billvon 3,109 #26 August 11, 2010 >So WHAT are you going to teach people to do in this scenario? Make one attempt to free yourself. Do not cut away since you are below 1000 feet. If the landing will be survivable, steer towards the softest area. If the landing will not be survivable, deploy your reserve. >How many would have been saved with better instruction on what to do >after a low altitude collision? Since I don't know what incidents you are referring to, I don't know. In this case, had the second jumper deployed his reserve sooner (or not cut away and just deployed his reserve once he found himself below 1000 feet) he likely would have survived. So this is a case where dealing with the collision after it happened could have saved him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpwally 0 #27 August 11, 2010 ...sure they do,,,but could you imagine if they didn't have a plan ?,,,it would be like,,,well,,,skydiving.smile, be nice, enjoy life FB # - 1083 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
danornan 79 #28 August 11, 2010 I really do think I understand your point. Regardless of what the "rules" are or what is "mandated" there will always be accidents and we'll never make the LZ bullet proof. I'm just trying to make it more predictable. Right now, it's very haphazard. 1. Watch the windsock and chase it all around. 2. Everyone agrees before boarding the airplane on a landing direction and then someone changes their mind. 3. First one down sets the pattern, unless the wind changes! and on and on.... Me, I land as far from the peas as possible and try to be last down. Never in a hurry to get down first. After the parachute opens I don't want any more excitement.Dano Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #29 August 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf the FAA can mandate a predictable landing pattern for airplanes, we can do the same for parachutes. Until then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem. Airplanes still have collisions in the pattern, no matter what rules the FAA has established. Aircraft, in general, are all planning to touch down at the same spot. Skydivers have the luxury of spreading out, in some cases over 100s of acres.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #30 August 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteIf the FAA can mandate a predictable landing pattern for airplanes, we can do the same for parachutes. Until then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem. Airplanes still have collisions in the pattern, no matter what rules the FAA has established. Aircraft, in general, are all planning to touch down at the same spot. Skydivers have the luxury of spreading out, in some cases over 100s of acres. A powered aircraft can fly on hold or abort landing an do a go around, skydivers can not do that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #31 August 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the FAA can mandate a predictable landing pattern for airplanes, we can do the same for parachutes. Until then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem. Airplanes still have collisions in the pattern, no matter what rules the FAA has established. At least there is a plan. Right now there are no rules, just an informal agreement that changes with the wind! I guess you missed my point. I guess I did too. What WAS your point? - Rules are useless? - Rules are made to be broken? - Rules are for sissies? - We don't need no stinkin' rules? - ?????My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #32 August 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the FAA can mandate a predictable landing pattern for airplanes, we can do the same for parachutes. Until then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem. Airplanes still have collisions in the pattern, no matter what rules the FAA has established. Aircraft, in general, are all planning to touch down at the same spot. Skydivers have the luxury of spreading out, in some cases over 100s of acres. A powered aircraft can fly on hold or abort landing an do a go around, . Yep, all situations that can lead to collisions.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #33 August 13, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIf the FAA can mandate a predictable landing pattern for airplanes, we can do the same for parachutes. Until then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem. Airplanes still have collisions in the pattern, no matter what rules the FAA has established. At least there is a plan. Right now there are no rules, just an informal agreement that changes with the wind! I guess you missed my point. I guess I did too. What WAS your point? - Rules are useless? - Rules are made to be broken? - Rules are for sissies? - We don't need no stinkin' rules? - ????? It was inferred that by mandating more rules this will "fix" the problem. QuoteUntil then this is just lip service and you are not serious about fixing the problem I am not against standardize rules for landing patterns. I am all for them. Having standard rules for landing patterns is good and will reduce the possibility of collisions. I am just not naive enough to believe more rules will "fix" the problem as my example shows. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
