Blind Spots

[winsor 186]

The blind spots that are getting us killed are both physical and psychological.

From a physical standpoint, there is all too often a complete lack of understanding of how all four dimensions come together, particularly as it relates to landing.

From the psychological standpoint, there is the luck-based denial mechanism that has some of the most clueless among us firmly convinced that they have a complete understanding of spatial awareness - by virtue of the fact that they are not dead yet.

I have spent an awful lot of time trying to spot traffic from the cockpit and under canopy and, while better at it than most, have a solid appreciation for how hard it can be. There are times that TCAS is nice to have.

I have interviewed people who survived canopy collisions that I witnessed, and they were generally looking in the wrong direction to spot the other person. In some cases, by the time the other jumper came into view there was no way to avoid collision.

"I have nothing against swoopers, why some of my best friends are swoopers."

Having got that out of the way, I am very concerned by the people who staunchly defend their right to fly blind in traffic. There is a big difference between someone who executes a radical landing in sterile airspace and some numbnuts who dials in a blind high speed setup in the pattern.

I don't care WHO you are, anything over a 180 or so requires taking your eyes off your intended direction of flight. The person you are going to hit is likely to be below and behind you before the turn, and a bitch to see even if you know they are there. A 180 is not necessarily a better choice than a 270 from the standpoint of controlled flight through traffic; the radical turn can put your canopy between you and your line of flight for part of the maneuver, making it every bit as blind an approach (depending on canopy and setup).

When executing radical aerobatics, one had best focus on a very short list of aiming points. The Thunderbirds disaster, wherein the whole formation flew into the ground after the flight leader's elevators jammed, is a case where the best in the business died because maintaining global awareness was not an option while executing comples manuevers.

Thus, doing the 270s or greater that are dear to the heart of swoop aficianados everywhere is ill-advised in anything but the most sterile of airspace. If there is any significant chance of traffic in the pattern, you can either look for traffic or swoop - you can't have both.

I really don't give a rat's ass if people want to swoop, so long as they maim or kill only themselves when things don't go quite as planned. The suggestion that there is any merit to flying blind at the edge of the envelope in traffic is absurd.

Anyone who would speak of 270s as "safe" would do well to take (and pass...) a basic course of study in Physics. Pay attention to that fourth dimension.

If you want to swoop, get yourself some sterile airspace. You do NOT have the right to swoop in traffic, period.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[speedy 0]

I have done a whole bunch of 270's where the airspace was not sterile. The other people in the airspace were doing 270's, 360's, 430's and more.

It worked because everyone was aware of what the others were doing where they were.

To add to the difficulty all the jumpers should land in the same place! Through some entry gates only a few meters apart, over a pond and land hopefully in the zone for top points.

Nope, no sterile airspace there, just awareness and planning.

The problem on most run of the mill loads is that you have a whole bunch of skydivers zipping around the air space with no real plan and little understanding of what others might be doing.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[winsor 186]

Quote

I have done a whole bunch of 270's where the airspace was not sterile. The other people in the airspace were doing 270's, 360's, 430's and more.

It worked because everyone was aware of what the others were doing where they were.

To add to the difficulty all the jumpers should land in the same place! Through some entry gates only a few meters apart, over a pond and land hopefully in the zone for top points.

Nope, no sterile airspace there, just awareness and planning.

The problem on most run of the mill loads is that you have a whole bunch of skydivers zipping around the air space with no real plan and little understanding of what others might be doing.

Sterile airspace is airspace that is cleared of stray traffic. An airshow takes place in sterile airspace; this does not mean that no more than one aircraft can be aloft at a time.

Your statement that everyone in this airspace was on the same page is precisely what I am talking about.

The limited intent of landing in one piece somewhere on the DZ may constitute "no real plan" to you, but poses a problem only if someone intends to make blind approaches with no outs in the same airspace.

The purpose of a pattern is to understand what others are doing. If people in the pattern have little understanding of what you might be doing, the fault does not lie with them.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[pilotdave 0]

How bout a couple 90-degree clearing turns before starting a swoop? I would have failed my private pilot checkride if I didn't do clearing turns between every maneuver (without being reminded).

Seems to me that anybody that causes or nearly causes a collision probably thought the airspace they were flying into was "sterile enough." Maybe a couple clearing turns would have helped clear up that confusion... Including approaches into a designated swooping area. Not an excuse to swoop through traffic in a main landing area.

Dave

[winsor 186]

Quote

How bout a couple 90-degree clearing turns before starting a swoop? I would have failed my private pilot checkride if I didn't do clearing turns between every maneuver (without being reminded).

Seems to me that anybody that causes or nearly causes a collision probably thought the airspace they were flying into was "sterile enough." Maybe a couple clearing turns would have helped clear up that confusion...

Dave

Clearing turns are fine if you are going to execute maneuvers at or near a particular altitude. Traffic is not as hard to spot when you only have two dimensions to consider - you scan the horizon and hope you did not miss anything.

With the third dimension in the mix, it becomes much more difficult. You have to visualize every direction from which a canoypy can come that might be a problem, you have to be able to spot ALL of the problem canopies, and you have to adapt your flight path so that avoidance is likely.

Designated airspace, where NOBODY should be there if they are not engaged in clearly predefined high-performance maneuvers, is the kind of sterile environment that reduces the potential for conflict to a manageable level.

Trying to mix such disparate flight regimes in common airspace is an exercise in futility.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

You do NOT have the right to swoop in traffic

Swooping in traffic is rolling the dice and people who insist on doing so put their lives and the lives of others at risk. But I am sorry it is not the turn type that is the problem. It really boils down to the attitude of the people who do not know when to abort their swoop.

Quote

A 180 is not necessarily a better choice than a 270 from the standpoint of controlled flight through traffic. When executing radical aerobatics, one had best focus on a very short list of aiming points.

My only reason to post here is to help educate people who think 180s are safer than 270s. At least in my opinion 180s are not better. They are just as bad if not worse to be doing in traffic. Why do we do 270s in swoop competitions? Sure there is the added time in the turn building more speed, but at least for me that is not the primary reason why I do a 270 over a 180 (I was trained that 180s and 270s turn altitudes start from the same window of opportunity). I prefer 270s because they are way more accurate. When I reach my setup point I glance at my visual digital altimeter and it tells me what sort of turn rate to use (faster turns burn up less altitude than slow turns) and whether or not I should or shouldn't be on double fronts. A competent swooper can be incredibly accurate entering the entry gates doing 270s. It is much harder to be as precise on a 180. So by allowing people to do 180s, what you are doing here is introducing people who will have a much harder time setting up and being precise with where they will enter the swoop entry gates (or lanes if that help clarify things) and the risk of canopy collision because of this lack of precision will still exist. Only this time the collisions will be on the deck (no more, no less dangerous than a collision higher up).

I am on your guys side when it comes to segregating fast canopies from slow ones (all I need to do is lean into my harness without touching my risers on a 90 and I am coming in balls to the wall). But to ban 270s while allowing 180s just goes to show how little people have really sat down and really thought about all the issues here. It's not the turn type that is crux of the problem here. It's the attitude of some people. They get to their setup and think: "I want to swoop ... hmmm ... there is a canopy below me ... oh shit I want to swoop ... fuck it ... here goes ... yahoo". To blame canopy collisions on the turn type is like blaming the actual gun for a gun crime. It is the person behind the canopy (or the gun) who makes bad decisions.

With all that said ... let's separate the fast canopies from the slow ones by either time or distance. The two do not mix well together. People who fly the slower canopies MUST fly predicatable patterns and people who swooping in the high performance swoop lanes need to communicate with each other before they leave the airplane and come up with a plan of who lands first, second, third, etc, etc, etc and to communicate with each other so they know exactly where the guy/gal before and after them will be coming from and what sort of turn they plan on doing. Winging it in the high performance swoop lanes is just as dangerous as swooping in traffic.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[brianfry713 0]

I normally do two 90 degree "clearing turns" before I do a 270 degree swoop. I call them my downwind and base legs. They also help for accuracy. If I see traffic that I think could be a potential conflict, then I abort the 270 degree swoop.

I'm also a private pilot and I remembered to do my clearing turns on my checkride before every maneuver.

I do my best to follow the DZ's swooping rules. Sometimes newbies end up landing straight in through the swoop lane, and I abort my swoop and then talk to them after we've landed.

If there's conflicting traffic or you're landing amongst a lot of standard pattern fliers, then don't swoop. Most of the time at most DZ's that have set up good landing procedures for different types of canopy traffic you can swoop safely.

[davadikian 0]

Quote

To blame canopy collisions on the turn type is like blaming the actual gun for a gun crime. It is the person behind the canopy (or the gun) who makes bad decisions.

We dont blame the gun, but because history has taught us we cant always trust people to make good decisions, in most states you cant carry your gun with you at all times. The gun is not outlawed, youre just only allowed to wield it in a controlled environment. In this analogy the gun is the most identifiable and easily fixable item. I say you can use your 270 just use it in a designated area. I dont begrudge you your gun or freedom to shoot it, just dont waive it around in the streets. We all have lapses in judgment, were human, I just dont want you to have your hand on the trigger with me in front of the barrel when it happens.

Steve not necessarily directed towards you, just towards the idea that, with one landing area, we can organize the landing pattern in the loading area. Or organize on the fly in the air with everyone recognizing what other people are doing.

Theyre are, and will always be young canopy pilots who barely understand regular canopy flight much less all of the intricacies of hp canopy flight. It just isnt realistic to expect all new jumpers or experienced jumpers who dont swoop, to understand hp canopy flight and what your doing/going to do. Hell most hp pilots will admit it took them 1000+ jumps (swooping not total jumps) for them to truly understand whats going on, how can you expect some new jumper to understand your setting up for a 270, which direction you will be going, what your entrance point will be, how fast you will be going, etc. all the while trying to set-up their own landing.

Stacking and organizing a landing pattern with all hp is a great idea but to try an apply that to a standard landing pattern just doesnt seem realistic to me.