billvon 2,425 #1 May 30, 2007 We've seen a lot of opinions on how to deal with the issues of canopy collisions in the pattern, and I figured I'd post this poll to see if people think we should do anything at a national level. (Note that this does not cover what people are doing at their individual DZ's, but rather what we should do as a group here in the US.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #2 May 30, 2007 QuoteWe've seen a lot of opinions on how to deal with the issues of canopy collisions in the pattern, and I figured I'd post this poll to see if people think we should do anything at a national level. (Note that this does not cover what people are doing at their individual DZ's, but rather what we should do as a group here in the US.) You could write an article called 'How to Avoid Canopy Collisions' published in Skydiving NewsMagazine June 2007. The original article is at TakeBackTheSky.com The APF said it would be publishing it this summer too. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
firstime 0 #3 May 31, 2007 Because of Bob, seperate landing areas, thats not a tall order Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
divnswoop 0 #4 May 31, 2007 ....add some common-sense and good judgment in there too.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
itllclear 1 #5 May 31, 2007 Exactly as worded, none of the above My choice is QuoteEducation, but leave the specifics to each DZO"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there." "Your statement answered your question." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,425 #6 May 31, 2007 >Education, but leave the specifics to each DZO That would be choice a) - nothing different at the national level. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
itllclear 1 #7 May 31, 2007 Quotenothing different at the national level Questions in the various license tests could address this issue. That would be education at the national level. Harry"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there." "Your statement answered your question." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #8 May 31, 2007 Maybe there should be a requirement to have a canopy course before graduating student status. I just don't think students are given enough education about s-turns, approaches, landing patterns, different canopies, etc. Wouldn't solve the problem that exists with already licensed jumpers but...a great "in addition to" whatever the solution. Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrismgtis 0 #9 May 31, 2007 The real solution to avoiding canopy collisions: looking for other canopies. The way I see it, that alone would have saved every life lost in a canopy collision (if everyone did this). Then if you want to get more technical and go beyond that; learn vertical separation and learn to fly your canopy accurately. How many of you know how to do that? Either way I think (unless there is a lot of traffic), simply looking around you and being aware of where everyone is would prevent any loss of life. Banning everything that kills someone is not the answer. If that is your solution, then sooner or later you will be looking for more ways to make the sport safer. Having banned almost everything, the only thing left will be to ban skydiving itself. Would that make any sense? Of course not. I suggest some of you start looking at this way. Drunk drivers believe they have a right to drink and drive and don't care that they most likely will take out someone else when an accident does occur. As a skydiver you are a canopy pilot and sooner or later if there is a problem in traffic, it won't just be you that gets hurt it will be someone else. It's your responsibility to learn how to fly your parachute correctly. QuoteI just don't think students are given enough education about s-turns, approaches, landing patterns, different canopies, etc. You're right. Although I think most accidents in traffic are caused by experienced jumpers. This still leads to the same conclusion that it would otherwise. We aren't learning what we should when we get into the sport in the beginning. I'm not saying there is a problem with the AFF program or what was taught in static line progression. I think the main problem is that we don't simply choose to learn what we should know, or do the things that are going to save someones life. Right off of AFF you may not have learned this or that, but you could easily choose to. AFF is a good program. Sure it can be improved, but I think we need to look more at ourselves first.Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033 Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
itllclear 1 #10 May 31, 2007 QuoteThe real solution to avoiding canopy collisions: looking for other canopies. That really won't help when the issue is someone way above you making a high performance, descending approach. In a few of seconds, someone who was a couple of hundred feet above you in straight flight may become a collision threat. Also, that person may have been in the blind spot above you, impossible for you to see."Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there." "Your statement answered your question." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrismgtis 0 #11 May 31, 2007 QuoteQuoteThe real solution to avoiding canopy collisions: looking for other canopies. That really won't help when the issue is someone way above you making a high performance, descending approach. In a few of seconds, someone who was a couple of hundred feet above you in straight flight may become a collision threat. Also, that person may have been in the blind spot above you, impossible for you to see. No offense, but... wrong. Let me explain why. If everyone is paying attention to traffic, the swooper would have known where traffic was and avoided it. This was my entire point. It is EVERYONES job to know where traffic is. If we are doing that, then at least ONE of the two jumpers who are in danger of hitting each other will be able to get out of danger and avoid a situation. It takes everyones participation. Not just you. That was just my point. You may not be able to avoid the swooper that is above you, but the swooper would have been able to. We have jumper A (non swooper) and jumper B (swooper). Jumper A has a responsibility to check his or her traffic and know where everyone within line of sight (outside of blind spots) are. Jumper B has the same responsibility. The difference is that jumper B is in your blind spot, but can see jumper A. Jumper A's blind spot becomes jumper B's responsibility because jumper B is IN it. Confusing, but hopefully you get my point. If you are in someones blind spot, you assume that jumpers responsibility of knowing where you are in his or her blind spot. If I'm not clear still, say your right above me and I can't see you because obviously my canopy is in the way. Get the hell away from me to where I can see you. If you don't, you screwed up. Simple as that. I'll tell you right now. If you ever see me above a canopy in traffic and I don't realize it and turn slightly to get in a spot where everyone can see me... I fucked up pure and simple. You can come up to me and tell me so. I'll agree with you. I'll be glad you told me.Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033 Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #12 May 31, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe real solution to avoiding canopy collisions: looking for other canopies. That really won't help when the issue is someone way above you making a high performance, descending approach. In a few of seconds, someone who was a couple of hundred feet above you in straight flight may become a collision threat. Also, that person may have been in the blind spot above you, impossible for you to see. No offense, but... wrong. If everyone is paying attention to traffic, the swooper would have known where traffic was and avoided it. It takes everyones participation. Not just you. No offense, but... wrong. Danny thought he was clear and ended up hitting someone. The guy in Eloy thought he was clear and the almost hit his GF. The guy in Cross Keys did not see someone. Roger did not see someone. etc, etc, etc.... The whole point of these debates is that you cannot always see everyone that may become a traffic problem at the bottom end of a swoop. Additional means need to be used to ensure separation: stacked exits, pre-planning at the loading area, do not swoop rules etc. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrismgtis 0 #13 May 31, 2007 QuoteDanny thought he was clear and ended up hitting someone. The guy in Eloy thought he was clear and the almost hit his GF. The guy in Cross Keys did not see someone. Roger did not see someone. etc, etc, etc.... The whole point of these debates is that you cannot always see everyone that may become a traffic problem at the bottom end of a swoop. . I hate to go there, but I'm going to have to. How exactly do you know what they did or did not see or were not able to see if they were looking? If you can honestly provide me with a real scenario where at least one of two different jumpers can not see the other (neither jumper can see the other jumper), I will agree with you, but I just don't see that being possible considering we are not talking about automobile traffic where there are objects such as trees and buildings in the way. It's just a canopy above us and the blind spot below us.Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033 Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #14 May 31, 2007 Quote I hate to go there, but I'm going to have to. How exactly do you know what they did or did not see or were not able to see if they were looking? Because I knew Danny. Because I knew Roger. Because I know that they would have 'cleared their airspace', but they did not see someone entering into the same space that they were going to use in a matter of seconds. They 'thought' they were in the clear. They did not intentionally cause a collision. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ianmdrennan 2 #15 May 31, 2007 QuoteHow exactly do you know what they did or did not see or were not able to see if they were looking? Because some of us have shared the sky with these individuals and knew them, their skill level, and the type of judgements they made, personally. Take Danny for example, while a hot dogger, he'd NEVER have made that turn if he saw Bob - his type of turn in those circumstances would have made it impossible to 'thread the needle' and he'd have known it. He might have been a hot dogger but he wasn't out to kill himself, or anyone else. Sometimes canopies blend into the background, sometimes something else distracts us for a second and then there's a canopy in the airspace we just checked and don't know about.....there's just too much going on to get it right every single time in crowded airspace. edit: Jan beat me to it. But she's right. Blues, IanPerformance Designs Factory Team Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #16 May 31, 2007 a swooper may see a clear pattern only to find it block when 2 or more people using the same landing area initiate the turn to final . this is caused by multiple patterns into the same area. until all patterns into the lz are the same this problem will continue. the only answer is multiple landing areas that have specific patterns for each area. this would be costly to implament but is the only safe answer. everyone wants to put a bandade on the problem by splitting a landing area in half or eduacating the masses which are both good ideas but in the end are only a small bandade on a large problem Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,425 #17 May 31, 2007 >How exactly do you know what they did or did not see or were not >able to see if they were looking? Because the alternative was that they saw the other jumper and turned into them deliberately. That's extremely unlikely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,425 #18 May 31, 2007 >Take Danny for example, while a hot dogger, he'd NEVER have made that turn if he saw Bob . . . Right. Which tells me "making sure your airspace is clear" doesn't work. So the question becomes - how do you deal with the small percentage of jumpers who are absolutely sure they can swoop through a crowded landing area safely? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #19 May 31, 2007 Quote>Take Danny for example, while a hot dogger, he'd NEVER have made that turn if he saw Bob . . . Right. Which tells me "making sure your airspace is clear" doesn't work. So the question becomes - how do you deal with the small percentage of jumpers who are absolutely sure they can swoop through a crowded landing area safely? Well it's obvious, Bill. You try to get a BSR on the books that creates BSR violators of the vast majority of other jumpers. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeedToJump 0 #20 May 31, 2007 QuoteI hate to go there, but I'm going to have to. How exactly do you know what they did or did not see or were not able to see if they were looking? If you can honestly provide me with a real scenario where at least one of two different jumpers can not see the other (neither jumper can see the other jumper), I will agree with you, but I just don't see that being possible considering we are not talking about automobile traffic where there are objects such as trees and buildings in the way. It's just a canopy above us and the blind spot below us. Because it's happened to me when I've been swooping. I thought my airspace was completely clear and that there was no one else below when I was setting up for my 270. I had my head on a swivel and always do. I always try to be extremely aware and safety conscious. I started my turn as I got about 180 through it, all of a sudden I saw another canopy almost right in front of me. I bailed and we both landed straight in without any further problems. I went over and apologized on the ground. The other jumper didn't have any idea of what happened. He was last out on a different plane and pulled high. I was doing 4-way with my team so we got out on a low pass. He wasn't expecting anyone above him, I wasn't expecting anyone below me. I know I was looking around and still didn't see him. I've spoken to other swoopers and have heard many stories of them looking around, not seeing anyone, starting to swopp and then seeing a person appear out of nowhere. Both people looking around doesn't guarantee that both people will see each other. Have you ever tried to see a gray canopy on a cloudy day?Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #21 May 31, 2007 QuoteI've spoken to other swoopers and have heard many stories of them looking around, not seeing anyone, starting to swopp and then seeing a person appear out of nowhere. It happened to me last September. I could even show you the camera view from my helmet cam and it sure looked like the swoop lanes were open (I exited last and pulled at 5k to ... what I thought ... would ensure that I was last down). But then as I am entering the swoop course at 60-70 mph I see a large canopy to my immediate left also wanting to enter the course. Fortunately my canopy was fast enough (or my turn started a split second just in time) and no collision occurred. But it was close and it was a reminder that what appears to be a open swoop lane, might not be as open as we think it is. I still say this guy (who toggle whipped it into the course) had no business flying in the high performance swoop lanes. But I am also not innocent as I did see him off in the distance before I started my turn. Just remember ... unless people have lived a perfect life, they shouldn't judge people for the mistakes they make just as long as the people making the mistakes are willing to try and learn from them. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrismgtis 0 #22 May 31, 2007 Quote>How exactly do you know what they did or did not see or were not >able to see if they were looking? Because the alternative was that they saw the other jumper and turned into them deliberately. That's extremely unlikely. I'm not arguing that they didn't see the jumper. I'm arguing that they could have seen the jumper had they been watching traffic correctly and that during a typical load, with any two jumpers, one of those jumpers should be aware of the other in all situations. Therefore for every two jumpers one of those jumpers is able to avoid a situation between the other. Yea, sure as traffic gets thicker it makes it harder, but I guess that is just one of those situations you shouldn't be swooping/etc into. The topic was how do we deal with pattern collisions. Well, my opinion is the best way to avoid them is to be aware of who is around you and make good decisions based on that, because I don't think you're going to deal with collisions any better in any other way. I don't see a better alternative to that unless you plan on installing tracking devices in rigs and artificial intelligence computers that yell at you when you're about to make a mistake. The alternative is to start banning this or that and I don't think we should ban anything we are doing completely. I mean I'm all for "no 270s in the main LZ" and that sort of thing.Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033 Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #23 May 31, 2007 Oh and the proposed BSR would have done nothing to fix the close call I had last September. I am a swooper, I exited last, pulled at 5k and flew to the dedicated high performance swoop course. This other person flying a 170 or 190 also felt that they had what it takes to swoop the course. Had I communicated with this person on the ground before we left the ground, then I might have known that he too was planning on swooping the course and then I would have sequenced myself before or after him. But I didn't. He was a visiting jumper and I made the mistake to assume that he knew I was one of the local swoopers who pretty much always goes for the dedicated swoop course and made the mistake thinking that someone under a 170 or 190 would also want swoop the course. Anyway, I digress ... the proposed BSR would have had zero effect on this event. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #24 May 31, 2007 even responsible swoopers that are against the 270 ban at eloy are admitting they can't always see the entire airspace around them and have had close calls - your ideas are good ideas but don't fix the problem - they may lower the collision rate but not come close to fixing the problem - seperate landing areas with each landing area having a specific pattern is the best solution and that isn't even 100 % Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrismgtis 0 #25 May 31, 2007 Quote seperate landing areas with each landing area having a specific pattern is the best solution and that isn't even 100 % I'm all for that solution too. Don't have any problem with it.Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033 Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)