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

 

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

Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 10:50 AM
Post #1 of 292 (4338 views)
Shortcut
BSR proposal for canopy patterns Can't Post

Below is a document that several skydivers (including myself) have spent some time working on. We will be discussing it here, via email with other DZO's, and at the upcoming USPA meeting in July. This thread is intended for discussion; I will later post a thread for anyone who wishes to add their name to the petition.
-----------------------------------
Dear Fellow Skydivers,

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. We
present them here to encourage feedback and discussion over the pros and
cons of the various implementations.

Our intent is to propose a new BSR to increase safety under canopy for all
skydivers.

With the advance of the sport over the decades, the BSRs have remained
largely unchanged for experienced skydivers. Today, the largest single
cause of injury and death in our sport is pilot error under an open and
flying canopy. Recently we have seen an alarming increase in one sort of
canopy incident - an incident where one jumper turns into another one.
These collisions rarely have good outcomes.

There are recommendations, suggestions, and guidelines in the SIM regarding
flying parachutes in a pattern but the statistics show that these are not
sufficient to slow down the increase in these injuries.
We therefore see a need for a landing area BSR to help DZO's to keep jumpers
from killing themselves (and more importantly other jumpers.)

Below we present three options for additions to the BSR's:

--------------------
OPTION 1:

H. Drop zone requirements

4. Landing Patterns:

a. The standard landing pattern (SLP) is defined as a rectangular flight
pattern with a defined downwind, base and final turn to land. Jumpers will
enter a leg of the pattern determined by their position relative to the
landing area. Each turn in the pattern will be no more than ninety (90)
degrees. [NW]

b. Any landing pattern that does not conform to the standard landing pattern
will be termed a high performance landing (HPL). [NW]

c. Every drop zone, where high performance landings are permitted, will
separate the landing traffic geographically, or by time, so that no one in
the high performance landing pattern area can interfere with a landing in
the standard landing pattern area. [FB]

d. If a jumper intends to make a high performance landing, but cannot get to
the HPL area, then a standard landing pattern will be performed regardless
of location. [NW]

e. If a jumper intends to make a standard landing, they will avoid using the
HPL area. If they find themselves in the HPL area, they will avoid the
center of the area and land on the edges. [NW]

----------------------

OPTION 2:

H. Drop zone requirements

4. Landing Patterns:

a. The standard landing pattern (SLP) is defined as a rectangular flight
pattern with a defined downwind, base and final turn to land. Jumpers will
enter a leg of the pattern determined by their position relative to the
landing area. Each turn in the pattern will be no more than ninety (90)
degrees. [NW]

b. Any landing pattern that does not conform to the standard landing pattern
will be termed a high performance landing (HPL). [NW]

c. Once a standard landing pattern (SLP) jumper enters the pattern area, NO
high performance landings (HPL) can be made in that area. [NW]

-----------------------------------

OPTION 3:

H. Drop zone requirements

4. Landing Patterns:

a. The standard landing pattern (SLP) is defined as a rectangular flight
pattern with a defined downwind, base and final turn to land. Jumpers will
enter a leg of the pattern determined by their position relative to the
landing area. Each turn in the pattern will be no more than ninety (90)
degrees. [NW]

b. Any landing pattern that does not conform to the standard landing pattern
will be termed a high performance landing (HPL). [NW]

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]

-----------------------------------

Aircraft flight patterns were devised to keep pilots from crashing into each
other while landing on the same runway, even when radio services are not
available. These FAR rules have worked well for a century and been modified
as technology has advanced the capabilities of aircraft.

USPA needs to remain proactive with the need to enforce safety. Canopy
collisions in the landing pattern are the next serious safety issue USPA
needs to address.

The last major threat to the sport was seatbelts. After a series of aircraft
crashes with skydivers on board and the apparent lack of seatbelts being
worn, the FAA wanted this problem fixed, quickly. The FAR requiring seatbelt
usage already existed, it was just overlooked by most people in the sport.
USPA solved the seatbelt issue by adding a BSR to the SIM, and by working
with DZOs, aircraft owners and skydivers via a proactive campaign to educate
all in the sport about seatbelt usage. Currently it is second nature for a
jumper to put on a seatbelt in a jump aircraft. We want this same second
nature attitude for jumpers flying into the landing pattern.

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


Mostly_Harmless  (C 35480)

Apr 30, 2007, 11:05 AM
Post #2 of 292 (4287 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Bill,
You list 8 people who contributed to drafting this document. What are the stats of these people (number of jumps/years in sport/canopy/disciplines practiced)? Also of these 8 people do any of them routinely perform high performance landings?


(This post was edited by Mostly_Harmless on Apr 30, 2007, 11:06 AM)


Premier ianmdrennan  (D 25821)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 11:55 AM
Post #3 of 292 (4220 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
You list 8 people who contributed to drafting this document. What are the stats of these people (number of jumps/years in sport/canopy/disciplines practiced)? Also of these 8 people do any of them routinely perform high performance landings?

Not one on that list are any HP Canopy Pilot that I know of or have met (not to say that means they aren't).

Ian


Glitch  (D 10834)

Apr 30, 2007, 11:56 AM
Post #4 of 292 (4218 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Mostly...

Mind if I ask why the stats of these individuals or whether they perform HP landings are relevant? I think we've (the skydiving communty at large) already determined that this IS NOT a swooper issue, but rather an issue with everyone under a canopy. In addition, I haven't a clue as to what their 'stats' do for this conversation either.

Something, aside from a knee-jerk reaction, needs to be done and this is the closest thing I've seen to date...


Premier ianmdrennan  (D 25821)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 11:57 AM
Post #5 of 292 (4216 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ianmdrennan] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
e. If a jumper intends to make a standard landing, they will avoid using the
HPL area. If they find themselves in the HPL area, they will avoid the
center of the area and land on the edges.

Depends on which edge and how they get there.

IMO they should be dealt with as harshly as a pilot doing HP's in a non HP area. For all intents and purposes it should be a no-fly zone.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 12:05 PM
Post #6 of 292 (4199 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ianmdrennan] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

>IMO they should be dealt with as harshly as a pilot doing HP's in a non HP area.

Any skydiver always has the option of doing a non-HP landing. Most skydivers do not have the option of doing a HP landing.


Mostly_Harmless  (C 35480)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:10 PM
Post #7 of 292 (4184 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Glitch] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Mostly...

Mind if I ask why the stats of these individuals or whether they perform HP landings are relevant? I think we've (the skydiving communty at large) already determined that this IS NOT a swooper issue, but rather an issue with everyone under a canopy. In addition, I haven't a clue as to what their 'stats' do for this conversation either.

Something, aside from a knee-jerk reaction, needs to be done and this is the closest thing I've seen to date...


I would just like to know who the people are who are writing this up. I don't think it's a rediculious question to ask. If this is an "issue with everyone under a canopy" situation then I think that every needs to have a say including jumpers who perform high performance landings routinely. I wouldn't want people with solely RW experience to write the rules regarding a VRW competition in the same way I wouldn't want people with 5,000 staight in landings to dictate rules with no input from pilots who perform high performance landings.

I agree that something needs to be done. I don't want to die because of someone elses neglect. I also agree that what Bill posted seems pretty fair to all pilots. But considering I am not a swooper (would like to be one day) I would like to know that the rules to a degree satisfy everyone. Maybe I am playing the devil's advocate (not really trying too) so if I am out of line with these questions then I will stop.


Andrewwhyte  (C 1988)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:11 PM
Post #8 of 292 (4181 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:


c. Once a standard landing pattern (SLP) jumper enters the pattern area, NO
high performance landings (HPL) can be made in that area. [NW]

How do you determine if someone is a SLP jumper other than after the fact?
What if I enter the pattern with intent to do a 270, screw up my base, and bail into a nice safe 90? Does that mean that the three guys stacked above me are now prohibited from busting their move?


Premier ianmdrennan  (D 25821)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 12:12 PM
Post #9 of 292 (4178 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Any skydiver always has the option of doing a non-HP landing. Most skydivers do not have the option of doing a HP landing.

Bill, that's not the point. The point is that if they are in, or around, the HP area they are an incredible danger to themselves and those doing HP landings.


Premier ianmdrennan  (D 25821)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 12:15 PM
Post #10 of 292 (4166 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I would just like to know who the people are who are writing this up. I don't think it's a rediculious question to ask. If this is an "issue with everyone under a canopy" situation then I think that every needs to have a say including jumpers who perform high performance landings routinely. I wouldn't want people with solely RW experience to write the rules regarding a VRW competition in the same way I wouldn't want people with 5,000 staight in landings to dictate rules with no input from pilots who perform high performance landings.

I agree that something needs to be done. I don't want to die because of someone elses neglect. I also agree that what Bill posted seems pretty fair to all pilots. But considering I am not a swooper (would like to be one day) I would like to know that the rules to a degree satisfy everyone. Maybe I am playing the devil's advocate (not really trying too) so if I am out of line with these questions then I will stop.

I agree. If someone hasn't dedicated part, if not all, of their skydiving career to learning canopy flight, how are they qualified or equipped to think of all the ways flight around the HP area can effect both the HP and the non-HP pilots?

Ian


Andrewwhyte  (C 1988)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:19 PM
Post #11 of 292 (4153 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

You're right someone without VRW should not dictate the competition rules, but we are talking about a BSR; this concerns everyone. John Kallend's head down skills (or lack thereof) were not important when he explained to us why they get out after the belly flyers.


Premier DSE  (D 29060)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:20 PM
Post #12 of 292 (4152 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

in terms of their experience, look at the D numbers; mostly very low.
Frankly, swooper, non-swooper, current, non-current, it takes a group like these guys to get *something* initiated. We can't know if it's the wrong thing til it's had some time to be experienced and fine-tuned.
Gotta applaud this team for making the effort, and hopefully this forum (small representation of skydivers) and the others that I'm confident are providing feedback outside of this community that Bill et al can use to strengthen/improve whatever foundation they are laying with this recommendation.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 12:27 PM
Post #13 of 292 (4135 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ianmdrennan] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

> The point is that if they are in, or around, the HP area they are
>an incredible danger to themselves and those doing HP landings.

I agree. Hence the section stating "If a jumper intends to make a standard landing, they will avoid using the HPL area."


Mostly_Harmless  (C 35480)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:31 PM
Post #14 of 292 (4127 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Andrewwhyte] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Andrew,
I agree with you, it does concern everyone which is why I believe pilots from both sides should be included.

DSE,
I noticed the low D numbers right away. While the does show input from long time jumpers, it doesn't show there currency or there participation in certain disciplines. Someone with a low D number could have made 200 jumps 20 years ago and haven't made one since then.

Bill posted this document up on dz.com for disscussion ( as stated in the begining of his post) so I am just adding my 2 cents (whatever they might be worth). As I said before I am a wannbe swooper and therefor I would like to know that there will be a place for it when I reach the experience level to which I feel comfortable enough to pursue it. Until then I can only count on the experienced pilots of today to ensure a certain level of "fairness" in the rules.


ChrisL  (C 35323)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:34 PM
Post #15 of 292 (4116 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ianmdrennan] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't think its relevant whether they swoop or not.

People don't need to drive a car to create common sense rules about how cars should behave with regard to each other.

Now if it was a rule about how one should execute a high performance landing, clearly you would want swoopers to have a LOT of input.

To decide that swoopers and non swoopers shouldn't land in the same place
I don't think you even need to be a skydiver. All you have to do is look at what can happen when the two mix in the same landing area.


(This post was edited by ChrisL on Apr 30, 2007, 12:35 PM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 12:35 PM
Post #16 of 292 (4113 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

>What are the stats of these people . . .

My stats:

Jumping since 1991, ~5000 jumps
AFF/Tandem/SL instructor at various times
S+TA for two years
Bigway world records 2002, 2004, 2006
Current discipline is RW; training for 8-way
Last jump was yesterday
Current canopy is a Nitro 108 loaded 1.95 to 1
Most of my landings are 90 degree front riser swoops since I usually land in traffic
When I have the space I do 180-270 degree swoops

I have emailed the other people on the proposal and told them that someone asked this question; they can answer if they choose. I won't try to speak for them.


(This post was edited by billvon on Apr 30, 2007, 12:36 PM)


Premier ianmdrennan  (D 25821)
Moderator
Apr 30, 2007, 12:37 PM
Post #17 of 292 (4103 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisL] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I don't think its relevant whether they swoop or not.

I disagree with you. How can you know enough about the dynamics of the environment you're proposing if you don't understand it in the first place?

It isn't only about seperate landing areas, it's about how those areas intersect in patterns, pattern direction, flight paths, and the necessary safety buffers required around those to make it work - and that's just to start with off the top of my head.

Unless you have an obnoxiously large landing area these are some issues you will have to deal with.

Blues,
Ian


(This post was edited by ianmdrennan on Apr 30, 2007, 12:40 PM)


Mostly_Harmless  (C 35480)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:43 PM
Post #18 of 292 (4078 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisL] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

If separating the landing areas into two different zones (one for non-HP landings the other for HP landings) is all it's going to take then I am all for it. As I mentioned before I don't want to die because of someone elses neglect as much as I believe no one wants to kills an innocent person. But how much of a DZ's landing area do we give to HP pilots and non-HP pilots? Should there be a certain distances between them? What if a certain DZ's landing area is too small to accommadate both types of pilots?

I only have 2 years in this sport. I have jumped at 5 DZ's out of hundreds. So if my questions seem stupid or out of line just let me know. Share the knowledge.


ChrisL  (C 35323)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:45 PM
Post #19 of 292 (4070 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ianmdrennan] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
I don't think its relevant whether they swoop or not.

I disagree with you. How can you know enough about the dynamics of the environment you're proposing if you don't understand it in the first place?

It isn't only about seperate landing areas, it's about how those areas intersect in patterns, pattern direction, flight paths, and the necessary safety buffers required around those to make it work - and that's just to start with off the top of my head.

Unless you have an obnoxiously large landing area these are some issues you will have to deal with.

Blues,
Ian

I don't think these proposals were meant to have that kind of granularity, but rather, they were just the basic framework.

I would think the specifics would need to be worked out for each dropzone at each dropzone depending on their layout and amount of space.

At that time, swoopers would DEFINITELY need to be involved in the process for the very reasons you state.

For these basic recommendations? I still don't see that the chosen disciplines of the people that came up with them is relevant.


(This post was edited by ChrisL on Apr 30, 2007, 12:47 PM)


jheadley  (D 28710)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:53 PM
Post #20 of 292 (4043 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
> The point is that if they are in, or around, the HP area they are
>an incredible danger to themselves and those doing HP landings.

I agree. Hence the section stating "If a jumper intends to make a standard landing, they will avoid using the HPL area."

What would one do if non-HPL jumpers are forced to land in the HPL area due to the spot or some other situation?


ChrisL  (C 35323)

Apr 30, 2007, 12:53 PM
Post #21 of 292 (4043 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mostly_Harmless] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
As I mentioned before I don't want to die because of someone elses neglect as much as I believe no one wants to kills an innocent person.

Me either. I don't want a swooper to take me out, nor do I want to stupidly blunder into the path of a high performance landing.

The result would be the same whether it was his fault or mine.

We would both be seriously injured or dead.

Separate landing areas would certainly seem to prevent either scenario
or at least seriously reduce the chances of such an event taking place.

In reply to:

I only have 2 years in this sport. I have jumped at 5 DZ's out of hundreds. So if my questions seem stupid or out of line just let me know. Share the knowledge.

I don't have much knowledge. I'm not all that experienced either. I do believe that some common sense stuff is not directly tied to experience in the sport.


simplyputsi  (B License)

Apr 30, 2007, 1:00 PM
Post #22 of 292 (4022 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Well it looks at though we all can agree on one thing

Something needs to be done.

seperate landing areas are definitely needed.

However from the looks of it, it's not going to just be cut and paste on this issue.

I think everyone needs to keep it simple. People who don't want to HPL it know where they should be landing, and those that are HPL'n it also know where they should be landing.

If one or the other end up in the others landing area it's a tough call. A non HPL pilot can not do an HPL. However a HPL pilot can do a SLP. My suggestion is given the landing zone, make the two far far apart from each other. As far as possible.

Then maybe because of wind patterns these areas can be switched up, this being needed because of landing zone constraints.

This is a tough one. I trust billvon and the others will come up with a truly acceptable solution, as will all of us.


tombuch  (D 8514)

Apr 30, 2007, 1:07 PM
Post #23 of 292 (4006 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Great work, Bill. Way to be proactive and try to make a difference.

My preference would be #3, then #2, then #1, but any of the options are certainly workable.

Take it to the BOD and demand an actual response at the July meeting. We are past study time and really need action from the national organization.


katecooper  (D 7333)

Apr 30, 2007, 1:08 PM
Post #24 of 292 (4003 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi--kate here sounding in per Bill's request:

Jumping since 1978, 8000 + jumps
SL instructor--not current
Pro Rating--current
Bigway world records, 12 in FS, 1 in FF
Current discipline is RW; training for 8-way and currently conducting events and coaching seminars worldwide. Have medaled in FS at the local, regional and national levels.
Last jump was Saturday (Denmark), I've made 150 jumps this year. I've remained current--by anyone's standards--since I started jumping.
Current canopies include a Katana 107, a Pilot 104, a Crossfire2 109, a Sabre2 107 and a Sabre2 120 (yes, I jump them all, and no, it does NOT suck to be me)
Most of my landings are straight in--sometimes, if space allows, I will do a 90 degree riser turn
I am actively coaching and training jumpers to do large formation FS at all levels. Adherence to strict canopy patterns is VERY important to me.

I believe in these changes. I am tired of losing friends. I want US to save this sport before others step in to "help" us save it.

I'm off to the US tomorrow, will be off line for a while.
I'll be at Perris from 1-14 May and available for comments or conversations.

So that others may live....

blue skies
kate


chaoskitty  (B 26574)

Apr 30, 2007, 1:14 PM
Post #25 of 292 (3991 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jheadley] BSR proposal for canopy patterns [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
> The point is that if they are in, or around, the HP area they are
>an incredible danger to themselves and those doing HP landings.

I agree. Hence the section stating "If a jumper intends to make a standard landing, they will avoid using the HPL area."

What would one do if non-HPL jumpers are forced to land in the HPL area due to the spot or some other situation?

Pick an out and walk back.


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

Forums : Skydiving : General Skydiving Discussions

 


Search for (options)