Dumbing Down of Jumpers

[MakeItHappen 15]

Dumbing Down of Jumpers

Dumb Down 1:

Making a bunch of people wait for a key to allow them to dock. This takes away the decision by individuals to know when a formation is ready for them. How can people learn when a slot is stable and available for docking if they cannot make that decision for themselves. I also think the 'wait for a key' method makes people rush because they take the key as 'dock now' as opposed to permission to dock. People should still verify that a slot is ready, even after a key. But people see a key and think 'Well, they said it was ok to dock - so I will.'' The 'wait for a key' method is almost as though the organizers want to fly other people's slots for them.

A better alternative is to teach people how to read formations, where and when to look. Grip fixation is major reason most people dock too soon or when a wave goes through the formation. Many people on big-ways can fly no contact very well. They fly no contact off their grip. They do not look all the way to the center to see if their grip is moving around the sky or parked on its proper radial. They fly no contact, pick up a grip(s) when they are close enough, then get level with the formation and try to move to their proper radial and distance from the center.

You should fly along your radial to the proper distance from the center exactly level or slightly below the formation, turn to your proper heading, then pick up a grip(s). The grip will come back to its proper place, assuming the formation does not funnel. If things look knarly in front of you, just wait, parked on your radial, up and out a few feet before committing as the formation settles out.

I think we lose in the long run by not teaching people the know how and proper sequence of docking.

Dumb Down 2:

Holding the tetrahedron to indicate landing direction. If people on a big-way cannot determine the landing pattern and land in the proper direction then they should not be on the load. Holding the tetrahedron also makes landing more hazardous. Small wind fluctuations because of dust devils, wind shear or wake turbulence are indicated by a tetrahedron. This information is lost if the tetrahedron is held in position. If a rotating tetrahedron switches 180 degrees after the pattern has been established, then jumpers need to deal with landing in the established pattern. The good news is that they have knowledge that the wind has shifted and can adjust their landing flare properly. Nowadays, you have to check the direction of the tetrahedron and if anyone is holding it. On any given jump, you have no idea if that tetrahedron will be telling you anything about the wind. Sometimes it will, sometimes it won't. That's a dissonance that will eat someone up one day.

A better alternative is to use a separate arrow to indicate landing direction.

Dumb Down 3:

Telling a new jumper to 'pull in place' on a load that is over their skill level. If someone does not have the ability to track and find clear air, then they should not be on that load. There are no guarantees that a dive will go exactly according to the plan. New jumpers may find themselves in the middle of a funnel at break-off. Do you really want a new guy pulling at 4K say in the middle of a funnel that he is low on?? I think not. Every jumper must be able to track all the way to assigned pull altitude. Your pull altitude may change to the lowest assigned altitude if you go low on a formation or a funnel puts you low. Funnels at break-off altitude are especially stressful to newer jumpers.

The better plan is to make sure every jumper can handle and deal with all the contingency plans. That includes the possibility of being a low jumper and having to pull at the lowest assigned pull altitude.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Small wind fluctuations because of dust devils, wind shear or wake turbulence are indicated by a tetrahedron

You know, most of the tetrahedrons I've seen don't shift direction for minor changes. Windsocks do, but thats an advantage of a tetrahedron, it will hold an "average" if the winds are fluxuating a bit.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Squeak 17]

cant say I have ever seen a tetrahedron at a DZ wanna post a pic??

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[metalslug 31]

Quote

cant say I have ever seen a tetrahedron at a DZ wanna post a pic??
Squeak
(Just learning how to Fly)
"My Life Rocks, How's Yours' Going"

Info and example here.

[Ron 7]

Jumpers taking life saving devices for granted.

Just like when all these cool computer cash registers started asking how much the customer gave you and then it tells you the change to give back. This has made it so many folks can't make change without a calculator.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 1,648]

I think I can guess what prompted items 1 and 2.

...

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

[skybytch 259]

Were they keying waves in on the POPS bigways?

I can understand having people wait for a key to dock in a camp situation (ie the big way camp held recently at Perris). It's a good way to learn what a "dockable" formation looks like - and what it doesn't look like. But on a record attempt, or even on a sunset load big way, every jumper should be able to figure out for themselves whether their slot is ready for them to dock on or not.

[bmcd308 0]

And #3 was no doubt prompted by my little admission in the look before you pull thread.

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

[headoverheels 291]

I don't agree that the key to dock makes people rush to dock after the key. If so, they are probably the same people that don't stop before docking, which was causing the problems when there was no "key to dock". There is some benefit in having the formation build cleanly and symmetrically, having people forced to match the fall rate before docking, etc. True, base practice for a world record should not require that key, but it certainly helped.

Regarding setting a landing direction by holding the tetrahedron in place to show required landing direction: I fully agree that a separate arrow for that purpose would be better; I don't know whether they had one there. At that landing area, assuming you mean Perris, there are many windsocks to indicate direction, and it is very common for them to be pointing in different directions. If you aren't landing pretty close to a sock, it's not going to be affected by dust devils, etc. the same way you are. The windsocks are much more sensitive than the tetrahedron for indicating the wind direction, and also give an indication of speed.

[billvon 2,434]

>Making a bunch of people wait for a key to allow them to dock.

I agree that this is a bad idea on training dives, but can be a useful tool for larger formations. It worked on the 300-way.


>Holding the tetrahedron to indicate landing direction. If people on a
>big-way cannot determine the landing pattern and land in the proper
> direction then they should not be on the load.

On most larger dives I've been on, landing in one direction takes precedence over landing with the wind. You can do that by mandating a landing direction before takeoff (as with the 300 way) or by using an indicator (like an arrow or tetrahedron, as on the 124 ways.) You can also just tell people to all land in the same direction, but that doesn't work as well in my experience. If two people land opposite directions at the same time, which way do you land?

>Holding the tetrahedron also makes landing more hazardous. Small
>wind fluctuations because of dust devils, wind shear or wake
>turbulence are indicated by a tetrahedron.

The usefulness of a tetrahedron over a streamer or windsock is that it has inertia and is NOT affected as quickly by wake turbulence. A streamer that is affected by turbulence might cause half the load to land going the opposite direction, since it was momentarily indicating the direction of the turbulence rather than the prevailing wind.

Turbulence, dust devils etc are still indicated by streamers.

>Telling a new jumper to 'pull in place' on a load that is over their skill >level.

I agree. Pulling in place is a useful tool if you desire a breakoff key, and it may well make sense to have one of the poorer trackers use that key. But it's not a substitute for having the skills to safely track away from a large dive. Funnels happen, and everyone must be able to get clear even if there is no base to pull out of.

[pilotdave 0]

A tetrahedron is never going to be your only wind indicator. If it is, you're not paying attention. It tells you nothing about wind speed anyway. If it's being used to indicate proper landing direction, you should have some other way of judging actual wind. I don't think a tetrahedron should ever be used alone. Same for a wind tee.

Dave

[kallend 1,648]

If we consider Bryan Burke's concept of each jumper opening in their own column of air, then why waste the column of air at the center? It's appropriate for a video guy or the pull-out person on a large formation load, but if neither of those are present, what's wrong with using it for one of the others? It simply allows a more efficient use of the airspace once you get to a seven-way or larger.

If you don't agree, try arranging seven pennies on a tabletop so they don't touch each other, in the smallest amount of space. Having one at the center allows a more efficient use of the space available.

I agree that using a center deployment as a crutch for someone marginally qualified is inappropriate.

On the whole, I am more concerned with the large number of people I see on big ways that dive rather than flat-track away on breakoff.

...

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

[billvon 2,434]

>It's appropriate for a video guy or the pull-out person on a large
> formation load, but if neither of those are present, what's wrong with
> using it for one of the others?

A funnel at breakoff time could put the pullout person below the formation; pulling at that point could have disastrous results. This is the primary problem with "pulling out" of a dive. If it's arranged so the guy in the center simply doesn't track, and deploys at the same altitude as everyone else, then no problem - but then it's not a pull-out.

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

>It's appropriate for a video guy or the pull-out person on a large
> formation load, but if neither of those are present, what's wrong with
> using it for one of the others?

A funnel at breakoff time could put the pullout person below the formation; pulling at that point could have disastrous results. This is the primary problem with "pulling out" of a dive. If it's arranged so the guy in the center simply doesn't track, and deploys at the same altitude as everyone else, then no problem - but then it's not a pull-out.

You and I have both been on a lot of big ways with a pull out from the center - you on many more than me. If you think it's dangerous, why do you do it?

...

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

[mccordia 73]

Quote

You and I have both been on a lot of big ways with a pull out from the center - you on many more than me. If you think it's dangerous, why do you do it?

I think he was stating that it's not dangerous if you also have the skills to do a normal track should something funnel/go to hell...
If pulling in place is your only option, skillwise, you could potentialy get into a lot of trouble...

JC
FlyLikeBrick
I'm an Athlete?

[billvon 2,434]

>You and I have both been on a lot of big ways with a pull out from
> the center - you on many more than me. If you think it's
> dangerous, why do you do it?

I saw the worst case scenario on a 60+ way a few years back - a jumper got below the base, pulled, and got pulled up through the base as he deployed. He didn't hit anyone (fortunately.) On more recent dives (i.e. the 124 ways at Perris) the plan has been that if the base funnels, the pullouts do NOT occur - and people break off at a slightly lower 'backup' altitude (i.e. 5300 feet instead of a pullout at 5500 feet.) The person planning to pull out then tracks off with the rest of his wave.

This, of course, makes it even more unsuitable for a low-time jumper as a way to get him in a larger formation.

[winsor 187]

Quote

Quote

>It's appropriate for a video guy or the pull-out person on a large
> formation load, but if neither of those are present, what's wrong with
> using it for one of the others?

A funnel at breakoff time could put the pullout person below the formation; pulling at that point could have disastrous results. This is the primary problem with "pulling out" of a dive. If it's arranged so the guy in the center simply doesn't track, and deploys at the same altitude as everyone else, then no problem - but then it's not a pull-out.

You and I have both been on a lot of big ways with a pull out from the center - you on many more than me. If you think it's dangerous, why do you do it?

Big ways are dangerous to begin with. Since you're gambling that nobody will do anything catastrophic in the first place, it seems natural to bet the ranch.

I was on a 3-point 118 way (or something like that - it was one of many similar jumps) wherein someone wound up on top of the person who was supposed to initiate breakoff, right as we reached breakoff altitude.

Nobody was very happy about it, but people were heads-up enough to begin breakoff as planned. I was in the second ring, and had clear air at opening altitude.

Big ways are a different animal. Your basic skydive is a nontrivial experience, and specialty jumps are just that much moreso. There really isn't much in the way of Plan-B.

When I organize smaller groups, I sure as hell don't do so by the same rules as apply to blots. I don't think it's appropriate.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>It's appropriate for a video guy or the pull-out person on a large
> formation load, but if neither of those are present, what's wrong with
> using it for one of the others?

A funnel at breakoff time could put the pullout person below the formation; pulling at that point could have disastrous results. This is the primary problem with "pulling out" of a dive. If it's arranged so the guy in the center simply doesn't track, and deploys at the same altitude as everyone else, then no problem - but then it's not a pull-out.

You and I have both been on a lot of big ways with a pull out from the center - you on many more than me. If you think it's dangerous, why do you do it?

Big ways are dangerous to begin with. Since you're gambling that nobody will do anything catastrophic in the first place, it seems natural to bet the ranch.

I was on a 3-point 118 way (or something like that - it was one of many similar jumps) wherein someone wound up on top of the person who was supposed to initiate breakoff, right as we reached breakoff altitude.

Nobody was very happy about it, but people were heads-up enough to begin breakoff as planned. I was in the second ring, and had clear air at opening altitude.

Big ways are a different animal. Your basic skydive is a nontrivial experience, and specialty jumps are just that much moreso. There really isn't much in the way of Plan-B.

When I organize smaller groups, I sure as hell don't do so by the same rules as apply to blots. I don't think it's appropriate.


Blue skies,

Winsor

As a skinny guy I get to view all the nasty stuff from the outside, and I always have had clean air to track into. On the whole, I prefer it that way.

...

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

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

a jumper got below the base, pulled, and got pulled up through the base as he deployed.

Ahem, ...Bill, BZZZZT!!! ...Busted here!

You know very well that this deploying jumper did NOT get "pulled UP" anywhere!! What type of fable are you trying to further propagate here? Next thing, you'll be telling us that this was necessary because he entered a cloud, and lost his breath (through his skin of course) as a result!

Sorry, but I just could not resist this one.

coitus non circum - Moab Stone