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

[MagicGuy 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?!

Maybe my opinions are tainted, or maybe I just got lucky and 'grew up' at a DZ where high wingloadings are not even an option for lower experience people. I weigh 150lbs with gear on. When I showed up with a 135 at 100 jumps, I basically got told "sorry, but no way you are jumping that". This is after getting through AFF with no failures. After standing up, literally, EVERY landing up to that point (100 jumps). In the words of some of the recent posters, I could've been called a "natural". My wingloading on that 135 would've been 1.1 something.

Sure, a 135 is a small canopy regardless. But these jumpers are coming on here and talking about their 1.3 wingloadings when they have between 100-200 jumps. Spectre 170s with 12 jumps?!?

I have 400 jumps. I have taken 2 canopy courses. I have been swooping for 200 jumps and getting coached by local guys. I've taken a coach course. I've done CReW, tons and tons of hop and pops and high pulls to focus on canopy control. I placed 3rd place in an accuracy competition. I have only not stood up 2 landings ever. My wingloading is barely at 1.1. (Sorry to use myself as an example)

So my question is.. why are these S&TAs allowing this stuff to happen? With the majority of fatalities and injuries resulting from canopy incidents and that number not really going down much, you would think that the S&TAs would be enforcing wingloadings a lot more with these lower experience jumpers. Is this acceptable?

Sorry for ranting, but as a person who loves this sport more than anything, I hate seeing this shit. Allowing someone with low experience to get away with high wingloadings is just setting them up for rapid downsizing and who knows what else in the future. Not to mention that it is a completely preventable thing.

Opinions?

[VTmotoMike08 0]

Well, here are my thoughts, whatever they are worth.

The S&TA is more likely to say something if they are at the only DZ in the area. If someone gets an earful from the S&TA and there is another DZ right down the road, then see ya! They will be off to where they can do as they please. Perhaps the DZO does not want to drive people away and lose money so they tell the S&TA to go easy on people.

But if they are the only DZ with 200 miles, then the jumper in question just might decide that it is not worth the drive to jump their small canopy and stick with a bigger one. Obviously, how much the jumper enjoys flying a particular canopy vs other disciplines will come into play.

There are many aspects to your post but that was just the most obvious one to me.

[diablopilot 2]

I find there are two types of S&TA. Those that care and those that don't.

Of those that care, many are hamstrung by the DZ's they jump or work at, and are not able to be as effective as they'd hope.

It's a tough job, especially when a call you have to make makes waves at the DZ you jump at.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[hackish 8]

Dunno. I'm 1.25 on a sabre2 170. Done about 30 jumps on it so far. I might even try a 150 by the end of next year but I'll stick to the 170 for a long time yet. It feels conservative to me but definitely isn't according to your evaluation.

Some feel I'm natural at it too but I don't - I just happen to really enjoy flying the 170. There are lots of things for me to work on. Some people are better at things than others so I don't think a 1 size fits all formula is good for everything here.

-Michael

[Joellercoaster 6]

Hackish, there's a couple of things about your post (and many others like it) that keep sticking in my mind, so here goes. This isn't personally directed at you, please don't take it as such.

One is the word "natural". Whether or not you think you're a natural is not relevant. Whether or not you are a natural is not relevant. The fact is that people who make it their major business to think about these things think that certain loadings, canopy planforms and sizes are just plain not appropriate for low-time jumpers. At all.

The other thing is the word "conservative". With all due respect, what the hell do you know? People at our level (and believe me, you and I are at the same level, think about that for a second) don't know what we don't know. We haven't accumulated enough landings to know what can happen, and what characteristics we're going to need to get ourselves out of that situation.

There's one more thing not in your post that gets me a little too, and it's related to the first thing: Often the Natural Skills kids will say, the locals at my dropzone have loads of jumps, they've seen my landings and they think I'll be fine on my Sabre 135. Do those locals spend their entire lives teaching canopy skills all over the world? Do those locals devote hours of study to the accident rates? Then why would you take their advice over Brian Germain's DO NOT EXCEED limits? Because they're watched you land?

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[virgin-burner 1]

maybe your reading comprehension really sucks big time, but i've pointed out in uncountable posts that my current wing, a sabre1 150, that i fly at a WL of about 1.2ish, was recommended to me by my chief instructor and S&TA. and he's not a guy that's easy on anything. you dont want to piss him off, he's grounded semi-pro, sponsored jumpers with a laugh..

pretty much anybody jumps something similar over here, after they get their license. which is likely to happen in the 50-100 jumps range. we do have incidents every now and then. in my short time in the sport, i know of two, one that i witnessed myself, the other i was told about or read of.

i could make some comments here about self-regulation, self-responsibility, common sense or the lack thereof. i've heard a nice statement from a manufacturer talking about how all of the above mentioned was missing in some parts of the world. he's a european by the way.

and since i'm already at: thanks for your comment on the other thread about telling co-jumpers about reckless attitude. i couldnt care less, really. and here its very likely to know about just anyone if you jumped for some time. goes together nicely with the thread about fewer and fewer jumpers. i dont wonder.. if some dude went around, saying watch out, that guy over there is likely going to burn in, people here will shake their heads and refuse to jump with you instead.. bad mouthing others is not liked in all parts of the world!

edited to add: funnily enough, when i asked around on the swiss boards about doing aff someplace cheaper, EVERYone advised against doing it outside of switzerland, as ALL other places were rather unsafe..

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

[Beatnik 2]

Quote

Dunno. I'm 1.25 on a sabre2 170. Done about 30 jumps on it so far. I might even try a 150 by the end of next year but I'll stick to the 170 for a long time yet. It feels conservative to me but definitely isn't according to your evaluation.

Some feel I'm natural at it too but I don't - I just happen to really enjoy flying the 170. There are lots of things for me to work on. Some people are better at things than others so I don't think a 1 size fits all formula is good for everything here.

I think that you are missing the point. Doing 30 jumps on a canopy is not a lot. Under controlled conditions I am sure that you or anyone else will be able to land their parachute in a safe manner. It is when things don't go as planned that you have to worry about things. Ever have someone cut you off on final or walk onto the landing area right before you are going to land? Probably doesn't matter if you are doing a nice slow landing but if you are coming in hot and have 1-2 seconds or less to make a decision of what to do. People have to be able to fly their canopies in all situations not just a few selected ones. This is what it is all about surviving and when people build a false sense of confidence that is when things start getting dangerous.

I think that there are a lot of dzo's that simple want to make money and don't enforce the rules like they should to help protect there jumpers. In fact I have seen the exact thing happen where they were scared of pushing away their jumpers if they try and enforce the rules. With all the commercial operations going on, I don't believe a safety officer is doing much or can anymore. If they tear into someone for breaking the rules or ground someone, the dzo can pull the "it's my dropzone, I can do things the way I feel fit" crap, Maybe at a non-commercial dz it works well but I have seen too many dzo's over rule safety officer advice because they own the place.

[Unstable 8]

I never felt really strongly about this until a few months ago. I was at a Skydiving Competition, (Collegiates) in AZ. I did the accuracy (I placed third in Masters, by the way....Don't Care.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the Kids (and I don't say kids because he has less jumps than me, I say kids because of his judgment Level, and I mean that in the most literal way..) from the Intermediate category was Flying at Katana at a 1.9 Wingloading. (Now remember that this kid has somewhere around 150-200 jumps, as I recall). He was on the same load as me, and of course he landed first. I was setting up for final, and I watch a snappy 180 and his canopy jump up from his weight instantaneously meeting the ground. I thought I watched a fellow jumper go in. He biffed right outside the landing area, and by the time he stopped, he was 2/3 the way across the landing area. Long story short, he was okay, his entire left side was black and blue, and disqualified instantly from the meet. Everything I know about canopy piloting (which isn't very much) tells me that kid shouldn't have gimped away -

Now the point is here - Afterwards, I got a rejump and I was discussing the incident with me teammates, and the injured jumpers loudmouth pal overheard me. He got up in my face, and shouted "I had a higher wingloading than that at his number of jumps and I'M Okay!!"

I agree with the original poster, Where are some of the S&TA's?

=========Shaun ==========

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Anyone who knowingly allows someone with 200 jumps jump a canopy loaded at 1.9 should go to jail if and when that person biffs and dies. That being said, you can not save everyone from themselves.

I've seen it many times, someone is denied jumping a certain canopy at one DZ and they just go to another. I remember a jumper in this area that learned the system well enough to name drop while ordering a canopy and bought a cross braced something way before anyone would have allowed him to have it.

Some people are going to do what they want no matter what. These are the same people that will fake a logbook to get what they want, be it a canopy or a rating. This also connects nicely to my recent rants about undesirables in our sport.

[Reginald 0]

Quote

With the majority of fatalities and injuries resulting from canopy incidents and that number not really going down much, you would think that the S&TAs would be enforcing wingloadings a lot more with these lower experience jumpers.

Exactly what wing loading standards would you like them to enforce? The last I recall the USPA has not regulated wing loading. I don't know any S&TA's that will let a 100 jump wonder fly a crossbraced 2.0 because it is clearly stupid. But should they be stopping someone with 100 jumps from jumping a 1.3 WL, which is just a marginally questionable decision? Most S&TA’s use their “power” on the big issues not the marginal ones, because if they run around a DZ stopping every marginally questionable decision then they lose credibility in general which detracts from their ability to handle the big issues. Until the USPA firmly dictates WL don’t expect any S&TA’s to be weighing in jumpers every morning before the first plane goes up. Clearly stupid is one thing to stop, marginally questionable is another.

And just to note, I'm an advocate of conservative WL and slow progression myself.

"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Some people are going to do what they want no matter what. These are the same people that will fake a logbook to get what they want, be it a canopy or a rating. This also connects nicely to my recent rants about undesirables in our sport.

Applies to a lot of people at ASC, don't it?

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[millertime24 8]

Looking at this from kind of a different angle here. Are we not talking about LICENSED skydivers here? I was under the distinct impression that once you hold a USPA "A" license then you could fly pretty much any canopy you like. Lets face it people we are all, "legally" at least, adults here. If someone gives you a "reccomendation" you have the "choice" to follow it or ignore it. People who make GOOD choices usually wind up living whereas those who dont usually end up hurting themselves. I, for one, CHOOSE to listen to AFFI's S&TA's etc for the simple purpose of I enjoy living. Just my 2cents.

Muff #5048

[BillyVance 34]

You made the smart choice to listen to the right people.

There's something to be said about self-policing our peers. We need that if we don't want additional restrictions placed on our skydiving activities by DZOs or worse, the FBO of airports and the FAA.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[MagicGuy 0]

Technically, that is true I guess. Not at my DZ it wasn't. When any newly licensed jumper comes in with their first gear, it gets the one over by the rigger. Quality is looked at, size of the rig on the person, and of course, the SIZE of the canopies. If the rigger/instructor doesn't think that it is the right size, they don't get to jump it, end of story.

I think self-policing is great, but there is a certain point where common sense should triumph over someone's stupid decision to jump a canopy that's too small.

1.25 on a Sabre2 170 seems a little high. 30 jumps is nothing on a canopy. Have you had to land out yet? Wait until you have to.. changes things a WHOLE lot. When you suddenly realize that shit, I'm not gonna make the dz.. tensions are high and all of a sudden you are saying FUCK. Or like the other poster said.. getting cut off on final (which WILL happen, just a matter of time if you keep jumping). What about if you can't make the pattern and have to land downwind? You are going to be hauling ass.

[millertimeunc 0]

I'm sure concerned with some 200 jump jackass on a 1.9 Katana or similarly loaded wing who decides he wants to do a "gnarly swoop" into the landing pattern and hooks himself into someone on final approach because he's too inexperienced to know what he's doing (this has almost happened to me twice), but jumps don't necessarily mean everything. The two near collision's I've had were both with very (>1000 jumps) experienced pilots. I am therefore very paranoid under canopy, regardless of who's around. I listen to the S&TA's as well, but the people who make the good choices could still be subject to danger from the dumbasses who don't or think they already know it all. Just my $.02

The best things in life are dangerous.

[MagicGuy 0]

You're absolutely right in the fact that noone is safe, lots of experience or little experience. But someone who has little experience that is flying a canopy that is over their head is putting themselves, and those around them, in far more danger than if they are flying a more conservative wing.

[kallend 1,623]

I expect you would have been even more outraged when I was jumping my Stiletto with 40 jumps. It would have been none of your business, of course.

...

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

[MagicGuy 0]

It would've been my business if you were on the load with me and in the same airspace as me, actually. Great way to make an example of yourself, bro.

[MagicGuy 0]

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.

[millertime24 8]

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.

Noted. I'll be sure to have Velo 103 shipped express mail so I can kill myself as soon as possible.JK of course.

Muff #5048

[MagicGuy 0]

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.

[millertime24 8]

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.

I'm not sure. The VX37 might be a little bit much just yet. As someone with 43 jumps I would reccomend you start a bit more conservatively say a Xaos 27 or something.

Muff #5048

[MagicGuy 0]

Yeah, probably right, but the VX37 is SOO much cooler..

[hackish 8]

Quote

One is the word "natural". Whether or not you think you're a natural is not relevant. Whether or not you are a natural is not relevant. The fact is that people who make it their major business to think about these things think that certain loadings, canopy planforms and sizes are just plain not appropriate for low-time jumpers. At all.

Oddly those who read things on the interweb say similar things. Those who have watched and taught me in person all seem to feel that I'm fine on this canopy. I took the Scott Miller course at DeLand and got video of my landings. I have to work on getting used to a more accurate pattern but had no trouble landing up wind, downwind and crosswind on it. The guy giving the course felt I was just fine. For me the most important thing besides safety is having fun and I do find this canopy maneuverable yet slow enough to feel safe.

Quote

The other thing is the word "conservative". With all due respect, what the hell do you know? People at our level (and believe me, you and I are at the same level, think about that for a second) don't know what we don't know. We haven't accumulated enough landings to know what can happen, and what characteristics we're going to need to get ourselves out of that situation.

I'll give you that - I haven't found myself in a bad situation and I haven't really jumped it in high winds 10mph is about the max. The flare is pretty good on that canopy and I was able to run out a 7mph downwind with relative ease. Can't remember having any non-standup landings since maybe my 25th jump.

I'm used to dealing with kids showing up in corvettes or wads of cash asking me to make 400whp on their Honda. I can identify pretty quickly who is about to kill themselves. I know if I had a car like that when I was young I would have. Flying a 170 it just doesn't feel like that.

Quote

Do those locals spend their entire lives teaching canopy skills all over the world? Do those locals devote hours of study to the accident rates? Then why would you take their advice over Brian Germain's DO NOT EXCEED limits? Because they're watched you land?

I'll go with what Jimmy said - he's the guy who taught the Scott Miller course - he said I was fine and gave me things to improve on.

Any way you slice it I and anyone else outside of the 1:1 wingloading that is required of low jump numbers are in a lose lose situation. If I get hurt people say they told me so. If I don't get hurt they say I was lucky.

In any event I stand by what I say - I don't believe a 1 size fits all is appropriate for wingloading. Different people progress and learn at different rates.

-Michael

[millertimeunc 0]

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

The best things in life are dangerous.