0
Treejumps

Swooping banned at SD Arizona

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

It did break the new "no greater than 180" rule.



And students will continue to break that. After all they're students, they're going to make mistakes. Wasnt' the last AZ collision with a low time jumper?

Anyway, the notion of '180s' being ok it ludicrous. It's a FAR more intrusive pattern than a 270. Now do I think the 270 is ok...no, but lets be reasonable here people, 180's aren't any better.

Education is the key IMO. Not some kneejerk reaction.

Smells like a witch hunt to me.



indeed.. another decision from the 'adminosphere' -"we have to DO SOMETHING" doesnt matter if it is the 'right something' at least its something..[:/]>:(

stupid rules like this will only contribute to the exodus of talent at Eloy, those without strong roots have already left for greener pastures.....[:/]

ah well it does create a business opportunity for someone else.....
____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

My guess is that adding these restrictions will make the notion of training and competing in swooping unrealistic for many people.



It has to change. We would never allow F1 or Indy drivers to train or compete on regular roads. They go to the track to train and compete. If you want to train to be a competitive swooper, I now believe you need to train in conditions that match competition. Currently, my profile lists something like 3500 swoops. I'll be changing that to 7 later today, as I've only ever done 7 hop and pops, maintained landing order and swooped the gates down a course 7 times. All those other swoops were after AFF, of FS, or wingsuit, and doubtless at some point I must have placed others at risk even though no incident ever occured.

I'll still swoop after wingsuit and after AFF if the student pulls at a normal altitude, as I'm last down on those loads. I'm lobbying for a seperate landing area for swoopers at our DZ too.

t
It's the year of the Pig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I wonder how they expect to conduct a Nationals again with said policy?



Probally the same exact way that Perris hold the Nationals. All Formation Skydiving events were restricted to a 90 degree turn to the grass in '05. Anything larger was grounds to have your team DQ'd. Swooping was done on its own hop and pops and its own schedule so they did not interfere with the traffic from the FS loads.

Out of the last 4 fatalities at SDA 2 were due to doing 270's into the pattern. Would a 180 change those to non-fatalites? I'm not sure.
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think doing a 180 is worse to enter the pattern than a 270 personally, I'd rather do a 135 degree carve to improve visual awareness of the target area. I think AZ is on the right track though, it is very busy in the main area on full loads.
Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I get what your saying, but I simply think a blanket rule of no 270's or larger is really going to limit your field of competitors and be counter productive to some of the good things that are being done to develop canopy piloting. For example, the CPC exists to bring up and educate new pilots. A rule like this will discourage people from competing.

Training in exact competition conditions is ideal, but unrealistic for many. It is fine to change your profile, but do you honestly believe your own canopy piloting skills would be where they are today if you only did a 270 or greater 7 times in you life?
Arizona Drive 4-Way VFS - www.DriveVFS.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

do you honestly believe your own canopy skills would be where they are today if you only did a 270 or greater 7 times in you life?



:D It would be close.. I got wet 5 times out of 5 yesterday! The looks on the faces of junior jumpers who have seen me swoop my old canopy at my home DZ in the regular landing area were priceless! Everything done well looks easy. I made this look really, really hard!

As anyone with competition experience knows, it shows you more about what you don't know than what you do. There are CP Champions with many fewer dives than my total number of swoops.
It's about what you can do - not how many times you've done it.

I'm glad I have that basic survival skill experience of knowing when I'm low and when to bail to toggles. I'll probably need a year or two to adapt my existing skills before I'm happy with my experience, and I don't think I'll ever be competitive. I'm an old dog. This is a new trick. I'm having a lot of fun learning it though.

t
It's the year of the Pig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It did break the new "no greater than 180" rule.



And students will continue to break that. After all they're students, they're going to make mistakes. Wasnt' the last AZ collision with a low time jumper?

Anyway, the notion of '180s' being ok it ludicrous. It's a FAR more intrusive pattern than a 270. Now do I think the 270 is ok...no, but lets be reasonable here people, 180's aren't any better.

Education is the key IMO. Not some kneejerk reaction.

Smells like a witch hunt to me.



Yup... and it'll probably cost more lives for them to figure out that a 180 is more intrusive to the pattern than a 270. Soon enough, people will be doing 90's and 180's in a congested pattern... [:/] and that will be considered 'safe'; after all, if 90's and 180's were dangerous in a congested pattern, they would have banned them too, right? :S:D:o:|

Nothing like wipping a 180, when you can't see what's behind you as your setting up. Sounds much safer than a 270 to me... :S
Shhh... you hear that sound? That's the sound of nobody caring!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Under what circumstances do you propose it is permissible to complete a high performance landing on a freefall load? I agree with Tonto is his evaluation of when the time is right (after an AFF Load, wing suit, or hop n pop).

I have to train with hop n pops, I try to take a page out of the RW crowd. Plan the skydive, mental rehearsal (over and over again), then skydive the plan. I have found this to be the most effective, safe and therefore most economical method of training. Granted I started high performance landings at a King Air dz, moved to a large dz where I found the traffic to be a definite challenge. However, after I started committed swooping I lost the enjoyment of holding other men's hands in freefall.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's about what you can do - not how many times you've done it.



It is about what you can do...but there is a strong relationship with how well you can do something and how many times you've done it. In my limited experience, doing well in a swoop competition comes down to consistency which comes from repetition and currency.
Arizona Drive 4-Way VFS - www.DriveVFS.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

...after I started committed swooping I lost the enjoyment of holding other men's hands in freefall


For me it never was about holding other men's hands in freefall ...it's all about playing grab ass and tickle with da hotties during foreplay (err... I mean 4-way) so that I don't get smacked around by the wifey! :)
Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>I wonder how they expect to conduct a Nationals again with said policy?

Serious competitors are generally willing to do what they need to do to compete. If that means not doing 270's, then they won't do 270's. If there are competitors who are unwilling to land any other way than doing a 270, it may be better that they don't go to Nationals. It's already a very high pressure event; a DZ may well decide it doesn't need the extra ambulance/coroner rides.

You may as well ask "how do they expect to get 400 skydivers on a record attempt with a policy like that?" They did, and the policy was even more stringent - no turns over 90 degrees, period. At least 400 skydivers wanted the record more than they wanted to swoop, and so we got it. And no one died in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have never been to Eloy. But from what i hear (crowded skies, busy landingarea) it sounds like, the only right thing to do, is to make at separate swooping area, where you also can land after a normal skydive (not only hop'n pops).

Swooping has come to stay.

Therefore i don't think there will be long before they make some kind of swooping area at Eloy.

It's a very good discussion though, it makes people think, how we can improve the current situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It did break the new "no greater than 180" rule.



And students will continue to break that. After all they're students, they're going to make mistakes. Wasnt' the last AZ collision with a low time jumper?

Anyway, the notion of '180s' being ok it ludicrous. It's a FAR more intrusive pattern than a 270. Now do I think the 270 is ok...no, but lets be reasonable here people, 180's aren't any better.

Education is the key IMO. Not some kneejerk reaction.

Smells like a witch hunt to me.



Yup... and it'll probably cost more lives for them to figure out that a 180 is more intrusive to the pattern than a 270. Soon enough, people will be doing 90's and 180's in a congested pattern... [:/] and that will be considered 'safe'; after all, if 90's and 180's were dangerous in a congested pattern, they would have banned them too, right? :S:D:o:|

Nothing like wipping a 180, when you can't see what's behind you as your setting up. Sounds much safer than a 270 to me... :S



Additioinally, there's not a good way to fly that pattern to set up. if you follow a tradional left hand patter, you have to make a 90 to the right to make your 180, or you'd have to fly downwind to your initiation point. That puts you flying against traffic. I know that makes me very nervous.

This isnt a one-rule-fixes-all problem. Its going to take a series of rules, someone to enforce them, and lots of education. To make a significant change quickly, it will take a lot of our energy, but once a DZ sets up its rules. they need to be plastered on every wall, and announced, and briefed with visiting jumpers.
Goddam dirty hippies piss me off! ~GFD
"What do I get for closing your rig?" ~ me
"Anything you want." ~ female skydiver
Mohoso Rodriguez #865

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gentlemen,

You are getting away from the root cause of this. One rule or a series of rules is not going to work out. It is said that "rules and regulation are guidance for the wise, but only idiots blindly follow them." The answer to this is educating people as to when and when not to swoop. There is a time and a place for everything including rash institution of worthless new rules and regulations. This is neither the time nor the place for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, at least we agree on one thing.

Education. I keep seeing it in everyone's posts. This we can do without debate. Im signed up for a canopy course on the 22nd. I'll encourage everyone else to do the same. It's a great starting point.


Oh, and if you go get a pair of Kangaroos, and a JVX you're pimp. ;)
Goddam dirty hippies piss me off! ~GFD
"What do I get for closing your rig?" ~ me
"Anything you want." ~ female skydiver
Mohoso Rodriguez #865

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Gentlemen,

You are getting away from the root cause of this. One rule or a series of rules is not going to work out. It is said that "rules and regulation are guidance for the wise, but only idiots blindly follow them." The answer to this is educating people as to when and when not to swoop. There is a time and a place for everything including rash institution of worthless new rules and regulations. This is neither the time nor the place for that.



Amen to that. If those intent on doing high performance landings were willing to walk an extra couple of hundred yards after every jump to stay out of traffic, then this issue wouldn't even be under discussion. Establish a high performance landing area well away from the main landing area and Bob's your uncle. If you have to make a backup, you're obviously not concentrating on your canopy piloting. If you need to get on the next plane, don't rip it up. I am more than happy to land at the other end of the DZ if that means no traffic and safe swoops.
"Bodygolfing" isn't as much fun as it sounds. People get pissed when you don't replace your divets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>It is said that "rules and regulation are guidance for the wise, but only
>idiots blindly follow them."

That is EXACTLY right. And a rule stating "no 270's in the main area" will make wise jumpers think about why this is important. The idiots who blindly follow that particular rule will at least survive until they get wise enough to understand why it's important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for joining this discussion in this forum. There was just to much BS going on in the other forum for any constructive conversation to happen.

I am not saying that there is not a place for rules and regulations in this sport. What I do feel strongly about is the fact that a blanket policy issued from USPA will in no way fix the situation. What is going on in the other forum is a whitch hunt plain and simple. I want to see an end to the needles death and bloodshed just like you do Bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but I simply think a blanket rule of no 270's or larger is really going to limit your field of competitors and be counter productive to some of the good things that are being done to develop canopy piloting.



Why cannot you stick to hop'n'pops if you are so dedicated to train as a swooper? Less expensive, more loads per day and less distruction from your major goal.

The degree of turn is a separate issue (and I agree that banning 270 for full altitude jumps will not completely solve the problem of collisions) but saying that this rule harms swooping as a discipline is nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I got wet 5 times out of 5 yesterday!



Well ya still made it look good! :P

Seriously though, what I really liked was that there were dedicated swoop loads, the exits were planned according to wingloading and there were several run-ins to separate jumpers - no chance of canopy collisions.

I know it was a competition, but how about applying that to normal jumping?

I always land on the very far side of the DZ because I worry about being in the way of the faster canopies.

-Chanti-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
people are gonna break that rule right and left. Half their staff swoops in on every landing, the swoop pond is near the landing area, ect. ive been to several dz's and the jumpers that really are into swooping: pull higher than other jumpers, fly in brakes to reach their set up points, and usually have a goal like hitting the gates. What happened is " hot doggers" tried to impress their friends and got fuc#$# up, and made things harder for others.
THANKS TO THE BLUE FALCONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<> if you jump naked, can you use your penis as a rudder?<>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Just got an e-mail saying that swooping is banned at SDAZ. Nothing passed a 180 permitted other than low passes with management approval.



This is a bit twisted. I would not say it is banned, but at least the maximum allowed rotation for common loads is controlled.

It sounds reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I know it was a competition, but how about applying that to normal jumping?



It can be done, but it costs money. Loads Wednesday were ZAR 150 ($21) with a ZAR 150 registration. This works out to ZAR 180 ($25) a jump from 5500ft AGL.

The extra money is well spent for me, because it allows me to focus on the one task I have to do on the skydive. Although I made mistakes, they were the same, consistant mistakes. The focus I had made them clear and memorable and several canopy pilots I respect (Chris B, Chris T and Rob K) all gave me the same feedback and advice. Basically I can swoop, but my setup needs work.

Conditions were marginal, but disipline was high, we all had fun, learned a lot and no one was injured at all. If an event like that is held every 2 months, I'll attend every one. (But will work harder to be dry in the winter!!)

t
It's the year of the Pig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>I wonder how they expect to conduct a Nationals again with said policy?

Serious competitors are generally willing to do what they need to do to compete. If that means not doing 270's, then they won't do 270's. If there are competitors who are unwilling to land any other way than doing a 270, it may be better that they don't go to Nationals. It's already a very high pressure event; a DZ may well decide it doesn't need the extra ambulance/coroner rides.

You may as well ask "how do they expect to get 400 skydivers on a record attempt with a policy like that?" They did, and the policy was even more stringent - no turns over 90 degrees, period. At least 400 skydivers wanted the record more than they wanted to swoop, and so we got it. And no one died in the process.



I think you missunderstood. I am a huge suporter of policies banning hookturns in crowded/dangerous situations like bigways or boogies.

Canopy piloting is part of Nationals now. That means large turns.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I understand, big turns are still allowed on hop 'n pop loads, with management approval. Presumably, for Nationals, management would approve.

The guy I am heading to Eloy with tomorrow tells me that when he was in Eloy in January they already had this rule in place. He said nothing over 180 in the main, and nothing over 90 in the alternate. Anybody else know anything about that?

Canuck

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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