billvon 2,400
Or a jumper who can drive a few hours and be at a DZ that's 1000 feet higher, on a day that's 20 degrees warmer. Suddenly that canopy they downsized to, that they are OK on provided they're really careful, is way more than they can handle.
nigel99 144
QuoteQuoteQuoteFor your interest I suggest you dig out the downsizing checklist here on dz.com
Attached are the Dutch Rules For Canopy choice. You might want to look though it.
Sparky
Sparky, after reading through the document it would seem that these are definitely rules and not a certain manufacturer's guidelines. Who is responsible for enforcing the rules and what is the penalty for someone who doesn't adhere to them?
Those rules are from the Netherlands and I am guessing it is their equivalent of the USPA. We have a couple of dutch posters here and they have mentioned the more conservative approach to canopy choice a few times.
For an interesting read there is also the British Parachute Association Canopy progression manual(s).
While I originally mentioned PD's categories, it is not their place to "regulate" the sport. However I do feel that manufacturers could provide more clarity.
nigel99 144
QuoteIs there a reason that you cannot establish for yourself a set of goals to achieve on your way to becoming a proficient canopy pilot?
USPA is US. Start a grassroots movement to support sane canopy progressions.
The folks who lead USPA now mostly came from a time when you needed to work a lot of stuff out on your own. Why put it on them?
If you think that guidelines are too vague, work on refining them.
You don't have to be the expert to launch the effort. Talk to the folks that appear to know, and write down what they say. When you have something that is better than what we have now, submit of for review and refinement.
If you really want to see it happen, MAKE it happen.
Very good advice Paul. I am lucky in that where I jump I have access to a number of very good people. I am currently soaking up information and learning like a sponge.
I am involved in voluntary industry committees, in my line of work (not skydiving related). I realise how much work and commitment it takes. So the people who contribute within the USPA have my respect. I do think that the USPA is best positioned to assist in the change of culture. I like the fact that accuracy is a requirement for both the B and C license, but it could start to encompass alot more detail.
When we had the accuracy competition on the Farm recently, Popsjumper sat down and reviewed canopy flight with all of us. Nothing that he covered was not part of a first jump course, and yet every single one of us went out after the review and practiced the techniques mentioned. There were people with 180 jumps involved.
Ron 7
Quote
I think it should be the USPA it is not the manufacturers job to self regulate.
Maybe, but the fact is the manufacturer has the right as well....
How many lawsuits are brought against the USPA vs. PD? And in the end, who knows its products best, the USPA or the people that tested and designed the product?
QuoteQuote
There is a common misconception that you need to "downsize for safety".
Not disagreeing with you, just adding that I think forward penetration is often misused as an excuse to downsize.
Skydivers need to think locally...a jumper on a square with a 1:1 loading at a DZ with 15 - 20mph and surrounded by soy beans is one thing...going backwards and landing off is not likely to be a big deal. That same jumper and conditions at a DZ surrounded by trees, buildings, powerlines, and bull fields with only a couple of outs is where more penetration can be helpful to give the jumper more options of where they can land.
....and there is always the option to stay on the ground.
People often discuss the merits of downsizing or not, but rarely do I see it summed up as "a smaller canopy gives the pilot a smaller margin for error". To me that is what it comes down to. Whether we are talking about being able to fly a precise pattern, get enough landing separation or to survive a low turn or a no-flare landing, it's all going to be easier on a larger, slower canopy.
Just this weekend I saw a whole bunch of landings where jumpers flared asymmetrically. No great problem on a Navigator loaded at 0.75, but potentially career ending on a Velocity @ 2.7.
Smaller canopies can be more fun, but they bite much harder and faster.
Ron 7
Quote1. If I find myself in a bad spot with a series of very confined outs, I don't see how a larger canopy would help me other than keeping me aloft for a little while longer. While that may be enough to get me out of the situation,
Would you rather hit a tree at 30 MPH, or 3MPH? A larger canopy will have both a slower fwd speed and a slower rate of descent.
Quoteit may be enough to keep me from landing because the canopy keeps flying instead of sinking into my landing area of choice..
This is not how canopies work. A bigger canopy will have less of a fwd speed and is MUCH better suited to a steep descent angle. For example, look at an accuracy canopy... Do they jump a big canopy, or a small one? In a tight area, FWD speed is bad and angle of approach is important.
Which would you rather land in a tight area?
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCkBtN6tVD4
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWFBVzDWk_o&NR=1
QuoteI'm also a dumbass for not checking the spot before I jumped
Uh, well you could also have been wrong on the spot. You could also have been in an RW jump and in the back of the plane unable to check the spot. Fact is that with 40 jumps you may not have landed off YET, but you WILL land off at some point.
Quote2. If I'm flying my simple pattern and a pilot almost flies into me, my canopy has nothing to do with the situation, it's my lack of heads up
Yes, but the speed of a canopy requires your brain to be faster than the canopy.
QuoteAn initial assessment of the situation on the ground, made with the help of instructors/coaches I trust, will help to prevent me from ending up in the worst case scenarios.
It will not prevent it.... It will reduce it. They call it "unforeseen" for a reason. Unless you are always 100% perfect, then reality happens.
Two simple questions. Of all the people that die each year skydiving.... How many of them thought they made choices that would kill them, or thought they didn't have the skills needed to survive the jump?
No one plans on dying, yet each year people die.
2. What makes you different than them?
Ron 7
QuoteSkydivers need to think locally...a jumper on a square with a 1:1 loading at a DZ with 15 - 20mph and surrounded by soy beans is one thing...going backwards and landing off is not likely to be a big deal. That same jumper and conditions at a DZ surrounded by trees, buildings, powerlines, and bull fields with only a couple of outs is where more penetration can be helpful to give the jumper more options of where they can land.
The jumper that is in a bad area needs to stay on the ground, not get a higher performance canopy.
Jumpah 0
QuoteQuoteSkydivers need to think locally...a jumper on a square with a 1:1 loading at a DZ with 15 - 20mph and surrounded by soy beans is one thing...going backwards and landing off is not likely to be a big deal. That same jumper and conditions at a DZ surrounded by trees, buildings, powerlines, and bull fields with only a couple of outs is where more penetration can be helpful to give the jumper more options of where they can land.
The jumper that is in a bad area needs to stay on the ground, not get a higher performance canopy.
Not necessarily...someone with 1,000 jumps is likely capable of a downsize for this sort of situation.
bwilling 0
Quote1. If I find myself in a bad spot with a series of very confined outs, I don't see how a larger canopy would help me other than keeping me aloft for a little while longer.
You need canopy coaching. Ever seen classic accuracy? They all jump big, big F-111 7 cell canopies. Want to know why? Because that's the absolute best combination for steep approaches into tight areas. Those guys can hit a 5cm target over and over!
You've obviously never landed a canopy in deep deep brakes in a very tight area, or you would understand why a larger parachute is desirable in that circumstance!
"If all you ever do is all you ever did, then all you'll ever get is all you ever got."
Not disagreeing with you, just adding that I think forward penetration is often misused as an excuse to downsize.
Skydivers need to think locally...a jumper on a square with a 1:1 loading at a DZ with 15 - 20mph and surrounded by soy beans is one thing...going backwards and landing off is not likely to be a big deal. That same jumper and conditions at a DZ surrounded by trees, buildings, powerlines, and bull fields with only a couple of outs is where more penetration can be helpful to give the jumper more options of where they can land.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites