SBS

Hey all, Quick note after finding out that the new Good Stuff DVD is coming out soon... Nobody can argue the fact that Joe is at the top of the list, if not the very best freefall cinematographer in the business. I have also known him to be an incredibly caring, sincere, generous person, and wanted to pass that on to anyone who has not yet had the pleasure of making his acquaintance. To see such a genuinely good person continue to succeed is truely awesome, and I hope that we all will continue to support him. So, everyone that has a DVD player, go out and get the newest Good Stuff...haven't seen it yet, but we all already know it's gonna rock! Thanks for listening! Steve

In answer to a question that has come up a couple of times... Anything anyone contributes is going to help...whether it's $1 or $10, $5 or $50. So, if you want a chance to win some stuff, throw a couple of bucks in an envelope and support a good cause. Also, thank you guys for your nice comments. Moreso than the money raised, the moral support is fantastic. I'll definitely pass them on, if she hasn't seen them already. Blue Ones, Steve

Wow, that looks like a really cool raffle. I think I will participate right away. Although my handle looks a lot like that of the person who originally posted the announcement, I assure you, I am mearly a member of the skydiving public who thinks that everyone should get involved in this raffle. :-)

Skydiving Raffle $2500 in prizes!!! Everything from videos to jumpsuits, discounts on canopies and containers from these generous sponsors: Joe Jennings - www.skydive.tv Firefly Unlimited - www.fireflysuits.com Icarus Canopies - www.icaruscanopies.com Skysystems - www.skysystemsltd.com The Flitesuit Company - www.flitesuit.com Bomber Manufacturing - www.bombermfg.com Action Air Parachutes - www.actionair.com And More... Help support a fellow skydiver during a year long volunteer position in South Africa. For more information, check out: http://tayatoafrica.topcities.com Blue Skies!!!

emphasis on ALMOST never. :-) he he he

So, I read the subject, and I was going to ask if it counts if you were with the person before he/she was a skydiver. Then, though, I saw that the question was "skydives" and not "skydivers". The actual answer is about 1300. :-)

as i read the release what i get is that 'good' x-fires with spectra will become 'bad' xfires as the lines wear and that the canopy is so sensitive that the normal dimensional shift on spectra line could make the canopy unstable. i have several issues with this: 1-i do not favor vectran. reason being that most jumpers do not carefully, routinely inspect their lines. nor do they accurately keep track of the # of jumps on those lines and religiously change them. on a soft opening canopy, there is the real possibility of when lines break, it will not be on opening but on a radical turn. if this if your final hook or anything below cutaway altitude you are in serious trouble ! So, what I get from your statement about "most people don't..." is that when someone makes a decision to jump a high performance canopy, they need not be held responsible for the proper upkeep of said canopy. That's just like squeezing jumps out of a wearing closing loop...saying, "I can get one more...I can get one more", instead of just doing the responsible thing and replacing the loop. So, when this guy has a premature deployment and a horseshoe, who's responsible? There are many, many things that can happen during a high performance landing, all of which need to be addressed and prevented as much as possible by the person who has chosen to jump a canopy. 2-canopies are flexible membrane structures. in addition to the lines changing specs with use, so does the fabric and tapes. the airfoil and planform design and other design variables can not be 'borderline' safe. they must safely allow for variences in sewing, line, fabric, and tape tensions. Sewing, line lengths, fabric, and tape are all variences, like you said, that cannot be helped. It is a fact that there may be a varience from time to time in how a canopy is sewn, where a line is cut and sewn, the uniformity of the tape tensions, etc. The stretching and shrinking of lines is something that can be addressed, and can be prevented. It's a variable that does not have to be thrown into the mix. I don't like vectran, personally, but being that I have chosen to jump this canopy, and will probably jump an Extreme or Velocity in the future, I view it as a way to prevent both threatening and none threatening problems that one may experience with the canopy, and I have accepted that along with the responsibility of maintaining it. 3-least of my concerns would be economical...ie. who is going to pay for the reline. as well as the now higher cost of maintainence, ie. vectran lines will probably have to be religiously replaced twice as often as spectra. Actually, if you replace the steering lines every couple hundred jumps or so, you should replace the entire line set around the same time with either line, if when jumping spectra, you want a canopy that is in proper trim. That is what I have experienced, at least. Basically, you are looking at $50-$100 more per 400 jumps or so, which is a price that I am willing to pay to jump this canopy. 4-icarus stated that the canopies are out of tollerence, but have not publically said word one as to what tollerences are off. every construction specification on a canopy can be measured. if this is true then why has icarus not stated exactly what has been constructed out of spec, what the factory specified dimensions are, and what is the acceptable tollerence on those specifications. What would we do with that information? What would Joe Jumper do if he were to know exactly where the tolerances were off? Also, if they were to know exactly where they were off, then they wouldn't still be researching the problem, would they? I equate this to the Vengeance issue that PD has at times, when a canopy comes out of their factory, nothing has changed in the design, cutting, etc. of the canopy, but a certain percentage are known as hard openers, which they cannot explain. typical canopy construction involves the cutting of fabric pannels on a hot knife or laser plotter from a computer cad file. this is dead accurate, additionally match marks are cut or marked in ink during this plotting process. when a seamstress sews the canopy together the match marks are overlaid. if a canopy was constructred out of tollerence. either the computer files were incorrect and therefore the fabric pannels cut out reflecting this. (as the computer files do not magically change, they are what was designed, i would call this a design flaw), or the cutting machine is messed up and one axis is out of scale from the other (doubtful, this is a mechanical function, ie. x steps of the motor creates x" linear movement, this is preset and never changes), or it was sewn incorectly. typical problems in sewing are mainly being sloppy ie. not aligning the match marks or not keeping even tension on seams. i believe precision uses visible ink for the match marks (atair uses small holes). Given the fact that this is only on a certain number of canopies, that are seemingly not from multiple manufacturers, it sounds to me like it is not a fault in the design of the canopy, rather a mistake that was made somewhere along the line in the manufacture of a number of canopies. This is all technical information that nobody has except for Icarus and its manufacturers that we really can't comment or speculate on. you can not state something is out of tollerance without specifing, what, its specified dimension and acceptable tollerence. until that this statement is simply BS. Pretty bold...you're saying that Icarus is being dishonest? What reason do they have to do that? As a canopy company yourself, would you think that it would be beneficial to lie to the public when there is a definite problem with your canopy? If it were a design flaw, would you want to leave 1000 canopies on the market and pretend that they are ok, just waiting for one to collapse and/or take a life? I just don't see where this would be beneficial to a company who plans on being around for more than just a few more months. I ask again (rhetorically): 1) what would Joe Jumper do with that information? and 2) if they had that information, why would they still be test jumping the canopies in relation to these anomolies? I'm going to refrain from commenting any more, unless someone asks a specific question that is directly to me, or has a quick answer, if you don't mind. I will continue to stand strong in my beliefs, as will you, and neither of us have all the information. I'm looking forward to seeing what will happen in the near future with this situation. Blue Skies, Steve

"Change (1): The story has changed a lot since early September when Icarus were still claiming very specifically that the only Crossfire instability problem was on a single batch incorrectly built with their B-lines too long." I, personally, never heard that said, so don't know. I just reread the statement from September and didn't see anything said about the B-lines. Change (2): Mike / Aviatr was told his canopy was unaffected. It collapsed on him. He was then told it was affected, and a bunch of new serial numbers were added to the list. I'll have to give you that one, to a point. Personally, though, I think it was better to release a statement and add to that statement as information became available, rather than wait, and possibly have an injury or death. It would be ideal for all of the information to be available from day one, and for them to not have to research it, but that's just not realistic. I have not heard them change the actual story regarding the anomalies with the canopy. As far as last I heard, they still were not sure what happened to that canopy, and why it had the issues that it did. I'll be interested to hear the latest when it becomes avaiable. "You don't see a contradiction in canopies described as 'unaffected' actually requiring a complete reline ?" Two seperate issues. The affected canopies were built out of tolerance, and therefore, need to be fixed. They are not saying that the canopies built with Spectra, no matter where they were built, have the problem that the bulletin is addressing of tolerance. What they are saying, simply, is that all canopies that were made with spectra need to have vectran, and that spectra is no longer going to be an option. In other words....the European canopies were not built out of tolerance....they simply want every Crossfire to be made with Vectran line. Steve

That would be the opposite of what the other guy said about sizes. I'm not clear on what differences there are exactly, but they come, from what I know, from the differences in methods of measuring. As far as my info, some companies measure the top surface inflated, and some companies measure the bottom surface deflated, or something like that. I think I'll call tomorrow and ask....I'm curious now, which company does what. I'll report back if I find anything. Steve

I'm sorry that you took offense, but consider what your original post was, and why I responded that way. The original reason that you said that there may be a problem relining your own canopy was that Icarus was going to mandate vectran on all of their canopies. That said nothing about canopies that have had the trim adjusted to compensate for the tolerance issue. That is why I said what I did. Any canopy that is "normal", meaning that it has a "general use" or "uniform" line set, should be able to be relined by a rigger....if he, who ever that may be, is not capable of attaching lines to a canopy where they are marked, I don't think there is any reason that you should be offended that I would say that they should not be relining a high performance canopy. I agree with you, though, that any of them that have been adjusted should have some sort of compensation by Icarus for the relining. I think that if that issue was brought up to them, they would be more than willing to discuss it. It would be for a very small amount of canopies, and would not mean that they would have any responsibility to reline ALL Crossfires at a reduced rate. I hope that clears up the misunderstanding. Blue Ones, Steve

I want to try to address some comments and questions in these posts, based on my many conversations with Icarus, and my understanding of the problems with the canopies: "I resent them transferring the responsibility of that decision onto us." I can see how it may be taken like that, but what they intended to do was to give the S&TA the ability to "unground" a canopy if they are certain that it is not one that is affected. They recognize that there are some people in this sport who would be out of work without their canopies....some of whom have thousands of jumps, have flown their canopies in all conditions, and know for a fact that theirs does not have an issue with collapsing, otherwise it would have shown up before this point. I think the position of keeping all possibly affected canopies grounded is reasonable, and what they have done is allowed you the leway to go either way on the issue. I have mixed feelings on their involvement of DZO's/S&TA's, but still think it's a valid option that they had. "why didn't george galloway copy the crossfire too." Who knows....but, if it is true that they have issues manufacturing the Crossfire, why would they go through the trouble of licensing it, if they already know that the ones that they are turning out from their facility have problems? I'm not making a statement either way as far as who is at fault, but it's just food for thought. "icarus states it is a line trim problem, not a design defect with the canopy. if the problem is simply line trim why has the line specification sheet not been posted. anyone with a tape measure can check line trim. for those of you not familiar with how line trim is checked it is simply measuring each line and comparing the length to that listed on a chart." As far as my discussions with them and what I got from the bulletins, they have not made that statement. What they have said is that it is a tolerance issue that can, in some cases, be solved by adjusting the trim on a canopy. Some will be solved by changing the trim, and some will have to be rebuilt. Either way, it is not an actual issue of line trim. Due to this fact, it is not a simple issue of putting a correct line set on a canopy, but custom building a line set for each specific canopy. "why would an s&ta have to certify their product to be safe, most especially without knowing the exactly what to measure." It's not an issue of measuring, it's an issue of knowing a jumper, how experienced he/she is as a canopy pilot, and knowing that he/she has flown the canopy through numerous conditions for hundreds of jumps without a problem. Example: Joe jumper with 500 jumps bought a Crossfire a couple of months ago and has put 40 jumps on it, and it appears on the list. He really does not have a case for the "ungrounding" of his canopy. Example 2: A videographer from the DZ with 1000, 2000, 3000 jumps, etc. with a couple hundred jumps on the canopy, flown using toggle input, front risers, in heat and in cold, in wind and in none, says that there are no issues with his/her canopy. That is a situation in which the DZO may want to consider allowing the jumper to use the canopy at his/her own risk. "The bulletin is contradictory about whether European canopies are affected. At one point the bulletin states "European Built Crossfire’s are not affected" and later "Any Crossfire’s with Spectra line require a change to Vectran." " This isn't contradictory at all. These are two separate issues. Whether a canopy was manufactured in Europe or in the USA, spectra line is going to shrink, whereas vectran will not. What they are saying is that with these problems that they are experiencing, they want as little working against the proper function of the canopy as possible. What they want to get out on the market are proper representations of what the Crossfire can be, and one made with Spectra is not the best canopy possible. "if Icarus can keep their story (a) the same" I haven't heard their story change from day one, only become more detailed. "Dan is using a NASA facility for the testing he is conducting and I am quite sure that he will not hesitate to publish the results of their findings." I would personally, love to see the technical information that he finds, whether that be consistant or inconsistant with what Icarus says, as long as the statement is comprised of facts, and not interpretation of what someone has said, or interpretation of said facts. THAT seems to me to be what we read on this thread. I am not slamming Dan, and appreciate his involvement in discussions as an intelligent person and engineer, but as he is a competitor in the industry, I think it's important that there always be an incredible amount of effort made towards presenting a position with "bias-less" fact. (did I just make up a word?) :-) "My questions are that if the tolerences for the lines are so close that Specta lines are'nt acceptible, how are riggers going to reline thier own/customers canopies?" I can't make any technical statement about exactly how much these canopies can and can't be out of trim, but to put it in perspective, it is possible for spectra steering lines to shrink a matter of inches in less than a hundred jumps. We are not talking about a centimeter being a serious issue. Also, things to consider... 1) If you do not have faith that your rigger can hit the mark, maybe he shouldn't be relining your high performance canopy. 2) There are manufacturers that do not sell line sets for canopies...if Icarus were to mandate that the canopies be returned to them for reline, they would not be the first manufacturer to do so. "If vectran is used as the only line choice, how long is it going to before there is another broken stering line during flare/hook injury? I know most people don't take enough care in inspecting thier lines to know the breaking point of Vectan lines." This is scary. It is a scary issue that you have brought up, as well as a scary position that you maintain. That is, that the manufacturer would be responsible for an accident, because someone did not properly maintain their gear and perform adequate gear checks on a regular basis. High performance means high maintenance, and that is something that someone jumping a high performance canopy MUST accept. This is the same with the Extremes and the Velocities, and any other canopy with vectran line. Someone who is going to jump a canopy like this MUST be aware of the dangers involved with EVERY piece of his/her equipment, and know how to maintain the gear to bring them down safely time after time. "He also pointed out that george could have copied many other canopies including the crossfire but elected to go with the German made Nitron." I would be interested to know how difficult the Nitro is to manufacture as opposed to the Crossfire, which is said to be very difficult. Also, regarding licensing issues, it's possible that it's easier to create a copy of the Nitro, as opposed to the Crossfire, legally. These are questions to which we do not have the answer. If anyone does, I would be interested in what is involved. "He also pointed out if its a line trim problem then why not give out specs so folks could check their own canopy or have it checked by a rigger. That don't look good." Again, it's not a line trim problem....changing the trim is one solution to the problem of some of the canopies being built out of tolerance. I am obviously biased towards the Crossfire, but have tried to state as much fact as I can, and answer some of the questions that you have. I jump a couple of Crossfires, and have spent a good deal of time examining the issue, as I obviously have a vested interest in the happenings. I don't have any more desire to die than the next guy, so, basically, should have every reason to look long and hard at the Crossfire and its recent mishaps. I love my canopies, though, and hope that this situation gets resolved soon. Blue Skies, steve

Ok, so you are looking for some excitement in your daily jumping life......you pack your main, you are on the way to the plane, and realize that you accidently twisted your bag around 7 times, and forgot to stow one toggle.....do you continue to the plane??? OF COURSE YOU DO!!! (I wouldn't really, this is just an illustration).....Anyway, you're coming to your pull altitude, and you have a hard pull.....it's tough to get the pilot chute out, but eventually you do, and you have begun the opening process.....do you cut away the canopy before it's fully inflated??? OF COURSE NOT!!! You ride that thing for the fun that it is, before you are about to go in, and you have no choice but to pull that handle..... Point is, continue as you were.....seems like you'll know pretty quick if this would be a fun relationship or not.....or, for that matter, just a cool friendship.....just don't expect her to come to any of your birthday parties. :-) Steve

yeah, but that means you're already talking to her....that would take balls.....those which some of us don't have..... ( I am including myself in that "us") :-)

wearing a skydiving shirt and answering questions is different than walking up to someone and going "hey, I skydive...wanna f*$*?" :-) We're not talking about him wanting to get action, we are talking about a fragile young heart seeking love....and action. I just think it's harder to wear a shirt to impress someone and then try to inconspicuously get it in their line of sight, in a way that they will take notice, than it is just to wear any old shirt and walk up to the chick and say "excuse me young attractive lady....I have noticed you in class many a time, and would be greatly honored if you would join me for a cup of coffee someday, or maybe even a shag or two." :-)

ya know what??? Stop listening to these people....yeah, she might think it's cool that you skydive, but approach her as a person....if she doesn't like you (which I doubt), she's not going to go out with you because you throw yourself out of an airplane regularly. It may or may not work, but I doubt that it would....and if it did, you wouldn't feel like you were able to be yourself....you would feel like you were hiding yourself behind this "cool skydiver" screen. If you put that screen up, then all of a sudden you will be in the position of trying to decide when to bring it down and show her who you are. Be yourself from the start, and feel good about it. Be authentic with her.....it will work its self out, and you both feel much better about you in the long run. Again, just a couple of cents from a guy who is terrified of approaching chicks. :-) Steve

That allegation regarding R&D is pretty serious, and I would not, personally, post anything like that without being 110% confident in that statement, which you obviously are not (otherwise you would not make the statement about covering your ass). If there are really issues with their R&D being negligent, then it need be said, but if you are not positive, and do not have proof that that is the case, I would not, personally, make a statement like that based on hearsay. I would recommend speaking to Icarus directly, and request some documentation, if they would be willing to share it. I think that you will find that their R&D is one of, if not THE, most extensive in the business. Previously, they have stopped short of mismanufacturing their product, just to see how it flies, but from what I sounds like, they will be doing just that in the future on a number of canopies. These are exacty the types of statements that we need to stay away from until we are sure of what is going on, and it is exactly the reason for my original post. Can we PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, state facts OR opinion? If it is a fact, state it as such, and back it up....if it is an opinion, state it as such, and share why it is you feel that way....The rumor mills that we create in life are bad enough, without everyone stating opinion as fact. Blue Skies, Steve

As far as the safety that you mention that is being sacrificed, it is a fact that high performance canopies are dangerous, and you run risks in jumping them. That is true, like you said, of ANY high performance canopy, and more prevalent, the more loaded it is. As far as that aspect of safety, the Crossfire is not any worse than any other high performance canopy....I would say that it is better in some aspects. The safety that I was referring to is that which is not agreed to by the jumper when he/she decides to jump a canopy, namely, a canopy that collapses, etc....a "defect". You state that Icarus sacrifices safety for performance??? Every manufacturer that produces a high performance canopy does that by your definition, which I can not argue, and have no desire to. I am just saying that Icarus (or any other manufacturer for that matter) is not going to put a canopy onto the market that they are aware has a problem with collapsing, or any other severe defect, for the sake of producing the "best landing canopy" or "the best opening canopy", etc. It sounds to me like your issues with the Crossfire are limited not to this canopy itsself, but to high performance, small canopies in general. All of the safety issues that you mentioned in this post are true of small Stilettos, Vengeances, Velocities, Cobalts, Extremes, Nitros, etc..... There is absolutely no problem, as far as I am concerned, with people who jump big Spectres, or Sabres, or Triathlons, etc. If that is how someone enjoys their skydive, that's great. I am very clear in speaking to people that I have chosen to take a risk in the canopies that I choose to fly, whether that be a Crossfire, Vengeance, etc. The idea that I am more at risk under a properly manufactured Crossfire than any other small, high performance canopy, is not true. Point is, there are a couple of different arguements here.... 1) Safety vs. performance in standard vs. high performance canopy flight 2) Safety vs. performance between all high performance canopies and the Crossfire. As for #1, you have your beliefs and I have mine. There is no point in debating it. As for #2, I think I have adressed it as much as I can. Again, you have your beliefs, and I have mine. I believe that mine are based on facts and physical evidence, and will stand behind those beliefs until the day that I see a problem with a Crossfire made in Europe. Again, I will look forward to seeing what happens. Steve

Ok, this is easier said than done, but look at it this way.... Are you happy now??? NO! Would you be happier having her say no, and knowing what the answer is, without having to wonder for the rest of your life if you could have had a really good time with this girl outside of photography class? PROBABLY. More people than we know go through the same things....even the ones that seem confident generally aren't. Be true to yourself and what you want, and you will be able to be honest and open with her. Remember getting out of the plane the first time??? The threshold of the door is the scariest part, and once you pass that threshold, you may be in an area where you are unfamiliar, but it can be the best experience of your life. If it is, great, if not, move on. Chew on this.....even if she says no, everything will be on the table, and you can proceed with what could be a fantastic friendship. If she says yes, you could get nookie. Either way, you will both be in a better position than you are now. Just my two cents....I'm going to follow my own advice, and go and hit on all the girls that I have always wanted to. :-) Blue Ones, Steve

**I posted that, and I meant exactly that.** I didn't say you didn't mean it, I said that people are jumping to conclusions, in my opinion. **We will never know for sure what's going on.** I think we have a pretty good idea right now of the cause of the problems, and should have an even better idea within the near future. **About all we know for sure is that there is a known, and serious, manufacturing problem with some Crossfires, and this problem can cause collapses. In addition, more serial numbers are being added to the list of 'bad' canopies.** Couldn't have said it better myself. **it is optimized for performance over safety** Could you clarify? It sounds to me like you are inferring that the Crossfire is made with the knowledge that there is a defect in the canopy that sacrifices safety, when you stated just a couple of sentances ago that it is clearly a manufacturing error on some Crossfires. Seems to me that it was designed with both safety and performance in mind, being that a high performance canopy is not going to last long on the market if it is blatently unsafe in its design. Thus, there is no need to release it, and mearly open yourself up to headaches and lawsuits. Besides that, with the technology today, there is just no reason to sacrifice that safety, as it is not a necessity in order to make a good, solid, high performance canopy. **additional manufacturing problems over and above the standard risks of high performance canopies.** If you mean that the tolerances are tighter on this canopy than others, and thus makes the canopy harder to manufacture correctly, yes, that is a fact. There is no reason, though, why a manufacturer with a solid QC department and skilled sewers should not be able to follow those guidelines, as has been done successfully with this canopy many, many times. In any event, I'm getting deeper into this than I originally intended. I just want people to realize what is going on, and keep an open mind. Condemning a canopy that is, for all intents and purposes, flawless in its design just doesn't make sense to me. Most people who I have spoken to who have Crossfires just want the canopy fixed and returned to them. I think that speaks volumes for the satisfaction that people have with these canopies. Anyway, like I said, I look forward to Icarus' findings in the next few days. Blue Skies, Steve

I, too, would like to thank you for your input. There are a couple of things that I would like to point out, meaning no disrespect, and not discounting this incident. The main problem that I have with this discussion is the fact that we are jumping to conclusions. Specifically, I think about the post saying "sounds like we are looking at the newest generation of Nova". I jump Crossfires, and will continue, with the knowledge that they were made in Europe, where 600 of the 1000 Crossfires that have been put on the market have been made. If we think conservatively, and estimate 150 jumps made on each one, that means that there have been nearly 100,000 jumps put on these canopies without incident. That, to me, says that there is not a flaw in the design, rather, the manufacturing of a certain percentage of said canopies. Given that this problem is public, it is going to open up Crossfires, and for that matter, Icarus Canopies, to criticism for anything that goes wrong in the air, whether or not it be the fault of the canopy (again, I am not specifically referring to this situation, I am speaking generally). I just hope that everyone can keep a relatively open mind regarding the Crossfires until we know for sure what is going on. At this point, what we do know is that there have been some incidents involving the canopy, some of which we do not know what the exact cause was. We also know that noone has been seriously injured or killed as a result of any flaws in the Crossfire, be that in design or manufacture. I, for one, am looking forward to hearing what Icarus has to say, both in the near future, and what they discover in the long haul. They have a fantastic product in the Crossfire, and I have complete confidence in their customer service and their desire to keep the skydiving community safe. Besides the fact that they are caring human beings, they have a lot to stand for in the value of their label. Stay safe! Blue Ones, Steve

Ask anyone who knows me, and they will tell you that I have a sense of humor....up until the point where people are at risk. I appologize if I mistook anything you were saying, but please understand where I and others have been coming from. I am in my happy place, and that is safe skies, so that we can all enjoy what it is we have. Blue Ones, Steve

You know, I don't even want to argue this, but I think that there is a major point that is being missed here... The fact is that as skydivers, we have to respect eachother....that's not a choice. We don't have to like eachother, but when we are in the airplane with people, we have to be able to trust that our comrades are not going to do anything purposeful that will put us in danger. In sharing the same vertical airspace as these people, the fact is that they were put in danger. There's no arguing that. ANY NUMBER OF THINGS could have happened and resulted in a disaster. The likelyhood that it would was slim, but that is something that they had not agreed to sign onto when they paid their money and boarded the plane. I guess that the main theme of my post is respect. Respect for others, as well as respect for this sport, what it can do to you, and the skill and planning it takes to effectively and safely pull off these types of skydives. I take very personally to this thread, because most all of the fun jumps that I am doing these days are video dives where I freefly around RW groups. Things like this are just going to push people away from freeflying altogether, changing it from something that they do not want to do into something that they don't want to be around and will not tolerate. Just as everyone in the world was not meant to skydive, every skydiver was not meant to freefly. They have found something that truely makes them happy, and for that, I think that we should respect what they have chosen as their passtime. As far as physics, if someone is in a sit, and they are falling at 120 mph, if they flatten out, they will go much slower. A combination of that and stealing the air from someone above you could turn into a pretty nasty collision. I think that that is what Skybytch was trying to say. If they have chosen to assume that as a risk, that is one thing...otherwise, I would not be able to accept the fact that I come down from a skydive with bumps, bruises, broken bones, or dead, because an inexperienced freeflier decided he was going to join us unannounced. You can take my post for what you will, but I sincerely beg that you consider what I have to say....it is quite literally a matter of life and death. Blue Skies! Steve

You know what I love even more than a hundred jump wonder, is a hundred jump wonder who is so insecure that he/she has to threaten violence. Hey, do you think your brother could beat up my brother? I think this forum has remained pretty cool, considering how immature we as skydivers can be. I, personally, find it insulting when someone gets on here and tries their best to turn it into the newest rec. Although I don't feel like responding to this moronic post, I have to make an attempt at helping you understand what it is we are talking about here.... What Skybytch has done is something that we like to refer to as exaggeration....it's supposed to be funny. What has happened is that it has turned into something serious. Yes, a belly flier can stay with freefliers in certain situations. I, being 6'2" and 170 lbs. have stayed with people in a sit with a little bit of work. I have also seen people in a head down flying no contact with larger people in a hard arch. If you are talking about a full speed freefly dive, I would have to agree with you, that a belly flier would not be likely to be able to catch you. What you did in your post after Skybytch telling you about Dave's dive was have your 70 something jumps explain to someone with hundreds of jumps, and someone with thousands of jumps, why they misunderstood what was happening during a skydive. Forgive me, but you came off like a pompous ass. Dave's point in stating his number of jumps was to clarify exactly how ridiculous it is for you and your skydiving infancy to "explain", in a pretty condescending manner, what a hybrid skydive is to someone who did this skydive before you probably even considered making a sport parachute jump. As far as belly flying being gay, when you get a lot more jumps, and you are capable of doing more than exit an aircraft, flail with your friends, pull, flare, and land, then I would like to have you come back here, and give your opinion regarding belly fliers. If at that point you would still like to maintain your position that they are gay, then so be it. I think it's funny, though, when someone with, for all intents and purposes, no experience, comes off telling the world that the roots of the sport he loves is gay. Oh, and does that mean that the Golden Knights are gay as well, and Airspeed, and Joe Jennings, because he films on his belly sometimes? I don't know why I hope so much that you will understand, because no amount of talking will ever change a "hundred jump wonder". You will figure it out someday, when you have 500, 1000, or more jumps. You will see someone on a forum, or at a drop zone, he/she will be acting like an ass, you will say, "don't they only have something like 75 jumps?", and then it will occur to you that you used to be like that. You will then hang your head for a moment in embarrassment, and then thank god that you have grown out of that part of your life. I hope, for your sake, that this happens sooner than later. Blue Skies, Steve