freakydiver 0 #201 April 29, 2003 Around and around we go - back to my original idea. "I'm saying there ARE DZO's, S&TA's, riggers and instructors out there telling people to buy small canopies at low experience levels." With proper education, gosh I feel as though I've said this ten times, with proper education, starting with jump one and through the early stages of one's jumping career, perhaps one could be molded to realize the negative aspects of downsizing to quickly. Let me ask you this, is there currently on average any material in an AFF class that pertains to high performace canopies? My bet would be a flat out no. Then the student goes out and makes his first three or four jumps. Then the student sees johnny hot shot 540in one kick ass swoop and thinks, shoot, how hard could it be?? I thought that way, luckily I made it out alive and unscathed. Bottom line - you asked for a quick solution, how about some basic education in the initial AFF class along the lines of, "when you exit this classroom and for your next one hundred jumps, you will see hot canopy pilots landing out there. You will also not see a few other hot canopy pilots because they thought they were ready for a high performance canopy without really seeking out knowledgeable individual's advice and got in WAY over their heads and are either no longer around or unable to walk." I'd be willing to bet there isn't a whole lot of talk like that in the initial AFF class, there sure wasn't when I went through it. On another note, one could liken this thread to motorcycle purchasing. I've gone through my share of bikes over the past few years and one thing still holds true in my own mind. I was at the Honda dealer wanting a huge bad ass bike and the saleswoman actually took the time to assess my skill level and make a product recommendation based on that ultimately recommending a smaller cc bike for me. Why can't canopy manufactuer's work with DZO or S&TA or AFF Jumpmaster in that same fashion? Oh yah, i forgot, because they won't. I guess its all on the sales folks shoulders! -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #202 April 29, 2003 QuoteWith proper education, gosh I feel as though I've said this ten times, with proper education, starting with jump one and through the early stages of one's jumping career, perhaps one could be molded to realize the negative aspects of downsizing to quickly. And repeating myself again, I don't disagree with this statement. Until every dz is teaching this way, education is not going to affect the injury or fatality rates significantly, and a significant reduction is what is needed RIGHT NOW. QuoteI guess its all on the sales folks shoulders! This salesperson's shoulders are getting mighty worn out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakydiver 0 #203 April 29, 2003 I'm with you one hundred percent. Sorry for gettin all bent outta shape. I like Canuck know that Square One definately does their part in terms of cracking down and should be appluaded for doing so. I feel like I should almost shut up and go out there and get my instructor ratings now just to help out with the cause, but that would mean getting more than my A license wouldn't it lol... In all seriuosness, perhaps something revolutionary is in order here, perhaps a group or coalition against non-educated canopy flight. (I am being serious here) If I may, "education is not going to affect the injury or fatality rates significantly, and a significant reduction is what is needed RIGHT NOW." ... even one life saved would and could be considered significant. Its too bad more people don't read these forums... Bluest Skys all. -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamsville 0 #204 April 29, 2003 What do we do in the very short term? |I don't drink during the day, so I don't know what it is about this airline. I keep falling out the door of the plane. Harry, FB #4143 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakydiver 0 #205 April 29, 2003 Every time any one is at the DZ and see's an "interesting" landing, run and educate as quickly as possible. I wish someone had done that with me b4 my 101st jump (the one with the five inch divot left by my face). I would've killed for some knowledge on, "this is how to carve a final approach" or "try learning with two front riser approach methodology". -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #206 April 29, 2003 >Every time any one is at the DZ and see's an "interesting" landing, >run and educate as quickly as possible. I think this is, in general, the worst time to do it. They just screwed up, and are going to be mad at themselves and very defensive. They will have a dozen reasons why it wasn't their fault, why they were just doing X, what the hell is your problem anyway? I didn't cut _you_ off. I know this because I've done it dozens of times. It's usually pointless. They will probably be more receptive later after they've tried to get the grass stains out of their rig, and have had some time to think about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freakydiver 0 #207 April 29, 2003 I just meant - don't let the day run out before making sure someone has the person's back. Talk to someone in charge at the DZ, get a highly competent canopy pilot to go and make a suggestion to the individual... Sorry about the miscommunication... -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikkey 0 #208 April 29, 2003 Reality Check: - Fatality and Injury Rates during landings are very high and increasing . - Those countries (in Europe) which have canopy regulations have seen a decrease in injuries and fatalities. - By all means educate people better - but if you want to really address the issue and decrease the fatalities and injuries quickly - you will have to regulate. Basta. Talk to the Europeans. - I have been on and off involved in the sport for 25 years. My gut feel is that injury and fatality rates are higher now - and even if they are not - they SHOULD be much lower - due to the overall improvement of equipment and training. It comes down to the canopy accidents. You either regulate canopies by number of jumps, weight, ratings etc. or you will continue seeing people going in like flies. There is no easy way out, the sport has to make a choice and no "lets leave it up to the locals to eduacate each other" will change this.--------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yoshi 0 #209 April 29, 2003 _________________________________________ this space for rent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yoshi 0 #210 April 29, 2003 as one of the people who fly at 1.8 and yes I do have 356 jumps I understand where people will and do now get upset at the notion of restricting canopy wing loading. On the other hand I also think that it is a good idea. I am all for somehting that would save more lives, but it would have to have a clear definition of what is and is not allowed and strict enforcement by the people around those who wish to exceed the "allowed" limits. Not only that but in certain cases I think wome type of waiver would be needed. The issues I see with some of the proposed ideas is that the cost seems to exceed what many will pay. This is already an expensive sport and I am in no way saying that any amount of money is worth someones life, but skydiving is also a business, and as far as that is concerned I dont see the regulations working well with canopy certification jumps. who pays for it... who designs the peramiters? who pays for that? who are the examiners? how to they get compensated? the list goes on and on. As I am one of the people who choose to fly a highly wing loaded canopy I also have had some canopy training and put 300 jumps at 1.45 with several in between the range of 1.5-1.8 and up to 1.9 before deciding to buy at 1.8. Perhaps if it was grandfathered in I could see alot less conflict. if when I got my licence I KNEW that I couldnt fly this stuff until I had X amount of jumps than prob also wouldnt have tried as hard to learn the canopy flight characteristics and aerodynamics of a canopy sooner. So much can be said on this subject (which has proven itself already). Do you really think that the FAA is at a point of stepping in? If so how long rom now before they even design a plan? and at that implement it? just curious on whats happening behind the sceenes that we as a general skydiving public dont see. -yoshi_________________________________________ this space for rent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #211 April 29, 2003 All the questions you just asked can be applied to the opening height requirement too. Look at how takes care of that one. Waiver or Grandfathering is just a bad idea. Too many people did a poor job of getting their JM so that their JM would get grandfathered into an I. Waivers set it up so that "I went to canopy school, I should get a waiver for my 2.5 loaded canopy" situations can happen. I could have meet all the requirements for my D licence in 20 jumps... why can't I just get it grandfathered in? Why have requirements for anything if you just can waiver them all?Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yoshi 0 #212 April 29, 2003 yeah but when you look at a waiver there should be a clear definition of how much is alowed and when...only one per 6 month period?, only in increments on .1-.2 change in wing load?, etc.. not someone saying I went to canopy school (and flying at 1.1) and asking for a waiver to fly at 1.8 or whatever.. -yoshi_________________________________________ this space for rent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #213 April 29, 2003 >On the other hand I also think that it is a good idea. If a DZ had a strict Brian Germain policy (i.e. at 200 jumps max loading is 1.2, at 300 1.3 etc) would you comply with it? >Not only that but in certain cases I think wome type of waiver would be needed. We already have a waiver that says "everything you do is your fault." What else could you do? If you had a second one that said "everything you do is REALLY your fault" someone who didn't pull and had a cypres ride into a tree would sue because they hadn't signed the second waiver, so it's not REALLY his fault. >Do you really think that the FAA is at a point of stepping in? No, they don't much care as long as passengers (i.e. tandems) or other aircraft are not involved. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yoshi 0 #214 April 29, 2003 If my dz (richmond) had implemented the jump rule to wing load before I started of course I would comply.. I love the dz and even if there were other dz near that didnt have it I think (hypethetically of course) that I would attribute it more of a safety issue as a student and respect it even more...If I went to a dz now that had that policy I wouldnt jump there.. because yes I fly a highly wingloaded canopy and that is the only one I have....if they were to give me rental gear at no charge (if I happened to go there without knowing the policy) then I would jump there for a day or 2...I am not so engulfed in the ability to fly my canopy that I would shun a dz for thier policy, however if it was a blnket rule that was implied over the entire usa than I would be pretty peeved since I wouldnt be able to jump my brand new system until I had 500 more jumps. as far as the waiver I meant a waiver to the rule...eg: someone who has 200 jumps at 1.2 and has taken canoppy control classes and has demonstrated the ability to land it proficiently and safely could file a waiver to the rule to be able to jump at 1.3-1.4. not like any of this seems it will apply to us any time in the near future, but just a brain storm..:) -yoshi_________________________________________ this space for rent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #215 April 29, 2003 >however if it was a blnket rule that was implied over the entire usa > than I would be pretty peeved since I wouldnt be able to jump my > brand new system until I had 500 more jumps. I would be too, but that's the problem with any non-mandatory system. I bet you'd be even more peeved if you couldn't jump your system but Joe Ego could - who, from what you've seen, isn't as good as you but "knows the DZO." >as far as the waiver I meant a waiver to the rule...eg: someone who > has 200 jumps at 1.2 and has taken canoppy control classes and > has demonstrated the ability to land it proficiently and safely could > file a waiver to the rule to be able to jump at 1.3-1.4. Could work as long as the canopy control class was part of it and was well structured i.e. didn't mean having a beer with the S+TA one night. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yoshi 0 #216 April 29, 2003 AMEN! -YOSHI_________________________________________ this space for rent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Danl 0 #217 April 30, 2003 Here's a template for a simpler progression that would still improve safety. You can only downsize one size at a time, and you have to have X jumps at each size before downsizing. Switching make/model/planform must be done at a comparable size to what you jump before switching. The Square One demo program actually makes this easy and practical. It is what I did. For me, X was about 10, and I stopped at a 1.3 loading on a rectangular canopy. But with this template, all we have to argue about is X. For the purpose of this discussion, maybe 20 or 25? Blue skies and home brews, Dan'l Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #218 April 30, 2003 I don't see your point... It is quite clear what the #'s say. PEOPLE WITH LESS THAN 500 JUMPS ARE DIEING AT A GREATER RATE THAN PRIOR YEARS UNDER OPEN CANOPIES. How does that not say that? Yes you could look at total jumps per year per person at each level ,and you could throw in Density Altitude and the fatalities of guys named bob...But the only real important thing is that people with less than 500 jumps are trying to go to small to fast and getting themselves killed...The numbers show the problem. Ro"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 #219 April 30, 2003 QuoteSomething that no amount of classes and videos will give you with out the jumps...Yes, Just having a lot of jumps does not mean you have skills, but it does mean you have EXPERIENCE. Something you will not get without jumps. " How can you say that (perhaps I missed your angle and that isn't directed against my post) - but, you show enough video of swoops gone bad and teach people about why bad swoops hurt then perhaps they wouldn't ever get themselves into that position to begin with until asking many questions of many locals It was a statement to all those who say "But I am different..I went to a canopy control class, and bought "FLY LIKE A PRO"!!!!" Watching video does not make you a better skydiver, or canopy pilot....If watching TV did these things, I should be able to drive like the guys on "Dukes of Hazzard", and be as fit as the chicks I watch working out on ESPN. Ro"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 #220 April 30, 2003 QuoteI find it interesting that you want to impose regulations through USPA. I see USPA as part of the problem as every issue of their magazine depicts swoopers "carving the water", and canopy ads that depict small high peformance canopies (back to the almighty buck!), touting fashion rather than basic understanding of equipment, etc., regardless of the outcome to their members. Well, I am looking at a Parachutist from 8/02...Its the only one I have in my office. The cover is of guys doing CRW with small canopies. It says that they are all members of the factory teams...That tells me they are good...Not just some shmuck. Javelin ad...shows a guy swooping...and a guy jumping some crazy board thingy...And CRW... There is an artical on a swoop meet.... There is a picture of my old team...Old Paragear cover..(Had to throw that in). An ICARUS add....showing some swooping. An artical on the ART OF SWOOP SURVIVAL..... And an ad for PD showing a swooper. So 3 ad's with swoopers....And a meet report on a meet...And a saftey artical.. Yeah they sure seem to be pushing swooping.. Hey dude they don't make the ad's..The company paying to run them does. Ro"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
freakydiver 0 #221 April 30, 2003 "Watching video does not make you a better skydiver, or canopy pilot....If watching TV did these things, I should be able to drive like the guys on "Dukes of Hazzard", and be as fit as the chicks I watch working out on ESPN." How can you possibly say that? What is wrong with a little education through a video?? Wouldn't a video shown to someone early on in their jumping career showing the problems that can arise very fast when swopping be educational? Wouldn't a video showing the progression someone goes through to get to the point of advanced swooping be beneficial?? I certainly wouldn't have minded knowing that I don't have to go straight for 90's or 180s ten years ago. I wouldn't have minded someone saying hey, look, if you want to learn how to swoop - do double front approaches for a good number of jumps to get that right. What other method of education would you propose. And, I am not saying that a video would replace human interaction BY ANY MEANS, I am simply saying that by making someone aware of how hard it is to get to the point of being able to drive like the dukes of hazard, maybe they would seek the proper assistance to begin down that road once they've made up their minds to do so. Does that honestly sound way off base to you??? -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #222 April 30, 2003 An INSTRUCTIONAL video is nothing with out practical application... It can not replace ACTUAL jumps. It can give information, but not experience... Too many times a guy will get som video and think that he has learned from it... Well, watching people hook...Even on an instructional tape...equals nothing with out application and exercises. Im not saying they are worthless, but they will not make you a swooper...only experience can do that. Ron"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
freakydiver 0 #223 April 30, 2003 That is not my point at all had you actually read my previous posts. My point is perhaps showing someone a video early on in their career might make them think twice about trying something that people take 100s if not 1000s of jumps to learn. I'm not saying use it as INSTRUCTION more as PREVENTION. I'm not saying it would REPLACE actual jump expereince but perhaps get them to see how hard what looks easy to do really is. We get them to pull on time just by telling them to do so (usually lol)... -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #224 April 30, 2003 Your not reading MY original post....I said that you can't learn from video....That is to say you can not learn to swoop by WATCHING VIDEO.... You can show them as a bad example of what not to do... Which is your point which I NEVER dissagreed to, You dissagreed with my point which I think you didn't truely understand. We are taking up to much time...any more issues with this PM. me"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
freakydiver 0 #225 April 30, 2003 I'm simply suggesting a way to perhaps prevent even just one individual from getting swoop is cool eyes. Agreed on the time issue, Blu Skys... -- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
