Responsibility in the landing pattern

[billvon 2,463]

>if someone else is forced to change their pattern because of your
>maneuver, you did not clear your airspace.

Correct. If a jumper 1000 feet above you sees you set up as if you are landing north, then you do a 180 and force him to change his landing pattern, then you have caused a problem.

>EVERYONE should be clearing their airspace EVERYTIME they make
> any maneuver under canopy. There is no tower to cross check you in
>skydiving,

As I'm sure you are aware, there is no tower for traffic at most small airports. To deal with this, people fly very specific patterns that include all left turns (or right turns) and specifically exclude turns that violate the pattern. Seems to work well.

>this developing 'witch hunt' against swoopers is ridiculous.. no matter
> what your approach method, if you fail to leave adequate room for
> your intended maneuver (and possible outs, what! you dont check
> your outs?? shame on you) you are wrong... period..

Agreed. And if you do a HP landing that involves more than a 90 degree turn in a busy pattern you are also wrong - period.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Correct. If a jumper 1000 feet above you sees you set up as if you are landing north, then you do a 180 and force him to change his landing pattern, then you have caused a problem.

I keep seeing refernces to this, and am wondering how this ouwld be possible.

Lets say I'm going to do a 180 for my landing, I'll follow roughly the same downwind leg as everyone else, and will simply combine my base and final turns into one manuver. The fact remains that my pattern is identical to everyone elses up to my 180. How is a jumper at 1k going to be confused by this?

Lets say I throw a 180 at 500ft. What altitude would expect to see a non-swooper turning onto their base leg? Pretty damn close to 500 ft. Close enough that a jumper at 1k, looking down on the pattern couldn't tell the difference. By the time that jumper sees me combine my base and final turns into one, within 7 or 8 seconds, I'm swooping on the deck, and shutting it down, landing in the same direction as everyone else, after following the same pattern as everyone else.

How does that confuse another jumper? How would that jumper have to change their planse based on that scenario?

For the record, there is a problem with the landing patterns, and the standards within that pattern. I'm not sure of how to solve it, but it's there.

I swoop in the pattern at my home DZ, but I know all the jumpers on the load, pull high enough to account for all the camopies before I swoop, and land in a swooper area. When I'm away from home, I pull even higher, and land last.

[goose491 0]

Quote

>if someone else is forced to change their pattern because of your
>maneuver, you did not clear your airspace.

Correct. If a jumper 1000 feet above you sees you set up as if you are landing north, then you do a 180 and force him to change his landing pattern, then you have caused a problem.

I have to disagree with you here Bill. That person 1000 feet above you should have a head on their shoulders too. Lower man has right of way and while that doesn't mean he/she can become erratic and unpredictable.... Are we not at risk of making this a "Save me from myself" type problem when we tell someone 1000feet above you they don't have to understand the possibilities?

Doing a 180 is fine providing of course, you are not cutting anyone off. If a jumper is some 1000 feet above you and sees you flying North... he/she may be thinking one of three things:

1) this person is on final and landing North, or
2) this person is going to do a turn to base and then a turn to final and land South, or
3) this person is going to do a 180 and land South

The lower canopy has right of way. If I'm 1000 feet above you, you are flying North and I can't decipher if you are going to be landing that way or turning around... I think I will need to speak to a few canopy coaches about my lack of skill in deciphering what goes on in a pattern on any given day.

I do 180 carves on the fronts for my landings. I'm in no way a skygod or whatever but If I do one and then someone lands later telling me: "I was 1000 feet above you and I thought you were landing one way and you surprised me by turning around and landing the other.".... I will refer them to a coach to watch a few more loads land. There is no way someone 1000 ft above me should not understand what is about to take place given where I initiate my 180.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[wmw999 2,166]

What if instead of 1000 feet up, they're 400 feet above you and several hundred feet away? Let's say you're the first person down, setting the landing direction.

Now all of a sudden that 180/270/540/whatever does become confusing. Really. Because, well, by 400 feet above you, I'm getting pretty committed, and your greater-than-expected turn radius needs to be taken into account.

Nope, I don't know everyone's canopy that's below me. Particularly not when I'm at some other DZ, or on our annual NASA demo (which is where this exact scenario happened).

Wendy W.

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)

[goose491 0]

Quote

What if instead of 1000 feet up, they're 400 feet above you and several hundred feet away? Let's say you're the first person down, setting the landing direction.

Now all of a sudden that 180/270/540/whatever does become confusing. Really. Because, well, by 400 feet above you, I'm getting pretty committed, and your greater-than-expected turn radius needs to be taken into account.

Nope, I don't know everyone's canopy that's below me. Particularly not when I'm at some other DZ, or on our annual NASA demo (which is where this exact scenario happened).

Wendy W.

At our DZ we have a bit of a theory which goes "Follow the first jumper down... but don't be an idioT!!!!"

In other words, the first jumper down is in no way responsible for YOU. If you're 400 feet above me instead of 1000... well listen, that should make it even easier to see that I'm preparing for a 180 or two more 90s because it's easier to see that I'm too high to call this a final... and that I'm at the other end of the landing area at some 450ft plus. You mentioned a "greater than expected turn radius" but you didn't address this extra altitude. What is this person doing here and this high if not preparing to turn around and land the other way?

If I'm setting up for a 180, I'm facing downwind and you are following me and thinking that I'm on final, then you are following blindly. You have not considered that you will be landing downwind and off given your position.

Doesn't this make some sense?

Follow the first jumper down does not mean stop thinking about how to land safely and become a sheep. What if the first guy down wants to do a downwinder? Not to say it's the best decision he/she could be making on the spot, having not told the rest of the load beforehand... but when you collide with him, all that goes out the window... you are both losers.

Everyone needs to THINK about what's going on and what every canopy in the pattern looks to be doing. Again, if I mistake someone setting up for a 180 as someone on Final... I have some issues to address before I put myself in traffic again.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[goose491 0]

Hey Wendy and Bill,

I hope my posts do not come off the wrong way. I'm starting to wonder if I was missing something. Please humor me a moment and see if we're on the same page.

Your intention is to do a 180 prior to landing. Your turns to base and final are to be done in one continuous motion. You are nearing the end of your downwind leg. You are at say 500ft. I am above and behind you.

Given the situation I have described, if I am not aware that you are still planning to turn yourself around, do I not have some awareness issues deciphering what's going on? Should it not be expected of me to understand that you shouldn't be where you are (if your plan is to land in the direction you are now facing)? And if I am convinced that you are on final, shouldn't I see that given your current position, you will be landing off? And downwind? Should I not then, decide it's a bad idea to simply follow you and not make plans of my own to get myself turned around... into wind and onto the landing area?

Please let me know what you think. I myself do a 180 carve on the fronts before landing and I don't see how this could confuse someone above me. I would, of course, like to understand fully, how my actions could cause someone jeopardy.

Nick

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[Orange1 0]

Quote

If you're 400 feet above me instead of 1000... well listen, that should make it even easier to see that I'm preparing for a 180 or two more 90s because it's easier to see that I'm too high to call this a final... and that I'm at the other end of the landing area at some 450ft plus. You mentioned a "greater than expected turn radius" but you didn't address this extra altitude. What is this person doing here and this high if not preparing to turn around and land the other way?

If I'm setting up for a 180, I'm facing downwind and you are following me and thinking that I'm on final, then you are following blindly. You have not considered that you will be landing downwind and off given your position.

Doesn't this make some sense?

Probably... as long as you're not at a DZ where newbies land in the same area; from other threads here there are DZs where that happens. And a lightly loaded student on the same load as you (and probably pulling higher) is almost certain to be following you down, and may not have enough experience to figure out what you've said.

Just my $0.02.

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[goose491 0]

Quote

Probably... as long as you're not at a DZ where newbies land in the same area; from other threads here there are DZs where that happens.

At skydive burnaby, we have a twin Otter dropping 22 jumpers and we are all landing in the same area. Same thing applies though, a 180 will be initiated only a slight bit lower than the two 90s this student will should be anticipating when they find themselves above and behind you.

Quote

And a lightly loaded student on the same load as you (and probably pulling higher) is almost certain to be following you down, and may not have enough experience to figure out what you've said.

Ah, well there I see an issue. I see what you are saying... But if that is the case, do we point our finger at the guy doing 180s or do we talk to the one that took that lightly loaded student off of radio?

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[Orange1 0]

Quote

Ah, well there I see an issue. I see what you are saying... But if that is the case, do we point our finger at the guy doing 180s or do we talk to the one that took that lightly loaded student off of radio?

At the DZ i started jumping we only got assistance (bats) on the first jump, and then we were on our own - though I never saw anyone swoop in the general landing area so I guess it may be a matter of DZ policy. All I was really trying to point out is that what may seem obvious to an experienced jumper is not always obvious to a novice!

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[Pendejo 0]

What is (bats)?

Pendejo

He who swoops the ditch and does not get out buys the BEER!!

[mnealtx 0]

paddles - visual signals rather than radio...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Pendejo 0]

Makes sense.... Guess I was having a South Carolina moment.... LOL

Thanks!

Pendejo

He who swoops the ditch and does not get out buys the BEER!!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Lets say I'm going to do a 180 for my landing, I'll follow roughly the same downwind leg as everyone else, and will simply combine my base and final turns into one manuver. The fact remains that my pattern is identical to everyone elses up to my 180. How is a jumper at 1k going to be confused by this?

Don't know about 1k, but at 2k I'm looking down on a mess. It's especially bad when winds are l/v and people aren't following any conventions on landing direction. The root problem is the lack of consistency, but the 180s add to it. There is no discernable pattern to follow. As Wendy writes, more of a problem at unfamiliar locales.

[Salsa_John 0]

During the July 4th boogie at Lake Wales (Great Boogie) there were continual landings in all directions. It made things interesting.

Great Post!

"You did what?!?!"

MUFF #3722, TDSM #72, Orfun #26, Nachos Rodriguez

[billvon 2,463]

>I have to disagree with you here Bill. That person 1000 feet above
>you should have a head on their shoulders too.

And a smart jumper will set up his pattern to match the pattern the first jumper is flying (at least at a DZ with no set rule, or with a first-jumper-down-sets-direction rule.) If you fly your pattern so as to give a false impression that you are landing north, then you turn low and land south, you are forcing that person (and all the people following _him_) to change their patterns very suddenly. This leads to collisions.

>Lower man has right of way and while that doesn't mean he/she can
> become erratic and unpredictable....

Turning onto final and then, at 400 feet, snapping a 180 is (IMO) being erratic and unpredictable. A pattern with 90 degree turns to base and final is predictable; a pattern of essentially random 90's, 180's and/or 270's is not.

>The lower canopy has right of way. If I'm 1000 feet above you, you
> are flying North and I can't decipher if you are going to be landing
> that way or turning around... I think I will need to speak to a few
> canopy coaches about my lack of skill in deciphering what goes on
> in a pattern on any given day.

What signal do you give someone above you to tell them that you are about to snap a 180? 21 other people above you, from altitudes from 200 to 1000 feet above you, may be setting up their pattern assuming you are flying a standard pattern. If you snap a 180, they all have to change. They will likely all be able to do that, but again, having everyone change their planned pattern by 180 degrees can lead to close calls and collisions.

>I do 180 carves on the fronts for my landings. I'm in no way a
> skygod or whatever but If I do one and then someone lands later
> telling me: "I was 1000 feet above you and I thought you were
> landing one way and you surprised me by turning around and
> landing the other.".... I will refer them to a coach to watch a few
> more loads land.

That would come off like someone with an incredible skygod complex; I hope you don't do that in the real world. "You don't have the skill to handle my unpredictable behavior." And what's this 1000 feet thing? What about someone 200 feet above you? How is he going to have enough time/altitude to switch his pattern 180 degrees? In most situations, unless you pull at 1200 feet, you're not going to have people 1000 feet above you.

>There is no way someone 1000 ft above me should not understand
> what is about to take place given where I initiate my 180.

Again, what signal do you give? A good pattern is understood by all jumpers by looking at it. If you do 180's, 270's or 360's, it becomes a guessing game for everyone above you.

[nate_1979 9]

I'm not seeing the issue with 180s, like mentioned here a 180 is just two 90s combined, if you do a left hand 180 in a left hand pattern, you have not really disrupted the "landing pattern", your first leg is the same, your just skipping the second leg and it should be very obvious very quick what's going on.. What does throw people off is the 270s, that's what screws me up when I'm trying to figure out which way we are gonna land.

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[GreenLight 5]

Quote

Follow the first jumper down... but don't be an idioT!!!!"

Never.... First person down should not be setting the pattern for a downwind landing... That is never acceptable when there is a choice... To do so in a common landing area is just plain selfish and dangerous to others.

Green Light
"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there."
"Your statement answered your question."

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

I'm not seeing the issue with 180s, like mentioned here a 180 is just two 90s combined,

If you really believe that you need some canopy coaching. How much altitude will you lose in 2 90's as opposed to a carving 180?

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[billvon 2,463]

>I'm not seeing the issue with 180s, like mentioned here a 180 is just two 90s combined . . .

If the 180 in question is a wide, slow turn from the downwind leg to base to final it's not a big deal. If you fly directly over the landing area and do a snap 180, then you can't tell whether that person is flying final or downwind - and one of the purposes of a pattern is to show explicitly what everyone is doing. In the example I gave above, a snap 180 can result in a dozen people having to switch landing directions at a very low altitude.

[nate_1979 9]

I guess I've usually just been able to tell if someone is planning a 180, ... they tend to be less off center of the landing spot if they are gonna whip a 180, ... those of us who do two 90deg turns tend to be way off center of the landing area as we setup the pattern. From my limited experience, 180's are predictable.

edited to add: I see the point now, after reading again, since sometimes altitude is hard to see from above..

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[chachi 0]

my $0.02

swooping and normal landing should be in completely separate areas of the landing area. if your dz has not yet segregated the two completely different styles of landing you should preasure your dzo's. regardless of what any of you guys do if they are together accident potential is high. speak with your dzo's immediately.

180's - are a weird setup and most people do a 180 by coming flying down the flight line and performing the turn. this is completely wrong for two reasons. first, judging your height accurately while cruising downwind leaves you in a bad position to be low or high at your initiation point. this usually results in stupid maneuvers to get to the correct height. secondly, you mow down the middle of the landing area and you are very unpredictable. if you do 180's you should be coming at a crosswind the same as a 270 approach and turning a 90 downwind right before you perform your 180. this will make your pattern more predictable, your initiation point more accurate, and your control over your swoop much safer.

the problem is we now have two distinctly different groups trying to share the air. on one hand people fly larger more docile canopies and think that the swoopers are making it dangerous. well, let me tell you - most of the people flying these larger canopies thinking they are being safe rarely fly patterns, regularily sashay on final, and are generally as much of a danger as swoopers. then you have the swoopers that are progressive, fast, and appear to be show offs. most get coaching, fly predictable patterns, and are very in control. but then again - in this part you have lots of idiots too.

we need to separate these two types of pilots. we need to live together safely. this comes from educating yourselves and your friends, coaching, knowing your canopy, flying predicatble patterns, discussions on loads, and generally being constanly aware.

SWOOPERS ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT NEED CANOPY COACHING - EVERYONE DOES if you disagree with this statement you are part of the problem, then again i know few people that get specific canopy coaching so I know there is just a bunch of little time bombs waiting to go off.

[Designer 0]

Nice post old man.I see plenty of safely done 270 landings at our DZ.Doesn't mean I'm gonna go out and try 1.I'm always sticking to my landing left hand pattern with just a final 90 toggle turn so everything is always in my sight.

[beergood 0]

I think part of the blame is on the DZ. Most are building swoop ponds right in front of manifest or in the main landing area. Building the pond away from the main landing area would solve some of the problems. I know one DZ out west built their pond a great distance from the main landing area with bleachers. I think this is the trend we need to look at and go with. However, all those that want to jump on the slam the swooper band wagon I cant tell you how many times I have watched people on larger canopies come floating in fixated on landing in 400 different directions cutting people off. So lets becareful how quick we judge and accuse swoopers of being the reason for canopy traffic issues. There are many constructive things we can learn without slamming one another

[Scrumpot 1]

Careful. That's exactly what I had thought too, with my scenario as posted in my post made from just this weekend HERE.

The point is, that unless the landing areas are separated, and is in fact rather a fully single, yet MIXED-USE LZ, oft times Nate, you can just throw "predictability" unfortunately, entirely out the window!

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

cant tell you how many times I have watched people on larger canopies come floating in fixated on landing in 400 different directions cutting people off.

I was just thinking, how can someone on a big slow canopy do anything to cut off someone on a H/P pocket rocket? They fly to slow to get in front and descend to slow to get below. They can't overrun you from behind. If you are good enough to do 270's in traffic, why not just go around them?

How does one person fixate on 400 different directions? Isn’t that an oxymoron?

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals