Lucky... 0 #26 March 26, 2007 QuoteWhy do people have this retarded idea that the degree of turn causes a problem or that less than a 270 is "safe"? 180's are more dangerous in trafic than a 270. The problem is hook turns done improperly in traffic. Period. I do think the visibility loss of a 270 is greater than of a 180. Furthermore, the commitment going in is greater as there are often fewer outs and more planning is required the more degrees you turn. If there was a storm of auto accidents ofpeople driving 90-1000mph I would do teh same and regard them as poor drivers, not speed being the primary factors, and I would think I'm right whether I am or not. I guess the issue here is that: A) Hook turns are unneccessary but cool and fun B) You assume others want to take the same chances, so it doesn't just include the hook turner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 March 26, 2007 QuoteEcho: QuoteNope. Allow them, just not in the main area with canopies flying a normal pattern. And the next question would be that of how much seperation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #28 March 26, 2007 QuoteMy canopy instructor said that a 180 high performance landing is the most dangerous... so why pick on 270s? Perhaps the recent barrage of 270-related deaths. I saw the aftermath of a 270 gone wrong, almost killed the guy as he ha no outs. I'm curious as to what the logic and reasoning behind a 180 being more dangerous is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #29 March 26, 2007 QuoteThe odds of succesful enforcement of such a rule would be astronoically against the success of the rule. Well, if there was a 270-related incident and it was discovered that the DZ refused to enforce it, the DZ/DZO could be: - Suspended / revoked by the USPA - Sued for neglegence by the injured, even by teh hook turner who may have caused teh incident Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #30 March 26, 2007 QuoteAll I hear is mostly a bunch of inactivists arguing that hook turns be allowed, after all, it is the canopy pilots fault if he makes himself dead righ? Then you have the hard right that want to ban high performance landings to seperate landing areas. Too many have come to accept that death is a part of this sport when it does not have to be. I have had more than enough, like many others who have buried a few friends. I am all for segregated landing areas. Maybe we need to look at exit order in regards to canopy size/landing manuvers............. Yea, as a person who wishes he was good enough to safely hook turn, I respect teh skill. I'm not freaking out when people hook close to me and think it's cool. Out of respect for others who don't think it's so cool, there has to be some remedy, whether banning or seperating. I think we can all agree on that. Then the issue of how much seperating is adaquate. For smaller DZ's what do we do? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,395 #31 March 26, 2007 QuoteSuspended / revoked by the USPA Means Nothing. QuoteSued for neglegence by the injured, even by teh hook turner who may have caused teh incident Please review the waiver.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #32 March 26, 2007 QuoteHow could the USPA even enforce a ban on 270s? I dont think this is even a possibility. As far as your poll goes... no. fuck no! As I wrote above, the USPA could draw a line and revoke anyone who crossed it. Fortunatley the USPA doesn't work that way, but we're only 1 lawsuit away from that kind of policing. I still believe that if you're dumb enough to jump out of an airplane then you're dumb enough to die doing so, so I'm not Ralph Nader here, not at all. I think that if you jump then you assume a lot of what happens after that; don't like who you jump around, jump elsewhere or don't jump. As for enforcement, hey, we live in Nazimerica, if they wanna enforce ANYTHING, they can, hard to believe that point isn't moot by now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 March 26, 2007 QuoteThe USPA doesn´t make laws. take care, space What are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,058 #34 March 26, 2007 >The problem is hook turns done improperly in traffic. Period. Like saying that the problem isn't drunk driving, it's drunk drivers who can't drive. There's a reason that pilots of aircraft fly standard patterns at airports without control towers. I hope too many more people don't have to die before we learn what pilots have already learned. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,557 #35 March 26, 2007 QuoteWhat are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,058 #36 March 26, 2007 > How could the USPA even enforce a ban on 270s? I dont think this is even a possibility. Same way they enforce the "ban" on pulling below 2000 feet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #37 March 26, 2007 QuoteThat's not a very good comparison, speed limits have little to do with safety (save Montana), they have everything to do with money. "Our" rules are fundamentally driven by a different set of priorities. I think it's a fair enough comparison, esp since driving a car is considered a priv, not a neccessity. The reaso we don't have regulation now is that if the avergae oe hears of a car collision killing 5 people, they shit, as they use teh roads. If the same Wuffo hears of a skydiving plane killing 10, they don't care and call them stupid. QuoteHaving said that, I understand what you mean. However, I think that this is an issue which really needs to reside with each DZ. A blanket solution from USPA will not help the skydiving community as a whole. I do to and hope it goes that way. But if the USPA gets sued for underregulating the sport they are tasked to supervise and regulate, then they might do soemthing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #38 March 26, 2007 I don't care about rules. I just don't want to see more of these blind spiral turns onto final...Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #39 March 26, 2007 QuoteYour poll misses the point by about 270 degrees. Becauseeeeeee? So should it read that straight in landings be banned then? 19% believe they s/b banned, which is ironically the same number that voted for Perot in 92. That is significant. And if asked if they s/b segregated, I bet 80% would say yes. Banning is the radical approach, so I just wanted to see what the result was. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #40 March 26, 2007 Quote> How could the USPA even enforce a ban on 270s? I dont think this is even a possibility. Same way they enforce the "ban" on pulling below 2000 feet. And yanking your TI ticket of have a Cypress fire, etc, etc, etc...... I like the rogue, "fuck the rules" mentality of skydivers tho - I mean that seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #41 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #42 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. Are you referring to reserve repacks? That is mandated by the FAA not USPA. Riggers are certified by the FAA and issued seal numbers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #43 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. USPA requires FAR compliance.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #44 March 26, 2007 QuoteMeans Nothing. If the USPA revokes the ticket, then the DZ has to operate w/o them, cool enough. They would lose the 3rd party protection, big deal I guess. Why is it then that DZ's want to be USPA so bad then? I think it covers them a bit by showing they subscribe to an organizing authority if they are sued. Also, the USPA fights against scum that wants to close DZ's. I think it is a big deal actually. QuotePlease review the waiver. Please. Lawrocket, please pipe in here and tell us the meaningless, worthless nature of waivers and prenups. All it does is shows the intent going in. If I own a DZ, have the students / up-jumpers sign a waiver and I allow activity that is KNOWINGLY more dangerous than it needs to be, then I can be personally sued for gross negligence, even with an incorporation/LLC. If I were a sleezy lawyer I could collect the recent barrage of 270-related deaths, sue and depose the DZ/DZO and ask what they did about these hooks, get video of post accident DZ operation and build a case. That's how it works, so we better self-regulate before some sleeze-bag gets involved. I appreciate the skydiver metality that says, ah fuck it, who cares? But we should self-regulate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #45 March 26, 2007 QuoteI don't care about rules. Ad you're in law school? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #46 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhat are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. Are you referring to reserve repacks? That is mandated by the FAA not USPA. Riggers are certified by the FAA and issued seal numbers. Does the USPA require that your gear be mantained as per the FAA? I'm thinking, yes, and I don't feel like loking it up, so someone pipe in! Why is it that she you go to a new DZ or your own DZ will do reserve checks? I'm thinking teh USPA also regulates this or enforces teh FAA regulation - same thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #47 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteI don't care about rules. Ad you're in law school? Yes. I am a walking contradiction. Aren't I sooo Emo?Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #48 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhat are BSR's then? So if you jump at a USPA DZ then you don't have to have your reserve repacked every 120? You don't have to be licensed by a USPA instructor? Hmmmmm..... learn things new everyday.... You seems to have the USPA confused with the FAA. W/o looking it up, doesn't the USPA require gear be repacked every 120? Even if so in a backdoor fashion by way of requiring gear be maintained. The USPA does regulate, don't make me break out the book. USPA requires FAR compliance. Thank you. SO teh USPA does backdoor regulate or ensure compliance with the 120 day repack. Why are some people so unwilling to agree that the USPA does regulate? Jebus.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #49 March 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteI don't care about rules. Ad you're in law school? Yes. I am a walking contradiction. Aren't I sooo Emo? You're honor, I don't care about your fucking rules of court, fuck you and your kangaroo court. If you get stuck, revert to that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #50 March 26, 2007 QuoteWhy are some people so unwilling to agree that the USPA does regulate? Jebus.... One does not need to be a USPA member to legally skydive. One does need to obey FAA regulations in order to legally skydive.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
