in2jumping

Quote

The web seats look really comfortable.

Until your PUD/Hackey gets caught in the webbing and you stand up .

Seven to eight AFF jumps with 10 minutes of tunnel training then we cut them loose in a crowded sky full of varying speed canopies and swoopers at one of the busiest dropzones in the world with pretty much no canopy training. Then we wonder why 75% of the fatalities last year were under canopy with many of them being canopy collisions?

USPA really needs to get off their asses and get out of the 1980's training mentality and mandate another seven to eight dedicated canopy training jumps for graduation. Not every student is smart and concerned enough like AZStone to take the initiative to seek out their own training.

Quote

1) Require a fairly extensive canopy training course for the A license.

Someone who doesn't have an A license isn't the problem. A student on a lightly loaded canopy is going to be flying, or trying to fly, a slow, normal basic pattern anyway. That's what they should be trying to learn, and if they can't do that then more advanced canopy training becomes irrelevant. -

They grow up to become problems because they do not receive ANY real canopy training early on, training has not kept up with canopy evolution. Also there has been a number of CCs involving low time jumpers over the years.

Quote

[ 2) Implement Brian Germain's downsizing chart as a BSR.

While Brian Germain's chart is useful as a reference, it has some serious shortcomings that make it unrealistic to use as an enforced rule.

The chart only combines three factors: exit weight, canopy size, and number of jumps. It doesn't take into account the design and performance differences between canopy models, it doesn't differentiate between how the canopy is intended to be used, and it doesn't account for a skydiver's skills, training, and attitude.

Compare this to paragliders, where wings are uniformly rated according to skill level and safety. -

Re-read Brian Germains chart it does take into account some design factors and I think is a great basic chart to form a BSR around. Some sort of BSR needs to be implemented to regulate canopy progression to cut down on the number of canopy related injuries and deaths.

Quote

[ 3) Implement a NO passing rule, lower canopy has the “right of way” and you must not over take them.

This isn't realistic. In every other facet of aviation, there are right-of-way rules for converging, overtaking, and sequencing to a landing area. How do you outlaw overtaking or "over-descending"? It doesn't matter if one canopy is faster than another if they're both flying a logical pattern and the faster canopy is practicing "see-and-avoid" which a no-passing rule would require anyway. It's the lack of "see-and-avoid" and therefore yielding to another canopy that's the problem. Not to mention, a traffic jam behind a slow canopy doesn't work in the air anymore than it works behind a slow car on the road.

Think if you segregate and split up the main landing area this could be doable. Would not be perfect but better than our current solution of doing nothing .

Quote

4) Segregate canopy landing areas by wing loading. Split landing areas into two, fast canopies land over here slower canopies land over here.

Again, one canopy overtaking another canopy isn't the problem; it's people not seeing each other and failing to properly yield to each other. "Circle of Awareness" is such a big deal during freefall training, but it needs to be an even bigger deal under canopy. Having a "head-on-a-swivel" looking for traffic and not just focusing on the landing area is what's going to make "see-and-avoid" work. I've seen very view videos of camera flyers thoroughly looking all-around them while under canopy.

Canopies over taking each other is a HUGE factor in CCs, keeping horizontal separation would dramatically reduce the chances of CCs.

Quote

5) Ban all HP landings (AKA swooping) on normal skydives and put into place rules that minimize any turns (must fly a standard pattern). Require a separate isolated pass for any type of HP landing.

Separate landing areas, sure, like DZO's are supposed to be doing all ready, but removing traffic and giving individual swoopers priority use of airspace, as restrictive as it seems, only builds bad habits by taking away the reason to be looking for traffic in the first place. It's not the airspace environment that's causing collisions, it's pilots not proactively trying to see-and-avoid other jumpers. Allowing swoopers to become complacent in their own protected airspace bubble isn't going to make them any safer when they do end up having to play nice with others.

What? This makes no sense saying that requiring HP landings be done on separate passes is going to make HP pilots complacent.

Quote

Recommendations:

1) Better analysis of what exactly causes a collision or near-miss.

Who?
HP landings
Students and low time jumpers
Rapid down sizers
Small canopies over taking large canopies
Other

Why?
Turns or big turns (swoops) in traffic
Lack of training and experience
Down sized to a canopy that they cannot stay ahead of
Canopies over taking each other in traffic (wide varying canopy speeds)
Erratic unpredictable canopy piloting

What can be done?
HP landings done on isolated separate pass
Mandatory canopy training
Regulate canopy progression
Do everything possible to create environment of horizontal and vertical canopy separation
Do everything possible to create predictable canopy behavior in traffic (predictable patterns with minimal turns).

I personally don't think that anything is going to be done to address this issue by USPA and major DZs any time soon. Canopy collisions and canopy related deaths have been a major issue in this sport for a long time and nothing has or is being done to address the issue.

It would mean putting in rules and regulations which would mean limiting fun under canopy and god forbid we throw a monkey wrench in anyone's fun in the name of safety.

The current CCs deaths will be forgotten and swept under the rug here in a few months and it will be business as usual

Quote

Quote

3) Implement a NO passing rule, lower canopy has the right of way and you must not over take them.

Are we going to implement this with a ban on canopies loaded over 1.2 pounds per square foot? That's as about as high as you can go and be guaranteed not to over-take some one jumping classic accuracy wing loadings who refrains from braked approaches.

Hence the idea of "4) Segregated canopy landing areas" for faster and slower canopies in an attempt to keep vertical and horizontal separation. Kind of like we do now when exiting the aircraft requiring separation to avoid collisions.
The whole idea is to try and bring some control to the existing chaos in the sky. Though this would not be a perfect solution I think would help.

1) Require a fairly extensive canopy training course for the A license.

This would fill current non-existing canopy training gap and would start new skydivers off with a solid canopy control foundation.

2) Implement Brian Germain's downsizing chart as a BSR.

Would help slow down the existing out of control downsizing trend, would assist in reducing number of jumpers flying around with their heads up their ass because they can barely control their canopy and would reduce number of non CC canopy injuries and deaths.

3) Implement a NO passing rule, lower canopy has the “right of way” and you must not over take them.

Greatly reduces chances of canopy collisions.

4) Segregate canopy landing areas by wing loading. Split landing areas into two, fast canopies land over here slower canopies land over here.

Reduces the chance of canopies overtaking each other, enhances separation and helps with the current problem of wide varying canopy speeds.

5) Ban all HP landings (AKA swooping) on normal skydives and put into place rules that minimize any turns (must fly a standard pattern). Require a separate isolated pass for any type of HP landing.

This would suck for swoopers but when 62% of the canopy collisions over the last 20 years involved HP landings and with swooping only making up a small portion of the sport, something needs to be done here.

Quote

I'm sorry but how about us new guys who are flying large slower canopies. The DZ I currently go to is very organized, but I'm told other DZ's tend to be a little bit more loose.
What do you suggest that we on the large slower canopies do so as to stay out of the way?
A good friend suggested going into deep brakes up wind and waiting for everyone to get down and then starting my pattern.
Suggestions?

Easy, just downsize to a 1.5 loaded Katana .

Quote

Faster canopies AND slower canopies competiting for the same airspace, 20 people exiting on one pass with similar opening altitudes all going to the same small place at the same time, unaware/uneducated/untalented people flying through a pattern causing havock and unplanned/unexpected turns by others trying to avoid them & creating a ripple effect.

You can also add higher and higher wing loadings over the years, With the majority of these jumpers having downsized to the point they cannot devote enough attention/focus to fly safely in traffic and avoid canopy collisions. To me a good number of experienced jumpers out there with highly loaded HP canopies these days are just as dangerous as a student with 10 jumps when it comes to flying in traffic.

Rapid downsizing is the norm for young immortal jumpers these days, with no rules and regulations in place to control their progression. Those same young immortal jumpers that survive grow up to become STAs, coaches or instructors. Then go on to teach new jumpers that it is perfectly fine to fly a canopy they can barely control as long as they can stand up their landings.

Quote

when the weather gets way hotter (I'm in Arizona), the flares are gonna be shit. Does anyone have experience with this?
.

I have ate crap on a few landings jumping in 100+ degree no wind days here in AZ. You definitely notice the difference when the temperatures rise, you come in much faster and have quite a bit less lift.

If you are going to jump in the summer, get your jumps in early in the morning before 10 or 11 am. To me it is not worth the risk jumping in the turbulence and all the dust devils that start forming in the afternoon.

How about redundant cutters?

Stack them on top of each other and stagger the lower cutter to fire milliseconds later. Or one above pilot chute and one bottom of container and stagger the lower cutter to fire milliseconds later.

Quote

How far as an instructor do you go to make sure your graduates understand the consequences of skydiving?

In this day of people believing there is a safety net for everything, what do you feel is your responsibility to impart.

Do you believe that there is a requirement to make sure that your students understand that their actions or inactions could cause their death, or serious injury? Or even the fact that sometimes thing just plain go wrong?

I know it's part of the waiver, but do you feel it's part of what should be understood before you stamp that A license card?

What say you? And if you so desire, share some of the techniques you use to get the point home.

All through my static line progression I was encouraged to read all the incident reports in the stack of Parachutist sitting next to the couch at the DZ and to ask questions about them if I did not understand.

This got the point home for me and taught me about all the crap that can go wrong, how to properly handle these situations, what not to do during a skydive and the consequences

Quote

That pretty much seems to be what everyone is saying so I believe that is what I will do. Found a PISA hornet for around $500 so I might save up and grab that one.

And yes, I realize my jump numbers are quite low but I have been consistently doing the recommended practice under canopy (stalls, flying in brakes, flying w/risers, etc.) as well as landing (downwind, crosswind, rears, etc.). Canopy flight is Something I take very seriously and I consistently pull around 4K so I can have more time to practice. This is not simply a matter of "smaller is cooler". I have weighed the pros and cons for myself and believe that it is getting close to the time for me to be able to safely downsize.

And we wonder why 75% of the fatalities last year were under perfectly functioning open canopies and why we have so many canopy collisions these days.

Quote

Kinda like taking a 1999 Javelin pattern and building it today with some advancements but without all the bells and whistles of the Odyssey.

For $2350

Quote

I'm looking at simply the sheer action performed... not including the analysis, thought process, hesitation, etc...

So there is no thought process or analysis at all in the actions of pulling your handles?

Quote

Let's just take these 3 phrases out:

1 "good 3 to 4 seconds to cutaway..."
2. "Pull reserve another 3 seconds..."
"This is if everything goes well."
3. "if say your velcro on your cut away handle is really tight and takes 2 or 3 more seconds to cutaway"

So, just looking at the action... 6 or 7 seconds just to pull 2 handles... "if everything goes well." Yeah, exaggerated.

6 second is not exaggerated what so ever.
Cutaway:
1 second to think cutaway
1 second to grab handle
1 second to peal and pull and clear cables
(ya you might be able to do this in 2 seconds, but how often do you practice cutting away belly to earth at 2500'?)
Reserve:
1 second to think pull reserve
1 second to grab handle
1 second to pull and clear cable
(again might be able to do this in 2 seconds but then again how often to you practice this at 2000' belly to earth??)

Quote

and if your velcro causes you to need up to 3 more extra seconds to pull your cutaway then: a) your as weak as a 2yo. or b) you should replace with normal velcro.

Have you every jumped a new rig with really strong velcro on the cutaway handle, which required a strong peel to free it? Also you realize that cutting away belly to earth, your cutaway handle is going to be tight up against your body and not out free like when your under canopy and your harness is under tension?

Quote

So---> in all, possibly 10 whole seconds just to pull 2 handles. Exaggerated!

Look at your math its 6 to 7 seconds for pulling the handles not 10. But you can say 10 seconds all together if you factor in the 3 to 4 seconds its going to take to realize you have a PCIT!! You are going to throw out you PC give it a couple seconds then wonder what the fsck is going on look over you shoulders and realize its a PCIT, this is going to take 3 to 4 seconds!!

Quote

Now if you want to add in analysis, thought process, hesitation, management, etc... then, yeah I agree 10 sec is a reasonable number, but not on simply the action alone. (except in the case of a total mal or pcit which is primarily what we have been talking about.)

DUH! The analysis and thought process was factored in times and assumed in my original post. Malfunctions are going to happen at times you are not expecting them and not when you are sitting in you living room typing on you computer thinking about them.

Quote

If he was in fact talking about a pcit then I think his numbers are completely f'n ridiculous.

ETA: he was talking about a pcit.

No they are not ridiculous, 10+ seconds to reconginze you have a PCIT and pull both handles is a very real number.

Quote

Quote

Your instructors taught you to cutaway, then manually release the three ring on each shoulder before pulling your reseve handle? All of this while still at terminal, afer you have pulled, determined there was not the desired response, and looked over each shoulder?

As I recall reading in the SIM and being told.
Look over your left shoulder, then your right.
So how fast is that?
Then cut away, and run your fingers so as to loosen the 3 rings. so that's just grab your shoulders and give them a good shake and then go silver.
So yeah 10+ seconds in all but the idea is to prevent the reserve and the main from becomming very close friends.

• Pull at 3000’ have a PCIT.
• A good 3 seconds to realize you have a PCIT by looking over your shoulders, now at 2500 with nothing out.
• Go to emergency procedures and start cutaway, another good 3 to 4 seconds to cutaway and now below 2000’.
• Grad and clear/loosen your 3 rings another good 3 to 4 seconds, now humming through 1500’ with nothing out.
• Pull reserve another 3 seconds and humming through 1000’.

This is if everything goes well. You will be fscked if say your velcro on your cut away handle is really tight and takes 2 or 3 more seconds to cutaway or maybe your finger gets caught in a one of the 3 rings as your wasting your time fscking with them.

Quote

I thought about asking this privately, but thought someone else might benefit from the discussion.

When PRO packing first came out, I heard that the danger was that one "could easily pack a line-over". So I flat packed for 10 years until I got my first ZP.

Then I learned to PRO pack, and was shown some tips along the way that aid in one way or another. But mostly I keep doing what I always did, hoping to get what I've always gotten... (OK its not always pretty, but its always worked well )

However, the one thing I've never seen (knock wood), is what the bad thing(s) is (are) that causes a line over in a PRO pack. And (knock wood), I've yet to do that bad thing...

So... esplain!!! Several gray hairs out there say that they know the wrong thing when they see it... So, how can we see the wrong thing when it is right there in front of us... what are the rest of us lookin' for...



- please fill in this gap -



JW

What I was taught was when grabbing the center of the tail and then bringing each side of the tail to the front for rolling. Lift and use your knee to ensure that none of the tail or D lines come around to the front of the canopy.

This ensures that they stay in the rear where they belong and not exposed to the front of the canopy.

Quote

Quote

If you were jumping a smaller canopy would it be fair so say you might not come to because of G-LOCK?

There is at least on fatality that I can think of where the jumper went in under a spinner (extremely small canopy from 14k)... common belief was that he blacked out from the G's.

Under a normal small canopy, dunno...
JW

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3672897;search_string=Double%20Fatality%20at%20Lodi;#3672897

This double fatality CREW warp last year under high loaded (2.1) canopies was more than likely caused from blacking out.

Quote

Skyhook's definition of "down" is primarily defined by tension on the RSL or reserve pilot chute. ... fairly easy to predict ...

"Down" is also defined by which direction the jumper is tumbling ... almost impossible to predict ...

http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/PDF/skyhook/09109PackIns.pdf

If you look at the last image on page 5 you see the skyhook being packed horizontally position .

What I am saying is why not have it packed/positioned at more of an angle and not horizontally. That way there is less likely a chance of the skyhook lineyard sliding off the open end on a cut away from a violent spinning malfunction.

The skyhook lineyard is going to mostly get pulled in a upward (top of container) direction and/or also a left or right direction if you are spinning.

By angling the skyhook you make the skyhook lineyard less likely to slide off the hook if it gets pulled in a left direction.

Quote

Quote

Quote

It could potentially not release the red lanyard in the event of a main total... I think that would be very bad.

how would that happen?

Unless there is something that Im not seeing, in the event of a main total (nothing out), the skyhook disengages the red loop and the reserve PC takes the deployment.

If you were to bend the hook opening down or something similar, the skyhook could get hung up on the lanyard.

I was referring to how it is packed and not bending or modifying the hook.
Packing it with the open end downward would actually make it more unlikely to get a total.

Quote

When I was going through rigger training, I was having a conversation with my instructor about the sky hook system as my primary rig is equipped with one. He mentioned that if the sky diver is spinning when he or she does a cut-away, if they happen to be spinning in a particular direction (can't remember which direction) that sky hook will disengage from the free-bag bridle and the system operates in old school mode. It sounds as they may have happened to you.

http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/PDF/skyhook/09109PackIns.pdf

Looking at the way the skyhook sits it appears that open end is facing to the left. So just maybe a violent spinning malfunction to right might just yank the skyhook lineyard off the open end of the skyhook.

Maybe instead of having the bridle and skyhook sitting in a horizontal positioning. Setting the bridle and skyhook (the open end of the skyhook) in a more downward angle would correct this issue? If this is truly an issue?

Donkey Dips will do a number on your upper body and your abs (core). You can forgo the dip part to just work the abs (core).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HE9mo6sl8OY

Quote

...to take your rig home unpacked at the end of the day.

...and then to take it outside to pack it (in the shade, of course) the next day.

I'm too lazy to pack, and too cheap to pay a packer ; )

BUT... Smelling my rig in my car got me to thinking of all the things that could go wrong. Mainly just snagging the parachute on something and tearing it.

What are your thoughts?

CHRCNF

This is called "zipper packing". Do a nice daisy chain of your lines, ball your canopy up into a nice small ball, stuff it into your gear bag then zip it up.

Of course make sure there is nothing free floating around in you gear bag that can damage your canopy.

Quote

Anybody? Alluding to the disappearance of the Russian at Perris, I can see the impracticality of staff trying to keep track of all the jumpers, but what if there was a way to do it electronically? Maybe GPS chips rented out to jumpers for some fee that would attach to a safe point on their harness, like the boogie tags... If a jumper with one lands out beyond the DZ's perimeter, an alarm activates at manifest with the coordinates of the location? Would something like that work and be feasible?

How about AAD MFGs start integrating GPS tracking into their AADs? Come in handy for lost jumpers or lost/stolen rigs?

I think wrist mounts are just a fad that took off in the late 90's. I look at it this way, two most critical times that you need a altimeter is when you are tracking away\getting ready to deploy and when you are about to initiate a cut away\dump your reserve. With a chest mount its right there in your face in both these situations.

Quote

It's you that doesn't get it.

Who the fuck are you to tell me I am being "stupid" when my DZO and S&TA have watched me jump and are happy with how I am doing?

Well, according to PD you are in the "Expert" category for wing loading and jumping their 2nd highest performing canopy.

http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/W-L_Interpretations.pdf

And completely off the chart for Brian's recommended canopy and wing loading.

http://www.bigairsportz.com/pdf/bas-sizingchart.pdf

But what the hell do these people know
You should call PD and Brian up and ask them their opinions? I bet the word "stupid" come up in their opinion.

Quote

Just be glad you're not trying to downsize. Then you'd really have 'em after you.

Neither one of you guys get it do you? You guys just can not read the writing on the wall? You under your Katana with so few jumps and doing less than 100 jumps a year and this guys wanting to jump a camera with 67 jumps.

I sure the hell am glad I did not learn to jump at where ever you guys jump at. There is no way in hell that my DZO or STA would have ever let stupid shit like this ever happen at his DZ.