Responding to "Swooping is not a crime"

[chrismgtis 0]

Quote

Quote

Why am I the only one?

Maybe at your DZ you are. But as a whole you're not alone. It should be common knowledge that if you want your canopy control to improve then you need to dedicate jumps towards it. Freefall is fun, but it is good canopy control decision which allows us to make that next jump.

I'll gladly say that the people at my DZ, if not all, are great and I'm sure every one of them wants to be safe and wants the same for the next person. So I'm not trying to make anyone look bad at all. Please don't take as if I'm saying "people I've seen don't care about learning". I just don't really "see" much of a push or trend to learn certain specific things that are important.

I know our DZ is working on programs to change that, because I'm one of the people that is trying to help make those changes... to introduce new instruction towards pre AND post-free fall skills. I know some globally influential people including Scott Miller and the USPA are looking at this to see what we can do. It should be interesting to see what is done in the next year at DZs, through the USPA, etc.

Personally, I'm just hoping that any changes are made are aimed at keeping the instruction fun but educational. The last thing I want is for annoying cumbersome changes to be made to the AFF program or A license proficiency card.

Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033
Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

It's for visibility and name recognition.

I think that was his point. Visibility and name recognition sells--no matter which product of the brand it's selling. I can't think of a better niche to better brand a parachute company.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

I vividly remember on jump 9 (I did an 8 jump IAF progression) I was not affraid of the skydive, or the exit, or deploying my canopy, but I was scared to death about the fact that I didn't know if I actually understood the pattern and flare/landing well enough after just 8 jumps to be "able" to do it without that stupid radio on my chest.

This has been my repeated point to make as well. Better education is desperately needed! I mentioned in the "What should we do" thread I would opt for a canopy course be required before graduating student status--or maybe before getting an A or B license. Such a canopy course should focus not only on canopy control, but landing patterns, awareness, etc.

I felt the same way after AFF. I still feel the same way. I'm not scared of much, but I'm scared of not seeing someone else or them not seeing me despite "keeping my head on a swivel" which is what Billy always tells me. I freefly, and am only at a 1:1 ratio on my canopy so, I'm usually last out of the plane before the tandems and then under my big-ass canopy, I'm the last to land before the tandems--so I'll land in the peas. But, ANY OTHER TIME I land well away from the main landing area for the sole reason that I just don't mind walking, and I'd rather walk than be sorry.

Education is desperately needed, in addition to separate landing areas.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[2shay 0]

oh okay (sarcasm)

don't try your bullshit with me!!!

[jacketsdb23 45]

I think canopy courses are fine to take...but I learned everything I was taught in my 1st canopy course during my FJC. I did a static line course for what its worth. The course in Elsinore was a great canopy course, but honestly, everything we did I had already done and knew about. I'm not sure if thats the norm or not, but some of the people in the class had over 200 jumps had never practiced flat turns or stalled their canopy. I do this as SOP for new canopies.

I think education will surely help. But I don't understand why a BSR separately landings area's in space or time is horrible. This is a self governing sport. The SIM is a guide. Lets put this in there and word it such that DZO's can adapt it to there own specific DZ.

Maybe the next to cool for school hot rod that swoops through canopy traffic will get a different reaction from us (skydiving community) if its an actual BSR thats being violated as opposed to a subjective claim of "i know what I'm doing" we hear to often. There is nothing common to common sense.

Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

Ban skydiving and you will solve the problem of people killing themselves in this sport. But until you do that, unfortunately people will die in this sport and if someone is not willing to accept this risk, then they need to be doing something else in life.

Once again, reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeal slowly:

Killing yourself is ok. Killing someone else is not. We are trying to stop jumpers from killing other jumpers. That is what this discussion is about.

Get it?

Walt

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Killing yourself is ok. Killing someone else is not. We are trying to stop jumpers from killing other jumpers. That is what this discussion is about.

Get it?

So when can we start talking about banning big-ways or jumping with anyone period? Surely you're NOT about to tell me that no one has ever died in this sport due to a freefall collision? Then maybe we'll see all the anti-swooping pro big-way types defend their discipline just as much as the swoopers are trying to defend swooping.

You can not legislate safety. I doesn't work in regular society and sure as heck won't work here. I'm all for seperate landing areas (being time or space). But some people here seem to think passing some rule will all of a sudden make this a safe sport?

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

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I'm all for seperate landing areas (being time or space).

Good - since that's what we're discussing.

Quote

But some people here seem to think passing some rule will all of a sudden make this a safe sport?

Nope...we're saying passing a rule MAY just help prevent people from killing others, by making it easier for those people acting like asshats to be effectively punished.

Reductio ad absurdum: Swooping into traffic breaks the "avoid other jumpers in the pattern" and "low jumper has right of way" rules that we have all been told again and again and again since our first jump courses.

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

[Remster 24]

Quote

Surely you're NOT about to tell me that no one has ever died in this sport due to a freefall collision?

Steve: its not a good comparaison.

If you get on a big way, you are allowing yourself in that environment with the added risks.

People who jump do not necesserally want to endorse the added risk of someone killing them for an erratic behavior in the pattern.

Remster

[billvon 2,400]

>So when can we start talking about banning big-ways or jumping with
>anyone period?

As soon as we start talking about banning swooping.

>Surely you're NOT about to tell me that no one has ever died in this sport
>due to a freefall collision?

They have. That's why there are USPA rules concerning who can jump with new jumpers.

>You can not legislate safety. I doesn't work in regular society and sure as
>heck won't work here.

You can legislate safety.

Drunk driving laws reduce drunk driving deaths. They don't prevent them, but they help prevent them.

Laws requiring trucks have decent brakes save lives. They don't prevent all truck accidents, but they do prevent some.

The minimum pull altitude helps save lives. They do not stop all low pulls, but they stopped the majority of them when that rule was enacted.

Education is by far the best way to reduce deaths in this sport. We now have entire sections of the SIM dedicated to "how to teach a canopy control course." We have several good people teaching canopy control courses, and we have factory programs to help people choose canopies and learn to fly them.

It's not enough. People are killing themselves, which is sad but is part of the sport. We all live with the fact that we can screw up and die, and we choose education etc with that in mind.

But now we're seeing something new. Jumpers are killing OTHER jumpers due to their carelessness, ignorance and obstinacy. And that is totally unacceptable. That's why we're talking about rules - to get the message out loud and clear that if you continually put other people at risk of death due to your incompetence you will not be allowed to jump at USPA drop zones. And that will save lives.

>I'm all for seperate landing areas (being time or space). But some people
> here seem to think passing some rule will all of a sudden make this a
>safe sport?

No one thinks that.

Debate on this is all well and good, but you're starting to just make shit up to slam people, and that's not cool. It's also somewhat detrimental to your position.

[PLFXpert 0]

Um, I said separate landing areas is a good thing.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

So when can we start talking about banning big-ways or jumping with anyone period? Surely you're NOT about to tell me that no one has ever died in this sport due to a freefall collision? Then maybe we'll see all the anti-swooping pro big-way types defend their discipline just as much as the swoopers are trying to defend swooping.

You can not legislate safety. I doesn't work in regular society and sure as heck won't work here. I'm all for seperate landing areas (being time or space). But some people here seem to think passing some rule will all of a sudden make this a safe sport?

Passing a rule does nothing--education and enforcement do. I'm sure we agree on that.

What the rule does is document a standard practice that helps people stay safe. BSRs do not have the force of law. You cannot be arrested for pulling below two grand and it's a good thing because I'd have received a life sentence long ago. That being said, I think a minimum pull altitude of *at least* two grand for experienced jumpers helps keep people safe.

Let me apologize to you publicly for my sarcasm toward you in other posts. We want the same thing. I don't think there is any issue there.

I think your concern (one that I don't share) is that the people supporting a new BSR have the "damn, there ought to be a law!!!!" mentality and want to ban everything as soon as someone gets hurt. I don't think swooping should be banned and I haven't talked with anyone who does think it should be banned.

Same for bigways and all other disciplines. We're trying to address a problem so that we can all have our chosen flavor of skydiving fun without taking blatant risks with others' safety.

Freefall collisions happen and they are all avoidable, but there is a real difference between one caused by two divers who collide after being in each others' blind spots and one caused by someone who unannounced, decides it would be really cool to do a no-lift dive through a large round. The first case is a case of bad shit happening because of poor planning and/or discipline but there is no clear disregard for others' safety. The second case, the unannounced no-lift dive is unquestionably disregard for others' safety.

I can't imagine that you would consider the unannounced no-lift dive to be acceptable risk. Reckless canopy flight in a landing pattern is not acceptable to me and I seriously doubt it is acceptable to you, either.

I speak only for myself but I think the people who support the new BSR want the BSR *and* enforcement and education--I do--not a ban on swooping.

Walt

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

As soon as we start talking about banning swooping.

Agreed; the theme here is safety, prevention and how we can all live happily ever after.

But, some HAVE banned it. Not necessarily many, but some view limiting a swooper to a specific turn ratio or less as a ban. All that does is lower the turn altitude for someone who still desires speed.

I believe why some are upset is NOT due to the suggestion of separation of landing areas or space, but due to...well, a "ban" so-to-speak.

And at the risk of being the broken record here, it IS the DZO's ultimate decision either way. What some are saying is, "banning" or "restricting to a specific degree turn" is NOT the answer.

I know you are not saying it IS the answer.
Most swoopers, as far as I can tell, support a separate landing area or space.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

I know you are not saying it IS the answer.

Can you tell us who has proposed banning swooping?

Quote

Most swoopers, as far as I can tell, support a separate landing area or space.

And what about those that don't? What about those that think swooping into pattern traffic is OK if they choose to do it?

...

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

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

Can you tell us who has proposed banning swooping?

I could; but I won't. And it's obvious at least one person in this thread knew of one of the DZs I was referring to that has since changed its restriction from a "90-degree turn or less" policy to a policy of separate time & space--which again, the latter I support. Ask someone else who doesn't mind throwing down a gauntlet on someone they like. We don't have to agree to like one another.

Quote

What about those that think swooping into pattern traffic is OK if they choose to do it?

Oy vey. I was about to get bitchy. Instead, I'll just say it again: Separation of space & time is obviously necessarily for many reasons.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

Can you tell us who has proposed banning swooping?

I could; but I won't. And it's obvious at least one person in this thread knew of one of the DZs I was referring to that has since changed its restriction from a "90-degree turn or less" policy to a policy of separate time & space--which again, the latter I support. Ask someone else who doesn't mind throwing down a gauntlet on someone they like. We don't have to agree to like one another.

Quote

What about those that think swooping into pattern traffic is OK if they choose to do it?

Oy vey. I was about to get bitchy. Instead, I'll just say it again: Separation of space & time is obviously necessarily for many reasons.

So what do YOU say to someone who posted with respect to rules about swooping:

" I hate the feeling of choices being taken away from me. My opinion and I am sticking to it" and "Everything is cool with me so long as everyone is jumping a lot and havin fun"?

Is everything cool about doing just whatever the hell you want as long as it's fun?

...

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

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

So what do YOU say to someone who posted with respect to rules about swooping:

" I hate the feeling of choices being taken away from me. My opinion and I am sticking to it" and "Everything is cool with me so long as everyone is jumping a lot and havin fun"?

Is everything cool about doing just whatever the hell you want as long as it's fun?

I didn't respond to that person, but you would like me to?

I'll pass.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

So what do YOU say to someone who posted with respect to rules about swooping:

" I hate the feeling of choices being taken away from me. My opinion and I am sticking to it" and "Everything is cool with me so long as everyone is jumping a lot and havin fun"?

Is everything cool about doing just whatever the hell you want as long as it's fun?

I didn't respond to that person, but you would like me to?

I'll pass.

Hard question, eh?

...

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

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

We all know swooping is the leading cause of death....

this misstatement discredits your entire post

First of all I said "We all know swooping is the leading cause of death, or close to it." You edited out the "close to it" part.

Second, landings are the leading cause of death according to dz.com, and swooping is very much in line with landing.

Collisions (34) 16%
Landings (66) 31%
No Pulls (16) 8%
Malfunctions (39) 18%
Reserve Problems (15) 7%
Other (29) 14%

Validity of argument stands.

in no way... since "landings" does not equal "swooping"

maybe a more in depth survey of incidents (as limited as that is) is in order, because youve clearly not read them very well if you equate all 'landing' incidents as 'swooping'

ofc that is a big part of the witch hunt attitude so clearly displayed on dizzy.com..

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[mnealtx 0]

If you have not done that data-mining yourself, how can you say if he is wrong or not?

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

[Zenister 0]

fuck it.. youve got your torches lit, reason isnt going to make any difference at all..

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

fuck it.. youve got your torches lit, reason isnt going to make any difference at all..

And YOU have your torch lit as well...answer the question.

He asserts that swooping is one of the leading causes of death. The incidents database show that landing mishaps (which include swooping) is the fatality leader.

You come back and say that he's wrong, that landing != swooping (which I agree) and that he should search the database.

All I asked is if YOU had done a search yourself, to be able to so conclusively say that he is wrong - that's all.

Get off your persecution complex and answer the question...or not. Up to you.

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

[mnealtx 0]

35 HP landings out of 66 in the fatalities database.

53% of the total landing fatalities.

15% of the total fatalities.

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

[skypuppy 1]

how about the 'slow and low accuracy relic' (see i can throw just as many 'push button phrases' as you without adding anything useful to the discussion) does multiple S turns to hit the peas EVERY TIME, thereby consuming and cutting off 4x the area he/she should to land??

that sucks too.. and happens JUST AS OFTEN, by those who think THEY 'own' the sky.
_________________________________________________

As I said before, chances are the 'low and slow accuracy jumper' is not going to kill anyone - people can see him in front of them and avoid him. Inconvenient, perhaps, but not life threatening.

It's the hotdogs coming fast from above and behind that are taking people out.

You cannot say the effects of the two are anywhere near the same.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

Swooping is selling canopies. Why do performance designs use top level swoopers to promote their canopies when the major market for them is sabre 2's etc.?..... BECAUSE SWOOPING SELLS.

people love swooping, People love danger.

If you are not into risk then don't own an operation that depends on the judgment of the customers. Period.
__________________________________________________

Hmm. So half the dz's in the world close down. Reduces the need for instructors. I guess you don't need the job really bad yourself, eh?

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone