Landing Patterns - altitude to begin each leg

[pchapman 262]

At least someone managed to try to summarize things from this messy thread!

Quote

+ Predetermined patterns with set altitudes and ground markers are useful for learning good judgment, but should be adjusted based on conditions (winds, other canopies in the air, etc.)
+ There is no real standard altitude points for the landing pattern, though some use 900/600/300
+ It's important to give your canopy time to recover from last turn (~5-10s) regardless of altitude
+ Some good advice on how to calculate landing pattern in the air using a digital altimeter + time to see how quickly I sink

Sounds good.

Quote

I'm not sure I agree with doing pattern in 1/4 brakes, leaves less forward motion to turn into lift when flaring.

You wouldn't do the end of final approach in 1/4 brakes in non-emergency situations. You'd make sure to go to full speed in time for the canopy to regain speed, and get into a steady glide after the little dive it might do if one let the brakes up quickly.

So that makes it OK to be in 1/4 brakes, if you like to "slow the world down" and to make glide path control easier. You'll still want full speed for the actual landing. That should allay your concern.

(I should note that there are some complications to using 1/4 brakes for glide path control. On a modern canopy going from zero to quarter brakes may extend your glide, or shorten it, depending on the canopy & winds.)

Quote

Is it okay to lower landing pattern altitudes (say to 650/400/200) in order to shorten landing pattern?

Yes it helps with landing where you want for a number of reasons, not just for staying over nicer terrain. When you turn final, to some degree you are committed. (Also depending on traffic around you.)

In an extreme example, if you turn final at 200' up and 200' out, expecting a 45 degree descent to landing, and misjudged the wind and are coming straight down, you'll miss by 200' short. If you made the same misjudgement and turned on final at 800', you'll miss by 800' short.

I find that a landing pattern can be as low as you are comfortable with, as needed to get around the corners in sufficient time to do what you want to do, with enough margin of error. (Again, modified as necessary if you need to fit in with traffic around you.)

So if you are on a new canopy and want a nice long 30 second final approach, keep your pattern high enough to do that. If you (down the road) are comfortable with a carving 180, with a margin for error, rolling out wings level a few seconds before starting to flare, then whatever height you need for that is high enough.

That's all my personal opinion only; I don't know what others teach. This isn't to encourage low turns, just that there isn't anything inherently wrong with picking different pattern altitudes. The only (?) real downside of a lower pattern is that you don't want to be crowded in time and altitude to get turned back safely into wind and have the canopy flying the way you want it before the flare.

One also uses the length of the downwind and the base to adjust for the winds and desired landing point. So if necessary the base leg can disappear entirely if one is getting too far downwind. That's an example of where the angles and position over the ground matter more than altitudes (other than the all important 0 altitude point where you meet the planet).

Also stand out in the landing area and watch others' landing patterns, and get an idea of what works and what looks sketchier. If you can, take along an jumper who has some experience coaching canopy flight for a second opinion.

[DocPop 1]

Quote

+ It's important to give your canopy time to recover from last turn (~5-10s) regardless of altitude

It is going to be nearer to the 10s to get you to true full flight after a turn.

Quote

I'm not sure I agree with doing pattern in 1/4 brakes, leaves less forward motion to turn into lift when flaring.

You can fly your downwind and base in 1/4 brakes and then go to full flight after your turn to final.

Quote

Is it okay to lower landing pattern altitudes (say to 650/400/200) in order to shorten landing pattern?

I'd say yes, provided that last 200ft turn gives you 10 seconds of full flight before you land (see above)

You're asking great questions, and you seem to understand the basics. Well done!

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

+ Predetermined patterns with set altitudes and ground markers are useful for learning good judgment, but should be adjusted based on conditions (winds, other canopies in the air, etc.)

Yes, altitudes should be predetermined/figured out. You adjust positioning over the ground, not pattern altitudes to deal with varying conditions.

Quote

+ Predetermined patterns with set altitudes and ground markers are useful for learning good judgment, but should be adjusted based on conditions (winds, other canopies in the air, etc.)

In that someone can tell you? No. Although 900, 600, 300 is a good starting point for your canopy and loading. The best things is to figure out how long 10 seconds of flight is in altitude (after the turn) and go from there. Once you figure out YOUR altitudes they should not change from jump to jump .

Quote

It's important to give your canopy time to recover from last turn (~5-10s) regardless of altitude

Yes, I'd consider 10 seconds without input as a good number. 5 is way too short to finish your flight cycles from your last input (turn to final).

Quote

'm not sure I agree with doing pattern in 1/4 brakes, leaves less forward motion to turn into lift when flaring. But if I'm aiming for a tiny clearing in a forest I reserve the right to muck with my canopy all the way in and PLF if necessary :).

You fly your holding, downwind, and base in 1/4 brakes (if possible). This is to give yourself options to either speed up, or slow down for adjustments. If you fly in full glide you only have 1 option to slow down, you can't speed up if you need do. Inverse for deep brakes.

Quote

Is it okay to lower landing pattern altitudes (say to 650/400/200) in order to shorten landing pattern?

I'd recommend against that if possible. If you've spent time refining your pattern (see above) then you'll just be messing with your timings and pictures you've spent all the hard work on.

Quote

Are there downsides to using a smaller landing pattern?
Are there downsides to starting pattern at lower altitude? (assuming final gives canopy chance to recover)

yes, less altitude = less opportunity for correction. It also increases the chances of you doing something bad close to the ground. Finally it creates a high pressure situation and almost no time to fix any minor errors you may have made.

My advice would be to seek a reputable canopy coach and get guidance from them.

Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[jhh166 0]

Thank you Ian....The explanations make alot of sense and are very clear.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I think you misunderstand what the method is. Fixed reference points are not useful so you don't use them.

Quote

Now I could walk the landing area and mark out 600ft due south of the peas or find some other suitable ground reference point the first few times. But that reference point needs to be determined each time depending on the conditions.

No, I do understand that method.

What I'm confused with now is your saying reference points are not useful and then saying go set them up.
It remains fixed until conditions change. OK...things change and your point has to change. You will have to to recalculate the new point.
Personally, I'd rather have people focusing on their surroundings in the pattern than doing conscious mental gymnastics. Besides all that should be set up well before you get into the pattern. We both know that having multiple people recalculating multiple patterns is not a good thing.

You will not have that perfect into-the-wind run-in every time and you will have to adjust.

You will have to adjust not only to YOUR pattern but also considering what all those other guys are doing. About the time you think you have your pattern recalculated, here comes the student on a downwinder coming right at you. OK, an extreme example, yes.

Quote

A decent digital altimeter will do a good job of telling me what altitude I'm at.

OK...until it doesn't work for any reason. Now you' have to use your judgment skills. judgement.

Quote

If you find you got it wrong on the first jump, you know you flew a predetermined path so you also now know exactly how far and in what direction you need to move your turn point over the ground to get it right the next time.

Exactly! And that's why it is a good training tool!

Quote

So rather than just using the spray and pray technique in the hope that you'll train your good judgement by pumping more shots down the range,....

OK...I think IO see the problem.
OK. It seems to me that you have missed where I said several times that using references is a good training tool. You missed where I recommended to the OP. Evidently what you saw was (I paraphrase) "don't do that and develop your judgement instead". That is NOT what I said.. I encouraged her to get her learning done as quickly as she can so that she won't have to depend on references and devices. Nothing more than that. Since you missed that, apparently you seem to think that I am proposing that we never use training tool and just jump right into an unorganized, hit or miss free-for-all. No, Not only that but, Hell no.

Quote

Now the ground marker serves one purpose and on purpose only. That is to provide a way for you to estimate 600ft from the peas when you're 200 ft up. But now that I've seen what 600ft along and 200ft up looks like from my previous jumps and I've got some practice flying a pattern that will get me close to 600ft along and 200ft up, maybe I can do without an actual ground reference and just judge the distance directly.

Exactly!!!!! So you do understand about developing your judgement. You do it. We all do it like that and I don't understand why we are ships passing in the dark.

Quote

The end result (good judgement) is the same as your "no method" method,

This is what I meant when I said you think I am proposing a free-for-all. Again, that is NOT what I said nor am I saying now.

All that just to say THIS is what I'm saying:

1. Use the reference point training tool to develop you judgement skills.
Note: As a matter of fact, Jack, I use ground reference points in teaching FJC students. To make a long story short: "Start your downwind leg at 1000 feet directly over the corner of the DZ. Turn on base when you get to the pond. Turn on final when you get to the middle of the landing area." Granted, the shape of the DZ was a determining factor in that.


2. Use that judgement skill...it will help save your butt when you run into those unfamiliar conditions you were not expecting.

3. Develop that judgment as quickly as you can.

That's it in a nutshell and I think we both agree on that.

I suspect part of the problem is my propensity for verbosity and for that I apologize.

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

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

IMO, you have a good grasp on traing progression and your learning points are on-target.

Quote

Perhaps I could ask my original intended question more clearly:
Is it okay to lower landing pattern altitudes (say to 650/400/200) in order to shorten landing pattern?
Are there downsides to using a smaller landing pattern?
Are there downsides to starting pattern at lower altitude? (assuming final gives canopy chance to recover)

Well, yes and no.

Yes because your canopy will recover from fly and recover at lower altitudes, always keeping in mind you have to have enough on final for it to recover before you hit.

And you are right. There is no real standard even though USPA throws out some numbers in the SIM.

NO, because you have to consider what everyone is doing. We can't, well at least shouldn't, just fly into the pattern at any old altitude.....unless we have good vertical separation, and horizontal of course, from other around us.

As you already know I'm sure, we all need to be doing the same thing in the pattern as much as possible.

Quote

With the intention that a smaller landing pattern makes it easier to keep the entire pattern over landable area,so if winds shift I'm not left 100 feet into the trees with a 15mph headwind.

No, size of the pattern and starting altitude is generally not a consideration when we are setting up landing patterns....except in somewhat iffy conditions

We would normally have set the patten up to account for that 15mph wind using normal altitudes.

Yes, staying over a landable area is a good thing but it's very often not possible or not recommended due to wind direction and speed.

Knowing how your canopy penetrates wind, your glide slope, and how to alter that glide slope all will help you determine if you are going to make it where you want to go.

FWIW, I'm very impressed with your willing and desire to learn. Keep at it!

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

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Once you figure out YOUR altitudes they should not change from jump to jump .

Ian , I have to question this. Consider high wind vs normal wind situations.
Just picking numbers off the top of my head for demo purposes only:

900 start downwind
600 turn on base
300 turn on final

Normal winds my downwind leg will be let's say 10 seconds to 600 feet and I have traveled say 500 feet over the ground.

High winds using same numbers
High winds my downwind leg will be let's say 10 seconds to 600 feet BUT now I have traveled 1000 feet over the ground. Now I'm far downwind of my target unable to make it back to the DZ.

This situation happens somewhat often especially with students when they are told to turn at specific altitudes. How many students have we seen come juuuust squeaking in from behind the hanger?

That is why I strongly oppose specified altitudes for turning.

Your thoughts?

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

[DocPop 1]

Quote

Just picking numbers off the top of my head for demo purposes only:

900 start downwind
600 turn on base
300 turn on final

Normal winds my downwind leg will be let's say 10 seconds to 600 feet and I have traveled say 500 feet over the ground.

High winds using same numbers
High winds my downwind leg will be let's say 10 seconds to 600 feet BUT now I have traveled 1000 feet over the ground. Now I'm far downwind of my target unable to make it back to the DZ.

This is where the points on the ground need to be adjusted. The shape of the pattern will change according to wind conditions. A very square pattern in no wind conditions going to a very long and thin pattern in high winds.

In your example above, the 900ft point should be moved upwind to a point where the 600ft point is reached level with, or just a little past the landing target (depending on how much penetration you expect on final).

The problem with your method of starting the downwind in the same place but much lower in windier conditions is that you have a very short time flying downwind to assess and make corrections.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[JohnMitchell 14]

Quote

Is it okay to lower landing pattern altitudes (say to 650/400/200) in order to shorten landing pattern?
Are there downsides to using a smaller landing pattern?
Are there downsides to starting pattern at lower altitude? (assuming final gives canopy chance to recover)

I say not only is it okay, but I teach people to do just that.

If you want to get a bullseye on the dart board, it's a lot easier if you stand much closer.
If you want to land in the middle of the pea gravel, it's a lot easier if you turn on final lower and closer.

With that said, remember that all turns down low are done gently and smoothly. I see so many novices that land off to the side of the target when a 10 degree adjustment to their final approach path would have put them right on the target. But when asked, they told me they were afraid to "make a low turn." We need to teach them that BIG turns are dangerous down low, but not smooth course corrections.

There are also methods of adjusting the timing and shape of your turn from base to final. This is one of the best places to fine tune your pattern to land on target.

Finally, the sight picture of the correct angle to the target on final (which, of course, varies with wind speed) needs to be visualized and learned. Being able to recognize when it's time to turn final is about half the game, IMO.

Edited to add: The "time to recover" question needs to be addressed. The closer you get to the ground, the gentler the turns you make. You can safely be making a gentle turn (toggle not past your ear) and flare from that point, As long as your canopy is above your head and your toggles come down together for the flare, you should have a good landing.

When jumping in windy, gusty conditions, you'll be steering your canopy left and right all the way down, then just flaring whenever the time is right. You certainly wouldn't want to say "Well, it's 100 feet, I'll quit steering now."

[dthames 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

...then suggest other methods.

I'm always up for learning a new method. What have you got?

The things Andy is suggesting to Vanessa. They are not new though.

Andy is Popsjumper right? Do you mean this: "Get yourself away from that dependence on altitudes and references as quickly as you can. Develop your judgement using your eyes."

How exactly do I do that? Is there a structured method involved or is it just trial and error and a shit load of (potentially dangerous) mistakes?

While not experienced enough to say this is a good method, I can share what I have done.
I took the canopy information taught in FJC to heart. I had read, “The Parachute And It’s Pilot” and the first part of the SIM, section 4 before I had my FJC. After I was jumping I also read what Brian Germain wrote in the articles “Saved ByThe Beep” and the one about the 4 leg landing pattern.
I got an audible and turned the freefall alarms down to a very low volume level, as I still needed to be focused on the visual altimeter.
Under canopy I had ground references when I first started. At some DZs, you can’t count of the wind being from the same direction every day. So, quickly those ground references need some other methods to help out. The audible with the canopy alarms set at 900, 600, and 300 helped me verify how the ground looked at those heights. After not very many jumps it was fairly common to hear the canopy beep and I would think, there was 900 but I am not where I want to be yet. But I could note I was paste 900 without any effort to look at my wrist altimeter or to take my eyes off of flying the canopy . If I found myself going past the altitude turn points that I had planned, I could note that for the jump.
I jumped at 5 DZs while on student status and at most every DZ I was complimented for flying a good pattern. I have no special skills but just do as I was told or as I was taught. I think there is plenty of information available if it is properly applied.
One thing I have found helpful and especially at a new DZ, go to Google Maps and print out an image of the landing area. Be sure to include the scale in the printed image. Then get a ruler and lay out a pattern using the scale and what you have determined your pattern legs need to be for a specific wind speed. Look at the size of the landing pattern on the field. By the time you have it all marked up, you should know the length of the pattern legs. Walk out on the field and step them off to get a better understanding of what you will be doing. Then go fly it and see what you learn.
Some might think that is all silly and overkill. I will be the first to say I don’t fly precisely what I might plan out. But the plan serves as a tool to make me spend a good bit of time getting an understanding of what I want to do and how it lays on the field.

Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”

[JackC1 0]

Quote

Quote

Once you figure out YOUR altitudes they should not change from jump to jump .

Ian , I have to question this. Consider high wind vs normal wind situations.
Just picking numbers off the top of my head for demo purposes only:

900 start downwind
600 turn on base
300 turn on final

Normal winds my downwind leg will be let's say 10 seconds to 600 feet and I have traveled say 500 feet over the ground.

High winds using same numbers
High winds my downwind leg will be let's say 10 seconds to 600 feet BUT now I have traveled 1000 feet over the ground. Now I'm far downwind of my target unable to make it back to the DZ.

This situation happens somewhat often especially with students when they are told to turn at specific altitudes. How many students have we seen come juuuust squeaking in from behind the hanger?

That is why I strongly oppose specified altitudes for turning.

Your thoughts?

I'm not Ian but here's my take.

The point about using fixed altitudes is that your canopy will always take the same amount of time to lose a fixed amount of altitude regardless of what the winds are doing. That allows you to fly the same rhythm every jump regardless of conditions.

In strong winds, you need to move your pattern relative to the ground to compensate, so you start your downwind leg correspondingly further out (or some other method to ensure you don't over shoot your downwind leg). If you do this correctly it means you won't end up flying further downwind than you need to before you turn onto your base leg. Similarly, your final leg will be correspondingly shorter over the ground but the time it takes you to fly it will be the same every time. It also allows you to gauge the conditions and make the necessary corrections during your higher altitude legs where you are less likely to foul up other peoples flight or put yourself in a dangerous corner. You can only really do this if you are actively keeping tabs on how far you travel over the ground in a given time.

Ideally you should never find yourself having to make your last turn low if you've correctly planned your flight according to the conditions or sorted out your screw ups on your downwind/base legs. The judgement part is shifted from potentially deciding to make a low turn to shifting your ground references to suit the conditions. Having a method that allows you to avoid low turns by design is generally safer than having a method that includes the possibility of a low turn by design.

Another bonus is that doing the same thing every time makes you predictable to other people. I know one guy who lands dead center in the peas every single jump, but his pattern is so erratic it's impossible to know where he's going, only where hell end up.

[popsjumper 2]

Agreed. All that is obvious and commonplace and very basic info that we all know already. Alter pattern according to conditions, just like we've always done. Nothing new there. Fine for experienced jumpers. I hope you don't expect students to have that ability to adjust on the fly.

Just out of curiosity,..

You are the AFFI for my Level 1 AFF.
What are you going to tell me for my first pattern and landing?
Include what you would say to cover changed wind speed between take-off and exit
(oh, let's say 5mph grounds at take-off, 20 at exit.)

Note: If you say, "listen to the radio", I'm going to say, "The radio didn't work" or, "I couldn't hear you".

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

[JackC1 0]

Quote

Agreed. All that is obvious and commonplace and very basic info that we all know already. Alter pattern according to conditions, just like we've always done. Nothing new there. Fine for experienced jumpers.

?? We're talking about experienced jumpers! So what's the problem? You seem to be objecting to everything, then agreeing with it, and still objecting. I don't get it.

Look, why don't you book yourself on a Flight 1 canopy course and learn it from the experts. Maybe they'll be able to explain better.

Quote

You are the AFFI for my Level 1 AFF.
What are you going to tell me for my first pattern and landing?

I'd tell you I'm not an AFFI.

[popsjumper 2]

Jack...enough. You can't even agree to agree.
The OP is a young jumper. We were talking about my post to her. Somehow you got off on what experienced jumpers are doing. That's fine.

I stand by my statements.

G'day.

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

[NeonLights 0]

Downwind - 2,341 ft. Base - 712 ft. Final - 22 ft.

[vanessalh 0]

Quote

I say not only is it okay, but I teach people to do just that.

Ahh, you and Lou are in agreement on teaching :) I think that's the part of the class which threw my accuracy out the most. I'm still adjusting, though I suppose it doesn't help that I jump at a different DZ every weekend :)

I was the same way a few jumps ago, scared that I'd somehow spin into a deadly spiral of successively faster hook turns if I pulled one toggle down any length on final - I'm over that now, but try not to muck with it too much on final so I can flare properly.

On adjusting from base to final, I've heard folks say that you should adjust from downwind -> base (go longer on downwind e.g.), but not change base->final because it can muck with traffic. Though I'm not sure how it's that much worse doing it on base->final.

Thanks John!

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Downwind - 2,341 ft. Base - 712 ft. Final - 22 ft.

I can't help but think that the reversal hasn't been tried before.


just don't make that low turn into the wind.

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

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

On adjusting from base to final, I've heard folks say that you should adjust from downwind -> base (go longer on downwind e.g.), but not change base->final because it can muck with traffic. Though I'm not sure how it's that much worse doing it on base->final.

I'll take a stab at it with this diagram
Black lines are normal flight paths
Red lines is where the base leg was extended.

- "A" extended his downwind leg...all is well.
- "A" and/or "B" extends base leg...they cross through the flight paths of others.

Note: "C", seeing the extended base leg coming, should give them room by moving over to his right as far as possible after checking that nobody is coming in on his right.


(a PDF and a Word doc of the same pic)

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

[NeonLights 0]

Quote

Quote

Downwind - 2,341 ft. Base - 712 ft. Final - 22 ft.

I can't help but think that the reversal hasn't been tried before.


just don't make that low turn into the wind.

Have no fear! I always make the turn into base a 270, so when i turn on final i am headed back down wind for landing. I usually try to line up on a wind sock or a flag pole too so i have something to aim for!

[popsjumper 2]

Something tells me you are pulling my leg about lining up on flags and such...I have a sneaky feeling that you are really lining up on entry gates.

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

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Is it okay to lower landing pattern altitudes (say to 650/400/200) in order to shorten landing pattern?

No, not unless you have to due to circumstance.

There are a few reasons for this, firstly you have to remember that you're in a "school of fish" when it comes to canopy traffic. Doing something that is outside the norm can create havoc inside the pattern. Also, the 1000ft downwind entry point gives you a chance to adjust your downwind length if you have to. For instance, if you fly your downwind in 1/4 brakes, you have the ability to dump altitude or gain altitude if you need to by going to full flight or by going to 1/2 brakes.

Quote

Are there downsides to using a smaller landing pattern?

Yes, it gives less altitude to adjust for your accuracy if you need to (deviating from your plan) and it also gives you less time to avoid other canopy conflicts. It also gives you a chance to evaluate any changes in conditions. This is important for the "school of fish" concept.

Quote

Are there downsides to starting pattern at lower altitude? (assuming final gives canopy chance to recover)

Yes, see above.

Quote

With the intention that a smaller landing pattern makes it easier to keep the entire pattern over landable area,so if winds shift I'm not left 100 feet into the trees with a 15mph headwind.

What you'll find is that eventually you will have 3 basic patterns, a no wind, a medium wind and a high wind pattern. The definition of the different winds that constitute each pattern is completely up to you. For instance, when I was comfortable rotating it in for a landing in winds well above 20mph, you may not be. There is nothing wrong with that. Also important to understand is that each landing area is different in each winds. For instance, at the old Skydive Aggieland when the winds got above 15mph they got really gusty, but at SD Dallas 15mph is a "light winds day."

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[vanessalh 0]

Ah, makes sense, thanks popsjumper.
I guess even if an extended downwind were to interfere with a base from C, there's enough altitude for them to make up for it.

[vanessalh 0]

I guess I owe this long and winding thread a quick report back.

I did 3 jumps today, with my audible at 650, 400, 200.
I started downwind at 650 each time, but ended up slightly adjusting where I began my base for the winds. I found it quite helpful to have an indication of the lower altitudes, even if I'd turned already, this aided my eyes as I lined up final.

Net result - 3 landings within 2m of my target.

Granted this was at my home DZ, where my accuracy has been pretty good, but lowering the altitudes and shrinking my pattern helped my accuracy a lot today.

Thanks again for all your discussion and perspectives.

[popsjumper 2]

Congrats!!!

" I found it quite helpful to have an indication of the lower altitudes, even if I'd turned already, this aided my eyes as I lined up final. "

WooooHoooo using the tools available to you AND training your eyeballs AND gaining judgment skill.....all wrapped up in one.
Now THAT'S good stuff.

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

[Nigel 0]

Quote

Let me rephrase, then.

You should move your pattern downwind to accomodate for overshooting. You should not change your altitudes. Leave your altitudes alone, so that in the air you're always flying the same pattern. Just slide the points across the ground. Good altitudes to use are 300, 600, and 900. Some use 1000, 500, and 250. I like 3/6/9 because they're the same amount of altitude loss per leg, so on no-wind days they cover the same distance across the ground.

I like the 300/600/900ft reference altitudes...I'm going to try that next jump.