TomNoonan

Broad stroke statement without any support by facts. Perhaps you can actually take the time to state specifically who was bought and what they were paid? I can only speak for myself: Not a single person asked me to do what I did. That is to bring 3 requests to S&T committee that passed S&T and then passed the full board voting process. I did what I did because: 1) I'm tired of investigating tandem turns over 90 degrees gone wrong that lead to grave injuries and fatalities under perfectly functioning parachutes. 2) I'm tired of investigating tandem AAD fires that start with the explanation "I couldn't find the handles". 3) I'm tired of being told when pointing out reckless/dangerous behavior that "unless its a BSR we do not have to follow any regulations". 4) If every end user of tandem systems used the gear in the manner and procedures it was intended, these BSRs wouldnt be necessary. BTW, (everything I did, I could have done without being on the board) The irony here is that it is I that asked the manufacturers (all of them) for their support as I brought it to the board, not the other way around. I even asked 2 manufacturers and some industry experts (not on the board) to weigh in during the meetings to support my statements, and in the end, the board made the right decisions and voted these two BSRs into place. Since then, every tandem examiner I have been in direct contact with (over 50) have said it was the right thing to do and "they should have happened 20 years ago." Of a population of 179 tandem examiners (subject matter experts) that have now been informed, not a single one raised an objection, and to the contrary, the BSRs have been embraced by practically everyone that has been informed. "Now we have a means to improve safety on our DZs" i s the repeated statement. When I was finished advocating for the safety of our tandem students in BOD meetings, I then volunteered my time to address the DZO conference, over 200 industry professionals in attendance on how to improve the operational safety of their tandem programs. When I finished that presentation, I went on to give a PIA record 10 seminars (5 seminars, twice) at PIA that reached over 1000 people: - Sigma Standard and Emergency Operating Procedures - Tandem Canopy Flight - Tandem Exit Techniques - AADs in Modern Skydiving Scenarios - Safety Day Seminar Selections All of which I wrote and presented on my own time. No fee, no cost. When all of that was over, I gave up 2 days off to present 16 hours of tandem examiner educational seminars with Jay Stokes and Jim Crouch to a room of over 50 tandem examiners. Again, on my own time, not my company's time. Through all of that, I also managed to find time to write two safety articles for Blue Skies Mag on AADs and Making Good Canopy Choices. Suffice to say, if I'm "bought and paid for", then whoever bought me got a serious bargain because I do all I do in this area on my own time, and everything I do, I do because I only want to see a safer landscape on our DZs. No ulterior motives. I may be a mouthpiece, but I'm a mouthpiece for safety, nothing more. In the last ten years that I have been trying to contribute the betterment of our sport, I have come to realize that no amount of effort or work will ever stop "top dockers" from making false broad stroke statements about people and situations they know nothing about. That rolls off like water. What I would genuinely be interested in though is what Craig has done in the last year for the membership to improve safety and what specific information Craig has about who has been bought and what they have been paid. I don't expect we will see that though, because from my perspective, that info doesnt exist. Have at me, I may or may not respond as I am replying to all of the emails thanking me for the seminars and BSRs and sending out my power points to one and all that ask for them so they can share the info at their own DZs. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

The answer Martin is because instructors involved in tandem free fall incidents are still saying: "I couldn't find the handle" as the root cause of their incidents. Despite your claim that floating handles are a thing of the past, there continues to be a number or low pulls, AAD activations, and two-out tandem incidents where the tandem instructor either could not find their main handle, even after thousands of tandems, or worse, could not find their reserve handle, even after thousands of jumps. It still happens, more often then you think. As for HandCams, that adds an even greater risk, as multiple times we have heard: I could see the handle, but I couldn't get my hand in there with the hand cam. So despite your (accurate assessment) that post deployment handles checks are also important and instructors should be doing that too, the free fall handles checks remain a high speed critical step in the process so that at the bottom end of your tandem jump, where every second counts, your not fumbling around looking for a main handle (some model tandems they can still dislodge) or struggling to either find or pull your reserve handle because you have never reached back in free fall to see if you could touch it. I have been told that there are actually drop zones out there that tell their instructors to actually NOT do handles checks with hand cam video, because it messes up the video. This BSR will ensure that there is a mechanism of consequence now for ignoring such a critical safety check. Ted Strong once told me (paraphrased) regarding Tandem SOPs: "When your asked to do something procedurally that you don't necessarily understand, it's because it's not for a reason you can think of, its for a reason you haven't thought of yet, but for a reason someone else already learned from." Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Thank you Mark. I was really impressed that the 90 degree turn BSR was a unanimous vote. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Here is a picture of a brand new Sigma riser, less than 20 jumps, melted from grommet on a riser with Slinks on the main. This is an example of almost immediate damage to an expensive component. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Thank you Douglas! I am doing a seminar at PIA on Safety Day Seminar ideas. With your permission I will include these. I will connect with you offline and confirm. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

If anyone would like copies of my AAD presentation or my Tandem Canopy presentation to go along with the videos, shoot me an email and I will send them to you via dropbox. noonantommy@yahoo.com Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

This thread has run it's course, so I'm locking it. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Greetings to our North America based UPT Tandem Examiners, I have just sent an email to you all with the 2015 Standardization Meeting schedule. We have 5 meetings on the calendar this year between March and April. If you did not receive the email, that means we have a bad address or an old address on file for you. If you did not receive the email and you area US or Canadian Tandem Examiner, please contact me at tom@uptvector.com. Thank you. Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Thats cool, Im happy it worked out for you. Just bear in mind that in doing so, you become a test jumper in that configuration. Hard openings injure people every year, and when you change a component out like a slider, you can change the outcome of the deployment sequence. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

IIRC, the slider on the Katana is built in part with mesh. If you put an RDS from another manufacturer on the canopy that does not have the same size mesh area, you will affect the opening characteristics of the canopy. Please contact PD directly if you intend to do this and get their input before doing so. support@performancedesigns.com Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi, you can email your question to: rigging@uptvector.com. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Mixing of the Type 12 and Kevlar bridle lowers/uppers is not a problem. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi Chris, Great input. While I don't think I am as old as Rob.....lol, I have to admit, I read his comment too, and thought: "Yup." I don't think Im burnt out, but I think most tandem instructors that have been doing this for a while realize, this sort of thing will happen from time to time, and rather than lecture the student, just move on smiling. I'm not too worried about the underground "flip movement" per say, students have been doing weird things to Tandem Instructors on exit, in free fall and in drogue fall, by accident and or on purpose, ever since tandem skydiving began. My perspective is that if we put our students in the door properly, put them in the relative wind properly on exit, fly our own bodies and do what we are trained to do, they could try and flip all day long and its not going to affect the outcome of the skydive. Thank you for including me in the conversation, I always like to hear from others in the field on this stuff. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

FYI - Vectran lined canopy, Slinks, brand new Sigma system, less than 10 jumps on the entire system and the slider grommet melted a spot on the riser. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Riser damage can occur on either Dacron lined or Vectran lined canopies, or any canopy that you attach to the risers. The other consideration is that both Slinks and Rapide links are capable of failing. When a Rapide link fails, traditionally the barrel breaks, and the Rapide link bends, but even distorted, can keep the line group relatively in tact while the TI performs EPs. The threads of the barrel screw can even hold the lines to the Rapide link, keeping the entire line group in place while EPs are performed. (Basically it is a slow speed manageable malfunction). When a Slink fails, it is a catastrophic failure, in which the entire line group is typically lost, distorting the canopy and creating a higher speed, less stable malfunction, which increases the stress of the EP scenario. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Slinks are not allowed on Sigma tandem systems for main or reserve risers. It was tested at one point, but it is not allowed. If anyone has any questions, please feel free to contact me at tom@uptvector.com Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi Joe Exit altitude depends on aircraft. In the porter, typically 27,000-29,200ft, with a couple of exits at 30,200ft MSL. AStar: 21,000ft-25,000ft MSL. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Thank you. That video was something that we put a lot of work into. The problem was unforeseen, timing.....It was completed just before the Y strap became mandatory on all passenger harnesses, so I am reshooting the standard male and standard female body positions, so we can release it with all of the harnesses including Y-straps. We are working on better presentation methods for sure. I'm a dedicated resource in this area now. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

This should be done in conjunction with the manual and whatever resources the DZ has available, for example, if you have videos of well fitted versus poorly fitted harnesses and the resulting free fall and landing postures. Most importantly, I highly encourage tandem instructors to log these meetings in their log books, for example: "Passenger Harness Fitting Review - DZ One skydiving center, June 1st, 2014" and have it signed off by another instructor, or if possible a local attending examiner. If you ever have to prove your currency having a series of logged and signed off entries shows a pattern of professional continuing education, if your ever called to defend what you do. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

I agree 100%. Its something that I am working on as we speak. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Our sport canopies vary by location, altitude, and size of jumper. We've landed Navigator 280s at 17192ft MSL down to Spectre 170s at 12, 350ft MSL. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

If you know what your doing when fitting a passenger harness, whether starting from the top down, or bottom up, you should be able to arrive at the same harness point locations. The passenger harness adjustment guide provides a systematic basis to fit the harness, that ensures the critical fitting of the leg straps, belt strap and back strap are properly fitted before the upper harness is fitted and secured. Why? If you adjust the MLW and rear diagonals first, you run the risk of the leg strap junction being too high or too low, and then either ignoring it, or having to readjust the harness. When a passenger appears to be sitting low in the harness after opening, with the chest strap a little high, its because of 1 of 2 things, possibly both: 1) Bodies are pliable and opening shock causes a sinking into the harness that cannot be fully duplicated on the ground prior to jumping unless you suspend a person in a hanging harness under their full body weight. A good estimate of this is to pick up the passenger by the apex of the leg straps (with their permission and foreknowledge), and shake the harness a little, they will "sink in" to the leg straps a few inches. 2) The main lift web is fitted with the MLW too far forward with a corresponding excess in the rear diagonals, allowing the back pad to rise up as the body sinks into it on opening, like pulling a shirt over the back of your head. If your experiencing this on a regular basis, you may want to revisit your diagonal adjustments and MLW adjustment process. The people that "make this stuff up" have a dedicated testing facility and dedicated test jumpers, that between sport and tandem testing have made over 45,000+ dedicated test jumps on "these types of things" over the last couple of decades. It's always fascinating to hear from anonymous posters that know examiners and tandem masters that are the "worst" at what they do, in such broad generalities. Its very easy to cast a negative comment against people in the industry and hide behind anonymity.... My email is tom@uptvector.com, if you genuinely have a concern about anyone in the tandem industry, examiner or instructor, I would challenge you to own your statements and contact me directly with names, and equally importantly, examples of your concerns. I'll await your email. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi Propblast, We are using a constant flow system that was originally developed for climbers that are using it to summit Mount Everest. The 02 developer/technician worked with our team over a three year period to develop the current version that we are using. Some of the earlier systems that we used were more bulky and rigid, this new system allows for a greater range of motion and more efficient use of size and equipment weight. Hope that helps! If you have any specific questions, please feel free to contact me at skydiveearth@gmail.com and if your in the Deland area, you are welcome to come by and I can walk you through the system in person with the units that I have here. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Yes, that is my understanding of it as well. As has been the case in the past, when an attorney files a frivolous lawsuit, they tend to cast as large of a net as possible looking for assets to go after. If you have nothing they can legally go after, you become less promising of a target. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

That of course goes without saying, but it is important to realize that there are a number of things that can go wrong on a tandem jump that are entirely beyond your control and your safety margins, like aircraft incidents for example, where you will still be exposed to a substantial level of liability acting as the tandem instructor on the jump. Organizing one's business model to the extent that it best protects you from liability is an additional layer of protection. The waiver that tandem passengers signs typically includes protecting the instructor and anyone involved in the tandem skydive, however it has been shown in the past, and will again in the future, that the waiver is not impenetrable. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com