USPA and the canopy issue

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Some time back I tried to address this problem, and offered my solution. I still think it's a good idea. Here is the thread:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3608467#3608467

Quote

...my main suggestion is to get away from 'chase the windsock' chaos that seems to happen at good, safety oriented DZs on a regular basis.

..and therein lies one of the main problem with FMD.
Add in the fast canopies coming in first who intentionally do downwinders and......



But back to the USPA....they cannot enforce any "requirement" or "recomendation" and it is impossible to get everyone doing the same thing voluntarily.

Both FMD and designated patterns have issues that neither can solve.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Was at a big way event at Elsinore earlier this year when, in light and variable winds, two people each thought they would be 1st down and set up in opposite directions. Mass confusion followed. F'in stupid rule IMO.

You ignored rule #2 then. That's YOUR fault.... One rule normally does not cover every situation.

You would think having been involved in a collision you would have done a better job of following rule #2 this time.

Which rule takes precedence, then? #1 or #2, when they are in conflict?

How is it MY fault if 2 other people set up in opposite directions?

...

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

[DocPop 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Maybe landing down wind should be, if it isn't already, part of
>the introductory canopy course that is being discussed.

Definitely. There are times when landing downwind can be deadly (i.e. 15kt winds) but being able to land in light downwinds is a critical skill - since light and variable winds are common at many DZ's.

Just to clarify - landing downwind in a 15kt wind can be accomplished perfectly safely as I and countless others have proved.

You really think he doesnt know that? 15 kt plus the speed of a canopy could be fatal if you flew into something.

No, I am quite sure that Bill knows that. Hence my use of the phrase "Just to clarify" for newbies who are reading this.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[Ron 7]

Quote

Count 'em Ron. Only two parts.

You are the one that ignored the second part. Don't blame me for your inability to read past the first period.

Quote

Sorry you see it that way even after the clarification. You choose your own colored glasses.

Don't run your mouth and you will not have to back peddle your ass from where your mouth took it.

Quote

You can read into it anything you want. Choose your own viewpoint. Your posts seem to indicate an angry young man.

Ah, the best you can do is run your mouth, then run away and throw insults.... Got it.

Quote

Bottom line: Your FMD rule causes more problems than it solves. Take it or leave it.

I guess you are the one guy that ignores the people below him and sets his own pattern no matter what is going on..... Take it or leave it.

Quote

Both FMD and designated patterns have issues that neither can solve.

Huh, I guess thats why I had two parts. You would have known that if you had read past the period, or were not just trying to start a fight.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 7]

Quote

Which rule takes precedence, then? #1 or #2, when they are in conflict?

When you are on base in your Mooney for 36 and you see a guy on final on 18... Do you turn final on 36 anyway?

Quote

How is it MY fault if 2 other people set up in opposite directions?

Your fault or not... It is your ass on the line. I'd rather pay attention to what the guys below me are doing than just do what was briefed and end up dead.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 2,394]

>Hence my use of the phrase "Just to clarify" for newbies who are reading this.

Just to clarify for newbies, then- landing downwind when the winds are doing 15kts can be deadly. However, learning to land in _light_ downwinds is a good idea.

[danornan 64]

All of the above issues throughout this thread stem from the same thing, confusion.... Better training is always a good thing. Common sense, though not always common will prevail at exceptions! Better thought to have all follow a rule most of the time.

Without a BASIC rule that all are aware of, there will ALWAYS be confusion. My personal opinion is that a rule stating that below X altitude, you are in the predetermined pattern and will land as such is the safest approach. It is a starting point and there will be exceptions.

BUT, even if my rule is not the one, I can promise to follow what ever the agreed upon rule is. This will limit confusion. It is the unexpected that is killing people, not the rule.

Dano

[robinheid 0]

Quote

>Hence my use of the phrase "Just to clarify" for newbies who are reading this.

Just to clarify for newbies, then- landing downwind when the winds are doing 15kts can be deadly. However, learning to land in _light_ downwinds is a good idea.

And just to clarify further, for noobs and the experienced as well, never forget that you can turn in a flare and flare in a turn.

Every degree you can turn off the windline as you flare on a downwind landing reduces your groundspeed and therefore landing force.

This doesn't mean do a 180 low so you can land directly into the wind (and then crater because you increased your rate of descent); it means turning slowly as you flare so that by the time you finish that flare you've taken yourself several degrees off the downwind line, thus significantly reducing your landing force.



P.S. At Perris, sometimes they have the FJD (first one down ain't always a MAN, you know) thing in effect and sometimes they have a designated pattern direction, but they also have something else I haven't seen mentioned in this thread (though I may have just missed it):

At Perris, if you don't like the direction of the designated pattern, or the choice made by the FJD, then you can land off the primary landing area in whatever direction you want.

This of course is a luxury that tighter DZs may not have, but it's a great choice to have... and one that's made regularly by jumpers with a lot of gray in their hair. They may have to walk a little farther to get back, but I'd rather have a longer walk to the packing area than a shorter stretcher ride to the ambulance.

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."

[popsjumper 2]

Yep, angry young man.
Maybe you'll grow out of it. Maybe not.

Why is it others can discuss and debate but you have to get all hussied up? You're well known for that.

Your point about watching out below you is valid but that has nothing to do with FMD only. It applies across the board regardless of the DZ-mandated landing rules. No need to debate that in either case...it's just common sense. So why get so wrapped up in it?

Why are you so hung up on something so simple as that?

How about discussing the real issue: FMD vs other?

Got anything of value?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[billvon 2,394]

Both of you cut it out. If you can't talk about this without attacking each other, then take it to PM's.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

And just to clarify further, for noobs and the experienced as well, never forget that you can turn in a flare and flare in a turn.

Every degree you can turn off the windline as you flare on a downwind landing reduces your groundspeed and therefore landing force.

This doesn't mean do a 180 low so you can land directly into the wind (and then crater because you increased your rate of descent); it means turning slowly as you flare so that by the time you finish that flare you've taken yourself several degrees off the downwind line, thus significantly reducing your landing force.

Good stuff. Well worth repeating.

Quote

At Perris, if you don't like the direction of the designated pattern, or the choice made by the FJD, then you can land off the primary landing area in whatever direction you want.

This of course is a luxury that tighter DZs may not have, but it's a great choice to have... and one that's made regularly by jumpers with a lot of gray in their hair.

That would be me.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Sorry 'bout that, Bill.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

So, Bill. You would know this, I'm sure.

Has there been a side-by-side comparison or synopsis of sorts listing the pros and cons of both the FMD and the Designated Pattern rules, as yet, in any of the several threads dealing with landing pattern rules?

I don't recall one.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[JumpRu 14]

Quote

And just to clarify further, for noobs and the experienced as well, never forget that you can turn in a flare and flare in a turn.

Every degree you can turn off the windline as you flare on a downwind landing reduces your groundspeed and therefore landing force.

Just to add something to discussion:
If winds are light then wind direction does not really matter at all. Especially when you have lots of energy coming out of the swoop. That is an obvious statement. But when winds are 10+ mph (I’ve never done more then 20) then crosswinds are much more dangerous then downwind. The only safe way to land downwind in those conditions is sliding (on your feet or and on your butt ) and the biggest danger is to roll sideways in process. For that reason I’d rather go downwind then try to do crosswind landing.
None of this is recommended for conventional approach on a big canopy especially for new jumpers.

[kkeenan 13]

Quote

When you are on base in your Mooney for 36 and you see a guy on final on 18... Do you turn final on 36 anyway?

I won't speak for John, but I'd add power and stay up in the pattern until the other traffic was clear. I'd listen on Unicom for other incoming traffic and ask the guy who just landed why he picked that runway, if it was downwind.

I'm sure you realize that none of these choices is available to a jumper landing a parachute.

_____________________________________
Dude, you are so awesome...
Can I be on your ash jump ?

[robinheid 0]

Quote

Quote

And just to clarify further, for noobs and the experienced as well, never forget that you can turn in a flare and flare in a turn.

Every degree you can turn off the windline as you flare on a downwind landing reduces your groundspeed and therefore landing force.

Just to add something to discussion:
If winds are light then wind direction does not really matter at all. Especially when you have lots of energy coming out of the swoop. That is an obvious statement. But when winds are 10+ mph (I’ve never done more then 20) then crosswinds are much more dangerous then downwind. The only safe way to land downwind in those conditions is sliding (on your feet or and on your butt ) and the biggest danger is to roll sideways in process. For that reason I’d rather go downwind then try to do crosswind landing.
None of this is recommended for conventional approach on a big canopy especially for new jumpers.

I must respectfully point out that your addition to this discussion defies the laws of physics.

Force = mass x acceleration -- or to say it in English, if you land twice as fast, you hit four times as hard (more or less).

Which means -- D'OH! -- each unit of speed subtracted from your landing speed = a much bigger unit of force subtracted from your landing impact.

Ergo, "the biggest danger" is not "to roll sideways in process" but to hit the ground harder than your body can absorb without breaking. Period.



P.S. News flash: "rolling" is a great way to dissipate your landing force by distributing it along time and body parts. You might want to look into that -- rumor has it they call it a PLF.

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."

[DocPop 1]

You can still land with almost zero VERTICAL speed even downwind.

If you then transition to a slide there is very little force on the body, provided you don't slide into an obstacle.

IMO and that of others, rolling (PLFing) is more likely to result in injury than sliding, when the body has a lot of horizontal speed. Check this:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=729

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[JumpRu 14]

What I described is a part of intentional downwind landing. It requires careful setup and some sort of acceleration (hook turn) for better lift at touchdown to ensure zero vertical speed for substantial time that require for weight transfer. It also requires nice and even landing surface for sliding. I don’t know from personal experience will or will not this be helpful in case of emergency crash landing. But this is a way to practice downwind landings. Everything else can get you to hospital.

[robinheid 0]

Quote

What I described is a part of intentional downwind landing. It requires careful setup and some sort of acceleration (hook turn) for better lift at touchdown to ensure zero vertical speed for substantial time that require for weight transfer. It also requires nice and even landing surface for sliding. I don’t know from personal experience will or will not this be helpful in case of emergency crash landing. But this is a way to practice downwind landings. Everything else can get you to hospital.

I must respectfully point out that your addenda to this discussion defies the rules of discussion and common sense.

I don't see the words "intentional" or "practice" anywhere in your prior post, nor do I recall seeing anywhere in this thread any mention of downwind landings as something to be practiced or done intentionally.

Secondly, if you have time for a "careful setup" to a downwind landing, then, uh... why don't you just, you know, do a careful setup so you can, uh... land into the wind?

Which brings me to your utterly absurd notion that you want to hook turn into your downwind landing for better acceleration -- toward what? The ambulance? The morgue?

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."

[billvon 2,394]

>is a part of intentional downwind landing. It requires careful setup and
>some sort of acceleration (hook turn) for better lift at touchdown to ensure
>zero vertical speed for substantial time that require for weight transfer.

That is indeed one way to do a downwind landing. However, you do not neet to do a "hook turn" to land downwind safely, at least in light winds (which is what we were talking about.)

[grimmie 173]

The FMD rule seriously injured a jumper at the Lost Prairie boogie. The jumper tried to follow the final turn of the FMD, and toggled into a broken femur, neck, pelvis.
The FMD only works when a clear and visible downwind, base and final are performed by the "pre designated" FMD. IMHO.

[Para5-0 0]

Not to go against the grain the FMD had nothing to do with the broken femur, neck, pelvis..

Ultimately a safe landing trumps FMD. I think maybe a discussion on canopy seperation and giving the fmd enough room so you can safely navigate a pattern would be in order.

I should add I am not a complete advocate for FMD for several reasons all stated previously. I am an advocate for patterns that are predictable. Hence, some standard that all jumpers are well aware of.

[craigbey 0]

Quote

The FMD only works when a clear and visible downwind, base and final are performed by the "pre designated" FMD

Good point and it brings up another question for those at DZ's that regularly use the FMD rule...

How often is a standard pattern used by the FMD at your DZ? Is it mandated?

[Ron 7]

Quote

I won't speak for John, but I'd add power and stay up in the pattern until the other traffic was clear. I'd listen on Unicom for other incoming traffic and ask the guy who just landed why he picked that runway, if it was downwind.

I'm sure you realize that none of these choices is available to a jumper landing a parachute.

The point is that you would not just ignore the traffic and do as you pleased. Even flying a Cub with no radio into an uncontrolled field can be done safely if you bother to pay attention to other traffic.

And any pilot worth a damn is going to pay attention and not just follow the briefed approach if it is going to kill him.

And if you will notice not once did I ever claim that a plan discussed before hand was not part of the answer (inspite of what some tried to claim).

But in the end, it is being observant that will prevent a collision, not a great plan. Because it only takes one jackass to destroy a great plan... But the guy without his head up his ass can still land safely.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Which rule takes precedence, then? #1 or #2, when they are in conflict?

When you are on base in your Mooney for 36 and you see a guy on final on 18... Do you turn final on 36 anyway?

Quote

How is it MY fault if 2 other people set up in opposite directions?

Your fault or not... It is your ass on the line. I'd rather pay attention to what the guys below me are doing than just do what was briefed and end up dead.

So if two people below you land simulataneously in opposite directions, what do YOU do?

I landed 1/2 mile out and walked back.

...

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