Dealing with the "Crossbrace at 300 jumps" crowd.

[Bolas 5]

-Joey-

Plain restricting someone is the worst idea ever - they are just going to go to another DZ and pound in there and so nothing has been accomplished (I'm assuming nobody here is enough of a douchebag to say "I don't care if they die, I just don't want it to be at my DZ.") They are going to do it anyway, so it's better they learn how to do it correctly and responsibly than to be shunned and end up pounding in.

I guess I'm a douchebag as I see NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) as an option, particularly for smaller DZs that may not have the people to properly teach advanced canopy flight, but would prefer it phrased as "If they get hurt/die it won't be at my DZ."

I've also been a douche and not sold a Stiletto to a guy with low jump numbers even though I was told "If you don't sell it to him, he'll just buy it from someone else." He probably did and I still have the canopy.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

They are going to do it anyway, so it's better they learn how to do it correctly and responsibly than to be shunned and end up pounding in.

Flying high performance canopies 'correctly and responsibly' involves waiting until you have sufficient jumps and training to do so such that senior jumpers/swoopers do not disapprove of your choices. 'Doing it anyway' in spite of such disapproval is not doing it 'correctly and responsibly', and no amount of training from me is going to change the fact that you're in over your head.

Your argument amounts to blackmail. 'I'm going to do it no matter what, so if you want me to be safe you need to teach me'. That's bullshit because your bad choice does not amount to forcing me to make a bad choice (teaching a newbie to swoop).

I've mentioned this before, but why would I teach someone who didn't listen to the first, most important piece of advice I gave them? If I tell you that you don't have the jumps/training for the canopy your jumping or what you're doing with it, and you disregard that, what's going to happen when I'm training you and I tell you're not ready for another downsize or a bigger turn? Should I expect you to magically start listening then?

[ChrisD 0]

I kind of like the ski patrol answere to this issue. You can't stop certian people from making bad decisions, an individual heads for a Black Dimond trail wanting to show off, and then we have to come and get them,...


Getting an individual to stay within their experience level is a difficult thing to do. All you can do is harp like a peacock perhaps some might listen.

But untill any individual is motivated by intrinsic V extrinsic thoughts there is little you can do. Some people like to show off, the fact that they die, well who gives a shit anyways, they are going to show off regardless of their skills, that's part of the extrinsic motivation for showing off in the first place, whether it be here in words or on some feild somewhere. The fact that this behavior affects the rest of us, well your just wasting your breath, they really don't give a shit about you or anyone else anyways!

Darwin takes care of some of these people, a hand slipping of a toggle at 20 feet takes care of a few,...


I guess it's the argument about what an incident does to the skydiving scene as a whole, in addition to making headlines, and the constant bad press, which does have consequences for your local DZ. The public opinion really does have a negative stigma that persists and just makes it all the more difficult each and every year. Brian Germain talks about this in some of his books. I think he points out the irresponsible ones and the consequences to the rest of us.

Peer pressure and spotlighting the errant behaivior is a valid and great suggestion, but then we have so many that just look the other way! And do nothing.

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[Deisel 38]

Sorry boss. There is a damn good reason that pilots have to have x amount of ass in the seat HOURS, in order to do y. There is no exception for mad skilzs and advanced progression for so called quick learners. As soon as you figure out how to speed up getting experience, then I'd be willing to listen. Until then, I say keep jumping and learning. And as mentioned already, the opinion/desires of the individual take a back seat to safety.

D

The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all.

[ChrisHoward 8]

NWFlyer

Time in sport. Time under a wing. Time to get to the point where you react instinctively when the shit hits the fan, and your instinct is right 99.9% the time.

+1
There is no substitute for Airtime. Sure check lists are a great way to assess your current skill level. But there is no substitute for Airtime.
I have also noticed that when you place set numbers or checklists on something you will end up with people rushing to get "X" amount of jumps completed so that they can then take a step forward. Almost to the point of it being counterproductive due to the fact that they are so focused on the numbers game that they are blinded to any other experiences along the way. Case and point would be new jumpers rushing to get 250 jumps in so they can take a BASE course and then being woefully un-prepared because they skipped out on every other avenue of learning in the pursuit of a magical log book number.

NWFlyer

Time to get to the point where you don't let the shit hit the fan because you can see the big picture so well that you stay out of the corner in the first place (proverbial or otherwise).

This is what you should be striving for. Being pre-emptive is the only safe way forward. Being able to recognize/avoid the dangers before they become a danger. Sure you need instincts and good reactions as they will eventually save your ass. But any time you need to resort to reactions proves that you were just caught un-awares ie. you failed to recognize the danger early enough to avoid it pre-emptively.

[-Joey- 0]

Bolas

***Plain restricting someone is the worst idea ever - they are just going to go to another DZ and pound in there and so nothing has been accomplished (I'm assuming nobody here is enough of a douchebag to say "I don't care if they die, I just don't want it to be at my DZ.") They are going to do it anyway, so it's better they learn how to do it correctly and responsibly than to be shunned and end up pounding in.

I guess I'm a douchebag as I see NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) as an option, particularly for smaller DZs that may not have the people to properly teach advanced canopy flight, but would prefer it phrased as "If they get hurt/die it won't be at my DZ."

I've also been a douche and not sold a Stiletto to a guy with low jump numbers even though I was told "If you don't sell it to him, he'll just buy it from someone else." He probably did and I still have the canopy. I'm talking more about giving advice. If a newbie asks something like "when during a swoop should I get off my fronts" it will be worse for them to go into it not knowing than having proper instruction, whether they should even be swooping or not. Just saying "I'm never telling, now go to another DZ" is just increasing the likelihood of a fatality.

Skydiving is serious business

[davelepka 4]

Quote

If a newbie asks something like "when during a swoop should I get off my fronts" it will be worse for them to go into it not knowing than having proper instruction, whether they should even be swooping or not.

If they should not be swooping, the proper instruction is to tell them not to swoop. Enabling them to swoop is not helping them in any way.

Quote

Just saying "I'm never telling, now go to another DZ" is just increasing the likelihood of a fatality.

Once again, a jumper who is unwilling to listen when told they shouldn't be swooping is a fatality waiting to happen no matter where they are. Nobody would ever tell someone to go to another DZ, they would tell them not to come to their DZ if they are going to engage in dangerous behavior. What that jumper does when they pull out of the parking lot is their business.

You seem to be making the mistake that you have a 'right' to do whatever you want, and that the best case scenario is that people should help to do whatever that may be. That is incorrect. You have a right to do whatever the management at a given DZ allows you to do, end of story.

[DocPop 1]

davelepka

If they should not be swooping, the proper instruction is to tell them not to swoop. Enabling them to swoop is not helping them in any way.

But this approach is not working.

I believe there is plenty these guys can be instructed to work on before throwing a 270 (see above). Just telling someone no and waking away is it helping. If you do that I believe you forfeit the right to tut-tut when they go ahead and try to make their own learning path.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[ChrisHoward 8]

DocPop

I believe there is plenty these guys can be instructed to work on before throwing a 270 (see above).

I see what it is you are trying to say but in the real world that generally isn't the way it works. Usually the newbie jumper that is insistent on doing 270s will become un-receptive to any contrary advice. Even if that advice is how to work towards their end goal of doing 270s. I.e. They don't want to know how to work towards doing a 270 safely, what they really want is to do a 270 today. At least that has been my observation.

[DocPop 1]

I am sure you and Dave have much more experience of seeing this than I do and for these individuals I am not sure there are options beyond Ignore or Ground.

All I'm saying is that to offer a path and give these guys a chance to take it would be an improvement. I know I would have take it when I started. I WANTED instruction. I just couldn't get it apart from the occasional course when Flight-1 was in town.

The answer I received when I first asked about double fronts was "hold them down until you're scared - then hold them for two more seconds"!

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[mik 2]

DocPop

I am sure you and Dave have much more experience of seeing this than I do and for these individuals I am not sure there are options beyond Ignore or Ground.

All I'm saying is that to offer a path and give these guys a chance to take it would be an improvement. I know I would have take it when I started. I WANTED instruction. I just couldn't get it apart from the occasional course when Flight-1 was in town.

The answer I received when I first asked about double fronts was "hold them down until you're scared - then hold them for two more seconds"!

A friend of mine is a very experienced instructor (over 18,000 jumps, full time professional skydiver). I remember him telling me a couple of years ago about a visiting jumper who wanted head down coaching. My friend asked him about his jumping history - which was a hundred or so belly jumps and no freeflying at all. He was not interested in learning how to sit fly, back fly or anything else - only head down.

My friend turned him away, shaking his head (explaining that he needed to progress in freeflying before trying head down).

Isn't the logic of the "pro teach him" group on this thread something like... my friend should have taught him head down because that's what he wanted.. and if not, he would go and do it himself and would probably be a danger to himself and others?

And the logic of the "anti" group is similar to that used by my friend (ie.. you are no-where near ready.. come back when you want to learn and progress at a sensible rate)?

***********************************************
I'm NOT totally useless... I can be used as a bad example

[Skydivesg 7]

This is in response to no one in particular.

I've often wondered why some people have the propensity to rush head on into doing things for which they may not be and often are clearly not ready.

In my research I found some very interesting studies, one of which was conducted by Cornell University.

*************************
Dunning–Kruger effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes and/or inadequacies.

Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding.

David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others".

The hypothesized phenomenon was tested in a series of experiments performed by Dunning and Kruger. Dunning and Kruger noted earlier studies suggesting that ignorance of standards of performance is behind a great deal of incompetence. This pattern was seen in studies of skills as diverse as reading comprehension, operating a motor vehicle, and playing chess or tennis.

Dunning and Kruger proposed that, for a given skill, incompetent people will:

1.tend to overestimate their own level of skill;
2.fail to recognize genuine skill in others;
3.fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy;

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

I know that many people in our sport today would find this kind of reseach quite boring and in fact most would likey not bother to even read it. However after decades of watching dozens of jumpers break themselves up to the point of being crippled (or dead) and wondering why so many people faulsely ignore the risks of this sport and the immeasurable additional risk of high perfomance landings with exuberance, I find this kind of research intriguing.

To me, it seems somewhat clear that ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.

Sandy

Be the canoy pilot you want that other guy to be.

.

Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

[davelepka 4]

You guys are talking about two different people.

I was responding to the idea of a jumper who is going to swoop no matter what anyone says. In that case, I'm not telling him shit because it's an unsafe situation and the jumper has proven himself to be someone that does not listen.

You're talking about non-swoop or swoop-prep instruction. If I tell a guy he shouldn't be swooping and he listens, I'd have no problem helping him to sharpen his pattern work and accuracy while he builds the skills and experience needed to start swooping at a later time.

Big difference between, 'I'm going to swoop anyway, so you might as well help me' and 'Ok, I guess I'm not ready to swoop, can you help me get ready to swoop'.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

DocPop

I am sure you and Dave have much more experience of seeing this than I do and for these individuals I am not sure there are options beyond Ignore or Ground.

All I'm saying is that to offer a path and give these guys a chance to take it would be an improvement. I know I would have take it when I started. I WANTED instruction. I just couldn't get it apart from the occasional course when Flight-1 was in town.

The answer I received when I first asked about double fronts was "hold them down until you're scared - then hold them for two more seconds"!

The problem is that there is a lot of stuff that can be learned, even on a bigger canopy, that the "Mad Skilz" crowd isn't interested in. AggieDave posted something a while back about this.
Pattern consistency, altitude judgment, sight picture, accuracy, stalls and slow flight, and on and on.
Fundamental canopy flight control that is very important but often overlooked by the "Can You Teach Me to Swoop?" crowd.
They don't want to do the "boring drills" that are necessary to develop the judgment needed.

And did anyone else notice the real brutal irony in the May "Parachutist"?

In the article about the new members of the PD canopy team (written by our own Miss Brz) one entered his first canopy competition without any formal training or practice, and the other was DQ'd from his second competition for erratic behavior in the pattern.
The irony is that 2 of the 3 non-fatal incidents in the back were novices flying perfectly good canopies into the ground, canopies they had no business being on in the first place.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[DocPop 1]

I agree that there are some folks who are going to do what they are going to do regardless of what anyone says.

However, I would venture to suggest that there is a section of the population that would do that if no help was offered but might slow it down if time was taken to explain that the basics of slow flight, high-altitude practice, accuracy, pattern flying etc are essential skills.

I understand that we can't reach everyone, but I believe that offering informal education (as is done with the freefall disciplines) can be beneficial. And it seems like the poll respondents agree.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[ChrisHoward 8]

DocPop

However, I would venture to suggest that there is a section of the population that would do that if no help was offered but might slow it down if time was taken to explain that the basics of slow flight, high-altitude practice, accuracy, pattern flying etc are essential skills.

You mean like they are taught on their AFF course?

DocPop

I understand that we can't reach everyone, but I believe that offering informal education (as is done with the freefall disciplines) can be beneficial. And it seems like the poll respondents agree.

To be accurate your poll should also include, "I've repeatedly tried warning people to slow down to no avail". I have no doubt that part of the problem is that experienced pilots get burned out trying to get through to newbie jumpers until they end up shying away from the endeavor entirely.

[Ron 10]

I'd ground them and sit them down and talk to them.

I would let them downsize if they could prove that they can handle their current canopy. I'd use the PRO standards (landing 10 out of 10 times, standing, in a target area). They would only be allowed to do hop n pops.

After proving they can handle their current canopy, they would be allowed to go down one size.

If they didn't want to follow those rules, then they could abide by Brian Germains canopy loading recomendation.

If they could not agree to those rules, they would not be allowed on the plane.

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

[davelepka 4]

Quote

I would venture to suggest that there is a section of the population that would do that if no help was offered but might slow it down if time was taken to explain that the basics of slow flight, high-altitude practice, accuracy, pattern flying etc are essential skills.

Again, you're talking about two different people. Someone who will not listen when you tell them they are not ready to swoop will also not listen when you tell them they are not ready for another downsize, a more aggressive canopy, or a bigger turn. The last thing I want to do with that sort of person is give them any advice/coaching that will push them further down the swooping road.

Aside from the ethical/personal responsibility of enabling someone to potentially hurt/kill themselves, why would I want to take my time and effort to help someone who doesn't respect my opinion or the fact that I'm taking my time to try and help them? If they're unwilling to listen to the first piece of instruction, that being that they are not ready to swoop, what's my motivation to stay 'on board' with them and take up a coach/mentor position?

[Ron 10]

As a guy that didn't listen... Maybe YOU should tell us what might have worked with you.

Quote

Where there's a will there's a way. And if there isn't a will then people should stop pissing and moaning when people "spoil their sport" by hooking in.

Eh, I used to get wrapped around the axle at all the Jr sky gods killing themselves..... I frankly lost my voice from trying to educate, was told to piss off by the USPA, and made so many enemies on here that I just gave up.

I'd *prefer* the Jr jet fighter to listen to experience, the USPA to grow some balls, DZO's to care more about the person than the jump ticket.... But I have learned that is not going to happen.

Now I just want the hot shots to hook in alone and not collide with and kill an innocent.

And yes, I take my own advice... I wanted to buy a Pitts Special aerobatic plane. I had one group telling me to buy it and I would 'learn to fly it'. I had another group telling me to buy something else and put 100-150 hours on it and then buy the Pitts. I now have 25 hours in my Citabria. I don't want to hear the bull shit 'canopies are expensive' excuse.... I am most likely going to spend 10k+ dollars extra going this method.

All the excuses are just that, crap.

I really wish we could get the hot shots to understand that they may *think* they are better than average.... But that does not mean it is true.

And I am at a loss how to make the hot shots understand that not everyone can be above average, make the USPA give a shit, and make the DZO's care more about the jumper, than the money.... But I don't know how and have been trying for so long that I am burnt out.

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

[DocPop 1]

ChrisHoward

You mean like they are taught on their AFF course?

No. I mean teaching it properly and in depth. Not just scratching the surface.

While we are at it, I think the canopy part of the AFF course is woefully inadequate. Maybe that's part of the problem - our sport sets up the expectation that freefall skills matter the most and canopy piloting is something you just go out and learn on your own. I don't know - it's a theory, though.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[DocPop 1]

I agree with you that there are people for whom no amount of advice or education will work. At that point they have forced your hand and the right thing, IMO, is to tell them to walk of the DZ.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[Deisel 38]

This whole thing sounds like the dumb ass argument that you should let your kids have hookers and blow at home, so at least you know that they are safe.

The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all.

[NWFlyer 2]

DocPop

***

You mean like they are taught on their AFF course?

No. I mean teaching it properly and in depth. Not just scratching the surface.

While we are at it, I think the canopy part of the AFF course is woefully inadequate. Maybe that's part of the problem - our sport sets up the expectation that freefall skills matter the most and canopy piloting is something you just go out and learn on your own. I don't know - it's a theory, though.

Well, we've made at least some progress in the last couple years by adding the mandatory canopy course for the B license. I think we can do more, but I'm personally a fan of having that be a B requirement; it hits someone just as they're starting to get their first set of sport gear, when they're starting to think about downsizes, etc. I feel like the information is probably better absorbed after a bit of experience jumping. (Not that we shouldn't also teach and emphasize canopy skills during the A license progression, too).

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[ChrisD 0]

Great points, and worthey of mention heer is PDs' position with their new canopy. I'm surprized at how little flack the idea that the manufacturer is limiting usage to "invitee's" is getting in the press!

C

But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

[ufk22 33]

The Canopy portion of the AFF course is woefully inadequate because it doesn't teach swooping???
Your confidence in your point of view despite opposing opinions from those who have a lot more experience does indeed coincide with the study quoted above by Sandy. It's actually worth a read. It's something that I use in my Coach and Instructor rating courses.

DocPop

***

You mean like they are taught on their AFF course?

No. I mean teaching it properly and in depth. Not just scratching the surface.

While we are at it, I think the canopy part of the AFF course is woefully inadequate. Maybe that's part of the problem - our sport sets up the expectation that freefall skills matter the most and canopy piloting is something you just go out and learn on your own. I don't know - it's a theory, though.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.