Forums: Skydiving: General Skydiving Discussions:
BSR proposal for canopy patterns

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 12 Next page Last page  View All

dob  (D 5362)

May 2, 2007, 7:17 PM
Post #126 of 292 (1568 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ianmdrennan] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm glad another thread of debate has been started by this BSR proposal for safe canopy flight by all.
I think the other recent thread from Bryan Burke at Skydive Arizona is a very good one.
http://dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2772931;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

As one of the authors of this working document for a BSR, the feedback and discussions are raising some of the issues that will help make canopy flight into a landing area safer for all.

The principle of education and enforcement has to start from 1 person before it can spread to others. Take responsibility for yourself first, am I safe in the landing area, that means a hard look in the mirror.
Then take it to others that are not so observant of safety in the landing area. Peer pressure is a great tool.


BSRs, let us count the Basic Safety Requirements, not FAA regs/FARs, that pertain to most skydivers, read experienced - C & D license, 1 BSR, that be ONE BSR.
"Thou shalt not have container opening below 2,000 feet AGL (above ground level)".Period end of USPA regulations for most experienced jumpers.
Two reasons this is self enforcing is that AADs (and the cost of rearming) and slower opening parachutes have kept the habitual violators in check.
It just seems like common sense to open at a reasonable altitude.

Seatbelts were almost never used 16+ years ago in jump aircraft. A lot of fatalities changed that attitude. Along with a very very aggressive education campaign by USPA for 2 years.
It just seems like common sense to put a seatbelt on before takeoff in a jump aircraft.

That is all we are asking of this BSR proposal. Make it seem like common sense to land everybody safely in a landing area.

The crafting of the words needs to be broad enough for all BUT the education and common sense part needs to be a very very very aggressive campaign by ALL skydivers and USPA.

My good friend Bob Holler lived by a creed for 30 years;
"These things I do, that others may live."
We want to carry on his creed and tradition in his name for a sport he loved dearly, to death.

http://www.andthereiwas.com/bobholler/


captainbb7  (D 28154)

May 2, 2007, 8:18 PM
Post #127 of 292 (1543 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
What exactly is a person flying a regular pattern with 90 degree turns supposed to do to protect themselves from being hit by someone starting a HPL 300ft above them and closing in fast on them from above and behind?


You can start by discussing and agreeing to a landing direction with everyone on your load before you even get on the plane. Then discuss if anyone is going to do a HPL and where you intend to perform such HPL (or if even such HPLs are allowed, i.e. no HPLs on bigways). If you are all agreed, go have fun. If the discussion leads to something that is not within your personal safety parameters or makes you uncomfortable, then dont get on the airplane and go talk to the DZO and/or DZ Staff to resolve the situation. It is your responsibility to know what the other people in the air are going to do around you. No BSR or any other "Rule" release you from that responsibility.


stratostar  (Student)

May 2, 2007, 10:05 PM
Post #128 of 292 (1509 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
As I said before, who's gonna enforce this BSR?

The same people who don't enforce the current ones.(depending on the dz your at)

Quote:
but we can't get DZO's, and DZM's to agree to monitor people's flying as it is.

Or to back S&TA's who wish to put a shoe in jumpers ass
It's just not "economically viable" to piss the jumpers off I guess.
Quote:

Correct or they (jumper) are SO & SO from DZ xyz and well known superstar.
What ever happened to people listening to instructors after student status?
Quote:

That went out of fashion with the belly warts...Wink
When's the last time someone you saw someone grounded?
Quote:

Sept. 2000 and before that around 1981 or 82.
How about the last time you saw someone asked not to come back to the DZ because of unsafe actions?
Quote:

Also Sept. 2001 for running down wind under a TDM trying to make the LZ and hook turning into the parking lot.Crazy Should have had TM rating yanked right then and there, but seeing how this TM wrote a check for his rating to some old fuck in Ohio who handed them out back then, he shouldn't have ever had a TM. But that is for another thread.Wink
BSR or no BSR, untill someone gets out on the field who cares enough to be the "bad guy", ain't nothing gonna change.
Quote:

Even then those who feel the wrath of said "badass" cry and whine as a group till the DZO gives in because as you said, "It's just not "economically viable" to piss the jumpers off" So those who rock the boat end up run off or not listened too.
I appreciate all the people who took the time to be the "bad guys" in my skydiving career, even if I didn't in the heat of the moment. I thank them, because of them, I'm still sucking air.
Quote:

Your welcome!Tongue


diablopilot  (D License)

May 2, 2007, 10:23 PM
Post #129 of 292 (1500 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dob] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for taking the time to support your ideas Dan, and even if we don't see eye to eye on the way to fix this problem, energies are being directed towards addressing it.

Thanks too for taking the time 9 years ago to see an eager jumper trying to jump a canopy above his skill level, and take him on a high altitude hop and pop, so he could see safely, just how in over his head he might have been getting.Smile

See ya around.


LloydDobbler  (D 30655)

May 2, 2007, 11:51 PM
Post #130 of 292 (1484 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kelpdiver] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
It's been working great. Where and when it's enforced.

One more time, like the broken record I am..... "Who ya gonna get to enforce this BSR?"

I agree, a BSR that just says, don't swoop in traffic, won't accomplish anything if DZOs don't enforce it.

But a BSR (NW) that directs DZs to segment their traffic will result in change.

Just to clarify, by 'segment their traffic,' do you mean 'separate their landing areas,' or do you mean 'bar swoopers from initiating HPL's into SLP traffic'?

If it's the former, as I mentioned before, part of that change you speak of is that small DZ's, with canopy pilots operating safely (i.e. swoopers being the first ones down, and after the first person enters the SLP, the swooping stops - catch it on the next load), will be restricted for no good reason.

I'll say it again - one size does not fit all. All DZ's don't operate the same way as Eloy or Perris.


kallend  (D 23151)

May 3, 2007, 3:02 AM
Post #131 of 292 (1475 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captainbb7] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
What exactly is a person flying a regular pattern with 90 degree turns supposed to do to protect themselves from being hit by someone starting a HPL 300ft above them and closing in fast on them from above and behind?


You can start by discussing and agreeing to a landing direction with everyone on your load before you even get on the plane. Then discuss if anyone is going to do a HPL and where you intend to perform such HPL (or if even such HPLs are allowed, i.e. no HPLs on bigways). If you are all agreed, go have fun. If the discussion leads to something that is not within your personal safety parameters or makes you uncomfortable, then dont get on the airplane and go talk to the DZO and/or DZ Staff to resolve the situation. It is your responsibility to know what the other people in the air are going to do around you. No BSR or any other "Rule" release you from that responsibility.

So you think it's OK for someone to do 270s into the standard pattern as long as you've talked about it first. I'm glad you're not on loads with me.

Now, back to the question you didn't answer - what does someone flying a STANDARD pattern do to protect from a hotshot coming at them fast from their blind spot above and behind their canopy.


captainbb7  (D 28154)

May 3, 2007, 6:12 AM
Post #132 of 292 (1452 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
So you think it's OK for someone to do 270s into the standard pattern as long as you've talked about it first. I'm glad you're not on loads with me.

Now, back to the question you didn't answer - what does someone flying a STANDARD pattern do to protect from a hotshot coming at them fast from their blind spot above and behind their canopy.


My Friend, if you are going to wait until you are under canopy to start thinking about protecting yourself, then you are doomed. Nothing will protect you from the person who intentionally breaks a "no swooping on bigways rule" or other such canopy related BSR. Once you are in the air, you have no control over what other people will do. That is why canopy safety must begin before you even board the plane. Discuss what canopy behavior is appropriate on your load BEFORE you board. This is the time where you do have control. Find out what the people around you intend to do, not only under canopy, but also during freefall (i.e., are they freeflying, RW, tracking dive, pulling higher than you, etc). The more information you have, the better decisions you can make about your own safety. If someone ends up breaking the plan that was agreed to by everyone, then hold them accountable.

Secondly, nowhere did I say that it was appropriate to perform HPLs in any situation as long as its been discussed. Example, HPLs are not allowed on bigways (most of them anyway). This is a complicated issue and what works for one DZ may not work at another (i.e., Cessna DZ compared to a Boogie DZ). There is a time and place for HPLs and that is for each DZ to decide and ENFORCE (if you dont like the DZs answer, then jump elsewhere). However, the person ultimately responsible for your safety is yourself... so make good decisions.


rehmwa  (D 12816)

May 3, 2007, 7:08 AM
Post #133 of 292 (1439 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
what does someone flying a STANDARD pattern do to protect from a hotshot coming at them fast from their blind spot above and behind their canopy.

apparently, they were supposed to drop off of the load and not jump


captainbb7  (D 28154)

May 3, 2007, 7:40 AM
Post #134 of 292 (1426 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rehmwa] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
apparently, they were supposed to drop off of the load and not jump

Yes. If the situation is outside of your personal safety parameters (be it from wind gusts, number of people in the air, who is in the air, etc) then dont jump... and live to jump another day when the situation is within your personal safety parameters. If the cause of your safety issues is man made, then discuss it with the appropriate DZ authorities.


ChrisL  (C 35323)

May 3, 2007, 9:05 AM
Post #135 of 292 (1393 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captainbb7] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
apparently, they were supposed to drop off of the load and not jump

Yes. If the situation is outside of your personal safety parameters (be it from wind gusts, number of people in the air, who is in the air, etc) then dont jump... and live to jump another day when the situation is within your personal safety parameters. If the cause of your safety issues is man made, then discuss it with the appropriate DZ authorities.

This reasoning would seem to imply that anyone should be allowed to perform any high performance, high risk maneuver they want, and its up to the people that don't want to be a target of this guy to scratch from the load.

Something seems fundamentally wrong with that.

To take this reasoning to the highway, I should be allowed to drive as fast as I want to, and anyone that doesn't want to partake of the increased risk this poses to them should stay home or take the train.

All I have to do is let everyone know that I'm gonna be driving REALLY fast and then its on them to stay the hell outta my way.


(This post was edited by ChrisL on May 3, 2007, 9:18 AM)


BrianSGermain  (D 11154)

May 3, 2007, 9:24 AM
Post #136 of 292 (1378 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

If we limit what skydivers can do beyond what is reasonable, we will effectively kill the sport. It is a step backward due to fear, rather than a step forward toward solutions.

Separation by time and location, yes.
Banning the human spirit, No!

Just my thoughts...
+


captainbb7  (D 28154)

May 3, 2007, 9:41 AM
Post #137 of 292 (1364 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisL] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
This reasoning would seem to imply that anyone should be allowed to perform any high performance, high risk maneuver they want,

That is not what I am saying. There is a time and place for HPLs and that varies according to each DZ. If you have someone who is not willing to follow the rules laid down at your DZ, then scratch off the load if necessary and get the DZ management to ground the unsafe person for not following the rules. Then go get back in the air and have fun. My point is, you wont know what other people intend to do unless you ask them.

Quote:
and its up to the people that don't want to be a target of this guy to scratch from the load.

Hopefully the situation could be handled amicably without the need to miss a load. But in the end, if you dont feel safe with the situation, then go get the DZ staff and make it safe.


ChrisL  (C 35323)

May 3, 2007, 9:55 AM
Post #138 of 292 (1351 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captainbb7] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
That is not what I am saying. There is a time and place for HPLs and that varies according to each DZ. If you have someone who is not willing to follow the rules laid down at your DZ, then scratch off the load if necessary and get the DZ management to ground the unsafe person for not following the rules.

I agree in theory, but if this guy plans to perform HP maneuvers in violation of DZ policy, what assurance does the average fun jumper have that this guy will disclose ahead of time that he intends to violate said safety policies?

This awesome skydiver doesn't feel these policies apply to him, so I doubt he will publicly broadcast that he is going to perform a HP landing
if the policy says that they aren't allowed at that time or landing area.

That might lead to someone specifically telling him that he cant do it, and thats a lot harder to ignore than a general, and maybe not strictly enforced, policy.

If nobody knows what he intends, its very unlikely that he would be told not to do it Smile


(This post was edited by ChrisL on May 3, 2007, 10:00 AM)


MakeItHappen

May 3, 2007, 10:11 AM
Post #139 of 292 (1338 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In the aftermath of many recent canopy related incidents, with the catalyst
being the deaths of Bob Holler and Danny Page, several skydivers got
together and began to discuss how to help prevent incidents like this in the
future. The proposals below are the result of this collaboration.

[snip]

Shiara Holler C-32753
Molly Osborne D-23904
Val Thal-Slocum D-5837
Bill von Novak D-16479
Paul Sitter D-2714
Flip Colmer D-6157
Dan "dob" O'Brien D-5362
Kate Cooper D-7333


I am truly sorry that Danny Page did a stupid, selfish act and took out Bob Holler and himself. We cannot change the outcome of March 17, 2007. We can only change the future.

I fully support separating HP landing patterns from conventional landing patterns, in time or space.
But a BSR is not needed and should not be implemented.

There are DZs that separate the patterns and have great success.
Elsinore is one such DZ. Elsinore has a swoop pond, a student area and an area for the conventional patterns. Elsinore's current setup was precipitated by a non-fatal canopy collision in May 2000. The local jumpers demanded that the patterns be separated.

Implementation and enforcement of separate landing areas has to be at the local level. That involves the DZO and local jumpers working out a solution that works for their particular DZ. What works at Elsinore may not be needed at a small Cessna DZ.
A geographically small Cessna DZ may have a separation plan that is determined by exit order and exit altitude. The proposed BSR does not allow for a swooper and a classic accuracy jumper to exit at 5k and then a second pass at 12.5K. The swooper executes a HP type approach, the classic accuracy jumper executes a classic approach and the freefallers to execute conventional patterns, all landing in the same physical area.

There are many other scenarios that the BSR would essentially ban, but we know can work.

There is also much more fundamental reason not to impulsively implement 'separate landing areas, in time or space' as a BSR.

I will call this the 'There ought to be a law!' syndrome.

'There ought to be a law!' syndrome:
This happens when friends or family of someone that dies in skydiving get on a path saying 'If only such-n-such was in place, then my little Johnny would be alive today.'
'If only such-n-such was in place, then many accidents like this would be prevented in the future.'

We've seen this in Nevada, when the parents of a student campaigned and succeeded in getting the USPA BSRs written into the state law.

We've seen this from Jane Melbourne when she tried and failed to get local, state and federal laws changed after the death of her son.

In the two cases mentioned above, most jumpers took a stance of 'No we don't want the government to regulate us. We can do it ourselves.'

Inside the skydiving community, we self regulate. RW, CRW, vRW and Swoop organizers regulate who gets on what loads to maintain the highest safety level. We impose rules upon our groups that USPA or any other national parachute organization does not mandate.

PST has qualification jumps.
RW has qualification jumps.
VRW has qualification jumps.
CRW has qualification jumps.

We impose rules of 'thou shall not swoop on a x-way'. We cut those that violate these self-imposed rules. We don't call up USPA and say "Well, Joe Blow here did a 270 approach in the middle of a 100-way. Can you suspend his membership?"
We cut Joe Blow off the load. We implement safe canopy patterns based upon the event and people on the load. We do it without a (perceived) heavy hand from a national organization. We do it based upon our authority as jumpers in the same airspace.

We do need to separate the different types of patterns in time or space.
We already have the authority to do that.
We do not need a BSR.
We should not bend to 'There ought to be a law.' pundits within skydiving anymore than we would do so if they were promoting local, state or federal laws.

If we follow this path, next it will be the 'mandatory RSL' pundits. That would have saved two people at a recent WFFC.
Then it'll be the 'mandatory AAD' pundits.
Etc, etc etc...

Education is a significant part of canopy patterns.
Please contact me at aerosoftware_AT_makeithappen.com ( _AT_ = @ )to see a preview of an article that will appear in SNM June 2007.

.


rehmwa  (D 12816)

May 3, 2007, 10:22 AM
Post #140 of 292 (1327 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BrianSGermain] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If we limit what skydivers can do beyond what is reasonable, we will effectively kill the sport. It is a step backward due to fear, rather than a step forward toward solutions.

Separation by time and location, yes.
Banning the human spirit, No!

Just my thoughts...
+

True, but really vague and touchy feely. What's your position on a BSR that encourages DZs use a method to "separate by time and location" (I find BSRs to be 'recommendations' rather than 'requirements' in real practice).

Can you clarify what you are talking about? whether you think that

1 - a BSR of this kind is a good idea vs

2 - whether you think a BSR of this kind is a 'step backward due to fear'.


rehmwa  (D 12816)

May 3, 2007, 10:27 AM
Post #141 of 292 (1335 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captainbb7] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
apparently, they were supposed to drop off of the load and not jump

Yes. If the situation is outside of your personal safety parameters (be it from wind gusts, number of people in the air, who is in the air, etc) then dont jump... and live to jump another day when the situation is within your personal safety parameters. If the cause of your safety issues is man made, then discuss it with the appropriate DZ authorities.

I actually agree with your part that we should have a very good idea of what's going to happen on a load with everyone. In practice, good luck making that happen (maybe you should propose a BSR that requires each load to have a pre-briefTongue).

But that is an ongoing idea and doesn't preclude a recommendation in the BSRs that encourages separate landing areas at DZs that can do it.

As far as Kallend and me and Chris misreading your statement that any jerk can pull off a 360 over slow traffic just because he loudly announces it - well, the misread was right there because it was written that way. The responses were made because, even though "you" didn't mean it that way, there are people out there that would be totally serious in that position and it's hard to tell the difference if you are one of them or not.


stratostar  (Student)

May 3, 2007, 10:51 AM
Post #142 of 292 (1316 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
'There ought to be a law!' syndrome:

I disagree with you! When Roger Nelson got taken out myself and others took our concerns to the S&TA as well as the DZo about a few pilots who kept doing the same crap as Danny did load after load and used students as pylons to swoop thru. We asked for a second landing area for the swoopers and were met with a bad attitude from not only the swoopers but the DZO as well. I felt at that time and I still feel we need a BSR and have for some time now. You and the rest of the BOD have sat on your ass for a number of years now without addressing the concerns of many of the membership with regard to HP canopies and those who shouldn't be under those wings, to the point we are today that now instead of having to clean up one mess we get to clean up some other dead person who was taken out while following the rules in place.

You don't want a BSR, fine how about a USPA canopy flight instructor rating then, and a BSR for high wingloadings then.

Quote:
You and the rest of the BOD have sat on your ass for a number of years now without addressing the concerns of many of the membership with regard to HP canopies and those who shouldn't be under those wings,

Sorry I forgot you guys did spend a bunch of membership money for a video and poster to show at safety day, that was a big help....wasn't it.Crazy


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
May 3, 2007, 11:11 AM
Post #143 of 292 (1302 views)
Shortcut
Re: [captainbb7] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

>My point is, you wont know what other people intend to do unless you ask them.

And often even then you won't. When I have asked, I've often gotten "I'm going to land like I always do, and I always clear my airspace" or "I'll follow the pattern" or "Don't worry about it." Not notably helpful. Needless to say, further discussion on what constitutes a standard pattern, or further probing on what they mean by "don't worry about it" might shed some light on things - but yelling such questions over a turbine engine as 20 people try to get into an Otter is not likely to produce good results.


JumpRu  (D License)

May 3, 2007, 11:24 AM
Post #144 of 292 (1290 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rehmwa] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
But that is an ongoing idea and doesn't preclude a recommendation in the BSRs that encourages separate landing areas at DZs that can do it.

Please don't mix recommendations with BSR. Im good with recommendations but Im against BSR. BSR will not encourage they will dictate Unsure


stratostar  (Student)

May 3, 2007, 11:33 AM
Post #145 of 292 (1284 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JumpRu] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

???? What part of recommendations don't you understand about,

Basic Safety Recommendations That is what a BSR is a recommendation not a rule or law or FAR.


MakeItHappen

May 3, 2007, 11:40 AM
Post #146 of 292 (1274 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
???? What part of recommendations don't you understand about,

Basic Safety Recommendations That is what a BSR is a recommendation not a rule or law or FAR.

FYI
BSR = Basic Safety Requirements

.


kallend  (D 23151)

May 3, 2007, 11:50 AM
Post #147 of 292 (1263 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
???? What part of recommendations don't you understand about,

Basic Safety Recommendations That is what a BSR is a recommendation not a rule or law or FAR.

FYI
BSR = Basic Safety Requirements

.

What about this:

c. Drop zone operators are required to establish safe separation procedures
for landing traffic to ensure SLP and HPL traffic do not conflict with each
other. [NW]


do you find objectionable? It doesn't dictate what the procedures should be, just that procedures should exist.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

May 3, 2007, 12:00 PM
Post #148 of 292 (1251 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

John-

When did you flip sides? What happened to "Education, not regulation"?

Derek


MakeItHappen

May 3, 2007, 12:03 PM
Post #149 of 292 (1243 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
???? What part of recommendations don't you understand about,

Basic Safety Recommendations That is what a BSR is a recommendation not a rule or law or FAR.

FYI
BSR = Basic Safety Requirements

.

What about this:

c. Drop zone operators are required to establish safe separation procedures
for landing traffic to ensure SLP and HPL traffic do not conflict with each
other. [NW]


do you find objectionable? It doesn't dictate what the procedures should be, just that procedures should exist.

If you read SIM Section 6-10.F
you will see that this recommendation is already in place.

This is a recent addition to the SIM. Perhaps, many jumpers are not aware of this.

.


JumpRu  (D License)

May 3, 2007, 12:11 PM
Post #150 of 292 (1235 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Drop zone operators are required...

last time i checked USPA is organization of jumpers, not Drop zone operators Cool


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 12 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : General Skydiving Discussions

 


Search for (options)