Duckwater 0 #1 September 3, 2004 Skydiver X has 150 jumps, 9 months and 50/50 RW/Freefly. He flies a Sabre 2 170 at 1.1. No complaints from the DZO or other skydivers, average skydiver. No additional training after AFF coaching. Has done some landings on front risers because someone told him to in the bar. Slides on his butt every 10th landing or so...average. Tandem - Give him a rig, brief in detail on operation of rig, send him up with briefed student of equal weight. Tell him " Tell the dude to arch, get that drouge out, and open at 5 grand" Swoop - Give him a Crossfire 2 129 which will bring him to 1.4 wingloading. Tell him "Pull on your right front riser when it looks like you are low enough, pull your legs up and do a 180 riser turn and swoop the grass. Don't look at your altimeter, bad habit, you have to eyeball it." (yes, you know where I am going with this) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kramer 0 #2 September 3, 2004 Not that I know the first damn thing about either of these two disciplines, but I'd see him getting injured swooping a lot sooner than attempting a tandem. Just my 2 cents. The FAKE KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER!!!!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bodyflight.Net 0 #3 September 3, 2004 Quote(yes, you know where I am going with this) I sure don't so I'll take the 'wait and see' approach Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #4 September 3, 2004 trolling trolling trolling... pretty much the definition of the term...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites metalslug 31 #5 September 3, 2004 Well, I think he may be about to say that... Although death&injury from a swoop is more likely, there are no (or fewer) regulations and minimum requirements in place for swoopers than there are for TMs. The other important distinction here is that a tandem jump involves another person's life (the passenger), a bad swooper usualy only endangers his own life. I would happier to see a newbie trying to swoop a beach-towel than to let him take any of my friends on a tandem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Duckwater 0 #6 September 3, 2004 OK....I think it is generally agreed that the swoop is more dangerous. Here are excerpts of the FAA requirements for a Tandem. I think most skydivers will agree that they are very reasonable. (i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist This rule really had me bewildered as to its point when I first started skydiving. I was jumping every day and why would I have to wait 3 years if I had all the other requirements? Now I know. In 3 years, you will have seen people die, get injured, do stupid crap etc. And, of you survive 3 years of Skydiving, you probably are not doing it recklessly. The wisdom of time in the sport is irreplacable. (ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute This number seems really low to me but OK....Most people with 3 years in have more than this anyway. (iv) Has successfully completed a tandem instructor course given by the manufacturer of the tandem parachute system used in the parachute operation or a course acceptable to the Administrator. A complete education. Much more involved than a canopy course and there is by far more physics and skill involed in swooping. Apply the same rules above (mandated by USPA) to canopy flight. There are 'suggested' wingloading progression guidelines in the SIM, enhance, clarify and make them requirements for new jumpers. Print on every A licence and make all new skydivers memorize and recite SIM Section 6-10 B-8 8. Each progressive step in downsizing, technique, and canopy design should be a conscious decision, rather than considered a routine part of a skydiver's progression: I know we need to protect the paying tandem passenger. We dont want him to get hurt or killed. But when that passenger loves it, does AFF and wants to swoop all of a sudden we don't care? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #7 September 3, 2004 Quotea bad swooper usualy only endangers his own life. This is often not the case. I have seen bad swoopers (or jumpers with canopies too small for their abilities) put others in danger many times... (especially at Perris where we have swoopers and non-swoopers landing in the same skinny grass landing area, with no rules about who is allowed to be swooping there). If you can't control a canopy good enough to land it properly, then chances are that you can't control it good enough to be flying in the same airspace as other jumpers. Also, in a crowded landing area, when you hit the ground hard and bounce 20 ft. or so (from a bad swoop or any other reason), I doubt that you have much control over which direction you bounce or who else you might take out in the process. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GravityGirl 0 #8 September 3, 2004 Tandem. Being an unexperienced swooper, he MOST likely turn too high and have an uncomfortable, yet uneventful landing. He knows his emergency proceedures. Being an unexperienced Tandem Master, with unrefined canopy control skills, he is gonna cream in that tandem an himself. What with landing a 160 lb meat sack that moves. Also, in the event of a malfunction things would be grim. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Peace and Blue Skies! Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites metalslug 31 #9 September 3, 2004 QuoteIf you can't control a canopy good enough to land it properly, then chances are that you can't control it good enough to be flying in the same airspace as other jumpers. This thread is talking about swooping, not "landing a canopy properly". Less than 1/4 of the members at my DZ swoop their landings but almost every one of them can land their canopy properly. Is it really fair to say that anyone who cant swoop is also incapabable of adequate canopy traffic awareness ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Guest #10 September 4, 2004 Quotetrolling trolling trolling... pretty much the definition of the term... Yup...over the bounding main... mh ."The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skydiver30960 0 #11 September 4, 2004 the crux of this argument is "survive uninjured". Break it down into the two separate parts, "survive" and "uninjured". You're more likely to hurt yourself swooping, but if you fuck up a tandem instead of just getting hurt you'll probably end up killing yourself and somebody else with you. Stephen King said it in "The Body" the movie that got turned into "Stand by Me": Go alone and you're a hero. Take somebody with you and you're dogpiss. Elvisio "taking nuggets of wisdom from Stephen King" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Shotgun 1 #12 September 4, 2004 Sorry if I got off-topic... I just wanted to point out that I do not agree with your statement that "a bad swooper usually only endangers his own life". My experience might be considerably different than yours based on the US dropzones that I have jumped at and the number of years that I have been around the sport... but I have definitely seen bad swoopers endangering other's lives (including my own) enough times that I consider it a problem. There have been canopy collisions and quite a few close calls that have been caused by someone on a canopy that they could not properly control (usually someone trying to swoop or land a canopy that they were not ready for). Now obviously, this can happen even with a big slow canopy on a straight-in approach... but I think the danger from that is far less than with a fast canopy on a less predictable approach (swooping). I certainly find it much easier to avoid an inexperienced canopy pilot on a big slow canopy than an incompetent swooper on a fast canopy that they have little control over. It seems to me that this is more of a problem at bigger dropzones where you often have very crowded landing area... Ok, I'm done now... wasn't trying to hijack the thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #13 September 4, 2004 it looks like your leading question is meant to suggest that swoopers should meet the requirements of a tandem master. If the passenger's life/health matters, then the tandem is much more dangerous. But your question actually only addresses the pilot, so I'm not sure which high wingloading is more dangerous. I'm at least somewhat dangerous to myself at 1.2. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Duckwater 0 #14 September 4, 2004 They used to have low pull contests. It was fun I'm sure. People died. I guess they were smarter a couple decades ago because they made rules prohibiting this. Im sure everyone bitched and moaned, mabye a few quit....but guess what, people are not createring in because they hummed it low almost ever. Go to a big DZ and have a low pull contest with your buddies. See how long you last at that DZ. Keep doing it at other DZ's and see what USPA does to your card. What is the difference if I think it is fun to deploy at 800' and you think it is fun to swoop the pond at 200 jumps? Shouldn't I have the RIGHT to pull low? It's my life...I died doing what I love! Why regulate one clearly dangerous trend and ignore another? Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,478 #15 September 4, 2004 >We dont want him to get hurt or killed. But when that passenger >loves it, does AFF and wants to swoop all of a sudden we don't care? Many of us care, but we also respect the jumper's right to make his own decisions on risks. That is not true of a student; he does NOT have the right to take any risks he wants because he simply can not understand them yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Duckwater 0 #16 September 4, 2004 QuoteThat is not true of a student; he does NOT have the right to take any risks he wants because he simply can not understand them yet. Do you think the Student Swooper in the hospital REALLY understood the risks? Surely a tandem passenger understands there are risks, he doesn't know what they all are so we regulate them to protect him. Why don't we regulate the risks these Student Swoopers are obviously not understanding. Why do they have the right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #17 September 4, 2004 there is a place for low pulls... its not the dropzone.. stupid analogy. btw have you seen a tandem malfunction decision tree?____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #18 September 4, 2004 QuoteDo you think the Student Swooper in the hospital REALLY understood the risks Yes. if they don’t quite clearly understand the risk they are taking simply by jumping out of the plane they should have been in the bowling alley instead. you are assuming everyone judges relative risk by your standard. Obviously you don’t speak for anyone’s real understanding but your own... How many times in AFF waivers alone do the emphasize you are taking an unnecessary risk?? how many times do you have to acknowledge your understanding??? how many times do you have to be told YOU CAN DIE DOING THIS!!!____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Duckwater 0 #19 September 4, 2004 Quotethere is a place for low pulls... its not the dropzone.. OK smarty pants....Where is THE place for low pulls? And, where are you skydivng off the DZ? BTW, what's your lowest pull, I'm curious. It is a perfect analogy You never cease to amaze me.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Duckwater 0 #20 September 4, 2004 Quotehow many times do you have to be told YOU CAN DIE DOING THIS!!! How many times do you have to be told, you do not have to KILL YOURSELF doing this!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,478 #21 September 4, 2004 >Do you think the Student Swooper in the hospital REALLY understood the risks? It's likely that he understands them better than the tandem student does. >Why don't we regulate the risks these Student Swoopers are obviously not understanding. I have no problem with people taking chances they understand. For the past 2 years or so I've proposed a change to the BSR's to regulate canopy loading; however, you can get out of any and all loading regulations by taking a canopy control course (in my proposal.) That way they at least have a better chance at understanding the risks. But to compare that to tandem jumping is silly. A tandem passenger is essentially a whuffo who signed an agreement he really didn't read; in many cases he's tossed out of the plane like cargo. Someone with 50 jumps has an infinitely better understanding of the risks of jumping out of an airplane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,478 #22 September 4, 2004 >Where is THE place for low pulls? Bridge Day in West Virginia. Or, if you prefer, talk to any BASE jumper about local sites. Pull as low as you like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Duckwater 0 #23 September 4, 2004 QuoteBridge Day in West Virginia. Or, if you prefer, talk to any BASE jumper about local sites. Pull as low as you like. Bill, I would tend to agree with any opinion you have over mine because you are friggin always right..Yes, the comparison was silly but I think you agree with my point. I have said all along, a canopy flight course should be mandatory.....It is so needed is is pathetic. As for base jumping. My first time....You think Ann will shove me off the bridge and sream "pull as low as ya like"...Hell no. It will be the professional, structrued, safe as can be program she runs....Basic Research takes the most dangerous sport in the world and makes it safe to learn. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wingnut 0 #24 September 4, 2004 QuoteBasic Research takes the most dangerous sport in the world and makes it safeer to learn fixed that for ya..... ______________________________________ "i have no reader's digest version" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #25 September 4, 2004 QuoteQuotethere is a place for low pulls... its not the dropzone.. OK smarty pants....Where is THE place for low pulls? And, where are you skydivng off the DZ? BTW, what's your lowest pull, I'm curious. It is a perfect analogy You never cease to amaze me.. its called BASE and it started at dropzones, but many of the people involved in it have moved away and stayed away from the DZ's because of the safety nazi control freak "you cant do that its not SAFE!!!" attitudes like yours... and yet the majority still take safety and preventative maintenance to levels skydivers rarely think about, all without anyone having to tell them the HAVE to..... only one person is responsible for your life, YOU! its up to you to seek training and equipment to make your activities safer. If you cant be bothered to learn without a government agency trying to mandate it and are going to blame the lack of that agency for another's death?? you shouldnt be jumping..... is it mandatory you get in the plane? nope. If you don’t like the risks, if you personally cannot be bothered to seek knowledge, learn and develop safe habits all without someone to force you… go to the bowling alley... seems like there are enough people who require spoon feeding in this world without extending skydiving to the list of activities that caters to them. oh wait, since you don’t really enjoy skydiving in the first place, why are you ranting about making it 'safer' for other skydivers ??? Cant we be trusted with our own lives without you to mother us?? Maybe your just looking for someone besides the pilot to point the finger at next time someone goes in under a perfectly good canopy?? How long till someone fresh out of a canopy control course makes an error and is killed or injured??? oh wait it's already happened... i suppose you'll be ready to blame the instructors and the quality of their teaching methods???? Sorry but the chain of responsibility starts and ends with you, if you can’t handle being responsible for your own life then you shouldn’t be jumping...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Zenister 0 #4 September 3, 2004 trolling trolling trolling... pretty much the definition of the term...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
metalslug 31 #5 September 3, 2004 Well, I think he may be about to say that... Although death&injury from a swoop is more likely, there are no (or fewer) regulations and minimum requirements in place for swoopers than there are for TMs. The other important distinction here is that a tandem jump involves another person's life (the passenger), a bad swooper usualy only endangers his own life. I would happier to see a newbie trying to swoop a beach-towel than to let him take any of my friends on a tandem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #6 September 3, 2004 OK....I think it is generally agreed that the swoop is more dangerous. Here are excerpts of the FAA requirements for a Tandem. I think most skydivers will agree that they are very reasonable. (i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist This rule really had me bewildered as to its point when I first started skydiving. I was jumping every day and why would I have to wait 3 years if I had all the other requirements? Now I know. In 3 years, you will have seen people die, get injured, do stupid crap etc. And, of you survive 3 years of Skydiving, you probably are not doing it recklessly. The wisdom of time in the sport is irreplacable. (ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute This number seems really low to me but OK....Most people with 3 years in have more than this anyway. (iv) Has successfully completed a tandem instructor course given by the manufacturer of the tandem parachute system used in the parachute operation or a course acceptable to the Administrator. A complete education. Much more involved than a canopy course and there is by far more physics and skill involed in swooping. Apply the same rules above (mandated by USPA) to canopy flight. There are 'suggested' wingloading progression guidelines in the SIM, enhance, clarify and make them requirements for new jumpers. Print on every A licence and make all new skydivers memorize and recite SIM Section 6-10 B-8 8. Each progressive step in downsizing, technique, and canopy design should be a conscious decision, rather than considered a routine part of a skydiver's progression: I know we need to protect the paying tandem passenger. We dont want him to get hurt or killed. But when that passenger loves it, does AFF and wants to swoop all of a sudden we don't care? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #7 September 3, 2004 Quotea bad swooper usualy only endangers his own life. This is often not the case. I have seen bad swoopers (or jumpers with canopies too small for their abilities) put others in danger many times... (especially at Perris where we have swoopers and non-swoopers landing in the same skinny grass landing area, with no rules about who is allowed to be swooping there). If you can't control a canopy good enough to land it properly, then chances are that you can't control it good enough to be flying in the same airspace as other jumpers. Also, in a crowded landing area, when you hit the ground hard and bounce 20 ft. or so (from a bad swoop or any other reason), I doubt that you have much control over which direction you bounce or who else you might take out in the process. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GravityGirl 0 #8 September 3, 2004 Tandem. Being an unexperienced swooper, he MOST likely turn too high and have an uncomfortable, yet uneventful landing. He knows his emergency proceedures. Being an unexperienced Tandem Master, with unrefined canopy control skills, he is gonna cream in that tandem an himself. What with landing a 160 lb meat sack that moves. Also, in the event of a malfunction things would be grim. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Peace and Blue Skies! Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
metalslug 31 #9 September 3, 2004 QuoteIf you can't control a canopy good enough to land it properly, then chances are that you can't control it good enough to be flying in the same airspace as other jumpers. This thread is talking about swooping, not "landing a canopy properly". Less than 1/4 of the members at my DZ swoop their landings but almost every one of them can land their canopy properly. Is it really fair to say that anyone who cant swoop is also incapabable of adequate canopy traffic awareness ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest #10 September 4, 2004 Quotetrolling trolling trolling... pretty much the definition of the term... Yup...over the bounding main... mh ."The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #11 September 4, 2004 the crux of this argument is "survive uninjured". Break it down into the two separate parts, "survive" and "uninjured". You're more likely to hurt yourself swooping, but if you fuck up a tandem instead of just getting hurt you'll probably end up killing yourself and somebody else with you. Stephen King said it in "The Body" the movie that got turned into "Stand by Me": Go alone and you're a hero. Take somebody with you and you're dogpiss. Elvisio "taking nuggets of wisdom from Stephen King" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #12 September 4, 2004 Sorry if I got off-topic... I just wanted to point out that I do not agree with your statement that "a bad swooper usually only endangers his own life". My experience might be considerably different than yours based on the US dropzones that I have jumped at and the number of years that I have been around the sport... but I have definitely seen bad swoopers endangering other's lives (including my own) enough times that I consider it a problem. There have been canopy collisions and quite a few close calls that have been caused by someone on a canopy that they could not properly control (usually someone trying to swoop or land a canopy that they were not ready for). Now obviously, this can happen even with a big slow canopy on a straight-in approach... but I think the danger from that is far less than with a fast canopy on a less predictable approach (swooping). I certainly find it much easier to avoid an inexperienced canopy pilot on a big slow canopy than an incompetent swooper on a fast canopy that they have little control over. It seems to me that this is more of a problem at bigger dropzones where you often have very crowded landing area... Ok, I'm done now... wasn't trying to hijack the thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #13 September 4, 2004 it looks like your leading question is meant to suggest that swoopers should meet the requirements of a tandem master. If the passenger's life/health matters, then the tandem is much more dangerous. But your question actually only addresses the pilot, so I'm not sure which high wingloading is more dangerous. I'm at least somewhat dangerous to myself at 1.2. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #14 September 4, 2004 They used to have low pull contests. It was fun I'm sure. People died. I guess they were smarter a couple decades ago because they made rules prohibiting this. Im sure everyone bitched and moaned, mabye a few quit....but guess what, people are not createring in because they hummed it low almost ever. Go to a big DZ and have a low pull contest with your buddies. See how long you last at that DZ. Keep doing it at other DZ's and see what USPA does to your card. What is the difference if I think it is fun to deploy at 800' and you think it is fun to swoop the pond at 200 jumps? Shouldn't I have the RIGHT to pull low? It's my life...I died doing what I love! Why regulate one clearly dangerous trend and ignore another? Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,478 #15 September 4, 2004 >We dont want him to get hurt or killed. But when that passenger >loves it, does AFF and wants to swoop all of a sudden we don't care? Many of us care, but we also respect the jumper's right to make his own decisions on risks. That is not true of a student; he does NOT have the right to take any risks he wants because he simply can not understand them yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #16 September 4, 2004 QuoteThat is not true of a student; he does NOT have the right to take any risks he wants because he simply can not understand them yet. Do you think the Student Swooper in the hospital REALLY understood the risks? Surely a tandem passenger understands there are risks, he doesn't know what they all are so we regulate them to protect him. Why don't we regulate the risks these Student Swoopers are obviously not understanding. Why do they have the right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #17 September 4, 2004 there is a place for low pulls... its not the dropzone.. stupid analogy. btw have you seen a tandem malfunction decision tree?____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #18 September 4, 2004 QuoteDo you think the Student Swooper in the hospital REALLY understood the risks Yes. if they don’t quite clearly understand the risk they are taking simply by jumping out of the plane they should have been in the bowling alley instead. you are assuming everyone judges relative risk by your standard. Obviously you don’t speak for anyone’s real understanding but your own... How many times in AFF waivers alone do the emphasize you are taking an unnecessary risk?? how many times do you have to acknowledge your understanding??? how many times do you have to be told YOU CAN DIE DOING THIS!!!____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #19 September 4, 2004 Quotethere is a place for low pulls... its not the dropzone.. OK smarty pants....Where is THE place for low pulls? And, where are you skydivng off the DZ? BTW, what's your lowest pull, I'm curious. It is a perfect analogy You never cease to amaze me.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #20 September 4, 2004 Quotehow many times do you have to be told YOU CAN DIE DOING THIS!!! How many times do you have to be told, you do not have to KILL YOURSELF doing this!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,478 #21 September 4, 2004 >Do you think the Student Swooper in the hospital REALLY understood the risks? It's likely that he understands them better than the tandem student does. >Why don't we regulate the risks these Student Swoopers are obviously not understanding. I have no problem with people taking chances they understand. For the past 2 years or so I've proposed a change to the BSR's to regulate canopy loading; however, you can get out of any and all loading regulations by taking a canopy control course (in my proposal.) That way they at least have a better chance at understanding the risks. But to compare that to tandem jumping is silly. A tandem passenger is essentially a whuffo who signed an agreement he really didn't read; in many cases he's tossed out of the plane like cargo. Someone with 50 jumps has an infinitely better understanding of the risks of jumping out of an airplane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,478 #22 September 4, 2004 >Where is THE place for low pulls? Bridge Day in West Virginia. Or, if you prefer, talk to any BASE jumper about local sites. Pull as low as you like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #23 September 4, 2004 QuoteBridge Day in West Virginia. Or, if you prefer, talk to any BASE jumper about local sites. Pull as low as you like. Bill, I would tend to agree with any opinion you have over mine because you are friggin always right..Yes, the comparison was silly but I think you agree with my point. I have said all along, a canopy flight course should be mandatory.....It is so needed is is pathetic. As for base jumping. My first time....You think Ann will shove me off the bridge and sream "pull as low as ya like"...Hell no. It will be the professional, structrued, safe as can be program she runs....Basic Research takes the most dangerous sport in the world and makes it safe to learn. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingnut 0 #24 September 4, 2004 QuoteBasic Research takes the most dangerous sport in the world and makes it safeer to learn fixed that for ya..... ______________________________________ "i have no reader's digest version" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #25 September 4, 2004 QuoteQuotethere is a place for low pulls... its not the dropzone.. OK smarty pants....Where is THE place for low pulls? And, where are you skydivng off the DZ? BTW, what's your lowest pull, I'm curious. It is a perfect analogy You never cease to amaze me.. its called BASE and it started at dropzones, but many of the people involved in it have moved away and stayed away from the DZ's because of the safety nazi control freak "you cant do that its not SAFE!!!" attitudes like yours... and yet the majority still take safety and preventative maintenance to levels skydivers rarely think about, all without anyone having to tell them the HAVE to..... only one person is responsible for your life, YOU! its up to you to seek training and equipment to make your activities safer. If you cant be bothered to learn without a government agency trying to mandate it and are going to blame the lack of that agency for another's death?? you shouldnt be jumping..... is it mandatory you get in the plane? nope. If you don’t like the risks, if you personally cannot be bothered to seek knowledge, learn and develop safe habits all without someone to force you… go to the bowling alley... seems like there are enough people who require spoon feeding in this world without extending skydiving to the list of activities that caters to them. oh wait, since you don’t really enjoy skydiving in the first place, why are you ranting about making it 'safer' for other skydivers ??? Cant we be trusted with our own lives without you to mother us?? Maybe your just looking for someone besides the pilot to point the finger at next time someone goes in under a perfectly good canopy?? How long till someone fresh out of a canopy control course makes an error and is killed or injured??? oh wait it's already happened... i suppose you'll be ready to blame the instructors and the quality of their teaching methods???? Sorry but the chain of responsibility starts and ends with you, if you can’t handle being responsible for your own life then you shouldn’t be jumping...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
