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

[billvon 3,009]

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

Yes, because that is essentially a standard pattern. (Two 90 degree turns to base and final.) I agree that a snap 180 is as bad as a 270, though.

[marks 0]

the only person who suggested you were stupid is yourself.

I didn't do that.

go ahead, find some more cut downs. your really hurting my feelings..


this is the part of your post I was replying to.

Quote

better view to where I am headed.

how can that be? your back is turned. and if your doing a left turn, how can you see the traffic entering the pattern to your right in a left hand pattern. if your doing a long slow 180 you best be looking and judging your altitude the whole time, which means your looking left and not in the direction that a possible standard pattern person is flying..

ohh and forgive me if I thought this thread was about turns bigger than 90 degrees in a traffic pattern, I just assumed that because of the thread title.

[marks 0]

Quote

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

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.

nobody likes a hater.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

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

Yes, because that is essentially a standard pattern. (Two 90 degree turns to base and final.) I agree that a snap 180 is as bad as a 270, though.

I *thought* that was what the poster was describing.

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

[waltappel 1]

Quote

Quote

(lots of stuff deleted)

13. Any swooper can kick Chuck Norris' ass.

Understand now? If not, then ask any swooper

Walt

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.

nobody likes a hater.

14. Not all swoopers have a sense of humor these days but that's ok because the real joke is on the non-swoopers. Just ask any swooper.

Walt

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.[Crazy]

nobody likes a hater.

Saying that banning 270's and allowing 180's is 'fucking stupid' is adding what to the conversation, pray tell?

As for the 'hater' attitude... look at various posts from people - I've seen quite a number of those 'views' espoused...some of them from yourself.

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

[marks 0]

I admit I don't always have the best sense of humor.

but some of you seem to be blinded by the fact that 180's are still allowed.

It is NOT the turn that is the problem, it is the fact it is done in traffic. have we not already got this far?

if you want to chose which turn is safest IN a standard pattern, I beleive you will find that a 180 is not it.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

Quote

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.[Crazy]

nobody likes a hater.

Saying that banning 270's and allowing 180's is 'fucking stupid' is adding what to the conversation, pray tell?

As for the 'hater' attitude... look at various posts from people - I've seen quite a number of those 'views' espoused...some of them from yourself.

C'mon guys, it was a *joke*!!!!! Can't we all just get along?
Walt

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.[Crazy]

nobody likes a hater.

Saying that banning 270's and allowing 180's is 'fucking stupid' is adding what to the conversation, pray tell?

As for the 'hater' attitude... look at various posts from people - I've seen quite a number of those 'views' espoused...some of them from yourself.

C'mon guys, it was a *joke*!!!!! Can't we all just get along?
Walt

It was a *good* joke, too... hilarious, in fact!

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

[waltappel 1]

Quote

I admit I don't always have the best sense of humor.

but some of you seem to be blinded by the fact that 180's are still allowed.

It is NOT the turn that is the problem, it is the fact it is done in traffic. have we not already got this far?

if you want to chose which turn is safest IN a standard pattern, I beleive you will find that a 180 is not it.

If you are talking a snap 180, yep. If you are talking a wide, slow 180 then, as Billvon pointed out, that's pretty much a standard pattern.

IMO, no maneuver that results in a canopy going significantly faster than canopies around it gets my vote as a safe maneuver in a landing pattern. If one such maneuver inherently causes more "blind spots" it's that much worse.

In other words, I *agree* that a snap 180 is not as safe as a 270. Where we *may* disagree (and I don't think we do) is that I don't think *either* maneuver belongs in the same pattern as slower traffic.

As far as DZs limiting turns to 90 degrees, I'm all for that in the "slow" landing pattern. If there are no slow canopies in the pattern or if HP landings have their own area, I'm all for the swoopers doing whatever they want.

Walt

[marks 0]

I think I can get more out of a 90 turn then a long 180.

so I guess it is just me, I don't see the point.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

I think I can get more out of a 90 turn then a long 180.

so I guess it is just me, I don't see the point.

I didn't say that but I think whoever did say it meant that a hard 90 will generate more speed than a slow 180.

Walt

[billvon 3,009]

>but some of you seem to be blinded by the fact that 180's are still allowed.

Who is blinded by that? I don't think snap 180's have any place in a standard pattern either. The standard pattern area is just that - a place for standard patterns.

[jheadley 0]

So snap 180's are bad, slow carving 180's are ok. Is there now going to have to be a regulation on what an acceptable turn rate is?

[dploi 0]

Call me a dick, but I have no interest in going to a dropzone that doesn't allow HP landings. It's like going to a snow park with a 15mph speed limit. Great for some, boring to me.

[skypuppy 1]

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.

nobody likes a hater.
__________________________________________________

Then read your posts again, and see if Walt's doesn't make as much or more sense to you.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[billvon 3,009]

> So snap 180's are bad, slow carving 180's are ok.

Snap 180's are bad, standard patterns are OK.

[ChrisG 0]

If they allow high speed landings away from the main landing area and observers, is that OK?

[ROK 0]

I'll jump anywhere that has a plane and a plan.

If the DZ doesn't participate in a discipline that I desire to pursue on that day, I'll go to one that does.

I'm very new and learning daily, but tell me why this issue can't be solved easily.

A simple answer would be to make a H&P run for those who wish to swoop. If this can't be done for economic or other reasons, do the following...

If you want to go to altitude, get out first. The next group should wait a safe amount of time to insure wide separation. It seems that most swoopers I know fly high wing loadings with small canopies. Hit the LZ way ahead of the others in the plane. Don't open above a pre-declared altitude (emergencies being the exception)

If you want to participate in disciplines with mixed groups while in freefall, don't swoop. Stick to a simple pattern.

If we can come up with a plan, and police each other in sticking to the plan, extremes shouldn't be necessary.

Now, tell me what I have missed?

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Don't open above a pre-declared altitude

As a rule swoopers want to open higher than old, conservative belly flyers.

Quote

If you want to participate in disciplines with mixed groups while in freefall, don't swoop.

Thats the real problem. Most people do not have unlimited skydiving budgets. Those who like swooping want to do their freeflying or their RW and then swoop their landing.

[winsor 236]

Quote

If they allow high speed landings away from the main landing area and observers, is that OK?

If someone wants to play Lawn Dart on their own time, I'm fine with that.

If they want to take me or someone else with them in the process, I have a problem with that.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

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..

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sorry

I thought we had a designated swoop lane at the start of this discussion.

Which leads me to repeat my earlier post about:

1. swoopers flying predictable patterns towards the designated swoop lane

2. accuracy competitors flying predictable patterns towards the pea gravel bowl/tuffet

3. everyone else flying predictable "boxed" patterns towards the student field/general landing area.

4. any one who does not want to fly a predictable pattern landing at the alternate.
Hint: the alternate is forty miles down the road.

[ROK 0]

Quote

Quote

Don't open above a pre-declared altitude

As a rule swoopers want to open higher than old, conservative belly flyers.

Quote

If you want to participate in disciplines with mixed groups while in freefall, don't swoop.

Thats the real problem. Most people do not have unlimited skydiving budgets. Those who like swooping want to do their freeflying or their RW and then swoop their landing.

All very good points...

While taking Brian's canopy course he said that once you start swooping, you live for it. He stated it much more eloquently.

I plan to be a swooper in the future when my experience allows. I stand next to the pond and dream of creating that rooster tail while flying by. I would rather see compromise than hard line edicts that forbid the discipline totally. For this to be possible, both sides will need to walk away feeling like they can live with the "plan". For this to happen, both sides will need to give a little.

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Quote

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

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.

nobody likes a hater.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes!

But it was funny and we could use some levity in this over-heated debate.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

Quote

this post gets everyone absolutely nowhere, fast.

nobody likes a hater.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes!

But it was funny and we could use some levity in this over-heated debate.

I'd gladly post a list of "things to understand" about non-swoopers but there's just not as much material to work with.

How about:

Q: How many non-swoopers does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Only one but it takes all fuckin' day because they only turn it 90 degrees at a time!

Ok, so it's not all that funny--at least I tried.

Walt