High WLs, Low Experience.. Where Are the S&TAs?

[MagicGuy 0]

hackish, I have to give you the benefit of the doubt, only because you have taken a canopy course (more than most people can say). I've take both of Scott's courses and I know that he doesn't mess around. If he thinks you are an accident waiting to happen, he'll tell you.

Just realize one thing, though, and I'll be happy if it's all that you get out of this thread. 1.25WL for most people with your experience is not a smart thing. It seems that canopy skills are what most people have the biggest problem with, and at 69 jumps, 1.25 is a high wingloading. I don't care what anyone says.

In realizing that, also know that any jumper that has less experience than you have will, of course, look up to you. You are more experienced and therefore, your opinion and advice are a big deal to them. If you go telling them about your 1.25WL, it will only give them the excuse to go and do the same thing. And in a lot of cases, that could potentially be bad news.

Take your Sabre2 on a nice downwinder one of these days.. it's good practice, if anything.

[Butters 0]

Quote

You're a friggin lightweight, I'm gonna try and land my wingsuit!

You're all friggin lightweights, I'm gonna try and land a pilot chute in tow!

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[MagicGuy 0]

Quote

Quote

You're a friggin lightweight, I'm gonna try and land my wingsuit!

You're all friggin lightweights, I'm gonna try and land a pilot chute in tow!

LOL!!!! Don't laugh - if I held a pilot chute and jumped off of a roof it might just slow me down enough to not hurt myself too bad.

[millertime24 8]

Quote

Quote

You're a friggin lightweight, I'm gonna try and land my wingsuit!

You're all friggin lightweights, I'm gonna try and land a pilot chute in tow!

You guys are both lightweights. I'm gonna land a model rocket parachute (about 1sqft). Lets see....that gives me a wingloading of 185:1. WHAT!!

Muff #5048

[virgin-burner 1]

good thinking there, but you guys just miss the BRASS..

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

[crashtested 0]

Quote

I take back my original post.

Any newbies out there, do yourselves a favor and buy the smallest canopy you can. Pull on your front risers.. hell, do 270s. Swooping is the coolest, anyways, and everyone knows that looking cool is what this sport is all about. Plus having a really small rig is pretty cool.. people will think that you have lots of experience. That's cool, too.

Have fun. I give up - sorry for expressing my concerns.

Sounds like fun I knew it was about looking cool..

No offence Mr magic, but you get hyped up about peoples wing loading but you may not know the whole story. As previously mentioned, in the uk at my home DZ your canopy size gets chosen for you pretty much during your training and through your progression, they see your capabillitys and acess you on your debrief, i still have chats with my aff instructor a year in to the sport asking me about my landings and what would i have done if a or b had happened. I still buy the beer in if i overshoot a landing area and i make sure that during another one of my rounds of beer i chat with the people who know there buisness, and learn somthing new. Not so long ago everyone still had rounds as reserves, before that they had rounds as mains. Did people flame the guys cutting holes in them so they could steer them?? (no internet so probally not) But you get the point.

Progression of the sport is on the side of the people getting into it, when you qualified did you have a skyhook on your rig i think not, zero p, cypress all are aids to help us stay in one peice, the new guys get to learn from other peoples mistakes and deaths (sadly)

But ranting about it on here won't help anything, Be more proactive and maybe the next time you jump and you see a 100 jump wonder steaming in, have a quiet word in his ear, give him some advice, offer to jump with him and show him a thing or 2.
I think that would be more useful...

BTW Maybe your cci just thought you were really shit under canopy, which is why he grounded you and your 150?? He probally knew better than us and you!!

[jdpml 0]

With the recent discussions of jumpers that have low jump numbers jumping canopies that are way too small for them, it makes me wonder - where are the S&TAs?!
The above was the original post.
Here is what I think.
Most of them are working to make sure people don't hurt. themselves under small canopies,hook turns ect
My question would be where is the common sense the jumper who is buying the stupidly small canopy should have ???
Where are there friends who care ???
S&ta's advise on this,licenced jumpers should take responsibility for there actions,not turn round and blame others for there stupidity.
I watched a jumper hook it in ,right in front of me six years ago and bust himself forever.
Three days before I had talked to him about his canopy flight,this was the second time in a week.
His FRIENDS told him he was doing ok,and said I was picking on him.
Talking to people involves them listening,good luck with that.
Paul.
While I agree that there are people out there jumping canopies they should not have,they are a minority,Remember there are a LOT of well trained,sensible low time jumpers who do listen and will have lots of fun in this sport for years to come I hope.
No one mentions them,there the one's we should be working with,hoping they become great mentors to other new jumpers.

[AllisonH 0]

Last time I discussed this with my S&TA, he agreed with me that there were a few people at our DZ jumping canopies that they were definitely not ready for, but he said something to the effect of "he was already jumping it, so what could I do?"

[kallend 1,666]

Quote

Cool!! The phone is dialing for me right now.. calling up Luigi C, I'm gonna see if he'll let me borrow his VX37. I'm a small guy so it's not that big of a deal for me to jump a small canopy.

And besides, kallend was jumping a Stiletto with 40 jumps and he is still alive. That must mean that I'll be OK, too.

No - your mileage may will vary. You have absolutely no idea of my prior background.

Let me know how it goes.

...

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

[MagicGuy 0]

Crash.. first of all I was never grounded. Secondly it was a 135 that I was just told I couldn't jump because it was, technically, a high performance canopy.

I'm ranting about it because I care about the sport, the progression of it, and preventing people from dying. Look at the fatality list. People are DYING in this sport, and the main reason they are dying is because of canopy related accidents. Sure, not all of them are because some newbie who wants to go fast and isn't happy with his 190, so he buys a Stiletto. But if I can rant about it and some new guy who is contemplating buying a small canopy sees it and says "hey, maybe this guy is onto something" - that makes me happy.

Oh by the way.. what you said about being proactive.. that's pretty much me in a nutshell. I am that guy. I'm trying to get people to learn not by seeing their friends die, but by opening up their ears (and minds) and listening to the people who have been in this sport for years and are still alive. Most of them have gotten here by taking things slow and not trying to be the next prodigy.

[MagicGuy 0]

Quote

My question would be where is the common sense the jumper who is buying the stupidly small canopy should have ???
Where are there friends who care ???

My point exactly. Is it bad that I am a friend that cares?

It's sad that some of the advice that people are giving on these forums is throwing that common sense right out of the window.

[billvon 2,462]

>why are these S&TAs allowing this stuff to happen?

Read the replies in this and other threads.

"One size doesn't fit all!"
"I just naturally progress faster."
"You wouldn't understand; you jump a Sabre instead of a high performance canopy."
"I stood up my last 10 landings - what are you talking about?"
"You want me to BORROW A CANOPY and DIE instead of jumping the Stiletto I am familiar with? And you call yourself an S+TA?"
"Why don't you support people instead of shitting on them?"

I was an S+TA for two years, and I just about gave up. I'd tell someone they should upsize, and they'd buy a smaller canopy. I'd tell them they couldn't jump it and they'd jump it anyway. I'd ground them and they'd go to Perris. I'd call Perris and they'd go to Eloy, proudly telling me "you're not an S+TA here, so you can't do anything about it!" Then they'd take out Airspeed at the mockup, and later break their pelvis.

After a few experiences like that, and hearing all the "Luigi said I was OK, and you suck compared to him" stuff I was tempted to just give up. Did I actually help keep anyone safe? I think I might have, which is why I didn't. But I can understand people who do.

[MagicGuy 0]

Well billvon, I praise you for doing that. I guess it all comes back to the fact that common sense is lacking in so many of these people. Noone thinks bad things can happen to them.

"I'm an adult, we are all adults, we should be able to make our own decisions". Unfortunately, skydiving seems to be an exception to that rule that some people just aren't willing to accept.

[leesamsiel 0]

Quote

Opinions?

You are too fixated on wingloading. The absolute size of your canopy is much more important. By studying vids of hundreds of jumpers landing w/ various size canopies and wingloadings in different wind conditions, it has become apparent that the absolute size of your canopy is much more important than W/L alone. Example: a 200sqft canopy W/L at 1.0 is going to be far more docile than a 125sqft canopy W/L at 1.0. If you happen to be a very light wt. person & experienced enough to jump a smaller canopy, you can easily prove this to yourself by jumping a fairly small canopy at W/L 1.0 then wear weights and jump the larger canopy also at W/L 1.0. Jumpers w/ highly wingloaded canopies go through the air faster but their angle of descent is no different than a less wingloaded jumper under the same canopy. The message here is: A small canopies' descent rate is fast over anyone's head.

This is an elementary fact of aerodynamics which applies as well to airplanes & is understood by few canopy pilots. Assume two GA planes with exactly the same wing surface & aerodynamics have an engine out at the same time side-by-side and one has 500 lbs more weight in it.....if they are both trimmed for max. glide, they will land at the same place, but the heavier one will land a bit sooner. This is equally true for canopy pilots.

I suggest you get a friend who has exactly the same size canopy as you but weighs ~40 lbs more than you. Do a 2-way. Open w/ plenty of separation to be safe but close enough that you can compare your canopies' speed and descent rates after opening. See what happens.

We have come to be preoccupied w/ wingloading more than absolute canopy size because you don't see many jumpers who are going to be lightly wingloaded with canopies under 125 sqft. How many people do you know that weight 100 lbs w/o gear? So we have come to think it is the W/L more than the actual size of the canopy. Very few jumpers under small canopies (<100 sqft) are NOT highly wingloaded. Thinking in reverse, a 250 lb jumper (maybe 275 out the door) under a 225 sqft rig is wingloaded at 1.2 but it won't be anything as "hot" as a 100 lb jumper under a 125 sqft canopy.

BTW it would be foolish to advise a small, very light girl (say...95 lbs) to jump a 125 sqft canopy early in her skydiving experience just because she would be wingloaded like a 200 lb male jumping a 260 sqft rig. The 125 would be way too much for her. Light women jumping very small Velo's should be just as experienced (read "expert") as 200 lb men jumping the same canopy.

LS

[billvon 2,462]

>The absolute size of your canopy is much more important.

While I agree the absolute size is important, wingloading dominates the issue. In general you are more likely to be OK by staying with a 1 to 1 wingloading limit until X jumps than by staying with a 170 no matter what your weight. A 170 for a 230lb guy is a VERY aggressive wingloading for a new jumper; it may be way too light for a 95lb woman.

But as you mention, both are definitely issues. Brian Germain's chart takes both into account; it's a good guide.

[crashtested 0]

I was thinking about your post and there are a lot of valid points here.

It was intresting to read the point on relative size to canopy and the obsession with WL, and stuff to the like.

I have been doing a little research into the deaths last year caused by low turns and inexperianced canopy flyers.

The vast majority ( and when i say vast i'm talking 95%, at least) of deaths were people with 300 - 600 jumps to there names, on a variety of rigs (but genraly sub 150)

It seems that once you get your C licence that people stop worrying about your rig selection, which is strange as these people seem to be dying more than anyone else.

When i have travelled to other DZ's i always get questioned about my experiance and get a proper debrief about landing areas and hazzards, as i am low jump numbers with high wing loading. whilst my other friends get in to the plane and just jump. who are high jump numberd very high wing loading.?!?

It seems the problem is that we expect people with 300 or more jumps to know what there doing, but it seems they are the ones making bad choices.

What do we as a community want from this sport, self regualtion seems to work to a point. but like with anything anyone can get a licence, just show your best for 1 minute and whoop heres your c licence or your fs2.
In motorcycling anyone can buy a 1000 cc fireblade with only 1 days driving experiance, they are high risk, unless they take it easy and dont make the wrong choices. a lot of ifs and buts!?

Skydiving is the same, you see somone with all the right gear do you question there experiance or do you think, he's been around for a few years he'll be ok.

He probally will be ok, unless he has to make a choice of turning low or landing a down winder.
Dead or bruised!!

This sport for some is about being free and being allowed to do what ever they please, for others it is about a community of people who care about each other and take an intrest in there choices.
For the newer guys, well we're just seeing where we can fit in. and what angle we want to take from it.

If the regulations step up maybe will leave and take up base, or maybe will just practice our skills untill we are good enough to jump at any time with any rig.

If you want to see less deaths everyone has to be on board and make a call.

At 200 jumps to continue you need to take a jump course.
Or to be above a 1.5 wing loading you need to take a pass or fail exam. or you stick with what you've got.

But as somone rightly said, if one Dz won't take my money on my 1.6 wingloading another 4 will take the pepsi challange.

[hackish 8]

Quote

In realizing that, also know that any jumper that has less experience than you have will, of course, look up to you. You are more experienced and therefore, your opinion and advice are a big deal to them. If you go telling them about your 1.25WL, it will only give them the excuse to go and do the same thing. And in a lot of cases, that could potentially be bad news.

This is a very good and valid point. Last year I found myself thinking that another student jumper was downsizing too fast because he jumped on the sabre 210 as soon as he finished his classic progression. Now he ordered a 170 but at a point I had to turn things around and realize he's following the exact same progression as me and at similar jump numbers.

Some years in the future I'd like to become an instructor but how does an instructor come up with the necessary guidance to keep their students reasonably safe? A judgment call I suppose and even those are open to errors.

Finally on a point billvon brought up. Skydivers tend to be an aggressive bunch of type A personalities. My better half and I have been talking about these things for some time as she's into psychology. I think for those who must make the decision on a jumper going or not it matters how they are told they can or can't jump. Ever try to tell a drunk he's not OK to drive? Sometimes I think the same principles at the DZ can apply.

-Michael

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Ever try to tell a drunk he's not OK to drive? Sometimes I think the same principles at the DZ can apply

No, a drunk is argumentative because they are impaired, and in turn cannot make good choices.

A jumper at the DZ who intentionally does the opposite of what others suggest is not impaired, they're just dickhead.

There's a big difference.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

Some years in the future I'd like to become an instructor but how does an instructor come up with the necessary guidance to keep their students reasonably safe? A judgment call I suppose and even those are open to errors.

imho, a good instructor listens to what the experts say and forms the advice that they give around that. A good instructor understands that each person has a different risk tolerance level and that different dz's have different weather and landing conditions, but also understands that shit happens and therefore tailors their gear advice toward survival in a worst case situation instead of what a jumper can probably land just fine 95% of the time.

An instructional rating is given because someone shows that they can fly and teach basic skydiving skills, not because they have knowledge about anything other than basic skydiving skills.

Maybe someday the parachuting organizations in North America will realize that part of why we don't retain new jumpers could be that they are told by their "instructors" to buy canopies that they either a) hurt themselves under or b) are so scared of that they quit the sport. At that point, perhaps we'll see some enforceable guidelines on wingloadings (so new jumpers know what they can and can't jump, regardless of which dz they are at) and canopy coach ratings and canopy control courses (so we are all getting the same information from people who should know something about the subject).

[Hausse 0]

To me it seems like everybody here is very concerned about keeping other people safe that obviously don't want to be safe. If it was safety first for them, they'd be at the bowling ally and not jumping out of a plane.

[Baksteen 84]

I think the point of this thread (andf other threads / posts like it) is that people who do not want to be safe should *be* at the bowling alley.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Hausse 0]

My post was intended to show that all the people jumping out of planes are for sure not safety first otherwise they would be at the bowling alley.
When you discuss WL it seems to be mostly discussing about the decision how much people are willing to risk and just because they are willing to risk more than you do doesn't mean they are wrong in any way.

[RevJim 0]

Quote

I think the point of this thread (andf other threads / posts like it) is that people who do not want to be safe should *be* at the bowling alley.

Actually, no. The point of this thread is safety, period, as was pointed out to me in a pm.

Anyone can screw up, at any time, no matter the experience. I was at Dublin last year and witnessed Danny's and Bob's "incident" 1st hand. This was a highly experienced jumper screwing up. Take that kind of responsibility and pass it down to a low timer, in canopy traffic, and the results can quickly become catastrophic.

A person that is not safe for themselves is not safe for those in the air around them either. As this very knowledgable person said to me in that pm, and I agree, if we can't stop them, keep them away from me. I'll easily back out of the load also.

Edited to add:
How many DZO's would continue to allow this if all the other jumpers refused to get on a load with the jumper that was, obvious to everyone but he/she, in over their head?

It's your life, live it!
Karma
RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1

[Baksteen 84]

I don't know...

I love to skydive, but I like to do it as safely as practical. More chance of doing it again

Quote

just because they are willing to risk more than you do doesn't mean they are wrong in any way.

Last weekend I downsized from a sabre1 210 to a sabre1 190. Basically same config, only difference being 20 sq.ft less fabric and 0.1 more WL. I felt I was "willing to risk" a smaller canopy.
I was amazed by the difference in response and handling I got. I had expected some difference, obviously, but since the canopy is still so large...

There's so much stuff I don't know yet, how can I make a worthy risk assesment all by myself?

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Hausse 0]

Quote

I don't know...

I love to skydive, but I like to do it as safely as practical. More chance of doing it again

Quote

I suppose the people that are flying high WL at low jump numbers they just think that the increased risk of going in is worth having more fun under a faster canopy. Why would I be interested in prohibiting them to do so?

Quote

Quote

just because they are willing to risk more than you do doesn't mean they are wrong in any way.

Last weekend I downsized from a sabre1 210 to a sabre1 190. Basically same config, only difference being 20 sq.ft less fabric and 0.1 more WL. I felt I was "willing to risk" a smaller canopy.
I was amazed by the difference in response and handling I got. I had expected some difference, obviously, but since the canopy is still so large...

There's so much stuff I don't know yet, how can I make a worthy risk assesment all by myself?

I completely agree that the people that think they are safe (no matter how big the canopy they fly is) are just not very educated about the sport itself. But I personally think the people that assume they are perfectly safe under a huge canopy are at least as dangerous as those that know how high their risk is under a small one.