chrisgr

I believe that the numbers that were originally provided 'make the case'. I am using them correctly ... for the purpose of justifying the argument for mandatory canopy control training as an integral part of all student training. If you haven't figured out what the right action is by now, you never will.

Congratulations, you missed the point … again. The job that needs to be done is to provide better canopy control training. Go play with your numbers and move on.

The population that is important in this case is the 112 skydivers who had properly functioning canopies and are now dead. What difference does it make if they were young/old, male/female, green/purple, etc. They were all skydivers who had properly functioning canopies and are now dead. Will your statistical analysis of this data result in any action that will help prevent future injuries or deaths?

http://www.packingparachutes.com/techniques_tips/greed.htm Reverse 'S' fold.

He’s a freeflier who loads a 135 at 1.74. That puts him at ~ 235 lbs out the door. Ask him what he thinks will happen to his Swift reserve when it is deployed at high speeds with him underneath it.

Currently, I can get the slider on my Stiletto down past the soft links and over the large (type 8) risers on the Javelin container. Once near the bottom of the risers, the slider rarely moves. Love them big fat risers!

http://www.packingparachutes.com/techniques_tips/greed.htm This technique was taught at my DZ and I started using it on a 'new' canopy 5 years ago. I still use this method and it works exceptionally well. One concern is the slider position. When I had my old Sabre, my sloppy use of this method pushed the slider around within the canopy and resulted in a few hard openings. These were strictly my fault and I learned to take more care with the slider position. Before I start the second s-fold, I always check the slider position to ensure that it stays within the canopy fabric. Also note: Keep the fabric under control! Take it slow and make the first fold as neat as possible and then get it in the bag. Get one or both knees on the bag and keep the air out of the first fold as you prepare for the second. During the cold winter months, those of us in the frozen tundra of midwest America should get out the fabric every few weeks and caress its lovely folds. Practice, practice, practice.

Do you consider the w/l on your reserve to be appropriate?

How confident do you feel about flying and landing your reserve at your w/l?

Skratch the Sage … You are so right on. When I exit from the plane with a simple grip on my friend and partner, we transition onto our heads and fly until we can relax and release the grip. I am so very happy when we can get back together and share a kiss. I really don’t care how many points other people with 200 jumps can turn … those 2-point head-down skydives have been the most rewarding experiences because they were shared with someone I love and we are sharing the learning process together.

You missed the most important part of Jumpmunki's post. Jumpmunki has listened to other skydivers and heeded their advice. Perhaps you should do the same. As mentioned by another experienced skydiver, why don't you get current or update your profile to better reflect your experience (or time) in this sport. I bet that if you actually had 9 years in this sport and had shared the same experiences as many other skydivers, you would be singing a different tune.

Forgive the cross-post, but tdog has an interesting suggestion regarding canopy type classes / ratings here ... http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1441148#1441148

Good of you to recognize when other jumpers are acting in a safe manner. It is very gratifying when you see people such as the tandem camera-fliers assisting with group separation. Take a moment sometime and tell these people ‘thanks’ and that you appreciated their assistance. Unfortunately, it does not get said enough in our sport.

Like it or not, you have been ‘taking advice’ from people who have never seen you fly since you started your student training. Consider the current BSR’s. You have probably taken most of these rules and regulations as absolutes that must be followed. At one time, most of the BSR’s were merely advice (yikes). Yes, you may be slightly exceeding the proposed w/l chart, but you have also stated that you have practiced many of the skills that would be tested to fly your canopy and / or continue your canopy progression. What is the harm of proving yourself? There is an important reason why many jumpers continue to challenge themselves on canopy survival skills. Even if we are not planning to downsize, we know that these skills are necessary to continue skydiving and safely fly our canopies. Your instructors, S&TA, DZO, etc. are still the best resources and they probably are giving you safe advice if they have watched your canopy control and landings. What they do not have, however, is a standard by which to educate and evaluate canopy pilots that is consistently practiced by licensed instructors.

It sounds like you have a good handle on your current canopy and you may be able to demonstrate the survival skills required to progress to another canopy. The proposed w/l table will NOT prevent you from jumping a canopy that you can safely fly. Again … the proposals recommend that a qualified instructor watches and evaluates your CC skills and ‘discusses your safety choices and thought processes’. If you can demonstrate your skills and pass the evaluation, you can fly your canopy of choice. Did your AFF training include all of the skills on Bill’s list? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=47

What do you define as ‘higher performance’ canopies? What do you consider to be ‘inappropriate training’? Most people who favor the proposals do not wish to restrict your choices without giving you the opportunity to demonstrate your abilities. The proposals recommend that a qualified instructor watches and evaluates your CC skills and ‘discusses your safety choices and thought processes’. If you can demonstrate your skills and pass the evaluation, you can fly your canopy of choice.

Please look at my profile and consider this ... I am completely ready to adhere to a w/l restriction myself. I am completely ready to pay for additional canopy control training if I am required to do so. You may also be subjected to such requirements. If you do not like that possibility then you must consider that there are many people actively lobbying (in many ways other than this forum) for these changes. If you do not want such changes, you may have to begin actively lobbying against them. And this means going beyond simply posting your concerns on dz.com. FWIW: Skydiving is an expensive sport. As the equipment, jump tickets, etc. become more expensive, so too will the cost of training and education. Hope I wasn't too vague.

Is that your reason for objecting to this proposal? We are talking about a combination of canopy training and w/l restrictions that would provide all new jumpers with the necessary education to safely control and land their canopies. I see nothing unreasonable or random about that. Perhaps you would like to review another incident … http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1429707#1429707

Do you think that experienced jumpers and instructors can instill the necessary attitudes about canopy training in each new jumper's mind when they enter into the sport. Why hasn't this already happened? We are currently living the dream of no regulations and freedom to do as we please. I hope you have been enjoying yourself as others have perished. I am very much aware of the dangers of this sport. That is why I am concerned about our lack of standardized canopy training.

More evidence why 'guidelines' are worthless.

These things are all available now. Why do we still have so many injuries and deaths that could have been avoided? The answer is because the education and advanced coaching is not available or provided to everyone. This type of training is needed by everybody as they learn to jump. Why aren't you insisting that everyone get this necessary training?

You have suggested that you would not follow your own guidelines in some situations. If so ... what is the point of your guidelines? Show me how your guidelines will be interpreted and followed by other instructors and DZ's. Show me how you would ensure that every instructor follows your guidelines to make a new, standardized canopy flight program consistent -- across all DZ's. You are absolutely right that there is a big difference between a canopy course and canopy guidelines. We need a new canopy flight program that is a mandated part of student training AND we need a restriction on w/l canopy progression. They are very different ... but they should implemented together to help protect our fellow jumpers. I do not think that you are really serious about protecting the safety of fellow jumpers. If you were, you would not wait for jumpers to come to you with their questions or desires for more training. If you REALLY care for the safety of all jumpers, you would insist on a standardized canopy flight training for EVERYBODY as they are learning to jump. If you REALLY care for the safety of all jumpers, you would insist on a restriction for canopy w/l progression.

Who is going to adhere to your 'guidelines'? Looking at different DZ's, you will find inconsistent training programs and execution. How are 'guidelines' going to be consistently applied to help the current safety problem?

That is wrong. We have proven that we cannot properly 'police ourselves' -- or our fellow jumpers. Besides, the 'bigger power' is our USPA (or other elected governing body) and the progression rule would simply be part of a more thorough canopy flight education program.

We have statistics that prove that there is a problem -- the current system does not work. As much as you may want instructors to know every student’s skills and watch them accordingly, we still have many students who do not receive such attention … http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1326963#1326963 Why are we allowing any student to suffer from this lack of training? If we cannot provide a safer environment under our current system, then the system must be changed.