Did I handle this in a safe manner?

[rifleman 61]

On zero wind days our DZ has a pre-arranged landing pattern for student jumpers.

[inline landingpattern_nowind.jpg]

The jumper enters the pattern at 1000ft at point A, travels parallel to the runway towards point B before making the turn to crosswind at approx 500ft. At point C (300ft)the jumper turns upfield to land somewhere around point D.

On the day (very warm) in question I entered the pattern as per the instructions but by the time I had travelled from point A to point B the alti was still reading 1000 ft. The end result was that I ended up flying 2 circuits of the DZ before the canopy (skymaster 290 loaded at 0.75) was at 300 ft and I was able to land.

As I flew the circuits I kept to a regular and predictable pattern which allowed me the option of avoiding other canopies but I was wondering if there was any way I could have handled it in a safer manner.

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[jzzsxm 0]

Typically you'd look at your altimeter on your way from A to B, see that it wasn't dropping, and swing super wide away from the DZ to lengthen the leg. Also, knowing how little descent you're getting, you'd likely want to swing wide and adjust your altitudes for the other legs.

Looping the pattern is definitely not the worst thing you could have done, but swinging wide is usually standard procedure (at least at my DZ)

[popsjumper 2]

In my book you did it right for the situation you described.

You were flying the same pattern as everyone else, just at a different altitude and in the pattern, vertical separation is a good thing. It goes a long way towards preventing collisions, eh?

I prefer students to stay within the boundaries of the DZ under 1000 ft.

I'm guessing you were the last one down.


In the U.S. students are taught to extend any, or all, legs of the pattern to adjust for altitude/location.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[3mpire 0]

With regard to swinging wide in this case it is possible swinging wide on downwind leg could put you over the runway and create a conflict with air traffic. Not that taking legs wide or narrow is incorrect advice, I'm just pointing out that you not only have to take other canopy traffic into account but other aircraft as well.

For the OP I would strongly advise asking a local instructor as they can speak to the specifics of your airport.

[kaustik 3]

What did your instructor/coach tell you? This information is the most pertinent.

The future belongs to those of us still willing to get our hands dirty.

[rifleman 61]

Basically, no spirals, no 360's below 1500 ft, 90 degree turns only once in the pattern and whichever direction you're facing at 300 ft is the direction you land in. Outside of the above it's pretty much up to you how you fly but expect to get a severe talking to from the DZO if you do something stupid.

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[oldrookie 0]

remember that on no wind days your downwind leg and final leg of your pattern will have similar lengths/ ground distances. Taking that into consideration would have altered your pattern initiation point, if you wanted to land at point D.

[Croc 0]

The pattern you referenced is not a pattern for no wind days. In a true no wind situation you would not land at point A: rather, you would land much farther out. If there is no wind at all start your pattern opposite point "D". Better yet, fly Brian Germain's "1200-900-600-300 pattern.

Also, when flying a pattern you do not fly from "point A to point B". Instead, you enter the pattern at, for example, 900 feet, at your best guess according to the wind conditions. In a true no wind situation, your entry point would be directly across from your target, and your pattern would be a square. You fly your pattern downwind until your altimeter reads 600 feet, turn 90 degrees, and fly crosswind until your altimeter reads 300 feet, then turn downwind.

With this method you are making two guesses, how far upwind to start your pattern, and how far away horizontally your down wind leg is from the target. With Brian's method, you reduce the guessing to one thing--how upwind you start your pattern, since, at 1200 ft you start directly upwind of the target. Consult your instructors before you use Brian's method. These methods work with any canopy, at any WL.

I think you need to go over the landing pattern, and at what altitudes to make your turns, with your instructors. I was accuracy challenged for many years until I began to trust my altimeter. (A good digital helps!) Good luck!

"Here's a good specimen of my own wisdom. Something is so, except when it isn't so."

Charles Fort, commenting on the many contradictions of astronomy

[rifleman 61]

This is the pattern that the CCI, DZO and Instructors have agreed upon for no wind days. The pattern starts at point A and finishes at point D. Under normal circumstances this pattern allows you to touch down safely at point D but my guess is that with the warm weather and a lightly loaded canopy the thermals increased the "float" on the canopy

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[Croc 0]

My bad. I see that your pattern starts at 1000 and the first turn is 500 feet. Nevertheless the principle is the same. It is good to remember that points "B" and "C" are not points above the ground but altitudes. (500 and 300). Had you continued to fly straight until you got to 500 feet altitude and then turned and flew until you were at 300 and turned again you should have been able to land near the target. That having been said, thermals can do strange things.
Did you do the safe thing? Yes--you kept your head on a swivel and re-entered the pattern.

"Here's a good specimen of my own wisdom. Something is so, except when it isn't so."

Charles Fort, commenting on the many contradictions of astronomy

[rifleman 61]

The problem at my DZ is that the imaginary line between B and C marks the boundary between the student landing area (north of the line) and the experienced skydiver landing area (south of the line). Crossing into that airspace would involve dodging traffic including tandems and high performance landings and requires CCI approval to land there otherwise it costs .

ETA: It can't be seen on the picture but just slightly south of the taxi way (below the experienced landing area) you're getting into an area of serious hazards - powerlines, old military hangars and a large wood.

Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation

[pchapman 261]

rifleman

The problem at my DZ is that the imaginary line between B and C marks the boundary between the student landing area (north of the line) and the experienced skydiver landing area

That provides a big constraint on the shape of the circuit, eliminating taking the downwind further than normal. Previous suggestions here were decent in general, but this changes the situation for you in particular.

The constraints really only leave the downwind part of the circuit flexible in terms of location and shape, unless you extend the final approach and soar out of the DZ entirely. Therefore you would need to modify the downwind so that you do get to "B" to start the Base at an appropriate height.

That suggests getting onto downwind, finding that one is floating, turning 90 deg. away from the circuit (to the North East on your diagram), and then slowly turning back to rejoin the circuit on an extended Base, to get to B at the desired altitude.

As others have said, one of course has to check what the local conventions are. My suggestion does mess with the regular circuit but what can one do.

Doing a second circuit actually conforms nicely to the shape of the proper circuit, although done lower. The problem is that it is too easy to get into danger with too low turns, and cranking turns too tight when trying to get that extra 360 degrees of turn in, between the initial way too high Final approach, and the second Final approach.

[popsjumper 2]

pchapman

Doing a second circuit actually conforms nicely to the shape of the proper circuit, although done lower. The problem is that it is too easy to get into danger with too low turns, and cranking turns too tight when trying to get that extra 360 degrees of turn in, between the initial way too high Final approach, and the second Final approach.

Yes, this is a real concern for students.
It can be avoided by the student if he merges back on to the A-B leg prior to the B turn altitude. That might be asking a lot out of AFF students but surely pre-license students should be able to handle that. It's not that difficult.

Personally, I worry anytime a student turns his back to the DZ by taking that 90 out of the pattern. I've seen it too many times. I worry that when he turns back towards the DZ, he may have already taken himself out of range of making it back.

I also worry with extending legs trying to turn at specific altitudes. I've seen it too many times...
"OK. I gotta go downwind to 500 feet and I am really hauling butt. Oh well, they said turn at 500 so I will. Now turn at 250 to final...Hey! Wait a minute! I'm not making enough forward progress to make it back!"

Yeah, I worry a lot.

In this specific case, I think he handled it well given the altitude he had.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[freekflyguy 0]

This is a difficult one as this is my DZ, I am the CCI and I think I may even have dispatched you on this particular jump.

The pattern you have shown is not strictly what students are briefed, as this can vary from lift to lift depending a number of factors such as upper winds, type and number of students on a pass, student level of experience etc. The aim isn't to land at point D but to land safely within the confines of the landing area, and on a nil wind day we want you to land either up or down the length of the runway as this gives the longest distance for the into wind leg.

To give some perspective for those that don't know the DZ, the runway is approx. 800m (2400ft) long and jumpers can land either side of the runway, although there are crops and a fence on the far right hand side of the landing area to the right of the runway. The zig zag line which separates the light brown field and green field to the left of the runway is a fence, but the light brown field is still acceptable for landing in, although this also has crops in depending on the time of year. In all we have over 64 acres of suitable landing area.

All our students jump with a radio until they have BPA Cat8 and if necessary will be talked down by DZ control if they are having problems with their flight drills and landing pattern. We only ever have a maximum of two students out per pass, and the turn around between passes ensures a minimum of 1000ft vertical separation, 1st time jumpers get out on their own pass.

Richard (Rifleman) whilst it is not unknown for thermal activity to give an amount of lift on particularly hot days, its extremely unlikely that there was enough lift for you to travel the length of the runway without descending below 1000ft, that said you did a good job adjusting your landing pattern in order to ensure that you landed safely within the confines of the DZ.

Next time you are at the DZ, we can go through you flight drills and canopy control again so that you are 100% happy with what you are doing and have a better idea of how to handled this situation if it happens again.

FYI, you wont get a severe talking to if you do something wrong, we will talk it over and offer ways of educating you so that you can learn from your mistakes.

I don't do bollockings, they don't improve things.

It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.

[freekflyguy 0]

popsjumper

I prefer students to stay within the boundaries of the DZ under 1000 ft.

So do I

popsjumper

In the U.S. students are taught to extend any, or all, legs of the pattern to adjust for altitude/location.

This is also what we teach our students at the DZ when they have done a couple of jumps and are a little more heads up, I find for the first few jumps they tend to react better to radio commands when necessary.

It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.