billvon 2,395 #151 May 10, 2011 >"Do you think someone performing a modern setup and carve turn, that >identifies their bailouts prior and initiates only if there is separation by >space or time and then alter/aborts if there is an unforseen issue can >avoid injuring someone else?" That's a leading question. Might as well ask "if you can avoid injuring someone else, will you?" Answer - "yes." Therefore we can do whatever we want without risk to someone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #152 May 10, 2011 Quote2. Eliminate FMD sets the pattern. Why? People keep suggesting this, but continue to fail to explain how this will stop canopy collisions. Show me how this has caused a canopy collision. What it has done is worked well for the 12 years I've been jumping. I do 10+ jumps a day. What doesn't work is a sign in the loading area that nobody updates, or a group of fun jumpers that cant agree on one direction on a single load much less 10 a day. What does work is looking at the wind indicators, and watching the people below me fly a standard pattern. It's what I and countless others have been teaching our students for many many years. and it works for everyone except the selfish that need to set things up to accommodate their high speed activities. Now this is coming from someone who likes swooping, has competed and holds medals in the discipline of canopy piloting, and has made their share of mistakes. There are those of us who can swoop, and hook safely all day long on mixed loads, we are disciplined enough to pull it in and sacrifice a swoop when the situation isn't right, however there is always that one time we make a mistake, and risk someone else's life. More importantly we are an example for others. When the upcoming fun jumpers see us pull a multi rotation turn after our tandem video they don't know that we intimately know the other 4 or 5 pilots and their canopy's and can stack up our landings with each other without much thought. Instead they see a badass beer line swoop and wanna do that. We cannot police it. It's just not working. It sucks for those of us who can, just like it sucks that a small number of people are good enough to drive at 90mph instead of 65mph. Well right up until they aren't anyway. Stop it. Hook turns and swooping has no business mixing with the rest of the load. We are not so selfish and omnipotent that we can risk anyone else's life simply because we are "good enough" and don't think they are.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #153 May 10, 2011 QuoteStop it. Hook turns and swooping has no business mixing with the rest of the load. We are not so selfish and omnipotent that we can risk anyone else's life simply because we are "good enough" and don't think they are. Thanks JP. And before Bolas starts going on about banning swooping: my highlight.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #154 May 10, 2011 Stop it. Hook turns and swooping has no business mixing with the rest of the load. We are not so selfish and omnipotent that we can risk anyone else's life simply because we are "good enough" and don't think they are. Quote Hard to agree with logic and credibility. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites LyraM45 0 #155 May 10, 2011 Nicely said!! I've been thread stalking and wanted to chime in and reinforce your question-- why eliminate FMD rule? What would this do to prevent canopy collisions? I've been on loads every now and then where people don't follow FMD (or at events where it's not enforced), and I can tell you that after one jump landing in a zoo of people every which way, I am sitting out.Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites robinheid 0 #156 May 10, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Steadily rising numbers regarding injury and fatality under open canopies. USPA pens a 'Call To Action' FAA sends a letter suggesting changes. ~Yeah, I'm sure it all coincidence...we're doin' just fine. +1... Yup! No problems here. So, expain to me again, why do my friends keep dying? Look at the big picture, not a specific sub-set, in terms of appreciative inquiry: Big picture = declining fatalties as a proportion of total jumps. We're doing well here. Specific subset = increasing fatalities from high-performance parachute mishandling. We can do better here. I.E., a call to action to do better on a subset of an otherwise well done self-regulating system And why do your friends keep dying? 1. Everybody dies. Get used to it. 2. Human beings make mistakes. 3. Mistakes hurt more when speed and altitude are involved. 4; Skydiving involves speed and altitude. 5. Your friends are skydiving and because they are human, they make mistakes. 6. That is why your friends keep dying. Any other questions? Yes. Just one. Are you suggesting that we ignore this "specific subset" just because the "big picture" looks rosie? No. Quote I hope that's not the message you're trying to send. It's not. Quote I'm not in favor of eliminating any discipline in this sport. I am in favor of finding a viable solution to a known problem. That's where the "we can do better here" part of appreciative inquiry comes into the picture. Start with "What are we doing well?" After you determine that, you are left with with the "What can we do better?" subset. Then you can focus on tweaking those subsets instead of confusing the subset with the big picture, which you and most of the other people on this thread have been doing. Quote Just imagine what the big picture could look like 10 years from now. Just imagine using tandem as it was initially intended -- as a dual canopy flying training system instead of a carnival ride. Just imagine a training system that focuses first on training people to fly, navigate and land their parachutes competently before they "go to the top of Fun Mountain." Just imagine a SIM and an ISP that emphasizes right-of-way aerial rules instead of the current cursory and almost criminally negligent treatment thereof. Just imagine there's no AFF to focus on fun skills at the expense of survival skills, thereby creating minefields through which we all have to navigate when these AFF babies become 1,000-, 3,000-, and 10,000-jump wonders who never actually learned the fundamentals of survival parachuting because they focused on the finer points of freefall fun. Just imagine... SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #157 May 10, 2011 Quote >"Do you think someone performing a modern setup and carve turn, that >identifies their bailouts prior and initiates only if there is separation by >space or time and then alter/aborts if there is an unforseen issue can >avoid injuring someone else?" That's a leading question. Might as well ask "if you can avoid injuring someone else, will you?" Answer - "yes." Therefore we can do whatever we want without risk to someone else. And this wasn't? Quote "Do most people who have HP canopies have the skills and judgement to swoop at the end of a mixed skydive safely every time, and do you believe it's possible for eveyone who swoops (not just specialist canopy pilots) to really clear their airspace before initiating a HP landing?" Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #158 May 10, 2011 QuoteJust imagine using tandem as it was initially intended -- as a dual canopy flying training system instead of a carnival ride. Just imagine a training system that focuses first on training people to fly, navigate and land their parachutes competently before they "go to the top of Fun Mountain." Just imagine a SIM and an ISP that emphasizes right-of-way aerial rules instead of the current cursory and almost criminally negligent treatment thereof. Just imagine there's no AFF to focus on fun skills at the expense of survival skills, thereby creating minefields through which we all have to navigate when these AFF babies become 1,000-, 3,000-, and 10,000-jump wonders who never actually learned the fundamentals of survival parachuting because they focused on the finer points of freefall fun. Can't argue with any of that... If we could turn back time huh Robin? ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #159 May 10, 2011 QuoteDo most people who have HP canopies have the skills and judgement to swoop at the end of a mixed skydive safely every time, and do you believe it's possible for eveyone who swoops (not just specialist canopy pilots) to really clear their airspace before initiating a HP landing?" 10 mins ago.... watched an exceptionally experienced swooper come way too close to an AFF student that had wandered where they should not have been. Tandem vidiot sets up and begins his turn only to find the student below him (the student was well out of the normal holding area). Yes...he aborted and to his credit, actually landed well away from the main and alternate/swoop pond areas. Can/will everyone do this? Apparently not. Had he "really cleared" his airspace, he shouldn't have set up for the HP turns in the first place, right?... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #160 May 10, 2011 How often do you see existing rules enforced for all equally or at all? What makes anyone think that this new one being proposed will be any different? Human nature: If you just tell someone not to do something, they're likely to want to do it more, perhaps out of spite. If they get away with it without consequence, the authority of those that made the rule is dminished in their perspective. If you show and tell them what the consequences are, you'll get much further. Invariably, you'll come across those that refuse to learn, say they'll be safe, or insist they're good enough to pull it off: all without explaining how they'll do it. Congratulations!!! You've now identified the target group most of these rules were needed for. Adjust their attitudes appropriately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #161 May 10, 2011 Quote Quote Do most people who have HP canopies have the skills and judgement to swoop at the end of a mixed skydive safely every time, and do you believe it's possible for eveyone who swoops (not just specialist canopy pilots) to really clear their airspace before initiating a HP landing?" 10 mins ago.... watched an exceptionally experienced swooper come way too close to an AFF student that had wandered where they should not have been. Tandem vidiot sets up and begins his turn only to find the student below him (the student was well out of the normal holding area). Yes...he aborted and to his credit, actually landed well away from the main and alternate/swoop pond areas. Can/will everyone do this? Apparently not. Had he "really cleared" his airspace, he shouldn't have set up for the HP turns in the first place, right?... Have you asked him if he saw the student prior? Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #162 May 10, 2011 QuoteHow often do you see existing rules enforced for all equally or at all? What makes anyone think that this new one being proposed will be any different? Human nature: If you just tell someone not to do something, they're likely to want to do it more, perhaps out of spite. If they get away with it without consequence, the authority of those that made the rule is diminished in their perspective. If you show and tell them what the consequences are, you'll get much further. Invariably, you'll come across those that refuse to learn, say they'll be safe, or insist they're good enough to pull it off: all without explaining how they'll do it. Congratulations!!! You've now identified the target group most of these rules were needed for. Adjust their attitudes appropriately. Do YOU follow the existing rules? If not why not, and why are you so sure no one else will follow new rules? Here's an idea... How about we ALL agree there is a problem going on. Then we all agree that working toward a positive solution is in the best interest of everyone. THEN we look at any and all proposals to the problem's solution with a cost/benefit analysis...keeping in mind ANY cost of not killing someone has a lot of benefit. d00d you keep arguing against pretty much any ideas presented, ideas that all pretty much agree... significantly separate landing areas are a must, no speed inducing turns in the pattern should be discouraged. (yes, carving too) Novices like DocPop to Experts like JP...the consensus is the same. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DiverMike 5 #163 May 10, 2011 I've been lurking this thead for a while. Isn't it somtimes the case of vidiot's / AFFI's wanting to eat their cake and have it too? They participate in the paid jump, then want to add a swoop at the end. It has been said several times that all these problems would go away if swoopers had a separate load and or hop/pop pass. That way they would only injure each other, and that probably would not happen since they are following their own pattern. Is there a valid argument against swoopers doing whatever they want on their own load/pass? Is there any valid argument that swoopers should be allowed to mixed with AFF's, Tandems, FF,RW etc? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #164 May 10, 2011 Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Quote What it proves is that people can and will be where they shouldn't. Again, do you really think the swoops/collisions of late were done even though a traffic hazard was seen?? If people did everything right every time, they wouldn't get kidded about a bunch of reserve rides bunched together. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #165 May 10, 2011 Is there a valid argument against swoopers doing whatever they want on their own load/pass? Is there any valid argument that swoopers should be allowed to mixed with AFF's, Tandems, FF,RW etc? ~No to both. Pretty easy when you break it down like that! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #166 May 10, 2011 QuoteIt has been said several times that all these problems would go away if swoopers had a separate load and or hop/pop pass. That's a big load of horseshit. That's what I have been fighting against. That exact mindset of "All we have to do is get swoopers away and we'll be safe." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites grimmie 173 #167 May 10, 2011 Another landing gone bad in Chicago...Epidemic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Liemberg 0 #168 May 10, 2011 Quote Why? Because a GOOD tetrahedron (gotta google THAT!) is better. It is cheap and simple to build, it can be automated - hell, if you want you can build in a computer and a weather station making it react to ahead of time set parameters (wind exceeding so many knots for such and such duration) but a piece of board on a discarded wheel + half a rear axis MANDATES a landing direction from opening to landing - so there's at least one factor eliminated like for competition training cameraflyers that want to practice their downwind skillz before anyone else has set the pattern. I - for one - have seen a bunch of skydivers land in the 'wrong' direction, when you think of reducing speed @ touchdown as preliminary goal. Ain't scared, proud or shy but not knowing WHO the first man down will be, how can I trust him to choose the correct direction? Like: beforehand? Automation is the future in decision making. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,395 #169 May 10, 2011 >Because a GOOD tetrahedron (gotta google THAT!) is better. What happens if it swings halfway through a load landing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #170 May 10, 2011 Quote Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Quote What it proves is that people can and will be where they shouldn't. Again, do you really think the swoops/collisions of late were done even though a traffic hazard was seen?? If people did everything right every time, they wouldn't get kidded about a bunch of reserve rides bunched together. I should have said carve turn above. I do think that in the collisions in Perris and in Georgia (not enough details yet on turn heights for the others including the recon one Austrailia) that they did clear their airspace prior but with the old style of turn they did and the heights it's initiated, (toggle spiral and low riser hook respectively) there was not even an option to alter or abort. There is absolutely NO REASON for anyone to do spiral and/or low toggle/riser hooks for landing. Not only are they far more dangerous for themselves and others they are also extremely inefficient as far as swoop distance. These types of landings are the ones that need to be separated far more than someone doing a modern carve turn.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Liemberg 0 #171 May 10, 2011 I'll be on the ground anyway on that occasion. When the winds are gusting in such a way my GOOD tetrahedron swings so dangerously that people risk flying each other out of the sky, the weather is WAY to unstable to safely skydive. I'll sit this one out, if you don't mind. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DocPop 1 #172 May 10, 2011 Quote Automation is the future in decision making. Tell that to Sarah Connor "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,120 #173 May 10, 2011 All the problems won't go away; people can still fly into each other. And there's no way we can guarantee that they won't. However, by eliminating a blind turn and all that speed in traffic, we reduce the likelihood, while having a rule that's reasonably possible to implement and monitor (i.e. "wanna swoop, get your own pass"). If the rule is too difficult it's irrelevant. If it's too ineffective, it's stupid. A rule to have separate passes for bird-men would have nothing to do with landing pattern canopy collisions. Simply dictating that everyone be smarter really isn't the way to go. Everyone already thinks they're smarter. And above-average, especially if they're swooping. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DSE 3 #174 May 10, 2011 Quote Have you asked him if he saw the student prior? Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Yes, we spoke about it. No, he didn't see the student prior. And the student never saw him. His initial response was "WTF is was that guy doing way over there." Not everyone has nearly 10K jumps. Not everyone has the presence of mind and quick actions that this very experienced, military MFF instructor has. And not every dropzone has the kind of outs that we do. As it was...it was way too close for comfort. Proof-positive that luck plays a big role in our sport at times. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,395 #175 May 10, 2011 >I'll be on the ground anyway on that occasion. When the winds are gusting > in such a way my GOOD tetrahedron swings so dangerously that people >risk flying each other out of the sky, the weather is WAY to unstable to >safely skydive. That sounds like a good decision for you, and for many jumpers. It does, however, highlight the problems of a tetrahedron used on a day with shifting winds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next Page 7 of 11 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
LyraM45 0 #155 May 10, 2011 Nicely said!! I've been thread stalking and wanted to chime in and reinforce your question-- why eliminate FMD rule? What would this do to prevent canopy collisions? I've been on loads every now and then where people don't follow FMD (or at events where it's not enforced), and I can tell you that after one jump landing in a zoo of people every which way, I am sitting out.Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
robinheid 0 #156 May 10, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Steadily rising numbers regarding injury and fatality under open canopies. USPA pens a 'Call To Action' FAA sends a letter suggesting changes. ~Yeah, I'm sure it all coincidence...we're doin' just fine. +1... Yup! No problems here. So, expain to me again, why do my friends keep dying? Look at the big picture, not a specific sub-set, in terms of appreciative inquiry: Big picture = declining fatalties as a proportion of total jumps. We're doing well here. Specific subset = increasing fatalities from high-performance parachute mishandling. We can do better here. I.E., a call to action to do better on a subset of an otherwise well done self-regulating system And why do your friends keep dying? 1. Everybody dies. Get used to it. 2. Human beings make mistakes. 3. Mistakes hurt more when speed and altitude are involved. 4; Skydiving involves speed and altitude. 5. Your friends are skydiving and because they are human, they make mistakes. 6. That is why your friends keep dying. Any other questions? Yes. Just one. Are you suggesting that we ignore this "specific subset" just because the "big picture" looks rosie? No. Quote I hope that's not the message you're trying to send. It's not. Quote I'm not in favor of eliminating any discipline in this sport. I am in favor of finding a viable solution to a known problem. That's where the "we can do better here" part of appreciative inquiry comes into the picture. Start with "What are we doing well?" After you determine that, you are left with with the "What can we do better?" subset. Then you can focus on tweaking those subsets instead of confusing the subset with the big picture, which you and most of the other people on this thread have been doing. Quote Just imagine what the big picture could look like 10 years from now. Just imagine using tandem as it was initially intended -- as a dual canopy flying training system instead of a carnival ride. Just imagine a training system that focuses first on training people to fly, navigate and land their parachutes competently before they "go to the top of Fun Mountain." Just imagine a SIM and an ISP that emphasizes right-of-way aerial rules instead of the current cursory and almost criminally negligent treatment thereof. Just imagine there's no AFF to focus on fun skills at the expense of survival skills, thereby creating minefields through which we all have to navigate when these AFF babies become 1,000-, 3,000-, and 10,000-jump wonders who never actually learned the fundamentals of survival parachuting because they focused on the finer points of freefall fun. Just imagine... SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.) "The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #157 May 10, 2011 Quote >"Do you think someone performing a modern setup and carve turn, that >identifies their bailouts prior and initiates only if there is separation by >space or time and then alter/aborts if there is an unforseen issue can >avoid injuring someone else?" That's a leading question. Might as well ask "if you can avoid injuring someone else, will you?" Answer - "yes." Therefore we can do whatever we want without risk to someone else. And this wasn't? Quote "Do most people who have HP canopies have the skills and judgement to swoop at the end of a mixed skydive safely every time, and do you believe it's possible for eveyone who swoops (not just specialist canopy pilots) to really clear their airspace before initiating a HP landing?" Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #158 May 10, 2011 QuoteJust imagine using tandem as it was initially intended -- as a dual canopy flying training system instead of a carnival ride. Just imagine a training system that focuses first on training people to fly, navigate and land their parachutes competently before they "go to the top of Fun Mountain." Just imagine a SIM and an ISP that emphasizes right-of-way aerial rules instead of the current cursory and almost criminally negligent treatment thereof. Just imagine there's no AFF to focus on fun skills at the expense of survival skills, thereby creating minefields through which we all have to navigate when these AFF babies become 1,000-, 3,000-, and 10,000-jump wonders who never actually learned the fundamentals of survival parachuting because they focused on the finer points of freefall fun. Can't argue with any of that... If we could turn back time huh Robin? ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #159 May 10, 2011 QuoteDo most people who have HP canopies have the skills and judgement to swoop at the end of a mixed skydive safely every time, and do you believe it's possible for eveyone who swoops (not just specialist canopy pilots) to really clear their airspace before initiating a HP landing?" 10 mins ago.... watched an exceptionally experienced swooper come way too close to an AFF student that had wandered where they should not have been. Tandem vidiot sets up and begins his turn only to find the student below him (the student was well out of the normal holding area). Yes...he aborted and to his credit, actually landed well away from the main and alternate/swoop pond areas. Can/will everyone do this? Apparently not. Had he "really cleared" his airspace, he shouldn't have set up for the HP turns in the first place, right?... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #160 May 10, 2011 How often do you see existing rules enforced for all equally or at all? What makes anyone think that this new one being proposed will be any different? Human nature: If you just tell someone not to do something, they're likely to want to do it more, perhaps out of spite. If they get away with it without consequence, the authority of those that made the rule is dminished in their perspective. If you show and tell them what the consequences are, you'll get much further. Invariably, you'll come across those that refuse to learn, say they'll be safe, or insist they're good enough to pull it off: all without explaining how they'll do it. Congratulations!!! You've now identified the target group most of these rules were needed for. Adjust their attitudes appropriately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #161 May 10, 2011 Quote Quote Do most people who have HP canopies have the skills and judgement to swoop at the end of a mixed skydive safely every time, and do you believe it's possible for eveyone who swoops (not just specialist canopy pilots) to really clear their airspace before initiating a HP landing?" 10 mins ago.... watched an exceptionally experienced swooper come way too close to an AFF student that had wandered where they should not have been. Tandem vidiot sets up and begins his turn only to find the student below him (the student was well out of the normal holding area). Yes...he aborted and to his credit, actually landed well away from the main and alternate/swoop pond areas. Can/will everyone do this? Apparently not. Had he "really cleared" his airspace, he shouldn't have set up for the HP turns in the first place, right?... Have you asked him if he saw the student prior? Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #162 May 10, 2011 QuoteHow often do you see existing rules enforced for all equally or at all? What makes anyone think that this new one being proposed will be any different? Human nature: If you just tell someone not to do something, they're likely to want to do it more, perhaps out of spite. If they get away with it without consequence, the authority of those that made the rule is diminished in their perspective. If you show and tell them what the consequences are, you'll get much further. Invariably, you'll come across those that refuse to learn, say they'll be safe, or insist they're good enough to pull it off: all without explaining how they'll do it. Congratulations!!! You've now identified the target group most of these rules were needed for. Adjust their attitudes appropriately. Do YOU follow the existing rules? If not why not, and why are you so sure no one else will follow new rules? Here's an idea... How about we ALL agree there is a problem going on. Then we all agree that working toward a positive solution is in the best interest of everyone. THEN we look at any and all proposals to the problem's solution with a cost/benefit analysis...keeping in mind ANY cost of not killing someone has a lot of benefit. d00d you keep arguing against pretty much any ideas presented, ideas that all pretty much agree... significantly separate landing areas are a must, no speed inducing turns in the pattern should be discouraged. (yes, carving too) Novices like DocPop to Experts like JP...the consensus is the same. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #163 May 10, 2011 I've been lurking this thead for a while. Isn't it somtimes the case of vidiot's / AFFI's wanting to eat their cake and have it too? They participate in the paid jump, then want to add a swoop at the end. It has been said several times that all these problems would go away if swoopers had a separate load and or hop/pop pass. That way they would only injure each other, and that probably would not happen since they are following their own pattern. Is there a valid argument against swoopers doing whatever they want on their own load/pass? Is there any valid argument that swoopers should be allowed to mixed with AFF's, Tandems, FF,RW etc? For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #164 May 10, 2011 Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Quote What it proves is that people can and will be where they shouldn't. Again, do you really think the swoops/collisions of late were done even though a traffic hazard was seen?? If people did everything right every time, they wouldn't get kidded about a bunch of reserve rides bunched together. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #165 May 10, 2011 Is there a valid argument against swoopers doing whatever they want on their own load/pass? Is there any valid argument that swoopers should be allowed to mixed with AFF's, Tandems, FF,RW etc? ~No to both. Pretty easy when you break it down like that! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #166 May 10, 2011 QuoteIt has been said several times that all these problems would go away if swoopers had a separate load and or hop/pop pass. That's a big load of horseshit. That's what I have been fighting against. That exact mindset of "All we have to do is get swoopers away and we'll be safe." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 173 #167 May 10, 2011 Another landing gone bad in Chicago...Epidemic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Liemberg 0 #168 May 10, 2011 Quote Why? Because a GOOD tetrahedron (gotta google THAT!) is better. It is cheap and simple to build, it can be automated - hell, if you want you can build in a computer and a weather station making it react to ahead of time set parameters (wind exceeding so many knots for such and such duration) but a piece of board on a discarded wheel + half a rear axis MANDATES a landing direction from opening to landing - so there's at least one factor eliminated like for competition training cameraflyers that want to practice their downwind skillz before anyone else has set the pattern. I - for one - have seen a bunch of skydivers land in the 'wrong' direction, when you think of reducing speed @ touchdown as preliminary goal. Ain't scared, proud or shy but not knowing WHO the first man down will be, how can I trust him to choose the correct direction? Like: beforehand? Automation is the future in decision making. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,395 #169 May 10, 2011 >Because a GOOD tetrahedron (gotta google THAT!) is better. What happens if it swings halfway through a load landing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #170 May 10, 2011 Quote Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Quote What it proves is that people can and will be where they shouldn't. Again, do you really think the swoops/collisions of late were done even though a traffic hazard was seen?? If people did everything right every time, they wouldn't get kidded about a bunch of reserve rides bunched together. I should have said carve turn above. I do think that in the collisions in Perris and in Georgia (not enough details yet on turn heights for the others including the recon one Austrailia) that they did clear their airspace prior but with the old style of turn they did and the heights it's initiated, (toggle spiral and low riser hook respectively) there was not even an option to alter or abort. There is absolutely NO REASON for anyone to do spiral and/or low toggle/riser hooks for landing. Not only are they far more dangerous for themselves and others they are also extremely inefficient as far as swoop distance. These types of landings are the ones that need to be separated far more than someone doing a modern carve turn.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Liemberg 0 #171 May 10, 2011 I'll be on the ground anyway on that occasion. When the winds are gusting in such a way my GOOD tetrahedron swings so dangerously that people risk flying each other out of the sky, the weather is WAY to unstable to safely skydive. I'll sit this one out, if you don't mind. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DocPop 1 #172 May 10, 2011 Quote Automation is the future in decision making. Tell that to Sarah Connor "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,120 #173 May 10, 2011 All the problems won't go away; people can still fly into each other. And there's no way we can guarantee that they won't. However, by eliminating a blind turn and all that speed in traffic, we reduce the likelihood, while having a rule that's reasonably possible to implement and monitor (i.e. "wanna swoop, get your own pass"). If the rule is too difficult it's irrelevant. If it's too ineffective, it's stupid. A rule to have separate passes for bird-men would have nothing to do with landing pattern canopy collisions. Simply dictating that everyone be smarter really isn't the way to go. Everyone already thinks they're smarter. And above-average, especially if they're swooping. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #174 May 10, 2011 Quote Have you asked him if he saw the student prior? Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works. Yes, we spoke about it. No, he didn't see the student prior. And the student never saw him. His initial response was "WTF is was that guy doing way over there." Not everyone has nearly 10K jumps. Not everyone has the presence of mind and quick actions that this very experienced, military MFF instructor has. And not every dropzone has the kind of outs that we do. As it was...it was way too close for comfort. Proof-positive that luck plays a big role in our sport at times. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,395 #175 May 10, 2011 >I'll be on the ground anyway on that occasion. When the winds are gusting > in such a way my GOOD tetrahedron swings so dangerously that people >risk flying each other out of the sky, the weather is WAY to unstable to >safely skydive. That sounds like a good decision for you, and for many jumpers. It does, however, highlight the problems of a tetrahedron used on a day with shifting winds. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
