Skydiving and FAA regs

"good grief" wrote in message
...
"climbing" would be some sort of altitude violation (or at the very least a
violation of the laws of physics.) ;-)
Of course I could be wrong......

You are wrong (well, sort of). My gliding instructor was also an avid
skydiver. He took great delight in guiding his jump plane upwind of the
best thermals before he jumped so he could fly into them and circle within
them . He was able to greatly prolong his parachute "flights" and on
occasion, actually climb back up to cloudbase; just like he taught me to do
in the sailplane.

Vaughn

In article
,
"vaughn" wrote:

"good grief" wrote in message
...
"climbing" would be some sort of altitude violation (or at the very least a
violation of the laws of physics.) ;-)
Of course I could be wrong......

You are wrong (well, sort of). My gliding instructor was also an avid
skydiver. He took great delight in guiding his jump plane upwind of the
best thermals before he jumped so he could fly into them and circle within
them . He was able to greatly prolong his parachute "flights" and on
occasion, actually climb back up to cloudbase; just like he taught me to do
in the sailplane.

And there is of course an entire sport dedicated to this called
paragliding. I believe their parachutes are somewhat different, but that
just means it's harder to thermal a skydiving parachute, not impossible.


Climbing *before* you open the chute, on the other hand, is going to
require some pretty "interesting" conditions....

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Tue, 26 May 2009 10:53:34 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

And there is of course an entire sport dedicated to this called
paragliding. I believe their parachutes are somewhat different, but that
just means it's harder to thermal a skydiving parachute, not impossible.

Despite some similarities in appearance and construction, a paraglider
is COMPLETELY different from a skydiving parachute. A paraglider is a
wing (PG pilot's don't call them "parachutes"), designed solely for
gliding flight, and cannot be used for jumping (the shock of a free
fall opening would destroy it).

But yes, it's just [barely] possible to thermal a skydiving parachute.
And there are some horror stories of people who have bailed out into
thunderstorms and reached alarming altitudes...

-Dana
--
When you get it right
mighty beasts float up into the sky
When you get it wrong
people die

-Roger Bacon (c1384)

In article ,
Dana M. Hague wrote:

On Tue, 26 May 2009 10:53:34 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

And there is of course an entire sport dedicated to this called
paragliding. I believe their parachutes are somewhat different, but that
just means it's harder to thermal a skydiving parachute, not impossible.

Despite some similarities in appearance and construction, a paraglider
is COMPLETELY different from a skydiving parachute. A paraglider is a
wing (PG pilot's don't call them "parachutes"), designed solely for
gliding flight, and cannot be used for jumping (the shock of a free
fall opening would destroy it).

What do they think the "para" in "paragliding" comes from, then?

Good information about the opening shock. I had no idea about that.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On May 27, 9:22*am, Mike Ash wrote:
In article ,
*Dana M. Hague wrote:

On Tue, 26 May 2009 10:53:34 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

And there is of course an entire sport dedicated to this called
paragliding. I believe their parachutes are somewhat different, but that
just means it's harder to thermal a skydiving parachute, not impossible.

Despite some similarities in appearance and construction, a paraglider
is COMPLETELY different from a skydiving parachute. *A paraglider is a
wing (PG pilot's don't call them "parachutes"), designed solely for
gliding flight, and cannot be used for jumping (the shock of a free
fall opening would destroy it).

What do they think the "para" in "paragliding" comes from, then?

Good information about the opening shock. I had no idea about that.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Yep. One of the most realistic moments in the latest Star Trek film
was the ad hoc tandem jump of Kirk and Sulu. Upon deployment Kirk's
canopy is immediately ripped away. Although (IIRC) the film indicated
a riser-harness (french links! those *******s!) failure it is more
likely that a riser connection would fail or seams would rip leading
to a 'blown out' canopy. That's one of the reasons tandem jumps use
drogue chutes.

wrote:

Yep. One of the most realistic moments in the latest Star Trek film
was the ad hoc tandem jump of Kirk and Sulu. Upon deployment Kirk's
canopy is immediately ripped away. Although (IIRC) the film indicated
a riser-harness (french links! those *******s!) failure it is more
likely that a riser connection would fail or seams would rip leading
to a 'blown out' canopy. That's one of the reasons tandem jumps use
drogue chutes.


That "realistic" tandem jump was preceded by a jump from orbit.

On May 28, 7:06*am, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:
wrote:

Yep. *One of the most realistic moments in the latest Star Trek film
was the ad hoc tandem jump of Kirk and Sulu. *Upon deployment Kirk's
canopy is immediately ripped away. *Although (IIRC) the film indicated
a riser-harness (french links! those *******s!) failure it is more
likely that a riser connection would fail or seams would rip leading
to a 'blown out' canopy. *That's one of the reasons tandem jumps use
drogue chutes.

That "realistic" tandem jump was preceded by a jump from orbit.

Actually, if you paid attention to the dialog (albeit brief) the
mining platform was not 'in orbit' but was rather 'in hover'. Thus
the jump was not 'from orbit' and was not subject to re-entry
conditions. Instead it was more akin to Joe Kittinger's jump in 1960
from 102,000 feet in a balloon. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question...cs/q0243.shtml

In article ,
Dana M. Hague wrote:

On Tue, 26 May 2009 10:53:34 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

And there is of course an entire sport dedicated to this called
paragliding. I believe their parachutes are somewhat different, but that
just means it's harder to thermal a skydiving parachute, not impossible.

Despite some similarities in appearance and construction, a paraglider
is COMPLETELY different from a skydiving parachute. A paraglider is a
wing (PG pilot's don't call them "parachutes"), designed solely for
gliding flight, and cannot be used for jumping (the shock of a free
fall opening would destroy it).

But yes, it's just [barely] possible to thermal a skydiving parachute.
And there are some horror stories of people who have bailed out into
thunderstorms and reached alarming altitudes...

"The Man Who Rode the Thunder", Lt. Col. William Rankin, USMC, for one.

"climbing" would be some sort of altitude violation (or at the very least
a violation of the laws of physics.) ;-)
Of course I could be wrong......

You are wrong (well, sort of). My gliding instructor was also an avid
skydiver. He took great delight in guiding his jump plane upwind of the
best thermals before he jumped so he could fly into them and circle within
them . He was able to greatly prolong his parachute "flights" and on
occasion, actually climb back up to cloudbase; just like he taught me to
do in the sailplane.

Vaughn



I, also, am a skydiver and have taken advantage of thermals during the
canopy ride. I have only encountered "weak" thermals and have only been able
to maintain a given altitude for a short time. While I'm sure it's probable
that a skydiver under a canopy can gain altitude from thermals under "good"
conditions, the canopy (as Mike points out in the post below) is trimmed
quite differently from a paraglider or a powered parachute and is designed
to descend. In my experience, the thermals I have encountered (mostly from
paved parts of the airfield) in Florida are somewhat turbulent. This can be
fun or not depending on the jumper's experience! Sometimes a jumper under a
lightly loaded canopy (usually a student or low-timer) can experience a
little rocking and rolling in thermals or other turbulence that can be a
little disconcerting while he's looking up at the canopy and watching it
flap and breathe and bump. Another thought -- Thermals generated by the sun
beating down on airport pavement are usually blown downwind of the landing
zone at canopy-flying altitudes but ideally the skydiver hangs out upwind of
the LZ before entering the landing pattern. The "going back up" I was
referring to was while in the freefall phase of the skydive but, after
giving it a little more thought, a freefalling skydiver really CAN go up
relative to other freefallers, especially the more massive ones. I usually
have to wear 10 - 15 lbs of lead to keep up with some of the more
"aggressive fallers". (Makes the canopy a little more fun, too!)

tp