New Tandem, Student, Re: wingsuit BSR

[GoHuskers 0]

DJL

Reliable data? Wingsuiters run into things all the time that they only intented to fly near. Very good ones too. http://www.blincmagazine.com/forum/wiki/BASE_Fatality_List

Go to the bottom of the list and start with the most recent. Time after time: Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit, Impact/Wingsuit.

What do you think would happen if that board meeting ended and the announcement was "USPA will make no restriction on wingsuiters flying in proximity to students or tandems either in freefall or under canopy."?

Enough with the BASE fatality list.

I think USPA could make the following statement. "The USPA has considered Tandem Skydiving with Wingsuit Fly-bys and decided that no action was necessary on its part. The USPA is believes that its network of Dropzones, Safety & Training Advisors, and Tandem Instructors can safely manage these activities."

[gowlerk 1,912]

Quote

Enough with the BASE fatality list.

Yes, not really all that relevant.

Quote

I think USPA could make the following statement. "The USPA has considered Tandem Skydiving with Wingsuit Fly-bys and decided that no action was necessary on its part. The USPA is believes that its network of Dropzones, Safety & Training Advisors, and Tandem Instructors can safely manage these activities."

USPA could do that. But they believe otherwise, so why would they?

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[GoHuskers 0]

Quote

I think USPA could make the following statement. "The USPA has considered Tandem Skydiving with Wingsuit Fly-bys and decided that no action was necessary on its part. The USPA is believes that its network of Dropzones, Safety & Training Advisors, and Tandem Instructors can safely manage these activities."

USPA could do that. But they believe otherwise, so why would they?

The answer was to the following question: What do you think would happen if that board meeting ended and the announcement was "USPA will make no restriction on wingsuiters flying in proximity to students or tandems either in freefall or under canopy."?

[yoink 321]

GoHuskers

The Hypothetical Rabbit Hole: An established wingsuiter with 300 plus wingsuit jumps and 600 total jumps is paying for his father/mother's tandem and wants to do a fly-by to make it extra special... DZO, S&TA, TI, and Fun Jumper agree that is a special moment for the loyal patron and his father/mother. Sorry can't do it, its a BSR.

The DZO says 'take the wingsuit off, and then link up with your parents in freefall and get a photo of you all together'.
I BET 99% of whuffos would find that a better memory of the jump - linking up with their son and posing for a photo, than a 3 second glimpse of them as they go past....

The same applies to swooping on demos - whuffos are just as impressed by standard skydiving stuff. We don't need to show off.

Don't try and make this about what's best for the students. It's not. In no way.

[cs_troyk 0]

Di0

Maybe, maybe not.
But at least it shows that often "preventing" a problem is doing something that might seem like "fixing a problem that doesn't exist".

Sorry for the tangent, but I just wanted to mention that people were well aware that swooping could fire your standard Cypres. I demonstrated this under controlled conditions in 2003, and there were a couple of (thankfully non-fatal) "unwanted deployments" that same summer. And it wasn't until after Adrian's death in 2005 that the new speed Cypres was released, so there was definitely awareness of the issue. Now, I guess, the question is whether people understand that even the "speed" Cypres is subject to firing given the latest and greatest canopy designs.

OK - back to the rather interesting debate on the fly-bys.

[gunsmokex 1]

I know this will probably make some wingsuiters mad but I think some of you are over looking at to why they are even making this BSR, sure it might be to protect the tandem student or the licensed jumper under canopy.. or maybe its to protect the wingsuiter.

At first this video looks kind of cool and I'm sure or hope to god that all of the people under canopy had at least agreed to have a wingsuiter fly by them. It doesn't end very well and to me it seems like the wingsuiter was focused on just flying by the canopies and lost altitude awareness, you can see there is another canopy at the end that but luckily he decided his flyby was over at that point....he deploys and surprise line twists.

I'm sure everyone has probably seen this video but if you haven't here it is. I know its only one person but they shared this video to bring to light how bad it really could have been. This guy got pretty lucky.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6a63fbqnNQ

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

And that video is probably the core reason for this.

Not what has happened, but what could happen.

These flybys have occurred. There are videos of them up in various places.

I'm reasonably sure most (as in all but a few) have gone as planned.
But exactly how many almost went bad?

I'm sure more than just that one. But I'd also bet fairly heavily that when they did happen, video wasn't released, the TM, WSer & maybe the DZO got together and said something like:

"Don't ever do that again. And don't tell anyone what almost happened."

This BSR has one purpose. Cover the manufacturers ass.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[GoHuskers 0]

yoink

1. The DZO says 'take the wingsuit off, and then link up with your parents in freefall and get a photo of you all together'.
I BET 99% of whuffos would find that a better memory...

2. Don't try and make this about what's best for the students. It's not. In no way.

1. The Devil's Advocate: Unless the manufacturer's don't want fun jumpers to expose them to that liability either. They'll just get the USPA to make another BSR...

2. My apologies.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Yes, not really all that relevant.

It seems relevant to me. It addresses wingsuiters flying into things. At least they were not putting others at risk.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[riggerrob 558]

USPA and the manufacturers have put numerous restrictions on who is allowed to freefall with tandems: more than 500 jumps, AFFI, plenty of recent belly freefall formations, etc.
These restrictions are a polite response to the first (or second?) tandem fatality when a clumsy lurker docked too hard and broke the TI's neck!

[DougH 270]

I believe someone also killed their own mother when they floated in to the pair during trap door and then opening, but I could have changed the story in my head after hearing it a while back.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[radical_flyer 0]

riggerrob

These restrictions are a polite response to the first (or second?) tandem fatality when a clumsy lurker docked too hard and broke the TI's neck!

what happened to the passenger? Did they have an AAD?

[Di0 1]

The way I look at it, there are 3 different groups in skydiving, cutting things roughly with an ax.

First, the funjumpers, skydivers, wingsuiters, weekend warriors, amateurs, pros alike. For this group, something that could go wrong once in a million times is good enough, safe enough, doable, why not. And reasonably so, because we see things from our perspective, where one in a million is safer than most things we do in our everyday lives, so we accept the risk. Plus, the measurable risk is what makes skydiving fun, in a way. Regardless of the reasonings behind it, some of it more logical than others, we're OK with that.

Then there are the manufacturers, the Bill Booths, etc., for whom one in a million is not acceptable, because their gear get millions of jumps over the years, so if something can go wrong once in a million times, it WILL go wrong at least once.
Which means at least one lawsuit.
At least one recall bulletin.
At least one death.

Finally there are the "lawmakers" in between, like USPA for us, who have to somewhat bridge and compromise between the two and decide what risk is acceptable and what requires regulating and limitations. How this happens is a mix of common sense, reasoning, projections based on experience but also, of course, politics and financial motivations. Deal with it.

I honestly don't know that this BSR is "right" or "wrong" but I think it covers such a limited and unnecessary part of skydiving (fly-by next to a student, really?!) that nobody should have a problem letting it go, even if you think you can do it safely you should see the rationale behind it..

I'm standing on the edge
With a vision in my head
My body screams release me
My dreams they must be fed... You're in flight.

[normiss 622]

Interesting timing of an I Love Skydiving post of a close zoomie.

This is just stupid.

[Di0 1]

It was planned.
I can plan to put a glass jar over my head and ask my good buddy to shoot it.
That doesn't mean that if messes up a bit and shoots in me in the forehead, we didn't see that coming or that it makes this outcome any less likely.

I'm standing on the edge
With a vision in my head
My body screams release me
My dreams they must be fed... You're in flight.

[riggerrob 558]

Correction: it was the third tandem fatality.
Mid-air collision.
The lurker collided with the TI's head/neck and knocked him unconscious.
No pull.
High speed impact.
Both the TI and student died.
This accident occurred before Cypres was invented.
No one trusted earlier AADs (FXC 8000, Sentinel, KAP-3, etc.) enough to install them on tandems. Hardly any licensed jumpers wore AADs either.

[yoink 321]

normiss

Interesting timing of an I Love Skydiving post of a close zoomie.

This is just stupid.

Look at that video.

That's about as close as it's possible to get in a wingsuit. Now imagine you're the student - how much time do you have seeing them? Maybe 3 or 4 seconds? And that's IF they're prepared for it...

The argument that it's a benefit for a student is a complete nonsense. It's always been about wingsuiters having their fun.


If these guys in the video were both experienced jumpers then more power to them. Have fun. Just don't mess with students.

[pms07 3]

"Not popular with a few Wingsuit jumpers. Who make piss poor excuses as to why they can't keep a distance away from the tandems..."

I fixed your comment for you...not all wingsuiters are interested in buzzing tandems. Anyway, tandem flybys are probably not a good idea and it was only a matter of time before something bad happened.

When my 18 year old son did his first tandem jump a local wingsuit school owner (and friend) thought it would be cool for he and I to do a flyby, prearranged with the TM. I turned that off and would do the same again. Now we have even more incentive to keep our distance.

The BSR and implementation was not as well thought out as it could have been but I think it was inevitable. That is because of the behavior and attitude of some in our own community. We earned it.

[DBCOOPER 1]

In the USA where USPA is the organization responsible to keep the FAA in check, there is a regulation about cloud clearances that is pretty much ignored by the cloud chasers. Its pretty hard to kill a cloud.
One of these days one of them will meet a pilot with the same disregard for the regs. Unfortunately the tandem student would be doing everything right when they get to meet their first wingsuiter.

According the tenents of Risk Management, USPA did the right thing.

Replying to: Re: Stall On Jump Run Emergency Procedure? by billvon

If the plane is unrecoverable then exiting is a very very good idea.