GreenLight 5 #51 April 2, 2004 Just had to jump in here... (no pun) I'm a firm believer that canopies do not kill skydivers,,, Hook turns too low to the ground, poor judgement and lack of knowledge are the things that get skydivers killed under a good canopy. Being a hang glider pilot I know something that most skydivers do not. The air at ground level can do some very wierd things and you can not see it. I've hit burbles in my hang glider at 5 feet AGL on landing approach that would collapse any canopy. I have video of people experiencing canopy distortion on final and if that person had been doing 40 mph and just coming out of a hook turn he would have eatin dirt for sure. I don't care how many hook turns you've done or how good you are at swooping, if you keep doing it you will eventually hit that burble in the air just above the ground and your calculations will be off by a foot or two at 40 to 50 mph. If it's off that much and low, you're going to eat dirt and at that speed you will either go to the hospital or the morgue. It's that simple folks... The thing is, no matter how safe they make this sport, there will always be those who wish to push the limits and there will always be those who die doing it. I mean with AADs, RSLs and square reserves, a sack of potatoes could do this now and make it safely to the ground. But to some, freefall is not the end of the thrill. Once the canopy is open they want more of a rush. Hense swooping and hook turns. Just an old and not so bold slydivers opinion...Green Light "Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there." "Your statement answered your question." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckbrown 0 #52 April 2, 2004 Ron, these numbers indicate that currency is the criteria you should be looking at to control this problem. I agree with what you're trying to do, but my divergence with you has been your focus on jump numbers. Again, almost 50% of the fatalities last year involved jumpers with over 600 jumps. I agree that low time jumpers are more at risk on these canopies, and steps should be taken to keep them from pounding in. But by the same token, this problem also effects jumpers with higher jump numbers, but who may not have the currency needed to properly control these canopies. Maybe a thought is to require a minimum number of jumps or a control course to initially qualify to fly a certain WL, but also require a specified number of jumps per year to maintain the qualification. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #53 April 2, 2004 QuoteQuoteMaybe, but the license says you are an expert, you can't be that without a night jump. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bzzzt - incorrect. the license says nothing of the sort, take a look at yours. Mine says "Expert" on it...I can show it to you if ya like. We know YOU are an expert. Some are even "master skydivers". But not regular old C or D licensees any more.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #54 April 2, 2004 Sampling isn't a cool name to discredit you or anyone. It's a procedure that researchers and statisticians use to ensure that the data they look at accurately represents the population under consideration. It's a particularly tricky business when you don't have much data to begin with -- it's very tempting to look at the data at hand and extrapolate, but this is in general not a sound technique. It's easy to pick a sample of jumpers to prove anything. In a study of 100 jumpers in the last 10 years, every last one of them died in the sport. Therefore everybody who skydives dies in a skydiving accident. A separate study shows that there's zero risk at all in skydiving -- 100 jumpers that didn't even twist an ankle. A subsequent meta study showed the risk of death to be exactly 50%. Using a proper sampling technique is what prevents us from making mistakes like this. nathanielMy advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #55 April 2, 2004 QuoteMaybe a thought is to require a minimum number of jumps or a control course to initially qualify to fly a certain WL, but also require a specified number of jumps per year to maintain the qualification I agree..I have said several times that most jumpers don't need a Xbraced canopy...Just like most drivers don't need a Ferrari. You WANT a Xbraced canopy, just like you want a Ferrari. But most jumpers don't do enough jumps to be current enough to jump a cutting edge canopy. But nothing is stopping them, and their ego says "Jump the cool canopy". As long as they think that way, and as long as they can get those canopies...People will die. Its funny to see how folks don't think of a Stiletto as a HP canopy...It stil is, and it still takes the same amount of advanced skill to fly it safely. But its no longer "cool" so you need a X braced canopy. Not eveyone should have the cutting edge."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #56 April 2, 2004 QuoteWe know YOU are an expert. Some are even "master skydivers". But not regular old C or D licensees any more. Well I don't consider myself an expert...I know experts and I am not one of them. The USPA DID change it...I don't know when. It was just a jab at you Doc. But I know that since I'm not an expert...I really have to doubt a guy with 300 jumps is."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #57 April 2, 2004 QuoteSampling isn't a cool name to discredit you or anyone. It's a procedure that researchers and statisticians use to ensure that the data they look at accurately represents the population under consideration. Well the problem is you have to take a sample for somewhere..Which is why I told you to ask the guys at your DZ...Do it independantly of me. Go ahead. Find out if more jumps are mad at your DZ from guys with over 1,000 jumps, or guys with 200-300. I would really like to know what you find. As for my experience here in FL....More jumps are made by guys that have over 1,000 jumps. It is almost impossible to swing a dead cat and not hit a guy with 1,000 jumps down here."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nathaniel 0 #58 April 3, 2004 Quote Which is why I told you to ask the guys at your DZ...Do it independantly of me. Go ahead. Find out if more jumps are mad at your DZ from guys with over 1,000 jumps, or guys with 200-300. Arg. What you're failing to grasp is it's not the person that makes it bogus, it's the method. If a person screws up once they can go back and do it again, but if anybody does it the same way it's still bunk. Has it occurred to you that the people mostly likely to be found at the dropzone are those that jump the most? To get an accurate sample, just polling the people you meet at the DZ is not going to work -- it's probably going to give a biased sample. Conducting a proper sample isn't a thing you can do without proper planning and implementation. It's not rocket science, but it's more than a weekend project. Which is probably why we don't have this data already... nathanielMy advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #59 April 5, 2004 QuoteArg. What you're failing to grasp is it's not the person that makes it bogus, it's the method. And what you are failing to grasp is this... Quotethat the people mostly likely to be found at the dropzone are those that jump the most? It seem to me that we are LOOKING to see who jumps the most. The guy with 250 jumps, or the guy with 1,000+. And I understand you position...But what I am saying is this....The people who jump the most IS the group we are looking for. And yes I am very disapointed in the USPA for not having this info...I have asked for it, and Ihave been ignored. The USPA is full of crap. They are more interested in building a museum than safe skydiving."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,635 #60 April 5, 2004 QuoteQuoteArg. What you're failing to grasp is it's not the person that makes it bogus, it's the method. And what you are failing to grasp is this... Quotethat the people mostly likely to be found at the dropzone are those that jump the most? It seem to me that we are LOOKING to see who jumps the most. The guy with 250 jumps, or the guy with 1,000+. And I understand you position...But what I am saying is this....The people who jump the most IS the group we are looking for. And yes I am very disapointed in the USPA for not having this info...I have asked for it, and Ihave been ignored. The USPA is full of crap. They are more interested in building a museum than safe skydiving. Disagree with your methodology. Just because SOME jumpers with thousands of jumps are most likely to be found at the DZ does not in any way make them representative of ALL jumpers with thousands of jumps. You have introduced an extra and confounding variable with no theoretical or empirical justification. Nathaniel is correct.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
