Swooping is not a crime

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Brian Germain is my hero (at the moment) for his article just posted.

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

[marks 0]

Thanks Brian,

your a man that puts the words in the right order.

thanks.

[mnealtx 0]

Ok - he's talking about separating the swoopers from the 'normal pattern' - the same as the proposed BSR that Billvon and the others said.

Why is Brian's idea so much better than what Billvon and other suggested...besides the fact that none of them are nationally-known "big name swoopers"?

Your prejudice is showing...

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

[skybeergodd 0]

It is a good article and his ideas to solve the 270 issue is good if the DZ has the extra landing area to divide up....What he made no mention of was the fact that swoopers need to take responsibility for their actions and you don't always have to "Hook or swoop" to land. Here's a huge SHOCKER...Not everyone comes to a DZ to watch you land!!!! But I will guarantee NO ONE comes to the DZ so you can kill them.
I firmly believe that swooping should be allowed and it is good for the sport. But if you want to practice the craft and do 270's or down winders then be professional enough to get out on a low pass or open high enough to hang out and let the pattern clear.
Believe me when I say this...skydiving has been around longer that swooping and it's here to stay even without swooping, so Everyone should keep their eyes open( YES EVEN THE HOT STUFF SWOOPER) and remember the low guy on final has the right of way and if he prevents your swoop then land safe and live so you can swoop on the next load.

[mnealtx 0]

Well said!

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

[marks 0]

Quote

Ok - he's talking about separating the swoopers from the 'normal pattern' - the same as the proposed BSR that Billvon and the others said.

Why is Brian's idea so much better than what Billvon and other suggested...besides the fact that none of them are nationally-known "big name swoopers"?

Your prejudice is showing...

It is because brian is saying that swoopers are NOT the problem.

in my opinion, swoopers are the most aware canopy pilots on the planet. the problem is not swoopers...

I don't expect you to understand this, but judge only what you know.

swoopers are very conscious about what is going on around them, under canopy, separating landings, separating wing loadings, and also exiting at a lower altitude to separate them selves from "whuffo" traffic.

it is the jackass canopy pilots that swoop in your pattern that are the problem.

brian put it into a non judgmental diagram to help make a solution, not that billvon didn't, it just is accepted differently.

swoopers "true swoopers" are not the problem.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Ok - he's talking about separating the swoopers from the 'normal pattern' - the same as the proposed BSR that Billvon and the others said.

Why is Brian's idea so much better than what Billvon and other suggested...besides the fact that none of them are nationally-known "big name swoopers"?

Your prejudice is showing...

It is because brian is saying that swoopers are NOT the problem.

in my opinion, swoopers are the most aware canopy pilots on the planet. the problem is not swoopers...

In your opinion. Unfortunately, not all of your colleagues are playing well with others... with tragic results. Your right to swoop in the pattern doesn't trump my right to land safely...especially if I'm the low person.

Quote

I don't expect you to understand this, but judge only what you know.

Bullshit - I can comment on issues of safety just as well as you can, or ANYONE else flinging themselves out of a plane. You may not agree with my views, but that does NOT make them invalid.

Quote

swoopers are very conscious about what is going on around them, under canopy, separating landings, separating wing loadings, and also exiting at a lower altitude to separate them selves from "whuffo" traffic.

it is the jackass canopy pilots that swoop in your pattern that are the problem.

Exactly - and that is the same folks that the proposed BSR was trying to address...

Quote

brian put it into a non judgmental diagram to help make a solution, not that billvon didn't, it just is accepted differently.

That is exactly what I meant about the "big name swooper"... Brian didn't suggest or say anything different than Bill or the others...but since he's a "big name" his idea is INSTANTLY better. THAT is the prejudice I'm speaking of y'all showing, and the same prejudice you all showed on the BSR thread. "You aren't a swooper" "How many swoopers on the creators of this BSR", etc....

Quote

swoopers "true swoopers" are not the problem.

Swoopers that have the humility to abort their run when the conditions warrant it aren't the problem. Swoopers that are bound and determined to 'get their swoop on' regardless of of the conditions ARE the problem.

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

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

in my opinion, swoopers are the most aware canopy pilots on the planet. the problem is not swoopers...

And that statement just told me that they are!!!

Quote

it is the jackass canopy pilots that swoop in your pattern that are the problem.

You are right, it was that jackass Bob Holler who caused the last double fatality.......NOT!!!! Any hope of credibility that swoopers ever had just went down the toilet!

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[NWFlyer 2]

I'll say the same thing here as I said on the other thread on this topic ...

Brian says:

Quote

widespread proliferation of new DZ rules that prohibit 270 turns

Widespread proliferation? I haven't heard of anyone other than Eloy doing it, and that's only in the main landing areas. Just because I haven't heard of it doesn't mean that other DZs aren't banning 270s, of course, but I don't think we can call it widespread. Brian's lost credibility already with that statement... at least without providing evidence.

I give Brian credit for at least adding a possible solution at the bottom, but he almost lost me with the hyperbolic "the sky is falling" rhetoric of the article itself. I'd rather skip all that and read some details about his proposed solution.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[mnealtx 0]

It seems to be a re-hash of the 'separation in space' (separate landing areas) of the BSR proposal that Billvon and the others put forward.

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

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

It seems to be a re-hash of the 'separation in space' (separate landing areas) of the BSR proposal that Billvon and the others put forward.

Yeah, I can see that by looking at the diagram, but that didn't really seem to be Brian's point.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[marks 0]

Quote

not all of your colleagues are playing well with others...

those are just as much "your colleagues" as they are mine.

Quote

Bullshit - I can comment on issues of safety just as well as you can, or ANYONE else flinging themselves out of a plane. You may not agree with my views, but that does NOT make them invalid.

I believe your views to be just as valid as mine, just looked at from a different angle.

Quote

Exactly - and that is the same folks that the proposed BSR was trying to address...

it takes a DZO to enforce a BSR, why can't this just be addressed with them?

Quote

That is exactly what I meant about the "big name swooper"... Brian didn't suggest or say anything different than Bill or the others...but since he's a "big name" his idea is INSTANTLY better. THAT is the prejudice I'm speaking of y'all showing, and the same prejudice you all showed on the BSR thread. "You aren't a swooper" "How many swoopers on the creators of this BSR", etc....

brian didn't suggest a "rule" he suggested a solution. there is a HUGE difference.

Quote

Swoopers that have the humility to abort their run when the conditions warrant it aren't the problem. Swoopers that are bound and determined to 'get their swoop on' regardless of of the conditions ARE the problem.

the forst group you mention, the one's with humility, are swoopers. the one's that want to "get their swoop on" are generally not, they are usually big way fliers with hot canopies, or employee's of a DZ.

but they and WE are all skydivers. so lets have this conversation without the emotion so WE can come up with a solution.

[marks 0]

Quote

Widespread proliferation? I haven't heard of anyone other than Eloy doing it, and that's only in the main landing areas.

you should look around, things have changed at alot of places.

at the farm things have changed. so next time you come, come see me and I will show you how we have changed to address this issue.

[marks 0]

Quote

Quote

in my opinion, swoopers are the most aware canopy pilots on the planet. the problem is not swoopers...

And that statement just told me that they are!!!

Quote

it is the jackass canopy pilots that swoop in your pattern that are the problem.

You are right, it was that jackass Bob Holler who caused the last double fatality.......NOT!!!! Any hope of credibility that swoopers ever had just went down the toilet!

that is to most jackass statement I have ever seen on this website. congrats..

I didn't expect that from you.

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

I didn't expect that from you.

Ditto

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

not all of your colleagues are playing well with others...

those are just as much "your colleagues" as they are mine.

Agree to disagree, I suppose. I've got no problems with hanging in brakes until someone clears, or landing in a different area if it's safer.

Quote

Quote

Bullshit - I can comment on issues of safety just as well as you can, or ANYONE else flinging themselves out of a plane. You may not agree with my views, but that does NOT make them invalid.

I believe your views to be just as valid as mine, just looked at from a different angle.

Then why the "don't judge what you don't know" comment? I see it as a safety issue.

Quote

Quote

Exactly - and that is the same folks that the proposed BSR was trying to address...

it takes a DZO to enforce a BSR, why can't this just be addressed with them?

And just who, perchance, is going to enforce a local rule? Perhaps the DZO?

Quote

Quote

That is exactly what I meant about the "big name swooper"... Brian didn't suggest or say anything different than Bill or the others...but since he's a "big name" his idea is INSTANTLY better. THAT is the prejudice I'm speaking of y'all showing, and the same prejudice you all showed on the BSR thread. "You aren't a swooper" "How many swoopers on the creators of this BSR", etc....

brian didn't suggest a "rule" he suggested a solution. there is a HUGE difference.

I don't see the difference, outside of possible consequences to those who break it. Why the resistance? It makes it look like a persecution complex.

Quote

Quote

Swoopers that have the humility to abort their run when the conditions warrant it aren't the problem. Swoopers that are bound and determined to 'get their swoop on' regardless of of the conditions ARE the problem.

the forst group you mention, the one's with humility, are swoopers. the one's that want to "get their swoop on" are generally not, they are usually big way fliers with hot canopies, or employee's of a DZ.

but they and WE are all skydivers. so lets have this conversation without the emotion so WE can come up with a solution.

Without the emotion? That's all we're hearing from you guys is arguments from emotion.... how many posts have swooping enthusiasts made, screaming aoubt how "swooping is being banned", when that's NOT the case? Limitations on degrees of turns, yes...outright banning? Not that I've seen anyone posting on, and I'm pretty sure that there would've been HUNDREDS of posts screaming about it if there was a ban.

It seems to me that the BSR proposal WAS a solution... just one that the swoopers didn't like....perhaps because it would add penalties to someone that disregards it?

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

[bob.dino 0]

Quote

You are right, it was that jackass Bob Holler who caused the last double fatality.......NOT!!!! Any hope of credibility that swoopers ever had just went down the toilet!

Was that a deliberate misunderstanding? marks said that idiots who swoop in the pattern are the problem, and you took that to mean that the person hit by someone swooping in the pattern is the problem?


Brian's article was aimed exactly at you. Not at billvon, or at mnealtx, or many others.

From where I sit here on the other side of the world, there seems to be a very vocal group of older jumpers looking to tar all swoopers with the same brush. People like Ian Drennan and marks have tried to say "Hey, there's two types of swoopers: those that are safety conscious, compete, coach, and generally provide a good example, and the fuck-yeah-I-can-swoop-the-beerline-on-every-load guys."

The first type of swooper is trying to say two things to you: 1. It's not the act of swooping that's the problem. It's the "I can do what the fuck I want" attitude that's the problem. 2. Not all of these accidents have involved swoopers. Let's find the underlying cause and fix that, rather than blaming the symptom.

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

Quote

Widespread proliferation? I haven't heard of anyone other than Eloy doing it, and that's only in the main landing areas.

you should look around, things have changed at alot of places.

at the farm things have changed. so next time you come, come see me and I will show you how we have changed to address this issue.

Yes, there have been changes - I have seen those myself. But changes in the landing pattern don't necessarily equal a ban. Brian's article implies that everyone is banning swooping altogether. I quote "This is because of the widespread proliferation of new DZ rules that prohibit 270 turns for landing or ban high speed approaches entirely."

I'm very interested in the different approaches that DZs are taking to keep the landing areas as safe as possible for everyone, whether they swoop or not.

[tbrown 26]

I welcome Brian's article and specific proposals AND I especially appreciate dropzone.com giving his article front page attention and sparking further discussion of the issue.

As I see it, this debate is entering a necessary "second phase". The first phase having been the crisis created by the unfortunate string of fatalities a few months back. There was a sense of urgency and a lot of anger at the time and a sense that something simply had to be done. Now it's time to move into the phase of calmer debate and seek out the lasting solutions.

Though I do not swoop myself, I think swooping's a beautiful thing and I don't see how we can ban it and still call ourselves a progressive or innovative sport. I certainly don't profess to have the answers, or even the experience to fully evaluate the different proposals. But I believe something can now be done. In my own limited experience I still side with physical seperation of high performance swoops from the main pattern. I have seen this work very well at Elsinore, where it's been the rule for as long as I've been around the last four years anyway. At Elsinore, if you want to make more than a 90 degree diving turn, you must go west of the runway, end of story. But there's a nice pond there if you want it and the rest of us have been warned to stay the hell out of there. I think something like that is going to be necessary for the people who really want to crank it over, we need seperate playgrounds and we need to respect each other's areas.

Swooping is NOT a crime. Just do it away from sunday divers like me and I'm more than willing to show you the repect of staying away from you too.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[billvon 2,380]

>Why is Brian's idea so much better than what Billvon and other suggested. . .

I don't see this as "one idea is better than another." Brian and I traded emails for a while on his ideas and I thought they were great - and he's a much better swooper than I am, and has far more experience teaching people canopy flight than I do.

I think everyone has agreed on some fundamentals:

1) No one wants to ban swooping
2) We have to figure out a way to separate the patterns
3) The problem isn't swoopers, and it isn't people flying standard patterns - it's the conflict when you try to do both of them in the same space at the same time

Now we're working on the details. Brian's drawings are an excellent starting point for a separation plan.

[mnealtx 0]

As I said earlier...I don't see any substantive difference between your BSR proposal and Brian's plan...but the same people that were saying your idea would never work are cheering in the aisles over Brian's proposal... makes no sense to me...

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

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I firmly believe that swooping should be allowed and it is good for the sport. But if you want to practice the craft and do 270's or down winders then be professional enough to get out on a low pass or open high enough to hang out and let the pattern clear.

Geez tell me something I didn't already know and as a PST qualified competitive swooper believe me a huge chunk (like 90-95%) of my last 1000 jumps have been dedicated to canopy control. But thank you for stereo-typing.

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

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

none of them are nationally-known "big name swoopers"?

Brian may not be one of the top PSTers, but you might want to rethink your stance on him not being nationally known in the sport of high performance canopy flight.

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

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

That is exactly what I meant about the "big name swooper"... Brian didn't suggest or say anything different than Bill or the others...but since he's a "big name" his idea is INSTANTLY better.

Go back and check the archives and see that even a low life nobody like myself was saying these things here before Bill or Brian. But I'm not about to claim credit for nothing. The difference is that a respected canopy pilot, parachute designer and canopy control instructor has decided to add his two cents to the topic.

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

swoopers are very conscious about what is going on around them, under canopy, separating landings, separating wing loadings, and also exiting at a lower altitude to separate them selves from "whuffo" traffic.

it is the jackass canopy pilots that swoop in your pattern that are the problem.

Is this like the difference between a 'carving turn' and a 'hook turn?' The issue can't be defined away by saying 'swoopers' never screw up. It's a nice tautology, but not helpful, unless the conclusion is that this spring was nothing more than bad luck.

And yeah, Brian and Bill said the same thing. Separation is much better than bans. Bill's group tried to put out as many solutions as possible short of banning.