Canopy Collision video (thankfully non fatal)

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Disclaimer: I don't know any of these guys personally, so there is every chance that they really are living on Ramen noodles.

Had a turkey sammich, pickle, garlic hummus, and pita, and some chocolate cake for lunch today.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Hellis 0]

Quote

So you've never been on a jump where it's good when you take off and turned to shit when you've reached altitude and are on jump run?, I have been on loads where the winds were light and variable out of the north when we took off and out of the east or west gusting 15 - 20 by the time we're on jump run and the DZO radios this to the pilot.I've also been on loads where it was cloudy but jumpable and by the time we've reached altitude you can't see shit. It doesn't happen very often but it does happen, As for the wall of text learn how to fucking read, i find it fucking hilarious watching the 100 jump wonder noobs argue cameras and everything under the sun with the old bitties who have seen it all and heard it all and are a wealth of knowledge that new jumpers can learn from. In case you can't read let me explain, you learn more by listening than you do when your talking

Edited to add

if compromising safety is wimping out then I'm glad I don't jump where you jump.

Maaaaaybeee.... you need to learn how to read?
You obviously don't know what 'wall of text' mean since you managed to do it again.

Ofcourse there are times when things change during the climb, but most of the times you get warnings before it happens.
Clouds building up during the day. They dont just pop up from nowhere.
And as in the video, those clouds are wet clouds, the ground looked damp. That means it's not the type of clouds that form quickly due to ground heating.

Wind change can usually be found on weather forcasts.
If the forcast shows a change in wind and strenght that you are not comfortable with, do I need to type it?

Compromising safety is in my opinion having people on the load that does not belong there.
If you know that you don't like clouds do_not_get_on_the_load.
If there is enough clouds or they are thick enough that you don't feel comfortable around or in them, stay on the ground.
What will you do in case the airplane breaks down?
Ask the pilot for a new pass because there is clouds?

[Fallcoholic 0]

Quote

Ofcourse there are times when things change during the climb, but most of the times you get warnings before it happens.
Clouds building up during the day. They dont just pop up from nowhere.
And as in the video, those clouds are wet clouds, the ground looked damp. That means it's not the type of clouds that form quickly due to ground heating

Quote

Compromising safety is in my opinion having people on the load that does not belong there.
If you know that you don't like clouds do_not_get_on_the_load.

So no responsibility goes on the DZO or pilot?
I know I am new, but I have already seen planes grounded at my DZ for far less menacing clouds, and with higher ceilings. Flame away

[Hellis 0]

No why would the DZO or pilot be responsible for YOUR actions?

Sure if you ask the pilot or DZO for help, for example: "What height and how thick are the clouds?".
They should help you.
But it's still your choise to get on the load and to jump.

In the civilized world we don't put the blame on, or sue everyone else.


Edit to add.
If planes has been grounded, thats good.
That means someone took the decision to not send up a load that would probably end up in a overcast.
And thats exactly what I'm saying. Stay on the ground if you don't feel comfortable.
But don't send up loads where you hope for the best on overcast days, and people don't like clouds.

[Fallcoholic 0]

In my world, responsibility and blame mean two different things.
All I was saying is that if it is obvious that there are clouds in violation of a FAR, why is the plane in the air, full of skydivers in the first place? (my guess would usually be $$$)
And you are correct it is MY choices to get on the load, and MY choice not to jump when it is obvious I shouldn't.
If the DZ sends a plane up I would assume there is a reasonable chance for a decent spot. If after getting up to altitude I realize they sent me up into a ton of clouds, then it is also my right NOT to jump.
Are you saying since I got on the load, I should be required to jump through the clouds?
Edited to add: Saw your edit after I posted this. Think we are on the same page.

[ShotterMG 0]

guys, your stupid newb fight is ruining my trolling. Please stop. :)

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

+ 1.

As the sying goes:" if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen".

Plus this one, Pal... I'll take any heat you've got, & shove it where you won't like it. That's hardly the point, though. Is it?

[PiLFy 0]

Quote

Honestly, if the choice is to scare someone by telling the truth vs. telling them "hey don't listen to the haters man, cameras aren't that big a problem" I'd rather tell them the truth.

This is a really stupid statement. Do you really think that is the choice? Guess what, you can tell the truth without being an asshole. Fear based learning does not work. It's not "touchy feely" to recognize that. It's just true. People learn much better in a respectful environment. You should know that. But it says a lot that you think that.. And that your your classic sky god buddies Diablo and Dave Lepka think that. Thankfully most people have learned to reject this very old and counterproductive attitude. You guys are the reason sport jumper numbers are dwindling. Nothing to do with calling tandem passengers students or not. Everything to do with asshole, ramen noodle eating 50 year old sky gods.

No, this is the Post of the Month.^^ Truth Hurts.

[billvon 2,400]

>Guess what, you can tell the truth without being an asshole.

Of course you can! (Wouldn't know it from reading this forum, but it's perfectly possible - and an important part of being an instructor.)

>Fear based learning does not work.

I've gotten into several arguments with DZO's about that.

One of the first things I say at every FJC I teach is "Skydiving is a dangerous sport. You can be injured, you can even be killed. To help prevent that, it is very important that you . . . ." and the FJC starts.

DZO's don't like that. They think it scares the students. And it probably DOES scare some of them. I think that's a good thing - I want people to decide that skydiving is too risky for them on the ground, not at 4000 feet under a spinning mal.

For upjumpers sometimes nothing works. Sometimes everything works; you only have to mention "hey that's not a great idea" and they get the message. Sometimes only "fear-based" methods work. Sometimes only touchy-feely methods work. And often you can figure out what method will get through to them by talking to them, their friends and their instructors (and sometimes their teammates and employers.)

But in the end my responsibility as a fellow jumper is to be as honest as I can with them about the risks they are taking, even if it scares them.

>You guys are the reason sport jumper numbers are dwindling.

Stuffing the sport with more questionable jumpers honestly isn't important to me. I'd much rather have a sport with competent and capable people in it than have people who need coddling and emotional support to be able to skydive at all. We're all better off that way, even if the sport is smaller as a result.

>Everything to do with asshole, ramen noodle eating 50 year old sky gods.

I like the ramen noodle angle! But I'm not sure why that's supposed to insult me. Is it meant to imply that I'm poor? That I don't have good taste? That I hang out with Fury too much?

[3mpire 0]

Quote

The Sim indicates that both parties turn left? Is that correct?

NO!!! You turn RIGHT.

http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section4/CategoryG/tabid/243/Default.aspx#956

Grab a right-rear riser and pull down on it if you don't have toggles in your hand, otherwise a toggle turn but it doesn't really matter if a collision is imminent JUST TURN ASAP.

[jrjny 0]

I'd agree with Bill that YOU CAN GET HURT REALLY BAD. Most of the time it's a twisted ankle or knee but even that can f*ck people up. I watched by buddy's girl land between hangers at deland on her 20 something'th jump and she opened at 5k. Not sure what happened....the mind is a strange thing.

Not worth sugarcoating things but you have to let people think for themselves with the best, unvarnished no BS info out there.

Being self reliant is a big concept out there. You're responsible for you. There is no welfare when you ride a junk canopy down the LZ... the check is cashed or it bounces, no pun intended. There's no foodstamps to pay your way out of a low cutaway after low deployment and line twists. The buck always stops with you...

Just don't be there in the first place and if something like a camera might cause some problem..maybe leave it at home. Maybe it's safer on some jumps than others. There are tons of variables, camera is one that can be isolated. I don't think it's a big deal but IF IT IS ONE TIME, that one time could have a very bad ending. We are talking about very small odds so it's difficult to generalize other than 'better safe than sorry'.

Guy seemed really shook and didn't chop, end of story probably. Read the SIM, review EP's so there's no hesitation in your procedures. I haven't looked at it in months I will probably read through before I jump again sometime next week. I owe it to myself and my future years to come.

[jrjny 0]

but if you're heading more left than right, turning right exacerbates the problem by creating a net effect of zero.it's a tough thing to generalize because the moments of realization and impact are so close...probably better to say:

' turn so that your existing momentum is used to your advantage'

anyone ever chop to avoid one?

[3mpire 0]

true however for a head on collision if one turns right and one turns left then you have not improved your situation. i was replying to a post that specifically cited the SIM incorrectly, which is dangerous.

For a head on collision, both canopies should turn right. If coming at an angle, whichever path is shorter to clear airspace, that is the path to take.

However the bigger concern is to incorrectly quote what the SIM says for a head-on collision, which everyone should know.

[Hellis 0]

Quote

Are you saying since I got on the load, I should be required to jump through the clouds?
Edited to add: Saw your edit after I posted this. Think we are on the same page.

As a final word from my side in this discussion.
No you are not forced, and should not be forced to jump.
But if you don't like the situation step aside and let the others jump, if they want to.
Maybe Chris (Skydiver604) is the only one on the load that did not pay attention during the climb and everyone else noted that the cloud base was at 3500 feet, and the top at 5000 feet.
Everyone else on the load might be fine with this, when he asks for a new pass every time he sees a cloud the cost WILL eventually go on the slotprices.
About the violation of FAR, I can't make any comments on that. I really don't know your rules that well.

But yes, I think we kind of agree.

My idea is simple, if you don't like sushi, don't go to a sushi restaurant and ask for a new plate because you will get sushi again!

[piisfish 135]

Quote

Are you saying since I got on the load, I should be required to jump through the clouds?

you are never required to jump through clouds. Hell, you aren't even required to jump, Stay on the damn plane if you feel like it.

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

but if you're heading more left than right, turning right exacerbates the problem by creating a net effect of zero.it's a tough thing to generalize because the moments of realization and impact are so close...probably better to say:

' turn so that your existing momentum is used to your advantage'

No. Please do not perpetuate that. It is ambiguous and confusing. I am sure that is not what you were taught.

Head on? Everybody turns right. Otherwise, turn away.
Simple and specific.


THIS, however is top-shelf stuff. Good on you and you can definitely perpetuate this attitude!:

"Read the SIM, review EP's so there's no hesitation in your procedures. I haven't looked at it in months I will probably read through before I jump again sometime next week. I owe it to myself and my future years to come. "

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

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Honestly, if the choice is to scare someone by telling the truth vs. telling them "hey don't listen to the haters man, cameras aren't that big a problem" I'd rather tell them the truth.

Quote

This is a really stupid statement.

Nope, not at all.

Quote

Guess what, you can tell the truth without being an asshole.

Absolutely!

Quote

Fear based learning does not work. It's not "touchy feely" to recognize that. It's just true.

And you would be wrong on that.

Quote

People learn much better in a respectful environment.

Depends on the person. It's our job as Instructors to help student learn. Some learn best with one approach, some learn better with another.

Quote

You should know that. But it says a lot that you think that.. And that your your classic sky god buddies Diablo and Dave Lepka think that.

Well, you can add me to that list if you will. I will be honored to be included in such respected company.

Quote

Thankfully most people have learned to reject this very old and counterproductive attitude.

You would be wrong to assume "most". You would be wrong to assume "counterproductive".

Quote

You guys are the reason sport jumper numbers are dwindling.....Everything to do with asshole, ramen noodle eating 50 year old sky gods.

And you would be wrong on that, too.

Overall, your post seems very narrow-minded and closed to the reality of teaching methods and mechanisms. It further seems that you have a strong desire to be divisive....Old vs Young, Us vs Them, for example.

Food for thought: It just may be that divisive attitude that more often drives people away...from any sport.

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

[JackC1 0]

Quote

Quote

People learn much better in a respectful environment.

Depends on the person. It's our job as Instructors to help student learn. Some learn best with one approach, some learn better with another.

This isn't a dz or a FJC where you can tailor your response to each individual student. Everyone reads the same posts here so if you're an asshole, you're not tailoring your teaching, you're just being an asshole.

[billvon 2,400]

>For a head on collision, both canopies should turn right. If coming at an angle,
>whichever path is shorter to clear airspace, that is the path to take.

I'd almost agree with that, but would phrase it thusly:

"If turning right can avoid the collision, turn right, because that's what the other jumper will expect you to do. If turning right will not avoid the collision, then turn towards clear airspace."

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

This isn't a dz or a FJC where you can tailor your response to each individual student. Everyone reads the same posts here so if you're an asshole, you're not tailoring your teaching, you're just being an asshole.

My bad. I thought we were talking about DZs and FJCs and teaching in general.


Here? You're right. We can ALL be assholes at one time or another. Some moreso than others.

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

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

For upjumpers sometimes nothing works. Sometimes everything works; you only have to mention "hey that's not a great idea" and they get the message. Sometimes only "fear-based" methods work. Sometimes only touchy-feely methods work. And often you can figure out what method will get through to them by talking to them, their friends and their instructors (and sometimes their teammates and employers.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[Austintxflight 0]

I wish we knew if this was a planned 4 way or if it was a 2 way with solos following. I keep watching that part over and over, and parts of it make it look like a 2 way with the other two guys just following them out, while other aspects make it look like a 4 way jump.

The guy he collided with was not one of the first two jumpers, but the guy that went out at the same time as him.

I don't have much experience, but I have yet to see people jumping after me, or getting ready to jump and been as set up in the door as they were.

Would there ever be a situation where you jump that soon after another group? It was almost instantaneous.

I could maybe have seen it as 2 2ways, although that still doesn't explain his plan during freefall.

[Snowflake 0]

Quote

I wish we knew if this was a planned 4 way or if it was a 2 way with solos following. I keep watching that part over and over, and parts of it make it look like a 2 way with the other two guys just following them out, while other aspects make it look like a 4 way jump.

The guy he collided with was not one of the first two jumpers, but the guy that went out at the same time as him.

I don't have much experience, but I have yet to see people jumping after me, or getting ready to jump and been as set up in the door as they were.

Would there ever be a situation where you jump that soon after another group? It was almost instantaneous.

I could maybe have seen it as 2 2ways, although that still doesn't explain his plan during freefall.

High probability it's a four way. Here is what I think happened. Two people leave as the base the other free fly the exit. Guy number 3 decides he's just going to pretend he's on a solo jump. Guy #4 fixates on #3 for a few seconds and then realizes what's going on and chases after the base. You see him go hauling ass past #3. #4 at least gets in sight of the base and when they break off he has to track back towards #3. No matter what if #3 had tracked perpendicular to the jump run the whole situation could have been avoided.

If it's not a four way there are a few issues that probably need to be addressed at that DZ.

[loch1957 0]

I'm sorry but I have a stupid question. I cant judge how high he was, maybe some of you with bunch of jumps can. If he was below safe cutaway altitude what happens if he just fired reserve? I know having two out isnt good but what would been downside?

Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.”

[davelepka 4]

Quote

If he was below safe cutaway altitude what happens if he just fired reserve? I know having two out isnt good but what would been downside?

The downside is a possible downplane, or the reserve fouling the main (or vice-versa) or one flying around the other and twisting them both up.

The idea of being too low to cutaway, and just dumping your reserve has a place, but I don't think this was it. Based on the fact that he was able to steer the canopy in for landing, and that it remained inflated the entire time, the main canopy wasn't 'that bad'.

In the case of high speed mal, or an uncontrollable main, then yes, get as much fabric out as possible, because the risks are worth it. If your main appears to be OK, and you have enough control to land with a level wing and a good PLF, the intentional 2-out might not be the way to go.

In any case, the best choice is to take action above your hard deck. Based on the time line of the video, I feel that this jumper had plenty of time above his hard deck to cutaway, and simply chose to take no action. Not looking up at the canopy suggestes to me thatthe guy was too scared to check the canopy or even consider a cutaway.