When Can I Do That Thing I Want To Do?

13 minutes ago, nwt said:

I don't know, I'm just starting to learn it myself.

e: I'll add that I'm on a Katana.

I’d rather see someone’s piloting progression improve on a specific low performance canopy w/ a WL of 1 (Let’s use a Sabre as an example). After they can consistently land that canopy within seven feet of a target area, (and preferably have done some proximity flying) and have demonstrated basic high performance landing techniques and everyone agrees they are ready to move to a higher performance canopy, stay on a WL of 1 and move to a Katana.

It’s MUCH safer to do that then go from a Sabre w/ a WL of 1 to a Katana w/ a WL of 1.3 and THEN learn basic high performance landing techniques. Everything is basically the same, but, it just happens faster with a higher WL.

14 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

I’d rather see someone’s piloting progression improve on a specific low performance canopy w/ a WL of 1 (Let’s use a Sabre as an example). After they can consistently land that canopy within seven feet of a target area, (and preferably have done some proximity flying) and have demonstrated basic high performance landing techniques and everyone agrees they are ready to move to a higher performance canopy, stay on a WL of 1 and move to a Katana.

It’s MUCH safer to do that then go from a Sabre w/ a WL of 1 to a Katana w/ a WL of 1.3 and THEN learn basic high performance landing techniques. Everything is basically the same, but, it just happens faster with a higher WL.

I'm just giving you the feedback on your video that you asked for. Like I said, I'm just learning high performance landings myself and I can't really discuss nuanced differences in teaching practices.

I am curious though how you would find Katanas that most of your students can load at 1.0, as they only go up to 170.

5 hours ago, nwt said:

I'm just giving you the feedback on your video that you asked for. Like I said, I'm just learning high performance landings myself and I can't really discuss nuanced differences in teaching practices.

I am curious though how you would find Katanas that most of your students can load at 1.0, as they only go up to 170.

Yes, I appreciate the feedback! Sabre @ WL of 1 -> Katana @ WL of 1 was an example  that wasn’t using exact numbers, but was directionally correct.

I’d rather see someone with an exit weight of 190 consistently land within seven feet of a target center and then become proficient at  proximity flying and then learn basic high performance landing techniques on a Sabre 190 and THEN move to a Katana 170 instead of someone on a Sabre 190 not be able to consistently land within seven feet of a target center move to a Sabre 170 and still not be able to consistently land within seven feet of a target center and not do any proximity flying and not learn any basic high performance landing techniques then downsize to a Sabre 150 and still not get the basics down and then go to a Katana 150 and THEN start learning high performance landing techniques.

Frankly, best case example scenario is someone with an exit weight of 190 and ~200 jumps can begin to learn basic high performance landing techniques on a Sabre 190 and after 400+ jumps begin to learn some advanced high performance landing techniques on that same Sabre 190 and get over 500+ jumps before moving to a Katana 170. (Those jump numbers are guidelines as some people will pick up on it faster and some slower [or never]).

Of course, nothing is set in stone or linear. I’ve noticed people who do CRW are almost ALWAYS better/safer canopy pilots after 10-20 CRW jumps and can move to a Lightning @ 1.3 pretty quickly and could probably safely move to a Katana @ 1.2+ much sooner than someone with zero CRW experience.

Also, WL is not exactly linear either. A 170 @1.1 WL is not the same as a 135 @1.1 WL.

Here’s a great article that may help: https://uspa.org/Portals/0/files/misc_downsizechecklist.pdf

On 5/22/2021 at 10:18 PM, faulknerwn said:

That video is definitely long and I couldn't sit through it.  But as in most disciplines in skydiving - are you doing a solo angle jump or a 10way?  Are you trying to do CRW with your 50 jump buddy or the guy with 5000 CRW jumps?  Are you trying to sitfly with 4 friends when none of you can keep it for a whole skydive?  

So much depends on the experience of everyone involved.  I have done a ton of CRW jumps with people who had less than 50 jumps but they were simple 2 ways with me who has world records in the discipline.  Them doing a 2-way with another 50 jump wonder would be a completely different thing.

Trying to sitfly with your friend who also has 50 jumps is a completely different beast than doing a sitfly with someone who has a thousand freefly jumps..

 

 

@faulknerwn and/or @wmw999 What’s your recommended progression path for someone wanting to get into CRW? I looked at the threads in CRW Forum, but, they are a little old. What canopy do you start with and what WL? When do you move them to a WL of 1.3?

Let’s say they show up to their FJC and the AFFI says, “Why are you here?” And the student says, “I saw a video of people doing canopy formations and I want to do that.”

What would you tell them to expect to do from jump zero all the way to being able to be on some CRW Big Ways (9-way diamonds+).

12 hours ago, BMAC615 said:

Yes, I appreciate the feedback! Sabre @ WL of 1 -> Katana @ WL of 1 was an example  that wasn’t using exact numbers, but was directionally correct.

I’d rather see someone with an exit weight of 190 consistently land within seven feet of a target center and then become proficient at  proximity flying and then learn basic high performance landing techniques on a Sabre 190 and THEN move to a Katana 170 instead of someone on a Sabre 190 not be able to consistently land within seven feet of a target center move to a Sabre 170 and still not be able to consistently land within seven feet of a target center and not do any proximity flying and not learn any basic high performance landing techniques then downsize to a Sabre 150 and still not get the basics down and then go to a Katana 150 and THEN start learning high performance landing techniques.

Yeah, that makes sense. I think a lot of people start high performance landings on a Sabre2 at first and that seems completely reasonable and accepted. Though, it *might* be a bad idea though to start swooping on something less or much less performant than a Sabre2 and that's what I was getting at in response to your video. Mostly because of the shorter recovery arc, but like I said, I'm just starting to dabble in this.

49 minutes ago, nwt said:

Yeah, that makes sense. I think a lot of people start high performance landings on a Sabre2 at first and that seems completely reasonable and accepted. Though, it *might* be a bad idea though to start swooping on something less or much less performant than a Sabre2 and that's what I was getting at in response to your video. Mostly because of the shorter recovery arc, but like I said, I'm just starting to dabble in this.

I wouldn’t mind seeing someone begin doing proximity flying and straight in front riser approaches and even 60-90* carving front riser turns to fronts on a Silhouette or Pulse @ a WL of 1 before moving to a Sabre @ 1.

4 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

I wouldn’t mind seeing someone begin doing proximity flying and straight in front riser approaches and even 60-90* carving front riser turns to fronts on a Silhouette or Pulse @ a WL of 1 before moving to a Sabre @ 1.

Well, maybe you're right. I honestly have no idea.

2 minutes ago, nwt said:

Well, maybe you're right. I honestly have no idea.

And, maybe you’re right. I’ve been wrong in the past and I’ll be wrong in the future, so, the chances of my being wrong right now is pretty high.

39 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

I wouldn’t mind seeing someone begin doing proximity flying and straight in front riser approaches and even 60-90* carving front riser turns to fronts on a Silhouette or Pulse @ a WL of 1 before moving to a Sabre @ 1.

I don't know if you've seen this:

2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

I don't know if you've seen this:

 

Yes, I referenced it in post #28 as an article in Parachutist. Thanks!

I decided to change a little bit of the audio related to Angle Jumps to better clarify an appropriate progression: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4ZqKeQDnSg

Okay, cool - that’s right in line what my thinking. I just needed a little confirmation bias :)