0
Marisan

HP From an Old Fart

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

what is this PLF you're speaking of exactly!?

:P



Are you being a dick or do you truly not know?

Either way it illustrates the problem in a way that my poor prose cannot.



a bit of both; i have never learned how to do a PLF.

there was an article on here not too long ago An inconvenient truth regarding PLF's, which you may like to read..
“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If you weren't trained by someone accepted by the CSO (Club Safety Officer) and didn't pass an EXAM administered by the CSO you didn't jump that hot Strato Star or Strato Cloud or (Gasp) Strato Flyer. You also had to have built up you experience on non wing type canopies before anyone would even look at you.
...
If you haven't had the training (And I mean TRAINING not a 10 minute brief on what to expect) well, then you don't jump that canopy whatever wingloading it is.



Quote

our industry will pull its finger out eventually and mandate canopy type/ experience levels




Now you've both said what others have been posting. It's not the canopy, it's the pilot.

Don't waste your time trying to convince anyone that you could ban a canopy. Train the pilot.

Hopefully, the sport can develop and deliver better canopy training to all those who need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


a bit of both; i have never learned how to do a PLF.

there was an article on here not too long ago An inconvenient truth regarding PLF's, which you may like to read..



I suggest that you learn how to do one. Who the hell taught you to skydive without covering PLFs? That's borderline negligent IMO.

Not know how to do a PLF is not a "badge of honour". It is a technique that could quite possibly save you from serious injury. The article you quote does NOT negate the need for PLFs, it merely argues that there are times when it may not be the best option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

what is this PLF you're speaking of exactly!?

:P



Are you being a dick or do you truly not know?

Either way it illustrates the problem in a way that my poor prose cannot.



a bit of both; i have never learned how to do a PLF.

there was an article on here not too long ago An inconvenient truth regarding PLF's, which you may like to read..



VB.... 33 years ago, I rode a streamer in from 500' (CRW gone bad). I’m alive today and perfectly healthy because, in great part, I was well trained at PLF's. I learned this technique in cliff diving, competitive gymnastics, and skydiving. I practiced it often!! I still do and I'm twice your age (probably more).

The thread you site offers reasons why PLF's don't work well with today’s canopies. But, how about when the s#!+ hits the fan???? Learn a good PLF, practice them often, live to do one again. That is all!
Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i merely suggested that article and stated we were not trained how to do one.

i've done martial arts for a long time, and especially in judo, we were "PLFing" for hours on end..

not saying i dont know how to do it, just saying it wasnt part of the curriculum. that's all! :)
“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

i've done martial arts for a long time, and especially in judo, we were "PLFing" for hours on end..

not saying i dont know how to do it, just saying it wasnt part of the curriculum. that's all! :)



uh, I'm a newbie skydiver, but I've done my share of Judo, too, and I never learned a PLF in the dojo. I learned how to fall/roll without hurting myself from being thrown, too, but the PLF is different - you'll be coming in a lot hotter if the fit hits the shan here, still connected to a harness. The very few times I've been thrown back on my feet, with someone holding onto my shoulder, I wasn't going all that fast, so I don't think that experience is relevant to skydiving...

T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

i merely suggested that article and stated we were not trained how to do one.

i've done martial arts for a long time, and especially in judo, we were "PLFing" for hours on end..

not saying i dont know how to do it, just saying it wasnt part of the curriculum. that's all! :)



I can't believe that PLF's aren't taught.

It's a basic survival skill.

What other survival skills aren't taught? (Besides good judgement and a healthy dose of respect for what you are doing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

i merely suggested that article and stated we were not trained how to do one.

i've done martial arts for a long time, and especially in judo, we were "PLFing" for hours on end..

not saying i dont know how to do it, just saying it wasnt part of the curriculum. that's all! :)



I can't believe that PLF's aren't taught.

It's a basic survival skill.

What other survival skills aren't taught?



I have a good friend that went through a whole AFF program on the left coast without ever being in a hanging harness or having the entirety of the cut-away procedures explained to him.

Never were any type of EP drills recommended or practiced beyone the 1st jump 'pull this then pull that'

...Not until his A license and going to a different DZ did he realize the poor quality of his instruction.










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Do you think any canopy under 168-170 is a high performance canopy? If so why?

No.

Let's take discussions of the definition of HP canopies to G+R and leave this thread for discussions of the incident itself.

OK Bill Von here it is!

Any Canopy that, when it opens in line twists, spins up to a speed that makes cutaways problematic is by definition lethal.

Any canopy, that has to be regularly opened at 4500' to give time to deal with high speed malfunctions is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that can kill by a mere 90 degree wind change is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that turns and dives so fast as to make any attempt to clear airspace impossible is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that can be totally collapsed by turbulence is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that can be docked on by a wingsuit is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that can exceed the parameters of an AAD is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that can cause a cutaway from a brake fire is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that with the slightest lapse of currency or attention can cause injury is by definition lethal.

Any canopy that (even on a test jump) that can cause GLOC (Google it) is by definition lethal.

I'm sure you can think of more and I'm certainly sure the guys with Mad Skillz will flame away.

Flame as much as you like because it's only luck keeping you out of the incident forum!



For the benefit of those that didn't read the first post here it is again.
I challenge you to find one of my 10 points that hasn't caused a fatality. Oops, should have exempted the Wingsuit docking on a Canopy.

One thing that this thread has shown is that the training given on HP Canopies is so inadequate as to be almost criminal.

When the Royal Australian Air Force was flying Mirage fighters one of the final exercises was low level night navigation. The students were told during their briefing that " If you stuff this up you WILL die"

And they had 6 months of training on the Mirage prior to getting to this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

i merely suggested that article and stated we were not trained how to do one.

i've done martial arts for a long time, and especially in judo, we were "PLFing" for hours on end..

not saying i dont know how to do it, just saying it wasnt part of the curriculum. that's all! :)



OK. So you say you know how to do PLF's. When was the last time you spent any time practicing them? Not doing martial arts, but practicing skydiving PLF's? I'll go even farther.... When was the last time you practiced them off a 3-4 foot platform?
Good Lord! Jumpers don't practice PLF's or EP's anymore? How can we possibly expect anyone to get canopy training? Not trying to pick on VB, but, it does exemplify my point.
[:/]
Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it all depends on the DZ and general attitude of the jumpers for EPs and canopy progression. I know at my DZ, EPs and PLFs are regularly practiced for students.
As for canopies? I think it's the individual mindset that is the big problem and with some people WL enforcement is necessary. I'm currently jumping a triathlon loaded at 1.0 WL. I'm looking into getting a 9 cell either Safire 2 or Pilot and maybe downsize to a 1.1 WL. After speaking with one of the instructors at my DZ he suggested I demo the 9 cell at the same WL as my tri first. He said he had no doubt I could handle the 1.1 but better to be safe. You know what? I will follow his advice! Why? Because I respect his experience and I do not want to get hurt. I know the risks with our sport and I RESPECT it!
I "grew up" in the sport with the canopy issue on the rise and knew in order to be safe and continue was not to be stupid. I took a canopy control course on my own accord not because I was forced to but because I wanted to become a safer pilot.
I don't think the HP canopies are the issue. I'm not for banning anything. It's the so called hot shots that are either too cocky or too stupid to seek out the training and/or advice of the respected experienced jumpers. Just my opinion.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in reply to "Here's where your disconenct from reality is showing through. The Sabre2 and the Spectre are most certainly NOT HP canopipes. "

and later on
"It just depends on the WL. If people loaded them the same way they loaded a Pegasus, the Sabre2 is not high performance. "
.........................................

Thanks for clarifying that, its getting much easier to totally agree with you.

I'm thinking that an ideal newbie learning canopy, say up to 100 jumps , would be better off having reltively heavy control input required.
Not so heavy that you can't operate it, but heavy enough so a newbie can really feel what they're doing.

Perhaps the lighter toggle/riser pressure is part of the disconnect that gets them / us into trouble...making the canopies just that much easier to over-control when people get too excited or surprised by something...even if they are used to it when things are more normal.

The attachment is from TIME Dec5 2011 mag , a Nobel-winning psychologist and economist Daniel Kahneman.

In his world , people would have to consciously opt out of decent canopy training rather than into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the consensus on this thread is that the high rate of injury and death is caused by untrained pilots flying high performance canopies.
Can we agree on that?
Given that, there are two ways to go about solving the problem.

Remove the canopies (And I've said before that, realistically, that's not going to happen unless you carry a really big stick like the FEDS do) or remove the untrained pilots (Either by stopping them jumping or training them to a more than adequate standard.)

Adequate training is going to cost lots of money so who's going to pay?

Well who benefits from this mad craze to downsize?

The manufacturers, that's who!

So, since they make the big bucks, make THEM responsible for the training. ie: They come up with a "Pilots Operational Handbook" like the fixed wing manufacturers do. (And that's not just a packing guide but a description of everything they found on their REGULATED test jumps and how to avoid the nasties that were found) They PAY to train qualified instructors on their latest little canopy and the prospective jumpers pay to get that training BEFORE they jump those canopies (And that includes mentoring after the first jump)

If the manufacturers won't do this then their canopies don't get a TSO and NOBODY jumps them. (That also means NOBODY buys them)

If you guys can't do this it means that you've lost control of YOUR sport to money and egos.

If you're going to flame me please do me the courtesy of reading this post and digesting it first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>If the manufacturers won't do this then their canopies don't get a TSO and NOBODY jumps them.

Main canopies don't need TSO's.



Well maybe they SHOULD have a TSO given their potential to kill jumpers.

If it's all too hard just accept the carnage and what's coming down the road.

In this thread about 60% of respondents say the problem is a lack of training. 30% say the canopies are the problem and the remainder are flamers.

At least I've come up with an idea (however flawed that idea may be) to address the training problem.

I expect those of you still in the sport to either suggest something different or refine my idea.

If you can't do this well, you have truly lost control of your sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

>If the manufacturers won't do this then their canopies don't get a TSO and NOBODY jumps them.

Main canopies don't need TSO's.



Well maybe they SHOULD have a TSO given their potential to kill jumpers.

If it's all too hard just accept the carnage and what's coming down the road.

In this thread about 60% of respondents say the problem is a lack of training. 30% say the canopies are the problem and the remainder are flamers.

At least I've come up with an idea (however flawed that idea may be) to address the training problem.

I expect those of you still in the sport to either suggest something different or refine my idea.

If you can't do this well, you have truly lost control of your sport.



Wow, you know how to ruin threads about canopies with your trolling, don't you?



Hey Aggie Dave, This is a thread I started. If you think I'm trolling don't respond. I note you've responded several times however!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


In this thread about 60% of respondents say the problem is a lack of training. 30% say the canopies are the problem and the remainder are flamers.


Two friends of mine go in on landings in the last year , both are not only expert skydivers but respected instructors with many thousands of jumps. Both impressively current and well within their skill range on the canopy they were flying.

It's not the fault of the canopy, or the fault of training. Someone pulled a pillar too close and they died. What did you expect to happen? that's what you get when you turn too low.
These guys were the EXPERTLY trained F16 pilots that some ancient poundmeintheass [:/]round jumper made a metaphor about earlier.:S
Quote


At least I've come up with an idea (however flawed that idea may be) to address the training problem.

I expect those of you still in the sport to either suggest something different or refine my idea.

If you can't do this well, you have truly lost control of your sport.


I do not deny there is a training issue overall, and that newer pilots need to be given 100x the attention they normally get in the way of canopy flying instruction. I am seeing it every time I go to my local drop zone, more jumps with a canopy coach. and tons of canopy course posters. I think it is a great start.

The only loss of control I see is -YOUR- loss of reality. Skydiving changed old man, for better or worse it changed and left your giant slow parachutes behind. This happens in every action sport out there. Someone finds a way to make it safer, faster, stronger, longer, and more fun. Though not always in that order.
It seems the people that can make it better are trying. It's getting better every day. New requirements at dropzones and more BS in the BSR.

The people that can make the difference are out there making the difference. The first person to notice the change is the one too far removed from it to have any part in making the change BETTER.

-SPACE-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>If the manufacturers won't do this then their canopies don't get a TSO and NOBODY jumps them.

Main canopies don't need TSO's.



Well maybe they SHOULD have a TSO given their potential to kill jumpers.

If it's all too hard just accept the carnage and what's coming down the road.

In this thread about 60% of respondents say the problem is a lack of training. 30% say the canopies are the problem and the remainder are flamers.

At least I've come up with an idea (however flawed that idea may be) to address the training problem.

I expect those of you still in the sport to either suggest something different or refine my idea.

If you can't do this well, you have truly lost control of your sport.



Wow, you know how to ruin threads about canopies with your trolling, don't you?



Hey Aggie Dave, This is a thread I started. If you think I'm trolling don't respond. I note you've responded several times however!



Dude,

You can't un-invent the atom bomb. Modern semi-elliptical and elliptical canopies exist in the sport, people enjoy flying them, and this is extremely likely to continue until someone invents something newer/better to replace them. If you were willing to accept the reality of their existence and high likelihood of their continued use, then you might be part of a constructive discussion, regardless of who started the thread. Rail against them if you will, but you might as well advocate for a constitutional monarchy in China for all the progress you'll make doing so.

I don't think the problem in the training discussion is a lack of ideas. As a newbie in the sport, there are a bewildering number of ideas and opinions where it comes to training and safety in canopy piloting. Most of the ideas I've read seem to involve a lot of work in uniform curriculum design, training, and certification that would require an enormous amount of buy-in from DZOs, S&TAa, and instructors around the US. In addition, it will cost money to students entering the sport to meet more requirements. Personally, I think it would be worth it, but what really matters to get it done is the buy-in of the people who will have to make a large investment of time/money in developing/training/testing these ideas.

Oddly enough, though, I haven't seen much discussion of the canopy piloting cards that the USPA is now requiring for the B license. The new requirement has the look and feel of a tentative trial of a requirement that could easily be expanded, but I imagine it will depend strongly on its reception from S&TAs, who have to sign off on these themselves, in the absence of a canopy coaching rating. I'm far too new to have an opinion, but what do you up-number jumpers think. What does everyone think of the new requirement? Close to the mark, way off?

T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Oddly enough, though, I haven't seen much discussion of the canopy piloting cards that the USPA is now requiring for the B license. The new requirement has the look and feel of a tentative trial of a requirement that could easily be expanded, but I imagine it will depend strongly on its reception from S&TAs, who have to sign off on these themselves, in the absence of a canopy coaching rating. I'm far too new to have an opinion, but what do you up-number jumpers think. What does everyone think of the new requirement? Close to the mark, way off?

T



For those that have not seen this...
http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_CPProficiencyCard.pdf
Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

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.

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.

0