Canopy Piloting Regulation (split from Fatality Georgia 3/18/2023)

[skybytch 259]

23 minutes ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Its better on average. "We" stopped swooping through traffic...We have nationally recognized teams teaching more advanced canopy control courses...more people are reaching out for this knowledge...at least in my little norcal bubble. All levels of canopy flight are better on average than 15 years ago.

How many people are landing canopies over 1.5 WL? More, less? I dont know the answer. Its been a bad 12 months. The 24 to 36 months before that not as bad. Was that covid number of jumps related? Maybe. 

We are much better canopy pilots today than 15 years ago....you will never eliminate swooping deaths....we either accept that or dont, but its not practical to remove that discipline from USPA, in my opinion. I appreciate the productive discussion and alternate view points. 

I like the option of DZO's figuring out what they want at their DZ. Dont like swooping...dont allow it. Id also say that a handful of swooping accidents a year does not hurt student participation (tandems or AFF)....if that is the concern on top of keeping our friends around. 

ETA: I work very hard to organize annual canopy courses for Norcal, and we get 60+ students at these weekend long events almost every non-Covid year for past 6 or 7 years. Even during covid we had great turn out. Teaching and access to this information is helping. Im under no illusion that this will eliminate swooping deaths...but its a net positive for the sport.

Better on average... Fifteen years of education should have resulted in a large measurable reduction in the number of injuries and deaths related to swooping.

Remember,  it's not just landing. Add in canopy collisions involving high performance approaches and improper EPs with swoop canopies and those rates are higher.

The question remains.  What has USPA, the organization tasked with safety and training in the sport, done over the past 15 years to reduce the number of injuries and deaths attributable to swooping?

If USPA has done little to nothing, should they be promoting the activity in the ways that they are?

[BMAC615 205]

2 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Its better on average. "We" stopped swooping through traffic...We have nationally recognized teams teaching more advanced canopy control courses...more people are reaching out for this knowledge...at least in my little norcal bubble. All levels of canopy flight are better on average than 15 years ago.

How many people are landing canopies over 1.5 WL? More, less? I dont know the answer. Its been a bad 12 months. The 24 to 36 months before that not as bad. Was that covid number of jumps related? Maybe. 

We are much better canopy pilots today than 15 years ago....you will never eliminate swooping deaths....we either accept that or dont, but its not practical to remove that discipline from USPA, in my opinion. I appreciate the productive discussion and alternate view points. 

I like the option of DZO's figuring out what they want at their DZ. Dont like swooping...dont allow it. Id also say that a handful of swooping accidents a year does not hurt student participation (tandems or AFF)....if that is the concern on top of keeping our friends around. 

ETA: I work very hard to organize annual canopy courses for Norcal, and we get 60+ students at these weekend long events almost every non-Covid year for past 6 or 7 years. Even during covid we had great turn out. Teaching and access to this information is helping. Im under no illusion that this will eliminate swooping deaths...but its a net positive for the sport.

What would be the downside for USPA’s 40,000 members if USPA decided they will no longer support/promote CP competitors or competitions?

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

3 hours ago, skybytch said:

Fifteen years ago, this was the argument used to keep the dreaded regulation of wing loading and canopy types from limiting the freedoms of jumpers in the US. You remember that, right? Education,  not regulation! 

Fifteen years to prove that point and yet it seems to be the same argument today. Educate, educate, educate... and still die.

Perhaps a point has been proven.

What exactly has USPA done in the past 15 years to educate jumpers to swoop in a way that limits the obvious dangers?

According to the report in the May Parachutist, 58% of nonfatal incidents were landing related In 2022. Is this better or worse than when they started the B license canopy course requirements a decade or so ago?

 

 

Hi Sky,

From my post #68, above:  

'Re:  more than education can

I made my first jump in Feb '64.  I've listened to that old 'education' BS ever since.

IMO it has never worked.'

Jerry Baumchen

 

[riggerrob 558]

10 hours ago, skybytch said:

Fifteen years ago, this was the argument used to keep the dreaded regulation of wing loading and canopy types from limiting the freedoms of jumpers in the US. You remember that, right? Education,  not regulation! 

Fifteen years to prove that point ...

15 years ago, the problem was that many young jumpers were already exceeding any wing-loading guidelines that USPA was likely to publish, so USPA politicians tried to find a "soft" response ... or "grandfather" those jumpers who were heavily-loading their canopies.

As usual, politicians were behind the fashion and trying to introduce solutions that were so luke-warm that they bordered on toothless.

Junior jumpers are always going to try to down-size too fast - quoting the "mad skills." Only DZOs can say "you can't jump that tiny canopy here." DZOs will only limit wing-loadings when they fear that ambulances and hearses will interrupt their regular business.

[riggerrob 558]

On 5/26/2023 at 11:12 AM, BMAC615 said:

How is it that USPA was able to essentially eliminate pulling below 2.5k at USPA DZs? How is it USPA was able to eliminate skydive training for anyone under 18 years old at USPA DZs? As for the nuance of “Encourage” vs “Support,” I direct your attention to the below image:

Sorry Dear BMAC,

But USPA did not change those things .... rather USPA REACTED to changes that were already the norm at larger DZs.

I have not been jumping as long as Gerry Baumchen, but I have seen many of the same changes.

Minimum opening altitudes changed because our airplanes got better. Compare a World War 2 surplus Beech 18 with a newly manufactured PAC750XL or Quest Kodiak.

Ambulance-chasing lawyers made it ruinously expensive to rick injuring students less than 18 years old.

[riggerrob 558]

10 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

" .... Id also say that a handful of swooping accidents a year does not hurt student participation (tandems or AFF).... "

I disagree. 

When hook turns become the norm, young TIs kill tandem students.

In 2022, USPA reported 3 fatal accidents after tandems hook-turned too low.

That is why tandem manufacturers preach against turns more than 90 degrees in the landing pattern.

[jacketsdb23 45]

12 hours ago, riggerrob said:

I disagree. 

When hook turns become the norm, young TIs kill tandem students.

In 2022, USPA reported 3 fatal accidents after tandems hook-turned too low.

That is why tandem manufacturers preach against turns more than 90 degrees in the landing pattern.

Sorry, i was referring to experienced up jumpers impacting new students walking through the door.

There is zero room for TI's hooking it in for landing. 

Edited May 28, 2023 by jacketsdb23

[jacketsdb23 45]

20 hours ago, BMAC615 said:

What would be the downside for USPA’s 40,000 members if USPA decided they will no longer support/promote CP competitors or competitions?

Good question. Probably not much short term...but then are we gonna go to the next discipline that accounts for a majority of accidents and remove that from USPA? 

I dont have any of the marketing data for how new tandems make decisions to walk through the door. CP, wingsuiting, and probably wingsuit base on social media probably play a small part. 

Swooping isnt going anywhere. USPA in my opinion is smart to try to frame it and work with it. Dont want it at your dz? its simple, dont allow it. Problem fixed. 

 

[sundevil777 93]

On 5/27/2023 at 10:48 AM, skybytch said:

Fifteen years ago, this was the argument used to keep the dreaded regulation of wing loading and canopy types from limiting the freedoms of jumpers in the US. You remember that, right? Education,  not regulation! 

Fifteen years to prove that point and yet it seems to be the same argument today. Educate, educate, educate... and still die.

Perhaps a point has been proven.

What exactly has USPA done in the past 15 years to educate jumpers to swoop in a way that limits the obvious dangers?

According to the report in the May Parachutist, 58% of nonfatal incidents were landing related In 2022. Is this better or worse than when they started the B license canopy course requirements a decade or so ago?

 

 

The canopy course requirement should be reconsidered.

 

[BMAC615 205]

13 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Good question. Probably not much short term...but then are we gonna go to the next discipline that accounts for a majority of accidents and remove that from USPA? 

I dont have any of the marketing data for how new tandems make decisions to walk through the door. CP, wingsuiting, and probably wingsuit base on social media probably play a small part. 

Swooping isnt going anywhere. USPA in my opinion is smart to try to frame it and work with it. Dont want it at your dz? its simple, dont allow it. Problem fixed. 

 

I started skydiving in 1993. Here we are 30 years later and people are still flying themselves into the ground. For a while now, I’ve been asking the question, “Why is this still happening and how can we solve this problem?”

Frankly, I don’t know why I even care. It would be a whole lot easier to say, “what other people do is not my problem.” However, if that were everyone’s attitude, no one would take any of the volunteer positions with USPA. So, I came here for understanding and a little hope that maybe there’s a way to make a positive change in this area. It’s now clear to me why it’s still happening and how to solve this problem.

I’m glad we can agree that there’s not a real downside if UPSA deprioritizes promotion/support of canopy piloting competitions. I haven’t seen any data that concludes that high performance landings or canopy piloting competitions have any real upside. It doesn’t increase memberships for USPA or profits for DZs or provide any real tangible benefit for the vast majority of the membership. 

I think a good first step in solving the landing injury/death problem is a simple de-prioritization of promotion of HPCP activities. For example, no photos from CP competitions on the cover of Parachutist magazine; request CP schools to not use photos of HP landings in advertisements for B-License courses; and USPA could softly dial back the promotion/support of HPCP competitions and/or demonstrations.

As for what to do next, yes, USPA should be focused on chipping away at reducing and eliminating the causes of injury or death.

Let’s take a look at USPA’s Mission:

• to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing and instructor qualification programs
• to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system
• to promote competition and record-setting programs

BSRs and recommendations exist to reduce injury and death while skydiving. Historically, when the safety and training committee recognized a trend that was causing, or could cause, injury or death, they created a BSR or recommendation to address it. That’s why we have minimum opening altitudes, water training and minimum number of jumps for flying wingsuits.

To say swooping isn’t going anywhere, as if USPA is powerless to the power of swooping, is naive. Injuries and deaths from low turns could go out the back door the same way injury and death from low pulling did.

Whether USPA followed DZOs lead or not as @riggerbob mentioned, the result is low pulls don’t happen anymore.  Let’s recognize that fewer people were injured or died as a result of low pulls than from swooping - and action was taken.

Let’s be clear - low pulls have been not only nearly eliminated, but anyone who says they want to pull <1.5k almost always gets a lecture about how pulling low is dangerous, stupid and not welcome on any DZ. So, it’s possible to change the culture of all USPA DZs.

Here are a couple more areas we agree: A BSR for WL restrictions is impractical. What’s an S&TA gonna do, make someone get on a scale and declare a canopy size before manifesting? Further, the liability for a DZ and USPA is too great if someone were to operate outside the WL restrictions. Also, a ban on swooping won’t work either. There are too many people within the skydiving political structure who are financially entangled with swooping for a ban to get any support.

So, the only thing to do is to call on those with influence to change the culture the same way they did with low pulls.

[base615 77]

Let’s just ban skydiving altogether 

[sfzombie13 307]

5 hours ago, BMAC615 said:

A BSR for WL restrictions is impractical. What’s an S&TA gonna do, make someone get on a scale and declare a canopy size before manifesting? Further, the liability for a DZ and USPA is too great if someone were to operate outside the WL restrictions

why not?  they make a visiting jumper show the reserve data card and aad, why not step on a scale and write down the canopy size given?  i heard so much whining when seatbelt laws went into effect and now we have some that don't use them but the culture changed.  it's a lot easier with uspa and skydiving, just give the info or don't jump there.  it would be a whole hell of a lot safer with a few folks flirting with the safety margins than if everyone were doing it.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

4 hours ago, base615 said:

Let’s just ban skydiving altogether 

Why, when with a little bit courage we can keep alive the sport we all love and a few more of our friends?

[riggerrob 558]

5 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

...   i heard so much whining when seatbelt laws went into effect and now we have some that don't use them but the culture changed.  ...

Tell them to go back and read the 4 articles that Annette O'Neil published - on dz.com - back during the autumn of 2016. I researched those articles, then handed the data to Annette because I was exhausted from a 9-year-long court trial about a King Air crash back in 2008. We learned a bloody lesson back in 1992 and there is no reason to repeat those mistakes.

Smart skydivers learn from the bloody mistakes made by others.

[base615 77]

8 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Why, when with a little bit courage we can keep alive the sport we all love and a few more of our friends?

The sport I love is competitive canopy piloting. This entire thread is about banning the sport I love, not keeping it alive.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

5 minutes ago, base615 said:

The sport I love is competitive canopy piloting. This entire thread is about banning the sport I love, not keeping it alive.

No, it is not about banning the sport you love. Some of us are of the position that 1. After experiencing first hand hook turn fatalities and horrendous, but somehow survivable, hook turn injuries (one where I was close to doing a tracheotomy while stanching the blood from where his femur rod from his last hook turn screw up was sticking out through his custom swoop shorts) have concluded they aren't the best fit in a public DZ environment. And 2. That owing to the fact the throughput for swoop competitions comes through DZ's, and that many injuries and fatalities result from these DZ's creating competitors for USPA's competitions that maybe USPA ought not to be pushing it so hard.

I don't know, maybe if a DZ had an off site pond and landing area far enough away that the ambulances weren't more obvious than any traffic accident it would be a wonderful thing. But I've tried it both ways and I don't think it's a good fit in front of the public.

[base615 77]

2 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

No, it is not about banning the sport you love. Some of us are of the position that 1. After experiencing first hand hook turn fatalities and horrendous, but somehow survivable, hook turn injuries (one where I was close to doing a tracheotomy while stanching the blood from where his femur rod from his last hook turn screw up was sticking out through his custom swoop shorts) have concluded they aren't the best fit in a public DZ environment. And 2. That owing to the fact the throughput for swoop competitions comes through DZ's, and that many injuries and fatalities result from these DZ's creating competitors for USPA's competitions that maybe USPA ought not to be pushing it so hard.

I don't know, maybe if a DZ had an off site pond and landing area far enough away that the ambulances weren't more obvious than any traffic accident it would be a wonderful thing. But I've tried it both ways and I don't think it's a good fit in front of the public.

So… not banning it, just basically killing it through inconvenience.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

30 minutes ago, base615 said:

So… not banning it, just basically killing it through inconvenience.

Unless you became a swooper and a competitor at a facility other than a regular DZ you really don't have a bone to pick. Stop moaning that the world doesn't revolve around you and your particular brand of fun and get out here on the sharp end of the stick and do something. You know, open a DZ that encourages nothing but hard core swooping and show us how it's done. Otherwise take what awesomeness you are given without complaint.

Edited May 29, 2023 by JoeWeber

[base615 77]

15 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Unless you became a swooper and a competitor at a facility other than a regular DZ you really don't have a bone to pick. Stop moaning that the world doesn't revolve around you and your particular brand of fun and get out here on the sharp end of the stick and do something. You know, open a DZ that encourages nothing but hard core swooping and show us how it's done. Otherwise take what awesomeness you are given without complaint.

I already jump at a regular DZ that is supportive of it and seems to be able to do it without issue. There are rules in place to limit turns to 90 degrees on height loads and you have to do hop and pops to do bigger turns or run the pond. You have to do a Flight-1 course to run the pond and people do regular canopy courses. It works just fine and we have regular canopy piloting competitions, including ones for beginners, attended by spectators. There is a real culture of learning to fly your canopy and we often have entire caravan loads of hop and pops.

If you guys are unable to organise a piss up in a brewery by putting similar safeguards in place then I guess complaining about swooping and trying to eradicate it are the only options available to you.

Edited May 29, 2023 by base615

[JoeWeber 2,294]

1 hour ago, base615 said:

I already jump at a regular DZ that is supportive of it and seems to be able to do it without issue. There are rules in place to limit turns to 90 degrees on height loads and you have to do hop and pops to do bigger turns or run the pond. You have to do a Flight-1 course to run the pond and people do regular canopy courses. It works just fine and we have regular canopy piloting competitions, including ones for beginners, attended by spectators. There is a real culture of learning to fly your canopy and we often have entire caravan loads of hop and pops.

If you guys are unable to organise a piss up in a brewery by putting similar safeguards in place then I guess complaining about swooping and trying to eradicate it are the only options available to you.

Er,um, so you participate in something someone else organized and think that means you have the right to talk? Got it.

[base615 77]

49 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Er,um, so you participate in something someone else organized and think that means you have the right to talk? Got it.

Are you drunk? Because you are literally making no sense.

I have no right to talk about something I’m heavily involved in (including helping to organise BTW), not to mention paying a significant chunk of my salary to support?

Going by your argument, if you don’t participate in it then you have even less of a right to talk about it.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

35 minutes ago, base615 said:

Are you drunk? Because you are literally making no sense.

I have no right to talk about something I’m heavily involved in (including helping to organise BTW), not to mention paying a significant chunk of my salary to support?

Going by your argument, if you don’t participate in it then you have even less of a right to talk about it.

Look man, you buy jump tickets and land your parachute. That's the extent of your skin in the game. You are also lucky enough to jump at a business that supports your discipline. Count your lucky stars.

[BMAC615 205]

4 hours ago, base615 said:

The sport I love is competitive canopy piloting. This entire thread is about banning the sport I love, not keeping it alive.

Are you jumping at a USPA DZ?

[base615 77]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Look man, you buy jump tickets and land your parachute. That's the extent of your skin in the game. You are also lucky enough to jump at a business that supports your discipline. Count your lucky stars.

Count your lucky stars that you have customers with that attitude 

[base615 77]

22 minutes ago, BMAC615 said:

Are you jumping at a USPA DZ?

No, thank fuck