stratostar 5 #1 March 18, 2007 Disclamer, this is not intended to point any fingers or show disrespect to the fallen brothers! It would seem to me we have got the word out about low hook turns (after 10 yrs or so) and the numbers of dead are coming down due to hooks, however the numbers seem to be on the rise for canopy collisions. How many friends do we need to lose to this before we get the word out? There is NOT one person in the sky who wants to take out another or be taken out, this we know. 2006 ended on a bad note and 07 is off to a bad start just one weekend after safety day. So what do we need to do to get the word out about running into each other under canopy or even tracking? With the death of well known and high profile jumpers like Roger N., Danny P. this should be a wake up call for many, if they can go that way it can happen to anyone. I have had talks with a few young hotshots who always seem to think "it won't happen to them" and they keep swooping (pulling 270's) into the main landing area with old boats and students in the air. The room for pilot mistakes low to the ground is very very small as we can see from the body count on the rise. Other canopies are not pylons for zommies to carve around and dodge in and out of, we all know this, yet I see it going on a fair amount. I have made my share of mistakes in 24 yrs, all of them would have only killed me. Yet I find more and more dangerous to be on loads with some pilots and their canopy control. I don't want to be taken out and I don't want to take anyone out! I use to pull low all the time, around 1500 ft, as I got older my deployment alti has gone up several thousand feet, now I do a lot of video work, one thing I really like about TDM vids is pulling with them around 5k. we have the sky to our selfs and the LZ is free of the hotrods by the time I get down. Wake up people we got a long 2007 season ahead of us and I don't want to get anymore distrubing phone calls like the three I got last night! Play hard but play safe out there, PLEASE!you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MagicGuy 0 #2 March 18, 2007 You make a good point about the deployment altitude. I think it makes sense for those wanting to swoop to maybe pull a little higher, give everyone else their room to land and then come in for the swoop. I know with the exit order it's not always possible, but definitely something to consider when it is. There's also the option of landing in a different part of the landing area if the dropzone has the room to do so. Of course, the primary thing here is to keep your head on a swivel at all times and be aware of who else is around you, from the time you delpoy until you are safe on the ground. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #3 March 18, 2007 I use to pull low all the time, around 1500 ft, as I got older my deployment alti has gone up several thousand feet... Quote I was telling someone the same thing last night, I use to pull that low so I could have the peas all to myself as I was a hard core Accuri Nut. Last 8-10 years I find myself pulling MUCH higher and floating the brakes to stay clear of the mayhem below in the pattern. 30 some years ago when I started this journey, I'm betting Nostradamus couldn't have predicted that here in the 21st century...the freaking OPEN NYLON would be killin' more people than anything else! Theses recent incidents show that even if YOU do everything right, you can still get dead. EVERYBODY has to do everything right so we're not takin' each other out! Always error n the side of safety...the life you save, might be MINE! ...and I buy a lotta beer, I'm worth keepin' around. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ladydyver 0 #4 March 18, 2007 I am a baby jumper....trying to be responsible and learn as much as possible about skydiving I have taken a canopy control course. I found it to VERY helpful and would hope that others would take the course so that they can learn more effectivley how to manuever your canopy and set up appropriate landing patterns (in addition to figuring out how to land my canopy - they use to call me "pigpen" at the DZ -hehehehehehe). My point is is that there is so much overload when you are taking IAD/AFF courses and focusing on the A license you don't necessarily absorb everything that you are taught ( at least i didn't). Maybe I am a rare bird that suffers from overload too - who knows. Anyway, going back and taking the course really cemented things in for me. Any thoughts or comments on how to or if the implementation of canopy control courses should be mandated for "low-time" jumpers?DPH # 2 "I am not sure what you are suppose to do with that, but I don't think it is suppose to flop around like that." ~Skootz~ I have a strong regard for the rules.......doc! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites brettski74 0 #5 March 18, 2007 Quote You make a good point about the deployment altitude. I think it makes sense for those wanting to swoop to maybe pull a little higher, give everyone else their room to land and then come in for the swoop. I know with the exit order it's not always possible, but definitely something to consider when it is. Actually, I think the opposite would make more sense. Swoopers generally have the fastest, highest performing canopies on the DZ, so they will sink faster, and the nature of their landing approach will also produce much higher descent rates, so even if they did pull high, that's no guarantee that they're not going to get down before the 110 pound student flying a 200+ square foot boat. It will be far easier to take steps to ensure that swoopers land before everyone else. It would also be safer if there weren't a bunch of people standing around gathering up their canopies or walking back to the packing area when they come zooming through. A separate HP landing area makes a lot of sense if there is room for one. If you don't have room, then maybe restrict them to hop 'n pops and have the swoopers come out first on the hop 'n pop jump run. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Nickkk 0 #6 March 18, 2007 I could not agree more with this post. Gear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. I know that I know barely anything, and am always learning, but one thing I do know is something needs to be done about this. What do you do when someone throws a big planet at you? Throw your pilot chute in defense! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites phoenixlpr 0 #7 March 18, 2007 QuoteGear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. Bad decisions are killing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Nickkk 0 #8 March 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteGear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. Bad decisions are killing. That is what I was getting at, It is operator related and not gear related. The opposite of what whuffos would assume. What do you do when someone throws a big planet at you? Throw your pilot chute in defense! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Remster 24 #9 March 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteGear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. Bad decisions are killing. That is what I was getting at, It is operator related and not gear related. The opposite of what whuffos would assume. This isnt new. I'm not the oldest sjydiver around by a long shot, but since I've started, it hasnt been our gear that has been killing us. A few years ago, it was people making divits by their own mistakes. In the last few months, its been a rash of collisions. I wouldnt call it a trend yet: 3 months of data is not representative. Overall, there have been a few in the last few years. I 'm not looking at athe data, but Roger Nelson's and the ones last year come to mind (in Texas?) In any event, the last few months have sucked... big time...Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skybytch 259 #10 March 18, 2007 QuoteAny thoughts or comments on how to or if the implementation of canopy control courses should be mandated for "low-time" jumpers? Do a search on "wingloading BSR" in these forums. Requiring canopy control courses has been suggested repeatedly. Maybe someday USPA will do it. I'm not holding my breath, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites phoenixlpr 0 #11 March 18, 2007 QuoteDo a search on "wingloading BSR" in these forums. Requiring canopy control courses has been suggested repeatedly. Maybe someday USPA will do it. I'm not holding my breath, though. So, do you state that a WL BSR can solve attitude an problem? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #12 March 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteDo a search on "unloading BR" in these forums. Requiring canopy control courses has been suggested repeatedly. Maybe someday USA will do it. I'm not holding my breath, though. So, do you state that a AWL BR can solve attitude an problem? I doubt it. What it could do is help restrict unloading until attitude and ego catch up with skill and experience. Lower windloadings generaly mean lower speeds.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LloydDobbler 2 #13 March 18, 2007 QuoteI doubt it. What it could do is help restrict unloading until attitude and ego catch up with skill and experience. Lower windloadings generaly mean lower speeds. Of course, a lot of the recent incidents have involved experienced jumpers, whose attitude and egos were commensurate with their skill & experience. I think the jumpers involved probably had pretty good canopy control. But obviously they still forgot a step somewhere, didn't look, whatever. Another issue is crowded landing areas. I know I'm lucky given the DZ's I jump at regularly, where there are usually designated high performance landing areas, general landing areas, and student areas. I've jumped at some DZ's where the h/p areas aren't really designated as such - it's more of a group consensus thing ("everybody usually lands here...but you can land over there, if you want to."). And even though I'm pretty darn accurate for my jump numbers, I'll purposefully land out at those DZ's, just to avoid the circus. In this most recent case, however, it sounds like the only thing that would have helped is better awareness of other canopies in the sky...or to have been in a different place at a different time. Ultimately, since there are so many variables to the situation, I think the only real answer is increased awareness of the problem. I know lately I've been much more vigilant about scanning for people in my pattern, just from reading about the incidents at hand....Signatures are the new black. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites phoenixlpr 0 #14 March 18, 2007 QuoteI doubt it. What it could do is help restrict unloading until attitude and ego catch up with skill and experience. Lower windloadings generaly mean lower speeds. Has it worked in any country where WL BSR is enforced? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skybytch 259 #15 March 18, 2007 QuoteSo, do you state that a WL BSR can solve attitude an problem? That is not what I said. I said - "do a search on 'wingloading BSR' in these forums." Why do a search on those words? Because a search using those words would turn up several threads in which the concept of requiring canopy control courses has been discussed. Which was what the person I was replying to was asking about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AMax 0 #16 March 18, 2007 IMHO the problem will not be solved until the HP and regular landing areas are physically separated on every dropzone. Most of the recent collisions involved a skydiver performing a 270 (or more) and running into a lover person. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #17 March 19, 2007 One trend that hasn't been mentioned (and seems to get pushed to the side when brought up) is that 5 recent fatalities have been at boogies. A boogie ain't home, and ain't safe. You can be safe at a boogie, but must approach it as a MUCH more dangerous situation if you want to get out alive through skill rather than luck.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #18 March 19, 2007 I don't know. I don't care either. I skydive and instruct in USA right now. That's my concern. What's your point?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #19 March 19, 2007 QuoteIMHO the problem will not be solved until the HP and regular landing areas are physically separated on every dropzone. Most of the recent collisions involved a skydiver performing a 270 (or more) and running into a lover person. That won't fix the problem by it's self. Jumpers must get over the ego that they should get to swoop on every jump. They need to take some responsibility for being aware of their surroundings both in freefall and under canopy.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #20 March 19, 2007 The two of you are really not contradicting each other. You're both correct that a new mindset has to become commonplace, and "standard procedures" along with it. Some perspective: In the early days of square canopies, most square canopy pilots were experienced jumpers who began their skydiving careers under round canopies. When mostly rounds were commonplace, canopy "landing patterns" as we think of them today really didn't exist yet at most DZ's, because you really don't use a "landing pattern", as such, relative to other canopies with a round. Anyhow, when experienced jumpers transitioned to rounds, they still had a lot of the old mentality. So, back then, for those who jumped squares, especially at the smaller and medium-sized DZ's, sashaying (S-turns) to bleed off altitude, and spiraling for fun and to lose altitude quickly were commonplace - again, because we really didn't think in terms of a "landing pattern" mentality. But canopy collisions were very rare. I remember one fatal canopy collision in the early 1980's, well before people were swooping or doing low 270's to set them up. Both jumpers, under squares, were spiraling to lose altitude, and they collided at around 400 feet. It was around that time that the word was getting out that landing patterns needed to be established and stuck to. Now we seem to be at a similar junction in the evolution of the sport, where we're being rudely awakened to "business as usual" no longer being safe. It's not just the past couple of weeks. I was at one particular large DZ just 2 weekends after a double fatal canopy collision occurred there in 2005, and people were still swooping into the crowded main landing area. It's up to all of us to create a new mindset, and safer procedures to go with it, or this will continue to happen until we wise up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #21 March 19, 2007 I treat a boogie like I treat a Demo and land as such. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AMax 0 #22 March 19, 2007 QuoteQuoteIMHO the problem will not be solved until the HP and regular landing areas are physically separated on every dropzone. Most of the recent collisions involved a skydiver performing a 270 (or more) and running into a lover person. That won't fix the problem by it's self. Jumpers must get over the ego that they should get to swoop on every jump. They need to take some responsibility for being aware of their surroundings both in freefall and under canopy. I totally agree that egos play a major role in this problem. However, I don't believe that you can effectively control the egos because skydivers are in general an ego-driven group of people. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #23 March 19, 2007 QuoteI treat a boogie like I treat a Demo and land as such. Matt Bingo. Took the words outta my mouth.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #24 March 19, 2007 Just FOLLOWING your lead! Matt Any one else getting the hint yet?An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites stratostar 5 #25 March 19, 2007 Hitting reply to you JP because I agree with your post here and in the accident threads and really I'm just a lazy ass. Where to begin, it's like what do I say to the three people who called last night, as they ask how do we deal with these events (two from Dublin one from TX). This was their first time with personal/live event death in the sport. One was seven years lucky, one is Three years in and the other just got an A. What is the point? It's about risk assessment. All three of these people I sat with and talked about the "what if's" as an instructor and each one of them made a risk assessment, based on training and making jumps, but when you see someone bounce for the first time it changes ones perspective, it is no longer information from a text book or words from a trusted instructor. It's a big reality check and mentally disturbing to those who see it in a lot of cases. In this case I really had nothing to say that would help. How do we teach how to get hit from high and behind at 200,300,400, 1000 ft.????? I see it as a trend, someone else posted he didn't think it was a trend yet. I disagree and see it as third step in progression of what started about 10 or 12 years ago as downsizing (high WL's and smaller is better and cool) to fast and hook turns. We saw a lot of people being sold canopies they shouldn't have been sold and others who thought they could handle it, even as many other asked them to cool it. Why dose everyone need to land faster then a Cessna 150 these days? I think there is more to the issue then just two LZ's and low passes for swoopers. With our numbers already in decline and the sport hurting across the country, it don't help any when we kill ourselves under working parachutes. The full page color glossy tributes in parachutist to the fallen are nice and all that, but I'm tired of seeing them, these kinds of accidents seem like such waste. The skyhook debate, well knowing what your lowest cutway hard deck is, don't sound all that bad, hell I could lower mine another 500 ft or so, unless your hit from above and behind at 200ft or less, at least you never saw it coming and have the time to know your fucked. I don't have the answers to all this but "Houston we have a problem"!you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo 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
ladydyver 0 #4 March 18, 2007 I am a baby jumper....trying to be responsible and learn as much as possible about skydiving I have taken a canopy control course. I found it to VERY helpful and would hope that others would take the course so that they can learn more effectivley how to manuever your canopy and set up appropriate landing patterns (in addition to figuring out how to land my canopy - they use to call me "pigpen" at the DZ -hehehehehehe). My point is is that there is so much overload when you are taking IAD/AFF courses and focusing on the A license you don't necessarily absorb everything that you are taught ( at least i didn't). Maybe I am a rare bird that suffers from overload too - who knows. Anyway, going back and taking the course really cemented things in for me. Any thoughts or comments on how to or if the implementation of canopy control courses should be mandated for "low-time" jumpers?DPH # 2 "I am not sure what you are suppose to do with that, but I don't think it is suppose to flop around like that." ~Skootz~ I have a strong regard for the rules.......doc! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brettski74 0 #5 March 18, 2007 Quote You make a good point about the deployment altitude. I think it makes sense for those wanting to swoop to maybe pull a little higher, give everyone else their room to land and then come in for the swoop. I know with the exit order it's not always possible, but definitely something to consider when it is. Actually, I think the opposite would make more sense. Swoopers generally have the fastest, highest performing canopies on the DZ, so they will sink faster, and the nature of their landing approach will also produce much higher descent rates, so even if they did pull high, that's no guarantee that they're not going to get down before the 110 pound student flying a 200+ square foot boat. It will be far easier to take steps to ensure that swoopers land before everyone else. It would also be safer if there weren't a bunch of people standing around gathering up their canopies or walking back to the packing area when they come zooming through. A separate HP landing area makes a lot of sense if there is room for one. If you don't have room, then maybe restrict them to hop 'n pops and have the swoopers come out first on the hop 'n pop jump run. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nickkk 0 #6 March 18, 2007 I could not agree more with this post. Gear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. I know that I know barely anything, and am always learning, but one thing I do know is something needs to be done about this. What do you do when someone throws a big planet at you? Throw your pilot chute in defense! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #7 March 18, 2007 QuoteGear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. Bad decisions are killing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nickkk 0 #8 March 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteGear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. Bad decisions are killing. That is what I was getting at, It is operator related and not gear related. The opposite of what whuffos would assume. What do you do when someone throws a big planet at you? Throw your pilot chute in defense! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #9 March 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteGear is becoming more and more reliable and it is now our fully functioning life saving equipment that is killing us. Bad decisions are killing. That is what I was getting at, It is operator related and not gear related. The opposite of what whuffos would assume. This isnt new. I'm not the oldest sjydiver around by a long shot, but since I've started, it hasnt been our gear that has been killing us. A few years ago, it was people making divits by their own mistakes. In the last few months, its been a rash of collisions. I wouldnt call it a trend yet: 3 months of data is not representative. Overall, there have been a few in the last few years. I 'm not looking at athe data, but Roger Nelson's and the ones last year come to mind (in Texas?) In any event, the last few months have sucked... big time...Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #10 March 18, 2007 QuoteAny thoughts or comments on how to or if the implementation of canopy control courses should be mandated for "low-time" jumpers? Do a search on "wingloading BSR" in these forums. Requiring canopy control courses has been suggested repeatedly. Maybe someday USPA will do it. I'm not holding my breath, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #11 March 18, 2007 QuoteDo a search on "wingloading BSR" in these forums. Requiring canopy control courses has been suggested repeatedly. Maybe someday USPA will do it. I'm not holding my breath, though. So, do you state that a WL BSR can solve attitude an problem? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #12 March 18, 2007 QuoteQuoteDo a search on "unloading BR" in these forums. Requiring canopy control courses has been suggested repeatedly. Maybe someday USA will do it. I'm not holding my breath, though. So, do you state that a AWL BR can solve attitude an problem? I doubt it. What it could do is help restrict unloading until attitude and ego catch up with skill and experience. Lower windloadings generaly mean lower speeds.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LloydDobbler 2 #13 March 18, 2007 QuoteI doubt it. What it could do is help restrict unloading until attitude and ego catch up with skill and experience. Lower windloadings generaly mean lower speeds. Of course, a lot of the recent incidents have involved experienced jumpers, whose attitude and egos were commensurate with their skill & experience. I think the jumpers involved probably had pretty good canopy control. But obviously they still forgot a step somewhere, didn't look, whatever. Another issue is crowded landing areas. I know I'm lucky given the DZ's I jump at regularly, where there are usually designated high performance landing areas, general landing areas, and student areas. I've jumped at some DZ's where the h/p areas aren't really designated as such - it's more of a group consensus thing ("everybody usually lands here...but you can land over there, if you want to."). And even though I'm pretty darn accurate for my jump numbers, I'll purposefully land out at those DZ's, just to avoid the circus. In this most recent case, however, it sounds like the only thing that would have helped is better awareness of other canopies in the sky...or to have been in a different place at a different time. Ultimately, since there are so many variables to the situation, I think the only real answer is increased awareness of the problem. I know lately I've been much more vigilant about scanning for people in my pattern, just from reading about the incidents at hand....Signatures are the new black. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #14 March 18, 2007 QuoteI doubt it. What it could do is help restrict unloading until attitude and ego catch up with skill and experience. Lower windloadings generaly mean lower speeds. Has it worked in any country where WL BSR is enforced? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #15 March 18, 2007 QuoteSo, do you state that a WL BSR can solve attitude an problem? That is not what I said. I said - "do a search on 'wingloading BSR' in these forums." Why do a search on those words? Because a search using those words would turn up several threads in which the concept of requiring canopy control courses has been discussed. Which was what the person I was replying to was asking about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #16 March 18, 2007 IMHO the problem will not be solved until the HP and regular landing areas are physically separated on every dropzone. Most of the recent collisions involved a skydiver performing a 270 (or more) and running into a lover person. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #17 March 19, 2007 One trend that hasn't been mentioned (and seems to get pushed to the side when brought up) is that 5 recent fatalities have been at boogies. A boogie ain't home, and ain't safe. You can be safe at a boogie, but must approach it as a MUCH more dangerous situation if you want to get out alive through skill rather than luck.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #18 March 19, 2007 I don't know. I don't care either. I skydive and instruct in USA right now. That's my concern. What's your point?---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #19 March 19, 2007 QuoteIMHO the problem will not be solved until the HP and regular landing areas are physically separated on every dropzone. Most of the recent collisions involved a skydiver performing a 270 (or more) and running into a lover person. That won't fix the problem by it's self. Jumpers must get over the ego that they should get to swoop on every jump. They need to take some responsibility for being aware of their surroundings both in freefall and under canopy.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #20 March 19, 2007 The two of you are really not contradicting each other. You're both correct that a new mindset has to become commonplace, and "standard procedures" along with it. Some perspective: In the early days of square canopies, most square canopy pilots were experienced jumpers who began their skydiving careers under round canopies. When mostly rounds were commonplace, canopy "landing patterns" as we think of them today really didn't exist yet at most DZ's, because you really don't use a "landing pattern", as such, relative to other canopies with a round. Anyhow, when experienced jumpers transitioned to rounds, they still had a lot of the old mentality. So, back then, for those who jumped squares, especially at the smaller and medium-sized DZ's, sashaying (S-turns) to bleed off altitude, and spiraling for fun and to lose altitude quickly were commonplace - again, because we really didn't think in terms of a "landing pattern" mentality. But canopy collisions were very rare. I remember one fatal canopy collision in the early 1980's, well before people were swooping or doing low 270's to set them up. Both jumpers, under squares, were spiraling to lose altitude, and they collided at around 400 feet. It was around that time that the word was getting out that landing patterns needed to be established and stuck to. Now we seem to be at a similar junction in the evolution of the sport, where we're being rudely awakened to "business as usual" no longer being safe. It's not just the past couple of weeks. I was at one particular large DZ just 2 weekends after a double fatal canopy collision occurred there in 2005, and people were still swooping into the crowded main landing area. It's up to all of us to create a new mindset, and safer procedures to go with it, or this will continue to happen until we wise up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #21 March 19, 2007 I treat a boogie like I treat a Demo and land as such. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #22 March 19, 2007 QuoteQuoteIMHO the problem will not be solved until the HP and regular landing areas are physically separated on every dropzone. Most of the recent collisions involved a skydiver performing a 270 (or more) and running into a lover person. That won't fix the problem by it's self. Jumpers must get over the ego that they should get to swoop on every jump. They need to take some responsibility for being aware of their surroundings both in freefall and under canopy. I totally agree that egos play a major role in this problem. However, I don't believe that you can effectively control the egos because skydivers are in general an ego-driven group of people. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #23 March 19, 2007 QuoteI treat a boogie like I treat a Demo and land as such. Matt Bingo. Took the words outta my mouth.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #24 March 19, 2007 Just FOLLOWING your lead! Matt Any one else getting the hint yet?An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #25 March 19, 2007 Hitting reply to you JP because I agree with your post here and in the accident threads and really I'm just a lazy ass. Where to begin, it's like what do I say to the three people who called last night, as they ask how do we deal with these events (two from Dublin one from TX). This was their first time with personal/live event death in the sport. One was seven years lucky, one is Three years in and the other just got an A. What is the point? It's about risk assessment. All three of these people I sat with and talked about the "what if's" as an instructor and each one of them made a risk assessment, based on training and making jumps, but when you see someone bounce for the first time it changes ones perspective, it is no longer information from a text book or words from a trusted instructor. It's a big reality check and mentally disturbing to those who see it in a lot of cases. In this case I really had nothing to say that would help. How do we teach how to get hit from high and behind at 200,300,400, 1000 ft.????? I see it as a trend, someone else posted he didn't think it was a trend yet. I disagree and see it as third step in progression of what started about 10 or 12 years ago as downsizing (high WL's and smaller is better and cool) to fast and hook turns. We saw a lot of people being sold canopies they shouldn't have been sold and others who thought they could handle it, even as many other asked them to cool it. Why dose everyone need to land faster then a Cessna 150 these days? I think there is more to the issue then just two LZ's and low passes for swoopers. With our numbers already in decline and the sport hurting across the country, it don't help any when we kill ourselves under working parachutes. The full page color glossy tributes in parachutist to the fallen are nice and all that, but I'm tired of seeing them, these kinds of accidents seem like such waste. The skyhook debate, well knowing what your lowest cutway hard deck is, don't sound all that bad, hell I could lower mine another 500 ft or so, unless your hit from above and behind at 200ft or less, at least you never saw it coming and have the time to know your fucked. I don't have the answers to all this but "Houston we have a problem"!you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
