0
NWFlyer

Canopy Manufacturers' Role in Rapid Downsizing

Recommended Posts

This is something that I really look out for. I can give you some "real life" examples of how things like this get sorted out, or don't. I think its really hard to get the manufacturers to play a prominent role in the used canopy market. The recent incident is a little different in that a major manufacturer appears to have known, or should have known, what he was jumping.

In most cases I think the DZ as a whole comes into play (Staff and DZO).

My experience has been one that sometimes talking to the jumpers as a staff member can help and have an impact, but there are definitely those that can't be reached. I've always felt the DZO has ultimately responsibility...not to know everything that is going on by him/her self - but to hire staff that he/she trusts and relies on to keep an eye out and bring up important matters.

I have two examples (several seasons old now): Guy A is jumping a highly elliptical canopy (XF2) at 150 jumps (~1.4 WL). This was brought to my attention. I approached the jumper who i like and consider a friend. I was unsuccessful with the 1 on 1 approach and approached the DZO. The DZO offered a different canopy to the jumper and asked him not to jump the XF2. This was not met with mutual satisfaction, but the jumper A no longer jumped that canopy at this DZ.

Guy B was started jumping a highly elliptical canopy (XF2) at 30 jumps!!!!(WL of less than 1.2). Again, this was brought to my attention by staff/up jumpers (by which point he had 90+ jumps on said canopy). A young, gifted, natural athlete, but who didn't know what he didn't know. I brought this to the DZO and said it was imperative this jumper not be allowed to jump the canopy. The answer was he has already put 60 jumps on it, I can't take it away. Several weeks later this jumper hit the ground, bounced through his risers, and somehow didn't get a scratch (sore as hell). He was a completely different canopy pilot after he hit the ground, but it could have been avoided. He is doing awesome and is a really good skydiver and a good friend.

The DZO must rely on his/her staff to make informed decisions and stand with them. In other words, in these examples...it took everyone - upjumpers/locals to say something, Staff to discuss with the jumper(s) and the DZO to implement action. I think jumper A was handled correctly, while jumper B was not. At the end of the day, the DZO can run things the way he wants.
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most DZ's I have worked at were managed by the DZO and S&TA. They listened to their instructors, staff and experienced jumpers. If I were to approach either and point out an accident waiting to happen it would have been dealt with immediately. We knew those people since they were locals and had a pretty good idea what W/L was appropriate.

Now you can get into the fact of how easy it is to have 400 jumps but make your logbook show you have 3,000. If you understand the system it is easy to find the loopholes. I've met people who actually have 5,000 jumps but if you didn't know any better you would think they had a few hundred and vice versa. So if you're not a local jumper we have to take your word as to your experience level.

So if you were a 500 jump sky god the DZO actually banned you from jumping something too small and you were determined to be a hotshot. It's as easy as switching DZ's, filling out a fake logbook, order a small wing and test your abilities.

Until you fix the flaws in the system there is no way to stop it completely.

Just my .02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's not Icarus's job to police the world. It's their job to make and market quality products. Those who choose to buy them and choose to fly them are responsible for their own choices.



Once again, you completely miss the point.

The question at hand is whether or not the fact that Icarus *sponsors* jumpers who are not following Icarus's own canopy recommendations and have rapidly downsized contributes to the overall culture of rapid downsizing. In other words, does it encourage ignorant attitudes like yours. And by ignorant, I totally mean lacking knowledge.
Owned by Remi #?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
-Joey-

It's not Icarus's job to police the world. It's their job to make and market quality products. Those who choose to buy them and choose to fly them are responsible for their own choices.



Oh good! Joey to the rescue? [:/] I seriously hope your just stirring the pot (Trolling)? Otherwise, ...what Twardo said in another thread!!! B|
Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skyjumpenfool

***It's not Icarus's job to police the world. It's their job to make and market quality products. Those who choose to buy them and choose to fly them are responsible for their own choices.



Oh good! Joey to the rescue? [:/] I seriously hope your just stirring the pot (Trolling)? Otherwise, ...what Twardo said in another thread!!! B|

I can't speak for Joey:)
But based on his previous posts I doubt he's trolling. Joey is on a mission to find a better and faster way to help out the newer jumpers. Joey knows everything just ask him:S

What Mr T said? Hell did you read what Wendy called joey. :$:$:$B|B|

Some peeps get off on arguing. something about it triggers a section of the brain that gives them the same high as cocaine.

To bad the brain becomes addicted to that high, so the Joey types get to the point where they cant help themselves.

The more we respond to Joey the more he gets his rocks off. Ignore him and he's goona go someplace else for high
One Jump Wonder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jhh166

On a side note... The sponsorship was with Icarus, not a Neos, they could have been jumping satfires, crossfires ect and still representing the company. I doubt Icarus said they had to jump a Neos. I am not saying they did not know he was flying one, but I bet they would have had no issue if he wanted to fly 169 crossfire or what ever....



I don't agree.
"Better to have a short life that is full of what you like doing than a long life spent in a miserable way." -Alan Watts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't have any idea what they would approve of.



Fixed it for you.

Nothing is accomplished here by assuming that Icarus pressured him into a small canopy. By all accounts on this thread he seemed to be an aggressive downsizer on his own accord.

Icarus could have intervened to stop this behavior, but that's another argument entirely.
Apex BASE
#1816

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not saying they forced him to fly the Neos. I'm saying why would they want to sponsor some guy who can fly a XF2 at a relatively low wingloading - too many people can do that for it to be prestigious.. No value to sponsoring him if that was the case.
"Better to have a short life that is full of what you like doing than a long life spent in a miserable way." -Alan Watts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly they might find value in sponsoring a talented VRW team in which some members flew more conservative canopies. They make money on Safire twos as well. They have a full line of products and are in all the major market segments.

It's unlikely they forced him into the choice he made. But due diligence on their part should have told them it was a dangerous choice. They sponsored his team for commercial reasons and made an error in judgement. Now it's up to you and all of us to let them know how you feel about that if it matters to you. It's no different than Nike sponsoring Tiger. If Tiger gets in trouble the brand suffers. Hold their feet to the fire and they will respond. Don't buy the brand, don't recommend it to others. That is how sponsorship works in the marketplace.

Just because we all love our small world does not mean that we have to support every company all the time. They probably are jumpers there as well, but money is the prime motive. Make them pay and they will stop.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Icarus could have intervened to stop this behavior, but that's another argument entirely.

There is a difference between "intervening to stop this behavior" and "giving him the tools to perform this behavior."

If someone drinks too much, you may not be able to help them. You might try intervening; that might work. If it doesn't work then at least you tried.

If you give that same person a bottle of scotch, the keys to fast car and tell him "I want to see some badass drinking before you go home!" - then you share some responsibility for what happens next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

>Icarus could have intervened to stop this behavior, but that's another argument entirely.

There is a difference between "intervening to stop this behavior" and "giving him the tools to perform this behavior."

If someone drinks too much, you may not be able to help them. You might try intervening; that might work. If it doesn't work then at least you tried.

If you give that same person a bottle of scotch, the keys to fast car and tell him "I want to see some badass drinking before you go home!" - then you share some responsibility for what happens next.



That raises a very interesting question.
Taking the alcohol analogy one step further, a bartender can be sued if they serve someone who then gets into a car and hurts someone. The bartender is legally liable because they served the person who caused the accident.

I'm no fan of the "sue happy" culture we have in the US, but what legal liability does or should Icarus have for sponsoring someone and presumably providing them with this canopy that is so far beyond their skills. A 119 Neos at 1.9 is widely recognized to be an "expert" canopy. And 400 jumps (maybe less) is widely recognized to be "not an expert, not even close."

Brian's Chart has a 170 recommended(144 absolute minimum) for 400 jumps and 220 exit weight. Plus it says go up one size for elliptical canopies.
So he was 3 or 4 sizes above where he should have been.

This may be a topic for SC, not here.
And I don't really have an answer.

I'm torn between accepting personal responsibility for our own actions, and blaming "corporations" for sponsoring and assisting in incredibly reckless and irresponsible actions.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DcloudZ

I'm not saying they forced him to fly the Neos. I'm saying why would they want to sponsor some guy who can fly a XF2 at a relatively low wingloading - too many people can do that for it to be prestigious.. No value to sponsoring him if that was the case.



I see this perspective as part of what is wrong in the sport. Mind blowing freefly or relative work doesn't need a tiny canopy. The only discipline that really NEEDs a tiny canopy is swooping (possibly modern CRW as well).

In fact it could have been used a positive message to sell their larger canopies. Our sponsored athlete is a kick-arse freeflier and look he jumps a 190.

As a slight aside, I do find the NZ Icarus "Fuck yeah" offensive, and believe it reflects their overall attitude. I cringe every time I see a 'Fuck yeah' on a helmet or advert.
Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really think that for every post that mentions NZA or their attitude there should be one that clarifies:

Icarus Spain (the company that sponsored this team) has nothing to do (anymore) with NZ Aerosports (the company that developed the Icarus brand). The NEOS is *only* made by Icarus Spain.

We can interpret "Fuck Yeah!" many ways. Fact is the jump in question did not have a "Fuck Yeah"TM sticker on in in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As a slight aside, I do find the NZ Icarus "Fuck yeah" offensive, and believe it reflects their overall attitude. I cringe every time I see a 'Fuck yeah' on a helmet or advert.



But realise, 'Fuck Yeah' is a slogan used by NZAerosports only.

It is not offensive to most skydivers...

NZAerosports had nothing to do with this incident.

A good reason to support NZAerosports who developed the Icarus Project 20 years ago...

Rather than these Spanish chumps that registered Icarus Canopies as a company in 2010...

They can go be Badass on their 'Gayos'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
westcoastSD

A good reason to support NZAerosports who developed the Icarus Project 20 years ago...

Rather than these Spanish chumps that registered Icarus Canopies as a company in 2010...



I think you're a little misinformed. The folks who started Icarus Spain also helped develop the original Icarus project 20 years ago. They split off a few years ago due to differences. Both companies' owners have been there from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think you're a little misinformed. The folks who started Icarus Spain also helped develop the original Icarus project 20 years ago. They split off a few years ago due to differences. Both companies' owners have been there from the start.



Not True,

The Icarus project was under the 'JYRO' brand for several years.

Jyro himself said in an early/mid 90's PIA symposium that he was going to make an extreme 69, everybody laughed at him. This was before 'Icarus Canopies' came to be.

Icarus was a model of parachute at that point in time, under the Jyro branding...

I have flown a 1993 Icarus 'by JYRO' 105 it is a really aggressive square zp 9 cell...

Spain came later, I don't know which year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm torn between accepting personal responsibility for our own actions, and blaming "corporations" for sponsoring and assisting in incredibly reckless and irresponsible actions.



Put me down as a solid "accepting personal responsibility for our own actions".
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remster

Agreed. The responsibility lies with the jumper.

That doesn't diminish the fact that Icarus should have NEVER sponsor the guy with a Neos. They fucked up big time.



Also agreed. I'm having a hard time with thinking they did that.
>:(
This is one time when it's appropriate to say, "WTF were they thinking?"
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gayos -- AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! :|

Some real wit right there. You come up with that one yourself?
See, it's funny cuz you replaced the first part of the word with gay and then added the -os from last half of the word. A hybrid if you will -- OMG OMG OMG, kinda like how the "Gayos" is a hybrid/half xbraced/half conventional canopy! WIT!

OMGOMGOMG, shouldn't Gayos be the word people who lack wit and vocabulary use for the Xaos canopy? It actually kinda fits better, no? Rhymes and follows cadence... I dunno, I'm just spitballing here. Maybe the Xaos isn't as "gay" as the Neos. I'm not skygodian enough to make that decision.


Anyhoo, thanks for the epic lulz from Gayos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0