Zlew

Ask a whuffo how many jumps between the average fatality in skydiving. The most common answer I used to get was between 50 and 100. People fear what they don't understand. For most people, their only real exposure to skydiving is the sensationalized stories they hear on the news "MAN DIES after parachute FAILS to open and he plummets to his death from a 2 miles high!!!". Or from war stories from grandpa from WW2 and Vietnam. Everyone has a buddy that saw a guy go in, broken legs, lucky they landed in a swamp.. .etc. etc. So the idea of being able to be in our extreme sport, and make thousands of jumps...jump for decades is totally foreign. Further, whuffos tend to think every jump is the "fear" adrenaline rush. They think each time you jump it is that crazy, scary, oh shit I'm going to die, heart doing 180BPM kinda rush. They don't understand that the rush as you keep jumping is that you are flying... you are in control... you get to do what people dream about, instead of overcoming a basic human fear of immanent death. They don't understand how far the sport has come. Most people will default to fear of falling (which is normal) and project their own fears. Don't expect a whuffo to get it...they usually will not.

You might be getting outdated advice. I think the split roll and nose stuffing methods have gone the way of the dinosaurs. Back when Sabre 1's and Monarchs were the common canopies of the day, everybody packed them that way. Everybody had their own special way to do it, but it was all just an attempt to keep canopies of the day from totally knocking the shit out of you. That was also around the same time as the Triathlon came out. So might have people who used to jump them and pack them that way...because that is what everyone was doing.

I think a lot of people do for that same reason, and it can be done safely. Devils advocate though- If the guy who put an S fold in his forearm this weekend that prompted Ron to write this article had landed his reserve the way he did...in a corn field, and ended up with the same break....that would have sucked. He landed close and had help within 10 seconds of him breaking his arm. Many DZ's seem to be good about helping find gear. Hell, I was going to land with his shit, but saw someone from the DZ already going after it, so I landed next to him instead (not knowing he was hurt). As far as not being able to afford losing the gear- I upped my home owners insurance this year specifically to cover any losses like that. Worth thinking about!

I usually don't see many people jumping reserves siginficantly smaller than their mains. What I tend to see is people who jump similar sized reserves (or even bigger reserves) than their mains... but they are jumping reserves at wingloadings that the canopes are not designed for, or at very least have significantly different flight characteristics than at a lighter loading. On a Katana I am at the "expert" wingloading on a 97, and on a velo I'd be at a 90. While on a PDR/Optimum I would need a 126 for that same rating. There are some arguments out there as to why you may not want a reserve that is 50% bigger than your main, but most people end up getting containers/ gear sized more closely together. So you end up with someone with a zippy main, and a similarly sized (or bigger )reserve, but still at wing loadings where the landing and flight characteristics might be very different than what the pilot is used to.

double fronts was the way I was able to get a few extra seconds of lift before stall. Not a "swoop" or anything to show off for... just a few extra mph. Airspeed is lift...lift is life. Both of my rides were landed with a little double front dive before landing. I would n't recommend that to people who are not familiar with that type of approach... but for me it seemed like the right choice.

It may or may not be as abrupt as what I experienced and have seen others experience. The key take away is you really need to make sure you work practice landings into your emergency plan so that you know what to expect before you actually land in an emergency. I will also note that the reserves today (many of them) were designed around canopies that were mains decades ago. Back then, even a 1.2-1 loading would have been aggressive. keep in mind that you are jumping a 1970-80's style wing (low aspect ration, 7 cell, rectangular, thick wing, non zp etc.). So "low wing loading" by our standards today and back then are quite different. Edit to add- the more you load a wing (any wing) the higher speed it will stall. so a 1:1 will stall more slowly than a 1:8-1, but they BOTH may really surprise the pilot who is used to how their mains fly.

+1 here. When the downsize craze started, I watched 2 of my friends break their hand/wrist when they learned the hard way that their reserve was not designed to land like their modern zippy dippy wings. They found the hard way how quickly and abruptly a reserve can fold up (esp when wing loaded). I had my first ride shortly there after and did 3 practice landings. The first two...well I would have probably broken my arm if I landed them that way. I was amazed how quickly it went from max lift, to bow tie stall. My 3rd practice landing I figured out a way that would work for me, and give me time before the quick stall. I know there has been a refresh in some of the reserves in the last few years, and that may help this issue out quite a bit, but in general people need to know that they may be surprised to find how different a reserve may perform on landing than their "sport" canopy. I know PD and Icarus will let you demo their reserves. That is a fantastic idea (and something I need to do myself). I hope your buddy heals quickly.

Don't second guess, and don't listen to the "coulda/woulda" folks. IMO, you don't want to land on your rears for the first time in an emergency situation. At 78 jumps, I doubt you have had the time to really learn that skill (I know people with thousands that can't). I landed on rears with a knoted brake line last season, and it wasn't that big of a deal. I also watched someone with 500+ jumps try to land on rears with a busted brake line a few months before. He was lucky to walk away after his canopy stalled and fell behind him at 10 feet or so off the ground. One day you may choose to land that same malfunction, and if/when that time comes I hope in your mind your skills and practice with your canopy piloting are strong enough that you hear yourself say- no problem, I got this! If not... chop it again. :)

From the USPA blog post by Ed Scott- "But the AAD manufacturers had a dilemma: They couldn’t increase their activation altitudes if the BSR allows a 2,000-foot altitude for initiating deployment. " http://skydiveuspa.wordpress.com/2013/08/02/uspa-raises-minimum-deployment-altitude/

Why cant cypres/vigil/etc put out a bullitin tomorrow that says- if you use our gear, and you pull below 2500 feet you are outside of the operating parameters of the equipment. If you use our gear, pull above 2500 to insure yadda yadda yadda... They can change their firing alt. to whatever they want... and recommend whatever they want. It's optional gear...not governed by USPA or by the FAA... they can make these changes on their own without a BSR change.

If the gear isn't working per guidelines, that should be addressed. Why is it so taboo to have rig makers show drop tests, and force/pull tests with their current gear...with current recommended sizes? TSO was 3 seconds/300 feet right? Why can't we still test that (even if it is just spot testing?). If it is taking 3-4 times that long...fak me, how is that not getting people up in arms? But why change an indirect rule...when the makers of the AAD's can make that recommendation (directly) on their own? Pulling at 2500 vs 2000 isn't the safety issue. The safety issue is how long reserves are taking to deploy and how that relates to the AAD firing alt. Maybe I'm too stuck on being logical...but changing a rule that directly has not had safety issues...for the sake of a product maker...to be the "low hanging fruit" fix for a problem of another product (containers/reserves) that everyone seems too afraid to evaluate is hard to stomach. And to be clear... I don't pull at 2 (haven't in years and years).

I think there is a little more to it. Will higher pulling help save people... maybe. I think most of us have already done that on our own and that has been well discussed here. To Ron's point- The problem seems to be more about the rigs than the AAD's. So why are we making a rule change that only indirectly increases safety (pulling higher not because we are dying at 2K....but that allows AAD's to bump their firing altitude....to compensate for more time/alt to get reserves out). So let's make things safer, but lets attack the real problem instead of doing this BSR change that takes the scenic route to making us more safe, and does have some negative consequences mentioned in this thread (S&TA waiver risk, Hop-N-Pops, Big Way, Demo Etc.) Edit to add- let's look at the reserves/container issue, and let AAD makers make their own recommendations without holding USPA hostage. So the "why" does matter to me. Just putting the...higher is safer label on it isn't enough for me to give it my (valueless) stamp of approval.

And private enterprise, IMO, should not be asking USPA to change BSR's so that they can make changes to their product. They can make the change to 1000ft without the USPA. Kinda a jacked up circle of logic- People are dying because an optional piece of equipment is firing as designed, but reserves are not getting out in time. The devices are firing when people have failed to pull all together, and when people are fighting mals too long. The trend does not seem to be people are pulling at 2K, or that being a factor in why they are dying after their AAD's fire. So the people who make the devices want to increase the altitude they fire at and ask USPA to raise the minimum pull altitude. So the logic jumps somehow to- We are doing this to make things safer... while pulling at 2000 feet isn't what is hurting/killing us, making everyone pull above 2000 feet will then let a maker of an optional piece of equipment raise their firing altitude, and hopefully will save lives when the next one of us chops dirty low, or goes screaming into the single digit altitudes with nothing out. So the BSR of 2500 isn't the "safer" part... it's us saying we will pull higher, to let the AAD's have piece of mind to raise the firing altitude for the guy who may have pulled at 3.5K...or not at all. Kinda screwy.

IMO, this is the correct line of thought. AAD's are not required by the USPA, so instead of changing a rule for everyone, so the makers of optional gear can raise their firing altitude, the correct thing to do is to tell the AAD makers to man up and put a policy out there that says- if you jump our gear, there are things you have to do to make it work correctly and safely. Turn it on...understand DZ offsets and the auto shutoff functions, and PULL ABOVE 2500 feet. It is part of the operation of their gear, and not gear that we have to have. I don't see the logic in having USPA change a rule so that the makers of optional equipment can change their product...when they can change it without USPA making rules for everyone.

The basics are important- being generally fit...cardio, core etc. I actually do a lot of exercises specific to my discipline (video). I do a lot of pull ups, straight hanging, grip strength exercises on top of my general cardo/weight mix. Cardio is more important than you think for jumping. Esp. if you are doing back to backs or otherwise rushing in and out on hot days. I don't wingsuit, but I'd thing weighs and flexibility for your upper body would be helpful. Upper body with pullups and such would seem to be good for BASE....since it often has a bit of climbing involved.

I know in the world of turbines and AFF...3500 feet seems scary low to low timers today. I've seen plenty nervous in the door on their first hop n pops even from 4K or more. I don't care where they jump from, but I do think being able to get out of the plane quickly, with stability, and able to open a canopy within 5 seconds is a reasonable requirement. I've been on dropzones twice where planes had emergencies, and the pilot ordered a bailout. IMO, everyone needs to be able to comply with that order. The idea of having some people who can't jump in places that might cause a traffic problems with the people trying to GTFO of the plane and follow the pilots orders is not appealing to me. If you are really not capable of exiting stable, and getting a parachute open in 5 seconds or so...I would argue that you are not ready to be considered a licensed skydiver.

Bingo. I figure in a few years this will be accepted and nobody will worry about it. But you are correct, the issue was they fought it too long, not that they pulled low. Most of us choose to pull well above two, but it is nice to have the freedom and choice to get out on a 2K hop n pop on a cloudy day, or get those extra feet of separation when tracking doesn't go as planned. If the gear isn't living up to the TSO standards, I think that is a bigger issue than if I pull at 2500 feet or 2499.

Many posts on this topic, but as most things around here, the answer is.... it depends. What are you shooting? HD or SD? What is your desired output- DVD/youtube? hwhat matters to you in your edits (speed? effects? ease of use etc?) If you are a mac guy...staying mac would be easy. If not, PC will be fine. Software- most simple/basic editors are usually free with your computer. Movie Maker in windows and imovie work plenty well for many users. If you want something more advanced, many on here use one of the Sony Vegas or adobe premiere products (movie studio and elements are usually under 100 bucks). Hardware- for speed of rendering, processor power and number of cores seems to have the biggest impact. having healthy ram space and a good graphics card can also be nice.

Me. 2K is no big deal... if you do it correctly with a very short delay you will be open by 1800 or 1900 feet. Remember, your opening sequence is mostly horizontal for for first few seconds of free fall and you have not accelerated vertically enough to eat any real altitude like you would at terminal. Pulling at 2K on a hop and pop will usually put you in the saddle higher than pulling at 2500 in freefall.

My current setup on the olympus There is a setting that I can't ever remember the name of that you need for manual focus...I want to say it is something like "auto reset off" or auto return off.... something like that. It's int the custom functions and it keeps the fly by wire focus from resetting to infinity when you power cycle the camera, and allows you to tape the focus ring to where you want it. Auto focus worked ok..but having better results with manual. I shoot in RAW, high speed, auto ISO 20mm prime lens (good for 4 way, might want the 17 or 14 for tandem). Most of the time I shoot shutter priority at around 1/500th. I'll slow that down a bit for dusk shots stability control on careful with gaffers tape over the video button, it pulls out easily. I think thats everything

Looks like they shut down their website, but you did have to buy them either in feet or in meters. I don't remember any markings on mine that would make it obvious which model you had. If you have the Pro model, it should register down to 10 feet (the small number). If you are not going to be in a plane soon, you could probably test it in an elevator and get an idea.

What model altimeter? just noticed you wrote Digitude, not digital. I have tons of jumps on a digitude, and to be honest I can't remember if you can change the mode on them, or if you had to buy them as either feet or meters. Let me dig around and see what I can find.

+1 here. Really close (1.5 miles?), very nice house, with tons of room. rates are really reasonable. Several rooms, and lots of beds in all the rooms. I'm guessing there are beds for 10 in there. Stayed there a few times with the team, and it was well worth it.

Have you thought about any of the mirrorless options? Not GoPro small...but the setup I am running now is about the size of my phone, and weighs 3/4's of a pound. There is a good range of options out there that range from really good for low cost (300ish) to more expensive rigs with the same sensor as your canon (APSC).

I think you should do it so I get to meet you in Chicago!