Re: [nicknitro71] Equipment simulation
No dude, it’s an entirely legitimate step in the process of learning to jump and freefall low objects.
Step 1: Static line or PCA

- if you are comfortable to have less canopy time, be open lower, have more variation in both, greater chance of an offheading and a risk of pilot chute hesitation, go to the next step.
Step 2: Freefall Assist

- if you are comfortable to have less canopy time, be open lower, have more variation in both, greater chance of an offheading and a higher risk of pilot chute hesitation, go to the next step.
Step 3: Handheld Freefall

- if you are comfortable to have less canopy time, be open lower, have more variation in both, greater chance of an offheading and a higher risk of pilot chute hesitation, go to the next step.
Step 4: Stowed Freefall



- scrutinize your reasoning well if you get to this step, the longer delay you take the less variation you can expect in canopy time, opening height, heading performance and pilot chute hesitation – BUT the smaller the window of opportunity becomes for PC location, pitch, canopy opening, canopy flight and landing. Freefall low enough and the normal variation in these processes can easily put you outside those windows of opportunity, which means if you keep doing this it’s really just a matter of time.
It nicely gives you a taste of what to expect going handheld with less risk.
AND it’s fun surprise for your friends on the right jumps!
And then there’s the times when your friends are too sketched by the height to go stowed, too sketched by the exit to go handheld, too sketched by the dish 60ft below to go PCA….
I wasn’t about to climb down 60ft and PCA him from the dish platform, so we agreed on a Freefall Assist and it all worked out nicely. I won’t name any names, but I will say that I saw him giving ‘the signal’ and screaming something that sounded like ‘derka derka’…..
come to think of it, I do recall laughing at him the whole way...