Canopy control

[nigel99 144]

Yesterday I had the misfortune of watching someone do a radical turn way to low that has resulted in severe injuries.

Skydiving has moved on from Round parachutes where "flying" was freefall and the parachute was a safety device to safely put your feet on the ground. Why hasn't the skydiving community put in place licences whereby you can only jump a certain windloading/performance with relevant qualification. These are wings that have high performance make a mistake and you can die. I know that this stuff is not cool to talk about.

It really unnerves me that there are hundreds of DZ's offering AFF and yet only a handfull of Canopy flying schools.

Please people it may be cool to jump small fast swooping machines but nobody can afford to learn the hard way anymore - put in place a self regulated licensing system - little labels recommending 500+ etc are not good enough. A proper progression system needs to be enforced.

Honest mistakes happen and always will but if people are trained and understand what they are doing alot less incidents will occur. If skydiving is going to get a respectable image in the community they are going to have to work hard to add a safer environment - it is not spectator friendly to see someone carted off in an ambulance believe me.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[flyhi 24]

Quote

Why hasn't the skydiving community put in place licences whereby you can only jump a certain windloading/performance with relevant qualification.

You cannot legislate ignorance or ego out of existence. Education is the key.

Shit happens. And it usually happens because of physics.

[christoofar 0]

What if a "daredevil" wants to start seeing how low he can go (deployment altitude)? There is no one that is really going to stop him, unless maybe the DZO or someone in the air sees him/her doing it and tattle-tales. I've heard enough stories of people who should have been out of the sport long ago because of the # of CYPRES fires they've been accumulating (ever think to pull out that hackie once in a while??!!!).

There's lots of of freedom in our sport. Of course, if you're too free to the point of carelessness, fate will have a way of taking care of you.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[PhreeZone 15]

On the opening.... DZO pressure has pretty much eliminated the low pull crowd that used to be out there. Peer pressure can be a good tool to use if you think that your friend is gettin in over their head and don't know it. start refusing to jump with them and tell them that its their canopy or flying is why. Get the rest of your friends to do the same. If the person hears it from enough sources... and has no one to jump with.... peer pressure can work.

In terms of education.... Its out there... but unlike AFF classes, most canopy classes are not advertized.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[skydiverbrian 0]

Quote

These are wings that have high performance make a mistake and you can die.

Same thing goes for a round (except the high performance part). Canopies don't kill people - people kill people.

In a world full of people, only some want to fly... isn't that crazy! --Seal

[nigel99 144]

my point exactly - a licence as in current BPA B license is only obtained once a competent instructor has validated that you have passed the requesite tests and proved that you are competant.

You can't legislate EGO/incompetance out of existance however you can curtail its effects and the sport as a whole gets more respect.

Legislation is a bitch but my concern is that people out there simply do not understand the dynamics of what they are flying. I believe that what I witnessed yesterday was a genuine mistake - but a mistake that if the jumper had been reinforced landing and canopy flight discipline to the same extent that other emergency procedures are drummed in may have been avioded.

The current figures for deaths in this sport are about 50% are under a fully functioning parachute. Would people sit back and accept it if 50% of deaths were due to pilot error whilst in the jump-ship on take-off?

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

Quote

In terms of education.... Its out there... but unlike AFF classes, most canopy classes are not advertized.

Absolutely true. Just because people don't incorporate and hang a shingle doesn't mean that they aren't more than willing to teach and coach. I freely give my time to anyone who asks, as do most other professional swoopers I know. At least where I am, when someone does something assinine, I am the one that is tasked by the DZO to go over and school the offender.

Still, even the most experienced canopy pilots get injured on occasion. Generally, it will be the result of nutty wind conditions, but occasionally someone biffs in trying to avoid other traffic. At Raeford we have a system in place for setting maximum wingload according to experience. It was adopted by the military S&TA on Fort Bragg and applies to all servicemembers. Does it help? Yes, but the great majority of canopy mishaps which lead to injuries are from novice and intermediate jumpers under larger canopies. Basically, people forgetting their training and just failing to fly their canopies all the way to the ground.

Chuck

[nigel99 144]

I apreciate that in the skydiving community for the people who are willing to ask there are many extremely competent people out there willing to help out.

I just believe that it would be benifial if these canopy classes were not only advertised but enforced. Nobody is allowed to skip AFF levels just because they show talent, I believe the same should be true for canopy classes.

Same time your comment on novice and intermediate jumpers I guess that even under training there will always be that category and the resultant consequences.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

At Raeford we have a system in place for setting maximum wingload according to experience.

Out of curiosity, what is it?

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

[christoofar 0]

Sometimes watching biffs and bad flares helps instill better canopy control (scared straight) than any other method, such as policing canopy sizes.

I've seen some pretty awesome biffs to the point where I think I'm going to count on a no-front-riser input, no >90degree final leg approach, no "monkey business" landings for quite some time since I'm flying a new bedsheet.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

These are wings that have high performance make a mistake and you can die.

Uh huh. Unfortunately there needs to be a major change in the attitudes of the majority of the skydiving community before the high rate of these kind of injuries and deaths can be reduced.

One of my coworkers got a call today from a guy with 100 jumps. He's been jumping a canopy loaded about 1.0:1 for 80 jumps or so. He said it was recommended to him that he buy a Vengeance that he'd load at about 1.25:1... so he wouldn't have to do his riser hook turn to final at 250 feet. I'm not even going to mention the person he said recommended that to him; after all, he could have been lying about that. But I will say that the name he dropped is the name of a very experienced and respected skydiver who has said very publicly within the past month or so that novice jumpers shouldn't be flying/buying canopies loaded over 1.0:1...

[Emma 0]

Unfortunately you can kill youself on a supposedly 'docile' canopy if you hook it in low enough.

The sentiments expressed on here are all sound. However rather than subscribe to the blame culture we need to take responsibility for ourselves. Each and every one of us. If your DZ doesn't offer canopy pilot courses, find someone who can help you.

WE are the BPA/ USPA. Not some disembodied group out there. We choose to educate ourselves as individuals...or not. Legislation seems like a good idea but it's pointless unless people make a choice to become educated first. We have to create the attitudes at our respective dropzones that encourage people to learn about flying their canopies. Learning how to minimise risks and handle emergencies is as important under canopy as it is at any stage of a skydive.

If the attitude is right then the rest will follow. I would like to see more emphasis on canopy control and progression as part of basic training courses - AFF and static line - and it should be ongoing. 'Feel the flare' and then get on with it yourself is not really enough.

Hopefully as attitudes change then accidents under perfectly good canopies will decrease.

[lummy 4]

Okay, Hypothetical question.....
Lets say, you know of someone who is seriously considering trying a demo canopy, let's say a Cobalt. Now, let's also say this is a really big guy and the wingloading would be around 1.6 or so and the guy was a little less than 200 jumps. Let's also say you've talked to this guy and voiced your concern and the response is that he has been getting a lot of Canopy coaching and even thou he sounds like he knows he will have his hands full, he is still planning on doing it.
What would you do? Voice your concern and let it go? Act like a Canopy Nazi and tell him and everyone else who knows him in the hopes they'll talk some sense into him? Hope he'll realize that the canopy is WAY too small for him and choose approriately? Pray for him?

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[skybytch 259]

Quote

What would you do?

I'd much rather be called a Canopy Nazi than attend another funeral. I'd rather lose a sale than find out that a canopy that I thought was too much for a jumper but sold it to him anyway injured or killed him.

Quote

he knows he will have his hands full,

This is a key statement. Has he seen someone hook in or otherwise get seriously injured under the same wingloading yet? If he has, then maybe he does know he has his hands full. If he hasn't, I submit that he has no clue what he's getting into. Just because someone says "I know I can get hurt" doesn't mean they really understand how badly that canopy can hurt them - on the most minor of screwups or with only a second of inattention.

In many cases when I'm talking to "younger" jumpers they haven't even considered if they can safely land that canopy in a bad area (think off dz landings) or what they will do if someone cuts them off on final.

All any of us can do is encourage less experienced jumpers to choose lighter wingloadings and really learn to fly them before they go smaller, to get good canopy coaching, and to slow down - the pond will still be there when you have 1000 jumps.

[billvon 2,400]

>What would you do? Voice your concern and let it go?

If it was a local jumper I would watch him land. If he seemed to have the skill to handle his current canopy, I would tell him my concerns and let him make his own decisions. If he did not have the skill to land the canopy he was currently jumping, I'd tell him, his canopy coaches, the S+TA and the local gear store. (Note - pulling both toggles down evenly at the right altitude does not equal being able to land a canopy well.)

[nigel99 144]

Well my original point of view and is that if a canopy licensing system were in place then by and large even a visiting jumper would be allowed based on a proven training and licensing system.

In much the same way as the BPA has different categories of specialisation within its licensing for freefall disciplines. Thereby you could be a super hot RW person who is not "licensed" to jump a high wingloading although you have 1000 dives, alternatively you might be a swooper with only 100 jumps but you are licensed to - based on the fact that you have been through a supervised progression system.


Just my 0.02cents worth on it.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Samurai136 0]

Does this person have an highly experienced mentor they listen to? Have the mentor explain things to them.

Has your friend read any of the technical material on high performance canopy piloting out on the web? He should read that first. What high performance landing experience does he currently have?


If he still decides to jump the canopy I'd advise him to:

1. Fly the canopy from full altitude.
2. Do not use the front risers in his landing pattern.
3. Add 500' of altitude to his landing pattern
4. Be on final by 500' AGL

It will be an eye opening experience for him. Obviously the single biggest danger is that he won't be able to handle the diving characteristics and go in.
Additionally, if he can't follow those 4 points and land the canopy w/ at least a B-license level of accuracy he's way in over his head.

Good luck!
-Ken

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[AggieDave 6]

Alright, I know this guy and have some more infomation about him.

He does have a highly experienced mentor that watches just about every landing he's done for the past 50 or so, advising and coaching.

Yes, he has been reading a lot of technical material on high performace canopy piloting on the web. As for canopy experience, he has about 70 jumps on semi-ellipticals loaded at just under 1.5 and about 40 jumps on fully ellipticals loaded at just under 1.5.

His plan for the weekend was to (if the winds were too his liking) go do a few hop-n-pops from atleast 11k and fly around to test the different control inputs. And also to note how much altitude is lost with each one. He also noted that he won't be doing anything but straight in approaches.

He also noted that if he doesn't like how the first jump goes or how the canopy flies, etc. that he's not going to jump it anymore.

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

[freeflyz 0]

Nobody with less than 300 should be jumpimg a elliptical canopy even less at that high of a wing loading!!!! Pure stupidity!!!!!

[skycat 0]

Exactly right, you don't need to be on a high Wingloaded canopy to get into trouble. Last week we watched a girl under a canopy with a WL of .8 fly it strait into a cessna. Lucky for her the engine was not on and the damage to the wing of the plane was cosmetic and not structural, which means she wasn't hurt. Still, you could tell she didn't learn anything beyond AFF about canopies. Plain and simple she didn't know how to do a flat turn, actually if she would have been more aware when she turned onto "final" at 500ft she would have easily been able turn slightly and land in the landing area rather than across the runway where the planes were parked. She and several other people yes mostly girls under very underloaded canopies, .5-.8 had no clue about canopy control and used the flare and pray method of landing. Thank god I got some canopy coaching about a year ago, cause I too was in the flare and pray category.

Fly it like you stole it!

[nicknitro71 0]

Good posts. I do agree that it all comes down to education. If you think this problem does not apply only to canopies wing loading. You can get a motorcycle license and go and buy a R1 without any experience. If you have the maturity and "empirical" knowledge you might be OK. If not, you'll sooner or later hurt yourself. Ego is an evil beast at times. You don't want to be left out with a square canopy loaded 1:1. You too want to be the hot shot swooping for ever with the latest ultra performance, ultra loaded canopy. I do believe in a scaled motorcycle licensing as well as a skydiving one. First the D license requirement should be at least 500 jumps and not 200. Second, each license should have a max wing load not to be exceeded and checked periodically buy the DZO or instructors. Third, I agree that there is the need of more education when it comes to canopy control.

Memento Audere Semper

903

[freeflyz 0]

Could't agree with you more!!!!!!!

[RichM 0]

I don't agree with the suggestion of a certain number of jumps as being a good guide to canopy skill. Someone who has done 300 jumps (to use your example) all in the last year should be a lot better at canopy control than another who has done 300 jumps in 30 years. Additionally you can kill yourself almost as easily under a heavily loaded square irrelevant of jumps numbers.

I think the main problem is that there is no official or recognised method of teaching advanced canopy skills (I mean swooping not CF).

I have been on the receiving end of significant peer and senior pressure to not begin swooping and then again to not continue with it because it "kills people". our local "ban skydiving" club uses that argument and yet many skydivers do not see the irony nor the danger of using and so giving credibility to the same argument. But I had to teach myself as no-one would teach me, I had a little help, but mostly had to research information (a heck of a lot of it came from here, thanks guys and gals) and carefully analyse the risks and build an approach to minimise and mitigate them.

I had to do it myself but as in all things, structured education is the key to making it safer. Kibi at Eloy delivers (maybe devised?) a teaching approach to skysurfing which is a level progression system much like AFF and RAPS are, and you have to pass each level before moving on, and so demonstrating the required level of skill before progressing.

So I think a similar approach would significantly reduce the risks of learning the skill of swooping. This is probably nothing more than any decent informal swoop coach is doing anyway. I might even start an approach and post it here for thoughts and improvement, anyone think it's a good idea?

Have fun, stay safe
Rich M

Rich M

[ernokaikkonen 0]

>I don't agree with the suggestion of a certain number of jumps
> as being a good guide to canopy skill.

No, but limiting the wingloadings on certain jump-numbers might save lives.

>I think the main problem is that there is no official or recognised
> method of teaching advanced canopy skills (I mean swooping not CF).

Proper training in swooping doesn't require insane wingloadings. All the things needed for swooping can be taught with lower wingloadings just as well(but more safely).

What we need(IMO), is both. Limit the wingloading for a couple of hundred jumps, and give training while people are still jumping their less-loaded canopies. That way the lowtime jumpers might actually have some skill before moving to smaller canopies.

>I had to do it myself but as in all things, structured education is
> the key to making it safer.
(...)
>So I think a similar approach would significantly reduce the risks
> of learning the skill of swooping. This is probably nothing more
>than any decent informal swoop coach is doing anyway.

"A controlled program of instruction" would of course be a good idea. And to keep the lowtimers alive until they have had a possibility to go through the course, wingload-limits would help.

Erno

[nigel99 144]

the UK has a restriction on motorcycle licencing based on the horse power etc I believe

I started this post as I saw someone hook in on a small elliptical and has since died of injuries received. As a direct result of this accident I know of 2 people who were intent on starting jumping who now have changed their minds. I personally was going to be starting again and my wife has put the brakes on (she is 1 of the 2).

Swooping is possibly one of skydiving's best "spectator" friendly events, but not will not do very well while 50% of skydiving deaths are a result of it - and that % is growing.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.