Recommended Posts
jceman 1
I have to chime in here with a number of others; I don't see how this can add anything to the convention.
I have watched the landing discipline deteriorate at WFFC since '98 (not that it was ever fabulous) and can only see this as adding to the problems rather than solving anything. It's true that there are plenty of areas to land at Rantoul and plenty of room to be safe, but adding in more jumpers who will want to open above 3500 and lack the discipline that comes with experience is nothing but a big step backwards in my eyes.
WFFC is having problems, nothing unsolvable, that have me worried about its survival; I've spoken enough with staffers to know that they are working hard to address these problems, but this step ... my mind boggles.
Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money.
Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them?
I have watched the landing discipline deteriorate at WFFC since '98 (not that it was ever fabulous) and can only see this as adding to the problems rather than solving anything. It's true that there are plenty of areas to land at Rantoul and plenty of room to be safe, but adding in more jumpers who will want to open above 3500 and lack the discipline that comes with experience is nothing but a big step backwards in my eyes.
WFFC is having problems, nothing unsolvable, that have me worried about its survival; I've spoken enough with staffers to know that they are working hard to address these problems, but this step ... my mind boggles.
Faster horses, younger women, older whiskey, more money.
Why do they call it "Tourist Season" if we can't shoot them?
peek 21
GM: But you aren't talking about limiting participation to those who learned at large DZ's.
GP: Correct, just an example.
GM: I doubt someone who has gotten their A licence at another DZ and who has been cleared to jump on their own is suddenly going to accept having to jump with a coach. Read: Pay more money to jump. My guess is this could encourage more logbook padding.
GP: You are not the first person to for some reason read into this new policy something about money. The only place "fees" are mentioned are in conjunction with the Student Training Vendor, which has always been the case. What we envisioned was a "Novice" skydiver jumping with a "Coach" from their home DZ doing them a favor! The Student Training Vendor does not want to do "coached" jumps, as they are too busy with "student" jumps.
GM: I'm assuming you mean 50 freefalls.
GP: of course
GM: Is there going to be an established Student landing area? If not, why not?
GP: The student training vendor always uses the student landing area. People acting as "Coaches" will establish a landing area with their "Novice" as they see fit. We expect them to.
Supervision is the key. We expect people acting as Coaches to do just that. The policy mentions this explicitely.
GP: Correct, just an example.
GM: I doubt someone who has gotten their A licence at another DZ and who has been cleared to jump on their own is suddenly going to accept having to jump with a coach. Read: Pay more money to jump. My guess is this could encourage more logbook padding.
GP: You are not the first person to for some reason read into this new policy something about money. The only place "fees" are mentioned are in conjunction with the Student Training Vendor, which has always been the case. What we envisioned was a "Novice" skydiver jumping with a "Coach" from their home DZ doing them a favor! The Student Training Vendor does not want to do "coached" jumps, as they are too busy with "student" jumps.
GM: I'm assuming you mean 50 freefalls.
GP: of course
GM: Is there going to be an established Student landing area? If not, why not?
GP: The student training vendor always uses the student landing area. People acting as "Coaches" will establish a landing area with their "Novice" as they see fit. We expect them to.
Supervision is the key. We expect people acting as Coaches to do just that. The policy mentions this explicitely.
QuoteWhat we envisioned was a "Novice" skydiver jumping with a "Coach" from their home DZ doing them a favor!
what happens if they are the only one there from their DZ, or maybe no instructors from their home DZ come, or maybe every at their home DZ is a bunch of dicks, and wont "GIVE" away their free time. cause I've been to plenty of DZ's where the coachs charge jumpers for EVERY jump they go on, and I've been to many that dont even charge you for your check dives.
Don't assume just because they have a coach from their home DZ that the coach is willing to give away a "free" coach jump. it may cost "novices" anywhere from slot, to slot+ whatever that particular coach charges.
and I still dont understand how a coach will keep them safe under canopy. the dangerous part of WFFC is the canopy traffic and the fact that u have someone with 25 jumps that has a decision altitude higher then some peoples pull altitude there. thats just dangerous for everyone around, not just the "novice"
----
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
peek 21
Goodness, does the WFFC seem like it is doing that badly in recent years that people think allowing a small select group of additional skydivers to jump there is going to add to the bottom line?!!!!!
The WFFC is certainly not in the "growth years" like back in the later Quincy years, but it is anything from suffering.
I have been telling people for quite a while now the the WFFC is basically reflecting skydiving in general. The 90's, "Point Break", and the influx of students are over, and skydiving is needing to downsize a bit.
To reiterate, if the supervising "coaches" are doing a good job, adding a few "novice" skydivers will not compromize safety.
The WFFC is certainly not in the "growth years" like back in the later Quincy years, but it is anything from suffering.
I have been telling people for quite a while now the the WFFC is basically reflecting skydiving in general. The 90's, "Point Break", and the influx of students are over, and skydiving is needing to downsize a bit.
To reiterate, if the supervising "coaches" are doing a good job, adding a few "novice" skydivers will not compromize safety.
Quote
To reiterate, if the supervising "coaches" are doing a good job, adding a few "novice" skydivers will not compromize safety.
oh thats cool, my saftey is partly in the hands of a coach I dont even know, and I'm hoping he is doing a good job. is their an exam that these coachs are going to have to go through to prove they should be responsible, or is WFFC just gonna take their word for it?
----
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
peek 21
I'm sorry, I can't tell from your comments how to respond or answer your questions. If you would like to call, (800) 435-1975.
AndyMan 7
Gary, how does one become a WFFC coach?
_Am
_Am
__
You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.
You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.
IM not sure if you cant answer it cause you thought I was being rude, if that is so, I'm sorry. Im a bit sarcastic. that was a serious question. because you arent providing coaches for them to jump with, its kinda a bring your own coach (B.Y.O.C 
) is their a process you are going to do to make sure the coach is adequate enough to handle the responsibility you are giving them. I mean Im sorry I Know plenty of "coaches" that if they were the person making sure this "novice" plays safe with others in the air or under canopy, I'd stay off outta the air.
) is their a process you are going to do to make sure the coach is adequate enough to handle the responsibility you are giving them. I mean Im sorry I Know plenty of "coaches" that if they were the person making sure this "novice" plays safe with others in the air or under canopy, I'd stay off outta the air.----
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
QuoteI mean Im sorry I Know plenty of "coaches" that if they were the person making sure this "novice" plays safe with others in the air or under canopy, I'd stay off outta the air.
If you witness a safety problem at a DZ then you need to speak with your S&TA, DZO, and/or Regional Director.
If you look back over the years, you will see the injured and dead were experienced jumpers.
Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.
Please don't shoot me for saying this... but aren't there already enough safety issues at WFFC???
I love the convention. It's a great party... a great place to meet up with old friends... but it is not the safest place to jump. You are already dealing with a lot of people traveling in from cesna dzs, who have never been in the air with more than 3 or 4 other canopies. There are multiple jump runs, people opening all over the place, etc. You really have to be heads up jumping there.
Now the jump numbers will be lowered? Sounds pretty sketchy to me.
Sorry.
I love the convention. It's a great party... a great place to meet up with old friends... but it is not the safest place to jump. You are already dealing with a lot of people traveling in from cesna dzs, who have never been in the air with more than 3 or 4 other canopies. There are multiple jump runs, people opening all over the place, etc. You really have to be heads up jumping there.
Now the jump numbers will be lowered? Sounds pretty sketchy to me.
Sorry.
QuoteNow the jump numbers will be lowered? Sounds pretty sketchy to me.
I guess I can see both sides. You're right in that it is already a more dangerous place to jump. However, should they keep ignoring people with 30 jumps padding their logbooks and jumping there? How should they address that? If it was acceptable for people with 30 jumps to jump there, then maybe logbooks wouldn't get padded, and they could jump there in a more safe fashion than they had before.
There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning
QuoteQuoteNow the jump numbers will be lowered? Sounds pretty sketchy to me.
I guess I can see both sides. You're right in that it is already a more dangerous place to jump. However, should they keep ignoring people with 30 jumps padding their logbooks and jumping there? How should they address that? If it was acceptable for people with 30 jumps to jump there, then maybe logbooks wouldn't get padded, and they could jump there in a more safe fashion than they had before.
How about requiring a stamp in their log book from their S&TA proving they have the jumps? I don't have jumps signed on a regular basis... so I used to have my S&TA stamp and sign a printed manifest ledger when I went to boogies. Rather than accepting it and allowing it, why don't they just enforce the rules?
30 jumps is NOT enough experience to be jumping at WFFC. And I'm confused as to how the coach should take responsibility for another canopy pilot, ensuring they land appropriately next to them??
QuoteHow about requiring a stamp in their log book from their S&TA proving they have the jumps?
S&TAs have signed off things before....
Quote30 jumps is NOT enough experience to be jumping at WFFC.
I think even 50 jumps is low for the Convention! It's a scary place. However, AFF students do jump there, so there should be a way that people with 30 jumps can as well. Sure, AFF students probably have radios, but those can and do fail...and no one has a problem with that.
There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning
AndyMan 7
Quote30 jumps is NOT enough experience to be jumping at WFFC. And I'm confused as to how the coach should take responsibility for another canopy pilot, ensuring they land appropriately next to them?? Crazy
How does the AFF concession take responsibility for their students?
It's not rocket science.
If they can do AFF jumps at the convention, then an appropriate coach can do coach jumps. It's that simple.
_Am
__
You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.
You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.
its as simple as a phone call to their home DZO, ask them how many jumps the particular jumper has. DZO's are much less likely to lie about that info. Im sure some probably still will, but most are safety concious enough to tell the truth.
Just because people are cheating to get in, doesnt mean the standards should be lowered. you will never stop it completely but by checking on it, and having some people lie their way in, you will have far less inexperienced jumpers then if u just opened the flood gates. I understand its not fair to those people that are allowed to jumps with others at their home DZ, but your talking about putting them in danger, and many experienced jumpers in even more danger then they already are. Even if you come from a big DZ, thats alot of canopys in the air.
Just because people are cheating to get in, doesnt mean the standards should be lowered. you will never stop it completely but by checking on it, and having some people lie their way in, you will have far less inexperienced jumpers then if u just opened the flood gates. I understand its not fair to those people that are allowed to jumps with others at their home DZ, but your talking about putting them in danger, and many experienced jumpers in even more danger then they already are. Even if you come from a big DZ, thats alot of canopys in the air.
----
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
QuoteJust because people are cheating to get in, doesnt mean the standards should be lowered.
That is a good point.
Quoteits as simple as a phone call to their home DZO,
This would be very difficult to do. If you have someone coming in on a Tuesday morning, what are the chances someone would even answer the dz phone in Utah???
There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning
QuoteQuoteJust because people are cheating to get in, doesnt mean the standards should be lowered.
That is a good point.Quoteits as simple as a phone call to their home DZO,
This would be very difficult to do. If you have someone coming in on a Tuesday morning, what are the chances someone would even answer the dz phone in Utah???
well them tell them they have to wait til someone gets ahold of the DZO. This could all be done in pre registration. If the jumpers with 50 jumps want to wait to register til the day of, then they can wait a day or a few hours. If there was no pre registration option, then I would say it wouldnt be fair.
----
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
Kris 0
The canopy traffic has gotten absolutely horrible at the WFFC over the last few years.
People don't look where they're flying, or they're deploying too high, or have no concept of a landing pattern.
I've been cut off several times and have seen more than one near-miss.
I'd like to see people booted out on their ass for causing situations like that. Maybe if it happens to a couple of people everyone else will stop flying like idiots.![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]")
People don't look where they're flying, or they're deploying too high, or have no concept of a landing pattern.
I've been cut off several times and have seen more than one near-miss.
I'd like to see people booted out on their ass for causing situations like that. Maybe if it happens to a couple of people everyone else will stop flying like idiots.
Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™
QuoteThe canopy traffic has gotten absolutely horrible at the WFFC over the last few years.
I thought it had always been bad. I though (maybe I'm wrong) that a few years ago, there had been more canopy collisions than recently.
QuoteI'd like to see people booted out on their ass for causing situations like that.
Agreed!!!!!!
There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning
Quote
Agreed!!!!!!
I second that!... but Im not a big fan of stupid people in general
----
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
-God, you are the perfect amount of dumb...
Peej 0
QuoteThe canopy traffic has gotten absolutely horrible at the WFFC over the last few years.
People don't look where they're flying, or they're deploying too high, or have no concept of a landing pattern.
I've been cut off several times and have seen more than one near-miss.
I'd like to see people booted out on their ass for causing situations like that. Maybe if it happens to a couple of people everyone else will stop flying like idiots.
Agreed. But in some people's defence that teeny tiny little yellow windsock that was in the main landing area last year just didn't cut it...
Advertisio Rodriguez / Sky
QuoteAgreed. But in some people's defence that teeny tiny little yellow windsock that was in the main landing area last year just didn't cut it...
Then follow the first person down.
Regardless of direction there is NO EXCUSE for piss poor patterns.
Unfortunately they're the norm, not the exception.
It's bad everywhere, but that kind of canopy traffic is a BIG reason why I have no desire to go to the WFFC.
Blues,
Ian
Performance Designs Factory Team
But you aren't talking about limiting participation to those who learned at large DZ's.
I doubt someone who has gotten their A licence at another DZ and who has been cleared to jump on their own is suddenly going to accept having to jump with a coach. Read: Pay more money to jump. My guess is this could encourage more logbook padding.
I'm assuming you mean 50 freefalls.
Is there going to be an established Student landing area? If not, why not? The WFFC already has a very poor history of enforcing landing directions etc. I don't see how this change helps make it safer for the more experienced jumpers by adding novices into the landing pattern.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites