more relevant for demonstrating competence and skill? Don't get me wrong here. I've done plenty of night jumps. I enjoy them. I really don't care if they stay part of the requirement for a D or not. I will do plenty more of them I'm sure. I'm just not buying your argument for why they SHOULD be required. On the other hand, I'm not in favor of lowering standards either, the whole give an inch take a mile thing. I really feel that the only reason they are there is a sort of "rite of passage". Keep in mind, that these two night jumps don't need to be successful. A jumper can make one night jump, funnel a formation, collide with someone in freefall, land off, break both his legs, then six months later after recovery do the same thing with the same result and, there you have it, got the two night jumps required for a D license. Perhaps we should specify conditions of success for night jumps if it's going to be a worthwhile requirement. Otherwise it is only the "rite of passage." I'm actually in favor of increasing requirements for the very reason you state, to demonstrate competence and skill. I wish I had been required to take a canopy control course as one of the license requirements. I wish that there were oral/written quizes on gear knowledge as a license requirement (you know there are many D license holders that don't know crap about their very own gear). In short, I'm in favor of demonstrating competence, I just don't buy your particular argument that "skydivers might find themselves in this position so it should be necessary." I guess I'm kind of playing Devils' Advocate here. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

And this is different from requiring somebody to do night jumps that never plans to do night jumps because.........????? Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Yes, but that's not what was done here. What we have is a nameless DZ, rigger and TM and nobody has done anything about it. There are ways to go about getting some resolution, but this isn't it. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Let's see if grue comes up with the same answer square root(2) = 1.41421356 To be a little more accurate it is 1.4142135623730950488016887242091 Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Really? Is that the point of your post? I don't think so. I think you know the answers to the questions you asked. I think your post is more designed to air dirty laundry to the public more than anything else. You know, let them read about it and react. Do these kind of things happen? Unfortunately. Is it the norm? I don't think so. I really think you're just trying to get the DZO to do something by airing dirty laundry. Well, its out there now. It's nearly as unfortunate as the incidents themselves that some people deal with issues this way. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Yes, and here is the excerpt from the SIM on restricted licenses. Notice that it doesn't say anything about what is restricted when holding a restricted license, only that it is a restricted license. What does that mean? As far as I can tell, a person holding a restricted D license has all the same priveleges as a regular D license holder which are: So you get a restricted D license. Restricted from what? Am I missing something here? Looks to me like you don't have to do night jumps. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Now I agree with everything you've just said. I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. When I think flat I'm thinking body position. When you explain flat, you're talking about travectory. I agree with all of the above. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Yeah, it does. If you fall faster (vertically), you can still win by moving faster horizontally. But regardless of your speed, the flatter tracker will always win... unless maybe you're tracking into the wind and judging it from the ground. It's not about speed, it's about glide ratio. As I said in a previous post, that's true unless you judge it based on horizontal distance covered over a certain time. A steeper track might go farther over a 30 second period, but will not go farther over a 5000 foot descent. Dave No it doesn't. I understand what you're saying and agree with your principles, but let me give you a crude example. If one tracker tracks for 30 seconds (steeper)at 20 mph forward speed and another for 60 seconds (flatter) at 5 mph speed, the one with the steeper track is going to go farther horizontally. Twice as far in this example. I know this is a crude example and not really feasible. I just use these numbers to illustrate my point. It is very much possible for a steeper tracker to go farther in the same vertical distance. I promise you. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

If you want to make sure that one doesn't get a jump on the other you can exit in a two-way round, facing each other. Orient so that when you both turn 90 it will be perpendicular to the jump run. On an agreed upon signal, turn 90 left or right and start tracking in the agreed upon direction. Pull at the agreed upon altitude. Have a ground observer judge. Make sure you have a plan if its neck and neck at the end to break off and gain separation. The flattest track doesn't always win. Some people get incredible horizontal speed in a steeper track. They may get to pull time faster but they may go a lot farther horizontally. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Let me guess, Seventh Nation Army-The White Stripes. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Well, if I'm freeflying and exit behind an RW group and we're pulling at the same altitude, I will almost always beat them to pull altitude. I routinely watch the very 8-way you speak of break off and deploy as I'm stowing my slider. I think that might be what he's getting at. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.

Did you mean a highly loaded cross-braced canopy as opposed to a highly cross-braced canopy? Not sure if loading has anything to do with your question, but I think it does. Anyway that may clarify your question. I'm not sure what you mean if you really are taling about highly cross-braced canopies. As opposed to not highly cross-braced? I guess one could make an argument that a Neos is less than highly cross-braced, but I think you see my point. I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, just trying to help clarify the question. I'm interested in the answers myself. Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute.