How To: canopy model suggestions for various skill levels according to KNVvLPA

[the.Legend 54]

A piece of useful information I came across which helps in selecting canopy models based on personal proficiency and experience:

http://www.parachute.nl/fileadmin/knvvlpa_upload/pdf/BVR_bijlage_B_versie_2017_mei.pdf
[Same file attached in case permalink gets changed]
[categories explanation attached as well]

At glance, it covers all popular models on the market.
Big thanks to Holland's association for updating this list every year.

N.B.
Always remember: such information is provided for educational purposes and does not substitute discussion with your instructor and rigger regarding future canopy choice.

Not sure if it was posted on forum this year or not, so please pardon me on that.

[Cloggy 1]

At http://skydivekompasroos.nl/ is a nice interactive version of this regulation.
It shows what you can jump, depending on exit weight, total jump nr. and how many jumps you made in the last 12 months.

[piisfish 135]

Cloggy

At http://skydivekompasroos.nl/ is a nice interactive version of this regulation.
It shows what you can jump, depending on exit weight, total jump nr. and how many jumps you made in the last 12 months.

very interesting:-)

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Deimian 43]

I find it very weird that on the 700-1000 jumps range, the minimum allowed size is 120 and the maximum WL is 1.7, and after 1000 jumps there is no limit, neither for canopy size nor for WL. Just looking at that it seems like it is ok to go from a 120 to a 79 in one step, and that having a 107 at a WL of 1.75 with 900 jumps is a no go .

[piisfish 135]

Maybe they consider that >1000 jumps should be smart enough for a decent canopy choice

In France, the old size & loading chart went up to 600 jumps. Went up to 2000 a couple of years ago. No canopy type selection.

For me the Dutch system is far better. More permissive yet with clear limits.

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Deimian 43]

piisfish

Maybe they consider that >1000 jumps should be smart enough for a decent canopy choice

Maybe they consider that, but IMO that'd be a mistake. Jump numbers are not necessarily related to wise decisions (eg: experience jumper going from a Storm 107 to VE96 at once).

Besides that, I think it makes far more sense to have more gradual and personalized limits. +0.1 on WL per 100 jumps is a rule of thumb, that even though it is far from perfect, could be mixed&matched with that scheme, together with other considerations. Canopy control is not a one dimensional space, where jump numbers is the only metric. Having 0 leeway to fly anything smaller than 120 with 950 jumps, and then total freedom 50 jumps later seems short-sighted to me.

In my opinion these simplifications ignore too many things. Currency, demonstrated ability, safety track, style of canopy flying, canopy piloting experience (600 hop'n'pops are not the same as 600 wingsuit jumps), coaching... Taking all these things in consideration you'd find out that you can and should move the limits up and down depending on the individual. But of course "ain't nobody got time for that".

These limits are similar in Flanders, but with canopy control courses you can get a bit extra leeway. http://valschermsport.be/docs/koepelkeuze_VVP.pdf. I find that a better approach, but I still think these limits are too permissive on the lower end and too restrictive in the upper end (ie: jump ranges are too wide and restrictions ignore individual circumstances). For instance: You are allowed to jump a 117 canopy with a WL of 1.7 at 501 jumps, or a 105 @1.9 if you have had a canopy control course (Flight-1 101 done right after AFF qualifies as a CP course). I find that too permissive. These are the same limits than with 999 jumps, where I find them pretty reasonable for most people. But then these scheme ignores other things, like how dedicated you are to CP. We have had a guy with ~1200 jumps, ~900 of them hop'n'pops, that was kicked out for flying a VK (WL and canopy size within the allowed limits). I consider that a mistake. For sure most people at ~1200 jumps shouldn't be jumping a VK. But somebody dedicated purely to CP, and with a super safe record, could be an exception.

[piisfish 135]

Some leeway with a course is good , but do you think that 1.7 loading for 201 jumps is reasonable?

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Baksteen 84]

First, the reasoning is that if you managed not to kill yourself in 1000 jumps (which are typically made over a longer period of time than in the US due to weather) you must have some active brain cells somewhere.
If not, and you DO consider a radical change as in your example, it is up to the instructor and indeed your friends to beat some sense into you.

Furthermore, there is indeed some leeway, as well as some furhter limitations:

Paraphrased rom elsewhere in the rules: Any instructor can permit an individual to jump a canopy which is one size smaller than the "Kompasroos" allows, provided that the other requirements are met.
"Other requirements" include "jumps in the past twelve months", a number which steadily increases as you want to progress to a higher category.

On top of that every Dutch swoopgod wannabe for whom these regulations are too restrictive is free to petition the KNVvL to grant them an exception.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Deimian 43]

piisfish

Some leeway with a course is good , but do you think that 1.7 loading for 201 jumps is reasonable?

Of course not. Possibly not even for 500 jumps. That's part of my point. That the ranges are too big, and they can be too lax in the lower end and too restrictive in the upper end (depending on the range), and completely ignore the circumstances of each individual.

Baksteen

First, the reasoning is that if you managed not to kill yourself in 1000 jumps (which are typically made over a longer period of time than in the US due to weather) you must have some active brain cells somewhere.
If not, and you DO consider a radical change as in your example, it is up to the instructor and indeed your friends to beat some sense into you.

Surviving for 1000 jumps is not the best metric to assess people's capacity to make good decisions IMO. It just shows that none of the decisions taken has been catastrophic yet. Also your friends beating some sense into you has never worked particularly well. That's what the regulations are for. In case someone and his/her friends are idiots.

Baksteen

Furthermore, there is indeed some leeway, as well as some furhter limitations:

Paraphrased rom elsewhere in the rules: Any instructor can permit an individual to jump a canopy which is one size smaller than the "Kompasroos" allows, provided that the other requirements are met.
"Other requirements" include "jumps in the past twelve months", a number which steadily increases as you want to progress to a higher category.

Ok, I missed that part, thanks for pointing it out.

Baksteen

On top of that every Dutch swoopgod wannabe for whom these regulations are too restrictive is free to petition the KNVvL to grant them an exception.

I think you are missing my point. Maybe because I focused too much on the "restrictive" bits of the regulation. I am just saying that a) CP proficiency can't be assessed just by jump numbers; and b) the current regulation has a "staircase" shape with big steps, instead of being more of a ramp (which in my opinion makes more sense). You aren't more capable of handling a WL of 2.0 at 1000 jumps than at 999 jumps. But you might be able to handle a WL of 1.8 at 850 jumps. One of this examples is permitted, the other is not.

[mbohu 77]

Oh Man! As a German living in the US (OK I'm actually Austrian, but here they don't really know the difference...) I have to laugh at your comment.

Only in our culture would we take these recommendations so literally!

(I'm guilty of the same: My popularity at my DZ did not sore when I tried to explain to them with charts that it was impossible to do a landing pattern with exact 90 degree turns at 1000, 600 and 300 feet, when the wind blew from the north--I was right, of course, but no one else took these numbers as rigidly!)

[Baksteen 84]

Our rules are not perfect, but nevertheless a decent tool.
By placing more responsibility with the instructor on site, the KNVvL aims to solve the flaws without over-regulating.

Deimian

But you might be able to handle a WL of 1.8 at 850 jumps. One of this examples is permitted, the other is not.

Yes and no. If you are (for instance) a competitive swooper who is capable of this WL 1.8 at 850 jumps, you can ask for (and probably get) an exemption to the rules.

The other example, if you make your 1000th jump and suddently want to go and jump something that would be unhelathy for you, the instructor is free to tell you you are not jumping. Of course, you could just grab your gear and try somewhere else, but I'm guessing that the kind of person who does this kind of stuff is on the radar way before the 1000th jump - and the Dutch Chief Instructors do communicate. That's one of the advantages of being a country with a small number of DZs.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Deimian 43]

mbohu

Oh Man! As a German living in the US (OK I'm actually Austrian, but here they don't really know the difference...) I have to laugh at your comment.

Only in our culture would we take these recommendations so literally!

I would agree, if it wasn't because I am not German (I just live here now) and because these are not recommendations, these are regulations

Baksteen

Our rules are not perfect, but nevertheless a decent tool.

Sure. No rules are perfect. I was just pointing out flaws I've seen. Not just in KNVvLPA's regulations, but generally. Other federations follow similar schemes. They are a "decent tool", but if we can do better, why not?

Baksteen

Yes and no. If you are (for instance) a competitive swooper who is capable of this WL 1.8 at 850 jumps, you can ask for (and probably get) an exemption to the rules.

1.8 at 850 jumps is nothing sort of a swooping wonder. It is reasonable for the average skydiver interested in CP. Note the word "reasonable" (as opposed to "logical", "normal" or "desirable"), and note too the "interested in CP" bit.

I am also not sure how open KNVvLPA is to add exemptions, but in many other federations they are pretty difficult to get, and even when you get them is often a long and frustrating process. Which in the real world means that nobody will ask for them for these kind of things, except the extremely dedicated CP, maybe.

Baksteen

The other example, if you make your 1000th jump and suddently want to go and jump something that would be unhelathy for you, the instructor is free to tell you you are not jumping. Of course, you could just grab your gear and try somewhere else, but I'm guessing that the kind of person who does this kind of stuff is on the radar way before the 1000th jump - and the Dutch Chief Instructors do communicate. That's one of the advantages of being a country with a small number of DZs.

I guess by "instructor" you mean the S&TA or the DZO, and not just one random instructor. So the S&TA is free to tell you to piss off with your unhealthy option, but he might not do it for a thousand reasons (trust the guy, doesn't care, don't want confrontation, secretly want him to femur because he stole his girlfriend, he isn't aware of the huge step in canopy progression of that guy, believe in your freedom to make stupid choices....). Whatever. So the S&TA doesn't say anything, the jumper makes a stupid decision, but everything is within the limits. Then the guy bounces and "we all saw it coming but he was a grown ass man and made his own decisions".

As I said before, I personally believe that building a "ramp" instead of a "staircase" within the regulations, taking into account more factors than just jump numbers, would be a safer and more logical option. It might be more difficult to put on paper or to make it understandable for everyone (particularly when you introduce multiple factors in the equation), but IMO it bets having the same limits from 700 to 1000 jumps (or from 500 to 1000, like we have in Belgium).

None of my comments were meant as "the regulations of federation X are BS", but more as a "we, as a community, should do better at establishing a clean, progressive and safe canopy progression path for those who are interested in it"

[piisfish 135]

You see these regulations as a staircase. As in : the jumper will go to the maximum allowed.
I see them as a ramp, as in : can go up to, but no further than...

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Deimian 43]

piisfish

You see these regulations as a staircase. As in : the jumper will go to the maximum allowed.
I see them as a ramp, as in : can go up to, but no further than...

Are you sure this is a ramp?

[inline noramp.png]

In the "can" vs "will" argument: Both are equivalent for many individuals. If you allow something, someone will do it. Hell, some will even try to get away with it even if you don't allow it.

[mbohu 77]

Quote

I would agree, if it wasn't because I am not German (I just live here now) and because these are not recommendations, these are regulations

Really? The post says "model suggestions". I have never heard of any regulations in regards to canopy models or even sizes. For example, Sabre2 is listed as 100+ jumps and there are dropzones in the US which use it as a student canopy during AFF.

Are these European or German regulations? This would be the first time I hear about it if there were any USPA regulations.

Of course, as far as regulations go, they have to use some arbitrary numbers. In the US we have one about using cameras only after 200 jumps. Of course there isn't some magical thing that happens between jump 199 and 201 that suddenly makes you so much more aware, that it's suddenly safe to jump with a camera. (Well, actually I don't know, since I haven't gotten there yet )

[mbohu 77]

Ah--sounds like these are Dutch regulations. Do they apply anywhere else in the world?

[Deimian 43]

mbohu

Ah--sounds like these are Dutch regulations. Do they apply anywhere else in the world?

Each country has its own federation and rules. Some might have recommendations about various things (canopies, cameras, wingsuits, freefly levels, etc). Some might have regulations, about some or all of these areas. Some might reuse USPA ways. Some might enforce the rules or not. Some DZs might even operate outside of the national federation. So in general, there isn't a straight answer. But the Dutch have no power in any other country, and the rules under which they operate are valid just in the DZs affiliated to their federation.

[Baksteen 84]

Please prepare for somebody saying: "Holy thread hijack, Batman".

Deimian

None of my comments were meant as "the regulations of federation X are BS", but more as a "we, as a community, should do better at establishing a clean, progressive and safe canopy progression path for those who are interested in it"

That's what I understood from your previous posts :)

Deimian

I am also not sure how open KNVvLPA is to add exemptions, but in many other federations they are pretty difficult to get, and even when you get them is often a long and frustrating process. Which in the real world means that nobody will ask for them for these kind of things, except the extremely dedicated CP, maybe.

I am a conservative jumper with ~850 jumps.
I jump a L160 at 1.37 for CReW and a Storm 190 for freefall. In my personal book there is nothing wrong with only the most dedicated Canopy Pilots asking for and getting an exemption. I am not convinced (as in: "I am most definitely uncinvinced") that the majority of regular skydivers spends enough time learning to handle their canopy. If FF/FS is somebody's game, what do they need a WL of 2.0 for?

Deimian

I guess by "instructor" you mean the S&TA or the DZO, and not just one random instructor.

No. It's difficult for me to explain in English, especially since I do not know exactly how other countries have defined their instructing licences.

But Dutch instructors are much more than "people who help you trough your first few jumps". They are trained to see that the spirit of the Dutch regulations are obeyed in the field on a daily basis. So basically, anyone with an instructor licence could stop the 'dangerous' individual from jumping.

Often, instructors are assisted by deputy instructors, who are trained to work with students and to signal "stuff the instructor should know about".It's up to the individual instructor (and depending on the individual deputy instructor) just how much responsibility can be delegated, but the instructor-on-duty has the final say and responsibility.

The Dutch S&TA (safety manager) is a very different type of 'licence' than in the US. (s)he coordinates and/or signals the safety related issues on a dropzone. Often that person is also a full instructor, but that is not mandatory.

Deimian

But the Dutch have no power in any other country, and the rules under which they operate are valid just in the DZs affiliated to their federation.

That out-of-contecxt-statement actually made me laugh. You are absolutely right - and what's more, skydiving is no different that any other area you care to name, including politics.

Back to the topic at hand, the Dutch Canopy rules indeed do only apply to Dutch jumpers. But if Joe Foreigner comes to a Dutch DZ, he needs an instructor to 'accept' his canopy choice and skill levels. Often, that won't be a problem, but somebody with a Stiletto 150 at 50 jumps will have some convincing to do.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Deimian 43]

Baksteen

Please prepare for somebody saying: "Holy thread hijack, Batman".

After 2 days nobody stepped up, so I'll do my part and say it: "holy thread hijack, Batman"

Baksteen

That's what I understood from your previous posts :)

Great. Over forums sometimes things can be misinterpreted. I am glad it didn't happen here.

Baksteen

I am a conservative jumper with ~850 jumps.
I jump a L160 at 1.37 for CReW and a Storm 190 for freefall. In my personal book there is nothing wrong with only the most dedicated Canopy Pilots asking for and getting an exemption. I am not convinced (as in: "I am most definitely uncinvinced") that the majority of regular skydivers spends enough time learning to handle their canopy. If FF/FS is somebody's game, what do they need a WL of 2.0 for?

I don't think there is anything wrong with just the most dedicated canopy pilots asking for exemptions..... if the rule works for the majority. For instance, the guy jumping a VK with 1200 jumps, 900 of them hop'n'pops, should in my view ask for an exemption, and it should be granted. I just think that flying a Katana 107 @1.9 at 900 jumps is something not aggressive enough to require an exemption. It should be part of the rule, provided the guy doing it has had a safe and reasonable canopy progression so far.

Nobody needs a WL of 2.0. I don't it is a matter of needing, but of wanting, and skills to handle it.

Baksteen

No. It's difficult for me to explain in English, especially since I do not know exactly how other countries have defined their instructing licences.

But Dutch instructors are much more than "people who help you trough your first few jumps". They are trained to see that the spirit of the Dutch regulations are obeyed in the field on a daily basis. So basically, anyone with an instructor licence could stop the 'dangerous' individual from jumping.

Often, instructors are assisted by deputy instructors, who are trained to work with students and to signal "stuff the instructor should know about".It's up to the individual instructor (and depending on the individual deputy instructor) just how much responsibility can be delegated, but the instructor-on-duty has the final say and responsibility.

The Dutch S&TA (safety manager) is a very different type of 'licence' than in the US. (s)he coordinates and/or signals the safety related issues on a dropzone. Often that person is also a full instructor, but that is not mandatory.

Interesting. I didn't know that. So I guess that, in a way, getting an instructor license in the Netherlands is way more complicated than in other places, since they have more power (and with it, more responsibilities).

Baksteen

***
But the Dutch have no power in any other country, and the rules under which they operate are valid just in the DZs affiliated to their federation.

That out-of-contecxt-statement actually made me laugh. You are absolutely right - and what's more, skydiving is no different that any other area you care to name, including politics.


If I was german that'd be the take away lesson from the thread. "The Dutch have no power"

Baksteen

Back to the topic at hand, the Dutch Canopy rules indeed do only apply to Dutch jumpers. But if Joe Foreigner comes to a Dutch DZ, he needs an instructor to 'accept' his canopy choice and skill levels. Often, that won't be a problem, but somebody with a Stiletto 150 at 50 jumps will have some convincing to do.

Rightfully so.

[DvK 2]

Baksteen

Our rules are not perfect, but nevertheless a decent tool.
By placing more responsibility with the instructor on site, the KNVvL aims to solve the flaws without over-regulating.

***
But you might be able to handle a WL of 1.8 at 850 jumps. One of this examples is permitted, the other is not.

Yes and no. If you are (for instance) a competitive swooper who is capable of this WL 1.8 at 850 jumps, you can ask for (and probably get) an exemption to the rules.

The other example, if you make your 1000th jump and suddently want to go and jump something that would be unhelathy for you, the instructor is free to tell you you are not jumping. Of course, you could just grab your gear and try somewhere else, but I'm guessing that the kind of person who does this kind of stuff is on the radar way before the 1000th jump - and the Dutch Chief Instructors do communicate. That's one of the advantages of being a country with a small number of DZs.

Will not happen ;)

[Deyan 31]

Those Compass Rules are doing a good job at what they were initially designed to do.Which is reducing the chance of killing yourself under an open canopy, until you gain some experience.

What I still don't get is how you are allowed to make your first skydive ever under a Sabre1 170 with WL of 1.0, but the following week and 20 jumps later you are not allowed to jump a Silhouette 210 with WL of .81

And at the end of the day, it's an activity for adults and if you want to play games and break the rules, you probably will go under the radar, unless you start telling everyone how awesome you are and how much shit you don't give....then you gonna get what's coming!

Oh, and oddly enough there's no rule on how big your reserve should be. Recently I refused packing a PDR143 for a guy who said that he upsized his main to 190, because we was not current. He was told by the person who sold him the gear that PDR 143 will fly and land the same way his Sabre 2 190 will....

"My belief is that once the doctor whacks you on the butt, all guarantees are off" Jerry Baumchen

[Baksteen 84]

Deyan

And at the end of the day, it's an activity for adults and if you want to play games and break the rules, you probably will go under the radar, unless you start telling everyone how awesome you are and how much shit you don't give....then you gonna get what's coming!

Fortunately, Mad Skillz and telling people how awesome you are are virtually inseparable.

Quote

Oh, and oddly enough there's no rule on how big your reserve should be.

AFAIK the rules simply refer to the TSO's, so you're(mostly) limited by max. suspended weight. Officially anyway. There too, instructor (and Rigger) are to provide a 'common sense'-factor.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[IJskonijn 38]

That said, if I had to buy a jumpticket for every Dutch jumper who has a main that's on the limit of what he/she is allowed to jump, and a reserve that's quite a bit smaller (I've seen 190 mains and 160 reserves in one rig!), I'd be broke.

I still fail to understand why people want small reserves... I'd guess there's a 50:50 chance of a >120 size reserve killing you if you fly it straight and level with toggles on half-brakes into the ground with no flare whatsoever. But what are the chances of that happening... /s