diablopilot 2 #26 March 27, 2007 By that logic as proven by the most recent fatality, they are not.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ORANGENBLUE 0 #27 March 27, 2007 Once again JP, exelent point. Maybe the LZ needs to be enlarged. At the DZ I frequent, the landing area is LARGER than SAZ's and you have do have at least "C" license and prove proficiency to land at the airport. Otherwise you land at the alternate LZ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nbblood 0 #28 March 27, 2007 QuoteHas there been any thought to the fact that the landing areas might just not be big enough to safely operate that many aircraft? What are you doing? Actually thinking to the root of the problem? What's gotten into you?Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #29 March 27, 2007 I think everyone needs to read what stu wrote again. it is only the truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 292 #31 March 27, 2007 Quotehas anyone looked at opening altitudes? if someone is loading a canopy at 2.0 opens at 3.5k while someone who loads a canopy at 1.0 opens at 2.5k there's going to be a problem. Good point. So don't be opening a highly loaded canopy at 3.5k, unless part of a planned swooper stack, or headed for different landing areas, or alone. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #32 March 27, 2007 I am of the opinion that there is no need to be in free fall below 3.5. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #33 March 28, 2007 QuoteI am of the opinion that there is no need to be in free fall below 3.5. unless your getting away from someone. but I agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #34 March 28, 2007 Go low for safety right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #35 March 28, 2007 QuoteThese rules will apply to everyone at Skydive Arizona. I know I will take heat for this, but I have a thick skin to absorb it and I believe this action in necessary. I will be in contact with other DZOs and hope to convince them to follow suit. While I hope Larry's voice on controlling patterns and reducing collisions is heeded, I hope he doesn't intend to simply convince other DZO's to ban turns >180. It's entirely possible that others could modify their infrastructure and procedures to separately accomodate both traditional and high-performance patterns. If another DZ can pull that off safely, I'd applaud them regardless of the economics (e.g. attracting a larger staff as a result). Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peckerhead 0 #36 March 28, 2007 QuoteI am of the opinion that there is no need to be in free fall below 3.5. Are you serious? What if you exit at 3.0? QuoteGo low for safety right? 3.5 is not low. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #37 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuoteGo low for safety right? 3.5 is not low. maybe not to you, but it is to me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AFFI 0 #38 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuoteGo low for safety right? 3.5 is not low. Exactly what I was thinking... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #39 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteGo low for safety right? 3.5 is not low. Exactly what I was thinking... thats because we fly small parachutes. 3.5 is where I want to be in the saddle, if I have to go lower, It really bothers me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #40 March 28, 2007 What do you gain by being in ff below 3.5? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #41 March 28, 2007 QuoteWhat do you gain by being in ff below 3.5? 10 more points dude!! damn!Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #42 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuotehas anyone looked at opening altitudes? if someone is loading a canopy at 2.0 opens at 3.5k while someone who loads a canopy at 1.0 opens at 2.5k there's going to be a problem. Good point. So don't be opening a highly loaded canopy at 3.5k, unless part of a planned swooper stack, or headed for different landing areas, or alone. This is incorrect. 3500 feet is less likely to cause conflicts for the higher performance canopy pilot than 2500 feet because it provides more options. While a small canopy with an agressive planform can go much faster than one loaded arround a pound per square foot with a less tapered planform and loose the first thousand feet in fifteen seconds, in full brakes it can't descend any slower than the moderately loaded canopy in full flight. When the small canopy starts out higher, it can land either before (passing above pattern altitude) or after (waiting until the large canopy has landed) the larger one. When it starts out at the same altitude it's going to land first. If the smaller canopy pilot exits from a turbine aircraft after a number of 2-4 person groups (4-way and typical freefly group sizes) and finishes snivelling at 2500 feet, he's going to pass the larger one which exited early in the jump run during his speed inducing landing maneuver. The number of freefall groups that can separate the canopies before this happens shrinks when the pilots under larger canopies try to have fun under canopy by spiraling. Everyone dumping at 3500 feet regardless of canopy size would improve the situation more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlueSBDeath 2 #43 March 28, 2007 Steve, that was NOT helpful!!!!! You know that the clean safe air is low get on the ground and get out of the way!!!!! Let the young ones die trying to get to our age!!! Look BEFORE and DURING the turn, BSBDBSBD...........Its all about Respect, USPA#-7062, FB-2197, Outlaw 499 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #44 March 28, 2007 QuoteHas there been any thought to the fact that the landing areas might just not be big enough to safely operate that many aircraft? The desert dust is very destructive to gear, perhaps the lure of that grass is just too much for some? The available landing area is of course vast. The new policy at Eloy seems very reasonable.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Unstable 8 #45 March 28, 2007 Good call Larry Hill!! The fact that Skydive Arizona, the mecca for jumpers, has put these rules into effect - makes a pretty loud statement! High Five!=========Shaun ========== Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZigZagMarquis 8 #46 March 28, 2007 Sounds good. I'll be interested to hear how the "enforcement" goes. I'm not saying it is... but I hope this isn't just lip service... i.e. it will be interesting to hear that if someone breaks the rules, if they're really punished according to the policy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #47 March 28, 2007 I have jumped at skydive AZ every year of my career so far... I did not this year due to the issues of people all trying to land in one small landing area.... I would love to see them extend the landing area, I think it woudl alleveate the current situations... Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tornolf 0 #48 March 28, 2007 QuoteWhat do you gain by being in ff below 3.5? Around 25 seconds of enjoyable freefall, assuming I follow BSRs. But I also hook a 270 riser turn around 200 feet, not 600+ Different strokes for different folks.A waddling elephant seal is the cutest thing in the entire world. -TJ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nbblood 0 #49 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat do you gain by being in ff below 3.5? Around 25 seconds of enjoyable freefall, assuming I follow BSRs. But I also hook a 270 riser turn around 200 feet, not 600+ Different strokes for different folks. I'm just assuming this post is fishing for a reaction cause this is just dumb. Even in a wingsuit, you'd be hard pressed to get 25 seconds of ff time between 3.5 and 2. Then if you're pulling at 2k in a wingsuit, that's a whole different discussion. Of course a 270 riser turn at 200 feet leaves you all kinds of options too. This looks an awful lot like generating controversy for the sake of controversy. Good luck with all that though!Blues, Nathan If you wait 'til the last minute, it'll only take a minute. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tornolf 0 #50 March 28, 2007 I jump a F111 7cell loaded at 0.6 freepacked with clamps (reserve type packjob so it will fit in the container) with a large hole mesh slider with a packjob that has me going from pitch to fully open in under 200 feet. And it's not very hard for someone like me to maintain a 45mph fallrate in a wingsuit either My point was that there's a large range of things we do in the sky that are fun, some things other people don't understand. You pretty much proved that point. It's up to us to determine our own level of safety with what we do. With regards to all the canopy stuff, I either get out low or get out way last. I like being the only canopy around.A waddling elephant seal is the cutest thing in the entire world. -TJ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
