Wing Loading Restrictions? (Skydive Kansas)

[Zenister 0]

its not an assumption it is the implication of their policy.

for whatever reason they feel that a wingloading of higher than 1.5 creates an environment of risk that their insurance cannot handle, no matter what the jumpers experience level.

just as if a world class formula driver could not get insurance because they were under age 25. Large insurance companies make exceptions to policy based on demonstrated ability.

It may not be entirely the result of the of the dropzone, but by bowing under to such pressures from local authorities and/or insurance agencies they are in effect agreeing with them.

I dont have a problem with a policy, i DO have a problem with an arbitrary policy that is enforced without regard to other factors (experience & demostrated ablility) that should mitigate it.

blanket, inflexible rules are ALWAYS wrong.

I guess its just too much trouble to actually make judgment on a case by case basis but as has been said, its their dropzone and they can run it the way they wish. Its also my perogative to laugh, point and steer anyone i might know in the area to a more progressive DZ with more realistic policies.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[weavermc 0]

ALL,
as the original poster of this thread, I want to point out that Mr & Mrs Sharp (Skydive Kansas DZOs) have posted a reply in this forum under "Skydive Kansas"

I thank everyone for your input and you have collectively increased my knowledge and given me some good points to ponder.

I think it is safe to summarize that the majority of people that have posted agree to the following basic points:
1-DZs have the basic right to make whatever rules they want
2-Enforcing safety is a good idea
3-Limiting low-time jumpers from jumping high-wing-loaded canopies before proper training, experience, and sensible progression should be encouraged
4-Limiting the possibility of potential injuries due to high-speed canopy landings can be accomplished without inflexible rules.

Mark Weaver

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Where do they say above 1.5 they are unsafe? I've read the pages multiple times and its not there... thats an assumption that its an implied message.

Exactly, it is implied. They don't list a reason why they have that limit. Do you think it is unreasonable to believe they have the rule because they think anything over 1.5:1 is unsafe? Or they have the rule to discourage fun jumpers? Why do you think they have the 1.5:1 limit?

Quote

I'm at just under 1.5 on my 136 so its not an issue to me, but for those jumpers thats over the limits they do provide the option of gear rental.

Good question for the original poster, did they offer him rental gear?

Quote

I've seen a member of a world class freefly team biff in under a Velocity multiple times in one week so I'm not going with the just since the rest of the teams are doing it they all can.

I never said everyone can handle 1.5:1, but it is unreasonable to say no one can handle 1.5:1.

Quote

For the max weight limit if they are enforcing a TSO on gear are we suddenly all going to boycott them for make all of us safer by not overloading our gear? For rigs that are certified and labeled higher I'm courious of their policy on those.

I could easily say you are assuming they limit exit weight to 254 because of TSO-23C, not a far reach though, is it? TSO 23B and D have different lmits. What id I was 254 under a PD-106R which is limited to 220? Would it then be OK to jump there? I could easily understand, and support a rule that says "All jumpers must be within the certified weight limits of their equipment". But they didn't do that. Why?

Quote

As for the GM, being a GM (or used to) gets you a price break on the airframe insurance and in libility insurance. That alone is worth it to most DZO's. I'd rather jump at a DZ that has libabiliy insurance if something happens and causes airplane parts or a sky ball or what ever to crash into my property thats parked there.

I agree that jumping at a DZ w/ insurance is nice, but if they are an USPA member, you are covered. I'm not impressed witht he GM program anyway, but if a DZ is a member, they shouldn't discourage fun jumpers. The only rule that I think they have that does that is the 1.5:1 max wing loading rule.

If I went out to the DZ, I wouldn't be allowed to jump. Not because I am unsafe, but because when you divide my exit wieght by the square footage of my main, it comes out to more than 1.5. Seems unfair and silly to me.

I am all for safety, but be realistic.

Hook

[weavermc 0]

To answer the question directed to me reference: Was I offered rental gear?

The answer is no - but that is only 1/2 the story. The truth is, after I was treated the way I was, I instantly didn't want to be there. On the phone with my former DZO after leaving the DZ, I explained to him that I've never had to "force" myself to enjoy being at a DZ and I wasn't going to start now. In my mind, It would have been difficult to keep an open mind and be happy at a DZ that was so unfriendly.

They didn't offer it because I was disgusted, tore up the waiver, tossed it on the counter, and left.
Mark

[jlyons 0]

So you're one of those people that like to stereotype other groups of people without actually knowing who they are and what they're about eh? A little word of advice, if you're going to call people names like we all did in elementary school and label the midwest as "Hicks," you should do it in the privacy of your own home, that way the hundreds of people who read this won't find out how much ignorance you actually retain.

[skycat 0]

Quote

label the midwest as "Hicks,"

Oh my god that is to funny...I'm from the midwest and I was trying to explain to Derek why he shouldn't get so worked up, due to the fact that most of the midwest is rather...ummm..."retro"

Fly it like you stole it!

[D22369 0]

Personal attack deleted

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[D22369 0]

Oh my god that is to funny...I'm from the midwest and I was trying to explain to Derek why he shouldn't get so worked up, due to the fact that most of the midwest is rather...ummm..."retro"

I see I got his panties in a bunch, truthfully I was reading about a DZ that has decided that they cannot rely on their customers to exercise their own intelligence and have decided to save them from themselves and it kinda irritated me, I did try to vent in a relatively safe and sane way, tried to keep it light. quite honestly, I didnt realise that the term "hick" was even still used......except by us old people. But I am glad you found it as amusing as I did to write.

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[Amazon 7]

If you have not already done so you may want to look at a similar thread started by the DZO himself... in Skydive Kansas.. same category.

Amazon

[jlyons 0]

No offense taken in the least, and those were MY words, not the DZ, I think they have made their point abundantly clear.
J.

[n2skdvn 0]

so much for me loading that vx 49 at 2.5

if my calculations are correct SLINKY + ESCULATOR = EVERLASTING FUN
my site

[jlyons 0]

You have a nice little web sight, the Porter ride looked fun.

[billvon 2,379]

>I dont have a problem with a policy, i DO have a problem with an
>arbitrary policy that is enforced without regard to other factors
>(experience & demostrated ablility) that should mitigate it.

>blanket, inflexible rules are ALWAYS wrong.

Do you know of ANY DZ's that allow a jumper to not use a reserve, if he's a really, really good packer? Or any that allow opening at 500 feet, even if the guy is a world class BASE jumper and has 500 jumps under 300 feet? How about one that lets you have just one beer then jump, as long as you aren't teaching? Are those rules therefore wrong?

I honestly don't get the big stink. Lots of rules are inflexible, like a mandatory AAD rule. They often keep perfectly safe jumpers from jumping at a given DZ, for whatever reason (no AAD, small canopy, foreigner with non-TSOed rig etc.) And that's too bad, but jumping somewhere else solves the problem.

[mjosparky 3]

Hook,
Is that 150 mph or 150 kts. I am not sure but I do not think any ramair reserve has be TSO'ed in standard category. (150 kts.) Low speed is 130 kts.
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Zenister 0]

unofficially? yes.

inflexible rules can never encompass every situation and so must bend on occasion.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Is that 150 mph or 150 kts. I am not sure but I do not think any ramair reserve has be TSO'ed in standard category. (150 kts.) Low speed is 130 kts.

My Reserve is TSO's under TSO C-23D, and is certified to 220 lbs. at 150 kts.

My container is under TSO C23B Standard Catagory max shock load of 5,000 lbs, for which there is a chart.

I am well within the placarded limits of my container and reserve. Why do you ask?

Hook

[riggerrob 558]

{blanket, inflexible rules are ALWAYS wrong}

I disagree.
The worst thing you can have is written standards that are not enforced.
Written standards that are not enforced only lead to confusion and loss of respect for standards.

As for their policy excluding the world's best freefly coaches: the world's best freefly coaches rarely visit smaller DZs so it not an issue.

Another way to look at it is: if organizers for the world-record 300-way can set wing-loading standards, then DZOs at small DZs should be able to set wing-loading standards.

Another more subtle way to set standards is to publicly state that standards may only be exceeded with permission from the owner or chief instructor. After the chief instructor says no a few dozen times, people quit asking.
For example, if you want to lurk a tandem at Pitt Meadows and your were not in the world-record 300-way, don't waste anyone's time asking.

[sundevil777 93]

What is really lousy is the claim that the rule was not in an obvious place on their website, and that after getting info on the DZ by phone, it was not even mentioned (Oh, did I forget to tell you that little insignificant detail about our DZ?).

That would make me very angry.

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

[MC208B 0]

Damn Bill, something we agree on!

[kansasskydiver 0]

I am very pleased to say that I met Mark this weekend (the 2.1 windloaded canopy pilot who was turned down if you don't know what started the forum) I'm happy to say that he is an incredible canopy pilot. Very cautious and as he put it "sissy" on his first jump at a new dz. That now puts to rest the doubt in my mind that anyone can or can't land a 2.1/1 windloaded canopy

blue skies

Chris aka Flash
come visit us www.ksu.edu/ksupc

[weavermc 0]

Sorry it took so long for me to get back on a computer --- but I just wanted to tell our community here that my negative attitude towards skydiving in Kansas has now been erased! I started this thread due to an unfortunate incident at a DZ in this state, and I thought everyone was as rude as the people I met there... however I was wrong.

The folks at Kansas State Univ Parachute club are AWESOME. They are friendly, fun, and made me feel at home in.... something like 3 minutes!

If anyone is going through this area (Kansas City - Topeka etc), I STRONGLY recommend you stop by and see these guys.

Thanks again and hopefully weather will hold and I'll be there again this weekend!
Weaves