C-license (App 40 Jumps) and until you reach 200 jumps: Only semi elliptical canopies. Weight naked + 10 KG-then you must have max 0.5 kg pr sq ft . 85 kg naked + 10 kg means 190 sq. ft
From 200 and up to 400 jumps : Weight naked + 10 KG- then you must have max 0.650 kg pr sq ft . 85 kg naked + 10 kg means 146 sq. ft. Only semi elliptical canopies, unless you choose to stick to 0,5 kg pr sq. ft. (Elliptical canopies are defined by name- Katana, Crossfire etc)
400-600 jumps: Common sense. No wingload restrictions, but crossbrace canopies are not allowed
600 jumps: Only common sense
The problem with this simple way is, that sometimes we hold someone back and sometimes people get into too small canopies too early. I think it's difficult only to have rules. A mix that includes canopy piloting courses will definately improve safety
For the different categories you need a certain amount of jumps, and you need to be current.
It tells you which type of canopy you can jump, which minimum size, and which maximum wingload.
I : wingload max 1,1; at least 170 sqft II : >25 jumps total, >10 last 12 months: wingload max 1,1; at least 170 sqft III : >100 jumps total, >25 last 12 months: wingload max 1,3; at least 150 sqft IV : >400 jumps total, >50 last 12 months: wingload max 1,5; at least 135 sqft V : >700 jumps total, >100 last 12 months: wingload max 1,7, at least 120 sqft VI : >1000 jumps total, no restrictions
If a canopy is not listed, it's automatically classified as catVI.
Do I read this correct or is it not allowed to fly any canopy smaller than 89 sqft. in Norway and I (85kg exitweight) could not fly something less than 104 sqft.? Or do you just go to the chefinstructor of the DZ and ask him if you can jump your small canopy?
The BPA as an organisation doesn't set any rules regarding wing loading once off student status; it's up to the Club Chief Instructor to be happy with you jumping with the canopy - and they do pay a considerable amount of attention to that. However, high performance landings - defined as anything to accelerate the canopy beyond its normal flying speed to land - cannot be conducted unsupervised until you have been through training and been given a suitable endorsement on your licence.
What I don't like about broad-brush wingloading-based rules for canopy choice are:
1. They can be too generous to small, lighter jumpers / too harsh on big heavy guys (it's not just wingloading; absolute size makes a difference)
2. Jump #s do not take into account prior experience (I was a hang and paraglider pilot before I jumped) and ability levels (I've also seen jumpers with 700+ skydives that would not be safe on anything more aggressive than a 7-cell canopy @ 1.2 lbs/sq ft doing straight-in approaches)
3. As could be seen in Germany and Austria with paragliders under the DHV system, once you reach a certain threshold in experience and become entitled to use a higher performance canopy, the decision to migrate to the higher perforance planform is often taken with scant regard for the pilot's own ability
4. Progress is usually not smooth, with jumps in performance being common (I think of my own downsize history - got to a 150 @ 1.4 relatively quickly; did hundreds of jumps on that before going through a 129 fairly quickly to a 109, which I had for several hundred. before trying crossbraced)
Consequently, I'm not in favour of implementing a hard "jump number"-based system of rules for downsizing, rather empowering those club operators to make appropriate choices given abililty.
...the accident statistics of the countries with mandatory downsizing rules prove them right!...
that is only "one" of the possible way. how can you prove that it is not rather because the jumper that are now flying like "pussy"... and again, except for the tranquility of DZO, how is this "so" better?
i dont know about other country, but in France, accidents are primarily due to lack of formation and training. the size is only one factor agravant, or not... and again, again, for the French, the problem is similar in driving a car, or bike, etc...
(This post was edited by rem on May 16, 2012, 3:42 AM)