chuckakers 425 #51 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #52 August 3, 2011 Quote I would argue that Jay would say about the same thing as Nick to a jumper with 200 jumps trying to jump a Katana 135 (for example). Which would be about the same answer that Scott and Bobo have. Which is similar to the answer that Ian has given on the subject. It's very doable if you do it right, you can jump stuff not according to the rules if you don't go about it doing absolutely chaotically.. Quote There really isn't a magic trick when it comes to canopy piloting. There are some fundamentals that must to be mastered before moving on and those are refined to a fine edge over the course of thousands of jumps. I completely agree with this.. You don't become ace over night, but it doesn't mean that nowadays you can't cut SOME corners.. Just cut them properly and cautiously "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #53 August 3, 2011 Quote besides, i think ian hasnt only broken bones once but twice IIRC. would you tell ian he should upsize!? haha well said Just shows how biased and untruthful to itself this forum is "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #54 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. saying "it's not", doesnt make it true or false.“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 425 #55 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #56 August 3, 2011 Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #57 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #58 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #59 August 3, 2011 And ban high performance canopy piloting, cause it's setting a bad example! "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #60 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #61 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified. wait-wait-wait, u're in the UK, right!? SIM, that's USPA, right? i think you jump under BPA, right? what about us folks here that dont have that A/B/C/D-crap? what about us? i'd still opt for EDUMUCATION, but that's just me.. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #62 August 3, 2011 >so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #63 August 3, 2011 Quote Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Because this is unrealistic. Think about the differences in weight between people and the differences in their skills.. Oh and SIM, that's US, US is not the world, so get over it.. Another thing, it's a suggestion as you said, while you want to make it a rule set, something mandatory, get over it again Anything less than 150 only for D licenses? This might be made mandatory for people like Shah maybe The USPA should establish RW with tandem sized canopies only DZ's, so all the crybabies here would be satisfied with safety "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #64 August 3, 2011 Quote>so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. bill, honestly, as much as i respect and like your input; i call BS on that one. that is STUPID. maybe we should ban stupidness!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 425 #65 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #66 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well. chuck, like it or not, but it's what i'm trying to say. everyone here is complaining about people dying under good canopies which is by far unnecessary. then there's always WL's coming up, sizes of canopies, we all know the drill. it's getting old! obviously, people want to fly small parachutes; ok, now since that is out of the way, why not make a canopy-course mandatory in order to aquire an A-license for example. maybe set the 25 jumps requirement up to say 50!? i think this would be the more "sensitive" reply to the current trend of dying under a good canopy. oh, i can already hear the outcry, "it diminishes even more students because of the cost!". well, tough tiddies mate, if you want to make skydiving a pure buisness, you're shit-out-of-luck, because if you want to keep skydiving safe, you need to focus more on your students to a maybe later stage of their progression in order to increase their canopy-piloting-skills and make them more aware of what they're actually doing. oh yea, that is MUCH MORE COMPLICATED than to just say: "LET'S BAN THIS AND THAT AND HERE'S THE RULES!".“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
Rigless 0 #52 August 3, 2011 Quote I would argue that Jay would say about the same thing as Nick to a jumper with 200 jumps trying to jump a Katana 135 (for example). Which would be about the same answer that Scott and Bobo have. Which is similar to the answer that Ian has given on the subject. It's very doable if you do it right, you can jump stuff not according to the rules if you don't go about it doing absolutely chaotically.. Quote There really isn't a magic trick when it comes to canopy piloting. There are some fundamentals that must to be mastered before moving on and those are refined to a fine edge over the course of thousands of jumps. I completely agree with this.. You don't become ace over night, but it doesn't mean that nowadays you can't cut SOME corners.. Just cut them properly and cautiously "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rigless 0 #53 August 3, 2011 Quote besides, i think ian hasnt only broken bones once but twice IIRC. would you tell ian he should upsize!? haha well said Just shows how biased and untruthful to itself this forum is "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #54 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. saying "it's not", doesnt make it true or false.“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 425 #55 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #56 August 3, 2011 Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #57 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #58 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #59 August 3, 2011 And ban high performance canopy piloting, cause it's setting a bad example! "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #60 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #61 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified. wait-wait-wait, u're in the UK, right!? SIM, that's USPA, right? i think you jump under BPA, right? what about us folks here that dont have that A/B/C/D-crap? what about us? i'd still opt for EDUMUCATION, but that's just me.. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #62 August 3, 2011 >so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #63 August 3, 2011 Quote Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Because this is unrealistic. Think about the differences in weight between people and the differences in their skills.. Oh and SIM, that's US, US is not the world, so get over it.. Another thing, it's a suggestion as you said, while you want to make it a rule set, something mandatory, get over it again Anything less than 150 only for D licenses? This might be made mandatory for people like Shah maybe The USPA should establish RW with tandem sized canopies only DZ's, so all the crybabies here would be satisfied with safety "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #64 August 3, 2011 Quote>so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. bill, honestly, as much as i respect and like your input; i call BS on that one. that is STUPID. maybe we should ban stupidness!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 425 #65 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #66 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well. chuck, like it or not, but it's what i'm trying to say. everyone here is complaining about people dying under good canopies which is by far unnecessary. then there's always WL's coming up, sizes of canopies, we all know the drill. it's getting old! obviously, people want to fly small parachutes; ok, now since that is out of the way, why not make a canopy-course mandatory in order to aquire an A-license for example. maybe set the 25 jumps requirement up to say 50!? i think this would be the more "sensitive" reply to the current trend of dying under a good canopy. oh, i can already hear the outcry, "it diminishes even more students because of the cost!". well, tough tiddies mate, if you want to make skydiving a pure buisness, you're shit-out-of-luck, because if you want to keep skydiving safe, you need to focus more on your students to a maybe later stage of their progression in order to increase their canopy-piloting-skills and make them more aware of what they're actually doing. oh yea, that is MUCH MORE COMPLICATED than to just say: "LET'S BAN THIS AND THAT AND HERE'S THE RULES!".“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
chuckakers 425 #55 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #56 August 3, 2011 Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #57 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #58 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #59 August 3, 2011 And ban high performance canopy piloting, cause it's setting a bad example! "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #60 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #61 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified. wait-wait-wait, u're in the UK, right!? SIM, that's USPA, right? i think you jump under BPA, right? what about us folks here that dont have that A/B/C/D-crap? what about us? i'd still opt for EDUMUCATION, but that's just me.. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #62 August 3, 2011 >so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #63 August 3, 2011 Quote Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Because this is unrealistic. Think about the differences in weight between people and the differences in their skills.. Oh and SIM, that's US, US is not the world, so get over it.. Another thing, it's a suggestion as you said, while you want to make it a rule set, something mandatory, get over it again Anything less than 150 only for D licenses? This might be made mandatory for people like Shah maybe The USPA should establish RW with tandem sized canopies only DZ's, so all the crybabies here would be satisfied with safety "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #64 August 3, 2011 Quote>so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. bill, honestly, as much as i respect and like your input; i call BS on that one. that is STUPID. maybe we should ban stupidness!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 425 #65 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #66 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well. chuck, like it or not, but it's what i'm trying to say. everyone here is complaining about people dying under good canopies which is by far unnecessary. then there's always WL's coming up, sizes of canopies, we all know the drill. it's getting old! obviously, people want to fly small parachutes; ok, now since that is out of the way, why not make a canopy-course mandatory in order to aquire an A-license for example. maybe set the 25 jumps requirement up to say 50!? i think this would be the more "sensitive" reply to the current trend of dying under a good canopy. oh, i can already hear the outcry, "it diminishes even more students because of the cost!". well, tough tiddies mate, if you want to make skydiving a pure buisness, you're shit-out-of-luck, because if you want to keep skydiving safe, you need to focus more on your students to a maybe later stage of their progression in order to increase their canopy-piloting-skills and make them more aware of what they're actually doing. oh yea, that is MUCH MORE COMPLICATED than to just say: "LET'S BAN THIS AND THAT AND HERE'S THE RULES!".“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
nigel99 501 #56 August 3, 2011 Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #57 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #58 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #59 August 3, 2011 And ban high performance canopy piloting, cause it's setting a bad example! "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 501 #60 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #61 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified. wait-wait-wait, u're in the UK, right!? SIM, that's USPA, right? i think you jump under BPA, right? what about us folks here that dont have that A/B/C/D-crap? what about us? i'd still opt for EDUMUCATION, but that's just me.. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #62 August 3, 2011 >so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rigless 0 #63 August 3, 2011 Quote Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Because this is unrealistic. Think about the differences in weight between people and the differences in their skills.. Oh and SIM, that's US, US is not the world, so get over it.. Another thing, it's a suggestion as you said, while you want to make it a rule set, something mandatory, get over it again Anything less than 150 only for D licenses? This might be made mandatory for people like Shah maybe The USPA should establish RW with tandem sized canopies only DZ's, so all the crybabies here would be satisfied with safety "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #64 August 3, 2011 Quote>so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. bill, honestly, as much as i respect and like your input; i call BS on that one. that is STUPID. maybe we should ban stupidness!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 425 #65 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #66 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well. chuck, like it or not, but it's what i'm trying to say. everyone here is complaining about people dying under good canopies which is by far unnecessary. then there's always WL's coming up, sizes of canopies, we all know the drill. it's getting old! obviously, people want to fly small parachutes; ok, now since that is out of the way, why not make a canopy-course mandatory in order to aquire an A-license for example. maybe set the 25 jumps requirement up to say 50!? i think this would be the more "sensitive" reply to the current trend of dying under a good canopy. oh, i can already hear the outcry, "it diminishes even more students because of the cost!". well, tough tiddies mate, if you want to make skydiving a pure buisness, you're shit-out-of-luck, because if you want to keep skydiving safe, you need to focus more on your students to a maybe later stage of their progression in order to increase their canopy-piloting-skills and make them more aware of what they're actually doing. oh yea, that is MUCH MORE COMPLICATED than to just say: "LET'S BAN THIS AND THAT AND HERE'S THE RULES!".“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
virgin-burner 1 #58 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rigless 0 #59 August 3, 2011 And ban high performance canopy piloting, cause it's setting a bad example! "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 501 #60 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #61 August 3, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote oh, it's not? how many "high profilers" we've had this year already? i'm too lazy to look it up, but out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. Actually I believe it is precisely because so many experienced jumpers have died this year that the USPA and general community woke up and started to re-evaluate the situation. It seems many people want the reward, without the sweat and learning involved. I get the same behaviour from my 11 year old, wants to learn guitar but doesn't want to do the scales. At the end of the day it is no different. That is the frustrating part I am sure. so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? Not at all. Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Secondly I think Krissanes thread that she linked to was spot on. How many times are people told that they will "out grow" a 1.0:1 wingloading within a 100 jumps? Other people have alluded to it, but if you want to jump an advanced parachute (referencing again the SIM limits above), get proper training and pursue it with due diligence and vigour. Flying an advanced parachute, means that the descent is not "just the final portion of getting to the ground", but it becomes a substantial part of the jump. In face taken to it's extreme it becomes THE jump, where freefall is entirely sacrified. wait-wait-wait, u're in the UK, right!? SIM, that's USPA, right? i think you jump under BPA, right? what about us folks here that dont have that A/B/C/D-crap? what about us? i'd still opt for EDUMUCATION, but that's just me.. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #62 August 3, 2011 >so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rigless 0 #63 August 3, 2011 Quote Firstly in the SIM it has a suggestion that A & B licenses stay below 1.0:1, C license below 1.2:1 and that anything less than 150 should really be reserved for D licenses. Right now the culture is to completely ignore that advice. Because this is unrealistic. Think about the differences in weight between people and the differences in their skills.. Oh and SIM, that's US, US is not the world, so get over it.. Another thing, it's a suggestion as you said, while you want to make it a rule set, something mandatory, get over it again Anything less than 150 only for D licenses? This might be made mandatory for people like Shah maybe The USPA should establish RW with tandem sized canopies only DZ's, so all the crybabies here would be satisfied with safety "All limits are self imposed." Icarus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #64 August 3, 2011 Quote>so, what would be your "solution" to the situation at hand!? ban anything smaller >than a 150? 210? no more ellipticals!? WHAT!? No, just learn to fly your canopy before going to a smaller one. Many people make twenty jumps on a canopy, stand up fifteen of them, tell everyone they've made fifty, and figure they're ready for the next smaller canopy cause it will be fun and cool. They're wrong. It can take hundreds - sometimes thousands - of jumps to become competent on a small canopy, and you have to put in the time to be able to fly it well. bill, honestly, as much as i respect and like your input; i call BS on that one. that is STUPID. maybe we should ban stupidness!?“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 425 #65 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #66 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well. chuck, like it or not, but it's what i'm trying to say. everyone here is complaining about people dying under good canopies which is by far unnecessary. then there's always WL's coming up, sizes of canopies, we all know the drill. it's getting old! obviously, people want to fly small parachutes; ok, now since that is out of the way, why not make a canopy-course mandatory in order to aquire an A-license for example. maybe set the 25 jumps requirement up to say 50!? i think this would be the more "sensitive" reply to the current trend of dying under a good canopy. oh, i can already hear the outcry, "it diminishes even more students because of the cost!". well, tough tiddies mate, if you want to make skydiving a pure buisness, you're shit-out-of-luck, because if you want to keep skydiving safe, you need to focus more on your students to a maybe later stage of their progression in order to increase their canopy-piloting-skills and make them more aware of what they're actually doing. oh yea, that is MUCH MORE COMPLICATED than to just say: "LET'S BAN THIS AND THAT AND HERE'S THE RULES!".“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
virgin-burner 1 #66 August 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhy does it seem it's mostly skydivers with THOUSANDS of jumps hooking themselves in.... It's not. ...out of the 20 or so "open canopy"-related incidents, my guess would be that AT LEAST half of those were from people with - thousands of jumps. And the other half weren't. are you really trying to make me look it all up again!? there's sheeple everywhere, wouldnt that be a reason for the "high profilers" to set a good example and exchange their pocket-rockets to something more sensitive like 210 navigators? i mean, since even "having learned over the course of thousands of jumps" wont save you from blood and gore!? even at a rate of 50%, maybe there should be rules in place that you cant jump anything smaller than that 210 i've mentioned further up!? Why a 210? Why not a 250, or a 400? You are using the same argument that many have, and it is - like it or not - hypocritical. You want certain skydivers to modify their behavior to meet what you consider an acceptable safety level, but would certainly refuse to modify your own behavior if you considered it acceptably safe. Skydiving is dangerous but we still do it. Jumping in turbulent winds increases the danger, yet some still jump. Doing CReW increases the odds of a wrap, but some still yell contact. It's not about flying fast canopies. It's about doing it well. chuck, like it or not, but it's what i'm trying to say. everyone here is complaining about people dying under good canopies which is by far unnecessary. then there's always WL's coming up, sizes of canopies, we all know the drill. it's getting old! obviously, people want to fly small parachutes; ok, now since that is out of the way, why not make a canopy-course mandatory in order to aquire an A-license for example. maybe set the 25 jumps requirement up to say 50!? i think this would be the more "sensitive" reply to the current trend of dying under a good canopy. oh, i can already hear the outcry, "it diminishes even more students because of the cost!". well, tough tiddies mate, if you want to make skydiving a pure buisness, you're shit-out-of-luck, because if you want to keep skydiving safe, you need to focus more on your students to a maybe later stage of their progression in order to increase their canopy-piloting-skills and make them more aware of what they're actually doing. oh yea, that is MUCH MORE COMPLICATED than to just say: "LET'S BAN THIS AND THAT AND HERE'S THE RULES!".“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
virgin-burner 1 #67 August 3, 2011 and i just found this gem“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #68 August 3, 2011 >that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #69 August 3, 2011 Quote>that is STUPID. Yes, it is. But it happens, unfortunately. so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? it may not only raise safety, but should help keep stupid away, too!“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,372 #70 August 3, 2011 Hi Rigless, Quote2.7k jumps over 35 years and over 10k posts.. And your profile says . . . . We're waiting for it, JerryBaumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #71 August 3, 2011 >so what do you say to my proposition two or three posts further up!? The mandatory canopy course? Some thoughts there: 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. 2) It would probably best be set at the C or D license point, since that's the point at which most people start downsizing. 3) It may be best to make such a canopy course a "gateway" to downsizing (i.e. above a certain wingloading.) That way you're not making an accuracy jumper learn to fly a small canopy they will never jump, and instead require it for canopy pilots before they get to a certain level of performance in their canopy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildcard451 0 #72 August 3, 2011 Quote 1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. ICU stays aren't cheap either.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #73 August 3, 2011 try jumping in europe! “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #74 August 3, 2011 >>1) It will increase costs for students overall in a sport that is already incredibly expensive. >ICU stays aren't cheap either.. True - but that decision is up to the jumper right now. If they are OK with, and can afford, the ICU stay, then that's their decision. (Of course, based on the number of "PLEASE HELP! Joey is in the ICU after a hook turn and he/his family really need your donations!" messages I've seen - this is often not the case.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #75 August 3, 2011 Quoteapparently, having learned over the "course of thousands of jumps" doesnt save you from dying under a perfectly good canopy. That is because just because someone has thousands of jumps, doesn't mean they have thousands of jumps in that discipline. Just because you're a top level RW competitor with 5,000 jumps doesn't mean you automatically get to jump a Velo and swoop. You have to learn how to fly a canopy that is on that level. Just like just because I have spent a long time getting good at flying a canopy, earning a pro-card and competing, doesn't mean that I'm a top level competitive freeflier as well. Quite the opposite. Even still, accidents can happen.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
