Landing Directions

[skr 1]

Landing Directions                                    Tue 2004-5-11

------------------                                    -------------


Landing into the wind has been the normal way to land ever since

people started flying 100 years ago, and birds have been doing it

that way for much longer. It gives you the least ground speed and

softest landings.


Recently the idea of following the first person down has emerged.


I think that's a bad idea and here's why:



Consider how a normal landing goes:


- You monitor the wind trends during the day.

- Jump out and open up.

- Look at the wind socks, wind tees, tetrahedrons,

and see how the winds are at this moment.

- Start flying from there to the beginning of a pattern

for these winds.

- Modify this general plan to account for traffic,

fly the pattern, and land.


With zero or light and variable winds there is either a default

direction, or you know that people could be landing in several

directions and watch out for it.



Now consider how it works when you're trying to follow the

first person down:


- You jump out and open up.

- You start looking around trying to figure out who's

going to be first down.

- You don't know who it is or what they're going to do,

so you can't start positioning yourself.

- Instead of watching for traffic you're looking down

trying to figure out who's going to be first and what

they're planning to do.

- You spot a couple possibilities and their shadows.

- You start setting your own pattern up based on what

you think they're doing.

- You glance away for a moment to check for traffic.

- One of them does a 180 hook and lands.

- You look down and think you know which direction they

were going.

- Others are fooled by the same thing.

- None of it makes sense according to the wind sock.

- Some people follow the rule and land down wind.

- Others follow common sense and land into the wind.



One of the arguments I hear for this is that that's how Eloy

does it.


But no, that is not how Eloy does it.


The general rule at Eloy is to land into the wind.


There is only one small grassy section where the landing

direction must be one way or the other based on the first

person down.


And there are lots of wind socks and wind tees and tetrahedrons

so you can figure out which way it will be.



"Follow the first person down" is one of those things that's

easy to say but doesn't make sense when you look at it more

closely.


It's not like you're hanging around at opening altitude until

the first person lands so you then know what to do. You need

to start positioning yourself up high, you can't wait till the

last minute.


It doesn't translate at all to a dropzone where the winds are

tricky and the landings could be in any direction.



I also hear the argument that you should not put up good wind

indicators because if people can see what's going on they will

chase the wind sock in light and variable winds.


But that really only happens where people have not been taught

to read the winds and fly their canopies according to conditions

and traffic.


That points to better training rather than suppressing important

wind information.



So, except for special cases like the one small area at Eloy,

I think it's better to put lots of wind indicators up and

teach people how to read the conditions and fly their canopies.


Skr

edit to add

 tags to restore formatting

			
		

[billvon 2,436]

I think that "Follow the first person down" is not sufficient. It needs to be "the first person lands into the wind/follows the tetrahedron" AND "follow the first person down." The problem is that a great many DZ's have a small dedicated area for high performance landings, and it's often the 'main' area where the grass is. Landing downwind is not that big a deal, but a collision at 50 feet can be fatal. Thus it is more important to land with everyone else than land with the wind. Extend the example to birds - in a flock of geese, they all follow the leader and land going in the same direction even if they have to land downwind to do it.

This has reared its head more than once on big-ways. On both records I was on, the ultimate law of the land was "everyone lands going the same way." It meant landing downwind sometimes, and for both events I got a bigger canopy just in case. It seemed to work in both cases; there were very few canopy collisions near landing.

The ideal situation is a large indicator (tetrahedron) that's assisted by a skydiver on the ground. It indicates which direction everyone should land, and if the winds are squirrely or light, the guy on the ground "forces" it to go one direction. Scott Smith did this for us during some of the Perris big-ways and it worked really well. If you don't have a ground person, then you have to use the tetrahedron (or wind socks) AND not change the landing direction after the first person lands - unless you want to land far enough away that traffic is not an issue. And that, effectively, means follow the first person down.

[Rdutch 0]

I would rather see everyone land in the same direction, than into the wind, (preferably the same direction into the wind) this reason: on light wind days the wind arrow changes direction frequently, sometimes 180 of the direction of the first person down. I have seen too many broken bones from people following the wind arrow. (yes we have flags but for some reason people dont use em), and even more close calls from people landing 7 different directions from the same load.

Also I would much rather see an entire load downwind land, and skid in, than see a canopy to canopy collision. Especially with the range of performance with canopies today and with the large amount of people under canopies they have no reason, or lack the skill to fly. I.M.O at my dz I would like to see a down or up the beer line rule. Like a runway you can only land this way or that way and in the same direction as everyone else. Isn't that how it works for airports? (Really I dont know it is a question) Trying to land 20 people in such a short time there needs to be some order, chaos in the landing area only means injury/death. There needs to be some order. If the first person down, lands downwind, he risks 20 people getting on his ass for it, it probably wont happen too many times after that.

Ray
Small and fast what every girl dreams of!

[DrewEckhardt 0]

In the light and variable conditions which cause most confusion it's safer for everyone in the main landing area to land in the same direction as the first guy down.

At under 5mph, even a tail wind isn't a big deal. If you are going too fast for comfort you should slide in and suffer no worse than grass stains.

The potential injury severity is much higher with people landing in all directions, with closing speeds well over 100 MPH for high performance canopies in opposite directions versus 0 for a perfect side by side approach.

Landing side by side, you need a lane 30' wide. In any direction there can be conflicts over hundreds of feet.

People get tunnel-vision in all high-speed situations (sking, skydiving, driving, etc). With people going in different directions, we're less likely to see them before it's too late.

The first guy down should be landing into the wind and you should be closer to into-the-wind than if you had a default direction.

Modern parachutes have a pretty wide range of sink rates. Opening at 3000 feet, it's not hard to get enough float so you have enough time for the first person to land and to get to where you want to be at 1000 feet.

Good wind indicators should be provided to facilitate accuracy (you need to know how much wind there is) and let you know when to expect a faster down-wind landing.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Extend the example to birds - in a flock of geese, they all follow the leader and land going in the same direction even if they have to land downwind to do it.

Birds must be much smarter than skydivers, I have never seen a bird of any kind downwind a landing, leader or no leader.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

The ideal situation is a large indicator (tetrahedron) that's assisted by a skydiver on the ground.

IMO The ideal situation would be that same large indicator (tetrahedron) but constructed in such a way that 3 or more meters of wind is required to make it turn, so that it doesn't turn with light/variable winds but turns as soon as the wind picks up.

Now everyone can chase the tetrahedron and ignore smaller, more responsive indicators.

The skydiver-on-the-ground, formerly designated to control the tetrahedron can go answer his cell phone, help somebody untangle a canopy, impress the female audience etcetera...

Build one for a reasonable price and I'm game...

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[riddler 0]

At the DZ I jump most often, the rule, as established by the S&TA, is to follow the first person down. But I only see that happen when the first person down lands into the wind, and the wind stays in the same direction for the rest of the jumpers. The rest of the time, everyone seems to forget the rule, and I feel bad when I take the AFF students out to the landing area after telling them the rule, and having them watch everyone land in different directions. I guess rules are only as good as their enforcement.

I make an effort to follow this rule out of respect for my fellow skydivers, who's safety is important to me. If my friends expect me to follow the pattern and I do not, it may lead to unsafe conditions for all of us. A few times, there have been first-down jumpers on a long spot that elected down-wind landings in the main landing area in order to get closer to the pea gravel. After landing, I always walk over to that person and remind them of the rule.

I don't necessarily think that it's safer one way or the other. What I think is UNsafe is telling everyone that this is the rule, having some people (like me) expect it, and still allowing everyone to do whatever they want. If it's a rule, it should be enforced.

Jumpers should always expect the unexpected, but we shouldn't make the unexpected a rule.

The rule does have an amendment that you can land in any direction you want outside of the main landing area. Because of this, the majority of my landings are outside the main landing area. When I work with students that have completed AFF, I encourage them to land outside the main landing area. It's only another 100 feet to walk, it keeps you out of the way of all the other traffic/students/tandems, and it allows you to land upwind.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[billvon 2,436]

>Birds must be much smarter than skydivers, I have never seen a
>bird of any kind downwind a landing, leader or no leader.

I watched a massive flock of geese (50-60) land downwind in a river in Yellowstone last year. Winds were light (around 5kts) and as far as I can tell they never changed from the path they were flying during their migration - just descended and landed.

[ianmdrennan 2]

This whole debate really drives me up the wall (the light and variable winds). Why is it that we tell students it's ok to land downwind cause it's better than turning into the ground but then they watch "instructors" arguing about landing in a 3mph downwind. I can't tell you how many times an instructor has yelled out "land into the wind" on a load where the winds have been light and variable all day.

No wonder so many low timers hook in trying to face into the wind on landing. How can we expect them to believe us that it's ok to land downwind if there are people out there with 1000's of skydives reinforcing the notion that we gotta land into the wind when there's hardly anything. These, I might add, are often the same people who blatently ignore any set landing direction and will land opposite to other skydivers down because they "refuse to land downwind".

Come on people. Think about the notions you're reinforcing in students minds when you're a "land into the wind at any cost" kind of person. Until you change your attitude how can you expect them to believe you?

Don't be a part of the problem. Be a part of the solution.

Can't land downwind? Get a bigger canopy.

Blue ones,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[lug 4]

Sorry, I just don’t see enough supporting detail to justify the concept that its ok to land into the wind regardless of the fact the first person’s landing direction is down wind. If everyone lands the same direction this eliminates a head on collision close to the ground. Further, if you have enough time to check for wind direction while under canopy then you have enough time to notice which way the landing direction has been set.

When someone lands down wind in fairly strong winds, steady from one direction then everyone should still land following the first persons direction. Then once everyone is on the ground, proceed to beat the snot out of the idiot and put him or her out last on future loads until they learn how to determine wind direction from the air.

Quote

The general rule at Eloy is to land into the wind.
There is only one small grassy section where the landing direction must be one way or the other based on the first person down.

Excuse me but if I remember correctly Eloy has two grassy landing areas. The latest Eloy rule I understand is fallow the first person down in the main area, who lands either east or west fallowing the dominant east, west direction of the tetrahedron. If there is a cross wind and someone can't handle that kind of landing then they need to land on the other grassy area.

If one can’t land their parachute down wind or in a crosswind weather they are sliding on their butt or running like a roadrunner then they need to think about getting out of skydiving and Take Up Golf.

Memento Mori

[Nightingale 0]

Perris's rule (what I was told by the instructors in my FJC) is that if you don't like the landing direction that's been set, you're welcome to land whichever way you feel is appropriate, but you'd better do it way the heck east of everyone else so you're not in the pattern and going the wrong way.

[lug 4]

I agree with this but not every DZ has the luxury of large area out side of the main landing area that can be use as an alternate. Those that do are lucky.

Memento Mori

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I agree with this but not every DZ has the luxury of large area out side of the main landing area that can be use as an alternate. Those that do are lucky.

People can always vote with their feet and dollars.

Having to wait till after a less than ideal landing setup to beat on some idiot for forcing it doesn't seem like a great solution to me. The reason for a consistent direction is strong, but you don't have to be total lemmings.

(fortunately I'm still so much higher up that the pattern is clear by the time I'm on final)

[lug 4]

Quote

Having to wait till after a less than ideal landing setup to beat on some idiot for forcing it doesn't seem like a great solution to me.

I was being sarcastic, teaching goes a lot further.

Quote

The reason for a consistent direction is strong, but you don't have to be total lemmings.

Ok, I give up you are absolutely right but you're wrong. Lemmings have nothing to do with it, Lemmings are furry little rodents that aimlessly fallow the one in front for no reason and no human should be pigeonholed with Lemmings. Humans have larger brains that we hopefully use, to reason with. So if every one on a load lands in the same direction, that has been set by the first one down, it would stand to reason that injury from a collision with another jumper would be avoided.

Have you ever seen and midair collation close to the ground, the sound alone is quite unique.



I am done.

Memento Mori

[Shark 0]

Quote

Quote

Extend the example to birds - in a flock of geese, they all follow the leader and land going in the same direction even if they have to land downwind to do it.

Birds must be much smarter than skydivers, I have never seen a bird of any kind downwind a landing, leader or no leader.

I've seen a mallard downwind it and get a great swoop on the pond. ...and he only did a 180 to final.

[ps5601 0]

In opion the "first man down rule" sucks. I open at 2,000 - 2,500ft . From there I can see if the wind direction or strength has changed significantly pretty quickly (my DZ has several flags, and wind socks of differing sizes). I generally do about a 120 into landing, so I fly to a suitable holding point before starting a pattern (note also that my home DZ has a landing area near to the centre for those with 800+ jumps).

However, someone else on a hot canopy spirals down 1000+ft below me, and is pretty much over the landing area. There is no way that I can tell in which direction they are setting up for landing, as I don't know what sort of turn they are going to do (lots of people with very similar canopies) and I can't tell how high they are.

The first time that I know in which direction they are landing is when I see the canopy hit the deck, by which time I am generally at 1000ft or lower. I have not been sitting directly over the landing area as I don't want to get in other people's way. If I am to change my set up now, I will struggle to be in the correct place at the correct time for my swoop. OK, so I don't get to hook on that load, not the end of the world.

However, it is the inconsiderate and selfish nature of the first man down that hoses all those who follow. If the winds are strong, land into wind. If not, follow a pre-determined landing direction. It's not hard. Unfortunately, there are some for whom the rules do not apply, either due to their Skygod status, or because they MUST land into wind.

In my opinion, if you are following a first man down rule, then the first man down should fly an easy to follow pattern that ALL can see. Think of others, not just yourself.

A further problem with "First man down", is when 2 people come into land "first" almost at the same time, but neither has seen the other until they are too low to do anything about it. I have seen this several times, at different DZs, with some very experienced skydivers.

Bit of a rant sorry, but it's a rule that I find stupid and unnecessary. With just a little planning and forethought the problem can be solved.

Blue skies

Paul

[happythoughts 0]

Good post. It's a long read with a lot of good points. Thanks.

[JohnMitchell 14]

***
Having to wait till after a less than ideal landing setup to beat on some idiot for forcing it doesn't seem like a great solution to me.

Quote

I agree. No procrastination.You should beat up your idiots early. Don't wait 'til they make you land downwind. They'll probably dump in your face first or crash you in freefall.

• Quote

[billvon 2,436]

>However, it is the inconsiderate and selfish nature of the first man
>down that hoses all those who follow.

So land first yourself or have a word with him afterwards. It would be even more inconsiderate of someone to disregard the set landing direction, collide with someone and injure them.

>If the winds are strong, land into wind. If not, follow a pre-
>determined landing direction. It's not hard.

The winds are 4 knots out of the north. Normal landing pattern is to the south. Result - half the people land to the north, half land to the south, because some of them see the streamer when it's a little higher and some see it when it's a little lower. Big problem.

>In my opinion, if you are following a first man down rule, then the
> first man down should fly an easy to follow pattern that ALL can see.
> Think of others, not just yourself.

I agree there. The first guy down has an obligation to set the correct landing direction.

[skr 1]

OK - I tried to combine 3 themes into one post
and it was a mistake, so let me separate them
into sub threads with different subject lines
and try again.

This is stuff I've been thinking for a long time
but it's the first time I've tried to articulate
it out loud.

Seeing people's reactions is very helpful.

----

Theme 1 was largely venting frustration at one
of the local dropzones where the wind indicators
are minimal and hard to see, swoopers and regular
jumpers land in the same area, the custom of
flying a recognizable pattern has never been
established, the rule is follow the first person
down, and people land every which way.

That is a local situation which doesn't really
belong in the discussion as other than motivation,
so let me drop that part, it doesn't contribute
to further understanding.

----

Theme 2 was that "Follow the first person down" is
one of those memes, like "Wait till they're at 45
degrees", that gets into people's minds and sidetracks
us from real solutions.

"Follow the first person down" as both formulation
and algorithm is inadequate, incomplete and
misleading.

The goal, safe landing / safe separation, gets
obscured by the statement of the attempted mechanism,
"Follow first down" / "Leave 45 degrees".

We can do better.

----

Theme 3 was that the difference in values between
swoopers and regular jumpers leads to very
different ideas of what a good landing is.

Like bicycles and cars they don't mix well and
trying to force them into a common mold doesn't
work.

Skr

[skr 1]

Theme 3 was that the difference in values between
swoopers and regular jumpers leads to very
different ideas of what a good landing is.

Like bicycles and cars they don't mix well and
trying to force them into a common mold doesn't
work.

----

Not being a swooper I'm only guessing at swooper
values but they appear to be along the lines of
length, form, assorted toe dragging and other bonus
points, maybe the esthetics of the entry.

Ideal swooping conditions would be down wind in a
meadow at 5,000 meters in the Alps where you could
go for about a mile.

The actual arrival back on earth is unimportant.


The traditional ideal landing is to come to a dead
stop, and then calmly place my feet on the ground.

If I have to take a step I lose points. If I have
to run it out it's a shitty landing. If I have to
PLF to survive I really blew it.

Mere survival is not the point.

----

Both the end goals and the flying required are
incompatible.


Due to the historical order in which they occurred
swooper goals and values are being forced on
regular jumpers instead of recognizing that they
are two separate kinds of activity.

Just look at what pictures of landings appear in
the magazines.

It's even built into the current language in such
phrases as "high performance landings".

Whether performance is high or low depends on the
values against which you are measuring it.

For speed and acceleration a car is high performance.
For an ecological paradigm bicycles are high performance.

For me a perfect standup is high performance.
For a swooper a great swoop is high performance.

So landings are not high or low performance, they are
simply swooper or traditional.

----

Now I happen to think that swooping is a very cool
development. It looks great, and it pushes our understanding
into whole new areas.

But forcing of values is not cool.

Seeing one as better than the other instead of just
different is not cool.

So that's that theme.

( Upon rereading this before posting it I realize that
( for me to be championing traditional values is at least
( a case of beer and possibly even a small keg.

Skr

[skr 1]

Theme 2 was that "Follow the first person down" is
one of those memes, like "Wait till they're at 45
degrees", that gets into people's minds and sidetracks
us from real solutions.

"Follow the first person down" as both formulation
and algorithm is inadequate, incomplete and
misleading.

The goal, safe landing / safe separation, gets
obscured by the statement of the attempted mechanism,
"Follow first down" / "Leave 45 degrees".

We can do better.

----

xxxxxxxxxx

But right now I can't seem to get into words what
I'm trying to say, so I'll just put this much out
and see if it comes to me when I get back, and also
maybe respond to some of the points made above.

Skr

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

"Follow the first person down" as both formulation
and algorithm is inadequate, incomplete and
misleading.

ABSO-F***ING-LUTELY!

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

[Hooknswoop 19]

1) You can generally figure out in the boarding area who is going to be the first person to land. At that time you can discuss which way they are planning on landing, the winds, etc. This can prevent the first person down from landing downwind.

2) The first person down is deciding which way to and based upon the same wind indicators that you are using to decide which way to land. This is usually only a problem when the winds are light and variable. If the winds are light and variable, then a downwind landing is a non-event since the maximum tailwind component will be very small if the wind direction changes after the first person lands and before you land.

3) Usually the first person to land is a competent canopy pilot, more often than not flying a small canopy. As long as they understand that intentional downwind landings will not be appreciated and that they are expected to land into the wind to set the landing direction for the entire load, there shouldn’t be a problem.

4) This is the most important reason why everyone should land facing the same direction; a canopy collision is much more dangerous and severe than a downwind landing any day. A downwind landing, at worst, results is sliding across the ground, whereas a canopy collision, at worst, results in two fatalities. Given the choice, I’d take the slide any day over the fatalities.

5) Aircraft at large airports are sometimes required to land downwind in the interest of traffic management. Imagine if the winds were light and variable at SFO and the controllers kept changing runways every few minutes to allow every aircraft to land into the wind.

6) If everyone lands in the same direction as the first person down, then the landing patterns will be similar, helping to prevent canopy collisions in the landing pattern as well as in the landing area.

7) The downside to everyone following the first person down is the possibility of the first person landing downwind in high winds. This is easy to prevent, as mentioned in 1), and should never happen.

Derek

[happythoughts 0]

On very light wind days where the windsock may be uninflated, a landing direction should be established in the boarding area. Wind direction arrows can change during landing during light, variable winds.

"If there is no wind sock direction, we will all land to the North." And then face the North to illustrate.