3 3
JoeWeber

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

Recommended Posts

Maybe the consideration is that swooping is more akin to racing than driving; drag racers generally go to dedicated tracks, or they have racing days where the public roads are repurposed temporarily to allow spectators whose main interest isn't all-cars-all-the-time.

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wmw999 said:

Maybe the consideration is that swooping is more akin to racing than driving; drag racers generally go to dedicated tracks, or they have racing days where the public roads are repurposed temporarily to allow spectators whose main interest isn't all-cars-all-the-time.

Wendy P.

I think that's a great analogy. When swooping goes well it's both fun to do and fun to watch. We used to have great times with the pond. The big problem is that it isn't the exact science some will insist. Having multiple dytters set to turn altitudes as a learning tool, for example, seemed a stretch to me especially given the micro climate effect of density altitude at the surface. No matter, it cannot be denied that at the Pro level the participants are true athletes. So there is a real conundrum here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

What is necessary is a culture shift where it becomes a commonly held belief by ALL skydivers that flying a WL >1.2 and/or doing high performance landings are akin to pulling <1.5k and BASE jumping.

The cognitive bias comes from having BSRs like minimum pull altitudes to keep skydivers safe while also encouraging skydivers to fly a high wing loading and do high performance landings.

Edited by BMAC615
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2023 at 3:58 PM, BMAC615 said:

What is necessary is a culture shift where it becomes a commonly held belief by ALL skydivers that flying a WL >1.2 and/or doing high performance landings are akin to pulling <1.5k and BASE jumping.

The cognitive bias comes from having BSRs like minimum pull altitudes to keep skydivers safe while also encouraging skydivers to fly a high wing loading and do high performance landings.

USPA doesn't encourage skydivers to fly high wing loading's and to perform high performance landings. If you want to say they support skydivers who choose to fly high performance canopies and who choose to do high performance landings, I would agree with that. Those are two vastly different sentences.

Share this post


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

USPA doesn't encourage skydivers to fly high wing loading's and to perform high performance landings. If you want to say they support skydivers who choose to fly high performance canopies and who choose to do high performance landings, I would agree with that. Those are two vastly different sentences.

What is being said here is that USPA takes an active role in PROMOTING CP events. Promoting the events is a form of encouraging participation.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

What is being said here is that USPA takes an active role in PROMOTING CP events. Promoting the events is a form of encouraging participation.

And they provide funding for CP competitors to perform the types of landings that kill people.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

USPA doesn't encourage skydivers to fly high wing loading's and to perform high performance landings. If you want to say they support skydivers who choose to fly high performance canopies and who choose to do high performance landings, I would agree with that. Those are two vastly different sentences.

Yes, they do.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, gowlerk said:

What is being said here is that USPA takes an active role in PROMOTING CP events. Promoting the events is a form of encouraging participation.

Promoting the events is a form of supporting participation.

Sure, its nuanced. But swooping isn't going anywhere. Support it and educate participants is the way to go. Its a better outcome than turning a blind eye and wishing it away. Humans are going to human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Promoting the events is a form of supporting participation.

Sure, its nuanced. But swooping isn't going anywhere. Support it and educate participants is the way to go. Its a better outcome than turning a blind eye and wishing it away. Humans are going to human.

Marcel,

It's maybe a bit too nuanced. Swooping is a dangerous thing to learn, by the numbers. My issue is that supporting it and educating participants has limits; moreover that approach can cause serious injuries and fatalities as I've personally witnessed. I've given up caring if people do it I simply think doing it in front of innocent bystanders is both reckless and careless: like base it's best done away from the public eye, a view that is exactly antithetical to the USPA position.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, I do appreciate your perspective. I was in daycare when a highly locally publicized (news crews, crowds, etc.) fundraiser demo that my dad organized and participated in ended up with his friend going in with a horseshoe malfunction 200 yards from me and all the cameras. A handful of years later another friend went in at my dad's DZ - in my dads gear - due to a heart attack in free fall (before cypres was used). I was very close to the repercussions my dad had to deal with over these events. I've had close friends die swooping and not so close friends, but people I cared about as humans non the less. I say all this to say I'm not hiding under some rock and oblivious to the dangers of this sport or swooping specifically. I'm passionate about the sport and swooping because its something I've literally been around my whole life. I'm more invested than most "weekend warriors" even though I've never had a financial tie to a DZ. I don't think our organization can split hairs about which disciplines to support and which ones they can't. Support, educate, and do the best you can to minimize death in an inherently dangerous sport. I appreciate your dialogue and 'hear' you. I think the gap in our perspective is probably the financial/ business side to the sport which has never appealed to me. Have an awesome day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

9B6D17F6-E4E8-4E92-9FD7-5E1963957A11.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again its nuanced. USPA isn't encouraging everyone to go swoop highly loaded canopies. They are providing support to those who choose to do it. I think there is a difference there.

I'm am biased. I swoop. I love swooping. I ran a competitive swoop league. I've competed at Nationals. I have an overall bronze medal at Nationals - yay me.

I'll never be convinced that banning swooping or limiting its exposure in the public light will limit swooping deaths more than education can. There is no way to prevent people from swooping highly loaded canopies short of banning the manufacturing of those canopies. Support, teach, educate, and provide a path way to do it in a manner that limits the inherent dangers. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Again its nuanced. USPA isn't encouraging everyone to go swoop highly loaded canopies. They are providing support to those who choose to do it. I think there is a difference there.

I'm am biased. I swoop. I love swooping. I ran a competitive swoop league. I've competed at Nationals. I have an overall bronze medal at Nationals - yay me.

I'll never be convinced that banning swooping or limiting its exposure in the public light will limit swooping deaths more than education can. There is no way to prevent people from swooping highly loaded canopies short of banning the manufacturing of those canopies. Support, teach, educate, and provide a path way to do it in a manner that limits the inherent dangers. 

Hi Marcel,

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.  At the end of the day, it is the DZO's who will make the decisions necessary.  Some allow swooping, low pulls, etc; and, some do not.

Jerry Baumchen

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Joe, I do appreciate your perspective. I was in daycare when a highly locally publicized (news crews, crowds, etc.) fundraiser demo that my dad organized and participated in ended up with his friend going in with a horseshoe malfunction 200 yards from me and all the cameras. A handful of years later another friend went in at my dad's DZ - in my dads gear - due to a heart attack in free fall (before cypres was used). I was very close to the repercussions my dad had to deal with over these events. I've had close friends die swooping and not so close friends, but people I cared about as humans non the less. I say all this to say I'm not hiding under some rock and oblivious to the dangers of this sport or swooping specifically. I'm passionate about the sport and swooping because its something I've literally been around my whole life. I'm more invested than most "weekend warriors" even though I've never had a financial tie to a DZ. I don't think our organization can split hairs about which disciplines to support and which ones they can't. Support, educate, and do the best you can to minimize death in an inherently dangerous sport. I appreciate your dialogue and 'hear' you. I think the gap in our perspective is probably the financial/ business side to the sport which has never appealed to me. Have an awesome day!

Again, we'll just need to disagree on what encouragement means in this context but please know that, USPA or not, many of us on the sharp end of the stick don't see it as the "good look" that brings our sport to the masses.  Also, good on you for medaling, that's a big deal. 

You wrote this: "I'll never be convinced that banning swooping or limiting its exposure in the public light will limit swooping deaths more than education can." You might be right but that's not the core issue. For example, I don't know what plumbing you keep between your pants legs pockets but mine has always enabled me to defeat the most well meaning education, no problemo, and from what I've seen in 34 years as a DZO I am not alone.

"Support, teach, educate, and provide a path way to do it in a manner that limits the inherent dangers." No disagreement there, it's the how and where that needs some work. For my part I'm am over fearing another traumatizing to the viewer whomp in front of spectators or anyone else on my patch of skydiving. If swooping is such a great sport then it must have decent economic numbers from a business perspective, right? And it mustn't need buy-off from the highest levels at USPA, either. So, why hasn't someone formed the USSA and made a million by opening a swoop park DZ? 

Again, thank you for your thoughtful engagement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
8 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

Again its nuanced. USPA isn't encouraging everyone to go swoop highly loaded canopies. They are providing support to those who choose to do it. I think there is a difference there.

I'm am biased. I swoop. I love swooping. I ran a competitive swoop league. I've competed at Nationals. I have an overall bronze medal at Nationals - yay me.

I'll never be convinced that banning swooping or limiting its exposure in the public light will limit swooping deaths more than education can. There is no way to prevent people from swooping highly loaded canopies short of banning the manufacturing of those canopies. Support, teach, educate, and provide a path way to do it in a manner that limits the inherent dangers. 

Do you think your bias and steadfastness in your position could be keeping you from recognizing that we’ve been educating people on how to swoop for more than 30 years and we just had a YoY increase in deaths last year?

Edited by BMAC615

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a bad year...no doubt. And yes, my position and experience in the sport is why I feel the way I do.

You cant really separate swooping from USPA. 99% of the "skydive" is the same stuff everyone else does. You need to have same emergency training, know the same regs. Same license structure etc. USPA has a duty to support a discipline that includes all of this.  And lets put the rat on the table....that also means that USPA / we (swoopers) accept the dark side of the discipline. Doesnt mean we like it or arent trying to improve it, but we accept it. And thats harsh to say and for some to hear. DZO's like Joe who have to answer for that dark side with no benefit from the upside see it as a detriment to their vision of what they are trying to foster and create. Totally understood and one can choose to not allow swooping at their DZ. But doesnt mean USPA is wrong for supporting it...it just doesnt fit the vision for some. 

 

Share this post


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

USPA has a duty to support a discipline that includes all of this.

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

none.  

6 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

99% of the "skydive" is the same stuff everyone else does. You need to have same emergency training, know the same regs. Same license structure etc. USPA has a duty to support a discipline that includes all of this.  And lets put the rat on the table....that also means that USPA / we (swoopers) accept the dark side of the discipline.

i think this is a false statement.  this is a big part of the problem, the license structure.  the other big part of the problem with this statement is the attitude.  uspa has no duty such as this, @JoeWeber is right in that swooping needs to be done outside the view of the public at the very least.  uspa didn't accept low pulls, jumping without an aad, and too many things that have changed for me to list.  and now even though an aad isn't required by uspa, almost everyone has one and most dzs require them. 

i'm not going to say you are wrong in this conversation since that is very subjective and not applicable to this, but it's ok to be wrong, even on the internet with something you believe passionately.  it's also a good idea to be able to truly able to see another perspective, even when you disagree with it as passionately as you believe in yours, probably more important with these things since you're more likely to be wrong about something when you're so deeply invested in it.  what i will say is that your comments and attitude toward swooping doesn't leave a lot of room to do anything useful about it, and that is evident in the fact that as pointed out, we have been educating folks on swooping too long with no improvement on the number of fatalities.  took me over 40 years to figure all that out.  have a great holiday weekend and stay safe.

Edited by sfzombie13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jacketsdb23 said:

 Support, teach, educate, and provide a path way to do it in a manner that limits the inherent dangers. 

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?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

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.

Edited by jacketsdb23

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