greybeard 0 #1 January 3, 2007 I am voting for any wing loaded pilot above 1:1, or any self proclaimed swooper, (and god love them, they are great fun to watch), to either have a solid bright red canopy or at least fly a thirty foot red streamer behind them. Let the vast majority of fun jumpers know that you are a danger to them. Maybe not today, or tomorrow, but eventualy, some day, we will have deal with you to protect or lives. I understand that you love all of us and would never deliberatly endanger any one of us. But, guess what............. It just keep happening. Fly a fucking red flag, please. Thank you. Mark, an old skydiver who wants to be and older skydiver. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydivexxl 0 #2 January 3, 2007 IMO, the unpredictable, toggle-happy, "I've been landing like this for 20 years" straight-in-ish lander is MUCH MUCH more dangerous. There are many canopy collisions among non-swoopers over the years, as well. The only red flag should be on your statement. Baseless and mis-informed. "Us new-fangled kids, with our parachute pants and 8 tracks listening to Barry Manilow.." Embrace change. Blog Clicky Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 855 #3 January 3, 2007 not cool bro...wrong place, wrong time Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #4 January 3, 2007 Quote IMO, the unpredictable, toggle-happy, "I've been landing like this for 20 years" straight-in-ish lander is MUCH MUCH more dangerous. There are many canopy collisions among non-swoopers over the years, as well. The only red flag should be on your statement. Baseless and mis-informed. "Us new-fangled kids, with our parachute pants and 8 tracks listening to Barry Manilow.." Embrace change. Dangerous to who? It's simple fact that if everyone on final is going roughly the same speed and direction that the likelihood of problems is pretty low. When performance and loading of canopies (pre-ZP) was about the same for most canopies at the DZ, life during final approach was a lot more simple. The advent of swooping has made the landing area more dangerous for *everyone*. Landing accidents under perfectly good canopies have been accounting for about half our fatalities for years now. You can break that down any way you want and dismiss as many as you want as being due to "idiot factor" but that doesn't change the fact that people are dying from botched swoops and innocent people are being hurt. Spectators have been hurt (and I believe one actually killed) by botched swoops. I don't think that has ever happened from one of those "unpredictable, toggle-happy, "I've been landing like this for 20 years" straight-in-ish landers" because their canopies fly a whole lot slower than a highly loaded canopy being used for a high-performance landing. Don't get me wrong--I don't have any problems with people doing high-performance landings--but as a sport I don't think we have developed the discipline and rules we need for swoopers and "conventional" canopy pilots to coexist in the same airspace without putting each other at undue risk. By airspace, I mean the confined airspace that we share on final approach into DZ landing areas. Some DZs have separate landing areas and I think that is a good thing. I think making very clear rules for patterns and enforcing those rules in addition to separate landing areas is an even better thing. And while we're at it, doing a better job of teaching people to fly parachutes needs to be a prority. Meanwhile, I'll stay as far away as I can from the swoopers while I'm under canopy and take my chances with "the unpredictable, toggle-happy, "I've been landing like this for 20 years" straight-in-ish landers. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #5 January 3, 2007 Quote not cool bro...wrong place, wrong time I disagree. After the first fatality of the weekend there should have been enough thought and discussion to prevent a second. While I may not agree with the OP's opinion/solution, the discussion needs to happen. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 855 #6 January 3, 2007 and those threads are already quite full of the same comments, do we need a thread in every forum for the same topic and thoughts? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #7 January 3, 2007 I'm an old jumper who wants to get older too, but I disagree with your answer. I think we need to segregate the people who land at high speed from those who don't. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #8 January 3, 2007 Quote and those threads are already quite full of the same comments, do we need a thread in every forum for the same topic and thoughts? For the simple reason that not everyone looks at all forums. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
btucker 0 #9 January 3, 2007 Aren't red flags for bulls? Did you mean this ;-) Most dropzones need a robust traffic management plan - if they don’t already have one. Even at “small” dropzones there can be boogies or instances of multiple large slot aircraft in operation with both very fast and very slow canopies in the air at the same time. A multitude of exit heights, opening heights, landing patterns and approaches will be used. Not all of these will be compatible. There are five landing areas at my home dropzones – one's a swoop pond. You can figure out who is landing where and doing what by talking to your mates in the boarding area. Under canopy work out who is where, a bad spot might change peoples plans. As a student I was told: It takes two to have a collision but only one to avoid it. Low man has right of way but don't be dead right! Blue skies, Benno PS: I've had one canopy collision, I wasn't swooping and it was my fault. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
