This is what the sport has come to

[pchapman 279]

Quote

Except that the message gets lost of time and it becomes the norm that you "need" to have an audible to land.

Agreed. Germain's article is a reasonable one about how to make good use of a tool. But soon we'll hear on the DZ how the BEST way to fly the circuit, the most modern way, is with canopy altitude alerts. "But Brian said you have to..."

So despite it being a reasonable article, some of us are going to be thinking, @%#$# Brian.

[Dean358 0]

Please look at what JimmyT wrote up thread: there is no "exact altitude" at which one should execute a turn from downwind to base or base to final. Instead, there are number of factors that go into that decision such as winds, traffic, the initial point you started your pattern from, etc., etc. You should enter the pattern with a plan and adjust it as conditions warrant. Or, as my glider instructor used to say about landing patterns: "You're either too high or too low, figure out which and adjust."

Next please read what Davelepka wrote just above about the difference between pilots and skydivers. While you're at it, take a peak at what AggieDave wrote about what he has SEEN happen. Did you "fucking read" any of the posts in this thread ????

For the record, I do get the value of having more data under canopy than an analog altimeter can provide. I've been jumping with a Digitude on my wrist since my student days, as it allows me to glance at it and confirm the sight pattern vs. altitude. It was a really helpful learning tool for me in getting the hang of flying something with such a tiny glide ratio. The key word being "glance."

But all of this pales next to what I consider the bigger issue: the Yahoo notion of just chucking oneself out of a plane without putting in the time to learn proper airmanship. As in, "hey, why do I need to study the winds and plan a precise landing pattern -- I'll just turn when the beeps go off." I believe this is what Chuck is referring to and why I so strongly agree with him.

www.wci.nyc

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Indeed a bunch of whining dinosours. If it help to keep newbie swoopers alive than it's the way to go.

Part of the problem is that the new generation is so enamored with the wonder of electronic gizmos, that they value those toys over the knowledge, experience and wisdom of "whining dinosaurs"...

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

as BG puts it, aviationists have been relying on instruments since the dawn of human flight; why do skydivers think they're any different?

of course, you shouldnt follow them blindly, as in aviation, that has led to numberous accidents, killing hundreds at once at times..

When pilots are really flying on instruments, they have air traffic controllers watching the whole thing and taking care of traffic and collision avoidance.

Now, if you are all alone in the sky, the audible could be useful to help establish one's familiarity with what things should look like.

But, if you are flying in any kind of traffic, the checkpoints are not nearly so important as simply fitting in with the flow of the traffic.

Precision entry altitudes are important to swoopers, but that is not at all what the article was talking about.

When you are in traffic - a canopy ahead, a canopy behind, and probably some canopies to the sides, what will the beeps mean? If you can't make the turn when the beeps come, you just have to live with that. And you aren't likely to miss one tun point but be back on for the next. Traffic just doesn't do that. If you get the beep, and there is a canopy where you intend to be, you cannot turn, plain and simple. From there on out, the beeps would be little more than a distraction, possibly even a hazard, because people will have a tendency to think that the beep means that they should be doing something when they hear it. That's going to be stressful, and BG is really clear that stress reduction is an important part of canopy flight, isn't he?

The sense I got from the article was that this was a possible technique for initial training in pattern work, not that it should become some common way of executing a pattern when you are in traffic and should generally know how to fly a pattern already.

If you don't already know how to fly a pattern and avoid collisions by the time you get to mixing it up with traffic, then you are in the wrong place, because you shouldn't be in traffic yet.

[billvon 2,991]

>as BG puts it, aviationists have been relying on instruments since the
>dawn of human flight; why do skydivers think they're any different?

Because

1) Instrument pilots are very specifically trained on how to use those instruments as their sole reference.

Take any new private pilot who has received perhaps 5 hours of instrument flight instruction - far more than any A-licensed jumper has received. Now put him into IMC. This occurrence, called "continued VFR flight into IMC," is one of the leading causes of death for pilots - pilots who have far more instrument training than any skydiver.

Why? Because it's hard to do, and a VFR-only pilot in IMC is a true emergency; he has only very basic training intended to keep him flying until he can get out of the clouds. That's why VFR pilots are required to fly only when they can see well - because their eyes are far superior to instruments when it comes to rapidly understanding and interpreting what's happening to their airplane.

2) Aircraft instruments are far more accurate and reliable than any skydiver's altimeter.

Aviation instruments are regularly calibrated and tested, and modern ones must fail visibly i.e. they must have a very visible indicator that says "DO NOT USE THIS INSTRUMENT" or something similar. In addition, every instrument on an IFR-certified aircraft has a backup. (turn-and-bank can substitute for artificial horizon for example.)

When's the last time you saw a skydiver get his altimeter calibrated? How do you tell when your audible altimeter is reading incorrectly? What sort of noise does an audible make when if fails completely?

Now, they are good _backups_ to your eyes, and someone who uses an audible to back up their eyes can indeed be safer. That, however, is very different than "relying on instruments."

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

as BG puts it, aviationists have been relying on instruments since the dawn of human flight; why do skydivers think they're any different?

There are lots of differences. Aircraft have two sources of data, the static port and the pitot tube, so if one fails, the other will still provide information.

If that were the whole story, Air France 447 wouldn't have crashed. Pitot and static sources are both needed, one can't substitute for the other.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[nigel99 474]

Quote

Quote

Indeed a bunch of whining dinosours. If it help to keep newbie swoopers alive than it's the way to go.

Part of the problem is that the new generation is so enamored with the wonder of electronic gizmos, that they value those toys over the knowledge, experience and wisdom of "whining dinosaurs"...

The electronic gizmo is simply a gadget that captures the knowledge, experience and wisdom of a bunch of whining dinosaurs without the whining

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Quote

Indeed a bunch of whining dinosours. If it help to keep newbie swoopers alive than it's the way to go.

Part of the problem is that the new generation is so enamored with the wonder of electronic gizmos, that they value those toys over the knowledge, experience and wisdom of "whining dinosaurs"...

The best part that not all dinosaurs are whining, but some of them writing great books, create valuable courses and giving good pieces of advices and trying to keep newbies alive.

For the whining ones: image if the next generation of gadgets are giving visual clues where to turn to make the swoop course/target.

[Ron 10]

Quote

You mean like relying on your speedometer as you drive across town so you don't get a ticket for speeding?

I have driven many cars that did not have a working speedo.... I didn't get a ticket.

Many cars with working speedos and people still got tickets.

Relying on any device blindly is foolish.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[DocPop 1]

Quote

Relying on any device blindly is foolish.

Yup - because that is exactly what Brian is advocating. Close your eyes and turn on the beep no matter what is going on.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Indeed a bunch of whining dinosours. If it help to keep newbie swoopers alive than it's the way to go.

Part of the problem is that the new generation is so enamored with the wonder of electronic gizmos, that they value those toys over the knowledge, experience and wisdom of "whining dinosaurs"...

The electronic gizmo is simply a gadget that captures the knowledge, experience and wisdom of a bunch of whining dinosaurs without the whining

....then the OLD bull says to the young bull, no let's walk down and fuck them ALL.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Ron 10]

Quote

Yup - because that is exactly what Brian is advocating. Close your eyes and turn on the beep no matter what is going on.

And what those of us that have been around see that someone says it is a good idea... And then others only hear you HAVE to do it.

We have seen this when 4way teams have three cypres fires since they were skydiving and the audible didn't go off.

We have heard cases of jumpers who went low did it because their "beeper didn't tell them to pull"

Why is it SO hard to understand that no everything is directed at you and your self perceived level of skill?

Also, in the article he states, "There have been many technological leaps that have changed the sport forever, and audible information for canopy flight is proving to be one of the most profound. By knowing exactly how high we are at all times, we can act appropriately. "

The audible will only give you clues at THREE points. The only way to know "how high we are at all times" is buy the use of an alti or our eyes.

Besides... You don't listen to Brian when he talks about wingloading and jump numbers, why are you suddenly thinking he has a clue on this?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Yup - because that is exactly what Brian is advocating. Close your eyes and turn on the beep no matter what is going on.

So if you don't learn to fly without the beeper, what do you do when the beeper goes off and you shouldn't turn at that time? How do you know an alternate course of action if you never learned to 'fly solo' in the first place?

If you did learn to 'fly solo' in the first place, what are you doing with a beeper?

(For the record, when I say 'learn' to fly solo, I don't mean you made it through AFF without a beeper, I mean you made it to the point that you were a 'skilled' canopy pilot without a beeper. After all, you need to be a 'skilled' canopy pilot to be safe, so that should really be the goal of every jumper, and should really eliminate the need for beepers under canopy.

The obvious exception would be pro-level swoopers, for whom differences of 50 or 75ft can make a big difference. These jumper already know how to fly without the beeper, and use it to refine their performance to a level beyond the limits of the human eyeball. No such level of precision is need in the pattern where 50 or 75 or even 100ft does not make the difference. The tolerance limits in the pattern are will within the confines of the human eye)

[DocPop 1]

Quote

Besides... You don't listen to Brian when he talks about wingloading and jump numbers, why are you suddenly thinking he has a clue on this?

Actually I don't use the canopy beeps on my audible.

What I am trying to point out (and failing) is that Germain was careful to describe the use of this tool in a way which makes it CLEAR that you can't rely on it 100% and that eyes always have the final say in decision making.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[DocPop 1]

I agree that jumpers should be able to fly a pattern without a beeper, or even an alti. But if you can do that, what is wrong with using technology to help fine tune it? If it makes people plan a pattern before the jump and then challenge themselves to try to fly that pattern as accurately as possible, then it is probably making skydiving safer.

Altimeters are widely accepted, although it is perfectly possible to make a jump without one, but nobody is saying that they are an unnecessary distraction.

If you don't like beepers, don't use them - no problem.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[billvon 2,991]

>What I am trying to point out (and failing) is that Germain was careful to
>describe the use of this tool in a way which makes it CLEAR that you can't
>rely on it 100% and that eyes always have the final say in decision
>making.

That's the problem, he doesn't.

From the article:

"General aviation has implemented many new technologies to assist pilots in navigation. These tools have enhanced aviation safety, and such devices are not considered crutches, but a necessary part of safe flying. Similar advances are now commercially available for skydivers as well . . ."

They are not necessary.

"There have been many technological leaps that have changed the sport forever, and audible information for canopy flight is proving to be one of the most profound. By knowing exactly how high we are at all times, we can act appropriately. We can relax more as we fly our approach, and enjoy the simplicity and joy of landing our parachutes without worry."

If someone is really relaxing and not worrying because they have an audible that they believe will tell them "exactly how high you are at all times" then they are dangerously dependent on a device.

I agree with the sentiment that they are good training tools. They are not reliable aircraft-like instruments that tell you exactly how high you are so can enjoy your landing without worry.

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

I agree that jumpers should be able to fly a pattern without a beeper, or even an alti. But if you can do that, what is wrong with using technology to help fine tune it? If it makes people plan a pattern before the jump and then challenge themselves to try to fly that pattern as accurately as possible, then it is probably making skydiving safer.

Altimeters are widely accepted, although it is perfectly possible to make a jump without one, but nobody is saying that they are an unnecessary distraction.

If you don't like beepers, don't use them - no problem.

it depends on what once considers "fine tuning".

If you are in traffic, fine tuning is not about the exact altitude at the turn points. It is about maintaining separation from your traffic maximally.

This is why I said I can see this as a helpful training air to develop skills when you are all alone, but far less useful once you are presented with the problems of flying in the flow of traffic.

How you get all alone can vary. You can be landing away in a student area when you are a novice, or you maybe engineer your jump to get your traffic down before you and so eliminate the traffic consideration.

But trying to fine tune turning points when you have other canopies around you is going to distract you from the essential job of collision avoidance.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

If you don't like beepers, don't use them - no problem

That's your answer? You really think I believe anyone is suggesting that I jump a beeper for flying the pattern, and that my opposition exists because I don't want to?

Much like your outlook on canopy selection, your viewpoint on this issue is awfully shortsighted.

You do realize that every move made in skydiving today will set the stage for what will be the 'norm' in skydiving tmorrow, right?

I never thought of it this way, but after 15 year of jumping, I ralize that I've been jumping longer than the vast majority of jumpers. There are plenty of guys who have been in longer than me, but out of 30,000 USPA members, I've got more years in than most.

What that means is that every change to training or procedures I saw come to pass, has been the only thing that most jumpers around me at the DZ know. If they started jumping after said change, to them the new way is the only way. What this means is that if we start using beepers for the simple act of flying the pattern now, soon enough that's going to be the 'norm', and that's not good.

So I don't need to jump a beeper, right? What I do need to do (and you if you keep jumping) is jump with others who will be jumping with beepers. Soon enough we'll be jumping with people who can't jump without one, and that's not good for me, you or them.

People talk about pilots, but the same things happen to them. Guys with too much money spend their time in planes loaded to the gills with bells and whistles. They quicly move up to complicated airplanes, and as soon as something small goes wrong, they're lost. Without the basis of 'stick and rudder' to fall back on, the shit quickyl hits the fan.

I;ve got a pilot/jumper buddy who flies a privately owned Pilatus PC-12NG. He tells me you can't even start it without entering all of the flight plan info into the flight management computer. It's that device dependant that the plane won't fire up unless it knows all about the flight, and is ready to assist the pilot. Soudns great, until something goes wrong with the FMC.

However, my buddy learned to fly in a 65 hp Taylorcraft (jumped it) in between jumping with students. He would hand prop that sucker (no starter) and do a couple of touch and goes in between students. He always said 'Stick time is stick time, and that's what I need, even 15 min at a time'.

He went on to tow banners in the biggest POS 172 I've ever seen. He even had control cable jump a pulley and lock up in flight. He managed to get the thing down in one peice, but it wasn't pretty.

After that is was off to Fed Ex to fly boxes in a Caravan, which he did for years. Day, night, rain or shine, he was hauling the mail (for the most part).

Then he did a couple years in a Beechjet 400 flying doctors, patients and organs where ever they needed to be.

So when he gets into a plane you can'y even start without telling the computer everything you plan to do, I don't think twice about it. Whatever the computer does, it's just helping him out, not doing his job for him. Whatever happens, I have confidence that he can keep the plane flying and get it down safely somewhere. Maybe in a field somewhere, by thanks to puddle jumping the Taylorcraft, he's been there and done that.

The point is that technology is OK for someone who doesn't need it to simply reduce the worklaod in a high-pressure situation. Technology is not OK as a replacement for trainig and experience, and for low pressure situations (like flying a a basic pattern) when the pilot should be able to fly manually with no problems.

[airtwardo 7]

As I said above, I use the beeper as a 'reminder'...something to tell me I'm doing stuff on time, NOT something to tell me it's time to do it.

This is a vid from a demo that perfectly illustrates what I'm talking about...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-QH7f1SSyo

@2:10 in, the canopy opens...then the beeper goes off.

@3:00 I start to deploy smoke...then the beeper goes off.


This is how you use it as a tool, and not a crutch.

If using one in that manner is what Brian I advocating I would have no problem with it...if someone is using it to tell them 'when' to turn, there WILL be problems in their future.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[strop45 0]

IMO, using an audible during canopy flight is a very useful way to calibrate your eyeballs. Sure you can do it without one, but you will make more mistakes while you are calibrating your mark1 eyeball. Those of you who have x thousand jumps and >10 years in the sport have well calibrated eyeballs.

Personally I have use an Optima, just in the same way I use my altimeter, it gives me some references, but turns are setup according to experience and eyeball, not the beep.

The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein

[sundevil777 102]

My audible lets me know when I've hit certain altitudes. I find that to be very convenient. I've never had such an audible until this year. It doesn't tell me when to turn, it just tells me when I've reached a certain altitude. I don't see the need for all the fuss.

BG's article can be rightly criticized for certain wording, no doubt.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

You mean like relying on your speedometer as you drive across town so you don't get a ticket for speeding?

I have driven many cars that did not have a working speedo.... I didn't get a ticket.

Many cars with working speedos and people still got tickets.

Relying on any device blindly is foolish.

My Shovelhead went without anything more than an oil pressure gauge for decades.

I was followed home by someone once, who then asked me how I was able to nail the speed limit every time it changed. I told her that I know what 25, 35 and 45 mph sound like in the appropriate gear, and I don't have to look at a meter to know how fast I'm going.

I have been flying instruments for over 20 years, and once shot an approach when I was down to a compass, a turn and bank indicator, a tachometer and a first-generation GPS (Garmin 55AVD). The lack of AI, DG, ASI, VSI and altimeter (as well as the liberal coating of ice) did not make things easier, but being able to tune out the bad sources was a great help.

I watch the ground on climbout to get a feel for how houses look at 1,000, 2,000 and so forth, so that I get a visual clue when my batteries are dead and/or the needle is stuck on my altimeter.

The most serious swoopers I have known did not use an altimeter, relying on sight picture to work their magic.

I keep instruments on hand, but expect them to fail en masse at the worst possible time - since they have been known to do so.


BSBD,

Winsor

[airtwardo 7]

I watch the ground on climb-out to get a feel for how houses look at 1,000, 2,000 and so forth, so that I get a visual clue when my batteries are dead and/or the needle is stuck on my altimeter

I just sent someone a PM suggesting that very thing.

I do it on every jump...drives my wife (who's a pilot) nuts when we're flying & I can look out and tell her how high we are.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

@3:00 I start to deploy smoke...then the beeper goes off.

you were looking at your DIGITAL altimeter before that, werent you!?

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

@3:00 I start to deploy smoke...then the beeper goes off.

you were looking at your DIGITAL altimeter before that, weren't you!?

Yup...TRIPLE redundancy, knew from the Mk.1 eyeball I was damn close, checked wrist to confirm, opened smoke container and beep beep beep!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~