al05r

I don't particularly care about replacing them - it's normal for written words to be misinterpreted or misunderstood. In my experience the more you try to remove ambiguity from text, the more "legalese" that text becomes. So, instead of assuming another person has the same definition in mind for "hard deck" as I do, I think its more effective to use a few more words and point out the significance of the various altitudes and the actions/decisions associated with them. It takes but a few seconds, definitely less than looking up the definition in the SIM. Once the concepts are clear, the nomenclature (should) be easier to understand.

I also hate these terms.. even with consistent definitions, it's very easy for new jumpers to just flip the jargon around, and understand the wrong thing. I think this is one of those areas where the sport's military drilling style of training sometimes falls short. Whenever I get asked about "hard decks" or "decision altitudes", rather than just spit out numbers I just try to reply in complete sentences, eg I will deploy my main at minimum at X. If I find myself in freefall below that I will deploy my reserve directly. If a malfunction looks fixable I'll try until Y, but then chop immediately no matter if I've almost solved the problem. I will not cutaway a mal below Z, I'll either ride it in or deploy my reserve in addition to the main. It's good to think about these and choose your own altitudes, but also understand that depending on the day, place, and jump some may need to be adjusted.

holds for any container in general .. but... friends don't let friends overstuff WINGS!

I think the only way to really know is to jump those canopies for yourself - choose a day with moderate wind from a good direction for your DZ and ask your buddies if you can borrow their stuff. For what it's worth, my personal experience: Hurt myself on a canopy collapse on a SA2-97, upsized to a CF2-107 to come back, and then down to a JFX-87 once I was good and current again. My reason for going crossbraced was I wanted a design that kept more pressure in the wing, rather than to increase performance. So I first borrowed a VE-103 and VE-96 from friends for a few jumps, and then had the opportunity to demo VC-96, VC-90, VC-84 and also JFX-94 and JFX-84 at events. At my wingloading (just over 60kg exit weight), the openings were really uncomfortable on anything larger than a 90 - the 103 was just a shitshow. These things like to be loaded. Since you're already at 1.75 it probably won't be an issue for you - but may be part of the reason for the big jump to 1st crosbraced you see. I know .. i know .. body position .. fly the opening ... maybe! :) I repeat: this is just my personal experience, not intended as advice for anyone. But if you want to know what these things are like before you buy them.. fly them for yourself That said, be ready, engaged, and conservative on these jumps. People say crossbraced flies "bigger" - in my experience the VE-103 was definitely faster and more agile than my beat up SA2-97..

I don't really get the relevance of this to the thread, but please DON'T carry scissors in your jumpsuit, especially pointy ones :) ...and DO carry a hook knife on every jump

I have a Vector in "Triple Lightning Split" that's almost Identical to the one in this pic (from skyshop.eu) . As you can also see in the pic, the reserve and main flaps don't always perfectly line up. It only takes a few seconds to line them up though

i've got a V305-1 built in late 2019, with an OP113. Its already pretty tight, so I'd think the 126 is out of the question

If I remember correctly, Worldnomads changed the wording on their policy sometime in 2018. Someone mustve made a large claim. I have an annual IHI BUPA travel insurance, and an email confirming they do cover skydiving. Unfortunately they don't cover paragliding, but I guess thats not relevant here. Truetraveller are a bit more expensive, but seem to cover everything except BASE under their ultimate cover.

I guess the key words are "bartacked" and "dacron" though ... these lines are too thin for that.

Just to add for anyone looking at this in the future, the response from NZA was "Don't worry, it will not increase wear". Just being a bit too paranoid I guess...

Cool, thanks for the info

Hi all. So my rigger just installed a new Vectran 400 line set on my JFX87. Jumped it and all appears normal, however when packing I noticed the stitching on the cascades end about 1cm lower than the point where the cascade emerges from the "outer" line. Of course I brought it to his attention, and while he didn't have a particular reason for doing so, he also didn't think there is any issue with this method. I also showed it to the other rigger on the DZ, his preferred method is to finish the stitch right at the cascade mark. Again, he had no particular reason for doing so, other than copying what the manufacturer did. He also pointed out that he only has experience with PD linesets, and the method for NZA may well be different. Looking at some Youtube videos, I found other riggers claiming this can create friction and increased wear on the outer line due to friction. I'll give NZA a call tomorrow (Monday), but in the meantime I'm wondering what the riggers on here think. Is this a major issue that will significantly reduce the life of my lineset? Is the cure just putting another stitch on higher up, or would one need to unpick the existing ones first?

Wow the Insta 360 OneX looks good - have you experimented with mounting it somewhere other than the helmet or even sideways ? Including the mount it seems it gets rather tall...

Great! learnt something new, and will pass it on to those that taught me the trick! Thanks Blis, mxk!

re. jumping with t-shirts: if you have hip rings you can attach a tandem bungee on either side to hold your t-shirt down works a treat!