Swooping banned at SD Arizona

[PhreeZone 15]

I think all that the policy change is doing is to prevent them from doing them in the main landing areas. They are more then welcome to go do 540's in the middle of the desert if I understood things correctly. Am I wrong here?

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[billvon 2,396]

?>The proposals don't ban swooping but they ban certain ppl from swooping.

Again, no. The most stringent proposals I've seen on line only ban certain manuevers (NOT all swoops) from one of the landing areas; it's akin to "banning" wingsuiters from flying down the jump run. They can still swoop in other areas.

SDAZ now prohibits 180's from the secondary area and 270's from the main area. Again, you can do whatever you like off the landing areas and you can still swoop in both areas as long as you don't exceed those degree limits.

Other DZO's may follow SDAZ's lead, which would be bad overall, because there will be fewer areas available for swooping across the country. We could help avoid this by coming up with less-stringent USPA rules that separate 270ers from regular pattern people. Given a choice between a USPA rule and a more-limiting SDAZ rule, most DZO's will choose the USPA rule (I believe.)

[D22369 0]

It is a proven fact that under certain conditions (jump run into the wind, winds stronger at altitude than near the ground, roughly same direction of wind from surface to altitude) that putting a freefly group out last will result in more separation at opening time than putting them out first. It's easily shown with some basic math.

***

Ok, sounds good, but then so did the scientists who claimed to have harnessed cold fusion, it looked good on the computer, the numbers all crunched correctly, but when it came to the real world, it didnt work.

What I would like to see is two people exit at the same time (2 sec interval would suffice) so the wind conditions are virtually identical, from 14k, one goes to belly, one goes head down, both wear GPS units, the belly flyer pulls at 5k, the freeflyer levels out at 4k, and pulls by 3k, the data compared and then published to the skydiving comunity.
Of course these jumpers would have to be people that we all could be sure are falling as straight down as they possibly can.

I have seen a computer simulation, but no real world data, i have jumped at DZ's that had freeflyers out first, with no problems, and others that put them out last.

I would like to see verifiable proof, not a computer simulation, not math that adds up, I would love to see data from a real world test.

Roy

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

[PhreeZone 15]

This should not be in the swooping forum and should be split to the S&T probally.

Instead of people you would want to use weights to eliminate any potential sliding, and the answers you are looking for go back to the US Army Air Bomber squads back in WW2. Using unguided munitions they were able to drop two different bombs at two different times to hit the same target. I'm going to have to find the links to the article but I remember for a college paper reading about it and how the bomb crews would under go training to do this. They would put out the larger/faster bombs first and the lighter ones slightly later and allow physics to take over so they would hit the same area.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[billvon 2,396]

>Ok, sounds good, but then so did the scientists who claimed to have
> harnessed cold fusion, it looked good on the computer, the numbers all
>crunched correctly, but when it came to the real world, it didnt work.

We're not talking about simulation here, we're talking about math. It's like wondering how many hours it will take you to drive 120 miles at 60mph. There's really no debate about it. You wouldn't need GPSes and accurate timers and two cars leaving at time X and arriving at time Y.

>What I would like to see is two people exit at the same time (2 sec
>interval would suffice) so the wind conditions are virtually identical, from
>14k, one goes to belly, one goes head down, both wear GPS units, the
>belly flyer pulls at 5k, the freeflyer levels out at 4k, and pulls by 3k, the
>data compared and then published to the skydiving comunity.

I have video; is that good enough? I believe Kallend has it in a downloadable form. (It's actually to disprove the 45 degree rule, but it also shows the different trajectories the freeflyers take from the point of view of the aircraft.)

>I would like to see verifiable proof, not a computer simulation, not math
>that adds up, I would love to see data from a real world test.

Sounds like a project you could easily do yourself!

[Pendragon 1]

Quote

They are more then welcome to go do 540's in the middle of the desert if I understood things correctly. Am I wrong here?

Try doing a 270 / 540 on a crossbraced out in the desert with scrub / holes and everything else out there. The desert there is only good for "landing off" - i.e. conservative, straight-in approaches.

The suggestion doesn't solve anything unfortunately.

--
BASE #1182
Muff #3573
PFI #52; UK WSI #13

[ianmdrennan 2]

Folks,

This thread has run it's course. There are already numerous threads on the topic, including on in the General forum here.

lets continue the discussion there.

Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team