Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Check-in debate

 


nigel99  (D 1)

Dec 20, 2012, 12:17 AM
Post #1 of 84 (5921 views)
Shortcut
Check-in debate Can't Post

I know there have been threads in the past, but in light of the recent Netherlands incident I thought I'd bring it up again.

Some DZ's successfully implement a check in procedure, whereas others claim it is not possible.

It seems to me that DZ's have a duty of care, to ensure that jumpers are safely checked in after a jump.

As most DZ's operate on weekends it is conceivable that an injury that may have been survivable, could end up as a fatality if the person isn't found in a timely manner.


piisfish

Dec 20, 2012, 12:34 AM
Post #2 of 84 (5864 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

it shouldn't be hard to implement, as all major DZ's claim that they have someone count all canopies opening, checking for cutaways etc....

we have lived a loss at a DZ I used to jump at, one jumper went in, with nothing out, just before lunchtime. Was noticed that he was missing about 4 hours later by his girlfriend (who was absent of the DZ for the day).


nigel99  (D 1)

Dec 20, 2012, 12:50 AM
Post #3 of 84 (5857 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
it shouldn't be hard to implement, as all major DZ's claim that they have someone count all canopies opening, checking for cutaways etc....

we have lived a loss at a DZ I used to jump at, one jumper went in, with nothing out, just before lunchtime. Was noticed that he was missing about 4 hours later by his girlfriend (who was absent of the DZ for the day).


Mac  (C 101464)

Dec 20, 2012, 2:33 AM
Post #4 of 84 (5826 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
it shouldn't be hard to implement, as all major DZ's claim that they have someone count all canopies opening, checking for cutaways etc....

Check-in controls are useful to account for everyone, however if we are looking to add response time to injuries that maybe avoided fatalities, then I feel that check-in procedures alone are not enough.

Imagine the scenario, a busy DZ, someone doesnt check in (there isnt a counting canopy control). Tannoy announcements go out, people search, and eventually its determined they are missing. How long would this take? Yes, they would be reporting missing earlier (maybe), but would this help a time sensitive injury?

Counting canopies, and watching them until landing I feel is a more beneficial control should there look to be an injury that requires a quick response time. I generally spend a little time on DZ control to get a feeling to how conscientious the DZ controller is in counting canopies, and the process of when people land off. In the most cases here in the UK, the controls are extremely vigilant. I normally take time to visit new DZs on week days (or quiet days) to get a feel for their overall processes (amoungst other reasons).

I would feel much happier having people counting canopies and watching landings then whether there was a check-in procdedure. Saying that, I think both together create a belt and braces control.

The otherside of the coin, dont be reliant on anyone other than yourself, and take full responsibility for your skills and capabilities and back up plans. Ensure your skills are as good as they can be for when you may have to land off, or for the conditions, be aware of whats occuring around you in the conditions, as breaking a femur or ankle compound in an off landing situation could result in death or loss of limbs if you rely on being noticed. Polish up your skills to minimise the risks, and take a phone with you on jumps.

In reply to:
It seems to me that DZ's have a duty of care, to ensure that jumpers are safely checked in after a jump

You and you alone are responsible, and look out for your friends and fellow jumpers.


(This post was edited by Mac on Dec 20, 2012, 2:49 AM)


INCH2524

Dec 20, 2012, 4:53 AM
Post #5 of 84 (5755 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mac] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi guys and gals, i,m new to the forum but i think this is relevant !![:(
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20780780

sorry dont know how to clicky


GLIDEANGLE  (D 30292)

Dec 20, 2012, 6:05 AM
Post #6 of 84 (5713 views)
Shortcut
Re: [INCH2524] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hi guys and gals, i,m new to the forum but i think this is relevant !![:(
http://www.bbc.co.uk/...orld-europe-20780780

sorry dont know how to clicky

Fixed it.


J-S  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 6:37 AM
Post #7 of 84 (5674 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't worry about checking in when with a group jump, but when I do solos and especially solos at a new dz (getting a feel before trying to find someone to jump with), I ask another jumper on the load to make sure to see me on the ground. Make a point to find them and ask how their jump went or something as a check in.

If a DZO wants or has a check in system, great, all the better. But it's still my responsibility 100% to lookout for myself and others firstly. I'd use a DZOs check in as a back up, people on the jump run can figure out something's wrong faster.

Edit: Its simple to police yourself and be responsible.


(This post was edited by J-S on Dec 20, 2012, 6:42 AM)


JackC1

Dec 20, 2012, 6:49 AM
Post #8 of 84 (5658 views)
Shortcut
Re: [J-S] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If a DZO wants or has a check in system, great, all the better. But it's still my responsibility 100% to lookout for myself and others firstly. I'd use a DZOs check in as a back up, people on the jump run can figure out something's wrong faster.

In my experience, when you're on jump run and you ask someone to do something when they land, they're quite likely to agree to anything you say then promptly forget you even exist about 0.00001s after exit.


Premier Remster  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 7:05 AM
Post #9 of 84 (5625 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
It seems to me that DZ's have a duty of care

No, they don't.


JackC1

Dec 20, 2012, 7:24 AM
Post #10 of 84 (5611 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Remster] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
It seems to me that DZ's have a duty of care

No, they don't.

I'd have thought that the authorities would quite likely take a dim view of a DZO that doesn't know or care if he litters the surrounding area with dead skydivers.


Premier Remster  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 7:33 AM
Post #11 of 84 (5582 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry... I just get tired of people wanting to make the DZ responsible for everything...


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Dec 20, 2012, 8:07 AM
Post #12 of 84 (5553 views)
Shortcut
Re: [J-S] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If a DZO wants or has a check in system, great, all the better. But it's still my responsibility 100% to lookout for myself and others firstly. I'd use a DZOs check in as a back up, people on the jump run can figure out something's wrong faster.
The check-in is for the DZ. It's their cue to go looking for your broken, responsible self.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Dec 20, 2012, 8:08 AM
Post #13 of 84 (5551 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Remster] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Sorry... I just get tired of people wanting to make the DZ responsible for everything...

+1
Nanny State penetrates the DZ.
Mad


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 20, 2012, 9:38 AM
Post #14 of 84 (5515 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Remster] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

So the dzo or dz doesn't care about you enough to notify someone that you are missing Should we just leave the bodies out there till someone else finds them? Hell who cares they're already dead so just leave the body for someone else to deal withUnsure


(This post was edited by Mr_Polite on Dec 20, 2012, 9:39 AM)


Premier Remster  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 10:23 AM
Post #15 of 84 (5474 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr_Polite] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So the dzo or dz doesn't care about you enough to notify someone that you are missing Should we just leave the bodies out there till someone else finds them? Hell who cares they're already dead so just leave the body for someone else to deal withUnsure

That's exactly what I said... Crazy

Come on people...

I jump at probably the busiest full time DZ in the world. I've called my home DZ everything from a 1 cesna DZ, a 3 Beech 18 place, and places with a couple medium sized turbines. All these DZs had evil DZOs that dont care if the body count in their fields go up Tongue, but, they all looked out for problems.

Eloy has ground personnel looking out of mals, problems, etc. Do I expect them to see me bounce in? No. I don't just go to the DZ, not talk to anyone, and be anti social. It's up to me to set up a network of people who know I'm there. If the DZ spots me, great. If not, one my my friends will notice.

/rant


hillson  (D 33134)

Dec 20, 2012, 10:46 AM
Post #16 of 84 (5453 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Remster] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

USPA reported 3 million jumps last year...how many jumpers are wandering around the dz woods, zombie-like, due to a lack of a check-in system. Zero.

This just seems silly to me.


Premier NWFlyer  (D License)

Dec 20, 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #17 of 84 (5426 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hillson] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
USPA reported 3 million jumps last year...how many jumpers are wandering around the dz woods, zombie-like, due to a lack of a check-in system. Zero.

This just seems silly to me.

There's been (I think) three fatalities in the last few years where the person wasn't missed and the body wasn't found for a few days. The one in Houston, the one at Bay Area Skydiving, and this one. This one and the one at BAS were both no-pull fatalities; a check-in system wouldn't have changed the outcome; there was some debate as to whether the guy in Houston could have been helped.

I'm with others who say that it really needs to be incumbent on us to look out for each other. Jumping in a group? Make sure your group is all accounted for post-jump. Jumping solo? Let someone on the load know, and ask 'em to check in with you after the jump. New to the dropzone and jumping solo? Same thing, but you'll have to introduce yourself to someone on the plane first. Sly


Rick  (D 28557)

Dec 20, 2012, 11:32 AM
Post #18 of 84 (5414 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
USPA reported 3 million jumps last year...how many jumpers are wandering around the dz woods, zombie-like, due to a lack of a check-in system. Zero.

This just seems silly to me.

There's been (I think) three fatalities in the last few years where the person wasn't missed and the body wasn't found for a few days. The one in Houston, the one at Bay Area Skydiving, and this one. This one and the one at BAS were both no-pull fatalities; a check-in system wouldn't have changed the outcome; there was some debate as to whether the guy in Houston could have been helped.

I'm with others who say that it really needs to be incumbent on us to look out for each other. Jumping in a group? Make sure your group is all accounted for post-jump. Jumping solo? Let someone on the load know, and ask 'em to check in with you after the jump. New to the dropzone and jumping solo? Same thing, but you'll have to introduce yourself to someone on the plane first. Sly


Wasn't there one a few years ago out west. i think an instructor at the DZ. Everyone thought he had gone back to his trailer and they found him later out of his harness ???


Premier Remster  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 11:33 AM
Post #19 of 84 (5411 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Rick] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
USPA reported 3 million jumps last year...how many jumpers are wandering around the dz woods, zombie-like, due to a lack of a check-in system. Zero.

This just seems silly to me.

There's been (I think) three fatalities in the last few years where the person wasn't missed and the body wasn't found for a few days. The one in Houston, the one at Bay Area Skydiving, and this one. This one and the one at BAS were both no-pull fatalities; a check-in system wouldn't have changed the outcome; there was some debate as to whether the guy in Houston could have been helped.

I'm with others who say that it really needs to be incumbent on us to look out for each other. Jumping in a group? Make sure your group is all accounted for post-jump. Jumping solo? Let someone on the load know, and ask 'em to check in with you after the jump. New to the dropzone and jumping solo? Same thing, but you'll have to introduce yourself to someone on the plane first. Sly


Wasn't there one a few years ago out west. i think an instructor at the DZ. Everyone thought he had gone back to his trailer and they found him later out of his harness ???

That was the one in Houston K mentioned.


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 20, 2012, 11:38 AM
Post #20 of 84 (5407 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Rick] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I believe there was one at Perris and the jumper involved was russian? They noticed a car left in the lot after a while and the body was found weeks or more later.


Premier NWFlyer  (D License)

Dec 20, 2012, 12:01 PM
Post #21 of 84 (5391 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr_Polite] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I believe there was one at Perris and the jumper involved was russian? They noticed a car left in the lot after a while and the body was found weeks or more later.

Oh yeah, forgot about that one.


J-S  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 12:46 PM
Post #22 of 84 (5361 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If a DZO wants or has a check in system, great, all the better. But it's still my responsibility 100% to lookout for myself and others firstly. I'd use a DZOs check in as a back up, people on the jump run can figure out something's wrong faster.
The check-in is for the DZ. It's their cue to go looking for your broken, responsible self.

Yes, I understand the system. Having never encountered a check in DZ (just went across country last month with my girl and jumped a few places on my way), none that required a check in either, I relied on the senior jumpers that took an interest in the new guy to their DZ to make sure I was accounted for.

I would gladly check in if it was required, but I would also still ask another jumper to account for me too. The DZ check in would be added insurance to the jumper looking out for me also if I was missing. (maybe I miss worded my first post).


J-S  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 12:53 PM
Post #23 of 84 (5351 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If a DZO wants or has a check in system, great, all the better. But it's still my responsibility 100% to lookout for myself and others firstly. I'd use a DZOs check in as a back up, people on the jump run can figure out something's wrong faster.

In my experience, when you're on jump run and you ask someone to do something when they land, they're quite likely to agree to anything you say then promptly forget you even exist about 0.00001s after exit.

That hasn't been my experience so far. I've always been met with some form of acknowledgement from others I ask.


hillson  (D 33134)

Dec 20, 2012, 1:28 PM
Post #24 of 84 (5321 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, clearly it was an exaggeration to make the larger point that while there will be exceptions to the rule but on balance this really isn't a problem - or the associated inference that DZs aren't "safe" or "caring" or whatever. Extraordinary skydives the system is used of course. For the most part I see people looking out for each other.

That's all.


Mac  (C 101464)

Dec 20, 2012, 1:37 PM
Post #25 of 84 (5316 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hillson] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I sometimes forget this is primarily a Seppo forum.

The UK, is quite different with systems in place to account for everyone on each load.


(This post was edited by Mac on Dec 20, 2012, 1:38 PM)


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 20, 2012, 1:42 PM
Post #26 of 84 (1993 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hillson] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, for the most part people do look out for each other. Its not those times that are an issue.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 20, 2012, 1:44 PM
Post #27 of 84 (1989 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr_Polite] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

>So the dzo or dz doesn't care about you enough to notify someone that you are missing

Do you care enough about your friends to notify someone that they are missing? If so implement a check-in system yourself. Problem solved.


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 20, 2012, 1:50 PM
Post #28 of 84 (1978 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Sure, but i can't babysit 20 other people on a load.


antibac  (C License)

Dec 20, 2012, 1:58 PM
Post #29 of 84 (1972 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I like the way we do it at our DZ.

We have one person who is not jumping that day, who count canopies and make sure everyone lands safely.

On big events, where we have more than one plane, jumpers have to check out when going to the plane and check in when they've landed.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 20, 2012, 3:24 PM
Post #30 of 84 (1932 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr_Polite] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

>Sure, but i can't babysit 20 other people on a load.

And a DZO can't babysit 400.


Premier NWFlyer  (D License)

Dec 20, 2012, 3:37 PM
Post #31 of 84 (1929 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hillson] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Extraordinary skydives the system is used of course.

Yep, I'm with you on that. Bigways where the ground crew couldn't possibly keep track of a massive number of jumpers? Of course. Another good example is the sunset cross-country that's done the final Saturday of the Lost Prairie boogie. There's 40-60 people doing a jump into the gathering darkness over a remote area and starting a fair ways up the valley, so it would be quite tough for a ground crew to keep an eye on everyone. You land out in Western Montana at night you'll be in for a long, miserably cold night if you can't find your way back, so it's critical to make sure everyone gets back safely so that we can get to looking for people as quickly as possible. No one really complains about the mandatory post-jump check-in for that jump.


Krip  (Student)

Dec 20, 2012, 3:42 PM
Post #32 of 84 (1926 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I believe there was one at Perris and the jumper involved was russian? They noticed a car left in the lot after a while and the body was found weeks or more later.

Oh yeah, forgot about that one.

The russian at perris?

How soon we forget. Cars left at the DZ could mean a lot of thingsWink

It wasn't until his travel buddies that he was supposeed to meet at another DZ (maybe eloy) called Perris and then the folks at perris checked the car and found the jumpers passport etc.

The russian did have a backup to bad they weren't at the same DZ.

Why try and reinvent the wheel every time there's the samePirate we should already know what to do to protect ourselve's.

Isn't that what the incident reports are for?Shocked

I hear lots of people saying the DZ is to busy , How many of you are not employed in the industry (CYA) or jump with a cliqueSly


Krip  (Student)

Dec 20, 2012, 3:43 PM
Post #33 of 84 (1926 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I believe there was one at Perris and the jumper involved was russian? They noticed a car left in the lot after a while and the body was found weeks or more later.

Oh yeah, forgot about that one.


nigel99  (D 1)

Dec 20, 2012, 4:47 PM
Post #34 of 84 (1905 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>So the dzo or dz doesn't care about you enough to notify someone that you are missing

Do you care enough about your friends to notify someone that they are missing? If so implement a check-in system yourself. Problem solved.

Most incidents involve visiting or solo jumpers. Not everyone has friends at the dz, and who is to say that the person you ask to watch your back actually does so?

Honestly, with the current industry attitude I can see someone with a broken leg dying in the field over the course of a few days.

I don't see it as a nanny state issue, rather a DZ completing the delivery of its service. Generally speaking implementing a process and systemic method of improvement works better than an ad-hoc system. Of course I realise that the US culture is to resist any form of process improvement, in the mistaken belief that "all rules violate my freedoms"Tongue


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 20, 2012, 5:30 PM
Post #35 of 84 (1892 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

sure they can, but you old fuckers are all too stubborn to accept anything new. God forbid you have to check in or do something that inconveniences you. Hope you think about this if you ever find yourself in a field for a few days.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 20, 2012, 9:46 PM
Post #36 of 84 (1854 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr_Polite] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

>sure they can, but you old fuckers are all too stubborn to accept anything new.

?? Hmm. I guess you don't know me very well, then.

>God forbid you have to check in or do something that inconveniences you.

And God forbid you actually DO the check-in for other people instead of just complaining on an Internet site about it. Is that the way of young hip modern skydivers? Post about your problems instead of solving them?


JackC1

Dec 21, 2012, 2:45 AM
Post #37 of 84 (1821 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

It beats me what the problem is. Checking in isn't difficult, it doesn't require very much effort from anyone and it's a relatively robust and structured way for skydivers to look after themselves. It might even save a life or two and stop the FAA from asking why DZs don't give a crap about leaving dead skydivers around the place for some random dog walker to find. On the other hand the entire argument against check ins seems to boil down to "fuck you, that's why".


dreaming13000  (B 35508)

Dec 21, 2012, 4:57 AM
Post #38 of 84 (1798 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mac] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

While a check in system is a nice idea, it's not really practical in the scenarios that have been mentioned in this thread. I've been a traveling jumper to quite a few dz's across the country, both big and small. I make friends on the ground before I go up. My family knows where I am... I make sure ppl notice me and therefore will notice if I'm missing. I've done solo hiking and camping trips, same thing, loved ones know where I am, and my intended schedule, if I encounter ppl I chat it up, not just thinking about myself but it's wise to have a plan and to let others know your plan...

In every scenario with the missing jumpers there has been a behavior pattern that led up to their absence not being noticed ie anti social behavior, routine disappearing acts etc.
Not to mention a few have been apparent suicides.

Sure the dz should care, and most humans do, but come on there is personal responsibility as well. If you want ppl to notice your absence, give them a reason to.

Ever watch 127hours, great movie and just confirms the wisdom in letting others know you. Shoot my mom flips out if I don't call her back in an hour, and she'll call the dz checking on me if necessary! :)


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 21, 2012, 5:52 AM
Post #39 of 84 (1783 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Pretty much Jack, they're just stubborn to any change or control. I wonder how they're going to feel when the FAA or government takes over skydiving?


DiverMike  (C 40024)

Dec 21, 2012, 6:16 AM
Post #40 of 84 (1773 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr_Polite] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I wonder how they're going to feel when the FAA or government takes over skydiving?

We will probably remain 'under their radar' as long as we are only killing ourselves and not the general public.


jacketsdb23  (D 29802)

Dec 21, 2012, 6:49 AM
Post #41 of 84 (1762 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DiverMike] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I know two things:

1. I swore this could never happen until it happened at my home DZ.
2. The FAA has already started to get more involved with the recent landing area proposal and increased aircraft ramp checks (locally in CA anyway). There is more coming if we don't wake up.


DiverMike  (C 40024)

Dec 21, 2012, 7:09 AM
Post #42 of 84 (1752 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jacketsdb23] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There is more coming if we don't wake up.

To date, the FAA involvement in skydiving has fortunately been at a glacial pace.

A single demo gone wrong where a spectator holding a baby gets killed by a skydiver would change that.

Most of the general public feels skydivers have a death wish anyway. I don't think they genuinely care if a dead body is left in a cornfield for a week


mr2mk1g  (C 103449)

Dec 21, 2012, 8:20 AM
Post #43 of 84 (1733 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DiverMike] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I genuinely don't get the issue. Every DZ in the UK has system of some form, be it DZ control, a computer touch screen or just crossing your name off the list etc. While none are exactly SDC, Arizona or Perris, a busy day at one of the bigger DZ's can see a couple of thousand jumps done. It works. It's not that hard. It's not expensive. It doesn't hold up operations, you've just got to tweak the way things work.

These people are supposed to be our friends ffs and the attitude against such a system basically boils down to "fuck em, not my problem". Nice.


ghost47  (D License)

Dec 21, 2012, 8:40 AM
Post #44 of 84 (1725 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It beats me what the problem is. Checking in isn't difficult, it doesn't require very much effort from anyone and it's a relatively robust and structured way for skydivers to look after themselves. It might even save a life or two and stop the FAA from asking why DZs don't give a crap about leaving dead skydivers around the place for some random dog walker to find. On the other hand the entire argument against check ins seems to boil down to "fuck you, that's why".
This is a genuine question:

If, in the middle of the day, some jumper who is new to the DZ doesn't check in, what happens?


skyjumpenfool  (Student)

Dec 21, 2012, 8:41 AM
Post #45 of 84 (1725 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mr2mk1g] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I genuinely don't get the issue. Every DZ in the UK has system of some form, be it DZ control, a computer touch screen or just crossing your name off the list etc. While none are exactly SDC, Arizona or Perris, a busy day at one of the bigger DZ's can see a couple of thousand jumps done. It works. It's not that hard. It's not expensive. It doesn't hold up operations, you've just got to tweak the way things work.

These people are supposed to be our friends ffs and the attitude against such a system basically boils down to "fuck em, not my problem". Nice.


No! That's not what it boils down to at all. Look, I've been around this sport for several decades, and we've been doing (informal) check-ins since the 70's (probably longer). It's called "looking out for each other". Maybe we need to rethink the process and make MINOR changes, as the sport changes? But we do not need to put a bunch of rediculous regulations and meaningless rules into effect.

Usually, groups debrief each skydive. If someones missing, where are they????? Most jumpers getting out on their own are being supervised by an I and they are thus checked in. Other individual jumpers can be the focus of the manifestor. Yes!!! It's just that simple! Shocked

Let's look at the holes in the system and come up with simple, easy to implement soulutions. That is all!Wink


mr2mk1g  (C 103449)

Dec 21, 2012, 9:06 AM
Post #46 of 84 (1714 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjumpenfool] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Why rules and regulations? If it's just looking out for each other - look out for each other. Write everyone's name on a manifest list (this already happens, no?) and when each jumper comes in, they (or someone else) cross their name off the list. Or come up with some other solution.

I don't understand the aversion to having a 'system' in place. No one said there needs to be nationwide rules or regulations - just that it would make real good sense if DZ's did this (perhaps before the govt stepped in and made them after the next person's found in a field after 3 days having crawled 50ft from their rig).

I just don't get the whole, "we" look out for each other thing where the "we" can't possibly involve anyone from the DZ. I know my DZO, his name is Jason, he's cool. I know my CCI (S&TA in the US), his name is Gary, he's a crazy South African. They know me; they want to look out for me. Thing is though, they don't know the FNG who shows up un-announced on a busy Saturday morning but ffs, we're all skydivers, they want to look out for him too.

The fact that they are the DZO and CCI shouldn't preclude them from being part of the solution to finding some poor schmuck who femured into the field across the road.

Besides, it makes for bad publicity, which hurts their income.

DZ's go to the trouble of banning hook turns in some cases... but apparently can't be bothered to see if everyone made it back to the DZ in the first place. They bother to say no - you're not jumping a JVX with 50 jumps... but can't be bothered to see if the idiot makes it back under his sabre.

It's the DZ's problem (they have to fill out the paperwork, talk to the coroner and deal with the business impact). But everyone seems to feel that it's only jumpers who could possibly be permitted to look out for jumpers. I just don't get the resistance.


DBCOOPER  (D 24112)

Dec 21, 2012, 10:05 AM
Post #47 of 84 (1688 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mr2mk1g] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Carolina Sky Sports had a great system. When you waiver into their system they gave you a card with your name on it. When you manifested for a load you gave them a jump ticket and your card. After you land the cards are hanging in a rack near the packing area. When you came in you picked your card up. About 20 minutes later manifest would check the rack and if your card was still there they would page you. I don't know what would happen if you didn't respond because I never saw it happen. Seemed to me to be a great system.


skyjumpenfool  (Student)

Dec 21, 2012, 10:53 AM
Post #48 of 84 (1671 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DBCOOPER] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Carolina Sky Sports had a great system. When you waiver into their system they gave you a card with your name on it. When you manifested for a load you gave them a jump ticket and your card. After you land the cards are hanging in a rack near the packing area. When you came in you picked your card up. About 20 minutes later manifest would check the rack and if your card was still there they would page you. I don't know what would happen if you didn't respond because I never saw it happen. Seemed to me to be a great system.

I believe Skydive Dallas has a similar system. Cool


JackC1

Dec 21, 2012, 12:39 PM
Post #49 of 84 (1642 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ghost47] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This is a genuine question:

If, in the middle of the day, some jumper who is new to the DZ doesn't check in, what happens?

Someone does something. The alternative is that no one does anything. Which would you prefer?


ghost47  (D License)

Dec 21, 2012, 12:53 PM
Post #50 of 84 (1636 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Someone does something. The alternative is that no one does anything. Which would you prefer?
It depends on what "someone does something" means (which is why I asked the question).

Does it mean someone broadcasts on the PA system that the missing person needs to check in? I can live with that (though that just begs the question -- what happens if they don't respond to the PA?).

Does it mean that operations shut down until this person is located? I'm not okay with that.

Does it mean jump ticket prices go up, so the DZ can hire a person specifically to deal with that? I don't think I'd be okay with that, either.

Or does it mean something else?

It really was a genuine question. At my DZ, only jumpers on the sunset load are required to check in after their jump. I have no idea what happens if someone doesn't check in. So I'm curious what the system is, or is proposed to be, for places that require checking in after every jump.


JackC1

Dec 21, 2012, 1:44 PM
Post #51 of 84 (1859 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ghost47] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

We generally try the easy stuff first, like paging them on the PA and asking around if anyone saw them land before we go and fetch the sniffer dogs. You know, common sense stuff.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 21, 2012, 1:47 PM
Post #52 of 84 (1855 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

>Checking in isn't difficult, it doesn't require very much effort from anyone and it's
>a relatively robust and structured way for skydivers to look after themselves.

Agreed. It works and we do it all the time. I am still scratching my head as to why some people here are saying "I could never do it; I hope someone else does it for me!" It's easy. Get a manifest and check. If you don't want to do it, then stop complaining.


nigel99  (D 1)

Dec 21, 2012, 2:26 PM
Post #53 of 84 (1831 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>Checking in isn't difficult, it doesn't require very much effort from anyone and it's
>a relatively robust and structured way for skydivers to look after themselves.

Agreed. It works and we do it all the time. I am still scratching my head as to why some people here are saying "I could never do it; I hope someone else does it for me!" It's easy. Get a manifest and check. If you don't want to do it, then stop complaining.

Because when it isn't a system properly implemented it doesn't work. So you're the one concerned citizen that regularly does it for YOUR load. What happens when it is you that is injured out in the field? Or another load?

What I find ironic is the UK has a system and yet it is the most densely populated, so your least likely to go undiscovered by others.


wolfriverjoe  (A 50013)

Dec 21, 2012, 2:59 PM
Post #54 of 84 (1821 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jacketsdb23] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm not sure how I feel about it, but I know two things:

1. I swore this could never happen until it happened at my home DZ.
2. The FAA has already started to get more involved with the recent landing area proposal and increased aircraft ramp checks (locally in CA anyway). There is more coming if we don't wake up.

Well, the landing area proposal is to address the claims of "safety issues" and traffic conflicts for access fights.
And the ramp checks are up (in part) because of a couple high profile situations involving aircraft maintenance.

I don't see the FAA getting too excited for an issue that has happened 3 times in the last 10 years in the US, where a check in wouldn't have changed the outcome anyway, (2 were dead on impact, the one that wasn't had already said "don't look for me, I'm gonna land by my trailer).

Edit to add: I'm not against implementing one, and I make sure everyone in my group makes it back, but I don't see a burning need for this.


(This post was edited by wolfriverjoe on Dec 21, 2012, 3:00 PM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 21, 2012, 3:14 PM
Post #55 of 84 (1812 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

>So you're the one concerned citizen that regularly does it for YOUR load.
>What happens when it is you that is injured out in the field? Or another load?

Someone else does it. It's really not hard. How many 8-way teams are really not going to notice when one of their members goes missing?


rifleman  (Student)

Dec 21, 2012, 5:16 PM
Post #56 of 84 (1783 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ghost47] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Someone does something. The alternative is that no one does anything. Which would you prefer?
It depends on what "someone does something" means (which is why I asked the question).

Does it mean someone broadcasts on the PA system that the missing person needs to check in? I can live with that (though that just begs the question -- what happens if they don't respond to the PA?).

Does it mean that operations shut down until this person is located? I'm not okay with that.

AFAIK in the UK it's standard practice to suspend jump operations until the missing person is accounted for - why add to the problem of a missing jumper by putting more people in the air? I've actually seen it happen - off landing where the canopy snagged a tree, operations stopped until the jumper was recovered and back on the DZ. By that time the weather had worsened so no more jumping.

Does it mean jump ticket prices go up, so the DZ can hire a person specifically to deal with that? I don't think I'd be okay with that, either.

Or does it mean something else?

It really was a genuine question. At my DZ, only jumpers on the sunset load are required to check in after their jump. I have no idea what happens if someone doesn't check in. So I'm curious what the system is, or is proposed to be, for places that require checking in after every jump.

At my home DZ it's as simple as someone on DZ control with a copy of the manifest - they know how many jumpers are on the A/C, they're in radio contact with the pilot who tells them if everyone jumped (or not); they count the canopies as they deploy and count them as they land and check them off on the manifest - so that you know someone's gone astray within 5 minutes or so


nigel99  (D 1)

Dec 21, 2012, 6:25 PM
Post #57 of 84 (1766 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>So you're the one concerned citizen that regularly does it for YOUR load.
>What happens when it is you that is injured out in the field? Or another load?

Someone else does it. It's really not hard. How many 8-way teams are really not going to notice when one of their members goes missing?

It's not the 8 way teams who have the problem. It's the visiting jumper, who nobody knows, or the guy who likes doing high pulls on his own.


Mr_Polite  (D 420)

Dec 21, 2012, 6:32 PM
Post #58 of 84 (1762 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

he was talking about himself being missing and how his 8 way team would notice. I highly doubt he actually bothers to check down the manifest list after each load he is on.


jsaxton  (D 26818)

Dec 22, 2012, 11:12 AM
Post #59 of 84 (1693 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

You forgot the Russian at Perris

In reply to:
In reply to:
USPA reported 3 million jumps last year...how many jumpers are wandering around the dz woods, zombie-like, due to a lack of a check-in system. Zero.

This just seems silly to me.

There's been (I think) three fatalities in the last few years where the person wasn't missed and the body wasn't found for a few days. The one in Houston, the one at Bay Area Skydiving, and this one. This one and the one at BAS were both no-pull fatalities; a check-in system wouldn't have changed the outcome; there was some debate as to whether the guy in Houston could have been helped.

I'm with others who say that it really needs to be incumbent on us to look out for each other. Jumping in a group? Make sure your group is all accounted for post-jump. Jumping solo? Let someone on the load know, and ask 'em to check in with you after the jump. New to the dropzone and jumping solo? Same thing, but you'll have to introduce yourself to someone on the plane first. Sly


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Dec 24, 2012, 5:50 AM
Post #60 of 84 (1565 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Remster] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Sorry... I just get tired of people wanting to make the DZ responsible for everything...

So if DZ's readily fix this problem by implementing a check-in procedure, how is it a DZ doesn't have some responsibility if they don't have such a procedure and someone goes missing?

The DZO IS responsible for everything that happens - or doesn't happen - on his/her DZ.


david3  (D 21297)

Dec 24, 2012, 12:28 PM
Post #61 of 84 (1534 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Sorry... I just get tired of people wanting to make the DZ responsible for everything...

So if DZ's readily fix this problem by implementing a check-in procedure, how is it a DZ doesn't have some responsibility if they don't have such a procedure and someone goes missing?

The DZO IS responsible for everything that happens - or doesn't happen - on his/her DZ.

Of course because no one should have any personal responsibility. It is someone elses fault.


Squeak  (E 1313)

Dec 24, 2012, 2:45 PM
Post #62 of 84 (1510 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Remster] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If the DZ spots me, great. If not, one my my friends will notice.

/rant

Dont worry mate, If I spot you bounce Ill let K know and comfort her :)Devil


Squeak  (E 1313)

Dec 24, 2012, 2:51 PM
Post #63 of 84 (1507 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>Sure, but i can't babysit 20 other people on a load.

And a DZO can't babysit 400.
you dont have to if every one is looking out for those they jump with (students should be looked out for my instructors). That only leaves the loners to account for, and obviously they have no friends so fuck em.


unkulunkulu  (C License)

Dec 24, 2012, 3:07 PM
Post #64 of 84 (1500 views)
Shortcut
Re: [david3] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Sorry... I just get tired of people wanting to make the DZ responsible for everything...

So if DZ's readily fix this problem by implementing a check-in procedure, how is it a DZ doesn't have some responsibility if they don't have such a procedure and someone goes missing?

The DZO IS responsible for everything that happens - or doesn't happen - on his/her DZ.

Of course because no one should have any personal responsibility. It is someone elses fault.
Of course the deceased is responsible for his own death, right, but he cannot for obvious reasons be responsible for noticing his absence, finding himself, his probably rented rig and notifying his relatives.


(This post was edited by unkulunkulu on Dec 24, 2012, 3:11 PM)


skyjumpenfool  (Student)

Dec 24, 2012, 3:08 PM
Post #65 of 84 (1498 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Squeak] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
That only leaves the loners to account for, and obviously they have no friends so fuck em.

Squeek... feeling that holiday spririt? Wink


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Dec 25, 2012, 5:29 AM
Post #66 of 84 (1445 views)
Shortcut
Re: [david3] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Sorry... I just get tired of people wanting to make the DZ responsible for everything...

So if DZ's readily fix this problem by implementing a check-in procedure, how is it a DZ doesn't have some responsibility if they don't have such a procedure and someone goes missing?

The DZO IS responsible for everything that happens - or doesn't happen - on his/her DZ.

Of course because no one should have any personal responsibility. It is someone elses fault.

That's not at all what I said. Each person and entity in the process has responsibilities, including the DZ.

By personal responsibility I assume you mean that an injured jumper who lands off the DZ should drag his busted femurs or broken back a few hundred yards to the nearest road and flag down help?

If there is a hole in the manifesting/jumper accountability system, exactly who or what besides the DZ is responsible for that?

I am about the biggest "individual responsibility" guy you'll ever know, but an injured jumper who lands off the DZ is at the mercy of the system - or lack thereof.


wolfriverjoe  (A 50013)

Dec 25, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #67 of 84 (1420 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

That's not at all what I said. Each person and entity in the process has responsibilities, including the DZ.

By personal responsibility I assume you mean that an injured jumper who lands off the DZ should drag his busted femurs or broken back a few hundred yards to the nearest road and flag down help?

If there is a hole in the manifesting/jumper accountability system, exactly who or what besides the DZ is responsible for that?

I am about the biggest "individual responsibility" guy you'll ever know, but an injured jumper who lands off the DZ is at the mercy of the system - or lack thereof.

Is it the responsibility of the DZO or the individual jumper to make sure he won't be laying out in a field with 2 broken legs, with nobody knowing about it?

A few years back, late on a Sunday afternoon, we were closing up. The pilot was taking the plane to a different airport for maintenance, everyone else was packing up. I did a solo H&P from the "departure flight" and asked someone to hang around until I landed, because I wasn't willing to take the risk of getting hurt on landing with nobody there.
It was one of those "Murphy" things where if I was alone, I would have been laying there until the pilot got back, but by asking someone to stay, I had a perfect landing.

At a buzy DZ, where a solo could get lost in the shuffle, I can't imagine that there wouldn't be someone willing to be that sort of "Check In" person.

But it would be up to the individual jumper to say something like "hey, I'm doing a solo. If I don't check in with you after the load lands, come look for me."


rastapara  (Student)

Dec 25, 2012, 11:25 AM
Post #68 of 84 (1386 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wolfriverjoe] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I dont really want to go in to speculation here.... but what if the guy/girl tries to kill him or her self (something the authorities in the dutch accident do not exclude as posability, and in all fairness in the facts known about the accident point to...)

I think there should be a general concern where you do not let people rot for nine days in a field... even if they didnt take responsibility for being accounted for post jump (or saving their own ass) ...

checking out from the DZ vs Checking out from the jump, there is a big difference... mind you..

On the other hand, I see this as an opportunity to realize we need to look out for one another (not more, but just do)... no system is foolproof... I have looked at my own observational capabilities and concluded to try to be a lot more aware and forthcoming of my observations.... ofcourse you can not check an entire load, but at least the people in front of you and behind you...(right?)

Ofcourse, responsablity is something diffrent but seeing that we have a general concern this is something we shoud do, and promote!

please people, be safe! And don't count on the guy with the binoculars to safe your ass or not let you rot in a field for nine days...(again not starting a menhunt, but facts are facts, and you are resposible for your own actions vs our general interesst in to not letting this happen)


nigel99  (D 1)

Dec 25, 2012, 2:44 PM
Post #69 of 84 (1369 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wolfriverjoe] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

The flaw in your system is that a new or visiting jumper may not know who is a responsible person to ask. If the person you asks forgets or most likely assumes that you're ok and does nothing you are stuffed.

We tend to make the assumption that someone is ok, and left without telling us, or something similar rather than that they are hurt. Couple of weeks ago I was atthe dz when a jumper called an hour or two after operations had stopped. They had left their credit card at manifest, and wanted it kept safe for the week. The.point is that everyone closed up "assuming" that was the case. There was no check made prior to find the missing person.

Just remember it is the dz that has the most to lose. Bad publicity can ruin a business. Individual responsibility comes in the form of checking in promptly and making you sure you don't waste peoples time.


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Dec 25, 2012, 3:43 PM
Post #70 of 84 (1356 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wolfriverjoe] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:

That's not at all what I said. Each person and entity in the process has responsibilities, including the DZ.

By personal responsibility I assume you mean that an injured jumper who lands off the DZ should drag his busted femurs or broken back a few hundred yards to the nearest road and flag down help?

If there is a hole in the manifesting/jumper accountability system, exactly who or what besides the DZ is responsible for that?

I am about the biggest "individual responsibility" guy you'll ever know, but an injured jumper who lands off the DZ is at the mercy of the system - or lack thereof.

Is it the responsibility of the DZO or the individual jumper to make sure he won't be laying out in a field with 2 broken legs, with nobody knowing about it?

The DZO.


Divalent  (C 40494)

Dec 25, 2012, 6:15 PM
Post #71 of 84 (1345 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I think there is an important distinction between someone who goes in without a main or reserve out (as appears to be the case here, and as was the case in the other notorious fatalities like it), and someone landing out under at least a partial that might be survivable. In the former case, unless they impact on the LZ, they likely will go unnoticed, but no accounting/check-in system is going to change the outcome. (At best, it will allow an early start to the search for the body.)

Where it might be beneficial is in the latter case. But here, the fact that they are landing off is more likely be noticed by other jumpers and casual spectators on the ground, particularly if something seemed unusual (like a spinning mal, or a drifting canopy flight heading away from the DZ). Have there been enough such incidents in the past (i.e., landing injured away from the DZ, but no one noticed) to justify the cost of putting in a system (and the cost of false alarms)?


(This post was edited by Divalent on Dec 25, 2012, 6:17 PM)


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Dec 25, 2012, 6:24 PM
Post #72 of 84 (1338 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Divalent] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I think there is an important distinction between someone who goes in without a main or reserve out (as appears to be the case here, and as was the case in the other notorious fatalities like it), and someone landing out under at least a partial that might be survivable. In the former case, unless they impact on the LZ, they likely will go unnoticed, but no accounting/check-in system is going to change the outcome. (At best, it will allow an early start to the search for the body.)

Where it might be beneficial is in the latter case. But here, the fact that they are landing off is more likely be noticed by other jumpers and casual spectators on the ground, particularly if something seemed unusual (like a spinning mal, or a drifting canopy flight heading away from the DZ). Have there been enough such incidents in the past (i.e., landing injured away from the DZ, but no one noticed) to justify the cost of putting in a system (and the cost of false alarms)?

That's over-think gone overboard.

Hindsight is perfect, so of course it would be easy to determine whether a check-in system made a difference in any particular situation after the fact.

The scenarios are infinite. The constant is the need to make sure everyone on the load makes it home.


JackC1

Dec 26, 2012, 1:54 AM
Post #73 of 84 (1289 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Divalent] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Have there been enough such incidents in the past (i.e., landing injured away from the DZ, but no one noticed) to justify the cost of putting in a system (and the cost of false alarms)?

Exactly how much do you think a piece of paper and a pen costs? And 99.9% of the time someone not checked-in costs you no more than the price of a PA announcement.


(This post was edited by JackC1 on Dec 26, 2012, 1:57 AM)


BillyVance  (D 18895)

Dec 26, 2012, 7:12 AM
Post #74 of 84 (1241 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If a DZO wants or has a check in system, great, all the better. But it's still my responsibility 100% to lookout for myself and others firstly. I'd use a DZOs check in as a back up, people on the jump run can figure out something's wrong faster.
The check-in is for the DZ. It's their cue to go looking for your broken, responsible self.

And nobody remembers the search for Billy Vance better than CSpencefly at the St Patrick's boogie. I had landed just off the other end of the pond and walked back, but forgot to check in. Somebody got sent out there yelling "BILLY VANCE!" in the woods. LaughLaughLaugh Blush


format  (B 15348)

Dec 26, 2012, 8:31 AM
Post #75 of 84 (1223 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BillyVance] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Pay later.
Missing money will do the rest.


tinkievinkie  (F License)

Jan 17, 2013, 10:43 AM
Post #76 of 84 (1325 views)
Shortcut
Re: [format] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

the dropzone wher this incedent happend.
is my home dz and we never want to deal with this isseu again.
we started a check in procedure on the next jump day after the suicide.
there is a "jumpmaster" every load who will check on his load if every body checked of the load sheet. if not checked in there will be an pa call and after that the dz shuts down and a search will start
danny


Scrumpot  (D License)

Jan 18, 2013, 3:53 PM
Post #77 of 84 (1229 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tinkievinkie] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Good luck with that. Seriously. Let us know how it goes, and if this procedure stands after a few incidences of shutting down the operation to start a search on a busy weekend day for just some otherwise (as is almost literally "normal" amongst us) errant dumbass, or the "jumpmaster" just misses 'em and he/she heads home, out of touch, etc.


JackC1

Jan 19, 2013, 12:14 AM
Post #78 of 84 (1178 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Scrumpot] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Meh... we've been doing that for years without a problem.


(This post was edited by JackC1 on Jan 19, 2013, 3:54 AM)


nigel99  (D 1)

Jan 19, 2013, 4:41 PM
Post #79 of 84 (1138 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JackC1] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Meh... we've been doing that for years without a problem.

Based on this discussion, I had a chat with our DZSO about check ins. He has seen a few things tried over the years, with varying levels of success.

However, from a practical point of view, it is fairly clear that solo jumpers are the 'at risk'. Students, tandems and teams all have someone else watching their back.

My understanding is that the UK has a 'load master' role, which probably marries up very well with monitoring check in and out. Manifest staff are generally swamped with 'other' issues, ground staff and instructors are usually run off their feet, looking after their primary tasks. I'd be curious to know more about the logistics of how it works in the UK?


rifleman  (Student)

Jan 21, 2013, 4:04 AM
Post #80 of 84 (1052 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

As far as I understand it (as a noob) you have one person at DZ control (the cattle pen) who gets the manifest sheet for the load. Jumpers get a flightline check and then either sign to say that thay've had it (B licence and above) or someone else signs for it (A licence and students).

DZ control then know how many jumpers at which altitudes (how many canopies) and is in constant radio contact with the A/C. The pilot tells DZ control when they've dropped people at each alti and how many (eg 3 jumpers out) and as the canopies open DZ control counts them (also observes for cutaways). As each one lands they get ticked off on the manifest sheet until all jumpers are down. If for any reason a canopy doesn't open or there's a cutaway with an off-landing then someone can be moving within minutes to start searching.

As I say this is just my impression as a low jump number noob based on the way things are done at my club. Other clubs may have different procedures in place.


ps5601  (D 100131)

Jan 21, 2013, 7:29 AM
Post #81 of 84 (995 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rifleman] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

Different UK DZs have different ways of doing things. A small cessna place may just keep an eye on who is walking back in. Bigger turbine DZs with multiple planes typically require the jumpers to check back in.

The DZ has a list of who was on what load (either paper or computer) at a point where nearly everyone has to walk past and you check your name as you walk back in. Sometimes 1 person may sign off their team etc as long as you know they are down safe.

Normally, if someone is missing the DZ calls them a lot on the PA, then saying that they will have to shut down if they don't appear (so others are also looking for them now). When they re-appear the DZO or CCI gives them a good talking to, reminding them to check in. I have not known a DZ to have to shut down and call in emergency services for someone who just forgot to check in.

Blue skies

Paul


dthames  (B 37674)

Jan 30, 2013, 10:31 AM
Post #82 of 84 (842 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rifleman] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I visited Zhills this month for 2 weeks. They did a great job of trying to find everyone that might have landed off or were unaccounted for on a load that had some off field landings. They put a lot of time and effort into finding everyone and getting them back to the DZ. They went way beyond what I have seen at other DZs to locate off jumpers. My hat is off to the staff for their consistant efforts.


airtwardo  (D License)

Jan 30, 2013, 11:02 AM
Post #83 of 84 (834 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

The best system I ever saw was at a mid-sized DZ I visited some years back.

At manifest you were given a little tag with your name on it which you stuck in your pocket until staging to board the aircraft.

There was a slot board there with cup-hooks that you hung your tag on, when you landed you grabbed your tag off the board.

Any tags remaining had the name of the jumper on it & a PA was made to both retrieve your tag and then stop by manifest to pay the beer fine for NOT retrieving your tag...Sly

2 or 3 PA's unanswered and operations were halted until everything was straightened out.

IIRC it was a 5.00 beer 'tax' for not getting your tag off the board in a timely manner which promoted compliance. Cool


Premier WickedWingsuits  (D 30916)

Jan 31, 2013, 6:09 AM
Post #84 of 84 (736 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Check-in debate [In reply to] Can't Post

I think miners use a very similar system. I wish there was more of that in action around the country. It would t be a big deal, you just needs a board and tokens, manifest doesn't even need to run it.

We could have a whole side business in logo tokens...like pull ups.



Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)