When to Quit

Every new hobby or job starts out fun. Then it gets harder until it hits a low and then really hard. You find yourself asking if it’s still worth the hassle. Maybe your in a setback that will improve if you keep going. But maybe it will never get better no matter how hard you try.

Quitting is not the Same as Failing

Quitting is a decision you make based on the choices that are available to you. If you realize you’re not going anywhere then quitting is not only a reasonable choice, it’s a smart one.

Failing, on the other hand, means your dream is over. Failing happens when you give up or when there are no other options. It’s easy to wring your hands of becoming a failure. Quitting smart is a good way to avoid failing.

Most People are Afraid to Quit

It’s easier to be mediocre than it is to confront reality and quit. Quitting is difficult.

“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect”-MARK TWAIN

A biological virus, by definition is simply a string of DNA or RNA surrounded by either a layer of lipid (fat) or protein.

The virus doesn’t really exhibit any signs of “life” until it attaches itself to a host cell.

Once attached, it replaces part of the host cell’s DNA with its own. The host stops what it was doing before and now has a new mission: make more viruses.

These fledgling viruses now float around until they attach to other cells and the process continues.

It’s a pretty scary thought when you think about it. A virus uses your own body against you in order to spread itself!

In the simplest sense, a virus is composed of two things:

1) A Program. The instructions are always “spread the virus”

2) A Delivery Mechanism. Sometimes they are delivered through the air (cough or sneeze). Sometimes they pass through simple skin to skin contact. Sometimes it requires an actual transmission of bodily fluids (you know who you are!)

Word of Mouth operates by essentially the same elements.

1) A Program. The program is simply the same, “spread the virus”. Word of mouth is happening all the time whether you like it or not, whether the message is good or bad.

2) A Delivery Mechanism. In the form of word of mouth, the delivery system is, well, words from your mouth.

How many times have you heard about something like a You Tube video going viral?

Language is a Virus

Dunbar’s number is a theoretical cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. These are relationships in which an individual knows who each person is, and how each person relates to every other person.

Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally require more restricted rules, laws, and enforced norms to maintain a stable, cohesive group. No precise value has been proposed for Dunbar’s number, but a commonly cited approximation is 150.

Dunbar’s number was first proposed by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, who theorized that “this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size … the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained.

How many Facebook or Myspace friends do you have?

How many Twitter followers do you keep up with?

If you have more than 150 friends then keeping up with them is probably starting to feel like a job!

As a marketing consultant I have helped my clients use color to both promote and sell their products. The astonishing power of color is evident everywhere. Colors are used to sell us on everything from clothing to light bulbs and much more. Marketing companies have spent millions of dollars over the past several decades researching how color is used to influence people’s perceptions, ideas & habits.

Fortune 500 companies have used this data to promote and sell products in every category imaginable including furniture, automobiles, beverages, sporting goods, foods and toys.

Throughout history certain groups of people have used color as a kind of personal “brand identification”. In current times, we use color brand identification to display our affiliations.

Universities alumni sport bright colored sweaters. On field trips school kids wear the same color T-shirt. Johnny cash wore all black and Michael Jackson wore a white glove!

If you understand colors and how they are used to effect people you will be able to determine the individual color preferences of anyone with whom you will be interacting. Whether its for business or pleasure you should be able to select the most effective colors for any item or occasion. We are going to briefly cover how colors can be used to influence what people buy, and how you can use colors to sell anything to anyone!

QUICK, what colors come to your mind first when we say:

~Tide laundry detergent

~Coke

~ Wrigley gum

Did you answer orange, Red & green? Congratulations! You are a typical consumer. Lets look at the most popular colors and how these colors effect us.

RED: Of all the colors red causes the most active responses. Red was the first color after white and black to be given a name. Red is the most important warm color which stirs strong emotions. Red is a color we associate with both love and anger! Red is a strong powerful color that shoots out at us.

ORANGE: Orange like red is a warm color which causes increased heart rate and pulse. Orange demands our attention which is one of the reasons its used by construction workers, hunters and worn in school cross walks. When we think of orange we think of cheerful, refreshing and sunny but we also think of it as cheap. Consumers have come to associate orange with low cost with many companies including Home Depot.

YELLOW: Yellow alerts us and catches our attention because yellow is the most reflective. It is the first color we see. Black and yellow together suggest danger. Marketing and advertisers know that black type on yellow paper is the easiest on the eyes. Just think about the yellow pages. Yellow is perceived as upbeat, lively and cheerful.

GREEN: Green can send a variety of different signals and emotions. When we add more yellow to green it gets more exciting than before. When we add more blue to green it becomes more calming. In more darker shades it is associated with reliability and durability. If we add too much yellow to green it looks out of ordinary which could set off a negative response.

BLUE: Blue is the most popular of all colors in America. Blue can be both calming and soothing giving us a sense of well being. It is linked with loyalty, reliability and honor. Blue is literally a “cool” color that seems to recede from us, rather than advance toward us like red. Darker blues are considered businesslike, dependable and professional. Blue is passive and can sometimes be perceived as boring or depressing.

WHITE: White is associated with innocence, purity, cleanliness and virginity. We view white as classic, timeless and subtle. However, white has also been associated with white lies and surrender.

BLACK: Black is associated with sophistication, elegance and sex. Black is the color of night, death, black magic, illegality and rejection. Black can also be associated with fear, anger and depression. You can find nearly any item in black these days which hints of strength, power and sophistication.

YOUTHFUL COLORS: Red, yellow and green

PROFESSIONAL/BUSINESS COLORS: Dark grey, black & dark blue.

DURABLE/STURDY COLORS: Dark browns and black.

USE RED: when you want to grab attention or communicate something emphatically. Use it to stimulate people and have them perceive you as powerful. Be careful not to use too much red as it can be exhausting and distracting.

USE PINK: When you want to signal warmth delicacy and femininity.

USE ORANGE: Use orange when you want to grab attention or convey creativity and signal “low cost”. Too much orange can be harsh, jarring and exhausting.

USE BLUE: Use blue when you want to be relaxed and calm, or when you want to play it safe. Blue is a conservative color, signaling value and reliability.

USE BLACK: Use black to suggest power, dominance, elegance and sophistication. You can use it to signal strength.

USE GREY: Use grey to appear conservative, businesslike and smart.

USE WHITE: Use white when you want to signal simplicity, purity and cleanliness. Keep in mind that in some situations white can mean something cold, artificial, plain or cheap.

What are the Favorite Colors of American Consumers?

1. Blue
2. Red
3. Green
4. White
5. Pink
6. Purple
7. Orange
8. Yellow

This post is only a brief introduction to colors and their use in the marketplace. If you are in marketing, advertising, sales or design you should take the time to research colors more in depth so you can use colors as a tool to establish a competitive edge in the marketplace.

There is a vast amount of information on the internet about colors and their use in the marketplace. Start with a simple google search or head down to your local library to learn more about the astonishing power of color.

In fact, the cost of online storage is so cheap it’s creating a new economy based off FREE! We are not talking about the old school “free prize inside” tricks of the 20th century but truely free. Just look at Google which gives away nearly everything it makes which simplifies our lives including gmail, documents, anaylitics, calendars, readers, video players & much more.

Online games like “second life” our wildly popular and they are selling virtual online “property” to players who pay monthly fees to keep their stake on the web. This is not monopoly money. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in real currency to purchase all sorts of things made of “bits” in the online world.

In the “offline” world real estate agents sell property that is valued based on location, traffic, surroundings, future development & more. Buyers choose to buy property with or without a building on it.

The “online” world is not much different than it’s offline counterparts and depending on the property it can be just as expensive! A web domain is the property in the online world and the URL is the address to that property. A web domain without a website is like property without a house.

Properties that have houses built on them are more expensive depending on how well they are built and their size. Developers in the offline world search for land to develop all sorts of buildings including houses, apartments or commercial buildings and web developers in the online world do the same.

The business of “flipping” properties online has become as popular (and finacially rewarding) as it is in the offline world. Websites like “Flippa.com” allow web developers to build or remodel an online property with the intention of “flipping” it for profit at auction.

So if you haven’t yet staked out your own piece of the online world yet then maybe you should consider talking with a web broker like New Step Marketing™. The right agency can have you sipping drinks on the beach of your own virtual property before all the dot coms run out.

Marketing is not selling.

Conventional marketing is based on selling when it should be based on branding.

Marketing is building a brand in the mind of the prospect. If you can build a powerful brand, you will have a powerful marketing program. If you can’t, then all the advertising, fancy packaging, sales promotion, web designs, and public relations in the world won’t help you achieve your objective.

Marketing is brand building. The two concepts are so inextricably linked that it’s impossible to separate them. Furthermore, since everything a company does can contribute to the brand-building process, marketing is not a function that can be considered in isolation.

Marketing is what a company is in business to do. Marketing is a company’s ultimate objective. Thats why everyone in a corporation should be concerned with marketing, and specifically, with the laws of branding. If the entire company is the marketing department, then the entire company is the branding department.

As illogical as it might seem, we can visualize a time when the marketing concept itself will become obsolete, to be replaced by a new concept called “branding”. From a business point of view, branding in the marketplace is very similar to branding on a ranch. A branding program should be designed to differentiate your product from all the other cattle on the range.

If you haven’t already you should consider building yourself a survival (emergency) kit. If your smart you will build yourself a survival kit for both your home and another you can take with you on foot. There are a variety of places that sell pre-packaged survival kits for emergency preparedness but its better if you build one from scratch. No emergency kit will fit everyone’s needs since most of us live in different areas with different climates.

If you live in a desert region you will need to have more water, sunscreen and shade. If you live up in the mountains or in a cold region you will need to focus on more clothing. Start storing foods like can goods, dehydrated fruits and dry foods but remember that if you have to move out on foot can goods are heavy! More consideration has to be put into your smaller traveling pack since you will probably end up carrying it most of the time.

I recommend you stay up to date at the survivalblog.com for the most news and up to date info on emergency readiness.  James Wesley, Rawles runs the survival blog and has written several popular books on the topic including my favorite “Patriots, survival in the coming collapse”. Expect the unexpected so you don’t get caught by surprise with the masses!

THE PAST

The sport has come a long way from T-10 rounds and the Para-Commanders of yesteryear. It wasn’t long after the development of the first ram-air parachute that high performance canopies were created. In 1988 Parachutes De France™ created one of the first high performance parachutes called the “Bluetrac”.It was a one of a kind elliptical ram-air parachute constructed of the first zero-permeability fabric that promised a new type of performance. This paved the way for an extreme form of parachuting called “swooping” and the sport has never been the same.

That same year parachutes took a giant leap forward when Performance Designs™ invented the “tri-cell” (cross braced) structure on the “Excalibur”. Even though the Excalibur was made of F111 and had an open nose it was a step in the right direction. The tri-cell configuration divides each cell of a parachute into three chambers which gives the canopy added rigidity and less drag. Many years later a parachute company called New Zealand Aerosports™ developed a ‘closed nose configuration’ for their own tri-cell canopy called the “Mach 1 Extreme”.

The much needed closed nose configuration helped slow down the deployment process and control the openings on this new breed of parachutes. This paved the way for more variations of tri-cell parachutes and in 1996 swoopers started organizing swoop competitions down mountains (called Bladerunning™) and on ponds (called pond swooping). Then in 2003 the Pro Swooping Tour™ presented the competition format to the International Parachuting Commission and the sport of “canopy piloting” was born. Swoop competitions push the evolution of parachutes as swoopers continue to search for the endless swoop.

In early 2000 the Icarus 46 project proved what many already knew, drag played a huge and significant role on smaller parachutes. During the VX46 project a ‘direct deployment’ method was used to remove the deployment bag, bridle and pilot chute which helped reduced drag and create a smoother flight. The positive effects of the direct deployment method on the VX46 lead to other developments. In 2001 Team Extreme experimented with using disposable deployment systems that were made of cheap material that after deployment simply floated away. This worked great for competition but it wasn’t very environmentally friendly. Around that same time Ian Bobo from Performance Designs created the RDS™ (Removable Deployable System).

Over the past decade designers have experimented with things like ram-air stabilizers, 11 cell (33 chamber) airfoils, fully elliptical canopies, new line configurations and more. Pilots even used slightly longer lines (or longer risers) to help keep their canopies diving longer which added even more flight performance. Then sometime between 2002-2003 a group of competition pilots (factory pilots) started thinking ‘differently’ than everyone else.

In the past, swoopers increased the performance of their parachute by simply downsizing which increased their wing loading and reduced drag. But the new idea was to fly slightly larger wings and add more thrust by wearing more weight. A radical new pattern emerged in canopy piloting and pilots started upsizing their parachutes while adding additional weight to reach their parachute’s optimal wing loading. The positive results were immediate and obvious.

Here is an example of how it works.

A swooper has two canopies that are exactly the same except one of them is a 60 sqft and the other is 90 sqft. The swooper is flying them both at the optimal wing loading of lets say 2.4 (optimal loading is different on most canopies) so both of these canopies have the same thrust potential. It then becomes a decision between which one is going to have more performance? The canopy with less surface area and less drag or the canopy with more surface area and more drag? Parachute wings, like the wings of an aircraft, are designed so air flows faster over the top than the bottom so as the “velocity” of air increases the pressure decreases and the wing produces ‘lift’ in the form of low pressure over the wing.

The 60 sqft canopy has just 60 sqft of surface area (lifting area) for low pressure over the wing and the 90 sqft canopy has 90 sqft of surface area over the wing. Parachutes with more surface area over the wing can carry more low pressure and thus more lift as long as they can generate the required thrust. The major drawback to the larger wing is the additional drag but in our scenario the drag of the 90 sqft wing doesn’t outweigh the advantages of all the additional lift.

So if both canopies were flown the same way, at the same loading and in the same conditions the 90 sqft parachute could swoop further than the 60 sqft. Smaller parachutes may come in faster but they can decelerate fast too! The was never more obvious than with the Icarus VX46 project and later with the VX39. These canopies were ballistic because they were flown at a very high wing loading and they had little drag. However, the wing couldn’t carry much low pressure (lift) over the wing so it would slow down fast during the swoop. Having a lot of speed is important but maintaining that speed is crucial for a long swoop. So as fate would have it the new trend emerged and pilots began upsizing while wearing weight to reach the podium.

This trend peaked around the time of the 2nd World Cup of Canopy Piloting in 2004 where several crashes occurred from pilots who struggled to stay in the course while wearing too much weight. On lookers got to see pilots strapping on more and more weight between rounds trying to increase performance. It got so bad that some pilots needed assistance strapping on the extra weight and making it out to the loading area. Some competitors were wearing as much as 60-70lbs of additional weight! It quickly became a dangerous game to see who could wear the most weight and stay in the course. It set our sport back years.

Due to safety issues canopy piloting had to be course corrected with the introduction of weight control rules. This is just one example of how canopy pilots have tried to squeeze more performance out their canopies in the absence of something better. There has been no major updates to the modern cross braced canopy for almost two decades. The basic tri-cell structure that Performance Designs™ created in 1988 is still the dominate platform used today. It is the same tri-cell configuration used on every cross braced canopy today.

In 1995 New Zealand Aerosports™ created the “Mach 1 Extreme” which was a seven cell ZP elliptical cross braced canopy with the new closed nose configuration. In 1997 they created Icarus canopies and upgraded the Mach 1 to the ‘FX Extreme”. Then in 1999 Icarus canopies added a nine cell version to the line up called the “VX”. In that same year Performance Designs™ came out with their own version called the “Velocity”. Several years later Precision Aerodynamics moved into the market with versions called the “XAOS”. Then in 2004 New Zealand Aerosports™ created Daedalus canopies™ and released a new improved version of their nine cell called the “JVX”.

The JVX had a new trim, new nose design and no stabilizers. Around the same time Daedalus canopies started creating parachutes specifically for ground launching using sail cloth. Sail cloth is thicker and more rigid material than ZP giving parachutes more ‘memory’ and rigidity than its ZP counterparts. Through testing it became apparent there were significant advantages to using sail cloth so the company began testing it on its JVX. The JVX made of sail material retained its shape better for longer periods of time and had less top skin distortion. Due to the canopy’s added rigidity it’s pilots could downsize without adding weight but still gain performance. Even though the JVX still uses the tri-cell structure it gives us a glimpse into what our future might look like if new technology was created to replace the current cell structure.

For parachute technology to make another big advancement like the one we made with tri-bracing there must be change in the market place. Significant time and money needs to be spent to create new technology that could replace the current cell structure used on high performance parachutes today. Any new technology would need to make our wings more rigid than those using the tri-cell structure. New technology could allow pilots to move in a new direction and fly smaller, more rigid wings that could create less drag while boosting performance. This is exactly what happened in the hand gliding community.

Previous Hang glider competitors used larger wings and wore extra ballast (weight) to increase their wing loading until that trend got replaced by new technology that allowed for smaller, more efficient gliders to dominate. Advanced composites and other materials made better more rigid gliders that created less drag while added performance. These new technologies allowed Hang glider pilots to fly gliders that were 30-40sqft smaller than before.

The evolution in high performance parachute design is driven by demand in the market. Unfortunately, canopy piloting is one of the smallest disciplines in the sport of skydiving. Even with canopy piloting’s recent popularity the market is still small. If there were as many swoopers as there are RW skydivers in the world we would no doubt be flying canopies we couldn’t imagine today.

So how far have we come?

TIMELINE

1988-Parachutes De France™ releases the “Bluetrac” which was constructed of the first zero-permeability fabric which promised a new type of performance.

1988-Performance Designs™ releases the “Excalibur” which marked the birth of cross braced technology. The Excalibur was made of F111, non elliptical & had an open nose.

1993-Performance Designs™ releases the “Stiletto”. One of the most popular non cross braced swooping canopies of all time.

1995-New Zealand Aerosports™ releases the “Mach 1 Extreme”. The first seven cell high performance elliptical crossed braced canopy made of ZP utilizing a closed nose.

1997-New Zealand Aerosports™ forms Icarus canopies™ and releases the “FX Extreme”. A new improved seven cell elliptical tri-cell made of ZP with a closed nose.

1999-Icarus canopies™ releases the “VX Extreme”. The first nine cell elliptical tri-cell made of ZP with a closed nose.

1999-Performance Designs™ releases the “Velocity”. PDs first high performance seven cell elliptical cross braced canopy made of ZP with a closed nose.

2002-Precision Aerodynamics™ releases the “XAOS”. Both seven & nine cell versions of an elliptical tri-cell made of ZP with a closed nose.

2002-Ian Bobo with Performance Designs™ creates the “RDS” (Removable Deployable System™).

2004-New Zealand Aerosports™ forms Daedalus canopies™ and releases the “JVX”. An improved nine cell with new trim, new nose section, no stabilizers & sail material.

It took a while for cross braced canopies to catch on because they packed much larger, had radical openings and cost more. High performance parachutes have high performance openings and the new breed of parachutes had more performance then ever before. Just imagine your a skydiver in 1997 and your accustomed to packing a non cross braced parachute like a Stiletto and suddenly the next best thing at your DZ packs twice as large, its more ground hungry and has radical openings!

Cross braced canopies were dismissed at first but before long they were swooping in at the DZ catching everyones attention. Some skydivers even had to purchase larger rigs to fit their new cross braced parachute. Eventually these canopies caught on as skydivers learned to pack these bulky canopies and deal with the wild openings. Fast forward a few decades and we could be facing some of the same challenges today.

THE FUTURE

“Z Bracing” technology has been paraded as the next big thing but I am not completely convinced. Z bracing replaces the tri-cell structure by dividing each cell into five chambers instead of three. This means that Z braced canopies will pack even larger than their tri-cell counterparts. Z braced canopies will pack considerably larger even if they are built with a low pack volume material. I have been testing the so called “Z brace” technology for over five years now and unless the market can find a better solution we are looking at a future where canopy pilots will be wearing large CRW like rigs to hold our small but thick wings.

Personally, if I were still competing today, I would want the most rigid wing possible regardless of the pack volume. With current technology and materials it would be a Z braced canopy (JSX) made of all sail material. I have an 83 Z braced canopy made of ZP and it packs like a 150+ conventional parachute. If this canopy was made with a thicker material (sail) it would most likely pack as big as 170 or 190! Hopefully new technology will emerge but I’m afraid it will still be bulky. Maybe its not that big of deal for most of us but it begs the question, what are swoopers really willing to deal with to advance the sport of canopy piloting?

It would take a considerable amount of time & money to come up with new designs to replace what we have today. Just consider for a moment how long the tri-cell structure was around before it was widely used? Just consider how long Z braced canopies have been teated (5+ years) already. Most of the advancements in high performance canopies have come from a friendly rivalry between parachute companies, factory teams and the pride of the designers themselves. Here are some examples.

PD created the tri-cell structure but it was New Zealand Aerosports™ that used the closed nose configuration to help the openings. PD made the decision to stay with a seven cell platform while New Zealand Aerosports™ (Icarus canopies) moved on to the nine cell platform. This has created the debate “which is better a seven cell or nine cell?” Whether its about pride or money when companies compete against each other consumers win and it helps our sport evolve. However, when one company dominates the market they are not motivated to innovate and push the evolution of the high performance parachute.

This lack of motivation slows down new developments or worse it stops development all together. Just think about it, why would a company spend more time and money on R&D to create a replacement for an existing canopy if they are dominating the market by using another method? The short answer, they wouldn’t. The company would ride out the existing design as long as they could and squeeze every dime out of the market. To motivate innovation there needs to be something or someone to come along and challenge their position forcing them to respond.

A good example of this is the friendly rivalry between Performance Designs™ and Icarus canopies™. In 1997 Icarus canopies built the “FX Extreme” which was one of the first high performance cross braced canopies that used PD’s tri-cell technology. This no doubt motivated PD in developing the Velocity that was released in 1999. This in turn motivated Icarus canopies to release a new nine cell version the same year called the “VX”. Then in 2000 Icarus canopies created ‘Team Extreme’ to help promote and demonstrate the potential of the VX.

Even though the VX and Velocity came out the same year Icarus had something that PD did not, a factory team. Similar to building a NASCAR team Icarus canopies hand selected the right guys at the right time and communicated with action instead of words. Team Extreme was nearly unstoppable while traveling the globe attending competition after competition. As a result many people bought the VX, which unlike today, created a field of competitors that was close to a 50/50 split between the VX and Velocity.

You could not open a skydiving magazine anywhere in the world without reading about the adventures of Team Extreme. It was a powerful marketing tool that motivated Performance Designs™ to form their own marketing vehicle called the “Performance Designs Factory Team”. The newly formed team went to the company asking for a nine cell version of the Velocity to compete with the VX but PD refused. Instead, PD told the team to look at ways to get more performance out of their existing Velocity. The team tested many ideas and the Removable Deployable System™ (RDS) was one of the things that came out of it. Little did they know but Team Extreme would not be around the following season to challenge them.

As fate would have it Team Extreme’s last season together (2003) was the PDFT’s first. So they took nearly the same path as Team Extreme (except not as cool:) and traveled the globe competing as an unstoppable force. The point here is that Team Extreme motivated PD into creating their own team (which took three years) which pushed the limits of the ram-air parachute but now there is no driving force pushing PD. There have been a few other teams along the way but none have had the support or funding of Team Extreme and the PDFT. So what motivates innovation in our sport?

If the PDFT is dominating the scene and this costs Performance Designs less than the R&D to create new parachute technology then what is motivating them to develop the next generation of high performance canopies? We should all hope that the sport of canopy piloting will continue to grow so the market becomes large enough that parachute companies will invest the time & money necessary to develop the next generation of parachutes. Otherwise there will need to be another company, another canopy design or another group of guys to come along and challenge the current “status quo”. So what are you waiting for?

About the Author

Jim Slaton, D-24261, has been parachuting for more than 16 years and has logged more than 10,000 jumps. He made his first skydive out of UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter while serving as an Airborne Ranger with the US Army. He is the founding member of Team Extreme, a factory test pilot and the creator of the Pro Swooping Tour and much more.

By Jim Slaton

I SURVIVED US ARMY AIRBORNE SCHOOL, RANGER SCHOOL AND SERE SCHOOL 1992-1997

A few of you know what I am talking about. For everyone else, just know that they are arguably the three hardest schools in the army (at least when I was in the military). The United States Army Airborne School widely known as Jump School conducts the basic paratrooper (military parachutist) training for the United States Armed Forces. The United States Army Ranger School is an extremely intense 61 day, combat leadership course, oriented to small-unit tactics to produce Airborne Rangers. SERE is a United States Military acronym for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape, a program that provides military personnel and private military contractors with training in evading capture, survival skills and the military code of conduct. It was an intense time to say the least.

I SURVIVED MY FIRST LOW HOOK TURN IN 1997

What can I say, I learned to swoop on a Raven III 249! That’s right you herd me correctly. I jumped that seven cell 249 for hundreds and hundreds of jumps and one day I snapped it too low. I was luck the canopy was a 249 and it had been raining so the ground was soft.

I SURVIVED MY FIRST BASE JUMP INTO THE TREES IN 1998

After watching all my friends B.A.S.E. jump in South Carolina I decided that I wanted to try it. So I borrowed a B.A.S.E. rig with a reserve parachute and had a guy that was taking his riggers ticket pack up the B.A.S.E. rig. The rigger was NOT a B.A.S.E. jumper nor had he ever packed a B.A.S.E. rig. He didn’t want to do it for me but he was the only one I knew that could do it. I climbed a antenna with another friend of mine who didn’t have a B.A.S.E. rig with him at the time. When we both thought I was high enough I jumped from the antenna. It went something like this….

3…2…1…See Ya!

Throw the pilot chute!

I’m still falling!

Oh shit!

WHHAACCKK!

Oh no, Oh no, Oh no…..into the trees!

I SURVIVED MY FIRST CROSS BRACED CANOPY A VX65 IN 1999-2000

I went from a conventional canopy called an “Alpha” to my first cross braced canopy a VX65. I showed up to my first competition with the 65 at the Word Freefall Convention in 2000. On my first practice jump it was windy and I miscalculated both my approach and turn. Luckily, my first point of contact was the pond and my second was the bank. I got up embarrassed, wet & muddy to see a tall dark figure standing over me with a video camera saying “Welcome to the WFFC!”. It was my future teammate JC Colclasure.

I SURVIVED TEAM EXTREME’S 1ST EXPEDITION TO THE SWISS ALPS IN 2001

I won’t say a lot here but we didn’t really know what we were doing back then, nobody did. This was the first time anyone had tried swooping mountains in the Alps with small high performance canopies. The team was flying a VX 90, 80, 70 & 60 which was much too small for the extreme altitude. We had many close calls during that expedition but I’ll spare you all the details.

I SURVIVED A LOW PULL TO BAG LOCK MALFUNCTION IN 2001

My rig and reserve parachute was wet after returning from a swoop competition in NY. I took it to my parachute rigger at Skydive Perris and some girls at Square One wanted me to go up and film them taking their first dock flying head down. They were very excited about it. I really didn’t want to go and thought I had an excuse since my rig was wet and getting re-packed. But Square one offered to loan me one of their new rental rigs called the Vodoo (go figure). Regretfully, I said OK and packed it up. I forgot to turn the AAD (Automatic Activation Device for the non-skydivers out there) on because I’m not used to having an AAD since I mostly pond swoop (there was no waterproof AAD in those days). We went on the skydive and the two girls kept chasing each other trying to take a dock. At 4,500ft my audible altimeter went off but I stayed with the girls because they were almost together. FInally at 3,500ft they took their first dock. I stayed around a second or two to get the shot but when they finally broke they tracked in my direction! Since I was slightly below them I had to wait for them to deploy their parachutes but they just kept on tracking!

My audible altimeter went off again at 2,000ft and the girls finally deployed their parachutes. I immediately rolled over and deployed but my system went straight into a bag lock! I made the mistake (don’t ever do this!) of reaching up and pulling down on the risers trying to get the parachute to come out of the bag. I pulled so hard on the risers that the bag came down far enough that some of the lines got wrapped around my arm! My audible was now FLAT LINING! Panicking I pulled the cutaway and reserve handle at nearly the same time and WHAAACCCKKK! the reserve parachute opened. As I looked up and unstowed the toggles of the reserve parachute I hit the ground at nearly the same time. It was as close as it can get. I hit the ground so hard that it knocked the breath out of me. I laid on the ground 3-4 minutes before I finally stood up. Needless to say I didn’t jump for a while after that. I would continue on in my career to have 87 reserve parachuted rides (and counting). Some of them were from test jumping but most were real. I have had every malfunction in the book except the dreaded “horseshoe malfunction” (knock on wood). This is largely due to the fact that I have mostly jumped a pull-out system (the absolute best system).

I SURVIVED TEAM EXTREME’S EXPEDITION TO THE TOP OF EUROPE IN 2002

On the success of Team Extreme’s 2001 expedition to the swiss Alps we decided to head to the roof of Europe in 2002. I could write a whole book on this one expedition but i’ll spare you all the drama. What I can tell you is that we nearly died several times during the expedition and at one time wanted to call it off. We decided to stay and to land on the summit of Mount Blanc. Mont Blanc is Europe’s highest mountain where only the very best mountain climbers can summit. There are only a few helicopters in the world that can hover at those altitudes and its very very cold. We breathed supplemental oxygen on the way up and it was -40 degrees on exit. During the first few attempts we couldn’t make the summit and was forced to land on the ice fields of the north face. The Super Lama helicopter had to rescue us one at a time. The final attempt was the most intense as it was the only time in my skydiving career where I looked at my teammates before exit thinking I may never see one of them again. After landing on top it was a race to see if the helicopter could pick us up before we passed out from the lack of oxygen! It was fun and scary.

I SURVIVED A PARACHUTE ENTANGLEMENT IN 2006

After starting the Ground Launch Center in California I started pushing the limits of what we thought was possible with the ram-air parachute. Using small cross braced canopies called the “GLX” we started flying new body positions in the harness (which is now used in competition swooping) and before long I was flying those positions reversed in the harness. I got so good at it I started leading small formations with a camerman. One day, the formation between me and my cameraman Duane Hall got too tight and we collided. We spun widely out of control until impact. It took two different rescue helicopters to get us to the hospital were w stayed in a coma for three days.That accident continues to hurt to this day.

I am glad to see my 40th birthday.

Jim Slaton

This is the first post in my new series of  articles to help you with the Canopy Flight Basics. Don’t get me wrong, when I say “Canopy Flight Basics“ I don’t mean this is just for beginners. In fact, most experienced skydivers (some with hundreds or even thousands of jumps) have never practiced or learned the basics of canopy flight. I know that is a bold statement but it is true. Many pilots just learn through trial and error by watching and listening to what other people at the DZ are doing. I challenge anyone who thinks Canopy Flight Basics is just for beginners to try it out for yourself.

One of the most important parts of your development as a canopy pilot is learning the performance envelope of your canopy. Students in my private coaching program know all about “Performance drills” and how they help shape you as a pilot. These flight exercises not only help you learn the performance envelope of your canopy but also get you familiar with your flight controls. These exercises will help you develop a sight picture for landing and how to control your canopy in varying wind conditions.

Its important for pilots to understand how to consistently arrive at the “set up point” (also know as your initiation point) . This is one of the most crucial skillz to have as a canopy pilot and can mean the difference between landing safely on target and turning the landing area into a bowling alley! In this training series I will give you tips on how you can develop all these skills and more. The tips in this series will come from the following areas:

*The Flight Pattern

*Adjusting your Pattern

*Sight Picture & Set up Point

*Approach

*Alternate landing area & Landing out

I hope you enjoy this new training series and I welcome all comments with questions. I might include some of your questions and comments in my future posts. You can signup on my email or text message list on the right and get these tips sent to you automatically. First article in this new series is coming soon!