Liemberg

I fail to see your ethical issue. Then again, taking your own kid up really brings home the FACT that every passenger you take with you on a jump is somebodies kid/spouse/mother/father/sister/brother. The real ethical issue should be: If you think making a tandemjump with you it is too dangerous for your family, how about somebody else's family? (But I waited with my son until he was eight, came to me volontarily on his own and then I had him wait for another two weeks... so 7 IS young IMO...) "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

When people jump out of airplanes with two neatly packed parachutes strapped to their back and I'm the one overseeing the safety aspect of the operation I couldn't give a rats ass wether they are confident that they are not backsliding in freefall, not arching enough to stay in sync with the formation, don't have trouble staying on heading, are able to turn in place, are able to sit in the sky, etcetera. I want them to be confident that they can remember where they are in space and time (i.e. HOW FAR IS IT TO THE GROUND?) confident that they are able to open at least one parachute before they hit 'terra firma' and to be confident that they can land that parachute safely - without hurting themselves or any other participants. I must have missed the point where the learning of all these abilities was magically transfered to 'doing 10 minutes of tunnel time'....

If it is visible from "way up" and works as designated in my earlier post (points into the wind but doesn't react to every light breeze) I'll settle for a "four headed lawn sprinkler". Hey - the dutch skydivers call their harness a "Harnas" which is - translated back - medieval body armour. Come to think of it, that might be a solution for the modern swooper... not only extra weight to optimize flight characteristics, but also extra body protection for those cool downwinders in the pattern...

Since your profile shows you jump at Perris I find it hard to believe that they don't have some sort of system in place to separate traffic and establish a landing pattern. AFAIK it isn't a small DZ, isn't it? They are planning to remain big, don't they? Keeping the customers alive is always sound business, unless you are an undertaker... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Responsibility in the landing pattern? First agree on the pattern! And in order to agree on the pattern we should find other ways to decide what it is at any given time; other ways than what is used in many places, nowadays. Most decisions about the pattern to follow have built in flaws that will not surface in moderate to strong winds and with everybody flying more or less the same type canopy. Some go a bit faster, some a bit slower but everything is pretty much predictable. It is the mixing of ‘conservative flying’ and ‘high performance flying’ and the type of both canopies and pilots that creates problems, sometimes. Add light winds from various directions (like on an otherwise sunny day, “perfect for skydiving”) and you have your recipe for disaster. Therefore I think every DZ needs a so called ‘tetrahydron’, a wind-arrow to give a clear direction on what the pattern should be, and we DO need one that works. How should it work? 1. It should be visible from way up (say 2000-1500ft) 2. It should move automatically with significant changes in wind direction (say more than eight knots) 3. It should NOT MOVE with slight variations in the wind. (i.e. not work as directly as a windsock or piece of tape on a stick …) 4. It should designate the landing pattern in real time. (It should show the MANDATORY landing direction at all times) All other smart plans have their shortcomings and will invariably still present the risk of low level canopy collisions – killing skydivers. “First-idiot-down” designates the pattern? Since I’m not always going to follow idiots who can’t read the wind I can’t blame you if you don’t do that either… Someone leaving the office / hangar to move the arrow? Yeah, right, that ‘ll be the day… I’m not going to wait for someone to finish his coffee / phonecall / packjob and turn the arrow when it is suddenly gusting 15 knots or more from a different direction than what the arrow shows – even though I’m capable of down wind landings, thank you … So…smart automation is what is called for, me thinks… Since you can’t get your ‘tetrahydron’ ready made at the local hardware-store, you will have to do some “junk-yard-wars-engineering” Our Low Tech Plan – “cunning in its simplicity…”: 1. Get a wheel with half the axis still attached. (We found a beautiful one from an old caravan – it goes without saying that it still should be able to move around on the axis…) 2. Get enough plywood, some bolts, some screws and orange or yellow paint. (we found an old arrow-shaped sign that was used to send cyclists towards the beach restaurant before that place was sold to the new owner…) 3. Build one. (Arrow on the axis + a piece of plywood vertically on the tail of the arrow. Moves to easily? Cut some of that plywood off… The wheel should be heavy enough and big enough to keep the whole set up in equilibrium...) Come on people, at most places there's a reasonable solid mock up - how hard can it be to build such a thing? Ours was constructed from less than $ 20 worth of material… Now all your DZO / DZ-staff need from now on is a big stick to highlight some of the softly spoken words*) for those that suffer from permanent altitude-deafness and show unacceptable behavior in the ‘parachutist landing area’ AND of course we all need a separate landing area for the swoopers – the “skygods area”. That one should have an entry gate and some built in challenges to “keep the kids away until they grow up”. It should be far enough away to not interfere with what else is going on, WHATEVER the wind direction… BTW: Part of my own first jump course is ALWAYS: 1. Look in the direction where you want to turn, ONLY THEN: 2. Pull the toggle down and KEEP LOOKING…. *) “Thou shalt fly the holy pattern as designated by the tetrahydron when landing in the parachutists area!” Thou shalt not let your high performance landing maneuver for the “skygods area” interfere with the “parachutist landing area’s” holy pattern in any way – decisive here is not whether ‘the airspace is clear’, decisive is whether you interfere with the holy pattern - and there it doesn't matter if you complete your maneuver or abort it. JUST DON'T GO THERE! I will personally kick the shit out of you and remove your battered body from the DZ if you choose to ignore this gospel – you’re not allowed to open below two grand either, are you not? If these conditions are met you may do your 90, 180, 270, 360 or even 540 – just stay out of the pattern! Nevertheless - even if this were in place everywhere I can’t help wondering what new ways you all are going to find to hurt or kill yourself anyway … "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

OTOH if we posted each and every incident we wouldn't have enough time to read it all. And yes, there are other (legal & business) issues. For a DZO / DZ- management it is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation : You would be damned if you do report each and every incident since your place would be mentioned a whole lot more than others which might give the impression to the uninformed that jumping at your place is a lot more dangerous than jumping elswhere, where they don't report as meticulously as you do... You would be damned if you don't report anything - "the DZ is conspiring" to keep the sorry state of the operation silent for the general public even though you are under no obligation to report everything at DZ.com and you can easily put yourself on slippery slopes legally speaking when you do state the facts as you perceive them. My guess is that most DZ's are well aware of this website and will only react once a discussion starts. If you look back in the incident forum you'll find that almost always if and when a heated debate follows you'll get a statement from the DZ and there it doesn't matter if an overweight tandempassenger twisted his ankle, an inexperienced person got into something over their head or two where killed in a midair collision. Its the intensity of the debate, not the seriousness of the incident or 'its educational value' that triggers the reaction... DZO's / DZ managment is naturally reluctant and will almost never start a thread about an incident that occured at their place... Doesn't make em criminals... (though people keep telling me I have a few nasty streaks...) "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Hope they remain unconscious during the landing?

Me too, me too, since the title of this thread is 'past injuries requiring treatment' - though I can always use a back / shoulder rub... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Finally! In the Netherlands we have had lenghty discussions about what to teach the students (one hand per handle vs. two hands per handle). We concluded that we agreed to disagree (i.e. left it open and only said; 'whatever is taught, first cut away and then pull reserve...') When that discussion was running (pre internet times) I always thought it to be a good idea to ask you - since you designed it and all...

Why not - if you are using direct bag deployment you have a trustworthy system resulting in survivable landings within 300ft underneath the airplane, almost 100% of the time...and even if you would have a double deployment with an FXC, I'm willing to bet that the thing fires at the opening shock of the main... Besides, this whole 'bail-out' decision altitude etcetera often asumes that the engine stops and the pilot is in control. If the tail is gone or it gets awfully hot in the cabin and the pilot is rushing for the door with his bail-out rig, I would reconsider my 'staying with the plane' plans...

When it "is", it is 'right" as far as I'm concerned. I think it is inevitable and anybody who says that for him or her this isn't the case is 'in denial' One of the leading scholars about automobile safety in the Netherlands once said that the main frustration in his line of work was that due to psychological reasons ('personal levels of risk acceptance') every time they invented a gadget to make driving safer it seemed that the drivers themselves found new ways they would never have thought about without it, to make the activity more dangerous. The classic example there was the Ford Scorpio, the first car on the dutch market that had ABS. When winter hit that season it was reported that a lot of drivers with brand new Scorpio's ended up in the ditch next to the road after overtaking the 'snow/service cars' - something one just didn't do in pre-ABS times... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

No more than "walking into a forum" filled with active participants of a certain activity, many of them professionally involved in that activity, many others from all walks of life with specific knowledge. (FYI we have "in house" doctors, EMR-personel, physicists, law-enforcement officers, lawyers, statisticians, pilots, etcetera - I bet there's the odd sociologist with in depth knowledge of Emile Durkheim's work to, but he prefers to stay in hiding

Minimum age is debated to death I'm afraid. In the US there is a significant legal problem when you take underage (younger than 18),but in the rest of the world that doesn't seem to be the case. I took some very young passengers but nowadays my position changed somewhat - we 'recommend' a minimum age of 14 on our website. (Often I get the feeling that I'm helping parents who are afraid to lose the love and respect of their siblings by saying "NO, YOU CAN'T" to postpone their problem for a couple of years...hehehe...) There is no technical problem that I'm aware of - but you don't want to be in high winds with to lightly loaded canopies - that BTW also take longer to open. Although often you can't control their legs, those are small legs and they don't create problems. My sole reason for not taking them very young kids are purely psychological. Although there is no 'rule of thumb' which says at what age, we do know that somewhere in the development of a child a world of magic and fantasy gets replaced by one of realities. Finding out at altitude isn't a good idea. Any kid under the age of 14 I deliberately separate from their parents for a while and talk to "face to face" before I decide what to do. My personal youngest was eight (my son, DZ-kid...) I must say that I have been surprised at times by the young kids I did take. (in stead of wrestling them out I'd be following them out, "freefall over yet? Bummer!" etcetera...) Also, I never had a kid that I did take freak out / get scared. You never know in advance though... As to headgear: I went from fraphat to no headgear and back to fraphat. I still prefer no headgear in the summer but I also want a loud beep 2 seconds after I deployed and I once lost a dytter + gogle... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Neither would I. But with the camera / recorder in a bag on the passengers belly and the bulletcam (8 cm long, 1.5 cm diameter) under my altimeter it is a non-issue... A bulletcam on the hand (and please do look at the picture of my setup a few posts back) is no more dangerous in that situation as the altimeter itself, or the hand as such - just don't let them grab you. (No one ever grabbed one of my hands during + 1000 tandems - I go to great lengths to avoid it...) The fact that you are paid to do certain things makes them more dangerous than if you would do exactly the same but were not paid? I fail to see why... The fine art (maybe beyond American minds...) is of course to not let your decision what you do and what you don't get influenced by the fact that you get paid... A rich man arives at heavens gate. St-Peter refuses to let him in. "I'm sorry" the rich man says - "there must have been a mistake. I gave over 5 milion dollar to charity during my lifetime, I built a new wing to the local hospital, I supported an orphanage in Sri Lanka, I put a new roof on the local church ... obviously there must be a mix-up somewhere..." "OK" St-Peter says "Wait here, I'll consult the Chief" Five minutes later St-Peter returns "Got it sorted out. A mix-up indeed. Here's your money back. Don't forget to refund the deducted taxes on your way down!"

Visions of a picket line in front of the recently aquired DZ?

Ah, but imagine getting that passenger in the picture out of our trusted C 182..., then with the PAC 750 even in Sweden you've arived in tandemmasters heaven. Doable in C 182? Yes, I guess... (if not done 'worse' ones myself, done 'just as bad' from C 182... you almost forget what a joy it is to make another skydive... granted, walking out of a tailgate is always more comfortable...) But my dream was more with small and gigling asian females sitting on my lap, wearing the jogging shoes of my 10 year old kid since they all arrived on the DZ at high heels... Could one 'duckwalk' in a PAC750 ? Good exercise!

Let the kid have his dreams for god's sake! I have a vision of myself in the moderate climate of New Zealand, jumping out of a nice PAC750XL with small japanese female tourists strapped to me, each of them graciously bowing after the jump, charmingly gigling and giving me a huge fee! Also there will be a paying trainee (barroch?) that listens eagerly to all my wise words in the evening at the bar while during daytime packing my tandemrig again and again and again... I'm sure some of the readers here can give me a reality check.... don't bother! "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

It wasn't in 1985, neither was it 'Der Sendung mit der Maus'. But I can understand where the mix-up is coming from: 'Mausclub' was a spin-off from 'Der Sendung mit der Maus' - I doubt thats me on the video you found - from the top of my head: the jump was in 1997. (and I have the video somewhere 'deep in the archive', of course.) (Update my avatar? says who? The profile police?

Bought my alti 2 in 1981 or '82. Used of course... It never failed me once in over 20 years (it is in its third career as chestmounted alti for Static line students since 1990...) Date-Of-Manufacturing? 79 or earlier... Wonder how a Suntoo will perform, 25 years from now...

Did one years ago with a German TV host for a kids-program. One of those "How things work" shows. ('Mausclub' for the German audience...) So I explained how a parachute worked, took this girl up, geeked at the camera, and landed in front of the TV crew. My passenger was to incoherent to finish what she had to say ("So kids, now you know how parachutes work, thank you, I hope you have enjoyed it - etcetera") so we had to do it once more, just for the final scene... One year later a German kid (five years old maybe) walks into the hangar and starts to explain the working of the parachute to me - "this goes in there, and this is what you have to pull and then first this comes out" etcetera. "You are very knowledgable about parachutes" I say to him - "How do you know all this stuff?" I ask. "I'm an expert on parachutes because I have seen it on the TV in the Mausclub!" .... "And ($64000 question) Do You Know Who I Am?" "Nah - no idea, never seen YOU before..."

OK - you can come out now, from under the bridge. Good catch? "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

To me it seems you have a problem with grasping the concept of likelihood. It is possible that I 'screw up' and break something It is possible that you 'screw up' and break something again However, MY bone structure staid fully intact during 25 years and 2700 jumps. From what I gather just reading your postings here YOU (with less jumps and years) femured already once and I get the impression that up until now you didn't get the full educational benefit that is the only 'pro' between all the 'cons' femuring has... Therefore, I think it is more likely that YOU will screw up again in the future - which is not the same as saying that it is impossible that I will be the one who screws up in the future....

I wanna work for his DZO...

If I didn't it must have slipped my mind...

No you can't. What happens of course is that as long as you put up your proposal on a 'low-treshold' website like this one here, a lot of people feel inclined to give their comments and suggestions. This could lead to a better proposal, in the long run even a perfect proposal but OTOH not a proposal that everybody is happy with. We all know however that the USPA board is where this or any proposal should be directed to; at last, if the whole point of this exercise is that you want something written in the BSR's to create the situation where people without enough experience or proper training jumping too highly loaded canopies doesn't happen as often as happens now, simply because there is a hurdle built into the BSR's. We know that hurdles like that can be circumvented, we know it is not going to put a complete halt on canopy related landing accidents, we know that with a bit more effort you can kill yourself just as well under a lighter loaded canopy and we know that once you send it 'as is' to the board, amendments and changes might result in new rules in the BSR's that may make it hard for you to recognise your original proposal, even if that was discussed overhere untill we all turned blue in our face - that is the way these things go... But now ask yourself how long YOU have been writing about this problem and what has changed since your first post (here or on "rec-dot-skydiving"?) other than a general awareness that more training and experience is needed with the new class canopies available today? BSR's themselves have a limited effect - If I jump without an AAD and for whatever reason don't pull before I'm back at 'terra firma' I probably break al the bones in my fragile body AND the BSR that said I should have pulled my main at or above 2000ft but the latter is not of great concern I would think. But, as the saying goes - BSR's are written in blood. Since (IMO) there is too much blood spilled, I would suggest you send your 'imperfect proposal that will be changed before it gets into the rules' through the proper channels and see what comes out. To me, that seems more fruitful than this 'take 5' discussion which in many respects is a repetition of moves - and in chess that leads to a draw which I always find an outcome disappointing for everyone... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...