Update from B Burke re: SDAZ landing policy

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

Quote

Will the holliday boogie still have 300+ people who are uncurrent, insufficently skilled, and untrained to land in demo conditions next year?

Yes. The desert has been closed off for landings.



Come on JP...

Remi - I think you were standing next to me at Eloy during the Easter boogie when we watched a person on a non-HP canopy come in against traffic and make at least one wise decision NOT to turn low to rejoin the pattern. Before that jumper had even hit the ground, a SDAZ staffer was on his way out to have a chat with the jumper about what had just happened.

One example but it does seem to indicate that SDAZ is policing everyone more closely. I have no idea what that jumper's story was in terms of experience or currency, but he or she definitely made a mistake in a busy landing area. That mistake did not go unacknowledged by SDAZ, and I certainly hope similar stupidity will be quickly addressed at the holiday boogie when there's even more traffic in the skies.

Throughout this whole debate I've felt that most DZs need to do a better job policing traffic, period. It's not only swoopers. It's all of us.

"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

[billvon 2,404]

>Throughout this whole debate I've felt that most DZs need to do a
>better job policing traffic, period. It's not only swoopers. It's all of us.

Agreed. I would go a bit farther, and suggest that the dedicated swoopers - the ones who take a separate pass because all they want to do is swoop - are often not the problem. The problem more often lies with the people who want to do RW/freefly/wingsuit and _then_ do aggressive non-pattern manuevers in the pattern - whether that aggressive manuever is a junior swooper doing a 270 or a lowtime jumper under a Spectre 230 doing a 360 because he's too high.

[JohnMitchell 14]

Does SDAZ have a C-182? They could do the swoopers out of that one, 3-4 at a time, economically.

You want to go high? Twin Otter.

You want a hop-and-pop? C-182.

Even then, that might not pencil out economically.

[ZigZagMarquis 8]

Quote

Does SDAZ have a C-182? They could do the swoopers out of that one, 3-4 at a time, economically.

You want to go high? Twin Otter.

You want a hop-and-pop? C-182.

Even then, that might not pencil out economically.

Very good point / good idea John!

You're right though, it may not pencil out economically and it may not work out for the "traffic" (airplane traffic, not canopy traffic) reasons (busy weekend, lots of Otter & Skyvan loads going to altitude vs. a C182 dumping low below them) that BBurke outlined above... but if it could work out, that would be an interesting solution.

Plus the whining from the "cool crowd" that now has to get on a Cessna would be entertaining...

[Peej 0]

Quote

Plus the whining from the "cool crowd" that now has to get on a Cessna would be entertaining...

i doubt there would be all that much whining... i'm seriously starting to hope that my home DZ will get a Cessna or a small aircraft soon so that us dudes who work filming videos all weekend can do a few pond runs in the early morning

Advertisio Rodriguez / Sky

[JohnMitchell 14]

Even a week day tandem w/video to 12,500 out of a C-182 is okay occasionally, if the passenger is little and you take a book to read on the way up.

[JohnMitchell 14]

Quote

Plus the whining from the "cool crowd" that now has to get on a Cessna would be entertaining...

Maybe even a few damn cases of beer from those spoiled ass turbine babies.

[Vallerina 2]

Having thouroughly enjoyed their beautiful aircraft and tunnel a few times this winter, I fully support Skydive Arizona making business decisions which support the facilities that make the dropzone one of the best in the world.

There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning

[jumpwally 0]

Yeah Man! Amen to that............

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[ZigZagMarquis 8]

Quote

Even a week day tandem w/video to 12,500 out of a C-182 is okay occasionally, if the passenger is little and you take a book to read on the way up.

Yeah, one of those little tandem passengers (i.e. 105lb hot coed working her way through college working at Hooters) that almost make you want to be a Tandem master... ... until the 230lb 6'+ male rugby player shows up wanting to do a Tandem...

Quote

Maybe even a few damn cases of beer from those spoiled ass turbine babies.

Beer!!!??! Who said Beer??? Don't make me start drinkin'!!

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Based on my previous experience, many of the attendees of the Holiday boogie come from areas of the country that have little to no jumping durring the winter months.

5 or 6 skydives in 4 to 6 weeks is NOT sufficient preparation for an event where there are 40 to 50 canopies in the air in the area at the same time.

People need training to learn how to handle high volume landing areas, and the landing areas at SDAZ are not big enough for that sort of volume with inexperienced jumpers.

Even the zoo that WFFC is/was has more landing area.

The desert is an option, but too few use it as it's not enforced.

On bigway record attempts landing areas are frequently designated and violations of the rules are responded to with cuts and groundings.

I forsee continued incidents.

/signed.. LOTS of locals dont jump at all during the Holiday Boogie for exactly that reason...

as to the rest... it seems there is an opening for a New DZ in Central Arizona.. a DZ with a 'club attitude' and not a 'business first' one... as soon as it opens it will be getting my money and support....

this is a sad state of affairs all the way around, and to think i used to prefer a larger DZ...

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

[kallend 1,634]

Quote

as to the rest... it seems there is an opening for a New DZ in Central Arizona.. a DZ with a 'club attitude' and not a 'business first' one... as soon as it opens it will be getting my money and support....

Then open it yourself - don't wait for someone else to do it for you.

...

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

[JohnMitchell 14]

Quote

Then open it yourself - don't wait for someone else to do it for you.

Yeah, good idea. Plunk down a million or so to start a turbine DZ, but don't worry about any return on your investment. Think of it as a donation.

[EricaH 0]

I have a question about predictability of pattern. SDAZ has the rule that the first one down sets the landing direction.

Now that swooping is out of the equation it will be MUCH easier to figure out which way the first person down will be chosing to land - but not necessarly. When I'm under canopy, my focus is on finding all the canopies in the sky trying to see if they're going to try to kill me & making sure I'm not targeting anyone too. When at SDAZ I have to focus on finding the lowest man & try to figure out what the heck way he's going to land. Till that person's made a base leg - it can be a toss up to decide. To me that makes a landing pattern unpredictable.

There is no can't. Only lack of knowledge or fear. Only you can fix your fear.

PMS #227 (just like the TV show)

[diverds 0]

Bryan Burke was our guest on Skydive Radio this week. If you would like to hear a more in depth discussion of the topics in this thread you can listen to it here.

Skydive Radio 85

Skydive Radio

[billvon 2,404]

> When at SDAZ I have to focus on finding the lowest man & try to figure
>out what the heck way he's going to land.

Yes, we have the same issue at Perris. Often I will be the first one down, and I'll try to descend rapidly to 1000 feet and set up a very standard pattern so it's pretty clear which way the pattern has been set. But there is one guy who often pulls a little low, races down and does a 270 over the landing area, which makes it hard to figure out what's going on. We can all help in this process by flying standard patterns, both so we reduce the chances of collision and so that others can see what we are doing and match the pattern.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

as to the rest... it seems there is an opening for a New DZ in Central Arizona.. a DZ with a 'club attitude' and not a 'business first' one... as soon as it opens it will be getting my money and support....

Then open it yourself - don't wait for someone else to do it for you.

it is under discussion.. i just dont know that I want to tie myself to AZ in such a major investment.

as to return? the return is enabling the activity for friends and members. Not profit, adding to your toy collection, expanding your portfolio, or sending your kids to college....as skydiving is a poor choice for any of those, thus illustrating the difference between a 'club' and a 'business'

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

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Often I will be the first one down, and I'll try to descend rapidly to 1000 feet and set up a very standard pattern so it's pretty clear which way the pattern has been set. But there is one guy who often pulls a little low, races down and does a 270 over the landing area, which makes it hard to figure out what's going on.

Is this other person spiraling down? I fear you're not telling us everything we need to know to make an informed decision as to whether or not you are just as guilty as this other person for trying to be the one who sets the pattern? Why are you often the first one down? Could you also be pulling low (low being in the 2k range which for anyone flying a highly loaded canopy should be considered low). You tell us that you "try to descend rapidly to 1000 feet" so are you spiraling down yourself? Why are you trying to be the first one down all of the time? Do you not look at who is on the load, try your best to determine what sort of jump they are doing and what sort of canopy they are flying. I'm sorry Bill but if you are out first doing a belly jump and I give your group 5-10 seconds separation and follow you on a freefly jump (and we both pull at the same altitude) who do you think has a better chance of being first down? The guy falling slower (even though he exited first) and the guy jumping the slightly larger larger canopy? Or the guy who falls faster and may be jumping a higher loaded canopy? I always evaluate who is on my load and try to determine where I will fit into the landing pattern before I even get on the airplane. Sometimes it makes sense to try and be first down, sometimes it makes sense to be last and more often than not, it just makes sense to try and sequence yourself in the middle of the load. So why aren't you doing the same? Why are you trying to be the first guy down?

Quote

We can all help in this process by flying standard patterns, both so we reduce the chances of collision and so that others can see what we are doing and match the pattern.

I don't know anything about this other person you speak of so I can not address how they approach their setup point, but for most accomplished swoopers who do a 270 speed induced landing, they do fly (at least from above) a standard downwind to base landing pattern. The only deviation is once at their setup point, they don't turn final, they turn the other way inducing speed for their landing and as you know from the time we initiate the turn to the time we level off above the ground we're talking about 5-8 seconds. Now don't get me wrong, I am on your side when it comes to people swooping in traffic, but I don't buy this "swoopers don't fly predicatable patterns" crap. What part of a downwind and base do you not recognize before the swooper starts the 270? You know if people spent more time trying to create separation in the pattern and less time worrying about being one of the first down, we would have less accidents in the skies.

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

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

thus illustrating the difference between a 'club' and a 'business'

I think you will find that any club that has been around and done well has had to adopt business like practices to stay afloat. To think you can operate with out them is unrealistic. The same economic issue would raise its head even if it was a club as clubs always operate at a very close margin. Besides living in Massachusetts, clubs are the closest thing to Communism and we all know what eventually happens. If that doesn't ring true to you then you have never lived in Massachusetts or been associated with the inner workings of a club.

Economics is only one part of this issue and to try and compare clubs to an operation the size of SDA or any other established DZ is absurd. The main issue here,be it a club or any other skydiving business is identifing a fix to a very serious safety problem that has happened at clubs and DZs in the past. One DZs fix will not work at every DZ or possibly any other DZ. The bottom line is that the people running the DZ have to do what is in the best interest of the DZ and in keeping its skydivers alive by mitigating associated risks. Some people are resitant to change and skydivers love to bitch about anything, especially when it is something designed to protect them and the sport( refer back to when the Cypress first came out or dig further back in skydiving history for similar situations. This is nothing new).

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Zenister 0]

and rather than do the effective method (the one that costs money) the solution is remove the problem and focus the business on the "other 80%"

its not like SDAZ doesnt have the land (or the money) for the most effective solution (separate landing areas) they just dont have the desire or the will to do so...

so they take the 'easy way' out... banning...

thus again supporting the difference between a club and a business.. a club does what supports the interests of members. ALL its members. A business does whatever the owner wants (ie Makes the most money with the least changes or adjustments.)

Clubs put members first, profit second. In Business the process is reversed.. except the jumpers are even farther away from first priority....

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

[PhreeZone 15]

Steve, a swoopers pattern looks completely different then a beginners pattern both from the air and on the ground. Draw them out some time in 3d space and you'll see that for someone trying to follow a tradition 1000-500-300 pattern that the swoopers pattern looks completely screwed up. At safety day this year we talked about patterns and a lot of the new jumpers had no idea what a 270 was or what to do if they tried to follow one in the pattern.

To swoopers they are flying completely predictible patterns based on their intended method of landing, but to others in the air their pattern does not overlay with the other peoples and it causes a lot of confusion in trying to land.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[billvon 2,404]

>Is this other person spiraling down?

Yep.

>Why are you often the first one down?

Because I generally have close to the highest wing loading on the load.

>Do you not look at who is on the load, try your best to determine what
>sort of jump they are doing and what sort of canopy they are flying.

Usually, no, I don't have to. On most loads I know 18 of the people and their approximate loading, and when we do have more than that, they generally end up opening well after we do. Our dedicated swoopers are pretty good about taking a separate pass, so they're not an issue anyway.

>I'm sorry Bill but if you are out first doing a belly jump and I give your
>group 5-10 seconds separation and follow you on a freefly jump (and we
>both pull at the same altitude) who do you think has a better chance of
>being first down?

Depends on our respective wing loadings and where you are after opening.

>Why are you trying to be the first guy down?

Well, one reason is that if the highest loadings increase their descent rates, and the lightest loadings decrease theirs, you get the most possible separation at landing time. Another reason is that there are a few people who like to land downwind, and that hoses everyone else on the load.

But it doesn't have to be me; I don't really care who lands first as long as the person who does flies a decent pattern and lands into the wind. If BC or McGowan is on the load I am happy to let them land first, since they're fairly predictable and load their canopies about as heavily as I do (Pat's a bit higher.)

>but I don't buy this "swoopers don't fly predicatable patterns" crap.

I didn't say that. Why do you assume that the person who does not fly a predictable pattern is a swooper?

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

so they take the 'easy way' out... banning

I'm just curious, have you been out to SDA since the policy came out? They just had a swoop competition not long ago and if you read the policy carefully, swooping isn't banned there, it is merely regulated to specific conditions. Likewise, unless you are in a position to make decisions at SDA, no one can definitively say they aren't currently looking at the possibilities of implimenting additional landing areas or issuing additional guideance. Just because nothing has been said at this point doesn't mean SDA does not have the desire or will.I am sure once a well thought out course of action is reached, they will make those changes.

However, you are correct, SDA did not focus on 80% of the skydivers, they focused on what has the better chance of keeping 100% of the skydivers who jump there alive. SDA has clearly put peoples lives first over a small pecentage of peoples wants.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Zenister 0]

it is effectively banned.

with 270 or better being the 'standard' competitive swoop approach, the ability for a serious swoop competitor to train (or coach) there is pretty much non existent due to the current policy.

common bureaucratic tactic really.. Set up enough hoops, forms and conditions that it isn't feasible on a day to day basis then claim you haven't banned anything when in fact you effectively have..

(the NPS is very familiar with this process, you can do anything with the proper permits, so everything is technically 'allowed'. You just cant get permits without a blessing from God, signed in blood in triplicate.. I'll be very surprised if Eloy is more accommodating to your 'average swooper' without a major bank roll..

which means that showing up for a weekend of canopy coached jumps (including swoop approaches) is no longer an option at Eloy without excessive coordination, and/or the additional risks and issues with continually landing off...

Quote

B.Burke Then there is the real estate problem. Why would a drop zone flood a significant swath of landing area to create a swoop area? Unless space is of no consideration, the available landing area needs to be dedicated to those who use it most, which is the non-swooping 80% of the customers. Even if space was available, the handful of people using a dedicated swoop park could never begin to pay for the sprinklers and the water bill, seeding and fertilizer, and maintenance

i can see separate landing areas has alot of support already... and you dont HAVE to have a swoop pond (which Eloy does already) you just need a cleared, dedicated area where everyone is aware that high performance landings are being conducted...

Honestly in the End its Larry's ball, Larry's business.. he can do whatever he wishes and the exodus of talented coaches (particularly talented canopy pilots who can no longer practice and refine their favorite discipline at Eloy) will likely continue...

Might as well just go ahead and label SDAZ a "Freefall Only" DZ and be done with it...

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

[LouDiamond 1]

I think you are failing to see the forest for the sake of the trees. Surely if you can quote from Brian's statement, it means you have had to read the following:

Quote

Skydive Arizona won’t allow low passes. That was never said. Not only that, you can go big and bust out your 720s on a low pass, right in the main landing area, as long as it is worked out with anyone else on that low pass.

You are either not reading the entire statement or you are choosing to ignore the parts that do not support your skewed perception. As for the exodus, tell me who all these people are that are leaving? I was just in Eloy and will be back there again in a few weeks. I didn't notice this exodus that you claim. There are a few unhappy people but by no means is there anything near an exodus of any sort, in fact, no one has left since this implementation. I think you(among others) who are not jumping at Eloy or have not been there lately, are clinging to a false supposition because you either do not have all the facts or willingly choose to ignore all of the facts. In the end, for the majority of people jumping, the only thing that has noticeably changed at Eloy is that the landing pattern IS now more consistent and predictable from load to load all day long.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING