This Site Is For Sale
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'training'.
Found 4 results
-
Here is an in-depth review of Brian Germain's online coaching service for skydivers (both beginners and advanced), which I've been a member of for a year. I'm not getting any commission for this, and no one asked me to write it. The Network is nothing like I thought it would be, and I wish a review like this was available when I first heard of it. I would have joined much earlier! Hopefully this helps others make a more informed decision. Questions, feedback, and grammar police welcome! Happy to add and clarify things. Warning: it's *very* in depth :-). Maybe read the first two sections and then skim all the headings to see what details you're interested in. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vSf8548z4FrC7PJ5dKoXbRpdYz9CwWq8WywXRvBHRT4T2sUN3appsa7FSQJMNSfnXjxqOLZAsOk6kzj/pub
-
I've been thinking about this for a while, and have talked about it a bit with some people deeply involved with developing current training methods in the US, but thought I'd feel out here, if people think I'm off with this: Clearly, learning to fall properly, when a landing does not go quite right, is an essential safety skill, and it has been my saving grace many times, especially on my first 100 jumps or so, but I feel like the current teachings around this topic may not quite be up to date with the reality of our sport. Like everyone else, I learned the good old PLF. And--I think also like everyone else--I tried to apply it in the real world, but if I am honest, in reality have practiced something that really wasn't quite what we learned. Don't get me wrong: There are some crucial aspects of the PLF (such as rolling over the side and distributing the impact over as wide of an area of the body as possible, at the same time protecting the most vulnerable parts of the body) that absolutely apply now just as much as in the past, but: If you look at any depiction of the exact technique of the PLF, it becomes clear that the technique was designed for absorbing high vertical speed with almost negligible horizontal speed, and minimizing the impact on crucial body systems in such a scenario. This is of course exactly what one would have experienced during a landing with a round parachute at the time when this method was developed (and still now, as a paratrooper jumping similar systems) However: This is generally NOT the situation during a (potentially) hard landing, using modern sports parachutes. In these situations, you are generally encountering fast horizontal speeds and varying vertical speeds, with a tremendous variety of exact scenarios. While again, something LIKE a PLF, or some principles of the PLF, still apply, I have noticed that many jumpers intuitively (or through experience) know that this does not work completely, and then design their own system (consciously or not) to deal with the reality of the situation. This can vary from from something like a rolling judo fall to "just slide it in"--and there is really no consistent system that gets trained that is fully applicable, since instructors and coaches simply have to train the "PLF", even though they would have to admit that they do not quite use it in the way it is described--if they were honest. (And clearly some solutions are better here than others.) On the other hand, there are so many techniques from martial arts and especially parkour that may actually apply more here and could be trained if someone dared to update our current methods. What do people with more experience think? Am I off about this? Can this "sacred cow" actually be updated? Does your own method of avoiding injury during (semi-) hard landings actually resemble the original PLF? Do you think it's good enough to continue teaching the PLF as a general system and trust that everyone will modify it to the actual situation they are in? If you think a PLF does not apply exactly as taught, what changes would you suggest? Should this go under the safety forum? (I feel the forums, other than "Speakers Corner" are so underused these days that I am hoping to post this somewhere, where it's at least got a semi-decent chance of attracting some eyeballs and responses--but feel free to move it, moderators, if you think that's more appropriate)
-
I live in New Hampshire and while there are plenty of places within a few hours I can get my A license at, the weather seems to make getting more than a single jump every week or two pretty challenging. It's been three weeks since FJC and my home DZ has had precisely one student get their first jump in (lucky me... my daughter slept in that day and is still waiting for her level one). I'm willing to take time off work to travel and try to get a bunch of jumps in. I'd like to get my A license as quickly as possible. Knowing I'm coming from the east coast USA, where would you recommend I go that has quality instruction and a good combination of aircraft and weather to achieve that goal? International travel is out. US travel is in... I'm going to be as far west as Arizona in November and could see adding to that trip.
-
untilAaron Stocum will be teaching Flight-1 201 & 101 canopy courses at Cleveland Skydiving Center on the 13th & 14th of July 2019.Module 200 provides a safe environment for skydivers wanting to progress their canopy skills to the next level in the area of high performance landings.**REQUIREMENT TO TAKE FLIGHT 201: Minimum of 200 jumps**We also highly recommend to have completed & attended Flight 101 and 102.Module 100 provides the cornerstone for safety & survival skills under canopy. Throughout this module you will learn the essential skills required for consistently accurate landings, various control inputs, how to deal with emergency situations and effectively managing air traffic.Flight 201 - Saturday 13 JulyFlight 101 - Sunday 14 JulyCost per course is $150 plus 5 hop n pops.To join, sign up here:201 - https://flight-1.com/sport/certification/courses/view/3586101 - https://flight-1.com/sport/certification/courses/view/3587
