popsjumper 2 #126 March 30, 2011 QuoteIn all this debate no one has clearly stated what legitimate purpose requiring night jumps serve. Edit: I can't identify any. You're missing the point... Quote1) Having a D-license makes you eligible for a PRO rating which often involves jumping at night. There's nobody holding a gun to your head making you do a night demo. Ergo, it's elective, not required. QuoteI think it would be a terrible idea to do a nighttime demo jump of any sort if you've never executed a night jump under controlled circumstances. FIFY Quote2) Licenses are meant to be a demonstration of proficiency. Jumping at night demonstrates that we can safely jump under severely hindered visual conditions. And so it does. There's more to it than "proficiency". That's only for bragging rights. There's a more important reason - safety. Which leads us to the need to have night jump training at an earlier stage in the developmental process. QuoteBLUF: No one NEEDS a D-license. If you don't feel up to satisfying all of the requirements, then don't. So you are saying maintain the status quo with no logical reason for doing so other than "that's the way it is." Again, you've missed the point. On top of that, were it up to me, I would seriously consider a requirement to raise the jump numbers for B license to 100 jumps...or more. And, since most people, apparently, see a need for night jump training because they may be forced to jump in after-sunset conditions, then it might be a good idea to have that night jump training as a requirement for the B-license. How they are confusing twilight with night, I don't know. But there you have it. In all fairness to USPA though, the SIM does mention, -"Every skydiver, regardless of experience, should participate in night-jump training..." -"Skydivers participating in night jumping should meet all the requirements for a USPA B or higher license." But then again, they make no mention of how to handle off-landings at night.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #127 March 30, 2011 QuoteQuoteIn all this debate no one has clearly stated what legitimate purpose requiring night jumps serve. Edit: I can't identify any. You're missing the point... __________________________________________________ The point is not missed. The point is there are those who insist that requiring night jumps is a good idea. I haven't seen any valid reasoning for it. I've read hear that it would be good if you push a sunset jump and end up making a night jump. That's not a justification for requiring night jumps, it's a lack of judgment on the part of the part of all participants who willing put themselves in that position. Quote1) Having a D-license makes you eligible for a PRO rating which often involves jumping at night. There's nobody holding a gun to your head making you do a night demo. Ergo, it's elective, not required. QuoteI think it would be a terrible idea to do a nighttime demo jump of any sort if you've never executed a night jump under controlled circumstances. For those who want a pro rating and do night demos, Make night jumps a requirement to the pro rating. Quote2) Licenses are meant to be a demonstration of proficiency. Jumping at night demonstrates that we can safely jump under severely hindered visual conditions. 2 night jumps at some point in ones career does not equate to proficiency further down the road. Proficiency comes with regular practice. And so it does. There's more to it than "proficiency". That's only for bragging rights. There's a more important reason - safety. Which leads us to the need to have night jump training at an earlier stage in the developmental process. I agree that safety is the primary objective. If you want to assure safety then don't allow that sunset load to leave the ground if there is not enough time for everyone to be on the ground before its dark. Pushing the envelope and being in the air unprepared (no night jump briefing, no skydivers wearing the appropriate equipment and the landing area adequately lighted) is an unsafe act in itself. QuoteBLUF: No one NEEDS a D-license. If you don't feel up to satisfying all of the requirements, then don't. So you are saying maintain the status quo with no logical reason for doing so other than "that's the way it is." Again, you've missed the point. On top of that, were it up to me, I would seriously consider a requirement to raise the jump numbers for B license to 100 jumps...or more. And, since most people, apparently, see a need for night jump training because they may be forced to jump in after-sunset conditions, then it might be a good idea to have that night jump training as a requirement for the B-license. How they are confusing twilight with night, I don't know. But there you have it. In all fairness to USPA though, the SIM does mention, -"Every skydiver, regardless of experience, should participate in night-jump training..." -"Skydivers participating in night jumping should meet all the requirements for a USPA B or higher license." But then again, they make no mention of how to handle off-landings at night. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #128 March 30, 2011 Quote The point is not missed. The point is there are those who insist that requiring night jumps is a good idea. I haven't seen any valid reasoning for it. I've read hear that it would be good if you push a sunset jump and end up making a night jump. That's not a justification for requiring night jumps, it's a lack of judgment on the part of the part of all participants who willing put themselves in that position. OK, OK...you don't have to yell! I misread your intent...sorry. Your example is what USPA uses to justify the night jump requirement for D-license and I agree with what you said about it being BS...I've been saying that all along with the caveat that you may be on that sunset load, decide it's too dark for you and then have the pilot yell, "Get the hell off my airplane!" Now you're stuck with no night jump training. The requirement would be better served at an earlier stage in one's progression, IMHO. How's that for a reason for requiring night jump training?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kuai43 7 #129 March 30, 2011 Quote BLUF: No one NEEDS a D-license.! Wasn't familiar with the acronym, but i am now. We won't tell... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(fetishism)Every fight is a food fight if you're a cannibal Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man. - Anthony Burgess Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #130 March 30, 2011 Quote Quote The point is not missed. The point is there are those who insist that requiring night jumps is a good idea. I haven't seen any valid reasoning for it. I've read hear that it would be good if you push a sunset jump and end up making a night jump. That's not a justification for requiring night jumps, it's a lack of judgment on the part of the part of all participants who willing put themselves in that position. OK, OK...you don't have to yell! I misread your intent...sorry. Your example is what USPA uses to justify the night jump requirement for D-license and I agree with what you said about it being BS...I've been saying that all along with the caveat that you may be on that sunset load, decide it's too dark for you and then have the pilot yell, "Get the hell off my airplane!" Now you're stuck with no night jump training. The requirement would be better served at an earlier stage in one's progression, IMHO. How's that for a reason for requiring night jump training? (In a normal conversational volume and tone) I don't accept that reasoning. The load should not even be taking off without knowing it can be completed during daytime, or "Normal" jump conditions. No justification to require night jumps for those who do not choose to make them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #131 March 30, 2011 Quote Quote BLUF: No one NEEDS a D-license.! Wasn't familiar with the acronym, but i am now. We won't tell... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLUF_(fetishism) You will tell! Your Blufing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #132 March 30, 2011 Just curious~ what's the reasoning behind NOT making a night jump? ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #133 March 30, 2011 Quote I don't accept that reasoning. OK.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #134 March 31, 2011 Quote Just curious~ what's the reasoning behind NOT making a night jump? Cause its dark out there! "I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grannyinthesky 0 #135 March 31, 2011 But the view from the airat night is awesome and they are fun!!! I did the two for my D and I've done a couple more. "safety first... and What the hell..... safety second, Too!!! " ~~jmy POPS #10490 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #136 March 31, 2011 Quote Quote Just curious~ what's the reasoning behind NOT making a night jump? Cause its dark out there! First, I am not against making night jumps. If you are ok with the risks of night skydives then by all means go for it. I am against requiring night jumps for anyone other than those who want to make intentional night jumps. Example: Night Demos My reasoning for not requiring night jumps. Greatly limited visibility/depth perception in freefall with others. Much more difficult to judge distance and closing speeds. Greatly limited visibility/depth perception under canopy for the same reasons as freefall. Greatly limited visibility/depth perception for landing. Obstacles, off field landings under a main or a reserve are much more dangerous. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #137 March 31, 2011 QuoteJust curious~ what's the reasoning behind NOT making a night jump? Not against night jumps. Just the requirement to make them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #138 March 31, 2011 Quote Quote Just curious~ what's the reasoning behind NOT making a night jump? Not against night jumps. Just the requirement to make them. Not really what I would consider a valid enough reason to change the current system. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #139 April 1, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Just curious~ what's the reasoning behind NOT making a night jump? Not against night jumps. Just the requirement to make them. Not really what I would consider a valid enough reason to change the current system. I would like to hear valid reasons to require night jumps. So far there haven't been any stated in this thread. With the exception of those who want to do night demos. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #140 April 1, 2011 >I am against requiring night jumps for anyone other than those who want >to make intentional night jumps. I agree 100%. There is no need for anyone to make night jumps who doesn't want to make them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #141 April 1, 2011 QuoteIn all this debate no one has clearly stated what legitimate purpose requiring night jumps serve. Edit: I can't identify any. That's because there isn't one. All the reasons given boil down to "because it's always been that way" or actually relate to something else (like a PRO rating). We seem to be losing a lot of colleagues to canopy accidents and collisions. I can't recall the last time we lost someone for lack of night jump skills. Maybe replacing night jumps with advanced canopy skills as a requirement would save a few lives.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #142 April 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteIn all this debate no one has clearly stated what legitimate purpose requiring night jumps serve. Edit: I can't identify any. That's because there isn't one. All the reasons given boil down to "because it's always been that way" or actually relate to something else (like a PRO rating). We seem to be losing a lot of colleagues to canopy accidents and collisions. I can't recall the last time we lost someone for lack of night jump skills. Maybe replacing night jumps with advanced canopy skills as a requirement would save a few lives. I couldn't agree with you more, especially in light of yesterdays incident at Paris. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #143 April 2, 2011 QuoteI couldn't agree with you more, especially in light of yesterdays incident at Paris. Look... I'm not going to take a stand on whether or not requiring night jumps is good or useless, but I do wonder about what you just said. The 2 men who died at Perris were instructors. One of them had 17000 jumps and 20 years in the sport. I don't think that the other instructor's experience level has been mentioned. Do you think that at 17000 jumps, one of those men would actually have been better prepared if a D licsense required a couple of canopy control jumps instead of a night jump? Requiring canopy control jumps for licenses is a great idea in my opinion, but I am highly skeptical that it will prevent the type of tragedy that happened at Perris yesterday. It may help more inexperienced jumpers, but using these fatalities is invalid in my opinionOwned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #144 April 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteI couldn't agree with you more, especially in light of yesterdays incident at Paris. Look... I'm not going to take a stand on whether or not requiring night jumps is good or useless, but I do wonder about what you just said. The 2 men who died at Perris were instructors. One of them had 17000 jumps and 20 years in the sport. I don't think that the other instructor's experience level has been mentioned. Do you think that at 17000 jumps, one of those men would actually have been better prepared if a D licsense required a couple of canopy control jumps instead of a night jump? Requiring canopy control jumps for licenses is a great idea in my opinion, but I am highly skeptical that it will prevent the type of tragedy that happened at Perris yesterday. It may help more inexperienced jumpers, but using these fatalities is invalid in my opinion Can you recall how many friends we've lost in, say, the past 10 years for lack of night jump skills. Then compare it with the number we've lost in canopy accidents. The priorities are simply wrong in 2011. Maybe they were appropriate in 1980.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #145 April 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteI couldn't agree with you more, especially in light of yesterdays incident at Paris. Look... I'm not going to take a stand on whether or not requiring night jumps is good or useless, but I do wonder about what you just said. The 2 men who died at Perris were instructors. One of them had 17000 jumps and 20 years in the sport. I don't think that the other instructor's experience level has been mentioned. Do you think that at 17000 jumps, one of those men would actually have been better prepared if a D licsense required a couple of canopy control jumps instead of a night jump? Requiring canopy control jumps for licenses is a great idea in my opinion, but I am highly skeptical that it will prevent the type of tragedy that happened at Perris yesterday. It may help more inexperienced jumpers, but using these fatalities is invalid in my opinion I don't think making one or two jumps in any discipline will do a thing to significantly improve safety. That was my point with the night jump requirement. There are many opinions and much disagreement on this forum as to what we should do to prevent canopy collisions. We have lost too many people both experienced and inexperienced. One thing is certain. We will continue to bury our friends if all we do is debate, disagree, and do nothing else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #146 April 2, 2011 >Can you recall how many friends we've lost in, say, the past 10 years for >lack of night jump skills. None that I can think of, due in part to the night jump training that almost all skydivers get. If you want to see how many friends you can lose in the next 10 years due to lack of night jump skills, I suppose we could drop the training. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #147 April 2, 2011 QuoteThe priorities are simply wrong in 2011. Maybe they were appropriate in 1980. What will we do when 2 people who have both taken canopy control classes collide with each other? Require that everyone take 2 canopy control classes? Again, I think canopy control requirements are a great idea but I don't think they will prevent the kind of accident that happened yesterday. I objected to using this incident as an example of why canopy training is more important than night jump training and I still do. Do you have any indication that neither of those men had any advanced canopy training? I've taken 2 basic and 1 advanced canopy course. If I"m involved in a collision with another canopy pilot who has also had canopy training will the accident be blamed on the fact that we had to do night jumps to get a D license? No, it won't. It will probably be because either one or the other of us made a mistake or did something reckless. People will always make mistakes. We can act to censor those who make too many. Some people will exhibit a tendency to be reckless. We can act to censor them too. Occasionally, people who have shown no tendency for mistakes or recklessness collide. Some of them are lucky, as you've experienced. Some of them are not.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firemedic 7 #148 April 2, 2011 Quote>Can you recall how many friends we've lost in, say, the past 10 years for >lack of night jump skills. None that I can think of, due in part to the night jump training that almost all skydivers get. If you want to see how many friends you can lose in the next 10 years due to lack of night jump skills, I suppose we could drop the training. I can't recall any we've lost due in whole or part to night jump training either. However, I would suspect it is not due to night jump training. I would suspect the reason we haven't had night jump fatalities is that out of the total jumps made annually, comparitively few of them would be night jumps. It would be interesting to get the actual number of night jumps made annually. Jumps by those to fulfill the 2 jump requirement and those who are making more than the required number. I think is would also be interesting to determine how many injuries have occurred during night jumps in comparison to daytime jumps. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #149 April 2, 2011 QuoteWe have lost too many people both experienced and inexperienced. One thing is certain. We will continue to bury our friends if all we do is debate, disagree, and do nothing else. I agree 100% The debate makes me think about all the conversation that's been had about exit order and exit separation. I think most people now agree that it would be a seriously bad idea for a 6 way RW group to exit 2 seconds after a 6 way freefly group.... And yet we keep mixing approach speeds and angles in the pattern. It's a dilemma, isn't it? We've accepted that mixing fall rates and wind drifts is bad in freefall, but we're at a loss to deal with the same physics under canopy. It really does suck. It's a level of fragmentation that approaches unmanageable... maybe. It might be more productive to require that DZs establish a standard set of pattern rules and that anyone who wants to fly anything other than a standard set of pattern rules make sure they're segregated. That's pretty easy to do at a small DZ like the one I jump at. Most of our HP pilots open high, hang in brakes, and land in a segregated space. The majority of these accidents happen at the large, vacation / team training / bigway camp types of DZs. With both kinds of DZs, the key to me seems to be that censorship and enforcement of the rules will help prevent collisions. As jumpers and canopy pilots, we can debate and disagree and vote with our wallets all we want, but until the folks running the DZs and bigway camps and boogies and vacation resorts get on board, nothing useful will happen because too many fun jumpers think nothing bad could ever happen to "them"Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #150 April 2, 2011 Quote>Can you recall how many friends we've lost in, say, the past 10 years for >lack of night jump skills. None that I can think of, due in part to the night jump training that almost all skydivers get. . Now compare with the number we've lost in canopy accidents.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
