Why Johnnie Can't Land
Scott Schnabel
and having been a witness to one I'm wondering why people are grinding
under good canopies. I understand the turf-surf accidents. There just
seems to be people turning too low. I can't understand it.
Scott
MOM1398
> Why Johnnie Can't Land
Here is my theory on this. I'm sure I will get flamed at, and condemed for what
I say, but keep in mind who those people are. Also keep in mind that I'm
speaking not only truth, but an attitude that many if not most old timers had
way back when. And maybe an attitude we should start adopting again.
First off, Skydiving is not a sport for just anyone. Just like not anyone can
race an Indy 500 car. It's safe to say that if you haven't already met a fellow
Skydiver who you consider an accident waiting to happen, you eventually will.
Back in the older days, AAD's were very unpopular for numerous reasons. Nobody
used them, and the general attitude among Skydivers was Fuck AAD's, PULL OR
DIE. Needless to say, back then, most fatalities were low pull or no pull
incidents. The attitude was, thats how the rif-raf was weeded out. You either
went in, or you got out because you could't stomach the possibility of that
happening to you. In some aspects, it kept the Sport pure.
Years later and new technology, and along came a brand new AAD called a CYPRES.
Still no REAL Skydiver wanted to jump it. PULL OR DIE. Along comes a really
famous Skydiver who is trying really hard to get people to use a Cypres. Still
nobody listens, until one fateful day when he forgets to turn his on, gets
Knocked out, and goes in (Gee, seven years later, and they are still forgetting
to turn the Damn thing on). All of a sudden, everyone realizes that if it was
on, he would surely be alive today. The mad rush to buy Cypreses began.
Now the majority of Skydivers wear one. Too many people are being saved by
them. Not because they were knocked out, but because they didn't stay aware
enough on the Skydive to save their own lives. End result is, the rif-raf are
not being weeded out like they used to be. Too many people that should not be
in this Sport, now have a false sence of security because of a $1,000 worth of
microchips on their back.
Now, along comes more technology in the form of Z-P fabrics, Laser cutters, and
Aeronautical Engineers designing Parachutes. Cool !! We now have smaller,
faster, more aerodynamically efficient Canopies. WE ALL HAVE THAT NEED FOR
SPEED. Oh, and of course that really cool turf surf. Don't forget that a
Skydiver wants to try and push the envelope once in awhile.
Now, in the beggining, the people jumping these hot-rods were people that
already had 1,000 jumps or so. They already had a very good understanding of
Canopy control, and they had alot of respect for consequences from errors.
These people were qualified to go push the envelope on new Canopies, just like
a test pilot with several thousand hours of flying is qualified to test a brand
new Airplane.
Lets add in our new fangled training methods. In the old days, a student spent
at average three Months hanging out at the DZ, trying to get his jumps in when
he could, to graduate. During that time the student gained alot of knowledge
and wisdom just by hanging out and talking with the experienced Jumpers. I want
to emphasize WISDOM here, because that is not something you can gain by just
racking up jump numbers.
Now days, we have AFF. It is very realistic to be able to go from the F.J.C. to
your A-License in a Week. Add to that, the Society we live in today. It's a
Microwave Society where everyone wants it now, and they don't want to have to
work hard to get it. And another factor is the reasons why new jumpers want to
jump. They see it on TV, and that looks really cool, and they want to be doing
cool things. Now after they graduate AFF, and they are ready to get their own
cool gear, thay want the same shit that all the really cool looking Skydivers
are jumping. Hey, they are licensed, they can jump whatever they want to. These
people have NO Canopy control skills, and they jump very small parachutes for
their experience level.
Take all the pieces of this puzzle and what do you get? You get rif-raf that
are being weeded out because they don't belong in the Sky in the first place.
Think about it. It doesn't matter how sophisticated Skydiving becomes, or how
reliable the equipment is, or the greatness of the next technological
breakthrough. The common denominator is the person using it. Some people dont
belong in this Sport, and because of that fact, they will find a way to kill
themselves. For hundreds if not thousands of years, mankind has tried to make
the World a safer place to live in. The safer we try to make it, the more
dangerous it becomes.
Now, let me clarify a few things for you people chomping at the bit to flame
me.
I'm not saying its just rif-raf that bust up or assume room tempurature. There
are too many that left us who didn't deserve their fate. It's that old adage
of, it couldn't have happened to a better person. Shit happens. But on the same
note, all of you personally know someone who is an accident waiting to happen.
I'm not putting down AFF. I am an AFF, Static Line, and Tandem Instructor. AFF
is a good program if used properly. Is it being used properly? Are Students
getting The quality of education they should be getting? Do they gain the same
wisdom after being supervised for 1/2 the time as they would under Static Line
training. The way AFF was originally designed says they will, but are they?
I'm not against AAD's. I wear a Cypres. I do AFF, meaning there is a greater
chance of me being knocked out. I still have the attitude of "Pull or Die". If
My Cypres ever fires, when I'm fully consious, and capable of pulling my own
handles to save my own life: I WILL re-evaluate my participation in this Sport,
and seriously consider spending my time at the Bowling Alley, rather than the
DZ.
Hot-rod Parachutes? Loooove them ! I jump a Jedi 150. Love the Surfs I get.
Then again, I have 1800 jumps, and I didn't get under a Z-P canopy until I had
about 600. Also I've learned you don't have to do that hook turn to get that
surf. Also, you don't need alot of speed to land that Z-P canopy. I can land
mine fairly well in fairly deep brakes. Thats only if your convinced you dont
need the tiniest canopy there is to have fun and get radical with it.
As far as wisdom goes. I've been in the Sport for 8 years. I've averaged 200
jumps a year. Not alot considering people do a 1,000 in a year these days. Do
those people have the same understanding, and respect for the possible
consequences of our actions? How about the respect for the forces of Mother
Nature? What is their lavel of wisdom and understanding?
The bottom line is, People will unwillingly find a way to maim or kill
themselves in this Sport, either from lack of education, disregard to the
consequences, complacency, or just plain stupidity. Look around, and you will
see that certain type of Skydiver that is only around for at most 5 years. You
know the kind. One day you think, gee, I wonder whatever happened to so and so.
Those people get out for numerous reasons. Alot of these people are the
rif-raf that are weeding out.
Your question runs much deeper than just "Why Johnnie cant land". Johnnie CAN
land. Read my PS and maybe you'll understand.
Blue SkyZ
D.J. Mike
The only thing guaranteed in Skydiving is...you WILL land !
TooyT
>From: mom...@aol.com (MOM1398)
Wrote:
>Why Johnnie Can't Land
>
>Here is my theory on this. I'm sure I will get flamed at, and condemed for
***********************************Hummm well thought out and spoken
but the original post sed it wuzn't hook
turns they was thinking about. So yer theory
still may be right. I think the kids have a lack
of attention. They more worried about looking cool and miss the flare point or
make too much toggle adjustment too
low or don't know how to flat turn or
drop a toggle. All from sloppy training
and inatention to details. Pure lack of
focus. :-* snuffy sez thuts why SL is
better in the long run. :-)
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
MOM1398 wrote:
> > Why Johnnie Can't Land
>
> Here is my theory on this. I'm sure I will get flamed at, and condemed for what
> I say, but keep in mind who those people are. Also keep in mind that I'm
> speaking not only truth, but an attitude that many if not most old timers had
> way back when. And maybe an attitude we should start adopting again.
> First off, Skydiving is not a sport for just anyone. Just like not anyone can
> race an Indy 500 car. It's safe to say that if you haven't already met a fellow
> Skydiver who you consider an accident waiting to happen, you eventually will.
> The only thing guaranteed in Skydiving is...you WILL land !
Hey Mike,
No flames from me. In fact I'm standing by ready to help put them out if they
should look like flareing up! At the risk of getting into a "you pat my back I'll
pat yours" situation, I'd like to say I think you're just about on the money in all
you say in this post, of course there are those out there that will tell you that
my head is halfway up my arse and maybe they're right, but then who cares what
they think! ;-)
I'm looking forward to meeting you this winter if things come together to bring
Tracey and I back to Florida, I'm sure we'll have some interesting conversations!
OK, I'm standing by!
Blue ones,
Stay Safe.
Martin Evans.
--
"Never confuse movement with action". Ernest Hemingway
RHallifax
I'm not sure I agree with all you have to say Mike, but it's an interesting
argument.
I see far too many of the deaths are from people with over 1000 jumps, not just
an occassional death. At that level, something different has to be going on.
It seems that many people at 1000 think they know it all, are immune to the
risks, and therefore assume higher risks (unlike automobile driving, where
experienced people usually find a way to assume lower risks).
I saw tons of hook turn, surf-turf at Quincy and they all looked highly
experienced to me. Problem is, even with experience, your risk factors still
go up. It only takes one miscalculation.
As for the training, I can see where you'd be correct when talking about the
large drop zones. There's a real advantage to a 2 cessna drop zone, as the
instructors are continually giving the novice jumpers, their new friends,
pointers. I would suppose the larger DZ's just grind out licensed jumpers,
then they join their novice buddies to tear up the skies.
But what do I know. I'm sitting here with a sprained ankle. Must be I'm
rif-raf.
Blue Skies,
Bob
TooyT
In article <3611EA38...@ix.netcom.com>, SKY...@ix.netcom.com writes:
>Hey Mike,
>No flames from me. In fact I'm standing by ready to help put them out if they
>should look like flareing up! At the risk of getting into a "you pat my back
>I'll
>pat yours" situation,
************
Ummmmm be keerfull here SKYEYE, ewell loose yer tuff guy immage and
look lakk a old homo stroking another guys arse :-P snuffy sez ewe ben showing
way too much self control, GOT PROZAC??????????????
**DISCLAIMER: This was NOT A FLAME, only a bubba observation. Posting
nice things cun be deadly just like Skydiving. Ewe huv to do it with
caution & a kick in the groin to prove ewe ain't a old softy Queen ** :-P
:-P No shit, going to Florida from California is like jumping frum the frying
pan
into the fire. Ewe need to go to a cessna DZ where kids are flopping
around
trying to do falcons out of 182's or 206's. in the short term thut might
seem
like a jump down, but in the long run it will be gud fer yer soul and the roots
of skydiving. As USPA Skydiver lakks to say "Trust me!" :-) Doktur Snuffy sez
git back in touch with yer roots man :-* heh heh heh ho ho hee hee Augggggg
I'm creaming my shorts OOOOOOOOOOwwwwwwww blues & be safe, remember
if ewe cunt do the right thing then do whut works fer ewe but try to laff evar
thing else
off including insane old men.
bil...@qualcomm.com
i can.
johnnie learned under a manta, and got lots of advice on how to land it,
turn it, etc. he also learned that sometimes you have to use lots of toggle
near the ground to keep it headed into the wind. once or twice he probably
had to turn a few degrees to avoid a bush, rock etc at 30 feet. how do you
do that on a manta? pull down one toggle all the way for half a second.
then he gets his first canopy - a PD190. he gets pretty good at landing
that under ideal conditions. he gets better at picking a landing spot so he
never has to turn at 30 feet again. after 20 jumps or so, he gets a sabre
150. a little fast for him, but he figures he'll grow into it.
then, one day, johnnie looks up and sees another canopy headed straight at
him at 50 feet. he does what he has learned to do to avoid obstacles - pulls
down one toggle all the way for half a second. it worked on the manta, but
right before impact, he learns that it doesn't work on a sabre 150.
i can't count the number of times i've seen this happen. if he's lucky
he'll break something minor (arm, wrist) and just get a good lesson out of it.
easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce students
to HP canopies early on. start them on mantas for the first one or two jumps
(just in case they just plain spaz) but then very quickly move them on to ZP
canopies loaded at least .9 to 1. then teach them flat turns, and have them
practice them as avoidance manuevers. now, when they are faced with an
obstacle at 50 feet, their first instinct will be the right one - flat turn
away and get ready to flare hard.
-bill von
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
bil...@qualcomm.com
mom...@aol.com (MOM1398) wrote:
> The bottom line is, People will unwillingly find a way to maim or kill
> themselves in this Sport, either from lack of education, disregard to the
> consequences, complacency, or just plain stupidity. Look around, and you will
> see that certain type of Skydiver that is only around for at most 5 years. You
> know the kind. One day you think, gee, I wonder whatever happened to so and
so.
> Those people get out for numerous reasons. Alot of these people are the
> rif-raf that are weeding out.
true, but part of that is our fault as JM's and instructors. we're not
teaching people how to flat turn HP canopies. we're not teaching them how to
flare a small canopy. we're just releasing them with the skills they need to
fly a manta (which are sometimes the _opposite_ skills they need to land a HP
canopy) and telling them "see ya!" if we see a low-experienced jumper buying
a tiny hotrod we tell them "you can't handle that." in general we don't tell
them _how_ to land it, just not to do it.
a few people (bryan burke, dave jurgens, roger nelson) have actually
trained people how to land HP canopies. they're the people who are really
making a difference. a jumper with 20 jumps can safely land a sabre loaded
at 1:1 - _if_ they have the training to do it. and it's up to us (the
experienced jumpers, JM's and I's) to make sure that training is available
when they need it.
Whyle McConnell
Oh yeah the technology, AAD's, Canopies, all new the only thing that hasn't
changed is ......the "landing gear"
Whyle
skydog skydiving club
Harju, Mark A
for my autosignature again...
"First, know your abilities and don't overestimate yourself. Second,
know the capability of the equipment you are using and don't demand more
than it can give you in service and performance. Third, don't become
complacent."
quote by COL Joseph W. Kittinger, Jr., USAF (Ret)
Holder of World-Record Skydive (102,800’)
Please remove "no-spam" from address when replying
TooyT wrote:
>
> >From: mom...@aol.com (MOM1398)
> Wrote:
> >Why Johnnie Can't Land
> >
> >Here is my theory on this. I'm sure I will get flamed at, and condemed for
> >what I say (, Snip a lot of good theory)
>
> In the old days, a student
> >spent
> >at average three Months hanging out at the DZ, trying to get his
>
> >jumps in when
> >he could, to graduate. During that time the student gained alot of knowledge
> >and wisdom just by hanging out and talking with the experienced Jumpers.
<snip more logical statements>
They see it on TV, and that looks really cool, and they want to be
> >doing
> >cool things. Now after they graduate AFF, and they are ready to get their own
> >cool gear, thay want the same shit that all the really cool looking Skydivers
> >are jumping. Hey, they are licensed, they can jump whatever they want to.
> >These
> >people have NO Canopy control skills, and they jump very small parachutes for
> >their experience level.
> >Take all the pieces of this puzzle
>
> >and what do you get? You get rif-raf that
> >are being weeded out because they don't belong in the Sky in the first place.
<snip more logical, well-put statements about safety>
new...@jps.net
>
if you haven't already met a
fellow
> Skydiver who you consider an accident waiting to happen, you eventually will.
But on the
same
> note, all of you personally know someone who is an accident waiting to happen.
Blue SkyZ
> D.J. Mike
> The only thing guaranteed in Skydiving is...you WILL land !
>
I've only been skydiving for about 5 years but I'm pretty good at spotting
future incident reports. So far I've only been surprised once ( I expected
that one to hook it in. Instead he bounced). Sometimes I look in the mirror
and see myself as a statistic. Another one had the good sense to get out of
the sport alive and mostly intact. The question is..... How do you tell the
young hotrod that he's going to bounce? You know the one, a natural,
everything came easy and knows everything. How do you make deaf ears listen?
-- Joe Carroll Skydiving is a safe sport. The penalty for error is severe.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
bil...@qualcomm.com
new...@jps.net wrote:
> I've only been skydiving for about 5 years but I'm pretty good at spotting
> future incident reports. So far I've only been surprised once ( I expected
> that one to hook it in. Instead he bounced). Sometimes I look in the mirror
> and see myself as a statistic. Another one had the good sense to get out of
> the sport alive and mostly intact. The question is..... How do you tell the
> young hotrod that he's going to bounce?
instead of telling him he's going to bounce, why not teach him what he
needs to know so he doesn't bounce? takes longer, but can be more effective.
-bill von
ocon...@slr.orl.lmco.com
> The question is..... How do you tell the
> young hotrod that he's going to bounce?
I don't know. But I bet ya could ask Carbone.
He's been told by lots-o-people lots-o-different ways.
Ask him which one was most effective.
Kevin O'Connell
MOM1398
>Why Johnnie Can't Land
> How do you make deaf ears listen?
I'm going to kill two birds with one stone here.
Bill Von and I originally came frome the same DZ. Bill, you are correct in
stating that some of the fault lays on the JM & I's. I see far too many of them
that seem to have an attitude of "no money in my pocket? No no wisdom from me".
I've also seen too many times, a JM move a Student to the next level when they
should'nt. "GEE if I fail him, he might get frustrated and quit. My cash flow
from this one will end too soon". How many JM&I's have an open invitation to
all graduates and low timers to jump with them? I do! Others try to sell them
on coaching or Skydive U. More money!! Don't get me wrong, I'm not against
making money. Skydiving is my livelyhood. I just have a genuine concern for my
students well being. On more than one occasion, I've had to sit down with a
Student, and tell them they need to re-evaluate the reasons they want to
Skydive. It's not pleasant, but my job is to ensure the student is capable of
staying alive. I also believe in giving the customer more than what they paid
for.
I agree with what Roger Nelson and others are doing with Student Z-P Canopies.
This can only work on a large scale, if DZ's, and more importantly JM & I's
re-evaluate their role in the positive progression of our Sport. Bill and I
come from a tight landing area DZ. Canopy control was taught with just as much
importance as "ARCH" or "PULL". Both you and I are at DZ's with super huge
landing areas with all the outs in the world. Canopy control looses it's
importance for some reason.People think the Ranch is tiny? It's huge compared
to where Bill and I learned.
Now lets look at the other side of the Coin and answer the question that Joe
Carroll poses.
How do you tell the young hotrod he's going to bounce? SIMPLE! You tell the
young hot rod he's going to bounce. One of two things will happen. One, he will
humble up, and listen to your words of wisdom, or two he will get pissed and
tell you to fuck off. If number two happens, and he does go in, you have the
satisfaction of being able to say "I told you so".
If you keep your mouth shut and say nothing, then you have to live with not
trying to make a difference.
Way back when, I was one of those naturals. Skydiving came too easy for me. I
became one of those 200 jump wonders who knew it all. My friends tried to warn
me, and when I wouldn't listen, they all turned their back on me. Pissed me off
at the time, but now I look back at it and thank them. I'm lucky I got thru
that period unscratched. I was smart enough to realize I was doing something
wrong, and maybe it's time I started learning again. Learning is something I do
every day.
"How do you make deaf ears listen"? You can't ! You can't help someone who
doesn't want help. These are the rif-raf that don't belong in the air. They
will eventually disapear, either by going in, getting scared, or being rejected
by Skydivers who know better. Skydivers who have the wisdom.
Theres an old pilots saying that applies to Skydivers as well. "There are old
Pilots, and there are bold Pilots. There are NO old, bold Pilots".
As I stated before, it's not just rif-raf that goes in. Some didn't deserve
their fate. BUT, as long as rif-raf want to try and Skydive we will continue to
have fatalities. Mankind finds many ways of weeding out those who should not
propagate.
Sorry Joe, Skydiving is NOT a safe sport. Don't ever believe it is !
D.J. Mike
MOM1398
Woops I hit the send button too early.
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
new...@jps.net wrote:
> In article <19980930011224...@ng13.aol.com>,
> mom...@aol.com (MOM1398) wrote:
> >
> > > Why Johnnie Can't Land
>
> I've only been skydiving for about 5 years but I'm pretty good at spotting
> future incident reports. So far I've only been surprised once ( I expected
> that one to hook it in. Instead he bounced). Sometimes I look in the mirror
> and see myself as a statistic. Another one had the good sense to get out of
> the sport alive and mostly intact. The question is..... How do you tell the
> young hotrod that he's going to bounce? You know the one, a natural,
> everything came easy and knows everything. How do you make deaf ears listen?
> -- Joe Carroll Skydiving is a safe sport. The penalty for error is severe.
You can't, unfortunately they don't want to hear it, believe me I try. My parting
comment is always along the line of, "fine you go right ahead and do what you want
as long as you don't involve others there's nothing else I can say to you *BUT, when
you're laying there waiting for the ambulance to come and cart your broken body off,
I will come over and say "I told you so"* and I do!
What most of them fail to realize is, that many of us have made the mistakes that we
are trying to save them from. We've been there, done that and were often lucky to
survive it. Of course many of us also thought we were invincible and more capable
than we actually were/are, but then were still here aren't we, so perhaps it was
true! ;-)
Blue ones,
Stay Safe (and remember, "I told you so")!
Duksnarow
>Ewe need to go to a cessna DZ where kids are flopping
>around
> trying to do falcons out of 182's
ahh, sounds like us. where we still do things the old fashioned way. actually
there a lot of things to do with a wdi. you can have the pilot throw it,
throw one at 8,000, get out a 9500 and try to catch it, throw it under canopy,
see if you can throw it in front of the step. you can clean your goggles with
it, blow your nose with it.
we still <gasp> spot.
i say if ya cant do it from 9500 ya cant do it.
- Mark Elenbaas
http://members.aol.com/Duksnarow/index.html
home DZ.: Skydive Hastings, Hastings Michigan 616-948-2665
Duksnarow
>easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce students
>to HP canopies early on.
perhaps, but i dont see the wisdom in putting a 25 jump wonder on a stillitto
TooyT
>From: bil...@qualcomm.com Wrote:
>I've only been skydiving for about 5 years but I'm pretty good at spotting
>> future incident reports. So far I've only been surprised once ( I expected
>> that one to hook it in. Instead he bounced). Sometimes I look in the
>mirror
>and see myself as a statistic. Another one had the good sense to get out of
>> the sport alive and mostly intact. The question is..... How do you tell
>the young hotrod that he's going to bounce?
***********************************
Yawl gitting into sum kinky stuff here
Although breaking BSR's pretty well uses up your luck. Ask yerself if its just
a wish they
bounce because they jump different or
show less fear than you? I seen experianced
conservative skydivers bounce for no known reason while a yahoo keeps on
ticking
like the pink bunny. One thing fer sure
everybody is going to bounce this life sooner
or later. When Azreal cums ewe gone, gone
good, bad or indifferent don't be afraid, is
this not the NO FEAR sport? I think their
may be some sign self destructive people
may go early. Did you help push them off?
People are so narrow minded and judgemental I seen one guy, wuz a bozo
he went in but happened to be doing everything right that particular day, all
the conservative people rush up and say
I saw that coming! I standing there thinking
yawl holymen? Tell me which load is one
load too many then. Life is a crap shoot where dieing is concerned. Seen people
screw
sucking on the barrel up. Seen enemy walk thru hails of fmj and git away. seen
guys minding their own business under cover git the golden BB. Yawl just be
ready ewe may be watching others to die so hard ewe don't see Azreal coming for
you. Be ready, beeee readyyyy
we all gonna die beee readddddy. readddy
BTW do ewe know when the next load was
one to many? heh heh heh dum dum de dum dum, heh heh dieing dieeeeeeee. :-*
snuffy
Damn yawl morbid shits make me look normal.
Gud thread to spook the students though,
wish I had thought of it. :-P
new...@jps.net
> instead of telling him he's going to bounce, why not teach him what he
> needs to know so he doesn't bounce? takes longer, but can be more effective.
>
> -bill von
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
How do you you get them to listen when they know it all already?
--
Joe Carroll
Skydiving is a safe sport.
The penalty for error is severe.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
General Stark
>
>>Why Johnnie Can't Land
>
>> How do you make deaf ears listen?
>
>I'm going to kill two birds with one stone here.
<snip>
>People think the Ranch is tiny? It's huge compared
>to where Bill and I learned.
Whoa! People think the Ranch is tiny? I thought it was pretty darn
big, but it's the only other place I've been besides home. Are most
DZ's bigger?
Marty
Home DZ: Airborne Adventures
Northampton, MA (7B2)
NCB #317
RHallifax
>>easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce students
>>to HP canopies early on.
>
>perhaps, but i dont see the wisdom in putting a 25 jump wonder on a stillitto
Bill Von has a point here. Roger Nelson has been putting students on Sabers
for some time now, with success. You know, there was a time when students were
required to fly a round because the squares were too fast, or something.... So
I'm not so sure Roger's idea is wrong.
Bob
RHallifax
> i say if ya cant do it from 9500 ya cant do it.
My god, man.... that's heresy.... these are the 1990's... You're gonna cause
heart failure...
On the serious side, I understand a DZ on Long Island, NY only goes to 7,500.
And I've been told (never been there myself) that they turn as many points as
anyone. Just makes ya work a little harder.... ah.... I mean, faster.....
Blues Skies,
Bob
Fogelder
While I have no argument with D.J. Mike's general thesis, I think there is
another cause for fatalities that's not being addressed here -- and I think it
helps explain some of the "very-experienced jumper" landing incidents.
Hot swoops, and especially the most impressive ones, depend on getting the
timing down to a gnat's ass, and then repeating it, landing after landing. The
problem is that your timing can be literally perfect and exactly repeatable,
but the air is not. Think back to some of the recent incidents -- the second
tandem fatality up in Washington comes to mind, and I think it makes a good
example. There were no reports of extreme turbulence in that area, as far as I
can tell; yet something was there that was severe enough to take out the
canopy, beyond recovery.
The atmosphere is a fluid in turmoil: turbulence on all scales can be present,
over a wide area, but unless there is a tracer for the flow you won't see it (a
dust devil makes its presence known when over a dusty field, for example, but
in a clean parking lot you're lucky to see a few scraps of paper whirling -- or
your hat). Even if the air has been pretty clean all day, there's no way to
guarantee that will be true in a given place at a given time.
So what happens when you hit air in unexpected motion? Here are a couple of
scenarios:
Let's say you've just done a front-riser turn to build speed, and are about to
start your flare... as you begin, you pass through a small rotor with a few
feet per second peak rotational velocity, and you hit the up side first. What
happens is that you aren't descending as fast as you expect, so you wait... and
then you hit the downside a fraction of a second later because of your fast
swoop, and all of a sudden you are descending much faster than you anticipated
-- and you may be in the dirt before you can do anything about it. Now, small
rotors like this are common where you have a moderate wind over uneven terrain
(like a gentle slope with an upwind breeze), and if the wind is a little gusty
they can be quite small and very mobile. How do you tell if you're going to
hit one? You don't...
Another one: ramairs are peculiar wings, because they depend on the lift they
generate from their shape to maintain their shape... if you change the air flow
on the airfoil fast enough, in the right place, you can knock the flow right
off the surface. Then there is no more lift on that portion of the wing, but
all the speed is still there -- so the ramair literally runs over that part of
itself, and presto: collapse! Some airfoil designs are more prone to this
than others -- the Nova comes to mind -- but you can slap even the best of them
hard enough to cause this sort of collapse. The worst kinds of "slap" come
from very fast changes in flow direction -- like the edge of a dust devil, or a
bad wind shear, or the turbulent wake of another canopy or a building or a
mountain. But again, you can't see the changing flow under many (or possibly
even most) circumstances.
In all these cases, the faster you're traveling when you hit the bad air, the
less time you have to react to it. And yes, I know the argument that ZP
canopies are more turbulence-resistant the faster they go -- but neither of
these scenarios are affected by that argument.
What it comes down to is this: it doesn't matter how good you are, the air can
screw you faster than you can react, and it may not bother to warn you. The
more swoops you do, the more confident you tend to get -- and the greater the
likelihood that you'll run into a problem you don't see coming. The risk on a
single landing may be small, but as far as this type problem goes, the risk is
simply proportional to the number of times you do it.
Scott Schnabel
flaw. Betcha don't read too many incident reports of newbie pilots
(aircraft type) turning low and worm-hunting in their 185's. I am not
an instructor but I wonder how much time is devoted to landing safely.
Again, I'm not referring to turf-surf accidents...rather the students
who pull boneheaded maneuvers.
Is it lack of respect for the serious hurt this sport can put on you?
Is it lack of training?
Seems to me it's an issue that will have to be addressed by someone
(USPA?).
Jan Meyer
Roger Nelson and Tony Frost (Marana, AZ) were the first DZOs to put
students on ramairs (c 82 or 83???). They caught a lot of flack about it
too. MOstly bcz folks didn't know they had redundant steering systems
(student education, radio, ground arrows or flags).
Back then the *norm* was to have a 100 jumps BEFORE you could jump a
ramair.
(This is why my first ram air jump is jump #97).
Roger's educational programs have ALWAYS been good, progressive and in
the right direction. To evaluate Roger's system read his course
materials, talk to his JM/Is and talk to his students. You can also talk
to Roger, but he'll give you a *biased* opinion. ;) (of course)
--
Jan Meyer
Women's World Record in Large Formation Skydiving
http://www.MakeItHappen.com/wwr
Email: Aeroso...@MakeItHappen.com
Aerosoftware at http://www.MakeItHappen.com
Rita
> easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce students
> to HP canopies early on. start them on mantas for the first one or two jumps
> (just in case they just plain spaz) but then very quickly move them on to ZP
> canopies loaded at least .9 to 1. then teach them flat turns, and have them
> practice them as avoidance manuevers. now, when they are faced with an
> obstacle at 50 feet, their first instinct will be the right one - flat turn
> away and get ready to flare hard.
While this would be nice ... in the real world it's often impossible. Many
dz's are small ... they don't have unlimited budgets for state-of-the-art
student gear. Those old, but very well-maintained mantas, may be all they
have to work with. So Johnnie has to learn on them.
Maybe after student progression, Johnnie wouldn't be so quick to get hurt or
killed if he just took his time ... and wasn't in such a hurry to get under
that high performance hankerchief. Work on canopy control under a
larger, more docile main. Use some of the video training programs
available, and ask for help at the dz. Then, as he gains more and more
experience, he can begin to slowly downsize.
After all, the skies will be there tomorrow ... what's the rush?
Blue ones!
--rita
Rita
> Whoa! People think the Ranch is tiny? I thought it was pretty darn
> big, but it's the only other place I've been besides home. Are most
> DZ's bigger?
LOL ... United Parachute Club's landing area is friggin huge!
And, if you can't make that (and on a couple of occasions, I couldn't) ...
the whole surrounding area is nothing but great outs ... as in wide open
fields. You'd almost have to be an idiot to land out there and get hurt in
the process. And, when I say that ... well, let's just say it means
something. :)
Blue ones!
--rita
rick nelson
Back when most DZs were C-182 operations, and the big DZs had Beech-18s
or even the occaisional <snuffy> hack, pffft, gag</snuffy> Lodestar
(Deathstar, Lodestall, whatever),most RW jumps were from 7500'. With the
ultra-baggy RW Eagle, Thunderbolt and Balloon Suits you had a fall rate
that allowed a little more freefall time, unless someone got scared and
tracked away at 2500'. :) It was a real bargain too, even with the
inflation rate figured in: 3200' SL w/rented conventional gear for
$7.50, or 7500' w/yer own gear for $5.00. Didn't turn many points
though. The skygods back then wouldn't pull a piece off, "hell, that
ain't skydivin' if you're all exitin' with grips already."
rick
Rita
>
> > instead of telling him he's going to bounce, why not teach him what he
> > needs to know so he doesn't bounce? takes longer, but can be more effective.
> How do you you get them to listen when they know it all already?
I spent the weekend at Cleveland Parachute Center. Shame more dz's don't
have the awesome canopy control simulator that they have there. Very
realistic in some respects ... a real eyeopener.
Someone tries something stupid in the air ... especially a low-timer ... you
can show them what the result *could* have been.
For example, someone pulls too low for their experience level? Kewl. Don't
yell at them ... make them feel like two cents ... maybe they honestly didn't
intend to do that.
Instead, make it a learning experience for them ... a really valuable one.
Put them in the sim ... have them pull at just the altitude they did in the
air. Then throw in a nice mal for them to deal with ... perhaps a pilot
chute in tow or nothing at all out. Now let them see how much time they have
to deal with it. When the sim stops ... and you clear your throat ...
"ahhhhhh, you just bounced" ... they'll get the picture very clearly ... and
probably learn a good lesson too.
I only wish that back 50 jumps ago I had had a chance to do this simulator.
Shame more dz's don't have one. I tend to think I would have been spending a
lot of time in there during the early days of my student progression ...
working out the canopy control problems I had ... rather than screwing up in
the air and pissing a lot of jm's off. :(
Just my humble opinion.
Blue ones!
--rita
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
Fogelder wrote:
> While I have no argument with D.J. Mike's general thesis, I think there is
> another cause for fatalities that's not being addressed here -- and I think it
> helps explain some of the "very-experienced jumper" landing incidents.
>
> Hot swoops, and especially the most impressive ones, depend on getting the
> timing down to a gnat's ass, and then repeating it, landing after landing. The
> problem is that your timing can be literally perfect and exactly repeatable,
> but the air is not.
> What it comes down to is this: it doesn't matter how good you are, the air can
> screw you faster than you can react, and it may not bother to warn you. The
> more swoops you do, the more confident you tend to get -- and the greater the
> likelihood that you'll run into a problem you don't see coming. The risk on a
> single landing may be small, but as far as this type problem goes, the risk is
> simply proportional to the number of times you do it.
Yes good point and one that many fail to factor in, even the best can screw up or
be screwed by circumstances beyond their control! If you're going to push to the
limit, be aware that sometimes there's a push back! It's great fun to ride along
the edge, doesn't mean you should be there on every jump though, sometimes it's
smarter to back off just a little in whatever you do!
Blue ones,
Stay Safe.
MOM1398
> I understand a DZ on Long Island, NY only
>goes to 7,500.
>And I've been told (never been there myself) that they turn as many points as
>anyone. Just makes ya work a little harder.... ah.... I mean, faster.....
Thats almost correct. The Club goes to 9,500 and CRANKS POINTS like the best of
them. The school has a 7,500 limit. I know, cause Skydive Long Island is where
I learned, and where I taught for 6 years. It also has one of the BEST
scenery's in the country.
bil...@qualcomm.com
duks...@aol.com (Duksnarow) wrote:
> perhaps, but i dont see the wisdom in putting a 25 jump wonder on a stillitto
well, let's skip the stiletto, because it has some bad habits.
but what about a jedei? let's say you take someone, start them on a manta,
then by jump 3 have them on a sabre 170, jump 5 a sabre 135, jump 10 a jedei
135, and jump 20 a jedei 120. let's also say that, on every jump, this guy
is told to practice canopy control, with the JM setting up for no-contact
CRW, and the JM watching and critiquing his landing. compare him to someone
with 1000 jumps on a PD190 who is jumping a jedei 120 for the first time.
who's safer? i think the 25 jump wonder would be. he knows how to fly his
canopy, because he's been taught.
bil...@qualcomm.com
new...@jps.net wrote:
> How do you you get them to listen when they know it all already?
that's a very good question, one that's not easily answered. it's at the
basis of all good teaching. how do you get the student to look at something
a new way, when they're used to looking at it an older way? FJ course
instructors generally have an easier time of it, because the people there are
afraid they'll die if they screw up (which is true.) it's no less true
later, but people forget that, and experienced jumpers have preconceptions
that new jumpers don't have.
one idea - challenge them. say "yeah, you think you're pretty good with
that sabre 170, but can you turn 90 degrees in the flare? i can do that."
skydivers generally respond well to challenges like that. then, when they
biff, point out that that's something they really have to know before they
jump that stiletto 120 - how to steer through the landing.
FFP74
Good point Bill.
I don't know many DZ's that have post graduate training on landings and canopy
control. After you graduation jump you are on your own. Better pray that you
listen to someone with some sense. Don't listen to that 100 jump wonder on a
Sabre, heavily loaded.
Later
TooyT
>From: Rita <kr...@philly.infi.net> Wrote:
>new...@jps.net wrote:
>Someone tries something stupid in the air ... especially a low-timer ... you
>can show them what the result *could* have been.
Yuh git them in a hammerlock and jump up and down with them in tow chanting see
whut happens kid? Till the AFF/JM's pull ewe off the sheep :-) snuffy heh heh
Duksnarow
>>>easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce students
>> >>to HP canopies early on.
>> >
>stillitto
i am probably getting in over my head here, but here goes nothing.
how many fjc students do you see landing with a no flare/ late flare? 99% walk
away if they are under a manta. how many in the same scenario walk away under a
sabre?
i still fail to see the wisdom in putting someone with 25 jumps under a
stillitto, especially when he had biffed it in really hard the day before under
a sabre.
otoh, i havent seen rogers student course and i have only been there once. so i
dont have the all the insight i should have to make statements such as these.
i guess my view is aimed at preventing uneccesary injuries. roger told me the
stillitto is easier to land, i wouldnt know, i have never jumped one. i figure
its also easier to get hurt when you screw up your landing.
my wife is coming off a broken leg caused by a landing mistake under a manta.
she would have been seriusly screwed up under a sabre. ( its not easy living
with a skydiver with a broken leg. even tougher for her. heh, heh)
as always, i will admit to bieng a newbie (85 jumps) so i dont know everything.
Duksnarow
> well, let's skip the stiletto, because it has some bad habits.
>
> but what about a jedei? let's say you take someone, start them on a manta,
>then by jump 3 have them on a sabre 170
now that makes some sense. provided they are not inept at landing.
Rita
> Yuh git them in a hammerlock and jump up and down with them in tow chanting see
> whut happens kid? Till the AFF/JM's pull ewe off the sheep :-) snuffy heh heh
Yeah, sounds like my static line jm's ... those pesky guys with the low "D"
numbers. Boy, my neck used to be sore quite a bit. :(
Blue ones!
--rita
Rita
> how many fjc students do you see landing with a no flare/ late flare? 99% walk
> away if they are under a manta. how many in the same scenario walk away under a
> sabre?
I have less jumps than you, Mark ... but I'll add my two cents here too.
I trained pretty much on 288' mantas ... and PD280's. I now jump a PD210.
I'm still struggling with landings after 70 jumps. While I'm getting better,
some of them ain't too pretty. You talk about no flare/late flare. My
problem has often been *early* flare ... as in 20 to 30-feet from the ground.
I don't skydive as much as I would like, and perhaps that's my problem ...
but I would hate to think how little I would skydive if I were jumping a high
performance canopy. I'd probably be spending more time casted than jumping.
At least with the PD210, I may land a bit hard ... but, fortunately, I walk
away from my mistakes with nary a bruise. I wouldn't want to get under a
high performance canopy unless I had many, many consecutive good landings
under progressively smaller and smaller docile-type mains.
This is the problem with student progressions ... both the progressive ones
like Roger's, and the more traditional ones provided by the small, one-Cessna
dz's. It's generally "one size fits all." A program like Roger's may work
great for many students ... perhaps they pick up landing technique very
quickly ... getting a gentle standup on their first jump. Others have
problems ... believe me, I know damned well that I'm not the only one! The
word "gentle" simply doesn't apply to most of my landings.
I think this is one of the areas where a student progression needs to be
customized to the individual ... and the decision as to which canopy they
jump should be made by a knowledgeable jm based on their performance on
previous jumps. Some students may do very well under high performance
canopies ... just as some tend to pick up the nuances of AFF very easily.
But, trust me, this ain't gonna work with everyone ... and could probably
spell disaster for many.
TooyT
>From: Rita <kr...@philly.infi.net>
>Date: 10/1/98 Wrote:
>Duksnarow wrote:
>I'm still struggling with landings after 70 jumps. While I'm getting better,
Ha ha ha ha ha ho ho, I never stood it up till my 80th jump, one day it just
clicked and I
rarely crashed much anymore unless it wuz running frum my zoo buddies who were
tryin to use my canopy fer a landing pad. Yawl
stick around the DZ and git them jump tickets
yewl learn sumthing after awhile even if
its on yer own, nothing like busting in on
yer ass as a teaching tool. Shake it off and
bust yer ass again. Man ewe just got to luv
it like a bitchy woman. :-) snuffy
TooyT
***********************************
Well I ain't no low D never gonna be a super
skydiver either, wuz cut down in the flower of my youth by old age:) But I
bought a
D.I. or Cardray type attitude to the sport
with me. The Skygods hated it but the kids
luved the attention. Like thay ain't nevar
had no Great Unkle or Grandpa git on
their ass with a switch. They wuz starved
fer it. But it may huv turned me into terror
by civilian standards. Heh heh :-P snuffy
D17105
RHallifax
<<People are so narrow minded and judgemental I seen one guy, wuz a bozo
he went in but happened to be doing everything right that particular day, all
the conservative people rush up and say
I saw that coming! I standing there thinking
yawl holymen?>>
No, not holymen. Not really even judgmental, though they look like that. Just
trying to convince themselves that they're different, therefore they won't
bounce....they just want to see a survivor in the mirror...But, don't worry
snuffy: They don't ever figure out they're wrong when they are wrong..... I
suppose there's a little of all of us in this denial.
Rita
> In the old days, a student spent
> at average three Months hanging out at the DZ, trying to get his jumps in when
> he could, to graduate. During that time the student gained alot of knowledge
> and wisdom just by hanging out and talking with the experienced Jumpers. I want
> to emphasize WISDOM here, because that is not something you can gain by just
> racking up jump numbers.
> Now days, we have AFF. It is very realistic to be able to go from the F.J.C. to
> your A-License in a Week. Add to that, the Society we live in today. It's a
> Microwave Society where everyone wants it now, and they don't want to have to
> work hard to get it.
God, I'm glad to see someone of your experience post this, Mike ... because I
would never have dared to.
I *don't* have your experience ... but I've had a long student progression
and I've seen a lot ... and have thus come away with some very strong
impressions of the sport and how one goes about progressing in it.
Why Johnnie can't land? How about why Johnnie sometimes can't be safe? I
think that's the problem here ... the focus is on the wrong areas in many
student progressions. Doing awesome RW might be nice ... high performance
swoops look really kewl ... but the bottom line in any student progression
should be one of safety ... can Johnnie get himself out of the aircraft and
back onto the ground without doing too much damage to either himself or
others? Getting him to that point should be the goal of any student
progression. The other stuff ... that needs to come with time.
You're right ... AFF is a bit fast ... much too fast for my tastes. I
finally went AFF to graduate ... in my case, it was probably a wise choice.
I had been floundering around on student progression for close to two years
... making an AFF jump here ... a tandem there ... and finally settling in on
a slow static line progression taking place over a cold northeast winter. I
had been around long enough where the speed of AFF probably wasn't going to
hurt me much. I had already been involved with the sport for some time
before going into it.
But how about Johnnie? His only exposure to the sport may have been through
TV ... like you said, he thinks it looks "kewl" and wants to do it. So, he
goes to the dz on Friday and takes his FJC. Maybe things are a bit slow that
particular weekend. Maybe Johnnie is a lucky boy. He gets all his AFF jumps
in by Sunday ... making his hop 'n pop on the sunset load Sunday night. Now
he's done graduated! Good boy! You can jump by yourself now!
Is Johnnie really prepared to be totally on his own? Sure, Johnnie did
really well in AFF. His jumpmasters were really impressed by his
performance, with nary a negative comment appearing in his logbook. Should
Johnnie be graduated? Sure, he should. That's only fair.
But should Johnnie be on his own yet? That's where I think the problem is
... in that stage between student progression and getting that first license.
Is 20 jumps really enough to allow someone to be totally in charge of their
own destiny? Does one really know enough at that point to get themselves out
of the situations that perhaps their over-zealousness and over-confidence may
get them into? At some dz's Johnnie would be carefully looked out for ...
for quite a while. The smaller, "family" type operations would guarantee
that. When Johnnie gets over-confident and does things which perhaps
illustrate a severe lack of good judgment, he would be called on it ...
perhaps grounded for the rest of the weekend so that he could spend some time
reflecting on it ... but at many, larger operations, he would be entirely on
his own.
Do most dz's have in place a program ... a standard ... whereby the "newbie"
fresh off of student status is helped along ... taught all those things that
a quick AFF program simply doesn't have time to teach? I've been lucky. My
learning in this sport hasn't stopped one iota since graduating AFF ... and I
honestly hope it never does. But part of the reason for my luck is that I'm
older ... more mature. I've been "mentored" quite a bit ... but that's
mainly because I've sought that mentoring out. I've asked the people I
respect at my dz to take me up for coaching dives. I've asked for lots and
lots of guidance with packing (a skill I am only starting to see some success
with) ... as a result, I think that when I have my license, it will be
because I've really worked my ass off for it and am better prepared to be
truly "cut loose." I will be able to go to the dz ... on my own, if
necessary, put on my gear, get into an airplane with no one but the pilot ...
go to altitude, spot, get out, and land safely ... with no one to depend on
but myself.
And, until I feel I would be able to do that ... guess what? I don't give a
flying fuck if I have a license or not. I'll be happy to be a bit restricted
... to have someone insist on giving me a gear check ... to have someone
maybe become annoyed with me because perhaps I routed my BOC throw-out bridle
wrong ... or screwed up another flare and took a hard landing.
I honestly don't think there's a thing wrong with AFF. But there is a lot
wrong with the speed at which many people wish to progress. Our sport draws
a lot of young people, a lot of very "heads up" people, very successful
people. They've done so much so quickly in other areas of their lives, that
they think this sport should be the same way. Then they whip through a
student progression, have their license in a week, and rack up another
success. Perhaps they get cocky, get over-confident. Why not? It's never
caused them a problem in any other area of their lives, now has it? Why
should skydiving be any different? So they try more and more ... pushing the
envelope ... doing many things that perhaps someone of their experience level
isn't quite ready for. And, that's when they get hurt ... or worse.
Mentoring. Therein lies the key. That period between AFF and that first
license needs to be a more intense period ... a period not just for jumping,
but for talking ... an experienced jm or coach gathering a bunch of low
timers together for a discussion of landing techniques, formation safety,
aircraft procedures, etc. ... an experienced skydiver grabbing a newbie for a
fun jump ... taking them up and sharing a piece of the sky, and of their
experience, with them ... a kindly rigger who is willing to take time out
from his busy schedule to work on packing with an asshole like me who just
can't seem to "get it," and then seeing the light dawn ... as finally some of
those mysteries unfold themselves.
This is the sort of "mentoring" I am talking about ... not the formal "Level
VIII" programs ... the professional coaching, the structured syllabus ... but
the relationships being fostered wherein the newbie won't hesitate to
ask for clarification on something ... something that to most others
seems obvious. Fostering an environment where the newbie wouldn't
hesitate to pull a trusted "mentor" aside and say ... "listen, I know this is
gonna sound like a really stupid question ... " ... an environment where he
wouldn't be laughed at.
And, finally, more than innate skill ... more than being able to go up on a
dive and perform perfectly the first time ... this sport requires people with
judgment and with maturity, and with a total lack of inflated pride. It
requires people who are not ashamed to ask questions ... and to speak up when
they don't understand. It requires people who are not afraid to look stupid
... if they don't understand, to seek out someone else who may have a
different way of explaining it. It requires the person who truly wants to
make this a lifelong learning experience.
To me, the successful skydiver is not necessarily the one who was on that
awesome 200-way record attempt ... but it is the one who has been in the
sport for a while ... and is still around to enjoy the skies.
Blue ones!
--rita
bil...@qualcomm.com
Rita <kr...@philly.infi.net> wrote:
> bil...@qualcomm.com wrote:
>
> > easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce
students
jumps
> > (just in case they just plain spaz) but then very quickly move them on to ZP
> > canopies loaded at least .9 to 1. then teach them flat turns, and have them
> > practice them as avoidance manuevers. now, when they are faced with an
> > obstacle at 50 feet, their first instinct will be the right one - flat turn
> > away and get ready to flare hard.
>
> While this would be nice ... in the real world it's often impossible. Many
> dz's are small ... they don't have unlimited budgets for state-of-the-art
> student gear. Those old, but very well-maintained mantas, may be all they
> have to work with. So Johnnie has to learn on them.
i'm not sure if i buy that. my first DZ used this as an excuse to use
1950's - vintage rounds that came apart when you opened them and DC-5's that
simply did not flare. if you want to make money teaching students you have to
spend the money to get the gear they need.
> Maybe after student progression, Johnnie wouldn't be so quick to get hurt or
> killed if he just took his time ... and wasn't in such a hurry to get under
> that high performance hankerchief. Work on canopy control under a
> larger, more docile main. Use some of the video training programs
> available, and ask for help at the dz. Then, as he gains more and more
> experience, he can begin to slowly downsize.
that's fine, as long as he always sticks to larger F111 mains. but if he
ever wants to transition to a ZP main loaded at 1:1, he will spend all that
time teaching himself bad habits under that manta.
we're going through a transition right now. i've heard very old arguments,
exactly like yours, to rationalize keeping students on rounds for their first
100 jumps. we learned the hard way that squares were actually safer,
especially when you trained people from day one to use them. roger and a few
others have extended this to HP canopies. i think it's just a matter of time
before the rest of us catch up.
yes, it will cost money to replace mantas with triathalon 190's. but
that's life. "it's too expensive!" is a poor reason to not buy AAD's for
students (for example.)
TooyT
>From: rhal...@aol.com (RHallifax) Wrote:
***********************************
Yuh I guess so but I hate it when these kinky young guys think they can tell.
It distracts me from livining every day of my life like I will
live forever not die tomorrow. SPOIL SPORTS I say! :-) Wise up you only have a
certain amount of time left, all
of you. don't be anal enjoy life exsplore the
edges, don't fall over though. fer that matter
don't bend over a coyote might try to hump
ewe (under subsection on fates worse than death) . :-* snuffy Har har har heh
heh
Wendy Faulkner
Rita <kr...@philly.infi.net> wrote:
>
>but I would hate to think how little I would skydive if I were jumping a high
>performance canopy. I'd probably be spending more time casted than jumping.
>
What people need to remember is that ZP does NOT equal high performance.
For Rita I'd say a Sabre 210 would seem to have less performance than a
PD 210, but have a more forgiving flare. I know right off student
status (I was 115 pounds) I MUCH preferred the PD 170 over the Sabre
150. The PD seemed more fun. Sabres at light loadings are far from
high performance. They can even be forgiving.
There are several different types of student canopies at my dz. A
Manta, the South African Skymaster, and some canopy for smaller people
(I'm not a JM there - I can't remember what they are.) The one that's
impressed the hell out of me? The Skymaster. Its half ZP, and is
noticably faster than the same-sized Manta. It has a lot more lift,
more glide, and a much more forgiving flare. I've seen students flare
way too high, and way too low on the Skymasters, and stand up the
landing. Its a sweet, forgiving canopy. More so than the same sized
F111 canopies.
The first canopy I owned off of student status was a Monarch 135. I
plowed in on a Night Jump without flaring at all. (Kinda discovered
just how bad my night vision could be). Was fine other than being a bit
bruised. I was loading that canopy < 1.0. The canopy wasn't high
performance.
Wen
--
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that
heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!)
but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov
http://www.eco.utexas.edu/~faulkner Wendy Faulkner
MOM1398
I'm curious to know if anyone at U.S.P.A. Headquarters is following this post.
For once we have a good debate going, on a very important subject. Although I
don't agree with all of them, a lot of good points are being made here.
I some times wonder if our U.S.P.A. Rep's. really know whats going on in the
real world of Skydiving. It would be interesting to hear some feedback from
Glen Bangs, or anyone else who is an Elected, or hired Representative of
U.S.P.A.
Blue SkyZ,
D.J. Mike
The only thing guaranteed in Skydiving is...you WILL land !
Liv4fear
>i guess my view is aimed at preventing uneccesary injuries. roger told me
>the
>stillitto is easier to land, i wouldnt know, i have never jumped one. i
>figure
>its also easier to get hurt when you screw up your landing.
Hey Mark,
I put myself under a Stiletto and YES, it's much easier to land. And yes, I'm a
newbie (~75 jumps) and no, I didn't go through Roger's course. However,
EVERYONE who flew a Stiletto at my DZ took time out to talk to me about how it
flies and suggested exercises to try up high. In fact, after going from the
Manta to a PD-280, then a PD-230, and finally a Silhouette 190 (which was nice,
but still no cigar), I asked one of my "mentors" at the DZ about the Sabre 170
and she recommended the Stiletto 170 instead because it simply flies nicer. And
even as a Tri owner, she recommended it over a Tri 175. So I did these
exercises, working the risers and practicing flat turns, etc., and you know
what? And oddly enough, a Stiletto loaded at 1.2 can turn pretty flat! Cool,
huh? And even flying straight, it's damn smooth. Sometimes, just sometimes, I
hate to make it turn cause it glides so nice... I even took time to fly the
Spectre 170 and it did not land as smoothly as the Stiletto (in my own
opinion).
It took me two tries to get a tip-toe landing. And even those two messed up
landings were softer than all but two of my landings under the PD-230's on the
student and rental rigs. I hated gettin' pounded into the ground with those
circus tents above my head. Even if I stood up the landing, it wasn't soft by
any means. They just didn't give me enough lift.
But I'll bet most the people who've been around for awhile are reading this
and shaking their heads (and getting ready to flame away). And not without good
reason. The Stiletto is a hot canopy and it can seriously drive you into the
ground. However, if one is comfortable enough and truly trains for it, the risk
of this happening can be minimized. Not eliminated, but I believe it can be
minimized. And hopefully, I've done this for myself...
Blue Skies,
Mark
bil...@qualcomm.com
> I trained pretty much on 288' mantas ... and PD280's. I now jump a PD210.
> I'm still struggling with landings after 70 jumps. While I'm getting better,
> some of them ain't too pretty. You talk about no flare/late flare. My
> problem has often been *early* flare ... as in 20 to 30-feet from the ground.
> I don't skydive as much as I would like, and perhaps that's my problem ...
> but I would hate to think how little I would skydive if I were jumping a high
> performance canopy. I'd probably be spending more time casted than jumping.
this is a common misconception - that a ZP canopy will hurt you more often
than an F111 will. a sabre 210 will land you better than an old PD210 under
pretty much all combinations of loading. i don't know what your exit weight
is, but if you're loading that PD210 close to 1:1, a sabre 210 will land you
_much_ better than the PD will.
> This is the problem with student progressions ... both the progressive ones
> like Roger's, and the more traditional ones provided by the small, one-Cessna
> dz's. It's generally "one size fits all." A program like Roger's may work
> great for many students ... perhaps they pick up landing technique very
> quickly ... getting a gentle standup on their first jump. Others have
> problems ... believe me, I know damned well that I'm not the only one! The
> word "gentle" simply doesn't apply to most of my landings.
roger teaches thousands of students a year to fly HP canopies loaded over
1:1. students don't have the option of staying on a manta - there are no
student mantas, other than the SL rigs. yet he has almost zero injuries. is
that just dumb luck? or might he be doing something right, something the rest
of the skydiving community hasn't caught on to yet?
in your case, is it possible that you just never learned to land correctly?
i know i got very little instruction in canopy flight when i started out, and
had to learn by trial and error. it took a long time (and a few injuries) to
figure it out, but i got it. one of my biggest problems was overcoming all
the mistakes i had learned under the manta (well, DC5 in my case.) had i
never been taught those mistakes i would have had a much easier time getting
to a canopy that lands me well (in my case, a sabre 150.)
> I think this is one of the areas where a student progression needs to be
> customized to the individual ... and the decision as to which canopy they
> jump should be made by a knowledgeable jm based on their performance on
> previous jumps. Some students may do very well under high performance
> canopies ... just as some tend to pick up the nuances of AFF very easily.
> But, trust me, this ain't gonna work with everyone ... and could probably
> spell disaster for many.
i think there are two issues here.
you talk about how some students have more trouble than others, and that
the program should be customized to them. however, i think you'd agree that
if someone can't reliably pull on time, we shouldn't graduate them, come up
with a "custom" program where pulling isn't a requirement. similarly, i
think that the ability to safely land a canopy is an important part of a
student program. if someone can't land even a manta well, they should plain
not graduate until they can. and "landing a manta well" does not mean
surviving every landing - it means being able to control it and flare it
correctly.
problem is, mantas don't teach you canopy control. generally they teach
you as many bad habits as good ones. in many students, flaring too high is a
learned response - they do it four times in a row and still land OK. they
keep hearing people tell them to flare lower, but their eyes and arms
remember what they did last time to save their lives, and they remember what
happens under pressure much more clearly than they remember what happens
sitting at the DZ. roger solves this by keeping students on radio much
longer, teaching them by actually talking them through a series of HP
landings. once they've done it correctly five times in a row, they have a
really good shot at doing it on their own.
the second issue is "what's a high performance canopy?" to me, there's no
advantage to getting someone to a 1.5 to 1 loaded stiletto. there is,
however, a great advantage to getting a student to a canopy that planes out.
that seems to happen at around .9 to 1. in my case, a triathalon 190 would
be that canopy. because once they can plan an approach on a canopy that
size, flare at the right altitude, plane out, and successfully fly the canopy
through the flare all the way to a soft landing, they know the basics of
landing any canopy. they've "graduated" to being a canopy pilot, rather than
being a canopy payload.
David Tolan
The title refers to me ! No flames here, just my own experience.
I started jumping a Stilleto 170 at about 70 Jumps, Weighing about 205 lbs with
gear. I would say that my experiences were about the same. You have enough
performance to flare a little high, then hold it, and complete the flare, or flare
a little to late, but flare hard and get away with it. Landing improved instantly.
You MUST fly it to the ground. At least once I got dumped on my arse 'cause as I
touched down I pulled down on one toggle (this was explained to me by someone who
saw the landing). And if you don't turn hard when you're low......
I jump a Sabre 170 now - My Stilleto was nicked from my car 8-((
The Sabre is perhaps a better canopy for someone with my number of jumps, now about
200. I'm about 220 lbs with gear now, (I've been working out - it's not fat -
honest - no, really). I need to use a little bit of brakes to get a flat glide out
of it. Otherwise its glide path is quite steep. (Is this normal for a Sabre loaded
at 1.3 ?)
The Stilleto was like being on a Bicycle going down hill. I always felt like it
wanted to run away on me. Daydreaming is not a runner. The Sabre is more like
Cycling on the flat. I feel much more in control. A sharp turn down low could still
be an 8.9 on the nasty scale.
I wouldn't recommend a Stilleto to someone at 100 jump because your learning slows
down. You can't play around as much. You have got to bring it in dead straight and
you need lots of space to land. I survived it, but given the chance to go back I'd
probably try for a Silhouette 190 and have more fun and learn more.
The Sabre 170 is much easier to fly, but I'm a little nervous about trips away to
bigger DZ's where there will be lots of canopies in the air, or other locations
where the landing area is small. It's still too small, but I needed a secondhand
canopy that was cheap cause I was still paying off the gear that got nicked 8-((
There are downsides to downsizing too fast, even if you never hurt yourself.
Blues Skies,
Safe Landings,
Lucky Dave
IPC C364
Rita
>
> I'm curious to know if anyone at U.S.P.A. Headquarters is following this post.
I sure as hell hope someone is ... I sure as hell hope that it is even in
someone's job description to at least scan the various threads and commentary
appearing on this newsgroup.
If not, then USPA is not truly serving their membership ... in terms of
staying abreast of the concerns/issues of that membership.
Blue ones!
--rita
RHallifax
Rita wrote:
<<Mentoring. Therein lies the key. That period between AFF and that first
license needs to be a more intense period ... a period not just for jumping,
but for talking ... an experienced jm or coach gathering a bunch of low
timers together for a discussion of landing techniques, formation safety,
aircraft procedures, etc. .>>
I agree .... except the mentoring should continue on. I have a " C" license,
and managed to turn an ankle a couple weeks ago. I hobbled into my home DZ, a
small family atmosphere, where an AFF instructor asked me what happened. After
I explained, he gave me some advise on preventing that again. ... And I would
suppose he'd talk to me after I get my D license as well.
One of the other keys is not to become complacent. It's easy enough to do.
However, one should always be reassessing the situation at hand, because
circumstances have a way of changing when you least expect them. That speaks
to the habitual hook turner that someone else wrote about in this thread, where
whether conditions can and do change when you least expect it.....
Blue skies,
Bob
skys...@my-dejanews.com
the responses. I think some good points have been brought up by all of you.
I'll try to put my thoughts together now.
I remember back 25 years ago when as a student when the squares were first
comming out that there was a reasonable requirement to not let students or
low time jumpers use them. They were just not developed enough (as well as we
did not know enough ourselves) to be used by those inexperienced people. So,
the responsibility of the sport and jumpmasters was to keep students away
from them until they had gained the experience. The point is the squares had
not developed to a point were any reasonable person could allow an
inexperienced person to use one. Experience here being the key. So now the
equipment has progressed to were it is reasonable to allow students to use
them. The question is then has the HP canopies progressed to the point that
it is reasonable to think that an inexperienced first jump person can use
one? At this point in time I don't think so.
I (and I'm most certain ALL JMs will agree) have many times said out loud
"thank God for student canopies" as I/they watched the high or low or no
flare landing by a student. But what's at fault here? Why did I have to make
that statement? Most certainly the fault lies with the instructor for not
having taught the student well enough. As an instructor we must always take
that responsibility and be prepared to deal with it. We are humans and must
realize thought that it will happen. As the instructor then we must provide
that student with the additional training to get it right.
Training, yes with proper training some students could and probably should be
allowed to progress to more HP canopies, but here training is most definitely
required in a strict syllabus like approach. What that syllabus should
contain and how it should be structured I don't know exactly. When should the
HP syllabus be introduced? Well, as some of you have already suggested, it
should depend on the students abilities and how well they have demonstrated
canopy control so far. I feel at this point in time, with HP canopies, in no
way should they be introduced on the first jump; but on subsequent jumps even
maybe the second one it could be possible. The syllabus should contain a
considerable amount of ground training covering aspects of HP opennings
including immediate use of rear risers in the advent of an approaching
canopy, dealing with line twists in a spinning situation, stalls and stall
recovery, flying flat turns, front riser and rear riser flying, and the more
hazardous results of low turns with HP canopies, etc. etc. Some of this
information was already covered in a first jump course but it needs more
stress and much more detail for a student to use a HP canopy. Trainning then
should proceed with in-flight instruction to even probably include a few
jumps were the JMs open with the student and use a follow me type of guidance
in the air.
The issue of at what cost to the students needs to be reviewed as well. Is
this something that the instructors, JMs, and DZOs should provide at no
additional cost? Well, maybe, if this type of training is spread out over a
large period of time were the AFF graduate provides his own equipment and is
downsizing slowly. The training could be progressive as it is already being
done this way now, but as can be seen by the number of incidences not
adequately enough. More needs to be done by DZs, JMs, and instructors to
ensure low time jumpers are not getting over their heads. Sure the problem
has been complicated by more jumpers and more DZs with the sight of many new
faces the DZs have never seen before; but a close inspection of equipment and
log books would catch the majority of these. But I digress; the issue of
cost, if we are to train inexperienced and even students to use these
canopies early on in their careers then yes we should charge them for it. If
the DZs can supply the equipment and instructors then by all means they need
to be compensated. I am sure that given the chance for students to progress
to HP canopies would be a sufficent motivator to spend the extra bucks. But
caution must be used by the DZs to ensure the person has demonstrated an
ability to progress.
And maybe this should be required training at some point in the students
progression. The sport has progressed, the gear has progressed, the training
has not progressed fast enough.
I applaud the work of those people who are working the issue and have
instituted some sort of program already. I would love to hear the details and
how their programs have progressed. I wish I could afford to go their and
watch it in action for myself. Progress is a good thing never to be stiffled
but also not to be irresponsibly advanced. The school of hard knocks while be
it an excellent one with very firm teachers and usually producing very
learned students is not the school for teaching HP canopy control. In the
days of the round it worked very well, but then landing fatalities were rare;
today they are all too frequent!
Just my thoughts, Blue skies and be safe;
--
Bill S.
D13096; AFF/SLI-98
We are never lost, we are always directly above the center of the Earth.
Wendy Faulkner
its the opening. Most ellipticals, especially Stilletto's, have a
reputation for opening off-heading. I know it took me several hundred
jumps to learn how to REALLY track - i.e. haul ass away - rather than
just move away. Canopy collisions could be real likely. I know I have
MUCH better reaction time on risers to avoid collisions and such than I
did back then. The spinning line-twist situation is another. You've
got to react fast or you're liable to have a real difficult time cutting
away. Not something I've seen too many people with 50 jumps do.
skys...@my-dejanews.com
Rita <kr...@philly.infi.net> wrote:
>
> Why Johnnie can't land? How about why Johnnie sometimes can't be safe? I
> think that's the problem here ...
Yep that is the point!
>
> This is the sort of "mentoring" I am talking about ... not the formal "Level
> VIII" programs ... the professional coaching, the structured syllabus ... but
> the relationships being fostered wherein the newbie won't hesitate to
> ask for clarification on something ...
I'm sorry, but without such a structured syllabus type approach we will miss
important points that need to be covered. Why wait for the unencumbered
question to come from the student? Why not just tell them before they ask?
Sure some students will not ask questions at times but we can't expect to
wait for the student to ask. A good program based on experience should cover
the necessary points and progressive demonstrations will display their
ability and comprehension.
>
>
> To me, the successful skydiver is not necessarily the one who was on that
> awesome 200-way record attempt ... but it is the one who has been in the
> sport for a while ... and is still around to enjoy the skies.
>
> Blue ones!
>
> --rita
>
I think we agree on most points. I just feel the sport and equipment have
progressed to a point where more structured training needs to be instituted.
Like when all there was to fly were single engine cubs and now their are jumbo
jets.
Blue ones too you all;
bskyrat
line twist on my 20th jump on it and it took off in a diving spiral. It
was relatively easy to cut it away while it was out in front of me. It
made two turns around with me looking into the tail of the canopy and it
was gone with my freebag flying up along side it.
Then I was flying my PD143R reserve. My 135 size elliptical was always
easy to kick out of line twists though. Low-time jumpers just don't need a
challenge with this. A nice size Sabre would be good enough and would have
good resale value.
If no ZP a PD-190 or 210 would be fine for the average size jumper.
Wendy Faulkner <faul...@eco.utexas.edu> wrote in article
<6v0egg$iqp$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>...
> To me the problem with low-timers jumping Stillettos isn't the landing -
> its the opening. Most ellipticals, especially Stilletto's, have a
> reputation for opening off-heading. .
> .
> .The spinning line-twist situation is another. You've
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
Duksnarow wrote:
> >>>easiest way to avoid this is do what roger nelson does. introduce students
> >> >>to HP canopies early on.
> >> >
> >> >perhaps, but i dont see the wisdom in putting a 25 jump wonder on a
> >stillitto
>
> i am probably getting in over my head here, but here goes nothing.
>
> how many fjc students do you see landing with a no flare/ late flare? 99% walk
> away if they are under a manta. how many in the same scenario walk away under a
> sabre?
>
> i still fail to see the wisdom in putting someone with 25 jumps under a
> stillitto, especially when he had biffed it in really hard the day before under
> a sabre.
>
> otoh, i havent seen rogers student course and i have only been there once. so i
> dont have the all the insight i should have to make statements such as these.
>
> i guess my view is aimed at preventing uneccesary injuries. roger told me the
> stillitto is easier to land, i wouldnt know, i have never jumped one. i figure
> its also easier to get hurt when you screw up your landing.
>
> my wife is coming off a broken leg caused by a landing mistake under a manta.
> she would have been seriusly screwed up under a sabre. ( its not easy living
> with a skydiver with a broken leg. even tougher for her. heh, heh)
Hi Mark,
I may be wrong here (can't believe I said that) but it is my understanding that
Skydive Chicago use SABRES not STILETTOS in their student progression program.
However, in a couple of your posts you have made reference to Roger putting his
students under Stilettos, is he doing that and if so, is that with selected
students half way through his program or across the board? The Sabre is considered
a high performance canopy by most while the Stiletto would be considered an extreme
performance canopy (by most) I believe. I personally don't disagree in principle
with the use of Sabres for student, although I think It may be a good idea to have
them on a more conventional student canopy for at least their first jump to see how
they react under canopy. However, I think putting lowtimers on Stilettos would be
pushing the envelope just a bit! Although, Roger has been doing the unconventional
thing for as long as he's been in the sport and has often been portrayed in many
manners from a crackpot to a visionary, so far he's ahead I believe. I would
certainly consider him to be one of the sports leading innovators and would be very
careful not to dismiss his ideas out of hand! Sometimes it just takes a little
longer for some of us to 'cotton on'! However I am curious and would be interested
in hearing if he (or anyone else) is advocating or encouraging the use of
Stilettos, or other extreme performance canopies for lowtimers?
Blue ones,
Stay Safe.
Martin Evans.
--
"Never confuse movement with action". Ernest Hemingway
Liv4fear
Dave and Wendy,
Both of you brought up excellent points. The Stiletto has a way of
communicating that you better be careful what you ask for cause you may get it
and more. However, my experience has been a little different. There's much more
to consider under this canopy. You DO have to fly a Stiletto all the way down.
And yes, the openings can be squirlly. However, I found that this served to
open up my awareness. I noticed this most of all on the weekend after I tested
the Stiletto when I flew a Spectre of equal size.
Landings at my DZ are fairly easy as it has a huge area. If someone takes your
slot, it's easy to pick another spot. Plus, there's always a strong steady
wind. So I can't comment about what it will be like at other DZ's and more
crowded airspace. Then, I may feel differently about my canopy.
However, the point that Wendy brings up is the one I struggle with the most.
The openings have been a challenge on a couple of my jumps. If I ever trade my
canopy in (with a heavy heart), it would probably be for that reason.
This has been the best thread I've seen yet. It's comforting to know that
people on the ng are struggling with these issues in a constructive manner.
Great community!! This is what skydiving is about!!!
Blue Skies,
Mark
AL DELLA PENNA JR
questions , wanting to learn anything I can , with out the time in the sport , how
can you ask the questions? The only way is to hang around the DZ , jumping or not ,
listen , watch , I read the posts here , if I have a question , I might ask here but
ususally ask my local JM. Like you said before Rita , the larger DZ's are real nice
to get up in a hurry , and there are alot of nice people there, but the little local
DZ's your just one big family. To me some newbie CANNOT ask enough questions or watch
enough experience jumper , from coming in to land to packing .
AL (REVID)
Rita wrote:
> Do most dz's have in place a program ... a standard ... whereby the "newbie"
> fresh off of student status is helped along ... taught all those things that
> a quick AFF program simply doesn't have time to teach? I've been lucky. My
> learning in this sport hasn't stopped one iota since graduating AFF ... and I
> honestly hope it never does. But part of the reason for my luck is that I'm
> older ... more mature. I've been "mentored" quite a bit ... but that's
> mainly because I've sought that mentoring out. I've asked the people I
> respect at my dz to take me up for coaching dives. I've asked for lots and
> lots of guidance with packing (a skill I am only starting to see some success
> with) ... as a result, I think that when I have my license, it will be
> because I've really worked my ass off for it and am better prepared to be
> truly "cut loose." I will be able to go to the dz ... on my own, if
> necessary, put on my gear, get into an airplane with no one but the pilot ...
> go to altitude, spot, get out, and land safely ... with no one to depend on
> but myself.
> I
Michael
with much enthusiasm and little knowledge. Is it too much to
maybe, just maybe, actually find out some details about the
program before you critique it?
FYI:
Nelson's students do not make their first jumps on either
Stilettos or Sabers. Ever. They make either 3 tandems (on a
ZP tandem canopy loaded to perform) which are training tandems -
where the student learns to fly and flare ZP - or they make 5 SL
jumps on Mantas. Either way by the time the student progresses
to solo flight under a ZP canopy he has about 15 minutes of canopy
time with instruction either from the tandem master on radio.
Students typically start with loadings of less than 1:1 but some do
progress to as much as 1.3:1 by the time they graduate. Some,
not all.
The part about having lowtimers on Stilettos is true, though. A
Stiletto loaded over 1.3:1 being jumped by people with well under
50 jumps is a pretty common sight at Skydive Chicago. Those
same people are turning points on 10-ways. Sabers are pretty
much considered student canopies. As for F-111...
Many of Roger's students can't safely jump F-111 in much the
same way many of today's square-trained skydivers can't safely
jump a round. I heard a story from one such student about his
trip to Florida. His normal canopy at Roger's DZ was a Saber
150 (loaded at about 1.2:1) but he did not have his own gear
when he went to Florida and a DZO who will remain nameless
refused to rent him anything like that at 20 jumps. He was
offered the choice between jumping some F-111 200sq ft 7-cell
and not jumping at all. He made a couple of jumps and scared
himself very badly, coming close to an injury.
So how did I find this out? Simple. I went to the source. I did
my SL ICC at Skydive Chicago, and stuck around one of the
campfires the evening after to chat with relatively recent graduates
from the program. A little effort goes a long way.
Michael S/L I (Retired)
SKY...@ix.netcom.com wrote in article <3613D248...@ix.netcom.com>...
Thomas Kerler
> required in a strict syllabus like approach. What that syllabus should
> contain and how it should be structured I don't know exactly.
look for example into Brian Burkes syllabus - that seems to be at
least a good proto type for a standard canopy control course. Take
a look at
http://www.skydiveaz.com/resources/book_canopy.htm
(see the "Skydive! Archives" for similar stuff)
Also "Skydive 150" from Skydive U is arranged in a way that you
could make a course out of it with a few additions. "Fly like a
Pro" is very informative but would need some serious organizing
to take the shape of a course. There's also a very sketchy course
from PD (or LeBlanc for that matter). In addition there's been a
pile of quite nice articles on CC in the magazines in the last months.
There's definitely plenty of information out there you could put
a CC curriculum together without too much effort. Finding useful
compilations of the material and suggestions on who to teach it is
*not* the problem.
The real problem is organization and dissemination on a large scale
and in a systematic manner. A nearby thought there would be to step
up to a national organization which has the infrastructure and notoriety
to support this.
Hell, maybe you could even get USPA to do something useful ...
> including immediate use of rear risers in the advent of an approaching
> canopy, dealing with line twists in a spinning situation, stalls and stall
> recovery, flying flat turns, front riser and rear riser flying, and the more
> hazardous results of low turns with HP canopies, etc. etc.
a good list of some very concrete and important skill - I tried hard to
find something like that in the S.I.M:
Well, i really didn't find much that went beyond the numbers for accuracy
reqs. and that it's better to land into the wind. The one I liked though
is from SIM 8-1.04 LEVEL 8B
4. Canopy control: The novice should
receive appropriate instruction and
coaching in canopy control to make five
landings within 20 meters of target
center. He or she should be able to make a
graceful stand-up landing.
... no word on the instruction - but probably they mean something like
"you stick you little fingers out a little when hold your toggles - that will
make for a particularly graceful picture on landing"
Otoh, the sections on license requirements and novice progression are
full of very specific maneuver for freefall that are supposedly very important
to learn. Like how many points you need on a 4-way or 8-way to get this or
that license or which particular style sets you should perform in what time.
Again in Section 8-1.04 LEVEL 8B you find stuff as detailed as
2 b. The novice should
continue to receive
instruction until he or
she can perform five
points with the following
sequence: Free fly the
exit, star, donut, opposed
wedge, murphy and
repeat.
I think this kind-of suggests a serious twist of priorities that USPA
has as to what is really the more important survival skill - canopy
control or a bunch of random freefall maneuvers.
I understand and sympathize with the argument that the SIM and license
requirements were written in a time when HP canopies were not very common
and landing accidents not an issue as it is now. In those times, i imagine,
surviving freefall was everything and the rest, like safe delivery to the
ground once you had a good canopy, was just gravy (though maybe painful).
(see also AAD-reg. vs. hook-turn-reg. discussion).
But times have changed a lot and there are less and less excuses to continue
to stick to this out-dated mind frame and emphasis on recommendations.
I can't say what the best way for USPA would be to implement canopy control
education, but designing a standard curriculum for a course would be a useful
first step. Also training programs for potential instructors of cc courses
are conceivably very helpful. The question of incentives for people to take
such courses is of course a bit delicate - that would go into realm of license
requirements or additional skill ratings, and we'd have another thread from
hell here.
Anyways, there's stuff to be done already now - so USPA get off your sorry
behind and get something useful done with my membership dues! :^).
--
Blue Skies, Thomas D-20874 Muff#2160
http://www.osu.edu/students/skydiving/
http://www.skydiveohio.com/
Some Basic RW-Skills:"... To be more to the point: If you
don't have anything positive to say, then say nothing.
If you cannot come across with good vibes, then keep the
negative things to yourself. Don't spit in the soup that
you'll have to eat later. ..."
Pat Works (The Art of Freefall Relative Work)
Rhonda Lea
>If not, then USPA is not truly serving their membership ... in terms of
>staying abreast of the concerns/issues of that membership.
Of that membership, what percentage reads/posts to this newsgroup?
I know that the ng has grown a lot in the past few years, but I don't think
we're more than a small portion of USPA members.
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
Rita wrote:
Rita, I like your attitude to this/these areas and I agree you've hit the nail pretty
squarely!
However, im-notso-ho:
Aff or any other program isn't at fault here, WE ARE! By 'we' I mean of course all of
us who skydive and society in general. Most (the vast majority) nowadays just don't
care enough to get involved in any way shape or form, from offering guidance or
critiquing, a wrist slapping when needed or even a friendly word or two, even
something as easy to perform as saying 'hi'! A little while ago somebody responded to
a post of mine saying that they were elated that the experienced jumpers had finally
actually started to acknowledge their presence in the world, well it's sad but that's
the downside of life in general and this sport too nowadays! People are so wrapped up
in their own self importance that they have no time for others at all, that is where
the problem lies. As a side note for those of you low timers who feel that this
attitude only pertains to you, don't. It has been a constant source of irritation to
me since I arrived in this country, that the vast majority of skydivers here only
acknowledge ones presence once they become aware that you can be of use to them.
Being somewhat outspoken at times, confronting this attitude in others has lead to a
number of (to me at least) amusing incidents and has provided me with a number of
stories to tell once I'm in full flow with a beer or two under my belt! So don't feel
that it's your lack of status around the dropzone that elicits this kind of behavior,
it happens to all of us! Anyway I digress.
Once a person has graduated the student program it is up to us all, as well as the
staff and instructors at the dropzone, to counsel and guide our new brother or
sister, just like those who did it for us back in the 'old days'! This lack of
mentoring and true brotherhood, in my opinion, is what is mostly wrong with the sport
nowadays, we are losing our connection, just doing the same thing isn't the same as
being of the same creed, we are br...e..a...kin...g u..p!
> Mentoring. Therein lies the key. That period between AFF and that first
> license
and beyond
> needs to be a more intense period ... a period not just for jumping,
> but for talking ... an experienced jm or coach gathering a bunch of low
> timers together for a discussion of landing techniques, formation safety,
> aircraft procedures, etc. ... an experienced skydiver grabbing a newbie for a
> fun jump ... taking them up and sharing a piece of the sky, and of their
> experience, with them ... a kindly rigger who is willing to take time out
> from his busy schedule to work on packing with an asshole like me who just
> can't seem to "get it," and then seeing the light dawn ... as finally some of
> those mysteries unfold themselves.
>
> And, finally, more than innate skill ... more than being able to go up on a
> dive and perform perfectly the first time ... this sport requires people with
> judgment and with maturity, and with a total lack of inflated pride.
> It
> requires people who are not ashamed to ask questions ... and to speak up when
> they don't understand. It requires people who are not afraid to look stupid
> ... if they don't understand, to seek out someone else who may have a
> different way of explaining it. It requires the person who truly wants to
> make this a lifelong learning experience.
Yes, speak up, you shouldn't be put off by the snobby attitudes (or gruff exteriors)
if you want to know something ASK! if you get brushed off, ASK AGAIN. If the only way
to get a response is to walk up to a bunch of self absorbed snobs and shout 'HEY
DICKHEADS, I NEED SOME HELP HERE?' do it! Most will actually talk to you and help if
they can if you approach them, many just seem to feel that making the first approach
to a lowtimer is beneath them, 'God only knows why'!
> To me, the successful skydiver is not necessarily the one who was on that
> awesome 200-way record attempt ... but it is the one who has been in the
> sport for a while ... and is still around to enjoy the skies.
>
Right on, although I applaud the feats and achievements of others, you only hold that
high spot until the next group or individual takes it from you! It ain't like the
presidency, you won't be Mr.World Champion/Record Holder forever! (NO! this isn't a
dig, many at the top are my friends, I'm just illustrating a point)!
Here's a repost of what I had to say a week or two ago on this same subject for those
who may give a shit:
someone.com wrote:
> perhaps the difference is that here in the US, once someone is off student
> status, they are considered responsible for themselves
which, in my opinion, has lead to a truly sorry state of affairs!
'How's that'? you may ask.
Well! I say,
This 'family' of ours is slowly disintegrating due to the 'self regulating'
attitude creeping into the sport!
Tell me please, I ask,
How is one supposed to acquire the knowledge to make them a capable, competent and
*safe* skydiver without the help and guidance of those of us who have gone before.
Very few experienced skydivers nowadays are willing to 'mentor' those with less
experience, either because they just don't care, they actually know very little
themselves and rely on plain dumb luck to get them through each skydive and safely
back to earth, or because they don't wish to appear as 'big mouth know it all's'
or 'arsehole of the day' by others who may construe their monitoring as nothing
more than showing off or talking down to others. Not, as so often may be the case,
as nothing more than giving constructive advise or critiquing another's
performance or ability with concern and care for their well-being and development
in our sport foremost in ones mind!
I believe it is the responsibility off each and every one of us, to adopt the
position of mentor and or coach to those newly graduated or of lesser experience
than ourselves. Besides helping to keep the newbie 'cousin' interested and
included in our 'family', we also help to keep them safer than if left to find
things out through trial and error and subsequently also make the skies safer for
ourselves in doing so!
I feel so sorry nowadays for the majority of those who have come into the sport in
the last ten years or so, for they really do not know the true meaning of
'skydiving family'. Those of you who nowadays feel that you are a part of a great
movement of brotherly love, caring and acceptance are either very lucky to have
found one of those so few DZ's that still remain and continue in the true spirit
of brotherhood or family, or you are misguided in your understanding of the
meaning of the terms used! Brotherhood, caring, concern, acceptance, guidance and
a host of other terms bandied around at dropzones and boogies, in magazines and
on this newsgroup seem to me to be far too liberally used and misused in reference
to our sport and how it generally is nowadays and they do not have the substance
behind them that they once had!
When I first joined this sport, those terms meant far more than they do now.
Skydiving, as in other facets of society was less about 'me' and more about 'us'
back then! 'We' took care of and looked out for 'each other'. We used guidance
where it was needed, either gently or if called for, with a firmer hand. We
coached or cajoled in whichever manner was called for and we watched over each
other, we assisted or stood by quietly and monitored, whichever each case merited,
whatever the situation 'we gave a damn'!
Nowadays I'm sorry to say, this feeling of fellowship is so obviously less
apparent wherever I go, yet I still see and hear the same words of 'family',
'brotherhood', 'caring and concern' but I don't see it at the dirtdive, in the
boarding area, on the plane or after the skydive! What I hear is people muttering
amongst themselves about the 'toad' that doesn't know how to slow down or de-arch,
clear from beneath the formation or track away at a safe altitude when he finds
himself in an unrecoverable situation. Or about the 'geek' that made the long
final and sashayed right above and across the landing area, cutting the others off
from coming in from the upwind side of the dropzone and stopping them from
performing 'the most amazing hook turn' that they had planned. I may hear them
scream an obscenity or two in the 'geeks' general direction but I rarely see them
walk over and offer constructive advice or mentoring, this ain't the family that I
once belonged to and I don't much like the way it is nowadays! I would like to see
it back the way it was, when you could cutaway a malfunction and look for a safe
place to land, comforted in the knowledge that a member or two of 'your family'
would land with you, while another or more would chase and recover your canopy and
freebag, * 'because that's what brothers do!* Now when did you last see a scene
like that at you 'family' residence (DZ)?
Over the last few years there has been much talk about the necessity of retaining
our students and what can be done to keep them in 'the family'. I believe that if
we were to abandon the attitude that * "once off student status they are
considered responsible for themselves",* along with a return to the attitudes of
skydivers of a decade or more ago, that by instilling in them and each of us that
sense of 'being', to truly mentor and show care, concern and acceptance of them
despite their (present) lowly status amongst us, to actually practice all of these
things instead of just paying them lip service and to return to the values of the
past, this is what is called for if we really wish to call ourselves and to be
seen as a 'true family'!
What do you think?
Blue ones,
Stay Safe.
Martin Evans.
P.S. For you young 'uns that are going to say, 'yeah, yeah, sure, we've heard
it all before, how it was so much better then, yadda, yadda, yadda! You don't
need to, I hear it all the time at my home DZ. Thing is though, I ain't no
dinosaur despite what you may read in this newsgroup, I've lived it both way's and
I know which I prefer. You on the other hand, only know what it's like now,
don'tcha! ;-)
Food for thought maybe?
C'Ya.
Duksnarow
>Skydive Chicago use SABRES not STILETTOS in their student progression
>program.
>However, in a couple of your posts you have made reference to Roger putting
>his
>students under Stilettos, is he doing that and if so, is that with selected
>students half way through his program or across the board
like i said i was there only once and do not know his training methods.
i jumped with roger, another visitor and two guys with around 25 jumps or so.
the one guy was talking about how they wanted him on a stiletto 150 ( he
probablly went 165 or so) roger overheard my "WHAT!!" and explained his
reasoning. i dont agree but its difficult to argue your point with a guy like
roger when your an 85 jump wonder and off your cessna dz for the first time.
maybe this kid was a "natural" and was ready for it (training included) i dont
know enough about the situation to really make these comments. i do know he had
biffed in hard the day before.
as a side note i was very impressed with skydive chicago and was treated very
well by all the staff including roger who gave me some good tips during
debreifing. glen took me out to the otter and showed me how to exit and all
that good stuff, walked me out around the landing area and really made me feel
comfortable there. athough i did get a kinda cold shoulder by some of the
jumpers.
all in all if he feels he can do it safely then what the heck maybe we are
wrong about it ( but i probably wont change my mind)
- Mark Elenbaas
http://members.aol.com/Duksnarow/index.html
home DZ.: Skydive Hastings, Hastings Michigan 616-948-2665
Unclbennie
>Skydive Chicago use SABRES not STILETTOS in their student progression
>program.
I'm currently a student at Skydive Chicago and we use Sabres. I love the
program, it has been individualized and the attention to safety is wonderful.
Karen
Marquis
canopies I have jumped were humongous. I see some of the older jumpers turf
surfing and I think I would like to do it sometime. But, I also think Jesus he's
flying when he comes in. I saw one guy have to jump two or three people when he
was surfing and i thought he was going to take someone out. That scared me.
As far as control goes I don't know. Both jumps I have done I was still on
radio. The first time the spotter talked me the whole way. the second time sthe
spotter got confused and though I was more experienced than the second guy. He
told the 2 guy that his landing wasn't bad for a second and the jumper said he had
3 or 4. The spotter started talking to me real quick. I wasjust doing what I had
the first time but and having a good ole time. I don't even know how to hook turn
i think. I really don't think i want to know yet either. The other stuff, flat
turns and such kind of confuses me. I don't know what those are either.
Basically what I am just trying to say is that not all students are deaf to
oldtimers. I plan on finding out as much as I can about landing and diving and
anything else. I jsut hope someone will be willing to help me like you guys seem
to be. if any of you are from Indiana, like around Muncie or West Lafayette,
would you let me know, I might try to look you up. Or even eastern OH.
"Reality is the leading
cause of stress... for
those in touch with
it."
Jack Wagner
Blue Skies
Nick
TooyT wrote:
> >From: mom...@aol.com (MOM1398)
> Wrote:
> >Why Johnnie Can't Land
> >
> >Here is my theory on this. I'm sure I will get flamed at, and condemed for
> >what I say (, Snip a lot of good theory)
>
> >Now, along comes more technology in the form of Z-P fabrics, Laser cutters,
> >and
> >Aeronautical Engineers designing Parachutes. Cool !! We now have smaller,
> >faster, more aerodynamically efficient Canopies. WE ALL HAVE THAT NEED FOR
> >SPEED. Oh, and of course that really cool turf surf. Don't forget that a
> >Skydiver wants to try and push the envelope once in awhile.
> >Now, in the beggining, the people jumping these hot-rods were people that
> >already had 1,000 jumps or so. They already had a very good understanding of
> >Canopy control, and they had alot of respect for consequences from errors.
> >These people were qualified to go push the envelope on new Canopies, just
> >like
> >a test pilot with several thousand hours of flying is qualified to test a
> >brand
> >new Airplane.
> >Lets add in our new fangled training methods. In the old days, a student
> >spent
> >at average three Months hanging out at the DZ, trying to get his
>
> >jumps in when
> >he could, to graduate. During that time the student gained alot of knowledge
> >and wisdom just by hanging out and talking with the experienced Jumpers. I
> >want
> >to emphasize WISDOM here, because that is not something you can gain by just
> >racking up jump numbers.
> >Now days, we have AFF. It is very realistic to be able to go from the F.J.C.
> >to
> >your A-License in a Week. Add to that, the Society we live in today. It's a
> >Microwave Society where everyone wants it now, and they don't want to have to
> >work hard to get it. And another factor is the reasons why new jumpers want
> >to
> >jump. They see it on TV, and that looks really cool, and they want to be
> >doing
> >cool things. Now after they graduate AFF, and they are ready to get their own
> >cool gear, thay want the same shit that all the really cool looking Skydivers
> >are jumping. Hey, they are licensed, they can jump whatever they want to.
> >These
> >people have NO Canopy control skills, and they jump very small parachutes for
> >their experience level.
> >Take all the pieces of this puzzle
>
> >and what do you get? You get rif-raf that
> >are being weeded out because they don't belong in the Sky in the first place.
> >Think about it. It doesn't matter how sophisticated Skydiving becomes, or how
> >reliable the equipment is, or the greatness of the next technological
> >breakthrough. The common denominator is the person using it. Some people dont
> >belong in this Sport, and because of that fact, they will find a way to kill
> >themselves. For hundreds if not thousands of years, mankind has tried to make
> >the World a safer place to live in. The safer we try to make it, the more
> >dangerous it becomes.
> >Now, let me clarify a few things for you people chomping at the bit to flame
> >me.
> >I'm not saying its just rif-raf that bust up or assume room tempurature.
> >There
> >are too many that left us who didn't deserve their fate. It's that old adage
> >of, it couldn't have happened to a better person. Shit happens. But on the
> >same
> >note, all of you personally know someone who is an accident waiting to
> >happen.
> >I'm not putting down AFF. I am an AFF, Static Line, and Tandem
>
> >Instructor. AFF
> >is a good program if used properly. Is it being used properly? Are Students
> >getting The quality of education they should be getting? Do they gain the
> >same
> >wisdom after being supervised for 1/2 the time as they would under Static
> >Line
> >training. The way AFF was originally designed says they will, but are they?
> >I'm not against AAD's. I wear a Cypres. I do AFF, meaning there is a greater
> >chance of me being knocked out. I still have the attitude of "Pull or Die".
> >If
> >My Cypres ever fires, when I'm fully consious, and capable of pulling my own
> >handles to save my own life: I WILL re-evaluate my participation in this
> >Sport,
> >and seriously consider spending my time at the Bowling Alley, rather than the
> >DZ.
> >Hot-rod Parachutes? Loooove them ! I jump a Jedi 150. Love the Surfs I get.
> >Then again, I have 1800 jumps, and I didn't get under a Z-P canopy until I
> >had
> >about 600. Also I've learned you don't have to do that hook turn to get that
> >surf. Also, you don't need alot of speed to land that Z-P canopy. I can land
> >mine fairly well in fairly deep brakes. Thats only if your convinced you dont
> >need the tiniest canopy there is to have fun and get radical with it.
> >As far as wisdom goes. I've been in the Sport for 8 years. I've averaged 200
> >jumps a year. Not alot considering people do a 1,000 in a year these days. Do
> >those people have the same understanding, and respect for the possible
> >consequences of our actions? How about the respect for the forces of Mother
> >Nature? What is their lavel of wisdom and understanding?
> >The bottom line is, People will unwillingly find a way to maim or kill
> >themselves in this Sport, either from lack of education, disregard to the
> >consequences, complacency, or just plain stupidity. Look around, and you will
> >see that certain type of Skydiver
>
> >that is only around for at most 5 years. You
> >know the kind. One day you think, gee, I wonder whatever happened to so and
> >so.
> >Those people get out for numerous reasons. Alot of these people are the
> >rif-raf that are weeding out.
> >Your question runs much deeper than just "Why Johnnie cant land". Johnnie CAN
> >land. Read my PS and maybe you'll understand.
> > Blue SkyZ
> > D.J. Mike
> >The only thing guaranteed in Skydiving is...you WILL land !
> ***********************************Hummm well thought out and spoken
> but the original post sed it wuzn't hook
> turns they was thinking about. So yer theory
> still may be right. I think the kids have a lack
> of attention. They more worried about looking cool and miss the flare point or
> make too much toggle adjustment too
> low or don't know how to flat turn or
> drop a toggle. All from sloppy training
> and inatention to details. Pure lack of
> focus. :-* snuffy sez thuts why SL is
> better in the long run. :-)
Marquis
plan on going this weekend. After reading this thread, I plan on finding out lots of
stuff that I had not thought about yet.
Thank you all for the thread it has helped me realize that skydiving is going to be
different than I thought.
"Reality is the leading
cause of stress... for
those in touch with
it."
Jack Wagner
Blue Ones
Nick
Bob Singleton
Rita wrote in message <3613BF...@philly.infi.net>...
.>I sure as hell hope someone is ... I sure as hell hope that it is even in
>someone's job description to at least scan the various threads and
commentary
>appearing on this newsgroup.
>
>staying abreast of the concerns/issues of that membership.
I think you over-estimate the participation of the USPA membership in this
NG. I know that a couple of those in the "head shed" read it, but I doubt
reading it is (and would oppose it being) part of their "job description".
I have seen (not from you Rita! just an example) others tell us to basically
shut up about accidents and such until the "facts" are out, or don't comment
unless you're an "official investagator (sic)" because such speculation is
"bad for the sport". A newsgroup is basically a discussion between
individuals...an electronic conversation if you will...I'd hate for USPA
policy to be based upon a few overheard conversations at the DZ.
soapbox mode OFF
BSBD
BS
b...@my-dejanews.com
> reason. The Stiletto is a hot canopy and it can seriously drive you into the
> ground. However, if one is comfortable enough and truly trains for it, the
risk
> of this happening can be minimized. Not eliminated, but I believe it can be
> minimized. And hopefully, I've done this for myself...
>
> Blue Skies,
>
> Mark
>
Nice post Mark...couldn't have said it better myself.
Blue Ones,
Bryan
Duksnarow
>Those
>same people are turning points on 10-ways.
again i dont have a wealth of background here but those same people you refer
to cant do a 4 way without kicking the shit out of someone. course thats par
for the course at 25 jumps
Duksnarow
snip
>'because that's what brothers do!* Now when did you last see a scene
>like that at you 'family' residence (DZ)?
every weekend..............every weekend
Duksnarow
>It never ceases to amaze me how these things are discussed
>with much enthusiasm and little knowledge. Is it too much to
>maybe, just maybe, actually find out some details about the
>program before you critique it?
hey man, i warned ya that i didnt know his training methods.
see all ya had to do was speak up. now we know. i still dont agree with low
timers on stiletto's but if everyone were like me it would be a
better........er..... boring world
D.Cruson
Started jumpin Jedei's on jump #34. yes thats right #34.
Before you spaz please realize that there is a full spectrum of
individuals out there with a wide range of different piloting abilities.
Some naturals, almost prodigal, some should stay on Manta's
indefinitely. It is up to the instructors, friends, and whomever else
is offering canopy advice, input, coaching, whatever to make sure that
the parachute you jump is the right parachute for your skill level.
One would think that people who have alot of flight time in airplanes
would make natural canopy pilots, this is not the case. Fear factor, the
fact that you have no engine, who knows, seems to bewilder some airplane
pilots. In my case I think that my airplane flying skills were a
benefit; besides, a 1.2#/ sq.ft 170 Jedei landed like I was used to,
horizontal and cruisin.
Be advised, I had help, excellent help, and I had to prove myself worthy
on several different parachutes. The final test before jumping the 170
was one of landing a big 236sq.ft unit-one in the peas after declaring
it, I did it 5 times in a row, three of them dead center. My first jump
on the Jedei, peas, dead center. Started and stayed with the 136 jedei
at jmp# 48. First ride as a test pilot, jump #65.
I have no problem putting very low timers on HP parachutes, I have put
numerous people on their first Demo elliptical with no problems at all
and alot of them with less than 500 jmps(some mfg's suggest this as a
minimum), it is strictly up to the individuals piloting ability, his/her
awareness, or having received the proper advice and or coaching. The
newbies who sneak or scam their way into jumping a HP elliptical without
the proper training or verifiable ability, are the same people we hear
of in the incident reports.
Never overestimate your own abilities. Canopy control can be taught;
I was taught by Brian Geramin and the many caring people at Skydive
City.
Deven Cruson
- Speed is life -
Marquis
yet. Give me a few 100 jumps(not just 100 but more) i will probably try it. Not
munky see, munky do. I ain't that stoopid. im smart enough to know my limits.
there's no reason to not try something. If ya ain't riskin it, ya ain't livin it.
but ya gotta have the skills. I don't so I will only do minimal risks until i got
the experience.
"Reality is the leading
cause of stress... for
those in touch with
it."
Jack Wagner
Blue ones
Nick
TooyT wrote:
> >From: Marquis <nmar...@purdue.edu>
> Wrote:
> >I have only two jumps and I am already worried about this stuff. I know that
> >the
> >canopies I have jumped were humongous. I see some of the older jumpers turf
> >surfing and I think I would like to do it sometime. But, I also think
> ***********************************
> thar it is! Johnny is like Monkey see Monkey
> do and don't think or relize he don't have
> the skills to recover in tight situations he may fall into. Most of my ass
> chewings from the S&TA when I was between the dangerous 150 to 250 jump level
> out there just bending
> the hell out of BSR's was. "These kids are watching you Snuffy and one day soon
> you will kill one by proxy if you don't kill yourself first! Bullshit!! Thay
> ain't jumping with me right
> now!
> "Yeah but their watching and thinking if that
> crazy old man can do that so can I. shit he
> is old enuff to be my Greatgrandpa. I can
> do it to, Ican do it to, hell all us non C & D guys could do that if That old
> fart can. And we will be cool, people will respect us cuz we are cool."
> I didn't like the S&TA thought he was a Skygod cuz he jumped with deguello but
> after thinking it over had to admit he was prolly right cuz kids are dum. I
> Autta know
> cuz I think like a kid, 2 year old kid thut is
> Anyway I quit my foolishness for the sheeps good but it did me more good I
> developed more dicipline, went off and started competing in National class
> scrambles. I STILL THINK THAT S&TA WAS A DAMN SKYGOD, HE PULLED ME OFF MORE
> THAN ONE FOCKING LOAD but he was right and I was wromg
> Auggggggggggggggggggggggggggg I gonna VOMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-( snuffy
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
Michael wrote:
> It never ceases to amaze me how these things are discussed
> with much enthusiasm and little knowledge. Is it too much to
> maybe, just maybe, actually find out some details about the
> program before you critique it?
>
>
> Michael S/L I (Retired)
>
> SKY...@ix.netcom.com wrote in article <3613D248...@ix.netcom.com>...
> > I may be wrong here (can't believe I said that) but it is my
> understanding that
> > Skydive Chicago use SABRES not STILETTOS in their student progression
> program.
> > However, in a couple of your posts you have made reference to Roger
> putting his
> > students under Stilettos, is he doing that and if so, is that with
> selected
> > students half way through his program or across the board?
Er! Excuse me but I do believe I was doing just as you suggest, you know like
asking for details!
>It never ceases to amaze me how these things are discussed
>with much enthusiasm and little knowledge. Is it too much to
>maybe, just maybe, actually find out some details about the
>program before you critique it?
Perhaps it's a good thing you're retired, you seem to be just a little too
quick out the trap to me! Did you miss your nap or something!
Blue ones,
Stay Safe.
Martin Evans.
> --
rick nelson
snubbing novices.
> . As a side note for those of you low timers who feel that this
> attitude only pertains to you, don't. It has been a constant source of irritation to
> me since I arrived in this country, that the vast majority of skydivers here only
> acknowledge ones presence once they become aware that you can be of use to them.
Yep, not just in skydiving either. This is a uniquely American, yuppie
attitude.
ric
john berntsen
are applicabe to most arenas of endeavor. I can't fault the hedonists
for their lack of mentoring though. It takes a special kind of person to
mother the newbies, it's something your born with or raised as (genitics
vs enviornmental).
In a perfect world we would all put our goals on a equal plane with the
outcome of the fledgling being.
Some do and they become the prized teachers, but in life mos't don't.
(that's why we still have to go to confession).
I agree, if your a JM or Instructor, you should be held to a much higher
standard of responsibility, and have the calling, to mentor inately, as
your priority.
The problem is those that forget and form cliques of $, & Mo Money to
support their own ends. Kinda like ATP wanna bees that instruct and milk
the pilot wanna be's, it's a ner ending cycle (but then you said that)
It all boils down ta human nature and the maturity of the observer, ta
weed out the chaff, glad I'm older, f..k no I'm not, but I'm stuck wit
it.
If ya can recommend any DZ's in western WA that have the qualities that
you admire E-mail me.
My background, Very insignicant, But I wish the news group would share(
their ,Dz's location)
If ya read any of my past posts, & I recon ya did, Ya know my
background, 5 s/l's 5 FF. Beavers, Chinooks, 182's Weir Prairie,
Military DZ Rainier WA
Ft Lewis PC 1963, Wooda Been A lic # 500 n' sumpti, if I applied, but
didn't. Kick my ass now cuz only needed 10 jumps back then ta get an A
not that it would mean anything now as I been away so long.
I had too many beers now thus the digressions.
Iron...hic... Dog
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
MOM1398 wrote:
> This thread started as a question of why johnny cant land. I put my nickels
> worth in, and opened it up for everyone to see the big picture behind this
> question. This debate is not about what type of parachutes students, and
> newbies should be under. This thread is about ATTITUDES. Attitudes of the
> experienced as well as the attitudes of students, and newbies. Attitudes of our
> DZO's, Instructors, and Jumpmasters.
> Martins words ring oh too true. I also started when there was a genuine
> brotherhood. I am now laughed at often for trying to keep that old spirit
> alive. True brotherhood is what kept this sport alive in it's infancy. It's
> what needs to come back to keep it prosperous.
You started a good thread here Mike, something we can all get our teeth into,
whatever our experience level. Once we've exhausted this one (a way to go yet I
think) maybe we can get something else with substance going. I've had enough of
pissing people of for one month, Oh hang on, this is a new month ain't it! ;-)
You know Mike if we aren't careful we'll have 'em thinking we're a double act and
they've been set up!
Blue ones,
Stay Safe.
Martin Evans.
--
Drew Eckhardt
Duksnarow <duks...@aol.com> wrote:
>how many fjc students do you see landing with a no flare/ late flare? 99% walk
>away if they are under a manta. how many in the same scenario walk away under a
>sabre?
Assuming it's lightly loaded, a similar number.
>i guess my view is aimed at preventing uneccesary injuries. roger told me the
>stillitto is easier to land, i wouldnt know, i have never jumped one.
While you land a big F111 canopy by slamming on the brakes at some arbitrary
altitude, you land nearly all modern ZP and half ZP canopies (I flare the
same on my Batwing 134 as I did on my Turbo Z 205) by an interactive process
which gives you ample time to correct for errors in altitude estimation.
More efficient wings like the Stiletto have a lower stall speed, and give
you even more time to work things out.
>its also easier to get hurt when you screw up your landing.
I've walked away from botched landings under canopies loaded at 1.45
pounds per square foot with aggressive front riser approaches at density
altitudes of 8000-9000 feet (your canopy flies about 4% faster for each
1000 feet), and wouldn't agree.
Vertical speed is bad.
As downhill skiers biffing at 80MPH, motorcycle racers going down at
120MPH, and skydivers like me have discovered, horizontal speed is
embarassing, but relatively painless.
When you botch a landing (low turns without regard for canopy attitude
and altitude loss are a separate issue) under a ZP canopy, although you
may be cooking across the ground, your vertical speed tends to be minimal
(because you literally "slammed on the brakes" if you really screwed
up).
--
If a President of the United States ever lied to the American people he
should resign," --- William Clinton, 1974 while running for the US House of
Representatives responding to a question about President Nixon.
Drew Eckhardt
Liv4fear <liv4...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>I put myself under a Stiletto and YES, it's much easier to land. And yes, I'm a
>newbie (~75 jumps) and no, I didn't go through Roger's course.
I think this is a fine idea.
Starting with a moderately loaded elliptical means that you'll have no
chance to develop instinctive control responses which will kill you when
you get under something smaller, less chance for landing asymetries which
go unnoticed until you get under something that lands _very_ fast, and
little oportunity to habitualize deployment practices which will lead to
malfunctions under higher performance canopies.
Glenn Lodge
when I first started jumping there were plenty of people at my dz whose
attitude was "We don't want you on our load
because you're just a low timer". Well there were allot of other jumpers
with lots of experience
who weren't afraid to take the newbe along and teach them.
This is really what kept me in the sport. Did this happen five or ten
years ago? No, almost fifteen.
So this type of attitude is not new or just restricted to young urban types.
There is a brotherhood in skydiving and it is being kept alive. Remember the
first word in funnel is FUN.
The new guy we jump with today will be the old guy we jump with tomorrow.
Blue Skies,
SKYDOG 134
TooyT
>From: Marquis <nmar...@purdue.edu>
Wrote:
>I have only two jumps and I am already worried about this stuff. I know that
>the
>canopies I have jumped were humongous. I see some of the older jumpers turf
>surfing and I think I would like to do it sometime. But, I also think
TooyT
>From: Marquis <nmar...@purdue.edu>
>Date: 10/2/98 Wrote:
>If it's fun why not do it? did however say that I realize I don't have the
>skillz
>yet. Give me a few 100 jumps(not just 100 but more) i will probably try it.
Not
>munky see, munky do. I ain't that stoopid. im smart enough to know my
limits.
***********************************
OH SHIT! a monkey that knows its limits. :)
rather than 200 more why not wait till ewe
have a thousand jumps min. At least you will
look gud laying there with you're gold wings
on yer chest . Who knows by then you may begin to understand the odds are
stacked. There ewe made me sound like a old
Fuddy Duddy, makk ewe happy kid? :-P snuffy sez be safe huv fun wear a rubber
no telling whut sheep gots
Livendive
Rhonda wrote:
>>If not, then USPA is not truly serving their membership ... in terms of
>>staying abreast of the concerns/issues of that membership.
>
>
>I know that the ng has grown a lot in the past few years, but I don't think
>we're more than a small portion of USPA members.
I think the more pertinent question would be whether we are a representative
sample. If so (and I'm not sure we are), then at least brief consideration of
the discussions here would fit well within what I believe USPA's role should
be.
EFS,
Dave
MOM1398
Hey Martin,
BRAVO!!!!!!!
This thread started as a question of why johnny cant land. I put my nickels
worth in, and opened it up for everyone to see the big picture behind this
question. This debate is not about what type of parachutes students, and
newbies should be under. This thread is about ATTITUDES. Attitudes of the
experienced as well as the attitudes of students, and newbies. Attitudes of our
DZO's, Instructors, and Jumpmasters.
Martins words ring oh too true. I also started when there was a genuine
brotherhood. I am now laughed at often for trying to keep that old spirit
alive. True brotherhood is what kept this sport alive in it's infancy. It's
what needs to come back to keep it prosperous.
Blue SkyZ
DJ Mike
The only thing guaranteed in Skydiving is...you will land !
TooyT
>From: rick nelson <nel...@airmail.net>
Wrote:
>SKY...@ix.netcom.com wrote: some stuff about experienced jumpers
>snubbing novices.
>> . As a side note for those of you low timers who feel that this
>> attitude only pertains to you, don't. It has been a constant source of
>irritation to
>> me since I arrived in this country, that the vast majority of skydivers
>here only
>> acknowledge ones presence once they become aware that you can be of use to
>them.
> Yep, not just in skydiving either
>attitude.
Hey Rick its the young yups. the ones that
have no assets only debt and melted plastic
cards & cain't make enuff to pay the debt
down, yuh poor yuppie kid living from paycheck to paycheck afraid the clock
will
strike midnight thats what makes them so
anal. If they they cain't keep the right
cloth's cars and lifestyle going the other young yups will dump them among the
unwashed masses It stress's them, thats
why they act so shitty on the DZ. :)
I actually had some older yup friends
ewe know the ones with assets. sure they
may have been slumming and I was their token Bubba but they nice people, laid
back, plenty of zen. Gee maybe money
would give me zen and make me a kinder and
gentler old bastard. :) Anyway thought I
would put in a word fer a very few yups.
Take Doc. and Cathy see how nice and
genteel they are? I rest my case. Now git a possee and start hanging the young
ones.
Their Beemer convertables could be used as beer coolers. Just put the top down,
pour in Ice and beer bottles throw gunny sacks
over the ice and have a boogie. HFBS & KAYAD:-) snuffy
Skydddiver
the dz i e-mailed you about is a child of the fort lewis sport parachute club
of the eighties and nineties
ryan
D14513
aad: if you want one, buy one; if you need one, get out of the sport.
Skydiver's Information Manual excerpt:
AADs are: <snip>
3. Intended to be used only as back-up devices and should not be relied upon as
they may not work as intended.
kr...@philly.infi.net
bil...@qualcomm.com wrote:
> yes, it will cost money to replace mantas with triathalon 190's. but
> that's life. "it's too expensive!" is a poor reason to not buy AAD's for
> students (for example.)
Well if you instructors taught them to pull, they wouldn't need AADs. :)
Just kidding. :)
Blue ones!
--rita
SKY...@ix.netcom.com
Bob Singleton wrote:
> Rita wrote in message <3613BF...@philly.infi.net>...
> .>I sure as hell hope someone is ... I sure as hell hope that it is even in
> >someone's job description to at least scan the various threads and
> commentary
> >appearing on this newsgroup.
> >
> >If not, then USPA is not truly serving their membership ... in terms of
> >staying abreast of the concerns/issues of that membership.
>
> I think you over-estimate the participation of the USPA membership in this
> NG. I know that a couple of those in the "head shed" read it, but I doubt
> reading it is (and would oppose it being) part of their "job description".
> A newsgroup is basically a discussion between
> individuals...an electronic conversation if you will...I'd hate for USPA
> policy to be based upon a few overheard conversations at the DZ.
Thing is though, that people here seem to be much more likely to express their
true feelings and thoughts on many skydiving related subjects than they ever
would face to face with a USPA representative, or by putting pen to paper and
signing their name to it! Many people look on the USPA as the skydiving police
and as such a force to be wary or frightened of and not as *our employees or
elected officials*! Sure there are very few of the membership posting here
(though I bet there would be a lot more if all the lurkers were to participate)
but it may not be such a bad idea to make it a part of the job for somebody from
'head office', to listen in and get an idea of the thoughts, ideas and concerns
of some of the membership, they may actually learn things here that they never
would through any other forum! Of course some of the things they learn may
actually involve sheep and gerbils along with a bunch of other unsavory
information but hey! I have to wade through it don't I and I'm not even on the
payroll, though I should be! ;-)
kr...@philly.infi.net
rhon...@aol.com (Rhonda Lea) wrote:
> Of that membership, what percentage reads/posts to this newsgroup?
>
> I know that the ng has grown a lot in the past few years, but I don't think
> we're more than a small portion of USPA members.
I would not be surprised if it was as many as 50%. While there are lots of
folks who probably never post, I'll bet lots of them lurk.
ellen_...@hotmail.com
>I'd hate for USPA
> policy to be based upon a few overheard conversations at the DZ.
How do you get 'basing policy on' from her call for USPA to be aware of
membership concerns?
Ellen
ellen_...@hotmail.com
Marquis <nmar...@purdue.edu> wrote:
> there's no reason to not try something. If ya ain't riskin it, ya ain't livin
it.
Yes there is: Broken bones really hurt. Trust me on this one.
ellen_...@hotmail.com
mom...@aol.com (MOM1398) wrote:
>
> that seem to have an attitude of "no money in my pocket? No no wisdom from
me".
>
I've addressed this issue here in the past. I'm with you. Who brought all
you experienced jumpers up to speed? If you got in the sport five or more
years ago, you most likely learned from other experienced jumpers. Did they
charge you? Or did they realize that the supply of experienced jumpers for
them to jump with in the future depended on them bringing you up to speed. I
have nothing against people who make their livelihood from jumping. OTOH, it
is up to we, more experienced jumpers to bring young jumpers along. Not for
cash, but for the sake of the sport. If you are a coach, more power to you,
but when that young jumper is done with his coach jumps, it's time for the
experienced jumpers to step forward and take him or her on their first no-pay
two way, their first four way, their first whatever. Besides! Think of all
the free beer you can weazel off them! :)
Ellen
RHallifax
>Kinda like ATP wanna bees that instruct and milk
>the pilot wanna be's,
Now what's an ATP, IronDog? With all your biological references (envirmental
vs. genetic), all I can come up with is adensine triphosphate. And I doubt
that's what you're talking about.
Bob
skys...@my-dejanews.com
Thomas Kerler <ker...@math.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>
> look for example into Brian Burkes syllabus - that seems to be at
> least a good proto type for a standard canopy control course. Take
> a look at
>
> http://www.skydiveaz.com/resources/book_canopy.htm
> (see the "Skydive! Archives" for similar stuff)
>
Thanks Tom for the web site info. Haven't read it yet but will do so today.
> a good list of some very concrete and important skill - I tried hard to
> find something like that in the S.I.M:
The SIM has been update recently and sevral other times during the times
while we have all restled with Level 8 and canopy control and the devastating
increase in landing injuries and death, and as you pointed out USPA has seen
to skirt the issue trusting in the JMs, Is, S&TAs, and DZOs to develop the
programs for themselves. But I must come to USPA's defense in that they are a
governing body and as such must tread cautiously when defining goals and
guidelines. Not an excuse but a reflection on yes we (the ones in the field)
as JMs etc. must work to develop the programs then propose them to USPA.
That's how AFF and Tandem was developed. We need to take the bull by the
horns and do it ourselves then get the support of USPA. I do feel that USPA
could make this more of a priority and investigate what is being done and
maybe put more of an effort to get the DZs inputs.
>
>
> I understand and sympathize with the argument that the SIM and
> license requirements were written in a time when HP canopies were not very
> common and landing accidents not an issue as it is now.
Not to jump on USPA but like I said above the SIM has been updated several
times even since the Stilleto has been on the market.
>
> I can't say what the best way for USPA would be to implement canopy
> control education, but designing a standard curriculum for a course would be a
> useful first step. Also training programs for potential instructors of cc
> courses are conceivably very helpful. The question of incentives for people to
> take such courses is of course a bit delicate - that would go into realm of
> license requirements or additional skill ratings, and we'd have another thread
> from hell here.
So isn't that what we do best here and I would enjoy reading the discussions.
So lets just do it.
> Blue Skies, Thomas D-20874 Muff#2160
>
--
Bill S.
D13096; AFF/SLI-98; Muff#1900
We are never lost, we are always directly above the center of the Earth.
bskyrat
free beer and the choice SCR ceremony afterwards.
wrote in article <6v2h4g$v4s$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com
Floydd
bil...@qualcomm.com wrote in message <6utjrg$lks$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <19980930011224...@ng13.aol.com>,
> true, but part of that is our fault as JM's and instructors. we're not
>teaching people how to flat turn HP canopies. we're not teaching them how
to
>flare a small canopy. we're just releasing them with the skills they need
to
>fly a manta (which are sometimes the _opposite_ skills they need to land a
HP
>canopy) and telling them "see ya!" if we see a low-experienced jumper
buying
>a tiny hotrod we tell them "you can't handle that." in general we don't
tell
>them _how_ to land it, just not to do it.
> a few people (bryan burke, dave jurgens, roger nelson) have actually
>trained people how to land HP canopies. they're the people who are really
>making a difference. a jumper with 20 jumps can safely land a sabre loaded
>at 1:1 - _if_ they have the training to do it. and it's up to us (the
well kudos to my instructors then... their theory is teach people on what
they'll really be jumping.... start with 2 tandems for steering & flaring
basics (6 hour clas in between). 3 IADs on radio to get used to solo canopy
flight.. then aff in 9 levels for a slower pace with the same objectives..
then 5 enhancement/polishing jumps with other experienced people on the DZ
to get a variety of expereience and make friends.... as far as
equipment... i STARTED on a sabre190 with an exit weight of 220. Dual
operation emercengy, BOC ripcord till level 8 then toss-out. I don't have
the years of experience that y'all have but compared with some friends of
mine i know doing traditional AFF on 300s with SOS systems i find myself out
ahead. I don't need to retrain at all getting off student status, i've
stood every landing with no trouble on a 1.1:1 zp and my last few on a sabre
170 (1.23:1) all nice and easy.
am i an expert? no. am i getting a big head? no. but someone's doing
something right and i'll give a lot of the credit to my instructors. when
i asked to go to a 170 they didn't say "NO" the said "stand a few more in
and prove to me you can handle it". they really care about making sure
people know what they're doing and won't let you pass until you do. They've
flat out grounded people they didn't feel comfortable letting jump. Maybe
it is the DZ size.. we're a little 2 cessna dz and i know everyone that
jumps there.. everybody talks to you and i've picked up a lot of what i know
just from talking to other jumpers.
have i still got a hell of a lot to learn? shit yeah but i think i've
gotten a darn goos start...
bil...@qualcomm.com
dr...@village.org (Drew Eckhardt) wrote:
> In article <19981001121948...@ng137.aol.com>,
> Liv4fear <liv4...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >I put myself under a Stiletto and YES, it's much easier to land. And yes, I'm
a
> >newbie (~75 jumps) and no, I didn't go through Roger's course.
>
> I think this is a fine idea.
>
> Starting with a moderately loaded elliptical means that you'll have no
> chance to develop instinctive control responses which will kill you when
> you get under something smaller, less chance for landing asymetries which
> go unnoticed until you get under something that lands _very_ fast, and
> little oportunity to habitualize deployment practices which will lead to
> malfunctions under higher performance canopies.
well, but if you start with someone who has learned under a manta, just
about the worst thing they can do is get to a small canopy quickly without
instruction. the only thing you know at that point is how to land a manta,
and those reactions just plain don't work under a HP canopy. there has to be
instruction.
i generally warn people away from small canopies if i discover that they
did not (and will not) get that instruction wherever they jump. if they do
have to learn through trial and error, a slow progression is a lot less
painful than a fast progression. i've seen people die making minor mistakes
under HP canopies - mistakes made because they learned under a manta and
never unlearned some basic (and completely wrong) reactions. the same
mistake made under a .9 to 1 sabre is simply painful, not fatal, and can be
learned from.
-bill von
Bob Singleton
USPA to be aware of
I don't. I merely equate this NG with a big room and alot of talk going
around. I really doubt that USPA would ever base policy on this NG's
discussions. Heck, maybe Rita and Martin are right, folks could air their
concerns easier here and USPA could get in better touch with it's
membership...chalk my comment up to the paranoid in me! :-)
BSBD
Bob Singleton (the initials BS fit better!)
ellen_...@hotmail.com wrote in message
<6v2g6e$u3g$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
>>I'd hate for USPA
>> policy to be based upon a few overheard conversations at the DZ.
>
>How do you get 'basing policy on' from her call for USPA to be aware of
>membership concerns?
>
>Ellen
>