3 3
nwt

My $2500 mistake

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, BMAC615 said:

I’m just suggesting that the outcome is the end result of a series of decisions you made long before the toggle got pulled through the excess line.

I've understood and accepted that this whole time, and I'm happy with my decisions. Thanks.

4 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

None of my decisions have been in conflict with anything expressed in this video

5 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

I’m pretty sure Curt has a similar opinion.

Dude, now you're getting ridiculous. You think you have a better understanding of my coach's opinions on my own personal progression than I do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Recognizing you haven't practiced landing on rears (and even that is not apples to apples when one side is in half brakes) this type of mal is why I highly recommend and teach to new jumps to get comfortable with all control inputs as soon as possible.

I did something almost identical and I should have known better. I landed my Velo loaded at 2.2 by taking two wraps of the 'good' toggle and landing on rears...however I had years of practice doing so (albeit not in half brakes). It was very natural and soft landing. I would not recommend that to anyone who has not practiced it.


At the end of the day, its just money. You landed safely and made the right decision. Live and learn. Good job.

This is something I hadn’t thought of: taking a couple wraps and landing with rears. Obviously cheaper than replacing a line. I had considered practicing leaving a brake stowed and landing one rear and one toggle. I might practice you method in good conditions as well - thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, nwt said:

I've understood and accepted that this whole time, and I'm happy with my decisions. Thanks.

None of my decisions have been in conflict with anything expressed in this video

Dude, now you're getting ridiculous. You think you have a better understanding of my coach's opinions on my own personal progression than I do?

Okay, you do you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nwt said:

If by that you mean get regular world-class canopy coaching and follow the advice of my coach, then yes I will. Thanks.

I mean ignore a learning moment and lacking self-awareness. You ordered a new container based on an aggressive downsizing schedule. You then asked lots of experienced people what their opinion on what size reserve you should put in it and several very experienced people said stick with the OP 143. You decided to sell your OP 143 and buy a used PDR 126 so you could take the difference and buy an AAD. Not a bad decision, but, you also rationalized the decision by saying you planned to rent a PDR 126 and jump it as a main to get used to it before flying it. You didn’t. Those decisions you made a long time ago contributed to you cutting away at such a high altitude (you wrote that you wanted to get comfortable with the 126).

You then downsized from a Katana 150 to a Katana 135 without really learning everything that that parachute can do. You don’t believe your decisions were in conflict with what Shannon Pilcher said in the video beginning at 1:20, “people who are watching you on the ground should see you land and think ... he can do anything that that parachute is capable of doing ... [that] should be the litmus test whether or not I should be considering downsizing or switching models or not.” You didn’t. Your decision to downsize, again, without ever landing using only rears contributed to you cutting away.

I seriously doubt Curt has an opinion that deviates very far from Shannon and Jason Moledzki,

What I’m suggesting is your $2,500 mistake wasn’t just pulling on your toggle without noticing the excess line looping around. That cutaway started with your decision to be on an aggressive downsizing schedule. Regardless of Curt’s opinion or your opinion, the fact is your decisions during the months or years leading up to that moment to cut away contributed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
21 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

“people who are watching you on the ground should see you land and think ... he can do anything that that parachute is capable of doing ... [that] should be the litmus test whether or not I should be considering downsizing or switching models or not.” You didn’t. Your decision to downsize, again, without ever landing using only rears

If you think that he means we should demonstrate landing on rears as a downsizing criteria, that's your own personal interpretation that I haven't heard from anyone else before.

21 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

the fact is your decisions during the months or years leading up to that moment to cut away contributed.

I don't know why you're continuing to throw this in my face as if I haven't acknowledged and accepted it several times, or why you're so heavily criticizing me for decisions that seem to be more about finance than safety.

addendum:

"You look really comfortable on this canopy" - Curt Bartholomew

Edited by nwt
addendum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nwt said:

If you think that he means we should demonstrate landing on rears as a downsizing criteria, that's your own personal interpretation that I haven't heard from anyone else before.

I don't know why you're continuing to throw this in my face as if I haven't acknowledged and accepted it several times, or why you're so heavily criticizing me for decisions that seem to be more about finance than safety.

I’m certainly not the only one who believes landing on rears as an emergency procedure is an important skill to develop - and that you should develop this skill on a beginner canopy w/ a low WL.

Please recognize I’m not throwing anything in your face and if it feels like that, please know it is not my intention. I started this discussion with saying I recognize the timing and how this might be interpreted and that my intent is to help you gain some broader understanding.

If you are suggesting I’m criticizing you for making certain financial decisions over your safety decisions, that is not the case. Please understand that none of what I have written has been with the intent to criticize, but, to help you understand what you could have done differently so you might not wind up in the same situation in the future and/or so you can better advise others to not make the same mistakes you have.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
30 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

I’m certainly not the only one who believes landing on rears as an emergency procedure is an important skill to develop

I'm not refuting that.

Where does he say rear riser landings are a downsizing criteria? Not here and not in his downsizing manual.

Where does he say that landing a main without the option to bail to toggles is preferable over chopping when you have plenty of altitude to do so? Personally, I think it's likely that had I been proficient in landing on rears, I still would have chopped.

I think landing on rears without the option to bail to toggles is more dangerous than landing a fully functional reserve. Do you agree?

30 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

so you can better advise others to not make the same mistakes you have.

That's exactly why I posted here, but my mistake was not looking for the problem before unstowing my toggles. Chopping was certainly not a mistake and I think the advice you're giving is dangerous.

edit: My other mistake was misidentifying the wind direction and flying downwind of the landing area before chopping instead of upwind. This mistake was more of a financial one, though.

Edited by nwt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, nwt said:

That's exactly why I posted here, but my mistake was not looking for the problem before unstowing my toggles. Chopping was certainly not a mistake and I think the advice you're giving is dangerous.

edit: My other mistake was misidentifying the wind direction and flying downwind of the landing area before chopping instead of upwind. This mistake was more of a financial one, though.

This is exactly the point of my bringing it up: You are not willing to recognize that this $2,500 mistake could have been avoided had you followed a different path during your “Canopy Progression.” Instead, you are blaming an oversight of the way your toggle was stowed.

There sort of is a canopy downsizing handbook and @billvon wrote it. Pay special attention to #7.

The downsizing checklist in short

 

The short version of the list is below. Before people downsize they should be able to:

  1. Flat turn 90 degrees at 50 feet
  2. Flare turn at least 45 degrees
  3. Land crosswind and in no wind
  4. Land reliably within a 10-meter circle
  5. Initiate a high-performance landing with double front risers and front riser turn to landing
  6. Land on slight uphills and downhills
  7. Land with rear risers

https://uspa.org/Portals/0/files/misc_downsizechecklist.pdf

Edited by BMAC615

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Bill von's' checklist is an oldie that still makes a fair bit of sense.  Just checked and saw he first posted it in rec.skydiving in 2003, and on dropzone.com too, with more details: https://www.dropzone.com/articles/safety/downsizing-checklist-r32/

I'm sure plenty of jumpers haven't done most of the steps, so it isn't like the OP is the odd one out, but they are good things to consider. 

Mind you, just working on learning these sort of things have dangers of their own. (While not directly related, I recall a couple people breaking ankles at the local DZ while participating in basic Flight-1 canopy skills camps.)

But to re-emphasize: in the OP's particular case, the knotted brake line might lock that brake line into having 'some brakes on', to a variable amount. Landing on rears with one brake partially set, preventing a full speed approach to landing, can become a lot tougher than doing it brakes free. That starts to be a whole new ballgame, and changes the equations when considering whether to land vs. chop.

One certainly can also practice landing from a little bit of brake on approach, but that again adds risk in practice while trying to reduce risk in an emergency. The USPA SIM mentioned flaring from "slow (braked) flight" in a section on downsizing, or at least some years ago it did. Don't overdo it though, as it would be easy to run out of flare power if the canopy is slowed too much on the approach!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
36 minutes ago, pchapman said:

'Bill von's' checklist is an oldie that still makes a fair bit of sense.  Just checked and saw he first posted it in rec.skydiving in 2003, and on dropzone.com too, with more details: https://www.dropzone.com/articles/safety/downsizing-checklist-r32/

I'm sure plenty of jumpers haven't done most of the steps, so it isn't like the OP is the odd one out, but they are good things to consider. 

Mind you, just working on learning these sort of things have dangers of their own. (While not directly related, I recall a couple people breaking ankles at the local DZ while participating in basic Flight-1 canopy skills camps.)

But to re-emphasize: in the OP's particular case, the knotted brake line might lock that brake line into having 'some brakes on', to a variable amount. Landing on rears with one brake partially set, preventing a full speed approach to landing, can become a lot tougher than doing it brakes free. That starts to be a whole new ballgame, and changes the equations when considering whether to land vs. chop.

One certainly can also practice landing from a little bit of brake on approach, but that again adds risk in practice while trying to reduce risk in an emergency. The USPA SIM mentioned flaring from "slow (braked) flight" in a section on downsizing, or at least some years ago it did. Don't overdo it though, as it would be easy to run out of flare power if the canopy is slowed too much on the approach!
 

Hook knife the offending steering line and land w/ rears is an option. I know during BASE canopy skills progression, landing w/ one toggle and one rear is a must-have skill. Having all these skills (and more) in your toolbox before moving to high performance canopies may save your life.

Had he followed @billvon’s checklist on EACH canopy that he flew during his progression, the outcome could have been different. That’s not even the issue here.

The issue is he’s flying a high performance canopy at a WL of 1.35 and has never landed on rears - regardless of whether he would have done it in this case - it highlighted the fact that maybe his “canopy progression” outstripped his “piloting progression.”

“Safety & Training Advisors spend a considerable amount of time telling people they shouldn’t be loading their canopies so heavily. But 90 percent of the time, jumpers don’t listen. Skydivers can have a bit of an ego, and many simply hear, “I think you’re a crappy canopy pilot who can’t handle a smaller wing.” So they downsize anyway and break their legs, backs and pelvises with some regularity.”

I like this story that’s in the original post, but, not in the article:

A few years back I met up with Brett, one of the people I'd been lecturing to whle I was an S+TA. He told me that he wished he'd listened to me back then. He had broken his femur during a botched landing, been out of the sport for a while, and then came back and really learned to fly his canopy. He took a canopy control course and actually upsized to get more performance out of his canopy. He ended up coming in first in one of the events at the PST that year.“

Edited by BMAC615

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BMAC615 said:

You are not willing to recognize that this $2,500 mistake could have been avoided had you followed a different path during your “Canopy Progression.”

 

4 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

Hook knife the offending steering line and land w/ rears is an option.

I addressed this in my last response but somehow you missed it. I even put it in bold so you would know it was important:

2 hours ago, nwt said:

Personally, I think it's likely that had I been proficient in landing on rears, I still would have chopped.

I think landing on rears without the option to bail to toggles is more dangerous than landing a fully functional reserve. Do you agree?

 

1 hour ago, BMAC615 said:

There sort of is a canopy downsizing handbook and @billvon wrote it. Pay special attention to #7.

Okay, maybe after several mis-steps you've finally found someone who actually agrees with you. Or, maybe we are missing some context here. I personally find it hard to believe that he's recommending everyone perform high performance landings. I also don't know who made billvon the supreme authority on all things canopy--I've already told you who my coach is.

1 hour ago, BMAC615 said:

you are blaming an oversight of the way your toggle was stowed.

No, I blamed myself for not looking at the toggle and clearing the excess line looped around it. One could easily interpret your statement here as meaning I've blamed my packer for my chop and I really don't appreciate that.

Quote

Skydivers can have a bit of an ego

It's funny that you bring up ego now, because even before you did, I was going to say: The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that cutting a toggle instead of chopping is an ego trip more than anything else. Not everything has to be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nwt said:

 

I addressed this in my last response but somehow you missed it. I even put it in bold so you would know it was important:

 

Okay, maybe after several mis-steps you've finally found someone who actually agrees with you. Or, maybe we are missing some context here. I personally find it hard to believe that he's recommending everyone perform high performance landings. I also don't know who made billvon the supreme authority on all things canopy--I've already told you who my coach is.

No, I blamed myself for not looking at the toggle and clearing the excess line looped around it. One could easily interpret your statement here as meaning I've blamed my packer for my chop and I really don't appreciate that.

It's funny that you bring up ego now, because even before you did, I was going to say: The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that cutting a toggle instead of chopping is an ego trip more than anything else. Not everything has to be fixed.

 

Okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Veis said:

We lock the line by the textile rubbers and the tip of the loop by the lower tongue of the toggle

futtUSpbz2U.jpg

Veis thank you for providing an image that illustrates the real issue of this thread.

This thread went wrong, not productive when the debate started about equipment or what could/should have been the proper course of action made by NWT. The thread should be focused on the management of the excess break lines and how well they were not secure and then show methods on how to improve securing the excess break line that can help prevent this type of unusual malfunction.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/2/2021 at 1:10 PM, wmw999 said:

Guys, there’s been a lot of good exposition here. 
Wendy P. 

 

1 hour ago, lug said:

Veis thank you for providing an image that illustrates the real issue of this thread.

This thread went wrong, not productive when the debate started about equipment or what could/should have been the proper course of action made by NWT. The thread should be focused on the management of the excess break lines and how well they were not secure and then show methods on how to improve securing the excess break line that can help prevent this type of unusual malfunction.

image.jpeg.eca017feee5065cfc7a0de997da97479.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

And my comment was more of a thought that maybe the recriminations should stop and we focus on the technical. Unclear, I realize; I should have elaborated. 
Wendy P. 

It was clear. I tried to shut it down at Post #28 and again at #39, but, I’ll stand by my point that the issue is bigger than just @nwt and storing lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a third party observer...

nwt and BMAC, I think you two are needlessly seeing your exchanges as an argument. I don't think your posts are conflicting, I think they are complementary. nwt, I don't think you're wrong in assessing your incident. BMAC, I don't think you're wrong in assessing other factors that contributed to / might have prevented it. Informative reading from both sides.

 

On another note, nwt, is your reserve still airworthy as a reserve? All that UV exposure...  (Yeah, I'm joking. Sort of.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

3 3