.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
Hooknswoop 19
Recommended Posts
You forgot the part about, go ahead and try to dial in that HP swoop in an off landing, more shit to sneak up to bite you in the ass doing that, but seeing how we have sooooo many hot shots who can handle anything that comes their way all they will have to worry about is some pissed off farmer with a shot gun.
~
~
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo
obelixtim 150
I've been quite happy with the job for 25 years now......"having the power" was not an egocentric statement at all........ its just a simple fact..........a statement to reinforce the fact that ALL DZO's have this power, and can choose to use it or not, in anyway they like.......
Arguing till you're blue in the face about "your" "rights" with a DZO will not cut any ice with them.....and is not the way to persuade them to bend to your wants.....after all they don't owe you anything.....
Just warning about possible negative effects of refusing to accept that an improvement in the accident rate is necessary.....the proposals here are a good way to start....
To others who suggest setting up their own DZ's, go for it.......and good luck.....you'll need it......
hhh
Arguing till you're blue in the face about "your" "rights" with a DZO will not cut any ice with them.....and is not the way to persuade them to bend to your wants.....after all they don't owe you anything.....
Just warning about possible negative effects of refusing to accept that an improvement in the accident rate is necessary.....the proposals here are a good way to start....
To others who suggest setting up their own DZ's, go for it.......and good luck.....you'll need it......
hhh
My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....
Designer 0
Sounds like you have a solid start on the solution.Not only a class system will be needed but a way to progress with or with out attending a canopy control class.(seminar)A reasonably good canopy pilot should know how his/her canopy flys in about 25 jumps.This includes almost all conditions,also when to sit a jump out because it does not feel safe.Some pilots A-C license holders will need less or more jumps to feel safe.A simple test can be taken to advance to the next level.Anymore Ideas?rob
We will have to adress this in an all emcopassing angle, not just people wanting to swoop. There are many reasons (not always valid) people downsize: drive into wind on windy days, smaller container, more responsive, etc. We will have to set a minimum with consideration from coached progressed swoop wanna-be's to the just want to fly faster non-swoppers. Of course the latter will be less effected I think. Some of the fatalities are still in that area: I don't want to swoop, I fly conservative, yadda yadda......land off in tight area, turn low to avoid power lines and smack the ground.
Todd
I am not totally useless, I can be used as a bad example.
Todd
I am not totally useless, I can be used as a bad example.
Quote
With regards to a WL BSR proposal, why not be more positive? Instead of trying to tear everyone else down, which it appears you are just doing for sport, and do some research? Come up with solutions. Put YOUR ideas out there to stepped on and hammered into nothing.
If you never consider dissent, you'll start to find all sorts of corkscrew ideas can become palatable over time.
Is it possible for you to conceive that I mean just as well as you, only I've got a different perspective?
Quote
I/we do not have to get past you or prove anything to you. You are not the self appointed "BSR-reviewer".
You don't have to prove anything to anybody.
And you're still linking me to my words. You seem unwilling or incapable of judging the concepts on their merits.
Quote
You don't think time and experience count for anything? I'll arrange for my old VX-60 to get shipped out to you for you to jump. You shouldn't have a problem, if time and experience don't matter.
I think they have value, but I think they've proven to be seriously unreliable when they stand alone. For the same reason that you wouldn't ship your VX to just any random jumper with more than 1000 jumps and more than 5 years in the sport.
Quote
We are trying to make things better and you want to play debate games.
I am trying to make things better, but I'm not able to come up with any particularly good ideas. I try not to get upset with others when I can't reasonably defend my ideas, I let them go and move on. In fact, if you dig through the history of this forum you'll find that I did put up some ideas and they were quickly dashed to bits. I do not cling to them.
Some problems are difficult to solve. We should not get distracted by trying to turn lead to gold.
Quote
In the meantime, people are getting seriouslt injured and killed
No contention here about that. Given the graveness of this situation, it is especially key that we not let our emotions mislead us.
nathaniel
My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?
Hooknswoop 19
QuoteIf you never consider dissent, you'll start to find all sorts of corkscrew ideas can become palatable over time.
There is a difference between constructive crititism and playing debating games for sport.
QuoteIs it possible for you to conceive that I mean just as well as you, only I've got a different perspective?
Sure, but you are not helping. People are pounding in on canopies they shouldn't be jumping and need guidence and education and you want a study. This isn't NASA.
QuoteAnd you're still linking me to my words. You seem unwilling or incapable of judging the concepts on their merits.
Not at all. The concept that we need a study or that BSR's that are not researched with big budgets and commitees are a bad idea.
QuoteI think they have value, but I think they've proven to be seriously unreliable when they stand alone.
There are more than one person with a lot of experience and time that realize that a WL BSR is a good idea. Seems to me that is the only thing we have and it works. Why screw with sucess, especially when we aren't going to get stastics, committes, budjets and reserach studies.
Quoteam trying to make things better, but I'm not able to come up with any particularly good ideas.
Yes, I know. So let people that do have good ideas figure this out.
QuoteI try not to get upset with others when I can't reasonably defend my ideas, I let them go and move on. In fact, if you dig through the history of this forum you'll find that I did put up some ideas and they were quickly dashed to bits. I do not cling to them.
Good. Let go of this one.
Some problems are difficult to solve. We should not get distracted by trying to turn lead to gold.
Exactly. There is a problem. Let's fix it. It isn't that complicated or that difficult as you are trying to make it. We can afford to impliment a less than perfect BSR and change it to make it as good as possible. A pilot program should work out any problems or even reveal if the whole idea is bad. But you want to continue to debate the issue. How many more people have to hammer in under canopies they aren't ready for before you'll wake up?
QuoteNo contention here about that. Given the graveness of this situation, it is especially key that we not let our emotions mislead us.
And it is important that this gets done, the sooner, the better. You seem to be willing to debate it forever and against it as long as there isn't proof that a WL BSR will work. Stop putting your efforts into slowing things down, and put your efforts into speeding things up.
This idea has been debated for a long time and has been refined down to a very good proposal. Stop debating and help, or don't help and be quiet.
Derek
***
QuoteAre you posting because you like to debate or because you have an opinion?
With regards to a WL BSR proposal, why not be more positive? Instead of trying to tear everyone else down, which it appears you are just doing for sport, and do some research? Come up with solutions. Put YOUR ideas out there to stepped on and hammered into nothing.
I/we do not have to get past you or prove anything to you. You are not the self appointed "BSR-reviewer".
Sorry, that is an unhelpful attitude.
The burden is on those proposing a new rule to show that it is needed, that it will do the job it's supposed to do, and that it is acceptable to the skydiving community. This continuing debate shows that you still have a way to go.
With respect to criticism:
The folks who noticed Newton's Laws didn't work for the orbit of Mercury weren't the same folks who came up with Special and General Relativity. But those folks triggered the search for the explanation.
The folks who noticed that electrons didn't behave according to the rules weren't the ones that came up with quantum mechanics. But these folks triggered the search that came up with QM.
The folks that noticed Uranus wasn't orbiting properly weren't the same ones that discovered Neptune, but no-one would have looked for Neptune unless the Uranus anomalies had been observed and written about.
Just because Nathaniel sees problems with your proposal doesn't imply that he has to know how to write a better one.
Quote
People are pounding in on canopies they shouldn't be jumping and need guidence and education and you want a study.
If we can't have a study. let's at least have some good reaoning.
Quote
The concept that we need a study or that BSR's that are not researched with big budgets and commitees are a bad idea.
Rational arguments are free.
Quote
There are more than one person with a lot of experience and time that realize that a WL BSR is a good idea.
From other posts on this board it appears that there are more than one person with a lot of experience and time that realize that a WL BSR hasn't been adequately justified.
Quote
Seems to me that is the only thing we have and it works. Why screw with sucess
Well sure, if you only consider the successes, the success rate is 100%.
Quote
So let people that do have good ideas figure this out.
And let whosoever shall figure this out produce some sound arguments for whatever they come up with.
Quote
How many more people have to hammer in under canopies they aren't ready for before you'll wake up?
I'm not going to touch this one. You complain about debating games, yet you produce remarks like this.
Quote
And it is important that this gets done, the sooner, the better.
It's important that whatsoever gets done, is done with the reasonable expecation that it shall improve the situation. As soon as we have such a means, we should exercise it, but not before.
nathaniel
My advice is to do what your parents did; get a job, sir. The bums will always lose. Do you hear me, Lebowski?
obelixtim 150
I agree with hooknswoop.....you are arguing for the sake of argument.......but your contribution to solving the problem seems to be zero.......
Its time for positive action, we've had enough hot air......
A BSR WILL have a positive effect on the accident rate.....no question about that.....but it will take some time after its introduction before we see meaningful statistics on a national/international scale......thats how it goes in a sport like ours.......as you may find out if you stick around long enough to find out......
The rest of us will still be involved.....and we'll notice results fairly soon....because we can compare events on our DZ's with previous experience.....
Thats what experience teaches us......
Its time for positive action, we've had enough hot air......
A BSR WILL have a positive effect on the accident rate.....no question about that.....but it will take some time after its introduction before we see meaningful statistics on a national/international scale......thats how it goes in a sport like ours.......as you may find out if you stick around long enough to find out......
The rest of us will still be involved.....and we'll notice results fairly soon....because we can compare events on our DZ's with previous experience.....
Thats what experience teaches us......
My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....
Hi Tim,
I do think a BSR along with good education will go a long way to bring down the incidents. The focus of this thread has been on fatalities, but my experiences around the dropzone indicate that a LARGE number of broken bones are because of botched landing attempts. I think people forget (or don't bother cause the data isn't as readily available or reported even) to look at the incidents that don't end in a fatality. If they did, I think they'd find there are a lot more accidents happening than they initially realize.
My question to you is, as a DZO, do you enforce something along the current recommended guidelines? If so have you noticed a drop in incidents at your dz since it's implementation?
Blues,
Ian
I do think a BSR along with good education will go a long way to bring down the incidents. The focus of this thread has been on fatalities, but my experiences around the dropzone indicate that a LARGE number of broken bones are because of botched landing attempts. I think people forget (or don't bother cause the data isn't as readily available or reported even) to look at the incidents that don't end in a fatality. If they did, I think they'd find there are a lot more accidents happening than they initially realize.
My question to you is, as a DZO, do you enforce something along the current recommended guidelines? If so have you noticed a drop in incidents at your dz since it's implementation?
Blues,
Ian
Performance Designs Factory Team
mnealtx 0
No, it can't be made perfect for everyone, that's true.... but it can be made BETTER for damn near everyone, and that's what they're striving for.
Please, if you have specific misgivings, then mention them - right now it looks like you're thread-crapping just because you can...
Please, if you have specific misgivings, then mention them - right now it looks like you're thread-crapping just because you can...
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
QuoteAre you posting because you like to debate or because you have an opinion?
QuoteI agree with hooknswoop.....you are arguing for the sake of argument.......but your contribution to solving the problem seems to be zero.......
QuotePlease, if you have specific misgivings, then mention them - right now it looks like you're thread-crapping just because you can...
Nathaniel,
If you remember, we had this very discussion in some other posts. You come across as a first year student of "reason & logic". But as I mentioned before, this is the real world we are dealing with. The neat and tidy solutions you are taught in class sometimes need to be "tweeked" when it come to solving a real problem. This is not the place to argue just because you feel you are good at.
You seen to be fairly intelligent so you should be able to come up with something specific to contribute. You say we need a study, well here is a chance for you to make an impact on the outcome of this program. You should be able to have that completed by the next USPA board meeting.
If you feel a study is needed to determine something needs to be done and done soon, you are not paying attention.
2003 50% of fatalities in the US were under good canopies.
2004 40% of fatalities in the us were under good canopies.
Show us the logic and reason in that!
Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals
Quote
Please, if you have specific misgivings, then mention them - right now it looks like you're thread-crapping just because you can...
Thread-crapping would be trashing the poster rather than the arguments being made. This is supposed to be a discussion group, not a lecture hall. Somehow an admonishment to sit down and shut up seems out of place. Mention misgivings? Sheesh - the thread is here. Only works if someone wants to hear.
Had a nice day - the weather and my schedule finally allowed me back in the air. With 6 weeks off, I had another one of those decisions to make on rental choice, with surprising results. It's very rewarding taking responsibility for oneself.
Good luck with La Mancha, folks.
pash 0
QuoteThread-crapping would be trashing the poster rather than the arguments being made. This is supposed to be a discussion group, not a lecture hall. Somehow an admonishment to sit down and shut up seems out of place. Mention misgivings? Sheesh - the thread is here. Only works if someone wants to hear.
If you read through the posts of the guy mnealtx is replying to, it just doesn't seem to be all that "discussion" oriented. I would agree 100% with Sparky and when he said it sounds like first-year logic coming out. NOT that the guy isn't intelligent and cannot contribute anything, but that he is overzealous in applying everything he was taught, or self-taught, about philosophy to SKYDIVING.
He should see that his adherence to the wisdom of logic set down by those before him (i.e. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, Locke, Sartes, Camus, etc...) is ironic given that he will not listen to the people in the sport he chooses to participate in today. Perhaps he was taught to question everything and that's what he's slavishly doing.
Liemberg 0
Quoteapplying everything he was taught, or self-taught, about philosophy to SKYDIVING.
Why not? The people from 'Monty Python' did it with soccer.
QuotePerhaps he was taught to question everything and that's what he's slavishly doing.
Questioning everything is one of the best childish qualities there is, though tiresome at times...
"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...
okalb 104
QuoteQuoteI think they have value, but I think they've proven to be seriously unreliable when they stand alone. For the same reason that you wouldn't ship your VX to just any random jumper with more than 1000 jumps and more than 5 years in the sport.
I think that statement is the key right there. If you ask that question of most highly experienced jumpers, the answer would be yes, I'll ship it to them. Experience and time in the sport has shown us that MOST people with a thousand jumps and 5 years in the sport are realistic about their own abilities and have seen enough people get hurt to not jump something they can't handle. The problem is less experienced jumpers who drastically over-estimate their abilities.
There are exceptions to every rule on both sides of the equation, but rules are not written for the exceptions. There are plenty of drivers who can safely handle their cars at speeds that far exceed the speed limits. The speed limits are designed for the masses not the few. The fact that we are proposing a test out option for the exceptions makes it fair for all.
It always seems odd to me that whenever this debate comes up it is the people with the least experience that argue the loudest against regulation. The same people that we are trying to protect from themselves.
I know a person who has recently bought a velocity that everyone on the DZ agrees he is nowhere near ready for. A bunch of us who jump velocities have all tried to talk to him about why he shouldn't jump it. We are all experienced on this canopy and have gotten into specifics about the flight characteristics and why he isn't ready. His response was that all of the other velo jumpers just don't want anyone else in their club. We just don't want him to compete with us using the same tools we use. Unfortunately, that is the mentality of a lot off the lower experienced jumpers. By the way, the person that I am talking about already jumps a stiletto loaded at around 1.6 to 1 and want to switch to the velo at over 2 to 1. His landing on the stiletto are far from stellar. Did I mention that he has under 400 jumps total and has been jumping for over 3 years.
-OK
Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana
QuoteI know a person who has recently bought a velocity that everyone on the DZ agrees he is nowhere near ready for. A bunch of us who jump velocities have all tried to talk to him about why he shouldn't jump it. We are all experienced on this canopy and have gotten into specifics about the flight characteristics and why he isn't ready. His response was that all of the other velo jumpers just don't want anyone else in their club. We just don't want him to compete with us using the same tools we use. Unfortunately, that is the mentality of a lot off the lower experienced jumpers. By the way, the person that I am talking about already jumps a stiletto loaded at around 1.6 to 1 and want to switch to the velo at over 2 to 1. His landing on the stiletto are far from stellar. Did I mention that he has under 400 jumps total and has been jumping for over 3 years.
The smart thing for you to do at this stage is to have this guy fill out an "incident form" now for future use. Would save you a lot of trouble later.
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals
obelixtim 150
Best get him to fill out a fatality report as well...just in case......nothing like being prepared....
.....Or......dig a hole on the DZ and tell him thats where you're gonna put all the bits......
.....Or......dig a hole on the DZ and tell him thats where you're gonna put all the bits......
My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....
QuoteIf you feel a study is needed to determine something needs to be done and done soon, you are not paying attention.
2003 50% of fatalities in the US were under good canopies.
2004 40% of fatalities in the us were under good canopies.
How many of them would have been affected by the proposal? Were they ALL inexperienced people with high WL? THAT is the critical question.
obelixtim 150
Hi Ian....in answer to your question.....
On my DZ I'm there fulltime so its relatively easy for me to control who does what....and after being part of a CRW team in 1991 that switched to 92 sq ft 9 cell ZP canopies in an attempt to do even faster rotations.....we quickly found out the potential these canopies had for great rotation times, but also serious landing injury......
Did a lot of thinking and discussing (being in a team was really helpful, because we were all different weights and sizes) we came up with our own ideas that basically go along with the current proposals.
The swooping phenomenon didn't really come along as a serious issue amongst the general skydiving population for a few years after that....but I already had a head start in terms of experience and the like, so I was able to warn all my jumpers of some of the pitfalls....I was lucky because no one on my DZ challenged me.....
Problems only came with visiting jumpers, but I solved that by requiring them to be briefed by myself or one of my senior DZSO's if I was away.......
My DZ is 1300 ft above sea level....so a good way to start was to ask a question along the lines of...."have you adjusted your altimeter back to ground level?......and, if so what does that mean? ( for landing)."
Often, getting a blank look in reply told me all I needed to know......and I briefed accordingly......
"Spotting the dolt" became quite easy....young, loud, inexperienced, latest gear, wanting to impress someone....
Despite this, I did have a spate of crash and burns at one stage.......no fatals but a couple of femurs and lots of bruises and scrapes.......
I realised this was a result of showing off......so I created a swooping zone about 500 metres from the main landing area......and the injury rate went right down to zero.....because the part time swooper showoffs had no audience to impress....and they were too lazy to walk......also kept them away from Tandems and Students....
We didn't have any formal guidelines to use, so I just relied on experience and common sense.....and most people were OK with that.....because on my DZ my word was law.....anyone who didn't agree took the long walk off the short plank.....
The accident rate DEFINITLY dropped with some basic DZ rules in place....
But I'm told on this board by a few that I have no basis for my views.......oh well.....
On my DZ I'm there fulltime so its relatively easy for me to control who does what....and after being part of a CRW team in 1991 that switched to 92 sq ft 9 cell ZP canopies in an attempt to do even faster rotations.....we quickly found out the potential these canopies had for great rotation times, but also serious landing injury......
Did a lot of thinking and discussing (being in a team was really helpful, because we were all different weights and sizes) we came up with our own ideas that basically go along with the current proposals.
The swooping phenomenon didn't really come along as a serious issue amongst the general skydiving population for a few years after that....but I already had a head start in terms of experience and the like, so I was able to warn all my jumpers of some of the pitfalls....I was lucky because no one on my DZ challenged me.....
Problems only came with visiting jumpers, but I solved that by requiring them to be briefed by myself or one of my senior DZSO's if I was away.......
My DZ is 1300 ft above sea level....so a good way to start was to ask a question along the lines of...."have you adjusted your altimeter back to ground level?......and, if so what does that mean? ( for landing)."
Often, getting a blank look in reply told me all I needed to know......and I briefed accordingly......
"Spotting the dolt" became quite easy....young, loud, inexperienced, latest gear, wanting to impress someone....
Despite this, I did have a spate of crash and burns at one stage.......no fatals but a couple of femurs and lots of bruises and scrapes.......
I realised this was a result of showing off......so I created a swooping zone about 500 metres from the main landing area......and the injury rate went right down to zero.....because the part time swooper showoffs had no audience to impress....and they were too lazy to walk......also kept them away from Tandems and Students....
We didn't have any formal guidelines to use, so I just relied on experience and common sense.....and most people were OK with that.....because on my DZ my word was law.....anyone who didn't agree took the long walk off the short plank.....
The accident rate DEFINITLY dropped with some basic DZ rules in place....
But I'm told on this board by a few that I have no basis for my views.......oh well.....
My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....
Hooknswoop 19
QuoteHow many of them would have been affected by the proposal?
All of them that had a "B" license or higher.
All of them that exceeded the WL chart.
QuoteWere they ALL inexperienced people with high WL?
That is not the only people that this proposal will affect in a positive manner.
Derek
Quote
There are exceptions to every rule on both sides of the equation, but rules are not written for the exceptions. There are plenty of drivers who can safely handle their cars at speeds that far exceed the speed limits. The speed limits are designed for the masses not the few. The fact that we are proposing a test out option for the exceptions makes it fair for all.
ROFL. We have some BSR proponents telling us we can't have the research to really find out what's going on, and now you claim to know what is the rule and what is the exception. How do you know what is "the rule" if the research hasn't been done?
I submit the the "rule" is that most low time jumpers with small canopies get on just fine, and that the injuries and fatalities are the exception. Yes, I HAVE read the fatality reports. One thing that jumps out at me is that jumpers of all experience levels and all canopy types and sizes are represented among the landing fatalities, with no one group prominent.
With regards to a WL BSR proposal, why not be more positive? Instead of trying to tear everyone else down, which it appears you are just doing for sport, and do some research? Come up with solutions. Put YOUR ideas out there to stepped on and hammered into nothing.
I/we do not have to get past you or prove anything to you. You are not the self appointed "BSR-reviewer".
You want a study? Too bad. You aren't going to get one. At the last FAR NPRM, the USPA was against mandatory incident reporting, so the stastics just don't exist. I'm sure there will be pilot program and if the whole idea is bad, it'll be discovered and dropped then with little harm done.
You don't think time and experience count for anything? I'll arrange for my old VX-60 to get shipped out to you for you to jump. You shouldn't have a problem, if time and experience don't matter.
We are trying to make things better and you want to play debate games. In the meantime, people are getting seriouslt injured and killed needlessly. Just like pilots, canopy pilots need time and experience before downsizing. They need training and instruction before jumping smaller, faster canopies. Otherwise the risk factor is simply too large and people get hurt too easily. You can link disctionaries and argument web sites all you want, but that doesn't change the truth. The truth is caqnopies have evolved, but jumpers haven't.
No BSR is perfect. This one allows for it's failings with the test-out option. If the jumper can exceeed the BSR, they will be allowed to.
If you don't think their is a problem, I'm sorry. When someone with a lot more experience on a subject than me tells me something. I listen. I didn't always and have some bad experiences to show for it.
If you still won't listen, then I don't want to listen to you say the same things over and over again anymore. Stop 'helping', because you aren't helping.
I;m sorry for the rant, I'm just sick and tired you your games. Some people are trying to make things better and you don't give a damn.
Derek
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites