thomas.n.thomas

I am hoping this isn't against the rules to post this here - I don't have an affiliation with this group, but stumbled upon it on another forum and it sounds like this group has a pretty awesome skydiving program they're running for wounded vets, called Operation X-wing. http://www.team-x-treme.org/#/operation-x-wing/4567169868 The background on these guys is that they run a bunch of adventure race, endurance race type events wearing rebreathers, gas masks, packs, running with flags, etc. All stuff that makes a physically exhaustive event darn near asphyxiating. I think it's pretty awesome they are getting wounded warriors to go get their A-license. Considering it's something I'm still working on after 2 years and I'm a fully able person, I admire the wounded vets that want to attempt and eventually complete it. Very cool.

Ok, the part where the instructor flies a spin with him had me saying "that is way cool!" I can only imagine how much fun he had. I think sharing this kind of experience with kids is more important than most of what we do ourselves at this point in life. It's tough enough to keep kids motivated and believing they can really do more than they think with many of their social influences these days. I think experiences like this really set a good foundation for them realizing that there is a whole lot of potential in life and they shouldn't be afraid to go for it.

You all have a lot of patience with us new folk trying to figure every angle before we get any experience under our belts to understand what we're even asking - thanks for that. I realize I am a bit neurotic when it comes to activities that motivate me, and I am always hurried to know everything I can about them. Maybe I watched too much GI Joe as a kid. I am finding that in successive jumps, there is a more intuitive feel. I did a slightly downwind landing the other day because the winds shifted a bit after takeoff (still light and variable) and had my first realization about flare height and speed needing to be a bit different in that situation as I crumpled into a surprise PLF. No injuries, actually felt pretty good when I got up, but definitely surprised. In retrospect, I should have known it was coming because I had thought to myself flying around up high that the downwind leg really seemed to be pointing upwind; I flew different headings and could just feel when I was into the wind vs. running. The next landing was the same pattern and much smoother, and I recognized the signs much earlier. So, as has been said many times before, a lot just comes down to learning by doing (provided you've had the right coaching to get down in one piece) - the accuracy and the finesse will come with more experience so long as I am paying attention. As an aside, I will be taking a canopy course on the 20th and am really looking forward to that. Already got my new notebook all ready.

Outstanding. He already looks better than me in the tunnel. Did it take him long to pick up? I actually saw that the min age for some tunnels is two? If I have kids, I would like to get them tunnel flying early, even if they never skydive, just so they can have an interesting and unique challenge that is a heck of a lot of fun. Plus, for the early years, I plan on convincing them I am a wizard and that is my magic room where I can make people fly.

Sorry for the thread hijack, but at what point did you take the course? I just got cleared for solos after finishing cat E and have made 1 solo so far and no low passes. There's a flight-1 course I'm signed up for at my DZ on the 20th. I'm hoping to work on low passes this coming weekend in preparation, but the thought of getting out at low altitude gives me the heebie jeebies. I don't want to miss out on this course, but I also don't want to get in over my head before I'm ready for it. Any tips or recommendations?

I did 3 jumps this weekend and felt better about the pattern on all of them. I am still nowhere near the accuracy I want, but I was doing more decision making on when to turn onto base and final to get closer to the target instead of just going on autopilot and following exactly what was drawn on the briefing board. I think my worst distance was about 75m, which is still way too far away by my standard. We have a nice large student landing field, but I am always concerned about obstacles ever since my tree incident, and I ultimately want to be able to hit

I'll give you my take on it after a very short time and only 11 jumps (so recognize the voice of inexperience when you hear it). I am scared every time the door opens. I have ridden the plane down twice, once due to clouds and once due to high ground winds that picked up when we were climbing. I could feel the tension leaving my body when I heard I wasn't going to be jumping. I wasn't happy about it, but it made me very aware of how freaked out I am near the door. Once I actually step out, all that anxiety is gone, and I'm completely focused on the dive. I just don't have much room for anything else because I'm so engaged in what I am trying to do (I am not very good and need all neurons firing just to simply arch). Today I had my first "oh crap" moment when I jumped a rig that had a pilot chute with a handle (small plastic pipe piece) instead of a hackey for the very first time. I knew it would be different, so I made sure to do some practice touches out the door. It was my first solo dive, so I could do whatever I wanted, but I tried to keep it simple with some aerobatics, then flat turns and toe taps just to work on my form. When I waved off and reached for the handle, I couldn't find it. Without really thinking, I reset, went back for try two, found the bottom of the container and found the handle and deployed. I realized later that I was holding my breath, scared out of my mind (I must have blanked because I don't remember thinking anything but "oh nooooooo!") but I did what I was trained to do, and I do remember this urge that had me going straight to the reserve if I couldn't find it again (I think I actually might have started to look down towards it when I found the pilot chute handle). So, forgive the long story, but my point is this. Door anxiety may be worse for you than others, it sure as heck is for me, but that goes away after you're out the door. If you're scared of malfunctions, I'm right there with you. Practice in the EP harness over and over and over again until it is second nature, and it will be. I couldn't believe I actually reacted correctly, and I think I did it fairly quickly - I waved off at 5000 and after all the fumbling was under a good canopy by 3700 after a slight snivel and control checks. Now for the "is it worth it?" For me, yes. Even though it scares me like crazy. I'm a wuss when it comes to pain and fear getting injured (and definitely fear getting killed). I will continue to jump at this point in my life. That equation can change depending on circumstances, and I suggest that each time before you go jump, you consider the "is it worth it" question. One day, I got two good jumps in, no problems, had a ton of fun, and I could have gone up on two more, but decided I had had enough and just didn't feel right for going up again. Coming down off the adrenaline just put me in a state where I wasn't 100% focused, so at that point I felt the risks were increased for me not doing things right and it wasn't worth it to go jump. Some days you might say no, it's not worth it today, and then you'll be right back at the DZ the next day ready to go. Maybe you'll say that one day and never come back. But definitely think about it each jump and take it one jump at a time. The next jump is the only one that really matters.

I feel sheepish - I never thought to fly the pattern aloft as a dry run. Also, does it get easier to eyeball it and not rely as much on the altimeter - I never quite trust that I can read it accurately enough or that it's really giving me the straight scoop differentiating 400 vs 300 or 700 vs 600, and that seems to make a big difference in where you land. I'd say my patterns so far have been bad 3/8 times - and by that I mean off the target by more than 50m. I'm also still just on Cat D w/ 8 jumps (3 since my time off for a year), but I am always a bit afraid of running into things and want to make accuracy a priority just for the safety aspect in case I ever did have to land off the beaten path. One other suggestion I got was S-turns on downwind and base if I know I'm too high, but doesn't this back up canopies behind me as well?

I busted my right ankle landing into the trunk of a tree in Feb '11 and just got back to jumping a couple weeks ago. I am still in AFF going on to finish Cat D. I was and still am scared on the flight up, especially when they open the door. Breathing deep and letting it out slow helps. Just keep doing it every time you feel yourself get tense. I was very scared of landing on my first jump back this year. I had it in my head that I was going to flare at the wrong time and hit hard or find another tree or obstacle again. Wearing an ankle brace gave me a little bit of confidence, but also just realizing that I am older and wiser after my accident helped as well. I ended up landing the first jump standing without even taking a step. It was one of the best feelings I've had in a long time. I think it helped that my pattern was a bit more cautious this time (no tree flyovers on final) and the conditions were good. I'd say (from my limited experience), make sure everything feels ok and the conditions look good before you get back in the saddle. Take a jump to just belly fly and not have to worry about anything but enjoying the ride. Wear a brace. Basically just limit as many extraneous factors that cause concern, and breathe. You'll do fine. Just *shaking hand*

Hi all, just getting back into jumping after a year off to rehab my ankle. I have a general problem with being inconsistent with altitude in my pattern. I'm usually 1000 +/- 100 at the start of downwind, and then half the time I'll be at 800 by the base leg turn instead of the desired 600. The last time I decided to extend the base leg a lot by swinging it out, I ended up in the trees, and as our pattern generally flies the base right above a treeline, I don't like crossing back over it on final, so the question is what to do to drop altitude before/on final approach? On Sunday, I used a combination of S-turns and then when I was getting really desperate (still about 300 and past the target by 25m and approaching a fenceline about 150m distant), I used a trick one of the tandem instructors told me. I pumped the toggles in an alternating sequence (left, right, left, and so on) so stall the canopy a bit and my glide path became less horizontal as desired. I gave myself what I thought was about 50-100 feet vertical to regain normal flight, flared, and landed standing up - no issues. My instructor later told me not to do this. He also said not to S-turn so much on final in case their were canopies behind me and I end up backing them up a good deal. So...in the case of being way high on final, what to do? I didn't want to try a 180 and land reverse, though I think I had the altitude to do it, just too many variables there to have something go wrong. Does anyone else do this pumping the toggles really fast in an alternating pattern? Is this a really stupid thing to do on final?

Another +1 for this. They should be treated the same way in terms of causal analysis. The causes of collisions are the same as the causes for near misses. The difference is only measured in feet. The saying, "any one you walk away from," is more often taken to heart as, "nobody got hurt so no problem." It is difficult to be self-critical, and so people often are not.

Noted - maybe I should rephrase as: the way Heinlein described our current situation. I was unaware of the numerous other references to the original (Roman?) phrase. Thanks for the info.

I know it's kind of insensitive, but I laughed pretty hard at how your post got derailed immediately into a political debate. It's funny how most suck the media teat and only see red vs. blue. Here's a much more enjoyable red vs. blue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BAM9fgV-ts Now that the children are distracted... Ok, I'm joking. But seriously, isn't this an interesting philosophical question without trying to throw feces everywhere? Didn't someone say, "Democracy is a great system, until the people realize that they can vote themselves money from the treasury. Then the jig is up." I very much like Heinlein's description: Bread and Circuses So really, how do you try to balance production and consumption? That's the ultimate question. An imbalance to either side is ultimately not beneficial, so what do we do to reach equilibrium before it comes and finds us in the middle of the night and beats the heck out of us with a bar of soap in a sock?

It's decreasing. That's the way it works. The ongoing reaction that is used to generate power when the plant is operational has stopped. The problem at the moment is the decay heat from the unstable isotopes created by the 'main' reaction. As those isotpes decay and generate heat (the current problem) they are being used up - and they aren't being replaced because, again, the main reaction has stopped. So it's not a case of continually dumping water into the reactors with no end in sight, it's a case of cooling them until the decay heat problem goes away. Which, as Bill points out, is not going to take that long. And this decay heat problem is not something that is unexpected, or poorly understood - it's something that always needs to be dealt with when a reactor of this type is shut down. The problem comes from the cooling system being damaged, not from the fuel doing anything unpredictable. This is correct, and I believe what Wayne is now saying is that the concern is variation in the contamination being released from the plant, which does exist. Depending on the amount of water leaking from a damaged reactor vessel, which will fluctuate with hydrostatic pressure from more water volume in the core, you will have different levels of contamination spilling out of the plant. [edit to add: I assumed conservatively the RV is damaged, don't actually know that. I have stopped following news reports and am relying instead on people involved with the issue for info and have not received many updates as of late] BUT, the facts you have stated, that the source radioactivity is continually decreasing, is part of the story that provides perspective - that day by day, the situation is getting better and not worse. Although there still may be environmental releases, the average levels on any significant time scale are dropping, and will continue to drop in the coolant that leaks out and in the contamination already outside the vessel. I'm not saying we don't have to do anything and can leave things be (need to re-establish long term cooling, permanent storage of affected material, cleanup of loose contamination), but with that work, the ultimate impacts will be so minor in comparison to the tsunami, which, even with a lot of work, still has devastated so many lives and consumed so many national resources. One thing to consider too - look at # of people it will have taken to recover from the nuclear accident vs # taken to recover from tsunami.

Wayne, I appreciate your candor and your concern. Yes, please call me Thomas. I hope you included me in the "us mere mortals." I could be some wannabe-lookhowsmartiam-internet poseur who is misleading every single person here with what he has just read on wikipedia. If nothing else resonates with this crowd, please let it be what I just wrote. What I hope, in all of this back and forth between people, is that people approach whatever they read with proper skepticism and a desire to learn about what is going on, rather than a desire to push whatever emotional gut reaction or agenda they have. I apologize for my impatience in previous posts. You are a freefall and canopy photographer. If I started making statements about how to photograph in freefall or under canopy I'm guessing you would probably be a little impatient with me (and you'd be well justified, given that I have 5 jumps to my name). As an aside, what you do is something I eventually aspire to and I recognize that I could learn a whole lot from you. I thought this was a more scientifically oriented discussion, so I won't comment on liberal or conservative theories, postulates, notions, etc. because I care about neither in this thread. I am glad we got the criticality/meltdown issue resolved (at least I think). Yes, release of fission products to the environment is always a bad thing. The question is how bad? Next thing to do is look up REM limits for people. Then look at the correlations that are the basis for those REM limits and realize that 5/yr actually shows a potential decrease in risk of cancer, so if I'm going to think about the likely impacts, I had better center on somewhere around 10/yr and above, maybe even more. I don't know, I haven't done the actual statistics work on those data. Then, I still need those numbers on how much activity is actually going to be sustained and over what area/volume. If I consider the entirety of the Daiichi SNM and expended SNM stockpile to be dumped into the neighboring sea, then make some assumptions about dispersion, wildlife consumption and survival from acute doses that might actually be detectable by the time humans eat those particular fish, and then calculate how many of those fish a single human would have to eat, I think (keyword think) I will be coming up with a low probability of someone being harmed. But I haven't done the calculations, so I couldn't say that's how it really is. I am not an expert in ocean currents, marine biology, agricultural marketing, Japanese eating habits, or the other myriad disciplines that have an input into this complex modelling problem you appear to think is of a dire nature. I'll give you my stance on it - I'm not going to cry wolf when I can justifiably reason that the probability is low and everything I know and have learned supports my view. To address your cesium concern - the longer lived an isotope is, the less radioactive it is. If there's a big concern about it, just take some agent to bond with the cesium to excrete it with whatever you eat. Again, I wouldn't want to be eating raw activated cesium, but again, I think it's not as big of a concern as the media is making it out to be. My problem with generating so much hype and concern over the nuclear concerns is that some people react without forethought and want to devote resources to that overlyhyped issue, instead of devoting resources to the much more present and still very dangerous issues of food, water, disease, and shelter for the many displaced (from the Tsunami) that you mentioned concern for. TMI - I hate when people mention TMI as a disaster or put it in the same sentence with. New sentence. Chernobyl. It's not even close, don't try to lump it in there. I can't even register TMI as anything but a loss of $. For your last sentence, we do know how to stabilize the situation - that's what we are doing. Cool with water. Restore long-term decay heat removal. The situation will end when decay heat generation is less than the cooling capacity of whatever long-term medium surrounds the components generating that heat, and loose contamination is cleaned up acceptable levels (if you want this number, it will require more of those calculations nobody seems willing to undertake). I'm guessing someone should invest in a local concrete supplier shortly.

Two things: 1) After a month of nothing more than desperation measures, there is still no visible end game in the works. 2) While Chernobyl dealt with one reactor, Fukushima has six (three in immediate danger) and the amount of radioactive material at risk is several times that of Chernobyl. Focusing on the immediate fatalities alone does not give the full picture of how this disaster will ultimately impact the Japanese. For a month now, their strategy has consisted of dumping large amounts of water continually on the problem reactors to keep them from going critical. That highly radioactive water then has to go somewhere and it does, either into the ocean or into the ground water. How long do you think they can keep doing that without creating permanent no-man's lands similar to areas around Chernobyl? What do you think that's going to mean for the long-term health of the people in the area? Likearock, please provide credentials or proof of knowledge to support your claims. You are all about focusing on the long term impacts when you have no knowledge base for even estimating what they would be. It would be like me saying we should be worried about asteroids because I watched the movie, "Armageddon." I have no idea how to estimate sizes and speeds of near Earth asteroids, nor the probability of intersecting orbits. So, I don't start telling people to worry about them. Statements you make such as "nothing more than desperation measures" and "dumping large amounts of water continually on the problem reactors to keep them from going critical," lead me to believe that, like much of the media, you have no clue what you are talking about. If I was buying a core from you and you gave me a core that didn't go critical, I would be pretty darned pissed, because I just wasted a few hundred million on your defective product. Go look up criticality in a textbook. Do you know why they are dumping water on the reactor, when in fact water is a moderator and provides the ability for those types of cores to go critical? (hint: it has to do with something called decay heat)? Please go learn more before making these statements. Contaminated groundwater? Yeah, not something I'd like, but where are your numbers to show what the impact? How much groundwater is being contaminated? How much could be? Any volume measurements? What depth is the water table? As for the ocean, they can dump every darn bit of spent fuel, nuclear waste, etc. from the entire world into the ocean for all I care. Do you know what it would do? NOTHING. Do you know how big the oceans are? And before you start saying how some delicate hydrothermal vent life will be impacted, those suckers would LOVE it. Thermovores would be all over those spent cores and we would be providing a life sustaining habitat to "the delicate creatures." If you really want to convince us of your concerns, go look up the legal limit for contaminated coolant (a.k.a. water) release into the environment, then multiply it by the 10,000 or 20,000 factor or whatever over a number of days, then divide that by the total volume of the Pacific Ocean, and then tell me why we should be so concerned about that instead of 13,000+ people who just died, massive amounts of standing water over corpses and other organics that will be a huge breading ground for disease, and the thousands upon thousands of displaced individuals from the TSUNAMI. Am I saying the Daiichi plants accident is no big deal? Nope - I think it's a problem, but it's not really all that bad compared to Chernobyl, and it's nothing compared to the Tsunami that was the proximate cause. Oh yeah, and for another homework assignment, look up the number of thyroid cancer cases that were claimed to be caused by Chernobyl, and then look up how many of them were cured. So for those who have read this far. Q: is Fukushima worse than Chernobyl? A: no, it's not even as bad. Ok, I am sick of being baited by homo sapiens ignoramous. Good luck with all your speculations and uninformed opinions. I'm out like a light.

It's incredibly short-sighted to assess the full threat of Fukushima by simply focusing on the fatality rate so far. We should be asking ourselves "how will this end?" Unfortunately, no one can give a good answer to that question. Blaming the media is sometimes justified, sometimes it's just a way to avoid looking at an unpleasant truth. So what is the unpleasant truth? I'm assuming you speak with some subject matter expertise on nuclear power other than that gained from the internet and media (clarification: reading the internet and watching the news does not make you a subject matter expert). You have media spreading hysteria about "fuel ignition" and the need for "special coolant" and it is clear they have no idea what they are talking about. If you'll excuse me now, I'm going to go write an autobiography about being a famous black civil rights leader who delivered the "I have a dream" speech.

Also an AFF student here. I got some tunnel time in before I started and haven't had a problem in freefall yet. Just up to doing turns now, but 8 minutes of tunnel time has made the freefall portion smooth sailing so far (don't ask about the landing part though). If you can get to a tunnel, do it - a few minutes of practicing descent rate changes and turns and you'll be good to go. Disclaimer: most of my advice is based on a statistical confidence bound of 50% calculated from completely anecdotal or fictitious information. Use with discretion.

I love the giraffe picture (1st one). They're all great, but that one just strikes me. I really like the shadow on the subject, a bit different than normal composition and contrast. How much sharpening/other PP do you do? I absolutely hate PP and don't do anything behind simple sliders in Lightroom. It was kind of a waste to buy photoshop cs3, but I figure if I learn some basic stuff to do with it, I might actually start to enjoy playing around with some photos. But whatever I do, I'm never really satisfied with how sharp my photos are - I'm pretty sure it's all user error, lack of understanding of light, and not very good settings in post.

I disagree... On March 24, 1944, 21 year old Flight Sergeant Nicholas Stephen Alkemade was a member of No. 115 Squadron RAF and was flying to the east of Schmallenberg, Germany, when his plane was attacked by enemies, caught fire, and began to spiral out of control. Because his parachute was destroyed by the fire, Alkemade opted to jump from the aircraft without one, preferring his death to be quick, rather than being burnt to death. He fell 18,000 feet (5500 m) to the ground below. His fall was broken by pine trees and a soft snow cover on the ground. He was able to move his arms and legs and suffered only a sprained leg. When he came to his senses and saw stars overhead, he lit a cigarette. He was subsequently captured and interviewed by the Gestapo. The orderly Germans were so impressed that Alkemade had bailed out without a parachute and lived, that they gave him a certificate testifying to the fact. Not verified other than seeing it a few different places on the net, but it makes sense that out of all the terminal falls, at least one would have survived... Now, if you start talking probabilities and prudent courses of action, I'm all ears. But then when you start talking probabilities and statistics, you might find yourself questioning your decisions about lots of things in life.

Let me know how you like it. Always looking at the new Canons and wouldn't mind a second body, especially a crop for telephoto. I'm loving your wide shooting. Landscape and Architecture are such a challenge for me.

Fixed. +2 more to make up for it: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_n7lWe_JZn2g/TYildAb0YlI/AAAAAAAAABc/v6hDtR4hWq4/s512/%20Basilica%20S.%20Pietro%201024.jpg https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/_n7lWe_JZn2g/TYilkxvONxI/AAAAAAAAABg/PesZIVD4UUQ/s720/%20Basilica%20S.%20Pietro%201.jpg They look overly sharpened because of the picasa downres. Might soften them up a bit to look better online, but the prints should turn out nicely.

Just got back from Italy. One of my favorites from that trip: https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_n7lWe_JZn2g/TYilUL0c8RI/AAAAAAAAABU/oCo2JK337VQ/s512/Window.jpg

I always tell people when they ask that I am a student. I won't consider myself a skydiver until I'm licensed. It's kind of like telling people you drive when you're still on your learner's permit and need a parent with you. Yeah, it's driving, but with a safety blanket. Once I'm able to go jump without someone looking over my shoulder, then I will be a skydiver - it scares me more than a little bit, but everyone tells me the ride is worth it, and so far I can't disagree.

How many knives becomes overkill? Also, because I am very new, what kind of stuff would you end up using a knife for? I can think of cutting myself out of trees and such...but I've already had my hopefully one tree experience of a lifetime. Waiting for a smart aleck picture of some guy with a set of hedgeclippers pinned to his rig.