Demo vs "off DZ jump" (was: Fatal/S Ga)

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Replying to the last several posts.

I don't disagree at all with what you all are saying. I disagree with the use of the term demo. If this kid had gone to another DZ and done this the word demo would have never come up. There is no difference between where he was jumping and any other DZ he had never been to that he might have chosen to visit.

I don't think chiming in here is out of order. I disagree with your assertion that there is no difference between this jump and a jump at an unfamiliar DZ.

At a DZ, there would be a large (not just long) landing area. Using the Google map image provided on a post in this thread, I measured the width of the "landing area" at less than 200 feet at the widest point between hangars, private taxiways, trees, houses, etc. That qualifies as a postage stamp, especially when you consider that Greg was flying a high performance canopy and doing a high performance landing.

At a DZ there would likely be landing restrictions - an established pattern, and a beer line if you will, and a designated landing area that is obstruction-free. At a backyard demo there are seldom any rules or standard operating procedures and often - as in this case - few if any large areas without obstacles. A DZ would also typically have "no-fly" areas established to keep people away from parking lots, aircraft parking areas, buildings, etc. At a backyard demo it's typically every man for himself, and by the way "be sure to impress the crowd".

A jump at an unfamiliar DZ would be viewed by the jumper as just that - a jump to be made with an extra bit of caution because it is unfamiliar. A jump into a backyard party is often viewed as an opportunity to put on a show for people who will be in awe of you all night long as they get drunk and listen to your death-defying stories.

Over and over in our history we have seen demo's turn deadly, often because the dangers of the jumps were under considered. There will be many, many more for the same reason.

From the SIM:

"An exhibition jump, also called a demonstration or display
jump, is a jump at a location other than an existing drop zone
done for the purpose of reward, remuneration, or promotion
and principally for the benefit of spectators."

None of that exists on a new DZ.

There are HUGE differences between ANY demo and a jump at an unfamiliar DZ. Some of the deadliest differences are between the ears.

None of that applies to this location or gathering. The cause of this accident was in the harness.

Agreeing to disagree. Adios.

From your previous post in this thread:

"This was a small gathering of friends jumping a Cessna at a private property."

My guess is there were more than just the jumpers at this "small gathering". You know, girlfriends, co-workers, ready-to-be-impressed single whuffo chickies, etc. Those folks are called spectators, regardless of how many there are. That is a party to folks on the ground, but it's a "backyard demo" when you are the one jumping in, and these types of jumps are often THE MOST dangerous because they are perceived by jumpers as low-key, no pressure jumps - even though they are not.

We can argue semantics all day, but one thing is clear. This was NOT the same as jumping at an established, wide open DZ, and that fact may certainly have played a role in this incident.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

You're right, we can argue all day and neither one of us would be completely right.

If you think this landing area is tight,which it's not, you would shit a brick where we use to land at my house.

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

You're right, we can argue all day and neither one of us would be completely right.

If you think this landing area is tight,which it's not, you would shit a brick where we use to land at my house.

I have no problem with tight landing areas, but I wasn't discussing my perception vs yours. I was referring to known and established circumstances.

The landing area in question was, by the "official" standard, pretty snug and may easily have played a part in this incident.

Table 7.A—Size and Definition of Landing Areas

1. A minimum-sized area that will accommodate a landing
area no less than 500,000 square feet.
2. Allows a jumper to drift over the spectators with sufficient
altitude (250 feet) so as not to create a hazard to persons
or property on the ground
3. Will accommodate landing no closer than 100 feet from
the spectators
Level 1
1. An area that will accommodate a landing area no smaller
than at least 250,000 square feet up to 500,000 square
feet
2. Or an area with the sum total that equals 250,000 square
feet, up to 500,000 square feet) with a one-sided linear
crowd line
3. Allows jumpers to drift over the spectators with sufficient
altitude (250 feet) so as not to create a hazard to persons
or property on the ground
4. Will accommodate landing no closer than 50 feet from
the spectators
5. Many Open-Field athletic areas constitute a Level 1 area.
Level 2
1. An area that will not accommodate a 250,000 square-foot
landing area but will allow an area no smaller than 5,000
square feet per four jumpers
2. Allows jumpers to fly under canopy no lower than 50 feet
above the crowd and land no closer than 15 feet from the
crowd line
3. Parachutists who certify that they will use both ram-air
main and ram-air reserve parachutes will be permitted to
exit over or into a congested area but not exit over an
open-air assembly of people.
4. This area would require an FAA Form 7711-2 to conduct
an approved demo.
Stadium
1. A Level 2 landing area smaller than 150 yards in length by
80 yards in width and bounded on two or more sides by
bleachers, walls, or buildings in excess of 50 feet high
2. This area would also require an FAA Form 7711-2 to conduct
an approved demonstration jump.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

You are throwing demo standards at something that wasn't a demo. Using your definition every jump made at a DZ when a wuffo is present should be considered a demo.

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

You are throwing demo standards at something that wasn't a demo. Using your definition every jump made at a DZ when a wuffo is present should be considered a demo.

Hair splitting and a complete thread drift.

My point - to stay on topic - was/is that a jump into a private gathering away from an established DZ - however you choose to classify it - carries many of the same dangers as anything you would call a demo.

Just because you can legally classify this as not being a demo, many of the attributes of this jump were the same as one and may have contributed to the incident.

Thanks for the move, mods. I didn't expect such triviality.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

You are throwing demo standards at something that wasn't a demo. Using your definition every jump made at a DZ when a wuffo is present should be considered a demo.

Hair splitting and a complete thread drift.

My point - to stay on topic - was/is that a jump into a private gathering away from an established DZ - however you choose to classify it - carries many of the same dangers as anything you would call a demo.

Just because you can legally classify this as not being a demo, many of the attributes of this jump were the same as one and may have contributed to the incident.

Thanks for the move, mods. I didn't expect such triviality.

Nice condescending tone. Nor did I.

I've agreed with you on most points. I disagree with the misuse of the term Demo. You can't always be right but you can damn sure argue like you are.

The only way you are right is by using your made up definition of what a demo is.

Again. I have agreed with all of your other points.

This accident was caused by someone doing a 270* turn to low to complete the turn. The space he had to land in had nothing to do with it. Altitude would have saved his life, a larger landing area would not. More space around the point of impact would not make the ground softer.

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

This accident was caused by someone doing a 270* turn to low to complete the turn. The space he had to land in had nothing to do with it. Altitude would have saved his life, a larger landing area would not. More space around the point of impact would not make the ground softer.

You don't know that the landing area size wasn't a contributing factor. That is a complete assumption on your part and kind of a double standard for a guy that wants to talk definitions.

Tight landing areas are notorious for sucking people in with target fixation, low performance turns to stay clear of obstacles (more perceived than real), and a variety of other factors. Getting sucked in could be even more prevalent in someone who wasn't current, was jumping a high performance canopy, and performing a high performance landing.

Unless you are talking to Greg from beyond the grave, you can not say with any degree of certainty whether a tight landing area contributed to his error. It's pretty obvious that a low turn was the eventual cause of death, but you apparently don't want to discuss the above very real factors that may have contributed to Greg making that low turn.

And in case you haven't noticed, we are both arguing.

Actually we were arguing. My point is made. I'm done. Go pour me a drink.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

This accident was caused by someone doing a 270* turn to low to complete the turn. The space he had to land in had nothing to do with it. Altitude would have saved his life, a larger landing area would not. More space around the point of impact would not make the ground softer.

You don't know that the landing area size wasn't a contributing factor. That is a complete assumption on your part and kind of a double standard for a guy that wants to talk definitions.

Tight landing areas are notorious for sucking people in with target fixation, low performance turns to stay clear of obstacles (more perceived than real), and a variety of other factors. Getting sucked in could be even more prevalent in someone who wasn't current, was jumping a high performance canopy, and performing a high performance landing.

Unless you are talking to Greg from beyond the grave, you can not say with any degree of certainty whether a tight landing area contributed to his error. It's pretty obvious that a low turn was the eventual cause of death, but you apparently don't want to discuss the above very real factors that may have contributed to Greg making that low turn.

And in case you haven't noticed, we are both arguing.

Actually we were arguing. My point is made. I'm done. Go pour me a drink.

I've agreed with you on every point but one. I don't think I'm being unreasonable.

[nigel99 479]

Chris,

If I understand correctly this was a similar situation to the St Patricks boogie. Normal jumps at a non permanent dz location?

Maybe they jumped there fairly regularly?

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

This was a once a year gathering of friends to make a couple of jumps and cook out. By invitation. Nothing close to the boogie, 20 to 30 people.

I use to do the same thing at my house before I started the boogie

[Ron 10]

Quote

You are throwing demo standards at something that wasn't a demo. Using your definition every jump made at a DZ when a wuffo is present should be considered a demo.

No, because the defintion of a demo has 'at other than a normal DZ'.
A DZ is not a demo because it is a normal DZ.

But the same reasons this kid slammed in can happen at a demo (read not at a DZ no matter how large the landing area) or at a new DZ. unfamiliar area and a desire to impress. I have carted jumpers off of a DZ because they wanted to 'Go big on the pond'.

I fail to see your issue with calling this jump a demo; It was a demo. It may have not been for pay, but the same factors are at play - Unfamiliar landing area and a desire to perform.

Has this kid hooked into the ground at the DZ? If not, then location and mindset needs to be considered.

And yes, any jump at a non-familiar location needs to be treated as a demo. I took 4 people into a 600 acre farm with an open landing area that was at least as large as Zhills. I still gave a demo brief and still didn't let just anyone on the load.

The attitude of, "This is not a demo" is exactly the wrong attitude to have here.

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

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Again, I have conceded to many of the points. Agreed with most right off the bat. There are as many reasons this was not a demo as reasons you and Chuck think there are. You both can get together and chant Demo Demo Demo and it's not going to make it so.

[pms07 3]

Quote

...a jump into a private gathering away from an established DZ - however you choose to classify it - carries many of the same dangers as anything you would call a demo.

Just because you can legally classify this as not being a demo, many of the attributes of this jump were the same as one and may have contributed to the incident.

Concur. Whether it's called a demo or not, it's the the added factors which make it a more complex jump that should be considered; an unfamiliar DZ/sight picture, dz size, added stress to "perform", etc.

Unfortunately, backyard party jumps often are approached casually...and sometimes go badly...

[tkhayes 348]

so to make a demo jump NOT a demo jump, you just simply have to say "It's not a demo jump" ?

[CSpenceFLY 1]

No different than saying it is when it's not.

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

so to make a demo jump NOT a demo jump, you just simply have to say "It's not a demo jump" ?

AS a demo jumper, I always tend to ask myself if the USPA 3rd party liability insurance we automatically receive with membership would cover the damages to property where I intend to land.

IF it does not, then it's a demo...and I factor that into the decision.

Getting killed or injured isn't the only consideration for me anymore, now that I have some 'stuff' that I'd like to keep... I look a lot harder at party jumps etc. since 'demo insurance' isn't usually practical.

Put a 'spectator' in the hospital & lose a house isn't a gamble I take as easily as I once did.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[billvon 2,995]

>so to make a demo jump NOT a demo jump, you just simply have to say "It's not a
>demo jump" ?

and to think of all the money we wasted in insurance, and jumper fees, and permits . . .

[SethInMI 174]

So once again, Twardo is the voice of reason.

Using the USPA definition from the SIM section 7:

An exhibition jump, also called a demonstration or display jump, is a jump at a location other than an existing drop zone done for the purpose of reward, remuneration, or promotion and principally for the benefit of spectators.

As I read it Spence is correct, this jump was NOT a demo according the USPA, and so 3rd party insurance would have covered the jump.

I think everyone agrees that a jumper should/should have treated such a jump like a demo and flown a conservative pattern, etc.

It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

[Ron 10]

Nevermind, not worth the trouble.

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

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

Nevermind, not worth the trouble.

yep

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Nevermind, not worth the trouble.

yep

Gotta quit sometime when you are wrong.

Show me by any accepted definition or guidelines (either the FAA or USPA) where jumping at this location should or would be defined as a demo and I will concede to this point like I did the others.

I'm not saying that off airport jumps shouldn't be taken more seriously or that the psychological issues didn't play a role here.

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Nevermind, not worth the trouble.

yep

I'm not saying that off airport jumps shouldn't be taken more seriously or that the psychological issues didn't play a role here.

Your earlier - and staunchly defended - stance was that this jump was no different than one at an unfamiliar established DZ. Now "off airport jumps" are different???

I think you're supposed to beep when you back up like that.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Nevermind, not worth the trouble.

yep

I'm not saying that off airport jumps shouldn't be taken more seriously or that the psychological issues didn't play a role here.

Your earlier - and staunchly defended - stance was that this jump was no different than one at an unfamiliar established DZ. Now "off airport jumps" are different???

I think you're supposed to beep when you back up like that.

No, now you are just twisting words.

The above statement is not making a comparison. If it were it would read, "I'm not saying that off airport jumps or jumps at an unfamiliar DZ shouldn't be taken more seriously or that the psychological issues didn't play a role here.

Is that better? I thought you intelligent enough not to stoop to make a point.

I've given you a simple task if the supporting guidelines exist.

[Andy9o8 2]

Jeez Louise, Chris, you're acting like some fucking lawyer. Ew.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

So what do you call someone who what's to make something so without any supporting evidence?