BPA canopy progression system unveiled.

[yoink 321]

Last weekend at the AGM, the BPA explained a new canopy progression system based upon a theory of combining education and regulations that will be enforced by CCIs (I think from April).

The system provides 4 new qualifications: CH1 and CH2 are mandatory canopy handling skills that will be taught and observed with practical and written tests throughout a students progression and beyond.

CH1 will be required to get an A licence and an instructor must be able to teach all canopy skills up to this level.
CH2 will be required for B license. It seperates the canopy skills (accuracy and rear riser control) from the current IC1 certification (called JM1(?) that willl be concerned with spotting, flightline checks etc.). I likened it to Billvons downsizing checklist. To teach will be similar to having a WARP rating - nominated by your CCI etc.

The aim of these two levels is to give both practical and theoretical knowledge to the skydiver and to teach them how to make plans whils on the ground, how to adapt the plan in the air and how to make safe decisions for landing. (i.e. avoiding panic turns & 'must get back' syndrome)...

the next two levels called CP1 and CP2 are voluntary and are only concerned with those who want to swoop. The BPA defines swooping as 'any speed inducing maneuvre undertaken to increase speed for landing'

CP1 is required for ANY swoop landing and must be taught by someone holding both CP1 and CP2. Additionly, a C licence will be required. 200 jumps minumum - even for a double front riser landing.

CP2 is is required for competition swooping and will require a minimum of 1000 jumps, (D license) and the completion of a swoop course - I think it was 3 sucessive carving swoops over 180ft.



that's about all I can remember, but I'm sure others will pitch in.

discuss

[rsibbald 0]

This is long overdue, I'm interested to see how they intend on bringing it in...

Unfortunately I can see CP1 qualifications being handed out to unqualified people - unless *every* BPA swooper has to suddenly take a test to continue doing what they've been doing for years. They'll be arguments either way.

[tilly 0]

Glad to see that the BPA are finally doing something pro-active, or I guess it could still be described as merely reactive. Still at least they have not got their heads in the sand quite so much. Hopefully CH1 and 2 will be much more advanced than IC1 especially in outlining the danger of low turns. So you need CP1 to swoop? That's got to be a good idea.

[freekflyguy 0]

Fortunately my CCI Mark Bayda, is the head of the panel and has worked hard on developing the new system, it was he that gave the seminar at the AGM.

As far as I believe CCI's will be asked to submit names of those they feel qualify for CP1. CP2 will be given to those that have completed PST selection.

There will be a grace period for people to qualify prior to the system becoming compulsory.

The above is accurate to the best of my knowledge but I will confirm it with Mark and post asap.

Buzz

It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.

[Dazzle 0]

The stickers are given out by the CCI so that will be pretty easy for them to control.

[justdumi 0]

What so do we all need to get these new ratings then even though we have IC1 and stuff?

[rsibbald 0]

What's to say that a CCI knows what makes a safe swooper? I know a lot that will.... but also some that will hand out CP1 to anyone that isn't injured yet

[vt1977 0]

I'll start by saying that education in this area is clearly a good thing. However I'm not convinced that this new system will solve the problem of people killing/seriously injuring themselves under perfectly good canopies.

I think it's fair to say that a high proportion of those who have been killed or injured as a result of poorly executed high performance landings have previously been warned about their canopy handling. And yet they carried on regardless. Would a CCI saying to that person, "You don't have CP1 so you're not allowed to swoop" make any more difference than the CCI saying, "You only just got away with that, please don't do that or you will end up getting hurt"? I'm not convinced it will.

My opinion is that it won't make much difference. Those who want to learn safely will do so but for those of the mindset that they can do it anyway and they want to do it even despite warnings, I can't see a sticker (or the lack of it) changing their behaviour. The only solution in this scenario would be for a CCI to ground the person in question for attempting to swoop without the sticker. But then - frankly - they could just as easily ground someone who is ignoring warnings about their canopy handling!

It's good to see something being done and it's WAY better than nothing, but I don't believe this will completely solve the problem.

Vicki

[rsibbald 0]

I believe CH1 & CH2 will save lives.

Like Vicki said though, CP1 is likely to become meaningless because of different methods of awarding and enforcing it.

CP2.... well there's probably only a handful of people in the UK that applies to.

I hope that the people that need CH2 go and learn voluntarily, even if they are grandfathered into the scheme above that level.

[vt1977 0]

Quote

I believe CH1 & CH2 will save lives.

I hope so.

Does anyone know what is going to be contained in CH1 and CH2 that isn't already in the canopy control part of IC1?

A lot of the problem with IC1 is that it ended up (not at all DZs I'm sure, but at several I can think of!) simply being about those 5 pre-declared accuracy landings. If this wasn't done properly, all it encouraged was target fixation which did no-one any favours!

I think a lot of people were losing sight of the actual canopy control aspect of the IC1 qualification and assuming if they got it in the pit - however they got it in the pit - 5 times, that was enough. I have seen far too many people injured on their 5th IC1 landing when they just had to land in the pit or start the whole process again. Totally unnecessary injuries!

It sounds like this has the potential to be a very good system of canopy education, if all DZs do it properly!

Vicki

[rsibbald 0]

The preliminary manuals for CH1 and CH2 should be working their way around the instructors at your DZ, just ask one of them for a glance at it next time you're there.

Hopefully it won't change what most instructors teach too much. I know a lot of others and myself extend the 'risers' brief into a full blown canopy safety lesson.

[Adi 0]

Does anyone know what degree of carve will be required for the CP2.

[garywainwright 0]

2 points;
Does anybody know if the criteria for CH1 include intentional downwind landings? I think they should as i believe we have to take the fear out of landing the 'wrong way'

I can't remember the last injury i saw out of intentional swooping - most things I see are people trying to get back from a poor spot and and turning too low.

gary

PS I think the current amount of carve is 30-60 degrees

http://www.garywainwright.co.uk

Instagram gary_wainwright_uk

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

I think the current amount of carve is 30-60 degrees

Seems like it'd follow the IPC standard which, I believe, is 30 degrees. Much like most (if not all) qualifiers.

Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[rsibbald 0]

How about every CH1 & CH2 instructor having to do 'X' jumps on student kit every 6 months?

[yoink 321]

Quote

How about every CH1 & CH2 instructor having to do 'X' jumps on student kit every 6 months?

That was mentioned with the promise of it being considered.

Gary: intentional crosswind landings were definately mentioned (It think as part of CH2). I can't remember about downwind. Sorry

[ukJump 0]

A lot of the problem with IC1 is that it ended up (not at all DZs I'm sure, but at several I can think of!) simply being about those 5 pre-declared accuracy landings. If this wasn't done properly, all it encouraged was target fixation which did no-one any favours!

I think a lot of people were losing sight of the actual canopy control aspect of the IC1 qualification and assuming if they got it in the pit - however they got it in the pit - 5 times, that was enough. I have seen far too many people injured on their 5th IC1 landing when they just had to land in the pit or start the whole process again. Totally unnecessary injuries! ***

A bit off the subject, but does anyone know if IC1 landings have to be truly consecutive or can you land a couple in the pit on a good day, then next time you jump NOT designate it as IC1 coz conditions aren't favorable for a pit landing (or you just don't feel like it). Then you can finish IC1 jumps when conditions are better.

• Quote

[rsibbald 0]

It's open to interpretation, a bit like most of the BPA ops manual.....

Some DZs think that "consecutive" refers to only pre-declared landings when conditions are favourable, the others think that it refers to each subsequent jump.

Hopefully the new system will standardise this a bit more.

[ukJump 0]

Thanks rsibbald. Thats pretty much what I fathomed too. It seems to makes more sense from a safety point of view to ease that '5th jump in the pit' pressure onto low time jumpers.

[rsibbald 0]

By the sounds of it, CH1 is going to reward smooth, safe landing approaches onto the DZ, instead of concentrating on accuracy into a pit.

[yoink 321]

I think that was definately in the minds of the committee - IIRC they've increased the distance for predeclared landings for CH2 to 30m as well to try and emphasise just that.

It seems like a lot of thought and teaching will go into showing the student how to plan a safe canopy ride from their first jump and to do it religiously every time, and to try to teach they that they can land on the whole dz... not just aim for the cross.

[Designer 0]

That is soooooo cool.

[verticalflyer 11]

Totally agree gary, also a few crosswind landings would be good so people learn to really land in any dircetion, so when the time comes they are not phased because the direction of wind and there flight path are not exactly opposite.

Cheers

Fraser

Dont just talk about it, Do it!

[andyflylife 0]

Was April confirmed as the start date for the new system??

"swooper 24/7, 365!"
ME on Myspace
My Project playlist

[spoons 0]

what about people like me with 130 jumps and have been doing speed inducing maneuvers on landing for the last 70 jumps or so (albeit the first 50 odd were just double fronts more or less and even now it's only 30-45 degree turns). Also having done 3 canopy control courses (2 basic and 1 swooping, all with Chris Lynch).

I don't have the 200 jumps required for the CP1 so does this mean i have to land straight in until i do?