Landing patterns and defensive flying.

[jpforget 0]

I’m writing this after reading the Perris incident and a near canopy collision thread:

Forums: Skydiving: Incidents:
Fatality - Canopy Collision - Perris, Ca - 30 April 2010http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3855074#3855074

Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Who is wrong in this video? near canopy collision
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3686163#3686163

Some people have suggested defensive flying to minimize the possibility of collision in case of opposite patterns:

In short:
- If there is a mandatory left hand pattern, land on the left side of the landing area.

- If there is a mandatory right hand pattern, land on the right side of the landing area.

- If for any reason somebody violates the mandatory landing pattern, at least he should stay the most he can on the other side of the landing area.

I agree that violation of the mandatory pattern is very serious and dangerous. But it may happen that you don’t have other options depending of the landing zone configuration. In that case, Defensive flying may save your life but it will not save you a good talk with the ST&A.

The purpose of this thread is not to promote Reverse pattern but to give some ideas to avoid potential collision if it happend.

For example, on a left hand pattern: (See attached file)
If people following the pattern land on 75% of the left side of the landing area, that will leave 25% unused on the right side.

If somebody else land with a reversed pattern on the 10% of the right side, it will leave at least 15% of space between the 2 jumpers.

The 75% - 10% ratio are arbitrary.

Most of the DZ I have seen can accommodate a load landing on 75% of the landing area. Some DZ may not. Before applying this, you should talk with the appropriate people at your DZ or the DZ you are visiting.

Do you consider this as defensive flying?
Do you think it can be applied to your DZ?
If yes, what is the percentage ratio at your DZ?
If not, why?

[jsaxton 0]

defensive flying is staying aware, reacting quickly and correctly to situations, making good choices and assuming that your friends are trying to kill you

[firstime 0]

great concept, but I will stick with landing off because stupid ppl will f%^k this up by misjudging their base and final

[phoenixlpr 0]

You can call it off or just getting a decent separation.

[Mad_Jasper 1]

As a 17 jump student, I often misjudge my base and final due to changing wind conditions, canopy size (due to rental gear availabilty) and jump loads. I'm still amazed at how a 3-5 MPH wind variance can shorten/lengthen my final approach, but I'd hardly consider myself stupid. Inexperienced is a better word.

Fortunately, I jump at SDA where I can stay clear of traffic. Even when I'm the first out, I'm often the last one down and rarely land in the main landing area. Smaller DZs don't afford me that luxury.

[regulator 0]

I am usually fairly good about executing my 3 point landing pattern, but the last time I jumped...a few weeks ago we had a looong spot. I was in the saddle by 3,200 or so and it took almost that entire altitude of flying in a straight line just to get back to the DZ. When I looked down I was above the fence around 450 feet or so and I looked first then executed a 90 degree right turn and faced into the wind. I landed with no problem and I always keep my head on a swivel so I had checked for other canopies in my airspace and landed standing with no problems. Is it ok to forego the 3 point landing pattern when you've got a long spot and you have to fly a straight line to get back to the DZ?


------------------------------------------------------
I also wanted to add that it was rather windy that day and that played a part in our spot and subsequent canopy ride in a straight line back to the DZ.

[danornan 79]

Quote

I am usually fairly good about executing my 3 point landing pattern, but the last time I jumped...a few weeks ago we had a looong spot. I was in the saddle by 3,200 or so and it took almost that entire altitude of flying in a straight line just to get back to the DZ. When I looked down I was above the fence around 450 feet or so and I looked first then executed a 90 degree right turn and faced into the wind. I landed with no problem and I always keep my head on a swivel so I had checked for other canopies in my airspace and landed standing with no problems. Is it ok to forego the 3 point landing pattern when you've got a long spot and you have to fly a straight line to get back to the DZ?


------------------------------------------------------
I also wanted to add that it was rather windy that day and that played a part in our spot and subsequent canopy ride in a straight line back to the DZ.

I'm a little confused. Why couldn't you get into the pattern based upon your approach and landed downwind? A 90 degree turn would not have been necessary.

Dano

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

I am usually fairly good about executing my 3 point landing pattern, but the last time I jumped...a few weeks ago we had a looong spot. I was in the saddle by 3,200 or so and it took almost that entire altitude of flying in a straight line just to get back to the DZ. When I looked down I was above the fence around 450 feet or so and I looked first then executed a 90 degree right turn and faced into the wind. I landed with no problem and I always keep my head on a swivel so I had checked for other canopies in my airspace and landed standing with no problems. Is it ok to forego the 3 point landing pattern when you've got a long spot and you have to fly a straight line to get back to the DZ?


------------------------------------------------------
I also wanted to add that it was rather windy that day and that played a part in our spot and subsequent canopy ride in a straight line back to the DZ.

I'm a little confused. Why couldn't you get into the pattern based upon your approach and landed downwind? A 90 degree turn would not have been necessary.

Probably one of those patented crosswind jump-runs, if you're at the end of the line, you can be out there a ways and there isn't a 'downwind' leg, just a crosswind to get back, and a 90 to face the breeze.

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

[billvon 3,070]

>Is it ok to forego the 3 point landing pattern when you've got a long
>spot and you have to fly a straight line to get back to the DZ?

Sure - as long as you land away from other people who are flying standard patterns.

[wmw999 2,534]

And knowing the field and the rules (you need a C license to land in the traffic area), he did exactly that.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[regulator 0]

Huh? are you saying I landed in the C licensed area? I landed out in the long grass next to the wind sock.

I'm not doubting the allmighty wendy...I must be misunderstanding you.

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

Huh? are you saying I landed in the C licensed area?

No. I read this as she is saying you did the "correct" thing. The parenthesis appear to me just to add additional information of policy, as ancillary information for readers who may not know your LZ layout, had you landed elsewhere.

That said - I have a question for you. ...How many perfectly clear, open areas did you also pass over on your long, focused, concentrated trek back, that culminated in:

Quote

I was above the fence around 450 feet or so

...?

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[BrianM 1]

Quote

Is it ok to forego the 3 point landing pattern when you've got a long spot and you have to fly a straight line to get back to the DZ?

While the answer will depend on the situation, in general I think that is ok. You are not flying against the pattern - you are just joining the pattern at a different point. I could fly a wide pattern and end up in the same position, relative to someone flying a narrow pattern, as someone coming straight in from downwind.

Landing pattern graphic from USPA: http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/SIM/collison_free_landing.gif

"It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

[airathanas 0]

I don't know if someone asked this already because I didn't read every single word of all of the replies...

What about if the landing area is longer than wide? That 75% is now a much smaller, but do you feel that same principle applies?

Not opposing the idea of defensive flying; just asking the question that popped into my head after seeing the landing pattern attachment.

http://3ringnecklace.com/

[regulator 0]

Well I jump at spaceland. There are lots of open areas all around the north side of the DZ. But (me admitting I STILL dont know shit) I haven't landed off the DZ yet. But I was constantly checking my airspace and seperation from other jumpers...I was 2nd out the door and I pulled at 4,000. Once I was in the saddle I was low on the left and when I looked behind me the other jumpers were high and to my right. I made sure there was no one in my airspace BEFORE I made my 90 right to face into the wind, but after I had a bit of distance over the barbed wire fence at 450 feet. So when I made my 90 right I was around 375 feet to face into the wind.

[wmw999 2,534]

While it doesn't sound like you were excitingly close to the fence, do consider seriously that if you're pretty far out when you open, you should look at all of the options between where you are and the DZ.

A lot of people have been hurt and killed (including at Spaceland) by trying to get back on the DZ on a bad spot. Particularly where there are so many good outs, it's a really pointless way to hurt yourself.

Just looking at the future. If you crossed the fence or berm at 400+ feet, you were in pretty good shape, but yeah, you didn't have enough room for a full pattern coming in from crosswind.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[regulator 0]

That's excellent advice and I will take it to heart. If it looked like I was say around 150 feet above the fence or close to being above it, I would've landed on the north side of the DZ in one of the huge fields out there. But yes I will remember that and I have no problems landing off the DZ to ensure no (or fewer) injuries.

Thanks wendy

[Scrumpot 1]

There ya go.

Edited to add PS:
Thanks for the "tag team" here on this one Wendy. - Still who I want to be, when I grow up!

As is being referenced: Get-Back-Itis

As Wendy states, has injured (and worse) many a skydiver before you, or even me (yup still!) my exuberant grasshopper!

coitus non circum - Moab Stone