grue

I think the issue is not so much of its past, as its present. *ding ding ding* cavete terrae.

I normally just say "I have my reasons", but sometimes when pressed I'll expound on those reasons. Usually that ends the conversation cavete terrae.

Oh that's just fantastic. cavete terrae.

Sounds about right cavete terrae.

I really don't get it. My girlfriend and I constantly have people saying "When you get married and have kids..." as if it's a foregone conclusion. Neither of us care about marriage, neither of us want kids, and I frankly don't like children in general. That said, I can deal with occasionally seeing those that have been made by family members. Worse yet, some people actually look down on the decision not to have them, and act like we need to justify the decision. WTF? cavete terrae.

No less outrageous than the standards a lot of people set. Perhaps a bit on the specific side but if he knows what he wants, why does it matter? cavete terrae.

Out of interest from a terminal (belly) speed, what is the minimum theoretical deceleration distance, before the G forces injure/kill you? The issue isn't absolute g per se but the rate you reach peak g force. Russian ejection seats in some aircraft hit a peak of (if memory serves) 22g but would often result in back injury, just like the Martin-Baker stuff used in the west. If you were in a centrifuge and were spun on your back (to simulate the towards-the-ass force of deployment) you wouldn't necessarily experience the same issues as someone who got to that level of force via a rocket. So if reserves were able to have a linear/gradual increase it might be ok, but that's going to eat altitude and negate the issue. I don't think that actually answered what you were asking though. cavete terrae.

I haven't met him personally but since I live in St Kilda I realllllly like the idea of someone that close I can drop my rig to when my Cypres gets here cavete terrae.

Hey Alex, When do you need to get it done, and where in Melbs are you? Matty Hylander is traveling until early Sept, he's near Tarneit or thereabouts if memory serves. The two others in the immediate area that I'm aware of area both traveling indefinitely as far as I'm aware. Nigel B from Skywerx was offering repacks in St Kilda though I'm not sure if that's still the case. I just messaged him not 20 minutes ago because I need a repack myself. cavete terrae.

Single Operation Systems cavete terrae.

have a link perchance? cavete terrae.

Interesting use of an emoticon. It makes it sound like you bought the tickets with a bad check. There's no emoticon for *nudge* so I could only wink to let him know to rig it for me Ah-hah, comprehension dawns! How's this?: Bought 5 http://www.survivingcollege.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/i-see-what-you-did-there.jpg cavete terrae.

Interesting use of an emoticon. It makes it sound like you bought the tickets with a bad check. There's no emoticon for *nudge* so I could only wink to let him know to rig it for me cavete terrae.

Bought 5 cavete terrae.

Well, they can… USPA dictates 16yo for tandems, but not every DZ is USPA-affiliated. Mike Mullins' kids start AFF at like 11 I think. Here in Australia, APF allows tandems as young as 12. cavete terrae.

It's interesting conceptually but why in the hell is the rego so expensive? That's more per day in rego than most boogies charge for the whole event. os it includes $1200 worth of jumps and 3 meals a day, plus all the other stuff, coaches entertainment etc. I'm not talking about the packs (which are 'ok' pricing at best), I'm talking about the daily rate of $60/day. That's hellacious. cavete terrae.

It's interesting conceptually but why in the hell is the rego so expensive? That's more per day in rego than most boogies charge for the whole event. cavete terrae.

Gonna throw this out there: rear riser knowledge saved me from a cutaway years ago. Had practiced rear riser landings at altitude a few times but not actually done one. One jump I had a brake line snap on opening. Said "hey, now's my chance", practiced a little more, and put it down in my normal spot for a smooth stand up landing. Fixed the brake line and… blew up the whole fucking canopy 5 jumps or so later cavete terrae.

Well, hang on here. If the canopy is spinning and diving in the line twists, I absolutely agree. Chop it, save yourself. However, if your canopy is flying straight and level (well, level being a relative term since it's descending, but you know what I mean), and you have a few twists, I think it's in your best interest to attempt to kick out of them before chopping. My reasoning is this: Your reserve will PROBABLY work. However, if you can SAFELY recover your main into a landable configuration, then you should consider an attempt to do so until your decision altitude to avoid having to find out. However, if there's any doubt, or if it's not stable, yes, it's time to get out. When I had my first chop, I had around 65-70 jumps and my canopy (loaded at 1.3 or so) had spun up into many line twists and went into a dive. I tried to kick out of 'em until 2,000', said to myself "hard deck is hard for a reason", and punched out. Given another few hundred feet of trying, I might have gotten out of them, but I wasn't willing to chase it down to find out. cavete terrae.

cavete terrae.

I completely understand what you're saying. Now take a look at the video again... this guy is leading a very nice tracking dive/angle flight while on his back, then at the end of the tracking dive, he flips to his belly with precision. You can CLEARLY see he is an experienced and capable skydiver if you understand what you're watching. This would then lead me to believe, which has also been confirmed by people who have been through this scenario, that getting stable after cutting away from a violently spinning canopy is actually quite difficult. Yes, it's true. This is why education on the matter is important. People keep killing themselves with shitty decisions, and the best way to avoid shitty decisions is by basing your decisions on better information. I'm completely against the "get stable and pull" argument and think it's a moronic train of thought. You'll lose MUCH less altitude kicking out of line twists under a reserve (if you even get them) than you will lose in freefall. We should take advantage of the fact that this guy got video of his bad decision (assuming that's what happened) and use it to demonstrate to people how that train of thought can go. cavete terrae.

I would try 'em if I saw 'em somewhere, but I don't know where I'd have to be to see such a thing. Didn't you go to school in Minnesota? The Minnesota State Fair invented that shit and took it to a whole new level. http://www.mnstatefair.org/find/food/ Search for the "on a stick" category and behold... State/local fairs I have been to: 0 That said, perhaps I've been remiss… cavete terrae.

I agree. However, education beats edict I would think, so why don't we use this video as a way to EDUCATE people who use the "get stable" mentality? cavete terrae.

I would try 'em if I saw 'em somewhere, but I don't know where I'd have to be to see such a thing. cavete terrae.

You don't think it's remotely cogent to the discussion that an experienced jumper turned a bad decision (chopping low and not immediately opening his reserve) into a near fatality because he didn't have the air skills to follow through on his decision? Plenty of people out there hurf and blurf about how they don't have an RSL because they need to get stable after a chop. If their freefall skills are so shitty that they need 10 seconds to get stable, they need to take that into consideration when planning out their decision altitudes. I'm hammering on this point for a reason, not just for fun. cavete terrae.