would you NOT visit a dz because they have restricted turns to 90 degree's or less

[livenletfly 0]

hey all, i used to visit sdaz at least twice a winter since 2001. now i go to sd sandiego for my winter vacation's to jump. sdaz was one of my favorite places to visit so im very bummed i wont be going there anymore. im just wondering how many others wont be visiting dz's that have restrictions for swooping.

p.s this poll is not meant to bash sdaz or any other dz. im truly interested in how dz's that have a large amount of visiting jumpers will be affected by these changes.

>

[phoenixlpr 0]

Yet another thread for whining swoopers? Yack!

[livenletfly 0]

actually im not whining, im honestly curious as to the demographic change restrcited dz's are going to have. i have no negative feelings tword sdaz or others for their decisions. i agree with alot of their reasons, not all but some. so if you dont like the poll then dont reply, but if going to talk shit at least spell correctly.

>

[damion75 0]

Of course the results of this poll might be a little skewed since this forum is mostly frequented by swoopers.

Perhaps a poll in Gen Skydiving would produce a more balanced result?

***************

Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus.

[livenletfly 0]

thanks, thats a good point. maybe a moderator could move the poll to general discussions.

ATTN MODERATORS; could you please move this post to general skydiving

thanks

>

[Pendragon 1]

...but then all you get are answers from masses that don't swoop anyway. That's like asking a bunch of flatflyers whether they would frequent a DZ that banned freeflying.

Besides, IMHO DZs that effectively ban swooping are just covering up the fact that they are unable to exercise any control over patterns, and who jumps what. Personally I would ban the "bell ringing", spiraling through stacks, s-turns on finals and other unpredictable - and dangerous - practices... and remind everyone that the low person only truly has the priority always claimed if they're not doing anything stupid like that!

--
BASE #1182
Muff #3573
PFI #52; UK WSI #13

[Tonto 1]

I'd avoid a DZ that doesn't have a swoop area, or restricts HP landings. I would however, attend an event where there is a restriction on landings. The Wingsuit event in Germany is an example. In that case I am there for that event, and landings are therefore secondary.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[Spizzzarko 0]

I have made the choice to practice the discipline of swooping, and if DZ's make teh choice to limit that discipline then I must not go to that DZ. I don't see how this is "whinning" as you say.

[ORANGENBLUE 0]

Maybe you should read the wingsuit forum, not the Swooping and canopy control one.

[Zenister 0]

I have the luxury of deciding when and where i skydive, so NO i will not jump at a DZ that has such ridiculous 'knee jerk' restrictions.

its a simple enough matter to plan my 'playtime' elsewhere..

but it still makes me sad that such a short sighted 'solution' is being applied at SDAZ.

specific event restrictions i have no issue with.. its easy to schedule around them.. you cant schedule around a policy that restricts a sub discipline completely.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Maybe you should read the wingsuit forum, not the Swooping and canopy control one.

I beg your pardon. How is this connected with the so called "restricted" DZs?

[ORANGENBLUE 0]

Quote

Yet another thread for whining swoopers? Yack!

I didn't think that this said anything about restricted DZs.

[bob.dino 1]

It depends. It's definitely a negative mark against the dropzone.

Later this year I'll be travelling to the USA to train with my 4-way team. The primary focus will be on tunnel time, jumping, and access to top-level coaching. Not swooping.

However, if I'm just travelling to a dropzone for fun, or trying to choose between two DZs as my new home DZ, sensible policies around patterns & landings would be a big factor.

[kamalasound 0]

Just cancelled my trip to Arizona due to the restrictions.
I had planned 100 jumps!!! I'll have to go to Perris

[livenletfly 0]

he's having a hard time making a point and apparently an even harder time being current.

on a serious note, these changes must have an effect on the dz. if your banning hp landings im guessing you will see far less freeflying visitors. (rw folks please dont attack me) it just seems the ratio of swooping freeflyers is very high, vs. swooping rw flyers tends to be much lower. im not refering to sponsored and pro skydivers but regular joes like me. freeflying and swooping have a younger demographic than rw. so with that in mind...

heres my chain of thought; with less freeflyers im guessing the average age of visitors will go up.
now with less freeflying swoopers around, these dz's will actually appeal and attract even more rw jumpers than they do now.

i think the face of sdaz will change from a healthy mix of disciplines and ages to a mostly rw non swooping crowd with a higher than current average age.

because the vast majority of skydivers are non swooping bellyflyers i feel that restricting dz's buisness will not decline but stay the same and possibly increase.
i know thats not what alot of us swoopers want to hear but i think its very likley to be the case.

>

[billvon 3,009]

I do indeed visit some DZ's that restrict turns to 90 degrees for safety reasons. It's nice going to a world record event knowing that you are safer in the air with 400 canopies in the air than you are at a boogie with 40.

[Tonto 1]

Done.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[popsjumper 2]

No, I would not, NOT visit a dz because they have restricted turns to 90 degree's or less. I'd put that DZ at the top of my list of DZs to jump.

(Hurrah for double and triple negatives!)

My goal is to live to be an old skydiver.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[rhys 0]

So a dz that restricts all landings would be safer in your opinion, than one that has the common sense to supply a separate landing area?

Not likely,

There will always be the small few the will break the rule, even in spite they need to break the rule if they are to be banned or punished and while they break the rule you could be in their way.

A DZ that can get their head around airspace and will allow for all disciplines/ approaches will more likely gain the respect of all the patrons of the said dropzone and the result will be a safer place to be.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Thanatos340 1]

Actually just the opposite. I will NOT visit a DZ that does allow HP landings in and around Slower traffic. If the DZ does not MANDATE separation in either Time or Location between Slower Traffic and HP landings in some manner, I think they are more likely to loose much more business.

[wmw999 2,461]

Safe landings are a goal. I don't think there's one answer for every dropzone. On the other hand, not doing anythnig seems to be a low-future proposition for some folks. And telling folks "just jump smarter" doesn't seem to be very effective, either.

Separating in time and space is one way. Limiting landing turns when on the main drop (i.e. not an early pass) on another. Having a mandatory landing pattern briefing for new jumpers (and a mandatory refresher for regulars) might also help. Because, well, all of us can get into bad habits, and being reminded of WHY some of these seemingly arbitrary things help is useful.

I realize that swoopers don't like any restrictions on what they do. On the other hand, non-swoopers would prefer to have a predictable-to-them way to look for traffic, without having to recognize canopies etc.

Wendy W.

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

[squirrel 0]

Quote

I do indeed visit some DZ's that restrict turns to 90 degrees for safety reasons. It's nice going to a world record event knowing that you are safer in the air with 400 canopies in the air than you are at a boogie with 40.

i totally 100% agree. while swooping is cool to watch, i would rather know that i am flying and landing among more "like patern" flyers. but i would still hope that swoopers have thier separate area/DZ.

________________________________
Where is Darwin when you need him?

[mirage62 0]

Quote

Just cancelled my trip to Arizona due to the restrictions.
I had planned 100 jumps!!! I'll have to go to Perris

Just plan my trip to Arizona due to the restrictions, I plan to do 200 jumps, pay packers AND drink more beer than you.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[Remster 30]

Quote

have restricted turns to 90 degree's or less

Quote

used to visit sdaz at least twice a winter since 2001. now i go to sd sandiego for my winter vacation's to jump. sdaz was one of my favorite places to visit so im very bummed i wont be going there anymore

The 2 statements dont concord. The limit at SDA is 180 degrees

Remster

[Tf15 0]

Quote

Done.

t

Well, that will reallly make interpretation of the results difficult. Part of the time in a swoopers' forum, and part in a general forum. Try to unscrmble that.

Three times is enemy action