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

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

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

This poll was not about SDA. Even 180 is not enough for him....

[kkeenan 14]

Quote

...because the vast majority of skydivers are non swooping bellyflyers ...

Do you really think this is the case ? I do a lot of belly, and in Florida, it's pretty hard to find enough to make a load sometimes. I had assumed that the freeflyers were in the majority everywhere.

Kevin K.

_____________________________________
Dude, you are so awesome...
Can I be on your ash jump ?

[BillyVance 34]

I would be more likely to visit DZs that restrict swoop turns. That way I won't have some yahoo take me out on final doing a blind 270.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[kamalasound 0]

Quote

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.

What about tunnel time!!! I would have done a couple of hours as well!!

[VideoFly 0]

I would prefer it all jumpers landing in the same area and at the same time as me were also doing 90-degree approaches. Especially if we were all doing 90s in the same direction. I have no problem with others doing high performance swooping landings at another time or in another area on the DZ.

[cocheese 0]

Last Sunday, I almost killed someone during my swoop. She never saw me. I didn't see her until i was half way through a tight 180 front riser turn. She was in the same position going the same direction only about 60 feet below me.

Afterword, nobody said a word. Then one person said it looked cool like a syncronized swoop that the pros do.

I thought i was clear. She thought she was clear.
We were so clear we didn't see each other.

This has messed with my head quite a bit since it happened. I can't trust myself anymore. I'm not as safe as i thought i was.

I don't know what to say or do.

[980 0]

no real surprise, as 180s have far more of a blindspot than 270s and they have people fly in other people's blind spot (the area above you obscured by your canopy)

they also have people fly toward each other with little or no horizontal separation, especially if setting up a tight 180

landing area restrictions only make sense if they restrict everyone in the pattern to 90 degree turns or less and everyone flies the same handed pattern

my 2 cents. give me 270s (where you only ever fly perpendicular to other traffic nearby) or 90s. 180s just make too little sense

[marks 0]

Quote

landing area restrictions only make sense if they restrict everyone in the pattern to 90 degree turns or less and everyone flies the same handed pattern

I agree.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

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?

Absolutely! How can you argue that?????

Quote

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.

Which is why it would be safer. The rule-breaking idiot only gets that one chance to kill me.

Quote

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.

...as recent history has shown...right.

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

[BillyVance 34]

It would have been better to do a long carving 180 swoop than a tight 180, you'd have had time to recognize the danger and bail out.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[rhys 0]

Quote

...as recent history has shown...right.

Please explain what you mean, as I do not wish to mis interpret what you are saying.

How many people have been grounded in AZ since the new Rule? has the chance of a canopy collision been eradicated?

My argument is that such rules do not prevent canopy collisions as a whole, some of the people advocating such rule changes are whining about the declining numbers in our sport and what about the rights of those % of people that want to make more than a 90degree or 180degree turn?

Attitudes like yours are quite self centered and your signature line is another piece of evidence that my intuition is correct. I'm not advocating high performance landings in the presence of other canopies. But see how long ASPEN kept their ban on snowboarding going . Once the olympics came around this new 'FAD' had become almost mainstream.


With Paragliding companies (over 8 of them now) making speed flying wings that are basically 9 cell high performance parachutes and one parachute company making a speed flying canopy that can be deployed as a parachute. It is only a matter of time before paragliders become skydivers in the quest to go even faster.

The skydiving industry should welcome new disciplines and allow for them, just like 4 way and freefly, swooping has the potential to save a rapidly declining sport but arrogant and ignorant opinions are trying to force the discipline away.

Fortunately that cannot happen. Some will lose business and others will make shit loads
Take Mile High skydiving centre for example. You watch that place grow at an alarming rate and then you watch paragliding companies make 'parachutes' for swooping. Performence designs should be sweating over all this. There is probably well over 100 times more paragliders on this earth than skydivers, this new phenomenon should not be ignored.

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

[kallend 2,032]

The category "doesnt (sic) matter to me either way" presumably means that a ban on swooping doesn't influence the decision whether or not to patronize the DZ and that the person would still visit that DZ.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,009]

>How many people have been grounded in AZ since the new Rule?

A better question is - how many people do not now swoop through traffic because of the fear of being grounded? Last time I went (about a month ago) the difference was noticeable.

>The skydiving industry should welcome new disciplines and allow for them . . .

They should indeed - and many do. Setting aside a separate safe area for swooping is a step in the right direction. Do you really want to learn to swoop in an area full of 230 sq ft canopies?

>Performence designs should be sweating over all this.

1) There are more ultralights built as well; should PD worry about that? (After all, they use fabric wings!)

2) PD builds paragliders under another name anyway.

[ChrisG 0]

I am glad that AZ did that and I wish all DZs would. The carnage AND near carnage is too great.
I used to really enjoy watching the swoopers because I think its funny how they have to take off running as fast as they can when they touch down. You see some funny spills.
My attitude has changed now.
When I was at AZ for the nats last year, the 'near misses' with 100mph canopys swooping amongst others was so bad that at times I could barely stand to watch! Again and again, swoopers having to make last 1/10 second manuvers to avoid tragedy. Often, a swooper zoomed out of nowhere, in front of traffic, causing them to have to correct.
There truly was an unsafe situation going on and I salute skydive AZ for trying to stop the carnage. They are taking a risk doing this, but they are probably sick of all the accidents and near misses.

The main problem with new rules, I think, with the irresponsible swoopers is that they are losing thier audience. A separate landing area means everybody cant see how good they are and how cool the last landing was. They might have to walk some more too!

Yes, there is good, safe responsible swoopers that very seldom have a close call, but it may be the old 'bad apples' thing thats ruining it for you guys.
Chris

[marks2065 0]

i recently visited a dz that had a freefly event that most of whom were swoopers - i don't care what you do when you jump and i think you have the right to choose what you want but standing in the landing area being used as a target by 10-12 swoopers all going big from every direction (right and left 270 and 180's and 90's ) scared the shit out of me just standing there and made me glad that my wingloading was high enough to be on the ground before the yahoos started the shit - and a couple of these yahoos were big name to vrw and swooping -just goes to show that with all the shit happening lately that people just don't learn - therefore i will galdly choose a dz that limits landing patterns and sda is on the top of my list of places i want to go

[riggerrob 643]

I don't care what the rules are.
Tell me what the rules are and I will follow them.

But remember that fancy new rules are only meaningful IF THEY ARE ENFORCED.

If I see one yahooo doing high-speed landings in the regular landing field, I rapidly lose respect for DZ management and take my money elsewhere!

[Zenister 0]

Quote

I don't care what the rules are.
Tell me what the rules are and I will follow them.

But remember that fancy new rules are only meaningful IF THEY ARE ENFORCED.

If I see one yahooo doing high-speed landings in the regular landing field, I rapidly lose respect for DZ management and take my money elsewhere!

dont open your eyes often.. implementing 'double standards' vs 'real solutions' is rampant.

specifying seperate HP and LP landing areas would be the best solution, but the best solution costs more than simple 'lipservice' for appearance's sake..

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

[waltappel 1]

Quote

I don't know what to say or do.

For starters, support the new BSR.

Walt

[AFFI 0]

Quote

do a long carving 180 swoop than a tight 180, you'd have had time to recognize the danger and bail out.

And in my limited experience, it seems that I can build up more speed in addition to having a better view to where I am headed.

Mykel AFF-I10
Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat…

[marks 0]

Quote

Quote

do a long carving 180 swoop than a tight 180, you'd have had time to recognize the danger and bail out.

And in my limited experience, it seems that I can build up more speed in addition to having a better view to where I am headed.

thats why is is limited experiance then.

A 180 in to a standard traffic pattern is the most dangerous thing you can do...

banning a 270 and saying do 180's is ok, is fucking stupid....

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

banning a 270 and saying do 180's is ok, is fucking stupid....

I'm a bit confused -

If a long, carving 180 was done in the place of the crosswind leg, wouldn't that actually be SAFER than the 270?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

A 180 in to a standard traffic pattern is the most dangerous thing you can do...

banning a 270 and saying do 180's is ok, is fucking stupid....

Despite what we continue to tell them, they just don't get it. I am all for seperate landing areas (be it seperated by time or space). Going big in traffic is rolling the dice and well sonner or later the losing number will come up. But it's a knee jerk reaction to think banning 270s will solve the issue. They remind me of the politicians in this world. Promise the lemmings something the lemmings think they need when in reality the politician knows they have done nothing of real substance to resolve the issue.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Meux 0]

Let me say this about that.

I don't like mixing in with HP landings. I want to fly downwind, be abeam at 1,000', turn base around 600', turn final at 300' and land in some grass not too far from the packing area. My biggest fear in skydiving is a canopy collision. I work hard at clearing,especially high 6 o'clock. If someone flies into that area I will fly aggressively away from that position (their low 12 o'clock) even if it means landing way away or even off. A long walk is way better than an ambulance ride (or worse).

Having said that. I love to watch swoopers, when I'm on the ground.

If a DZ bans swooping it is actually a plus for me. I like to watch it, but don't care if it's not there.

A very good friend of mine was killed recently by a HP collision. I pray that his death won't be in vain.

THAT OTHERS MAY LIVE

GBU

MH

[AFFI 0]

Quote

do a long carving 180 swoop than a tight 180, you'd have had time to recognize the danger and bail out.

And in my limited experience, it seems that I can build up more speed in addition to having a better view to where I am headed.

[waltappel 1]

Mykel,

I'm a bit disappointed that I have to spell it out to you.

1. Swoopers are smarter than non-swoopers.

2. Swoopers are always right.

3. If you disagree with a swooper, you are wrong.

4. If you agree with a swooper, you are still wrong because you are not a swooper.

5. Swoopers are the elite of the skydiving world.

6. Swoopers are the downtrodden of the skydiving world.

7. If you are not a swooper, you are hell-bent on banning their fun.

8. If you are not a swooper, you cannot possibly understand...*anything*. Why? Because you're not a swooper.

9. If a swooper kills an innocent jumper via canopy collision, it is at worst an "error in judgement". Most likely the slow canopy did something stupid to get in the swooper's way.

10. You're not worthy of being in the presence of a swooper; neither is God.

11. God wishes he were a swooper, but he's just not that good.

12. God doesn't go anywhere near churches on Sunday. He goes to the DZ to worship the swoopers.

13. Any swooper can kick Chuck Norris' ass.

Understand now? If not, then ask any swooper

Walt