0
chuckakers

USPA and the canopy issue

Recommended Posts

Thought: one thing that has helped me get the canopy word out so to speak is something I started last year. I was devasted to hear about the double canopy collision at Skys the Limit this year. Two older experienced guys who were adored by all.

I hold around 6 or so water trainings at our dropzone each season. When I get the 50 jump jumpers in front of me for water training, I incorporate a canopy discussion as well to include: landing patterns, canopy flight, canopy seperation, freefall seperation, exit order, landing area seperation, canopy characteristics...etc. This is all included in a power point prior to hitting the pool.
I figure I have their undivided attention and they have to be there so I have them. Why not use the time and fact they have to be there to my advantage. If there was a mandatory canopy sylabus it would be easy to incorporate it in at this point. It has worked well and I know that all new jumpers get that little extra that is needed at the 50 jump mark. It doesnt hurt to answer their questions at this point. Sometimes they are too shy to ask an instructor during normal jump days.
It also helps to do this in the evening or on non jump days so I really have no distractions.
I also like the C license and D license idea of a little extra on the topic being offered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This comes back to the issue that someone else pointed out. USPA isn't much into doing any sort of enforcement. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.



It's not a good thing. Without consequences for surviving something stupid, stupid will keep happening - "I did that and survived so that rule must be bullshit." Without an SOP that assures that every violator receives the same punishment, we end up with one person getting their ratings yanked for and another getting away with the same exact offense.

It also needs to be transparent. If it's a big secret what actually happened to the offender, the membership has to wonder who is being protected - the membership or the offender?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

This comes back to the issue that someone else pointed out. USPA isn't much into doing any sort of enforcement. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.



It's not a good thing. Without consequences for surviving something stupid, stupid will keep happening - "I did that and survived so that rule must be bullshit."



Since jumping out a a plane in flight is intrinsically a stupid thing to do, this must explain why you've given up skydiving. Following your logic, there should be a rule against skydiving.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

This comes back to the issue that someone else pointed out. USPA isn't much into doing any sort of enforcement. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.



It's not a good thing. Without consequences for surviving something stupid, stupid will keep happening - "I did that and survived so that rule must be bullshit."



Since jumping out a a plane in flight is intrinsically a stupid thing to do, this must explain why you've given up skydiving. Following your logic, there should be a rule against skydiving.



That's actually where I get hung up on the topic. There is a "whole lot wrong" with jumping out of a plane from a practical standpoint. None of us agree with any of that stuff though which is why we jump. So the question becomes, where does the line lay between what's stupid and what's not stupid in a sport that most of the modern world doesn't really understand.

I don't want to see the fun, innovation or free thinkers regulated out of the sport. I think that would do more harm than good. If everyone sits down and decides that hook turning at 30 feet is a bad idea though (I'm exaggerating) then maybe we should do something about that and there needs to be someone standing behind what is decided.
~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Following your logic, there should be a rule against skydiving.



Not my logic. Yours. Fairly faulty, too. Which is surprising considering your profession. But you just keep sliding down that slippery slope, Prof. You know you're right and that's all that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

This comes back to the issue that someone else pointed out. USPA isn't much into doing any sort of enforcement. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.



It's not a good thing. Without consequences for surviving something stupid, stupid will keep happening - "I did that and survived so that rule must be bullshit."


Since jumping out a a plane in flight is intrinsically a stupid thing to do, this must explain why you've given up skydiving. Following your logic, there should be a rule against skydiving.


+1

B|
SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.)

"The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Following your logic, there should be a rule against skydiving.



Not my logic. Yours. Fairly faulty, too. Which is surprising considering your profession. But you just keep sliding down that slippery slope, Prof. You know you're right and that's all that matters.


Sorry, Skybytch, the good professor did indeed follow your premise to its logical conclusion - a conclusion to which orders of magnitude more people subscribe than to "your" logical conclusion that only certain skydiving practices are stupid.

There are about 50,000 skydivers on this planet of 6 billion people-- one out of every 120 million. That means we can safely say that at least 5.99 billion of those 6 billion concur with the professor's logical conclusion rather than "yours."

B|
SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.)

"The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Following your logic, there should be a rule against skydiving.



Not my logic. Yours. Fairly faulty, too. Which is surprising considering your profession. But you just keep sliding down that slippery slope, Prof. You know you're right and that's all that matters.



Logic and consistency are not your strong suits, are they?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Next, Ed detailed the things USPA has done to combat the problem. In 2000, canopy training was introduced as part of the Integrated Student Program. In 2005, the head shed distributed a video – called “Fly to Survive” – and an accompanying poster to group member DZ’s. By 2006, USPA updated the Skydiver’s Information Manual with more information on canopy flight. In 2008 a new provision was added to the group member pledge requiring DZ’s to “establish and disseminate landing procedures that include separation of high-speed landings and normal landings”. He also mentioned numerous e-newsletters and repeated “Parachutist” magazine content on the subject.

..........two safety advisories on the subject.

I submit that the problem persists is because ....................



All this and more people died.

Here's the problem with simply pursuing the same rules more rigorously, if even SOME DZs had implemented these recommendations, fatalities might have been expected to decline (underneath the noise).

So this doesn't offer any explanation for the increase just proposes another untested solution. In fact rough though it may seem, one candidate for the biggest change during this increase may have been emphasis and training on canopy piloting.

There are alternative explanations, since a lack of follow-through on incident investigation would NOT in itself CAUSE numbers to "skyrocket". therefore a few other questions might be higher on the priority list.

Did those involved in accidents recieve additional canopy training; many aspiring swoopers tend to, are the emboldened by it?

What type & size of loads and jumps led some of the incidents. Some of the loudest voices on canopy piloting love bigways (for example).

When stuff isn't working it's time to get dispassionate and ask some questions that aren't simply aimed at promoting the same rules and agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0