What's it going to take to slow down canopy landing death and injury rates.

[Trae 1]

This question sort of answers itself. SLOW DOWN.

Is anyone else sick of seeing inexperienced people smashing into the ground under high performance canopies?

Sure no-ones to blame but who is responsible for letting these novices loose on such hard ( for them ) to control HP's?

If this problem was addressed with the seriousness that the injury and death rates indicate it calls for then perhaps our safety levels could be radically improved.

Is any person, group or association responsible or powerful enough to effect a change for the better?

What are the issues that stop our administrators from dealing with this deadly problem in an effective way?

[Travman 6]

Education.

Tell them what they can do, make more canopy courses and coaching available.

[Miami 0]

We need more assholes.

In my humble opinion 10 years ago s&ta's were much more effective at policing jumpers and controlling what canopies they were jumping. It seems this control has been weakened by a few different things...either dzo's not backing their s&ta's, jumpers lying or forging logbooks at a different dz, or just lazy s&ta's.

For the most part younger jumpers are in a huge rush to "be cool"...even when educated properly some still get in over their heads thinking they won't be the ones to get hurt...but end up doing just that. If we have more assholes (and I use the term lovingly) that give a shit and are not afraid to tell a fellow jumper they are jumping beyond their means, or at least bring it to the attention of someone responsible, then I feel the number of canopy related fatalities and injuries will drop.

Miami

[airdvr 198]

Peoples attitudes must change. There'll always be someone who pushes the envelope. Once they've seen and heard enough about bad swoops, mals, and airplanes it will begin to sink in. Unfortunately there's always someone else to take their place.

And why is it that we think these folks must be protected from themselves? Darwinism at work. My only concern with those folks is when they place someone else in danger. But that's nothing new..just a different avenue. Used to be pretty common to have newbies go low on a formation...loiter there then dump. To me its no different than somebody hotdogging it into the landing area and taking someone else with them. All I can do is try to stay out of their way. I used to enjoy flying my canopy after opening...now I'm just looking everywhere to make sure someone doesn't bone me.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[skybytch 259]

Quote

Sure no-ones to blame but who is responsible for letting these novices loose on such hard ( for them ) to control HP's?

We are.

Every skydiver who has ever told someone "Just be careful and you'll be fine" or "I did the same thing and I'm okay so you will be too" or "Don't be such a wussy!" or "Damn that rig is huge! You should downsize" or "Why such a big main? You should be on something smaller" is responsible.

Every skydiver who has ever sold a canopy to a novice without first verifying that the purchaser is not getting in over their heads is responsible.

Every skydiver who has ever told someone just off student status to buy the canopy that might be great for them at 200 jumps now so they won't "lose money" when they want to downsize later is responsible.

Every skydiver who has ever told a novice that they will want to downsize at "X" number of jumps is responsible.

Every one of us is responsible.

[billvon 2,416]

>Is any person, group or association responsible or powerful
>enough to effect a change for the better?

USPA could, through a canopy coach rating and a good list of guidelines, do a lot to help this problem. Education is the key, but we don't have any consistent educational program. Most people's canopy education consists of what their pal said, plus what an S+TA said, with an occasional canopy control class that contradicts what the pal said.

>What are the issues that stop our administrators from dealing with
>this deadly problem in an effective way?

Fear of over-regulation. Fear that "our freedoms will be lost" or some such. There is a strong sentiment among some skydivers that new jumpers should be allowed to do whatever they want, because they are adults and can make decisions on their own.

[Squeak 17]

one way could be to make requirements for downsizing madatory and part of the licencing requirements, not just the sign of stuff we have now but submitt a video of your landings and such for review before licences are issued. Sure it requires more work but so do incidents

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[piisfish 135]

Quote

Every skydiver who has ever told someone "Damn that rig is huge! You should downsize" or "Why such a big main? You should be on something smaller" is responsible.

this is what seems to have happened with the latest fatality in France. Downsizing from a 150(don't know the model) to a 99Crossfire .

The jumper was far from novice though.

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

[skybytch 259]

Quote

The jumper was far from novice though.

Oh I agree, it happens and it's wrong regardless of the jumper's experience level. Going solely on jump numbers, I'm far from a novice too. I get people telling me that I should be on something smaller all the time. Unlike most novices, I know the risks and I know my skill level so it's easier for me to resist that "peer pressure."

Note that I said easier, not easy. Even though I know I'm not good enough to downsize yet, I still think about it whenever I'm given shit for my huge ass main.

Another area where we're all responsible - encouraging novices to purchase a container one size smaller than the main they'll be putting into it. After all, they're "going to want to downsize in 100 jumps anyway." IMHO this encourages the novice to downsize before they are really ready - downsizing is done not because they've wrung all that can be wrung out of their current canopy but to make packing easier.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

The jumper was far from novice though.

Last year, 2004, in landing related fatalities the average jump numbers were 1150.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[jlmiracle 7]

Quote

Quote

The jumper was far from novice though.

Last year, 2004, in landing related fatalities the average jump numbers were 1150.

Sparky

Yeah, what mjosparky said and I thought the low turns to the ground (hookturns) killed and injured all these people.

J

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[piisfish 135]

he had around 1800 but not a lot with such a small canopy.

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

[NickDG 23]

I haven't looked too hard at the numbers, but I'd bet if we removed all the recent canopy deaths we'd be in the midst of the safest period this sport has ever seen.

Here's what I think will happen eventually . . .

Even though I worry about it sometimes I'm halfway sure the FAA won't do anything. To them the number of skydiving deaths probably seems fairly constant. We replaced hitting the ground in freefall with hitting the ground under canopy and they probably don't see that distinction.

No, it won't be the FAA, it's going to be mom and dad or the wife and kiddies. The skydiving community is fractured with some believing swooping is cool and teachable to the masses. There's another part of the sport that believes the whole idea may be viable for some, but not all, and in any case it's certainly not worth the huge cost to life and limb.

One day young Johnny Jumper is going to walk into some retail gear outlet, throw down his credit card, and purchase a canopy beyond his abilities. After a few jumps Johnny is getting the hang of it before one day getting himself too deep in the corner and Johnny dies.

Waiver be damned Johnny's family sues everybody. They file against the DZ, the retail gear outfit, the pilot, the aircraft, canopy, and rig manufacturers, every instructor Johnny ever had, and the USPA. Now, how hard do you think it would be for a lawyer to find a very experienced skydiver, as a paid expert witness, who could tell the court what's going on in the sport right now, in their expert opinion, is criminal negligence bordering on manslaughter. Don't scoff, this person could very well think they are doing the right and responsible thing.

The defense argument that twenty year old Johnny, who had 200 jumps and two years in the sport, was an adult who knew what he was doing is going to go right out the window. It's not going to be hard to show that someone, maybe even everyone, along the line let Johnny down.

With large color photos of a smiling Johnny at his sixth birthday party wearing a cute little cowboy hat festooning the courtroom, such an expert witness could send a jury into deliberations thinking not only is someone going to pay big money, a few are probably going to jail.

NickD
BASE 194

[kallend 1,635]

Quote

I haven't looked too hard at the numbers, but I'd bet if we removed all the recent canopy deaths we'd be in the midst of the safest period this sport has ever seen.

Even including them, we still are. Landing fatalities have gone up but other causes have gone down more, relative to the total number of jumpers (at least, in the USA).

www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_attachment;postatt_id=41357;

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Mike111 0]

I have no idea on to offer advice.

But if people want to do that and get a canopy to early, then noone IMHO should stop them. Its theri choice what they do, as long as they don't effect others.

Although this isn't the case if they get killed, as for their family etc. Banning things IMHO isn't the way to go.

[Mike111 0]

Sorry - previous post was unclear.

there should be regulations for those who do not have enough experience to handle good canopies, but banning things IMHO such as hooking and swopping is unfair.

Although im still a student and cn't offer anything good advice wise, sometime in the future im looking forward to hooking and swooping eventually, and wouldn't like them to be removed because they were deemed dangerous. Its up to the person to decide what they wanna do.

If they want a canopy which is fast, then let them have it.

just my 2 cents, this isn't meant to inflame or cause trouble at all.

[ChrisL 2]

Quote

If they want a canopy which is fast, then let them have it.
just my 2 cents, this isn't meant to inflame or cause trouble at all.

Playing the devils advocate, I agree.

In this society you can walk into a liquor store and buy a bottle of Wild Turkey and the only thing you need to do it is valid ID (and sometimes not even that)

You can then take that bottle of booze, drink it, and go out and wipe out an entire family with your car.

Aquiring the booze is regulated only by your age. They arent ever going to ask how long I've been drinking or suggest that I buy something thats not quite so strong until I'm a more experienced drinker.

With a canopy thats beyond your skill, the only person you are likely to kill or maim is yourself. Not that you couldnt fly into someone else and hurt/kill them, but in all likelyhood it'll just be yourself.

In my mind its the same thing as wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle. You should be allowed to make that choice for yourself.
Hopefully you will make an intelligent choice, but our society permits us the freedom to be idiots and make bad choices.

Why should skydiving be more restrictive than our entire society?

__

My mighty steed

[tr027 0]

Quote

Playing the devils advocate, I agree.
In this society you can walk into a liquor store and buy a bottle of Wild Turkey and the only thing you need to do it is valid ID (and sometimes not even that)
You can then take that bottle of booze, drink it, and go out and wipe out an entire family with your car.
Aquiring the booze is regulated only by your age. They arent ever going to ask how long I've been drinking or suggest that I buy something thats not quite so strong until I'm a more experienced drinker.
With a canopy thats beyond your skill, the only person you are likely to kill or maim is yourself. Not that you couldnt fly into someone else and hurt/kill them, but in all likelyhood it'll just be yourself.
In my mind its the same thing as wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle. You should be allowed to make that choice for yourself.
Hopefully you will make an intelligent choice, but our society permits us the freedom to be idiots and make bad choices.

Why should skydiving be more restrictive than our entire society?

I completely agree with you there and realize it's an unpopular opinion, but will express it anyway. I think it's pretty a clear-cut case of abdication of personal responsibility. Everybody wants to blame the DZ or the S&TA or somebody working at the DZ. Almost as if the jumper that bounced was their victim. I feel this is an extension of the tendency of Americans to abdicate their own personal responsibility. This isn't a kid's sport...who is responsible for you on your skydive??? you are. Who is responsible for making sure your equipment is ready to go and in-date?? you are. The DZ is not there to babysit licensed jumpers who should either A.) Know better or B.) Know how to find out. I would much rather see jumpers handling their own responsibilities like grown-ups rather than more infringements on freedoms of responsible skydivers.

"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957

[jlmiracle 7]

Quote

I have no idea on to offer advice.

But if people want to do that and get a canopy to early, then noone IMHO should stop them. Its theri choice what they do, as long as they don't effect others.

Although this isn't the case if they get killed, as for their family etc. Banning things IMHO isn't the way to go.

I see the problem as more of actions they are taking under canopy instead of the canopy itself. But I hate hookturns, they are stupid and have killed to many EXPERIENCED JUMPERS.

But to some on here its easier to blame the canopy and a bunch of other people then to blame the jumpers actions.

Judy

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[SpringVark 0]

Quote

one way could be to make requirements for downsizing madatory and part of the licencing requirements

Not sure if the same applies in the States, but PASA (Parachute Association of South Africa) has recently made it compulsory to fly a 1.0 or less wing-loading until B-Licence status.

The resulting stats should be interesting.

[freakydiver 0]

The only way you will slow the trend down is to look for WWIII to occur.

-- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." --

[Trae 1]

in reply to 'Playing the devils advocate, I agree...............Why should skydiving be more restrictive than our entire society? "
.............................

Good point.
Being a complete angel I agree with the devil bit.
Taking the advocate bit a bit further ...why do we have any laws at all as once we're adults we should be able to do anything we want.

Perhaps instead of looking at the solutions to this problem ( if it is a problem ) as restrictions we could see them as better guidlines for responsible skydiving.
Want a HP canopy? Do a HP canopy course and get yourself one.
Want to land a wingsuit or pack reserves? Do the course ..get the rating etc. etc

I'm not right up on the 'Duty of Care ' laws but realise they don't allow us to legally act negligently as individuals or collectively.

At the moment the skydiving industry and gear dealers are apparently locked in a mad rush to push more and more inexperienced people into buying equipment way beyond their abilities.
This 'need for speed' attitude from industry leaders kills and seriously injures supposedly experienced jumpers as well as novices .... all trying to emulate the most skilled and 'fastest' people in the sport.

For a skydiver --skydiving is fast enough.

Its the canopy ride that's getting TOO fast and out of control for a lot amoungst us.

The 'Go fast' ers need replacing with the 'getting there's'.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Not sure if the same applies in the States, but PASA (Parachute Association of South Africa) has recently made it compulsory to fly a 1.0 or less wing-loading until B-Licence status.

The resulting stats should be interesting.

Is B license just 50 jumps like in the USA?

If so, the results for fatalities probably won't change meaurably. Sparky pointed out the high average jump count. When I looked at 1995-early 2005, the median was 500, the mean closer to 1000.

There might be a drop in injuries, and there could be a secondary benefit in people learning more when not at the edge.

[SpringVark 0]

Quote

Is B license just 50 jumps like in the USA?

75 jumps in South Africa - though I think your prognosis would still remain accurate. It definitely makes students more aware. I have just purchased my first rig, and was surprised at how big my main had to be to keep my wing-loading at 1.0.

[Phillbo 11]

Since the Skydive and the Canopy ride are 2 different parts of the jump, why not regulate them as such. Current license requirements for the Skydive portion of the jump and new licensing requirements for the Canopy portion of the jump. Prove your capable and then you can downsize, in a controled enviroment.