Canopy loading restrictions take 3

[rhino 0]

Quote

by people flying smaller, faster, canopies that they couldn't control.

It is called toggles They allow you to control the direction the canopy flies

Quote

Accountability to the dead guy you just ran over is great. I'm sure he'll appreciate it

IT is the pilots fault again.. Not the wing loading...

Rhino

[freeflyz 0]

Dumb people will make dumb decisions. We, as a society still TRY to protect them from themselves - even if it doesn't always work. Making rules about someones actions is all you CAN do.


That is all you can do is Try to help the helpless...It's a losing battle. and truly it's a waste of time. It's a waste of time trying to tell 200-400 jump wonders of the world jumping canopys that are to small for them...But remember they always know more than you!!!!

[skycat 0]

Quote

Quote

Skycat,

First, remember these are recomendations.

remember recomendations need to encompass everyone

Quote

***Underloading can be a problem also. In your recomendation, until I have 500 jumps I wouldn't be able to jump a canopy at 1:1. That leave me at a huge disadvantage when it comes to learning how to fly a canopy.

So you're telling me you need to fly something small to learn canopies? I'm sorry but I have to totally disagree with you here. The only thing you gain from smaller canopies is more speed and less room for error, so it's learn or get hurt. Well, to me, that's like saying to a 16 year old here's a mustang 5.0 if you're still alive in 2 years you've learn't everything ok.


No a 150 is not a small canopy and in no way can be compared to a mustang at .8 and the difference between a 170 at .7 and a 150 at .8, can barely be felt other than the fact that you have options. Have you ever pulled the rear risers down on a canopy at that light of a loading, in an emergency situation? It is extremely hard, I was able to do pull ups on my rear and my front risers of my sabre 150. I'm not talking about high speeds swoops, I'm talking about avoiding traffic after opening, I'm talking about having options when the winds picked to 18.

Quote

My wife (130 out the door) spent her first 165 jumps on a 170. She jumped in almost all conditions that I did (I had a 120 at the time) and didn't go backwards, and I see plenty of lighter and smaller people do it all the time. Unless you were jumping some ragged out PD there's no way you should be going backwards in 15 mph winds (maybe not too fast forwards, but enough).

Ask anyone I jumped with, I didn't jump in winds over 15 even though students were going up because the DZ was waivered to 18. I backed up or came strait down all the time on my sabre 150. At the time I actually was 95 lbs with clothes on so I was probably 115 out the door, and I hated flying my canopy. I would pull, and then wish I was on the ground, cause all I could do was point my canopy at the DZ and pray, because without being able to use the front risers at all and the back risers very little. Your only option is sit in brakes which in my case killed all the forward speed and I just sank strait down.

Quote

The wind argument is one I hear often and my response is almost always this...if it's so windy that you're going backwards, maybe you shouldn't be jumping anyway? I can't tell you the number of times junior jumpers have gone up while the more experienced (not necessarily jumps, but time in the sport) sit on the ground recomending not to go up and wait for the winds to come down or get less squirrly.

well trust me I was the 1st one grounded and the last one back in the air even after the students. (I grounded myself btw) My wind limit was 14 on my 150 and 18 on my 135, I didn't even try winds around 20 until I was on my 120.

Quote

***B-C) 120 WL - 1

I've seen enough light people break themselves to know that the above isn't a good idea.


As in light people you mean small girls. Well I know why small girls tend to get themselves in to trouble. Here is a quote I posted in the women's forum about a long talk Derek and I had about girls and why they seem to be behind the canopy curve

Quote

Ok, as girls we tend to be smaller than our male counterparts, but we are flying the same sized canopies. Case in point at the time I was a student I was 115-120 out the door on a very old (lots of jumps) Manta 215. As a student I had 4 spring loaded pilot chute over the nose "malfunctions", due to the fact that I wasn't heavy enough to get the canopy to open normally. This cause 4 PLF landings, on top of the PLFs due to me backing up under canopy cause if the winds were over 8 I was not getting any forward drive. Out of 10 jumps I had 1 stand up landing, and more gear fear than I knew what to do with. I was lucky though, the DZ knew it was unsafe for me to be under that canopy and rig (slipped off my shoulders in freefall twice) and let me jump my own gear as soon as it arrived. Unfortuneately no one explained how to fly a ZP canopy, all I got was it's a 2 stage flare, just do a bunch of practice flares. That was it, so for 175 jumps I did a "2 stage flare" and never really learned how to fly. Since I wasn't learning to swoop no one wanted to seem to help.

Then I started dating Derek, who is a very good canopy coach, who explained how everything worked, how to feel the canopy fly what to do up high to really learn it. He helped me work past alot of those mental canopy issues, which I will admit still sneak in on some jumps especially if I'm hypoxic. I'm lucky, I have someone who is willing to teach me, but I see it over and over again where the girls get passed over for canopy instruction just cause they don't have plans to start swooping, or cause "They are under a huge canopy, I'll teach them when they get under something smaller".

I will say alot of DZs are taking steps in the right direction with having rigs that are smaller for the smaller jumpers. Man if I could have learned on a 170 then as a student still been able to go to a 150 with proper instruction my canopy progression would have been alot less stressful.

***
Just remember we're trying to come up with recomendations, so if the S&TA feels you can handle your 104 - fine, but the recomendations have to be written for the averages, not the exceptions.

For the record I'd rather see education be effective that any sort of regulation/recomendation.....unfortunately it seems most of us (and myself included in my earlier years) are incapable of that as we think of ourselves as indestructable and "it'll never happen to us"....well....it does.

Blue skies
Ian

Exactly make recommendations that really do take smaller jumpers into account, not using your wife as the model either. Remember that there are even smaller people than her out there. This then comes back to training, and attitudes that need to change. Rather than running out to the landing area to watch the girls crash in how about giving them real advice or sitting down with them explaining the aerodynamics of canopy flight and canopy drill they can do. Offer then the same thing you offer the guys.

I'm all for a BSR, heck I want people to have to test to continue jumping what they are jumping, no grandfathering, prove you really can handle what you got. Heck, I'm prepared to prove I can fly what I got. I know it won't happen, but if we are going to have recommendations, I want realistic ones for everyone.

Fly it like you stole it!

[Zenister 0]

Quote

It's all about how much damage is OK on the way there.

which is exactly what we have not defined.

how many significant yet another definition we need, but i'd start with 'required trained medical attention' incidents do we have?

Out of how many total possible occurances?

personally its kind of appalling that we support a legal system where reporting simple facts such as this that would allow you to make informed decisions about safety can potential cause enough legal and finacial ramifications that it is not done...

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

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Truth is, numbers do equate to experience but not necessarily knowledge. Hang around and you'll see the changes that occur due to deaths.

really? or do the 'changes' occur with age and responsibility?

which are not the same things..... younger people with less obligations and less experience are more likely to accept higher risks, often but not always, with less knowledge than older individuals. ?

while every death is certainly unfortunate, is this really something that we should be regulating? too much?

why?

[sarcasm]is the human population not growing fast enough?[sarcasm] if you truly care about anyone you think is taking far to much risk in any fashion, personally speak to them about it.....

Quote

Death is black or white.

as is skydiving, one of the things that seperates it from the "everyday, average life" as lived by the majority of the human race.
do you as skydivers not realize that there are things that make you different from the 'mass' of humanity?

get in the plane or do not.
get out of the plane or do not.
pull or do not.

live or die, and all of the tiny decisions (including wingloading) that affect that every moment of every day.

the choice is all up to you.

how much of that do you want taken away?
or decided by others who dont even know your name?

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

That has NOTHING to do with the wingloading and EVERYTHING to do with the canopy pilots judgement.

And the canopy pilot does not have the experience to know better...So someone must show them. Problem is there is not enough education out there, and young hot shots don't listen.

Quote

It is the pilots job to do the research and know the ins and outs of what he is flying.

And they are not doing this...as evidenced by the fact they are killing themselves.

Quote

I do not support wingloading regulations. I think if joe 200 jump wonder wants to fly at 1.7 then let him.
But limits the maneuvers he is allowed to perform under the loading.

SO you want to regulate the manuvers, but not wingloading...Its still regulation.

Quote

Make him do 50 jumps in double fronts if he wants to start swooping. Then make him do another 50
90degree carves. Then another 50 120-180 degree carves. Then the snap hook if he is ready. Make a
canopy coach sign off on those maneuvers as they are observed. This has a closer chance of working than
wingloading regulations.

So again...The sign off is regulation..You can't do this, till you do that. Same thing buddy. But I want WL regulated. And if you are skilled enoogh you can jump whatevre you want.

Quote

Make a canopy pilot try and learn to swoop on a canopy with a short recovery arc and fatalities will rise. I
would bet my rig on it.

Many people learned to swoop on Stilettos...Like me. This is BS.

Quote

I put these regulations on myself because I knew it was the smart thing to do. It was my decision to jump
on a higher performance wing. I did my homework. I was VERY VERY cautious. If someone jumps on a hp
wing without self regulating themselves then they are going to bounce and learn the hard way. Hopefully
they live and learn.

Using this logic we shoud get rid of the Pull altitude BSR's, and any BSR's for students...If they are smart enough to find a good place they will survive...If they just want to put on a rig and jump, we should let them. They will either learn or die...Again BS.

Quote

Stop trying to blame lack of blanket regulations concerning wing loading for the deaths and injuries and
start blaming the canopy pilots themselves.

Never blamed the lack of reguations...I blamed the lack of education, and the ability of young "Jonny hotshot" to get what ever he wants with any experience or skill to handle it. And no supervision from the DZO's S&TA's ect....

Quote

Quit yer bitchin.

Nope I owe it as guy with 10 years and 3,000 jumps to look after the people below me...Just like the ones above me look out for me now, and just like the ones that looked out for me then.

And FWIW...I have 7.5 times the EXPERIENCE you do, and I have jumped as small as the Extreme 69......So maybe I know more?

If a guy with 22,500 jumps started saying things to me I'd listen...Hell I listen to EVERYONE. MAybe thats one reason I have been around so long?

Ron

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

You hit the point as the only person who can "ground" you is the DZO. An S&TA can tell you all day long your grounded and unless the DZO says "yes you are grounded", nothing will happen.

I don't know about where you jump. But if the S&TA at CK says you're grounded, you're not getting on the plane. What's this crap about authority? We're talking about private businesses here. I would hope that DZO are hiring S&TAs that they can rely on and would back their decision. All he has to do is walk up to manifest and say "he's grounded" and you're not getting on any more loads. You can sit there and scream "he doesn't have the official authority to ground me" until you're blue in the face, but you're still not getting on a plane.

You're missing the point . They don't need authority through USPA or FAA.

For that matter the same would probably hold true for most instructors or coaches. If any of them went up to manifest and said someone was being unsafe, don't let them get on a load, you're not going to get on.

[okalb 104]

What you fail to understand since you have not been around long enough is that time in the sport and jump numbers mean a hell of a lot. They may not mean that you are a great skydiver or canopy pilot, but they mean you have been around and seen the mistakes.

When you are 16 and get your driver's license, you are told that the person making X turn in Y situation has the right of way. Once you have been driving for years you learn from experience that even though you have the right of way on paper, you never know what the other driver is going to do. You have to look at them and feel what the are going to do. If you can't figure it out you let them go first. That is something that only driving for years will teach you. You can't teach that in school. Once again, it comes from EXPERIENCE.

You and several others in this discussion have shown a complete disregard for the experience of others and a complete lack of respect for your "elders" in the sport. It is just that attitude that is pushing us to the point where a BSR to regulate canopy wingloading is necessary. If more of the lowtime jumpers would listen to the experienced ones, this whole thing would be a non issue.

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I don't know about where you jump. But if the S&TA at CK says you're grounded, you're not getting on the plane. What's this crap about authority? We're talking about private businesses here. I would hope that DZO are hiring S&TAs that they can rely on and would back their decision. All he has to do is walk up to manifest and say "he's grounded" and you're not getting on any more loads. You can sit there and scream "he doesn't have the official authority to ground me" until you're blue in the face, but you're still not getting on a plane.

You're missing the point . They don't need authority through USPA or FAA.

As an S & TA, I attempted to ground someone for pulling at 600 feet-ish. The DZO, said, get packed, you are the next load. There was nothing I could do. S & TA's are appointed, unpaid volunteers with no real authority. They can be overridden by the DZO, who really has all the authority. And what happens when the DZO is the S & TA? From what I have seen, DZO's want S &TA's appointed that will do what they are told. Grounding someone affects the DZ's bottom line. Some DZO's won't ground someone, cutting income and the S & TA is powerless.

Hook

[PhillyKev 0]

Yes, the DZO has to rely on the S&TA for them to have any kind of ability to ground someone, but if the DZO ignores the S&TA, and cares more about getting another $17, then I don't want to jump there.

[sducoach 0]

My name is J.E. Van Natta from Ozark Missouri. That solves that problem, now you know my name and who I am.

Quote

Truth is, numbers do equate to experience but not necessarily knowledge. Hang around and you'll see the changes that occur due to deaths.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


really? or do the 'changes' occur with age and responsibility?

which are not the same things..... younger people with less obligations and less experience are more likely to accept higher risks, often but not always, with less knowledge than older individuals. ?

while every death is certainly unfortunate, is this really something that we should be regulating? too much?

why?
***

[sarcasm]is the human population not growing fast enough?[sarcasm] if you truly care about anyone you think is taking far to much risk in any fashion, personally speak to them about it

Quote

No sarcasm.

Yes really. Don't know you, how long you've been around, or what your experience/knowledge level is but, assuming you are experienced and knowledgeable, check history. Be is skydiving, aviation, space exploration, developing/manufacturing the automobile, or riding horses, deaths occur. Do you ignore the cause and effect and gain knowledge or do you just chalk it off as experience and hope you don't "experience" the same thing?

"Those who choose to ignore, re-write, or fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."


***
while every death is certainly unfortunate, is this really something that we should be regulating? too much?

why?

No, death is not unfortunate nor is is avoidable, it's a fact. The fatality rate is 100% here on this earth, get ready, it's coming. However, if you choose to advance your time line, let me get out of your way. (not that is sarcasm!)

There is no regulating skydivers other than through the DZO's. As stated this is all a waste of time unless "someone" other than DZO's are given the authority to "regulate". And I'm sure that's going to happen............

Quote

Death is black or white.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


as is skydiving, one of the things that seperates it from the "everyday, average life" as lived by the majority of the human race.
do you as skydivers not realize that there are things that make you different from the 'mass' of humanity?

Score one for you, you got it! Death is black or white.
However, funny thing about us skydivers, we believe we are so much more "different" or "special" than anyone else. Talk to aerobatic pilots, scuba divers, rock climbers, cliff divers, base jumpers, etc., etc. and they will all tell you the same thing. We love this sport for the same basic reasons they all love theirs. The commonality among the participants as much as the sport itself.

And one last thing................

Quote

younger people with less obligations and less experience are more likely to accept higher risks, often but not always, with less knowledge than older individuals. ?

Prove it. I'm 50 years old. Own three cars, four rigs (two squares and two rounds), a rigging loft, a house, have two kids in college, go to Church on Sundays
Ooops......... I'm a skydiver???????

Love ya brother.......

Blues,

J.E.

P.S.
You got any money, steady job, own a home, drive a car, good looking...........................?
One of my daughters is in school in Phoenix.
No, never mind.............. no skydivers for my daughters, you know how they are..............................

James 4:8

[mikkey 0]

Quote

What you fail to understand since you have not been around long enough is that time in the sport and jump numbers mean a hell of a lot. They may not mean that you are a great skydiver or canopy pilot, but they mean you have been around and seen the mistakes.

.....................

You and several others in this discussion have shown a complete disregard for the experience of others and a complete lack of respect for your "elders" in the sport. It is just that attitude that is pushing us to the point where a BSR to regulate canopy wingloading is necessary. If more of the lowtime jumpers would listen to the experienced ones, this whole thing would be a non issue.

I also noticed that some of the very vocal opponents of any regulations have 100-300 jumps and are very dismissive of what very experienced jumpers have to say.
On the other hand, just because somebody has not thousands of jumps does not mean they do not have the right to an opinion and have valid points (and not all guys with thousands of jumps are always right). Key is that everybody should respect the others opinion and be open-minded. Do we want to have a pissing contest or do we want to find a way forward?

I do not have huge amount of jumps, but I have been involved in the sport on and off for 25 years. What upsets me is that the equipment is so much better and potentially safer then it was it the 70's and at the same time it allows for more "fun" in the sky. I think these canopy fatalities and injuries are mostly "unnecessary" because they can be avoided by better training and more controlled progression. I jump because it’s fun and not because it is dangerous. I do not like skydivers who are primarily motivated by danger and risk. Yes there is a risk and I like the idea of being responsible for my own safety to a large degree. But the equipment and technology we use today has potentially lowered this risk and that should be a good thing. 25-30 years ago you could be killed much easier even if you did not fuck up. Container and harness systems, deployment systems, cut away systems, clothing, helmet design, main and reserve design, etc. etc. "aides" like dytter and cypres, as well as better understanding of aerodynamics that has led to better training methods - all this has made it more safe and more fun. So it really pisses me off to see people getting injured or killed under perfectly good canopies. I do not understand why some people think that danger and "Darwin" are good for the sport. What's fun about scraping people off the ground? I rather have a few beers with them after a fun day of jumping.

The canopy control issue is the greatest challenge for the sport and I think the discussions here on dz.com are very useful. I just hope everybody agrees that the purpose has to be to minimize the number of accidents. I just stood last Sunday at my DZ and watched a widow, her son and some close friends standing at sunset on the spot where a very nice bloke got killed in a hookturn exactly 6 month ago. I then went home and read dz.com and got extremely annoyed when reading comments like "hey its dangerous, that’s why its fun, - let Darwin rule - freedom is more important then safety etc. etc."
Maybe some of the more "heated" discussions about Canopy restrictions are based on the difference in "reason" why people jump or what they enjoy in the sport. I want as much safety as possible, others might want maximum "thrill".
Anyway, I think the discussions in the S&T forum are very useful, however it would be nice if some people would show each other a little more respect.
Apologies for the ranting, just felt like it.....

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I also noticed that some of the very vocal opponents of any regulations have 100-300 jumps and are very dismissive of what very experienced jumpers have to say.

I tend to think that someones opinion on the matter isn't valid until they've seen and heard the sound of someone cratering. The sound in particular, has stayed with me ever since...

I'm amazed that people are arguing even the existance of the problem. It seems that's the one thing that should be given. I would be more content if people were to argue about different solutions, rather then if there even is a problem. That should be given.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

No a 150 is not a small canopy and in no way can be compared to a mustang at .8

It's small, but certainly not tiny, and most jumpers do not weigh less than 150 pounds out the door. In fact I'd bet it's more like 170-190 out the door but I have no data to back that up, it's more of an observation.

Quote

was able to do pull ups on my rear and my front risers of my sabre 150.

Odd, out of the light people I know, they typically only have trouble with front risers and thats normally from a full speed approach (So I teach them to use their brakes and then risers). I know NO-ONE that hasn't had the strength to pull down a rear riser on a lightly loaded canopy, but that's just me, I'm not saying your case isn't true...just once again the exception.

Quote

Ask anyone I jumped with, I didn't jump in winds over 15 even though students were going up because the DZ was waivered to 18. I backed up or came strait down all the time on my sabre 150. At the time I actually was 95 lbs with clothes on so I was probably 115 out the door, and I hated flying my canopy. I would pull, and then wish I was on the ground, cause all I could do was point my canopy at the DZ and pray, because without being able to use the front risers at all and the back risers very little. Your only option is sit in brakes which in my case killed all the forward speed and I just sank strait down.

According to Scott Miller further distance can be achieved using brakes (With the wind behind you than risers). Of course flying into the wind you wouldn't want to be using brakes at all, which would explain why you weren't getting any peneration.

Quote

well trust me I was the 1st one grounded and the last one back in the air even after the students. (I grounded myself btw) My wind limit was 14 on my 150 and 18 on my 135, I didn't even try winds around 20 until I was on my 120.

Thats cool and pretty responsible, but remember the reason we're discussing these things is because a number of us have proved we're not capable of thinking as rationally and carefully as you demonstrated.

Quote

Man if I could have learned on a 170 then as a student still been able to go to a 150 with proper instruction my canopy progression would have been alot less stressful.

That fits in quite nicely with my recomendations. Remember the biggest canopy I had on my list was a 170.

Quote

Exactly make recommendations that really do take smaller jumpers into account, not using your wife as the model either. Remember that there are even smaller people than her out there.

Yes but like I said we have to use averages, and even she is below the weight average. I used her as a demonstration that small people can do just fine and learn under a bigger canopy. She is by no means my benchmark.

Quote

This then comes back to training, and attitudes that need to change. Rather than running out to the landing area to watch the girls crash in how about giving them real advice or sitting down with them explaining the aerodynamics of canopy flight and canopy drill they can do. Offer then the same thing you offer the guys

I do, I have yet so see gender play a part in my helping people. Of course this cannot always be said for everyone, but I see plenty of girls getting help that guys aren't simply because the local hotshot is interested in them. My point is that besides the physical traits, I'd like to think that gender is irrelevant when it comes to helping each other out. at least for most of us.

Quote

I know it won't happen, but if we are going to have recommendations, I want realistic ones for everyone.

Unfortunately you are right here, but thats because there are simply too many dynamics to roll us all into one category. Instead we have to do our best to find out what the norms and averages are.

Thanks for the thoughtful post, maybe one day we'll get to discuss these things in person. I find that text doesn't always do an argument justice.

Until then,
Blue skies
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[Ron 10]

Quote

I tend to think that someones opinion on the matter isn't valid until they've seen and heard the sound of
someone cratering. The sound in particular, has stayed with me ever since...

Yep and the sight.

I think people should be in the sport long enough to change a set of CYPRES battery's before they even start to think they know more than anyone else.

Ron

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[FliegendeWolf 0]

Quote

I tend to think that someones opinion on the matter isn't valid until they've seen and heard the sound of someone cratering.

What if one's opinion is that they never wish to hear such a sound?

A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

What if one's opinion is that they never wish to hear such a sound?

One might want to consider bowling or golf. Stick around long enough and you will be witness to one of your buddies using Mother Earth as a trampoline. I don't think you can fully appreciate the consequences of the poor choices we make until you've been witness to this horrible sight.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I think people should be in the sport long enough to change a set of CYPRES battery's before they even start to think they know more than anyone else.

You guys are getting off of the topic here. It's obvious that many people would like to see something done in terms of educating people in the dangers of flying a canopy they may not be ready for. And that is what we really should be talking about. But instead, this thread is turning into a I know more than you know thread. Sure someone with several hundred jumps will have a certain experience that someone with 100 jumps won't have. Just as someone with several thousand jumps will have more experience than someone with only a few hundred jumps. But to say things like "you need to see someone bounce before you can have an opinion" or "you need to be in the sport long enough to change your cypres batteries before you can have an opinion" is not helping here. There are things which are said here which are sometimes ignored by myself just as there are things which are said which cause me to sit up and take notice of as good information. I know reading and participating in these threads have caused myself to seek canopy control instruction and I'd like to believe that my current skills are better because of this (and I have recent video proof that my skills are coming along).

In fact there is a certain person on these threads who's trying to sell one of his canopies which I would love to have (and it's quite possible that I could safely fly it now). But another person I respect has recently told me that while he thought I was ready for this type of canopy, he warned me not to downsize too much all at once. So I wrote the first person and told them that I would regrettably have to pass on their canopy (even though buying the same canopy in a larger size will cost me more $$$). So it's threads like this that are making a difference in my own personal opinions. But it still annoys me when some people claim that we 'x' number jump wonders (an incredible insulting term I might add) don't know squat and that we need to witness accidents or that we need to wait for our first cypres battery service before we are allowed to have an opinion. Come on people. Keep to the topic of canopy control education with possible BSR changes and/or recommendations and let's keep our egos in check. I respect the opinion of the more experienced person when they are trying to educate me. But as soon as they start trying to preach to me, I become disinterested.

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

[craddock 0]

Quote

Yep and the sight.

I think people should be in the sport long enough to change a set of CYPRES battery's before they even start to think they know more than anyone else.

Well I have never had the pleasure of changing CYPRES battery's yet Ron. I am not a rigger anyway.
I have however witnessed in less than 12 months three fatalites in which I had watched the entire approach from ~500 ft and was at very close range to the impact. All with almost identical angles of impact and all ended up in the pond. One was a real good friend of mine. I have to live with the fact that I could have prevented that one or at least did a better job of trying. I have been on scene trying to save someone. There are others where I was present but did not witness, the latest being the loss of our friend at SDC.

Ron, does this count for anything. Do you think I should be "allowed" to debate this issue. You not only challenge anyone who questions you, but you shut down them down and label them as being opposed to you. You need to keep an open mind Ron. I questioned a few points and you defensivaly assumed I was fighting your proposal. I do feel there are many flaws in your logic but I do not want to get into a pissing match with you anymore. You cut and paste and then imply context to others words. You also claim people (or at least me) say something they didn't say. When questioned about it, you again cut and paste and try to explain that XXXX means XXX. I do not understand why you are so defensive.

Just because I have questions on something you say, does Not mean I think I know more than anyone else. It may indicate that I try and keep an open mind and can debate all points relevant from both sides before making a conclusion.

Josh

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

[rhino 0]

Ron it is all good.. I know people with twice your jump numbers that still don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

Quote

And the canopy pilot does not have the experience to know better...So someone must show them.

The pilot must seek out someone to show them. It isn't your job to show some jack ass how to fly his canopy. If he really wants to learn and keep from killing himself IT IS HIS JOB TO DO THE RESEARCH not yours. You want to help him, fin.. Ultimitely it is his responsibility.

Quote

And they are not doing this

Some are and some aren't. The ones that aren't might learn the hard way.

Quote

Many people learned to swoop on Stilettos...Like me. This is BS.

That's fine. I was thinking more of a Triathlon or a Sabre. Not swooping canopies. I follow Derek's train of thought on this one.

Quote

Using this logic we shoud get rid of the Pull altitude BSR's, and any BSR's for students...If they are smart enough to find a good place they will survive...If they just want to put on a rig and jump, we should let them. They will either learn or die...Again BS.

It isn't YOUR choice to let them or not to let them. The monkey is on the jumpers back. What are you the skydiving police?

Quote

Nope I owe it as guy with 10 years and 3,000 jumps to look after the people below me...Just like the ones above me look out for me now, and just like the ones that looked out for me then.

This I agree with. But the responsibility doesn't belong solely to you. It is more if not entirely on the pilot. I completely agree that we should allways be looking out for all skydivers regardless of numbers.

Quote

And FWIW...I have 7.5 times the EXPERIENCE you do, and I have jumped as small as the Extreme 69......So maybe I know more?

I never claimed to know more than anyone. Here you are trying to make it personal. Your opinion is yours and you are entitled to it just the same.

By the time any Johnnyhotshot canopy pilot gets under an hp wing he knows the risks involved. And unless you are a psychic you don't really know if he is a hotshot or a good canopy pilot in training trying to improve himself.

Rhino

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

We're talking about private businesses here. I would hope that DZO are hiring S&TAs that they can rely on and would back their decision. All he has to do is walk up to manifest and say "he's grounded" and you're not getting on any more loads.

I agree with this completely. While a wingloading BSR might help to get the ball rolling, it will ultimately be up to each DZ to do what they can to keep people from hurting themselves or others. The main point being that these are private businesses and they have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason they see fit.

The one thing I have learned from reading this discussion is that I need to be more vocal at my DZ. If I see someone who I think is putting themselves or anyone else in danger, I will now talk to the DZO or S&TA and let them decide if anything needs to be done. (and of course I don't mean running to them with every little issue, but anything that appears to be a major issue)

[Ron 10]

Quote

"you need to be in the sport long enough to change your cypres batteries before you
can have an opinion"

Thats not what I wrote....

Quote

I think people should be in the sport long enough to change a set of CYPRES battery's before they
even start to think they know more than anyone else.

BIG difference between having an opinion, and thinking you know it all.

Ron

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

You cut and paste and then imply context to others words. You also claim people
(or at least me) say something they didn't say

Ya mean just like this

Quote

I think people should be in the sport long enough to change a set of CYPRES battery's before they
even start to think they know more than anyone else.

Now where did I saw you are not allowed to have an opinion?
I said before they
even start to think they know more than anyone else.

Where does that say you are not allowed to have an opinion?

It is saying that some people need to understand that unless you have been in the sport for a while...you don't know all there is to know. I don't know all there is to know. How is a guy with 300 jumps going to? I guess I could be stupid (Which is possible). But I think it might be more an issue of some people thinking they know more than they do.

If a guy that just finished the FJC comes up to you and starts telling you you are wrong....Is he allowed to have an opinion? Yes he is...Does he have a clue? Maybe not.


Like I said...try READING waht I wrote, insted of reading what you thought it said.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

Ron it is all good.. I know people with twice your jump numbers that still don't know their ass from a hole in
the ground.

But I know more with 300 jumps that don't have a clue than 6,000.

Quote

ME:Using this logic we shoud get rid of the Pull altitude BSR's, and any BSR's for students...If they are smart enough to find a good place they will survive...If they just want to put on a rig and jump, we should let them. They will either learn or die...Again BS.

You: It isn't YOUR choice to let them or not to let them. The monkey is on the jumpers back. What are you the skydiving police?

Then you say

Quote

ME: Nope I owe it as guy with 10 years and 3,000 jumps to look after the people below me...Just like the ones above me look out for me now, and just like the ones that looked out for me then.



You: This I agree with. But the responsibility doesn't belong solely to you. It is more if not entirely on the pilot. I completely agree that we should allways be looking out for all skydivers regardless of numbers.

So which is it? Do I look after the people that don't know enough to know they are doing something stupid? Or do I not?

Quote

By the time any Johnnyhotshot canopy pilot gets under an hp wing he knows the risks involved. And unless
you are a psychic you don't really know if he is a hotshot or a good canopy pilot in training trying to improve himself

Or, they might THINK they know what could happen. And of course it will not happen to him, he is too skilled.

And I don't have to be psychic to see the same story over and over again...Its like watching a movie...I know the people, and I know the plot. So when the ending comes again, it never surprizes me.

Can't he be a hotshot, and a guy trying to improve himself?

Maybe the guy trying to improve himself IS the hotshot?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[craddock 0]

Quote

Ya mean just like this
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I think people should be in the sport long enough to change a set of CYPRES battery's before they
even start to think they know more than anyone else.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now where did I saw you are not allowed to have an opinion?
I said before they
even start to think they know more than anyone else.

Yes Ron, just like that.

Quote

Where does that say you are not allowed to have an opinion?

???? Are you responding to my post or trying to illustrate my point for me? Not sure if I even used the word opinion much less in that context. I was just trying to question yours.

Quote

Like I said...try READING waht I wrote, insted of reading what you thought it said.

Funny YOU should say this. You have done this even in that post

Josh

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.