Injury at Perris

[quade 3]

Quote

JUMPERS WHEN THEY START TALKING ABOUT THE GEAR THEY WANT TO BUY AND JUMP.
I ONLY HOPE THAT IF THEY ARE GOING WAY OVER THEIR HEADS (YOU) TRY TO TALK THEM OUT OF IT “WITH CLEAR REASONS WHY”.

Perfectly good advice, but I have mixed emotions about the attitude behind it.
Yes, experienced jumpers should look out for less experienced jumps. Yes, they should give them good advice.
However, what really bugs me is the concept that these less experienced people somehow can't think for themselves. I gotta go back to something I learned a long time ago, you can't really teach good judgement.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[billvon 2,434]

> but if he sees people doing crazy near death stuff and getting applauded
>well you can't blame him, cause thats what he sees and learns. (sorry for
>kinda repeating things)
I don't think that's the issue. I've jumped with people, had them go unstable, and flown down, flipped them over and pulled for them. That might be a "crazy near death stunt" (at least, that's the way it's shown in the movies) but I have the training (AFF-I) to do it. If someone with 20 jumps tried to take their whuffo girlfriend for a jump and do that, the results might be very bad.
Same thing here. Someone with 2500 jumps, 1500 on a small elliptical, can safely land a small canopy with a massive surf. They can swoop ponds, run a blade slalom etc. The mistake people make is that they assume that they can do the same with 250 jumps. I don't think the failure is that he sees the swoop - the failure is that he does not see how much he must learn before he can do the same.
-bill von

[billvon 2,434]

>I do not believe it was the size of canopy that was the problem here.
I disagree here. I was about 100 feet from him when he initiated his turn; he tried to bail immediately with toggles. A larger canopy would probably have made all the difference. In fact, the first thing I thought when I saw him start the turn was "he just tried a Sabre 170 manuever with a much smaller canopy."
>You would hook a 190 in if you do it at 75 feet.
And you can kill yourself with a Manta if you try. The issue is jumping something that will keep you alive, even if you made a moderate screwup, until you have the skill and experience to jump something more risky. Without the right training, the only thing that may stand between an embarrassing landing and a trip to the hospital might be the extra margin those additional 50 square feet of canopy give you.
>I believe education, or the lack of it, was the primary factor.
I agree here. Education and proper training are, by far, the best way to approach rapid downsizing. Anything else can be deadly.
>Furthermore, a class of this sort should be mandatory for an A license.
Sort of, although I'd change it to "should be mandatory for anyone who wants to jump high performance canopies." AFF training is adequate if you jump only large F111 canopies.
>Please Please Please.....If you know someone attempting things that they have
>not been trained to do, STOP THEM!!! KICK THEIR ASS! whatever........
Some of us try, and get called canopy nazis and the like. We get told that "Hey, I pull high, and I play with my canopy, so I can safely jump a 97." We get told that Joe so-and-so jumps a Jedei 107 with ony 300 jumps so of _course_ they can jump a 129! Heck, that's conservative! We get told that, yeah, that advice is good for most jumpers, but they just have superior canopy skills - they're a natural, everyone says so.
Far too many people do not learn the lesson you learned until it's too late. I wish there was a better answer, that there was some way to make people listen. Unfortunately, all you can do is give them advice and hope they take it.
-bill von

[cwylie 0]

I'm part of his core group that he jumps with every weekend and as for clarity to what has happened to him and how he is doing I will try to shed some light.
First of all, He is pretty new to the sport. Dec. 1st Tandem.
Since then he is around 230 jumps, consistantly 15-20 on the weekend. He has progressed fast because he is very aggressive and also very competant and coordinated and has been patted on the back by more people at the DZ then anyone else out there. He has been a natural at picking up headown and sit and all around freeflying as well as canopy flight.
As for canopy work, he has been down sizing at a rapid pace and has been warned about going small. He understood the risk and made decisions. He flew his canopy well from the time that he started until now and has nice landings 99%of the time. Just like anyone, we all have a few unplanned landings (Meaning that it wasn't in the grass, or having to make adjustments due to others in the air space or obstacles on the ground). This particular jump was no different except that he made a bad decision too low. I think that anyone making a comment about his abilities or lack of abilities has NO PLACE TO OPEN THERE MOUTH now and especially if you weren't there to see it. It should have been said before and now that something has happened we should try to learn from that.
As for keeping up with his group, we did not push him to fly smaller canopies! The four people that he jumps with on a regular basis that he is trying to keep up with do not do hook turns. We do not do hook turns. None of us. The only keeping up we wanted from him was in the sky where the fun is. Reasons for pushing him - safety, currency, safety, awareness, experience. Pushing is a strong term for someone that is successful and loves the sport and wants to progress. We love him and want nothing but the best for him. It was a bad decision, we all make them. sometimes it just has worse consequences. Hindsight is always 20/20
As for our friend, he is doing better. fractured pelvis. That seems to be all. As for the eye, it is still to early to tell but also signs look positive.
I wanted to post this because another friend on here also posted and made him sound less educated than is true. He is not dangerous, he is a good skydiver, and is learning a sport as we all are. He is also a great friend to me and to all that are around him. I think we all need to evaluate what we do in this sport jump by jump and proceed from there.
Be careful out there and your jump is not over until you are off the landing area and in the packing area.
Best wishes to all that know him and all who will know him
-he will be back!

[GroundZero 0]

Quade,
Very well said.
Blues,
Chris

[VectorBoy 0]

When I heard who it was that hooked in I was in shock. I have jumped with the guy and his friends and they are conservative. The freeflying never gets more daring than the least comfortable jumper can handle. This guy himself had toned down the nature of few jumps I've been on with them to make them safer and more relaxing even though he had the skills for a more demanding jump and the group was game on one. Like posted earlier this group NEVER hooks it. There are no ego problems in the bunch. For the most part I believe this group fly canopy's that would be considered safe for your first rig. And it is unfortunate that his core group has been taking the heat for being aggressive they are not. This individual did display eagerness and zest. He is driven and does display a love for this sport openly. I was aware he was testing aggressive canopys but not that he was flying them aggressively. It was a personal event. I could speculate, based on my knowledge that I've never seen him practice 90s, that the 180 wasn't planned. But I'll just wait and ask him myself. Again I am shocked. I feel for him and I feel for his friends that were there that day.

[E150 0]

<Yes, experienced jumpers should look out for less experienced jumps. Yes, they should give them good advice.
However, what really bugs me is the concept that these less experienced people somehow can't think for themselves. I gotta go back to something I learned a long time ago, you can't really teach good judgement.>>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very much agreed. We should all look out for eachother. But on a few occasions I have seen more experianced jumpers underestimate the ability of lower time jumpers (by telling toem to go for something bigger than they need). It's as if they don't want them to tred their ground by jumping smaller canopies. Maybe it boiles down to image again.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

But on a few occasions I have seen more experianced jumpers underestimate the ability of lower time jumpers (by telling toem to go for something bigger than they need). It's as if they don't want them to tred their ground by jumping smaller canopies. Maybe it boiles down to image again.

Yeah that's it. I'm sure that's the same reason big way organizers don't put people with 100 jumps on 100 ways. Wouldn't want some young pup flying really well and making them look bad.
Sorry if this ruffles anyone's feathers, but there's a big difference between thousands of jumps and hundreds of jumps. There are people out there with a couple hundred jumps who are pretty damn good, but generally experience counts for more than raw talent in this sport. Until you've seen at least some of the shit that can happen, flying something "bigger than you need" (ie larger than the smallest and/or most aggressive canopy you can safely land in perfect conditions) is smart. Listen to the people with experience or don't; your choice. But don't assume that someone recommending conservative choices is trying to "keep you down". That's a rather childish way to look at it imho.
pull & flare,
lisa
---
On the other hand...you have different fingers

[hobbes4star 0]

Hope he has a speedy recovery. the sucks!!!
why jump when you can fly

[billvon 2,434]

>I could speculate, based on my knowledge that I've never seen him practice
> 90s, that the 180 wasn't planned.
As the video from his own camera shows him pulling down a front riser pretty aggressively, I have to think that he intended to do a front riser turn. Perhaps he did not realize how much that would turn him, or how aggressively such a heavily loaded canopy would dive.
>But I'll just wait and ask him myself.
You may be disappointed. It is common with serious injuries for the injured to have no memory of the events leading up to the accident. Time will tell.
-bill von

[billvon 2,434]

>Very much agreed. We should all look out for eachother. But on a few occasions
> I have seen more experianced jumpers underestimate the ability of lower time
> jumpers (by telling toem to go for something bigger than they need).
Quite possible. It's a lot better to be annoyed by having a too-large canopy than have a broken pelvis because you chose a too-small canopy, so it's better to err on the side of caution until competence has been proved.
> It's as if they don't want them to tred their ground by jumping smaller canopies.
> Maybe it boiles down to image again.
That's a load of crap. I've had one friend die and five get seriously injured - one will never walk again - from low turns and hook turns under small high performance canopies. I don't want that to happen any more. That's my big issue, and I know that's Lisa's issue and Jack Gramley's issue as well. Image doesn't even enter into the equation.
-bill von

[homer 0]

First off I would like to say it's good being back in the forums. Like anybody has missed me over the last two months. God speed for the injured jumper and may they jump again. I'm still a newbie to the sport, but I have great respect for what could possibly happen each and every time I leave that plane. It has been said before and I will say it again how many people have to get hurt before someone will step forward and do something about this problem. I haven't had the opertunity to travel to any world class dropzones like Perris, but I am planning to next summer. Dont these DZ have rules as to what a jumper can and cannot do below a designated altitude. Both DZ's that I jump at here in Washington State say that there are to be no 360 degree turns under 1,000 feet and absolutley NO HOOK TURNS. Sure visiting jumpers don't like the rules but it's for SAFETY!!!!! I believe more DZ's should start setting more stricter rules as to what jumpers can and cannot do. If you really want to swoop then do it over a pond where if something does go wrong the water is a lot softer than the dirt.
Another thing pointed out is talking to newbies who want to down size because it's cool. Listen to the more experienced jumpers they know what they're talking about. This cones from experience. I came to my home DZ as a smug PARATROOPER fresh off active duty. I thought I jump rounds for the fun of it. I got a rude awaikining when I could have cost the lives of myself and two fellow jumpers because of it. safety is number 1 for me know. I have just purchased my first rig and every body askes why I didn't get something smaller and I tell them I done feel safe enough yet to down size.
Look out for each other and keep each other safe. We jump to have fun not to kill or cripple ourselves.
Can't we all just get along

• Quote

[GrumpySmurf 0]

Quote

until competence has been proved.

Amen to that.
It's frightening to see how fast the canopies have outpaced the instruction. It's assumed that all the canopy instruction we need is to be completed within 20 jumps, give or take a few - the rest we either are expected to figure out on our own or try to find a competent mentor (or both). Now with canopy flight schools starting to appear, would it be worth wondering if the vendors and manufacturers will want to see proof of advanced canopy training (or approval from a S&TA for 'grandfathered' folk) before selling or sending out a demo of a high performance main or one that would be highly loaded (yes, there would be ways around the system - but if it saves one life, it could quite well worth the hassle)? Sadly, it is ignorance that seems to kill the most in this sport, ignorance that could be avoided by additional training.
Just a thought.

[QuickDraw 0]

Quote

For the most part I believe this group fly canopy's that would be considered safe for your first rig.

And form Icarus's web-site

Quote

The Icarus Crossfire is a High Performance Elliptical ZP 9-cell canopy designed specifically for experienced ram air pilots.

Think i'm gonna take the 5th amendment on this one.
Good vibes on the way.
"Bart, stop pestering satan" - Marge Simpson.

[SBS 0]

This whole situation has bothered me a lot from the beginning. It's a horrible thing to happen to anyone, but really hits home when it is someone who you consider to be a friend and all around great guy, as in the case of Nathan.
I see people here defending him, and making statements like saying that the group that he jumps with is not aggressive, etc. We don't need to place blame, and I agree, the group, as a whole, is not extremely aggressive. At the same time, though, what led to this accident was a series of aggressive decisions, that were made by Nathan himself. We are not talking about an entanglement, or landing a canopy with broken lines, having a steering line break on landing, etc. This situation is a product of a mistake, pure and simple. Although it is hard sometimes to accept as an individual that makes a mistake, and many times, harder as a friend of that individual, because you want to be supportive and not bad mouth, I think it is vitally important to take each and every situation for the facts, emotions aside, and take the opportunity to learn what we can for our own futures and the futures of those who will look to us for advice.
I wrote the following on Monday, not knowing where I would send it, post it, etc. or if I anyone would see it at all. It was sort of my way of venting. Anyway, figured I'd include it.
Blue Skies people! Stay Safe!!!
Steve
---------------------------
It is a fact of life that we will have friends who get seriously injured,
and in some cases pass on. In any aspect of life, though, the horrible
reality will be realized in any one of a number of ways. What comes to pass
may be an accident, which I am not sure is better, in this world where we
seem to thrive on having those who we can blame for misfortune. In other
instances, the result follows as a direct result of decisions that have been
made by the victim. It may happen that the we all agree with the decisions
that were made, but what is worse, is when we lower our heads in the
acknowledgment that we may have been able to prevent what came to pass.
Watching a friend be taken from the DZ by ambulance this weekend turned out
to be a situation more closely related to the latter. Having just over 225
jumps, this friend was jumping a canopy unquestionably classified as high
performance. Further magnifying the issue was the fact that he was loading
the canopy at greater than 1.5:1.
One can be injured on any canopy, large or small, low or high performance.
In this case, given the severity of the maneuver that was made, the result
may have been nearly the same, regardless of 10 or 20 additional square feet.
In a vast number of cases, though, that difference may just save a life,
and sometimes, even injury.
The question is, how to convince those who lack experience that they are
endangering themselves and others, and that they do, in fact, lack
experience? How can we convince people that small high performance canopies
being hooked low is not what makes a great swoop, but the experienced canopy
pilot that can make any size or type of canopy look good?
Even if it is understood that "thou shalt not hook low", it still takes experience
in order to know what is low, and what is not. It takes experience to judge the
difference between 700 feet and 725 feet, which can make the difference between
a sweet swoop and a broken body. It takes experience to know how to adjust
based on winds, humidity, and temperature, to know when something isn't going
as planned, when one needs to bail out, how to do so, etc. These are all based on
experiential knowledge, not things that can be implemented straight from a discussion
at the bar, or from any book.
It seems to me that it would be horrible on a number of levels to set hard,
steadfast rules by which we all must abide with regards to licensing
dictating canopy size, etc. After all, people are different, as are skill
levels, drop zone altitudes, learning/teaching ability, etc. What seems
sure to me, though, is that someone looking to become a proficient canopy
pilot should not downsize as quickly as possible, and at 250 jumps, does not
have the skill to use a high performance canopy to its potential, which
would thus, allow the individual's potential to be realized. By downsizing
at too rapid of a pace, the focus moves from developing skill to simply
survival. Either: A) The person will consciously focus on that survival,
which will negatively impact the learning curve, or B) They will not realize
to what extent their survival is threatened, not have that focus, and likely
break themselves or worse.
Jumping the smallest canopy that one CAN is not what needs to be the focus,
but jumping the optimum canopy for ones skill level, experience, and goals
in the sport of skydiving. Save the case of highly experienced canopy
competitors going for records, etc., that formula never (NEVER) adds up to
the conclusion "jump the smallest, fastest canopy I can land".
I wonder many times if exceptions to rules really exist. I would venture to
say, though, that if one thinks that they are an exception, they probably
are not. I heard it put brilliantly once, that every one of us should learn
from the mistakes of others, because we will not live long enough to make
them all ourselves.
Some say that the answer to the drug problem in the United States is to make
them legal and tax them. Though I don't know if that's quite the right
answer to that problem, I think that it can be used as a reasonable
illustration of what we can do to help those who do things that may be
considered by a wide number of peers to be dangerous. People are going to
downsize and jump small canopies. People are going to hook turn. We can
turn our heads after saying, "you don't have the experience", we can give
these people constant crap, or we can help these people to do it right.
Like rebellious teens, the more they are alienated, the more they will
continue doing what they are doing, thinking, "I'll show them". I think
most all of us can come down from the high horses that we sometimes ride,
and help these maneuvers and progressions to be learned as relatively safely
as possible, as opposed to leaving many of these eager youths of our sport
to their own faculties to learn by trial and error. More times than not,
our reaction to disagreement is to say, "he's a big boy, it's his choice".
We lose sight of the fact that worldly age has nothing to do with youth
within the sport. This is something that need be realized on both
sides...by us, who may be put in more of a parenting position than is
sometimes comfortable, and by those who are learning, who need to accept
their youth, learning from the advice of the experienced who offer it.
By treating people with respect, we can also earn it. Hopefully, in the
process, we may keep an ear open to education, and keep more of our friends
from making the mistakes that so many like them have made in the past.
So, you want to be a good canopy pilot? Don't get in over your head. Don't
jump what you can, jump what will help you better your skills. Fly the snot
out of a canopy before you downsize...when you have the experience to
squeeze performance out of a canopy, you will be better suited to make a
reasonable decision regarding your next step.
If ever you are sitting at home or having a conversation and the thought
crosses your mind, "But I have a D-license", stop and ask yourself if you
know the as much as the D-license holder next to you that has 6,000
skydives, and started jumping in 1977. Experience is more than just jump
numbers. Proficiency is more than how long you have been in the sport. A
good landing is more than being alive to tell about it.
I have been through some of these phases, and will never lose sight of the
fact that I am lucky to be alive. I hope that examples such as this
weekend's will cause ears to bend, and that those ears will be greeted with
helpful voices that will breed bigger and better canopy pilots that swoop
faster and farther than ever before.
Refuse to believe that you are the exception...it will likely keep you
alive.

[QuickDraw 0]

Classic post dude,
Billvon will be proud of you.
That should be sewn into every container by law.
"Bart, stop pestering satan" - Marge Simpson.

[GrumpySmurf 0]

Or at least:

Quote

Refuse to believe that you are the exception...it will likely keep you alive.

Should be physically branded into every student upon getting thier 'A'.

[Jessica 0]

Quote

Refuse to believe that you are the exception...it will likely keep you alive.

I agree. Best line in there.
People are inherently egotistical. Why, I'm the lead character in this movie called life! The STAR of "The Jessica Story"!! And main characters don't die. They don't hurt themselves so bad that the movie stops. They just don't, right?
Actually, yeah. They do. Every day.

[VectorBoy 0]

Hey Quickdraw if you read what I said " for the most part this group". They fly specters and sabre2 s maybe a Safire loaded at or around 1.1 or 1.2 Max. I don't believe the IllumiNazi's would have trouble with that.
Now I did say our friend was testing aggressive canopys. He alone.This was a personal situation.