normiss 840 #1 March 11, 2016 Thoughts? "At its most recent meeting in late February, the USPA Board of Directors approved a new Basic Safety Requirement regarding wingsuit flight close to solo and tandem students: "Wingsuit flight within 500 feet vertically or horizontally of any student, including tandem students, is prohibited." Additionally, the board added the following recommendation to the Skydiver's Information Manual: "Wingsuit flight within 500 feet vertically or horizontally of any licensed skydiver under canopy requires prior planning and agreement between the canopy pilot and wingsuit pilot." Both the new BSR and recommendation are effective immediately." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dthames 0 #2 March 11, 2016 normissThoughts? "At its most recent meeting in late February, the USPA Board of Directors approved a new Basic Safety Requirement regarding wingsuit flight close to solo and tandem students: "Wingsuit flight within 500 feet vertically or horizontally of any student, including tandem students, is prohibited." Additionally, the board added the following recommendation to the Skydiver's Information Manual: "Wingsuit flight within 500 feet vertically or horizontally of any licensed skydiver under canopy requires prior planning and agreement between the canopy pilot and wingsuit pilot." Both the new BSR and recommendation are effective immediately." As it is worded..... If the student or tandem is in the plane when the WS wants to exit, now does the WS manage to get 500 feet away without flying? Ball up? If the student or tandem was in freefall, that would make the rule much easier to follow.Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #3 March 11, 2016 I agree the wording should include something like '... of any student in freefall or under canopy". What if the pilot of the plane is learning to skydive and doesn't have his 'A' license yet? I know it is silly, but the BSR as written will not allow wingsuiters to leave the plane. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bluhdow 31 #4 March 11, 2016 It's stupid. Yet another solution in search of a problem. Qualified wingsuit pilots and tandem instructors have been safely planning and performing flybys without incident for years. What's the catalyst for this ruling? Now I understand and agree that a tandem should be notified and informed of the additional risks associated with such a jump, and should obviously be allowed to veto the idea, but I really don't see an issue with flybys. Why not re-word it to something more reasonable? 100 feet still allows safe flybys without killing the whole game. Were any wingsuiters consulted when this was written?Apex BASE #1816 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,241 #5 March 11, 2016 BluhdowIt's stupid. Yet another solution in search of a problem. Qualified wingsuit pilots and tandem instructors have been safely planning and performing flybys without incident for years. What's the catalyst for this ruling? Now I understand and agree that a tandem should be notified and informed of the additional risks associated with such a jump, and should obviously be allowed to veto the idea, but I really don't see an issue with flybys. Why not re-word it to something more reasonable? 100 feet still allows safe flybys without killing the whole game. Were any wingsuiters consulted when this was written? I'm sure the rights of wingsuiters were not considered, nor should they be. Is there some reason you need to do these flybys? Do they enhance the experience of the tandem passenger, or are they for the pleasure of the wingsuiter? Tandem skydiving is not a game. Your attitude needs a small adjustment if you think it is. Notifying the tandem of the increased risk? Are you kidding? Do you mean the TI, who should know better, or the paying customer who has no way of knowing better? The BSR is entirely appropriate, at least as it pertains to tandems. Because no amount of additional risk is appropriate to add to a tandem skydive. Edit to add: I don't think of this as a BSR about wingsuits, I think of it as a BSR about students and tandems.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 840 #6 March 11, 2016 As a TI and wingsuiter, I've experienced a shit load of fly-bys. I'm curious who will carry the measuring tape when I ask a friend to do one. At 500.1ft of course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #7 March 11, 2016 I guess the only rationalization is zero tolerance for additional unnecessary risk to tandem students. You don't want to screw the pooch. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DiverMike 5 #8 March 11, 2016 I haven't seen the actual BSR, but I hope it is written with more precision than what has so far been shown. In addition to adding 'while in freefall or under canopy', it should probably clarify what a 'wingsuit' is. A camera suit has wings, and I am pretty sure more camera flyers have bumped into tandem students than wingsuiters. I think to the general public (and legal counsel) any skydiving suit with wings would be classified as a wingsuit. For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WickedWingsuits 0 #9 March 11, 2016 Can it be waivered? I think there could be some rare but legit situations where a tandem flyby was preplanned and all above board. Similar to how a tandem demo is rare but does happen.Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month. Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bluhdow 31 #10 March 11, 2016 gowlerkI'm sure the rights of wingsuiters were not considered, nor should they be. Good start. QuoteIs there some reason you need to do these flybys? Is there some reason you need to skydive? If not, we should ban skydiving. In fact, ban everything that can't be justified by the nebulous measure of being "necessary." QuoteDo they enhance the experience of the tandem passenger, or are they for the pleasure of the wingsuiter? Both students and wingsuiters have fun with flybys. Every tandem I've flown by has indicated that it was additive to their experience. QuoteTandem skydiving is not a game. Your attitude needs a small adjustment if you think it is. Thanks mom. QuoteNotifying the tandem of the increased risk? Are you kidding? Do you mean the TI, who should know better, or the paying customer who has no way of knowing better? I am not kidding. We allow them to sign up for risk by skydiving in the first place. Do they know all of the risks there? Do we present them with detailed statistics and studies about skydiving? What's different in allowing them to consent to a flyby? Oh, I know what it is. Money. They pay money for the tandem so we allow them to consent to that risk. They don't pay for flybys so there's no way in hell they'd be allowed to consent to that. Maybe if there was money in flybys the USPA would take a different approach. Have fun with your yardsticks. We'll see who gets busted for 500 feet. This is just another unenforceable "solution" which solves a non-existent problem. If you're a TI and you don't like them you don't have to consent to them. I've never flown by a TI without getting their permission first. That's all I have to say about that.Apex BASE #1816 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 840 #11 March 11, 2016 What I posted is from the USPA Instructor email, word for word. Personally, I think it's an unenforceable silliness. Wickey, those are "VIP tandems AT demos", that makes them different. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lyosha 50 #12 March 11, 2016 ... what if the passenger specifically requests it and the tandem instructor approves? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,241 #13 March 11, 2016 This is a wingsuit forum, and I expect my post to be attacked here. Bring it to the tandem forum and it will be different. Apparently the BoD of USPA also disagrees with you. But I'm sure that's because they are just killjoy fools.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WickedWingsuits 0 #14 March 11, 2016 gowlerkThis is a wingsuit forum, and I expect my post to be attacked here. Bring it to the tandem forum and it will be different. Apparently the BoD of USPA also disagrees with you. But I'm sure that's because they are just killjoy fools. I wouldn't call someone replying to your post an attack....that's over reacting a tad. For the record I stay as far away as possible from tandems and sure as shit never did a fly by. I just think the BSR was barley thought through.Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month. Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,241 #15 March 11, 2016 QuoteI wouldn't call someone replying to your post an attack....that's over reacting a tad. I can agree with that. Attack may be too strong a word. What I mean is that the people in this forum will probably disagree with both my post and the BSR. I won't take it as a personal attack, I understand. There have been other BSRs enacted lately about tandems. I would say that USPA is micro managing tandems using the blunt instrument of BSRs at the behest of the tandem manufacturers and possibly DZOs as well. The stakes are very high for these groups.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hjumper33 0 #16 March 12, 2016 Arbitrary rule that is virtually impossible to enforce unless you post pictures or video. I strongly doubt the ability of a tandem instructor or even wingsuit pilot to determine the distance of an object moving over 100mph if it is 200,300, or 400 ft away. Ill just continue to enjoy my non-uspa dropzone and rejoin as jobs and travel force me to ;) This was actually taken with a telephoto lense, and I assure you I was exactly 501 feet away from any consenting student. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SionaSioux 0 #17 March 12, 2016 gowlerk ***It's stupid. Yet another solution in search of a problem. Qualified wingsuit pilots and tandem instructors have been safely planning and performing flybys without incident for years. What's the catalyst for this ruling? Now I understand and agree that a tandem should be notified and informed of the additional risks associated with such a jump, and should obviously be allowed to veto the idea, but I really don't see an issue with flybys. Why not re-word it to something more reasonable? 100 feet still allows safe flybys without killing the whole game. Were any wingsuiters consulted when this was written? I'm sure the rights of wingsuiters were not considered, nor should they be. Is there some reason you need to do these flybys? Do they enhance the experience of the tandem passenger, or are they for the pleasure of the wingsuiter? Tandem skydiving is not a game. Your attitude needs a small adjustment if you think it is. Notifying the tandem of the increased risk? Are you kidding? Do you mean the TI, who should know better, or the paying customer who has no way of knowing better? The BSR is entirely appropriate, at least as it pertains to tandems. Because no amount of additional risk is appropriate to add to a tandem skydive. Edit to add: I don't think of this as a BSR about wingsuits, I think of it as a BSR about students and tandems. It wasn't a wingsuiter that chopped off a tandem drogue on a recent flyby, so where is the BSR addressing THAT? Always remember the danger. Never forget the fun! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,241 #18 March 12, 2016 hjumper33Arbitrary rule that is virtually impossible to enforce unless you post pictures or video. I strongly doubt the ability of a tandem instructor or even wingsuit pilot to determine the distance of an object moving over 100mph if it is 200,300, or 400 ft away. Ill just continue to enjoy my non-uspa dropzone and rejoin as jobs and travel force me to ;) This was actually taken with a telephoto lense, and I assure you I was exactly 501 feet away from any consenting student. Meh.... wingsuiters are all above average skydivers who rules don't apply to. Carry on.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
megamalfunction 1 #19 March 12, 2016 I think this is just a common sense rule. At the end of most wingsuit flights you will likely see some tandems. Personally, I would just take that as a good cue to pull, but maybe some people need this rule because they don't have any sense... It's Time to Buzz the Tandem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FUSKahthlQ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wasatchrider 0 #20 March 13, 2016 So if you ever put on a wing suit and you see a canopy you would just pull? Even if you are at 4500 feet and you have airspace to clear with canopy traffic. Yes rules are built for common sense. Rules are built for youBASE 1519 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hjumper33 0 #21 March 13, 2016 Base jumpers, you're confusing wingsuiters and base jumpers. I think we all know the real issue here. Tandem instructors are usually making their living with this, and it's a chance to look cool and rub your weiner on a girls butt while you tell her how cool you are. A wingsuiter flying by steals your thunder, and likely your chance to score. I'd be pissed too! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,241 #22 March 13, 2016 hjumper33Base jumpers, you're confusing wingsuiters and base jumpers. I think we all know the real issue here. Tandem instructors are usually making their living with this, and it's a chance to look cool and rub your weiner on a girls butt while you tell her how cool you are. A wingsuiter flying by steals your thunder, and likely your chance to score. I'd be pissed too! Only the wingsuiters who are also BASE jumpers are cool enough to score from under the noses of the TIs. I bow to them. The other wingsuiters? Well.... I'll be kind and just say, not so much. A wingsuiter that doesn't do BASE is just a wanna be.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,098 #23 March 13, 2016 Maybe the USPA will develop omnidirectional laser rangefinders with heads-up displays and tamper-proof recording to make sure the 500' rule is enforcible. Otherwise it's just nonsensical.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,241 #24 March 13, 2016 Enforcement is not the primary tool of BSRs. This one sends a clear message for wingsuits to stay away from students. The 500 feet? It's far enough to mean stay far away. So far only wingsuiters seem to feel the rule is not enforceable. No one else seems to think it's a bad idea. Hmmm..... If a rule had been written without a metric you would be saying it's too vague and therefore unenforceable. Maybe you could just take the rule as written and stay the hell away from students instead of saying you need a heads up display. Are you really that poor at judging distance? If so you should probably just stay away from everyone. There have been some very thoughtful comments here, and a few from people who don't like rules. But looking for a loophole in the rule is a little like lawyering up in the sky. And that is nonsensical.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
megamalfunction 1 #25 March 13, 2016 500 feet is roughly two football fields. So yes, when I see tandems I am most likely 500 feet away or so and pull. That seems to be what the USPA is suggesting others do as well. However, if you want to fly around the tandems I'm sure that's fine as long as you keep 500 feet of distance from the tandems. Who knows, maybe you've got a lot more wing than I do and can easily fly around them. What you should not do is this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6a63fbqnNQ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites