Recommended Posts
QuoteI can only assume that means you believe I'm giving somebody some sort of "pass." Nothing could be further from the truth.
And, in my book, you've pretty much nailed the solution to many, many problems in the skydiving world.
Giving the "pass".
I may be wrong but I don't think so right now. I can't help but to imagine how much better things would be in many areas if nobody got the "pass". Letting your buddy or the skygod or the popular guy get away with stupid crap only encourages him AND OTHERS to do more of it.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
quade 3
QuoteQuoteI can only assume that means you believe I'm giving somebody some sort of "pass." Nothing could be further from the truth.
And, in my book, you've pretty much nailed the solution to many, many problems in the skydiving world.
Giving the "pass".
I may be wrong but I don't think so right now. I can't help but to imagine how much better things would be in many areas if nobody got the "pass". Letting your buddy or the skygod or the popular guy get away with stupid crap only encourages him AND OTHERS to do more of it.
On this we agree completely.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
craigbey 0
QuoteDan was in the landing area Saturday talking to everyone who didn't fly a standard pattern.
Give it a rest about the recent changes to DZ management practices. Dan should have been out there a long time ago.
How long do you expect him to continue?
blackfox 0
dropzones need to "plan better" and not assume that everyone knows everything, canopy and landing trainning probably needs improvement and stronger uspa trainning requirments
nigel99 151
QuoteQuoteI'm new to the sport .... in my home DZ ground controll set the pattern before bording the plane.
So, if you happen to visit a DZ that has the FMD rule, please be aware:
-Landing direction could change at the last possible minute.
-It could change even after that last possible minute.
-Be prepared to dodge those last-minute waggers who drive all over the sky chasing the guy that they think is the FMD.
-Keep your head on a swivel and be prepared to dodge the people who are focused on the FMD instead of the airspace around them even if tthey are not wagging.
-Be prepared to do downwinders regardless of windspeed.
-Be prepared to share that way-out-there landing space with the 22 others who don't want to land near that FMD guy either.
-Have 9-1-1 on speed dial.
Good luck.
It seems that at the very least Perris should be doing a thorough review of their procedures. I don't buy into the argument in the latest incident that it is simply perris "time in the bucket".
I don't have the knowledge or experience to agree or disagree with their current approach but that doesn't mean that people with the appropriate knowledge and familiarity with large dz's can't review and make recommendations in the interests of ensuring that safety is as good as it can be.
davjohns 1
QuoteQuoteAnyone care to comment on the statistic that 83% of skydivers who died last year were D license holder?
The statistic, by itself, is near meaningless.
D License holders are generally the ones making more jumps.
Take a deck of cards. Shuffle it. Pick a card at random.
Every single time you pick a card, you have a 1 in 52 chance of picking the Ace of Spades. Every single time.
However, while it's possible that you could go hundreds of rounds and never pick the Ace of Spades, it's far more likely that eventually you will, regardless of what you may have been taught about "Gambler's Paradox." The ratio stays approximately the same averaged out over every round. Eventually you will almost certainly pick the Ace of Spades.
People with A licenses generally don't stay that way for very long. People with D license tend to stay that way for a very long time and accumulate far more jumps than they did as A licensed skydivers.
I think you made a leap of inference there and slightly missed the fine point of probability statistics. The deck of cards does not know how many times you have pulled a card. Neither does the Ace of spades. Every time you pull a card out of a fresh deck, your odds are 1:52. Every time.
In relation to your comment, an equal number of A, B, C and D licensed jumpers should die every year (given an equal number exists within each category). If there are more A licenses than others, there should be a greater number of dead A license holders at the end of each year.
For your argument to hold, the most prolific license in the sport should be a D license by the measure that 83% of jumpers hold a D license. I have done no research, but highly doubt that is the case. Even then, we are talking about pure probability without any consideration of skill, experience or maturity in the sport. If you factor those in, theoretically, D license holders would be the least likely to die per capita. The wind, ground, rig, etc. have no idea if it is your first jump or 10,000th. They don't care.
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
davjohns 1
QuoteSo the argument dismissing the 83% of fatalities last year is that (to take it to its logical conclusion) ~83% of skydives made were by D license holders?
Personally I'd be happy to avoid any DZ that has an FMD rule, not because I'm concerned about landing in any wind direction but because it presents a danger to me and others around me. I've never jumped at Perris so I don't know the unusual weather patterns there. To me, if you're getting winds switching that quickly from load to load, at a wind speed that would be dangerous to land down wind in, I'd say don't jump. What do I know though.
A resounding NO! In order for that logic to work, it must be mandatory that someone die every X number of jumps, regardless of skill, equipment maintenance, weather, decision making, etc. A penny flipped fifty times in a row that comes up heads every time is still 50% likely to come up heads (or tails) the next time because those are the only options and they are equally viable. The penny has no idea how many times it has been flipped.
There is no mandatory death in skydiving. None of the factors that go into a successful dive and landing have a mandatory fail...ever. Therefore, it is not logically supported to say that making more jumps increases your risk of failure.
I know people like to think this way. It seems intuitive. It is also wrong.
If this logic worked, there would be no need for accident investigations. The cause would always be law of probability. To look at fatalities this way assumes that all jumps, jumpers, equipment and conditions are equal on every jump.
But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.
kallend 1,683
QuoteQuoteQuoteAnyone care to comment on the statistic that 83% of skydivers who died last year were D license holder?
The statistic, by itself, is near meaningless.
D License holders are generally the ones making more jumps.
Take a deck of cards. Shuffle it. Pick a card at random.
Every single time you pick a card, you have a 1 in 52 chance of picking the Ace of Spades. Every single time.
However, while it's possible that you could go hundreds of rounds and never pick the Ace of Spades, it's far more likely that eventually you will, regardless of what you may have been taught about "Gambler's Paradox." The ratio stays approximately the same averaged out over every round. Eventually you will almost certainly pick the Ace of Spades.
People with A licenses generally don't stay that way for very long. People with D license tend to stay that way for a very long time and accumulate far more jumps than they did as A licensed skydivers.
I think you made a leap of inference there and slightly missed the fine point of probability statistics. The deck of cards does not know how many times you have pulled a card. Neither does the Ace of spades. Every time you pull a card out of a fresh deck, your odds are 1:52. Every time.
In relation to your comment, an equal number of A, B, C and D licensed jumpers should die every year (given an equal number exists within each category). If there are more A licenses than others, there should be a greater number of dead A license holders at the end of each year.
For your argument to hold, the most prolific license in the sport should be a D license by the measure that 83% of jumpers hold a D license. I have done no research, but highly doubt that is the case. Even then, we are talking about pure probability without any consideration of skill, experience or maturity in the sport. If you factor those in, theoretically, D license holders would be the least likely to die per capita. The wind, ground, rig, etc. have no idea if it is your first jump or 10,000th. They don't care.
But what is the probability that you will NOT have pulled an ace of spades at least once after 1,000 attempts? (answer, 3.7 x 10^-9). Meaning that after 1000 picks you have 99.9999996% likelihood of having pulled at least one ace of spades.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Why sure! You got a theory? Investigate it and see what you come up with...that's the sane way of doing things. Your investigation would, of course, include the evaluation of the operating parameters involved.
The only caveat is that you have investigate on the current terms that apply and be able and willing to approach the problem from more than just one viewpoint.
No doubt and haven't we all.
OTOH, in a similar vein, sometimes I read suggestions some people have made and wonder why not look into it....even if I don't see the relevance of it right off the bat.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites