Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Safety rules and USPA

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 11, 2012, 11:07 AM
Post #76 of 142 (880 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

...disagree with someone who has the same ideas I do? How would that work?

Like any marraige. Blush


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 11, 2012, 3:33 PM
Post #77 of 142 (859 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

>Then there are those who want to set world records but don't want to swoop. Need to
>accommodate them.

Already done. No proposed rules require anyone to swoop.


Douggarr  (D 2791)

Mar 11, 2012, 4:08 PM
Post #78 of 142 (852 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

I was just about to post a reply to this guy and say, "See what Winny has to say on this subject." If it weren't for you we wouldn't even have had baby steps.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 11, 2012, 10:13 PM
Post #79 of 142 (820 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kallend] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The Devil is in the details.

A rule needs to be simple or it will not be enforceable.

So now we enshrine a WL chart into the rules.

Exceptions created for altitude.

Exceptions created for "featherweights"

Exceptions created for those of exceptional talent who can demonstrate proficiency.

Then there are those who want to set world records but don't want to swoop. Need to accommodate them.

Etc. Etc.+

Pretty soon it will be like the tax code, and be unenforceable.

+1 it's what i was trying to say who gets to decide all these exceptions and why bother if there is exceptions. I'm all about teaching more canopy. I just think if I can educate a student then they will make choices that are smart. On the ground and in the air. With their wingloading and their surroundings. I don't have a problem at all with canopy drills for C+D as well. I do have proven with restriction in any form.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 11, 2012, 11:14 PM
Post #80 of 142 (810 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

>I'm all about teaching more canopy. I just think if I can educate a student then they
>will make choices that are smart. On the ground and in the air. With their
>wingloading and their surroundings. I don't have a problem at all with canopy drills
>for C+D as well. I do have proven with restriction in any form.

Education alone doesn't do it. We have that now and it often doesn't work.

Upjumper: "Dude you cut me off again and you never even saw me. You really need to take a canopy control course. I can recommend one."
New jumper: "No problem. I saw you. I got it covered; I didn't hit you, did I?"
Upjumper: "You don't have it covered; you're having problems with basic canopy control."
New jumper: "Get off my back, OK? My pal Joe is a great canopy pilot and he says I should downsize."
Upjumper: "Joe is even worse! He almost killed that woman last year when he . . . ."
New jumper: "What are you, a stalker? Take a hike!"

So the two options are:

1) Continue with what we have now. As others have pointed out, the FAA may not be OK with that.

2) Put in some kind of requirement to get decent education before jumping small canopies.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Mar 11, 2012, 11:42 PM
Post #81 of 142 (822 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm all about teaching more canopy. I just think if I can educate a student then they will make choices that are smart. On the ground and in the air. With their wingloading and their surroundings.

In the last 10 years there have been more books written, articles published, courses given and discussions on canopy safety than any other aspect of skydiving since the sport began. The opportunity for education is there. But the deaths under good canopies continue to rise each year. Only a fool can fail to see that without some form of regulation things are not going to change.

Sparky


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 12, 2012, 5:46 AM
Post #82 of 142 (808 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In the last 10 years there have been more books written, articles published, courses given and discussions on canopy safety than any other aspect of skydiving since the sport began. The opportunity for education is there. But the deaths under good canopies continue to rise each year. Only a fool can fail to see that without some form of regulation things are not going to change.

Sparky

..and there you have it folks. End of story.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 12, 2012, 6:05 AM
Post #83 of 142 (804 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
As far as a wing loading card. I look at it this way.We are all grown ups here I hope.
I look at is as no we are not all grown-ups here. Grown-ups would not be making the radical, thoughtless, Mad Skillz decisions some of us are making.

In reply to:
If someone told me your not good enough to jump this or that Id would be the first one to go and prove them wrong.
And you would be encouraged to do just that....after the education, training and practice.

We have educational opportunities. Many are not, and even go so far as to resist, taking advantage of those opportunities.

The B card is a start in the right direction, IMHO.

The problem with it as I see it is that it's simply a list of activities making no requirement for actual training on how to safely DO those activities.

Hopefully, the people authorized to sign off on the card have some integrity in making the requirement that the jumper actually receive the training before they agree to sign off. Given the general quality and integrity of those we have today, I see it as an open-ended invitation to bypass the training and simply sign off on the guys cards.

"I don't agree with the card idea so I'll just sign off for anyone that needs it."

Please, do NOT try to tell me it doesn't happen and please do NOT try to tell me it doesn't happen often.

In reply to:
My first TI told me this. We are in a extreme sport with extreme personalities. All different walks of life. People learn faster. Have more abilities. Its up to that person to know their limits. Yes giving direction is good but we are not kids here.
Right. On the face of it that's true. The problem is the first misconception of us all be adults making adult decisions. And that's NOT true at all.

In reply to:
Teach people to fly their canopy's and there will be less collisions.
The likelihood of there being fewer is greater with education, yes, I agree.

In reply to:
I think education is the best direction.
YEs, I agree with this. I also think that the education is not the panacea. The fact that education has always been available and yet we still have the problems we have bears that out, IMO.

It's time for regulation. The problems have brought it on themselves...and on all of us.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 12, 2012, 6:28 AM
Post #84 of 142 (794 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

If you are saying we have it now with just canopy education on the a card you are nuts. I'm sorry but what we are teaching for canopy to get your A is a joke. It's bare minimum to survive. Putting in the requirements for your B. is a step in the right direction. I sorry I just think a chart telling someone they can jump this when you have that is just a step in the wrong direction. Again how is your chart helping the 45% of poeople that died last year.

I can say we both agree something needs to be done. Good job USPA for starting to do just that. Sorry for any typos I'm driving Unsure


airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 12, 2012, 6:37 AM
Post #85 of 142 (790 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

 Sorry for any typos I'm driving

In reply to:

ummmm....


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Mar 12, 2012, 7:21 AM
Post #86 of 142 (778 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Douggarr] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

Hey Doug,

What I have to say some may not want to hear. Does something need to be done? The statistics indicate yes. What we do is the question. No matter what USPA does or doesnt do most will be unhappy because that is where they enjoy living life. It doesnt matter if a step is taken in the right direction it will never be good enough for some because the BOD has failed them for the last twenty years. So, most sit back and bitch rather than let by gones be by gones and get involved. IMO getting involved doesnt mean typing on DZ.com and bitching and moaning how they would do everything differently. Getting involved means do like Bill did and compose a draft letter, compose a full idea, put down on paper the exact answer that you feel will work. Dot your I's and cross your T's. You know the questions that will be asked, just have answers for them. Then send it to me. I will give you my two cents and then I will request it get put on the agenda for consideration. Sorry fellas that is how it works.

It seems that the majority of membership is in favor of a BSR for wingloading. So come together and make it happen. I will help bring it forward. But quite frankly I have gotten bored and discouraged reading threads and threads of complaints. We spent more hours than you can imagine on the B proficiency card, with the hopes it would be accepted. Then once Vetted in the field then maybe we can come forward with a C or D license card or a higher wingloading card.
I was just like most and I felt I had all the answers, the problem is the system is designed to slow down those that want change yesterday. Maybe a good thing, it stops or at least slows down knee jerk reactions.

Anyhow, to sum it up, I am not in disagreement, I would just need to see it all laid out in front of me so I can take it in. Until someone takes the lead on it we can just keep on reading the nay sayers go on and on about how if they were king.

A good example whether you agree or not is the Wing Suit Instructor rating. It doesnt matter, did you hear me? it doesnt matter if you agree or not. What DSE did was he felt there was a need for a WS Instructor rating. He developed a syllabus, he developed full presentation, he had answers for all questions that were thrown at him, he had statistics, he had videos to back up his statistics. Once he compiled it all he came forward and had it placed on the agenda. At the BOD meeting he gave a very impressive presentation. That is how you get involved if you want something to change or you feel you have a better way to do something. I respect that far more than the guy who sends me a PM saying how bad we screwed the pooch on said topic. Now a sub-committee has been formed to gather as much input from the membership as possible and try to make a sound decision. Oh and let me add he brought this forward once before and it failed but he believes in it so strongly he gathered more information, statistics, and input from experienced ws'ers and brought it forward again. Kudoos to him. There is your example of how to make change happen. It might fail but you know what, you have to respect the dedication and commitment to a cause that is strongly believed in.

If you want a wing loading BSR, bring it forward. If you want a C or D license proficiency card bring it forward. If you want a high performance card bring it forward. I promise to help you out the best I can. My job is to represent the members and if that is what they want I will do just that.

Rich Winstock


davelepka  (D 21448)

Mar 12, 2012, 7:36 AM
Post #87 of 142 (772 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If you want a wing loading BSR, bring it forward

You don't think the fatality reports have brought this forward every year for the last decade (or more)?

I'll bite on your example with DSE. He knows about wingsuiting rating because he's involved with wingsuit training everyday. The rest of us don't much about the details because it's not a problem that's plagued the sport for over a decade and that has been put into print in the USPAs very oen magazine for each of those years. If the wingsuit community wants something done, they need to step up and make it happen because it might not be apparent to non-wingsuiters that there is a problem or a need for a rating.

Every jumper flies a canopy, and the fact that open canopy incidents are the #1 killer of skydivers has been common knowledge for many, many years. This is not the type of thing the membership should have to initiate, this is the type of thing that should be on the top of the list at every BOD meeting until the trend is reversed.

Trying to push the responsibility off on the membership is a cop-out. The whole purpose of the BOD is to handle the business of the USPA, and that business is regulating skydiving in the US (mostly so the FAA doesn't have to). The membership did it's job when it elected the BOD to do theirs.


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Mar 12, 2012, 7:49 AM
Post #88 of 142 (761 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Sorry for any typos I'm driving Unsure

Hmm, I think you just made an example, and the point, that education alone is not working, and "Rules with Enforcement" is needed.

Matt


DiverMike  (C 40024)

Mar 12, 2012, 8:27 AM
Post #89 of 142 (752 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hmm, I think you just made an example, and the point, that education alone is not working, and "Rules with Enforcement" is needed.

Hell - rules and enforcement don't always help as in this example texting while driving is illegal and enforced.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 12, 2012, 9:24 AM
Post #90 of 142 (734 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

Whatever lol
I was in a gas station filling my car with gass while typing this actually. Listen people wii always die in this sport. It's a fact of life. We are all adults and if we educate them they will be smarter adults. I really don't mind a chart if education goes with it. Geez one of the fatalities was a guy with 150 jumps with a camera on his head and jumping with a tandem. We have restrictions on that and a lot they did for that guy. I just think if we took the time to teach people why this or that is more of a risk they would be less likely to do it and if they do do it they would have a better understanding what they are gettting involved in. I have said enough on this madder. Time to go skydive.


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Mar 12, 2012, 9:35 AM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 12, 2012, 9:27 AM
Post #91 of 142 (732 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

>If you are saying we have it now with just canopy education on the a card you are nuts.

We have canopy education on the card. We have a section in the SIM dealing with advanced canopy control. We have articles from companies like PD and Aerodyne. We have literally dozens of canopy coaches and canopy courses. We have schools dedicated to canopy coaching, and they use everything from video coaching to ground launching to teach canopy control.

So we have that all. We just need incentives to get people to use it. "You can't jump that canopy until you get some training" or "you can't get a C license until you get that training" are both excellent incentives, IMO.

>I'm sorry but what we are teaching for canopy to get your A is a joke. It's bare
>minimum to survive.

I agree; we should do more. But now you sound like you're moving to the side of restrictions. "No canopy education? You can't have an A, and you can't jump on your own. Guess you'll have to take that canopy control course."

>Again how is your chart helping the 45% of poeople that died last year.

Let's take the first 5:

3/3 - Two dead due to collision. One person turned into another person and killed them. If they had had to get training on setting up a HP turn before they got their current canopy both might have survived. If they didn't want to get the education the offending jumper would have been restricted to a larger canopy - and likely would not have collided,

3/6 - One died due to collision with tree. 600 jumps. If he had had to get canopy training (including extending glide and additional tree landing instruction) before he got his D license he might have survived.

3/31 - Two died due to canopy collision. The offender had thousands of jumps and per friends did this sort of stuff all the time. If he had had to get better HP canopy training before he got his D license this accident might not have occurred.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 12, 2012, 9:51 AM
Post #92 of 142 (725 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not saying we don't need to do more. Just the oppiste. What I was saying is the A card canopy skills is a joke. The student are learning so much that I think most don't retain most of what they learn. As it was before the only other thing is accuracy jumps to move forward. Everyone mentions articals and adv canopy in the sims. Well most don't read it cause they don't have too. Now they do. Now all these canopy course that have been out there you need to take to further your self. Thums up for that. Restricting wing loading is not the problem. Like you said people are running into each other. That has nothing to do with wing loading. That has to do with people don't know how to fly their Canopy's. Let's. Start teaching them is all I am saying. This is what I think USPA is trying to do. I think we are arguing the same point it's I just think it needs to be done differently is all again sorry about typos using my phone and it's hard to see.
Edit to add
Bottom line is swooping and wingloading is not the problem here. People knowing how to fly there canopy is. adding a wing loading chart might slow people down but it will not help the situation. Teaching them to understand the wing over their head and how to use it will. Just my opinion.


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Mar 12, 2012, 10:57 AM)


kallend  (D 23151)

Mar 12, 2012, 9:54 AM
Post #93 of 142 (722 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>Then there are those who want to set world records but don't want to swoop. Need to
>accommodate them.

Already done. No proposed rules require anyone to swoop.

Good.

But that really wasn't the point of my post.


kallend  (D 23151)

Mar 12, 2012, 10:06 AM
Post #94 of 142 (716 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hey Doug,

What I have to say some may not want to hear. Does something need to be done? The statistics indicate yes. What we do is the question.

...

Rich Winstock

Statistics indicate that skydivers are killing themselves under perfectly good canopies for a variety of reasons.

I remain to be convinced that anything will improve much if the proposals are implemented. For sure, nothing will be achieved if DZOs aren't willing to enforce them.

What seems to be missing is a clearly articulated argument that the details of any WL BSR actually addresses the problems identified in the statistics, an indication of how it is to be effectively enforced, and some evaluation and improvement protocol so we can see if it's actually working once it is in place, and tweaking it to fix any issues that become apparent.

I think the BOD has been correct in holding off on this until the proposals meet some minimum standard for imposing a rule change on the community.


(This post was edited by kallend on Mar 12, 2012, 10:08 AM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 12, 2012, 11:37 AM
Post #95 of 142 (685 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

>The student are learning so much that I think most don't retain most of what they learn.

Agreed. Which is why the B license requirements are a good start.

>Like you said people are running into each other. That has nothing to do with wing loading.

Faster canopies = less time to see and avoid.

>Let's. Start teaching them is all I am saying.

OK. You have a guy at your DZ who just wants to buy a Velo 96 and swoop. He refuses to get canopy coaching; he says he's fine, although he is clearly going to kill himself if he continues.

What do you do?


airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 12, 2012, 11:44 AM
Post #96 of 142 (683 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

What do you do?

In reply to:

Unfortunately the only thing you currently CAN do is buy Bingo squares...that's gotta change. Unimpressed


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 12, 2012, 12:12 PM
Post #97 of 142 (674 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

lol I get that all the time. I tell them if that's what he wants to do so be it just not here. I know you will say its restricting them. I think it's just making the decision for them because they are not educated enough to make the decision themselves. Your question is a open ended question. Is it a guy that has 200 jumps or a guy with 1000. I would defiantly sit them down and explain the steps to get to said size canopy. Again I think we are arguing the same point that something needed to be done. I think a chart would be more of a headache with all the exceptions and what's the point if there is exceptions. What good is a chart if this guy or that girl can go outside the chart. Having everyone go threw a advanced course will change things


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Mar 12, 2012, 1:26 PM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 12, 2012, 12:17 PM
Post #98 of 142 (671 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

>I think it's just make the discition for the because them are not educated enough to
>make the decision themselves.

I agree. And that's why restrictions work - to give them enough time to get that education _before_ they cripple or kill themselves.

>What good is a chart if this guy or that girl can go outside the chart.

It's not good if anyone can do that. If they have to take a course BEFORE they can do that, then they'll take the course - and the objective (more education) will be achieved.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 12, 2012, 1:19 PM
Post #99 of 142 (657 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>I think it's just make the discition for the because them are not educated enough to
>make the decision themselves.

I agree. And that's why restrictions work - to give them enough time to get that education _before_ they cripple or kill themselves.

>What good is a chart if this guy or that girl can go outside the chart.

It's not good if anyone can do that. If they have to take a course BEFORE they can do that, then they'll take the course - and the objective (more education) will be achieved.

Agree so where does this chart fit in then? If everyone is taking canopy courses whats the chart for? How does that teach?

So basically the chart is a glide line of the person making the chart Who thinks said wing loading is good for everyone based off of jump numbers and no other factor. I don't see how you can do this with all variables out there that comes with it.
If you do include all the different situation in the chart. Whats the point. Either they are ready or they are not. A chart will never be able to tell you this. A course will.

Just got home man im sorry about all the typos in my posts.


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Mar 12, 2012, 1:27 PM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 12, 2012, 1:47 PM
Post #100 of 142 (641 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Safety rules and USPA [In reply to] Can't Post

>Agree so where does this chart fit in then?

"You can't exceed the loadings on this chart until you take this course." That helps keep people alive until they take the course.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)