Should Canopy Coaching be #1 route to take to not Femur?

[KillerKimmy 0]

USPA has been inserting these "Femur is not a verb" ads into parachutist. A lot of the people I jump with have some things to say about it. Myself? . . .

It seems from the way it is placed in the ad, that if you have enough money to pay for coaching, it will keep you out of harms way somehow. The rest of the list is fine enough, but I think professional coaching should not be number one.

Thirsting for knowledge in canopy flying disciplines, and being open to learning in all situations from all people is what I think will benefit a jumper the most. Whether he gets coaching or not is bull. Sure coaching has its benefits, but to be safe, it isn't mandatory, much less should it be the #1 way to keep from femuring.

Talking with different jumpers, S&TAs, reading up on safety and incidents on DZ.com, learning to critique canopy approaches, and landings, watching good pilots, being aware. . . All of these things could be in the nuber one slot easily.

Having had some canopy coaching myself, I can say it has helped, however it was definitely not the number one thing that has kept me safe.

I want to know what everyone else thinks.

Captain Kim

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Having had some canopy coaching myself, I can say it has helped, however it was definitely not the number one thing that has kept me safe.

What is the #1 thing that has kept you safe?

[skybytch 273]

Quote

Talking with different jumpers, S&TAs, reading up on safety and incidents on DZ.com, learning to critique canopy approaches, and landings, watching good pilots, being aware. . . All of these things could be in the nuber one slot easily.

I would add conservative gear selection during the learning process to that list, as I feel it is the number one thing that will keep us from femuring while we are learning.

[mark 107]

I guess I'm not exactly clear on where you're going on this. Are you suggesting that lack of skill or knowledge is what causes folks to femur? And that there might be different sources for acquiring skill or knowledge?

Mark

[slotperfect 7]

My priority list:

#1 A complete and neverending respect for dangers involved in jumping out of an airplane and flying/landing a canopy. Acknowledging and accepting one's personal limits (place on the learning curve) is a part of this.

#2 Making an informed decision to select the proper gear based on weight, experience level, DZ altitude, discipline, etc.

#3 Attending a Canopy Piloting Course.

#4 "Continuing education" type canopy coaching.

Arrive Safely

John

[KillerKimmy 0]

I'd say the #1 thing that has kept me safe is a neverending thirst for knowledge. Plenty of jumpers are okay with what they know, they don't watch safety seminars thinking they are no longer beginners and have nothing to learn. When I am on the ground and not jumping, I'm talking with S&TAs, other jumpers, and watching landings and approaches.

Reading on DZ.com, reading incident reports. . . (didn't I mention this already?) These are the things that have kept me not only safe now, but will continue to save my ass. Constant learning.

Captain Kim

[KillerKimmy 0]

Lack of skill knowledge would cause you to femur, but it isn't the only thing. I'm just saying that putting canopy coaching as a number one method to not femur is not the way to prevent it from happening. Maybe not numbering the list would help that. But it certainly makes it look like that is the first thing people who want to be safe should think about.

I disagree.

Captain Kim

[KillerKimmy 0]

Good one!

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

You positively do not need to PAY for the coaching you need to be safe. You must simply ask the right, qualified people. Every dropzone has those people, but the few people out there that have chosen to hang a shingle and make money off the information are the ones that Parachutist seem to mention all the time. Don't believe for a second that you have to pay for that training.

Chuck Blue

[AndyMan 7]

USPA's "Femur is not a verb" campaign is rediculous. Femur *is* a verb, because it's a comon injury. Insisting that it is not a verb is to insist that it does not happen. That's just dumb. Saying it does not make it happen. Wishing it does not make it happen.

Paying for canopy coaching isn't the final answer. You do not have to go far to find people who've come away from canopy coaching with an air of superiority, only to femur (or worse) immediately afterwards. I remember a fatality or serious injury at Perris (i think...) a while ago that happened literally the first jump after Jim Slantons course. Many people seem to think that attending a canopy course is a 'license to be swoop'. Far too frequently, I think a canopy course actually is "a license to be stupid".

I've decided that for myself and people that (occaisionally) choose to listen to me, the secret to living without titainium implants is simple: An attitude open to learning. Approach dangerous activities with your eyes, ears open - but don't forget to keep your mind open, too. Learn from everyone, even those who do it wrong.

I think it's dumb for self proclaimed experts around the country to be charging for canopy lessons. Since there's no such thing as a "canopy coach rating", there is absolutely no quality control. Any idiot can open up a "swoop school" and charge for it. Along with a "canopy coach rating" there needs to be a standardized curiculum. For example, I constantly hear myths of aerodynamics from expert canopy pilots. These people who are excellent swoopers should never even consider teaching people, because they don't know what to teach.

So my answer is two-fold:

A canopy coach rating, so that we know who we should learn from.
A canopy coach course curiculum, so that we know what should be taught.

Once that's done, then coaches should be plentiful and well dispursed, so that their knowledge can be dispursed frequently and cheaply.

There's no point in requiring somebody to fly accorss the country to pay hundreds of dollars to self proclaimed "experts". Real certified experts, with real factual knowledge should be sharing a case of beer at the end of the day, with people who want to learn.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Who's Jim Slanton? I never heard of the dude.

Now while I don't disagree with everything that you say (some of your points are valid), I can tell you that Jim Slaton doesn't market his instruction at people wanting to learn how to fly canopies. Jim markets his instruction towards people who have a basic swooping foundation and want to take their swooping to the next level and/or want to learn how to be competitive swoopers. Who are you to criticize his instruction when I'm guessing that you haven't even taked to him about his knowledge let alone done some coaching sessions with the dude. Jim is very knowledgeable and very passionate about what he does and he's just trying to find his niche for making a living doing the things he loves to do. I never knew that the great AndyMan was such an authority on aerodynamics and canopy flight that he could be openly and publicly criticizing Jim Slaton's instruction.

Jim Slaton rocked my swooping world with the coaching I have received from him (on three seperate occasions). He's explained swooping to me like no other person ever has done and he's armed myself with enough knowledge and practical experience about Ground Launching that will (hopefully) prevent me from doing something stupid in that arena. Of course he's not the only authority out there as there are plenty of other knowledgeable and experienced high performance canopy instructors and while I agree with Chuck Blue that one shouldn't need to spend money to learn something about canopy control and/or high performance canopy flight, why do some feel the need to criticize those who have choosen this path?

Of course just because someone has received instruction from a qualified individual doesn't mean that they know all that. All the instruction in the world won't help if we don't put this instruction into practical use through showing good judgement in the air, practicing what they were taught, staying current and staying within our skill and risk tolerance levels. So talking about this topic is good. But some instruction (be it paid coaching or just talking over beer) is better than no instruction at all and some of this instruction has been individually tailored towards specific goals that the student is looking for.

Plus while it's still in it's infancy levels, there are people who do provide the three levels of canopy control instruction (basic canopy control skills, advanced canopy control and high performance canopy control). Why are some people so quick to criticize what's available today. We're all continually learning and what may exist today might be improved on tomorrow through the lessons that we learn now. One only needs to look at www.canopypiloting.com on the feedback that's being offered by many people towards what the CPC should and shouldn't be.

Canopy control instruction is good, but it's still the canopy pilot who influences how successful or unsuccessful their jumps are.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Who are you to criticize his instruction...

I didn't criticize his instruction. I know nothing of his instruction.

I did criticize how some people think courses like his are "a license to swoop".

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

I did criticize how some people think courses like his are "a license to swoop".

People are going to swoop regardless of whether or not they have been formally trained. Plus Jim doesn't offer a "swooping" course. His instruction is personally tailored towards the current skill, experience level and goals of his students. That's why he can get away with charging money for it.

Hey I don't want to start a war here or anything. You do bring some valid points to the table. But having knowledge is better than having none and one shouldn't be criticized because they sought out that knowledge on their own accord. Keep the dialogue open and who knows, maybe a few years from now the skydiving canopy control scene will be much more structured that what it is now.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[skybytch 273]

Quote

I think it's dumb for self proclaimed experts around the country to be charging for canopy lessons.

I don't. I think there's a place for it, just as there is a place for self proclaimed freeflying, RW and wingsuit "experts" to be charging for coaching. Do I think everybody needs to pay for said coaching? No. But I do think there is great value in having structured instruction available to those who have the time, money and/or desire to attend them.

The way I see it, the value of a structured program is in the consistency of the information presented, a focus on learning the new information and practicing the new skills and the availability of someone (hopefully somewhat knowledgable) to provide feedback on the "student's" performance.

There's a section in the 2006 SIM that outlines a basic canopy control course; it covers things like braked turns, landing patterns, canopy flight plans and getting back from long spots. The course appears to me to be exactly what Scott Miller teaches in his basic course, which I took a couple of years ago. I don't see anything in there that would stop anybody out there from taking this outline and presenting it to other jumpers at any dz, whether they choose to charge for their time and effort or not.

imho, this is a far better way for jumpers to learn than the "traditional" 12 ounces of coaching at the end of the day.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I don't. I think there's a place for it, just as there is a place for self proclaimed freeflying, RW and wingsuit "experts" to be charging for coaching. Do I think everybody needs to pay for said coaching? No. But I do think there is great value in having structured instruction available to those who have the time, money and/or desire to attend them.

Most Wingsuit coaches are rated, and they teach a standard curiculum. That's a great example of how canopy coaching could work well. I'm not thrilled that wingsuit ratings are handed out by a manufacturer, I'd prefer it be done by the national associations to ensure consistency accross manufacturers.

Right now, there's nothing stopping me from offering swooping courses, and I assure you that I would not be wise for customers to pay me for my knowlege. I don't know nearly enough to teach anyone meaningfully. The problem is that if I chose to do so - my potential clients would not have a good way of judging my abilities. Even if I was a far better canopy pilot than I am now, I stll might not be a good teacher.

With the exception of maybe 3 or 4 individuals nationwide who have good reputations, jumpers have absolute no idea who to take advice from. 3 or 4 people nationwide is not nearly enough to teach the 10's of thousands of active skydivers in America.

Local instruction does not need to be given in 12 ounces, nor does it need to be paid for. Both, if done properly - are fine. The key though, is that if its to have any impact, it needs to be local, and it needs to continue beyond the end of the camp.


_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[Remster 30]

Quote

Right now, there's nothing stopping me from offering swooping courses

Go for it. Its the same as RW or FF. You'll get what people are willing to pay for your services.

What I see is a big gap both in the very basic, student level of control coaching, and in the beginers to intermediate level (say the 50 to 250 jumps). And no, you dont need to be a Jim Slaton, Brian Germain or Scott Miller for that. A proper curriculum can be put together and integrated into either the Coaches program, or some other USPA rating (I think your coach rating may be a bit on the early stages of progression for that, but at the very least, a AFF instructor rating should include that).

PS: Steve: Jim does aim his coaching accross the board, not just at swoopers:

Quote

Welcome to the Canopy Piloting school...
No matter your experience, whether you are a beginner or looking to get ready for competition we have the ability to get you to the level you are shooting for. Coaching programs are available for all individuals who are looking to excel past their current flying ability, or towards specific goals. Our programs include coaching for those looking to progress in all areas of canopy piloting including, but not limited to: one on one coaching, basic skills camps and/or competition camps. Our instructors have the experience and ability to teach all facets of canopy piloting, in the most efficient and safe atmosphere.

Remster

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

and in the beginers to intermediate level (say the 50 to 250 jumps).

Remi, I think you've hit a good point here. Right now I'm feeling like a poster child for this unmet need. I'm not the person in that range who wants to progress/downsize too fast; I'm the one who's just flat out had trouble with landings on a conservative canopy, and my efforts to solve my problems have led to a confusing hodgepodge of information and advice from a wide variety of sources of vastly different credibility from a lot of dropzones.

While I did take Brian Germain's course (who falls into those "3 or 4 individuals" that AndyMan refers to), because of the nature of the course (and the unfortunate weather that weekend) I only got a couple jumps with Brian around. While it was a helpful course, it doesn't, by design, provide regular, ongoing feedback. Like AndyMan said "The key though, is that if its to have any impact, it needs to be local, and it needs to continue beyond the end of the camp."

I took some "local" advice on modifications to my brake lines that has only worsened my landings, as evidenced by my faceplant at Eloy last week. However well-intentioned the advice might have been, it now appears to have also been flat-out wrong. (Note that I'm not blaming anyone... I take full responsibility for my decisions and their consequences). What I needed (and continue to need, I'm not too proud to admit) is to work on my technique and the mental games I'm playing with myself, not futz around with my gear.

I like the idea of a canopy control coach rating; this would help to identify "go-to" people at DZs to work with one on one or in formal skills camps. We tell students "trust your instructors" and, for the most part, we can trust that those instructors are teaching in a relatively consistent way. After that... it's such a catch-all and it can be a challenge to sort out all the mixed messages.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[johnny1488 1]

Quote

Are you suggesting that lack of skill or knowledge is what causes folks to femur? And that there might be different sources for acquiring skill or knowledge?

Absoutly. Lack of knowledge on how a ram air canopy flies (I think) is the number one reason people get hurt under canopies. Skill will come from knowledge and practice,

I totally believe professional coaching has it's place. But I think by USPA putting this as the #1 priority, they are keeping jumpers from trying to aquire knowledge on their own.

This is just my opinion from looking at the ads. I think the space and time could be used a lot more wisely.

Johnny
--"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!"
Mike Rome

[CrazyL 0]

Read the current SIM. Read the info on PD's website. Read Brian Germain's books. Read Scott Millers info. For those who do and do not wish to pay for a coach there IS FREE INFO. I used to coach for SDU, the program had canopy coaching involved with each jump. Was effective in gaining the skills to keep from breaking oneself. Canopy Coaches: Good.you are still the pilot/jumper who ultimately will be landing the parachute.Even while being coached, a jumper still can break themselves,seen it happen. AFF gives a jumper the basics and extra info such as the SIM to continue learning. My suggestion: Read and observe others flying. If you'd like to know more of what things to observe, ask me.

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

I want to know what everyone else thinks.

Since the number one reason for femuring is turning too radical too close to the ground and it is common knowledge that smaller parachutes and higher wingloads deteriorate the outcome, a course can be very short IMO.

"Don't turn too radical too close to the ground"

Why don't we put that vital piece of information in a first jump course?

In the latest dutch "sportparachutist" I did read two articles that by a strange quirk of fate ended up in that same issue of that magazine.

The first article was from an experienced skydiver who said how much he learned during a canopy course given by one of the local experts in the field, despite his own experience of + 1450 jumps.

The other article was a fatality report about a jumper who did not survive the landing of a perfectly good canopy.

It is common knowledge among dutch skydivers that the person who died there is the same as the one who was giving the course that got so much praise in the other article. He had a website about the courses, you could book at certain dates, he was touring the DZ's etcetera.

He impacted the ground with too much speed after turning too radical too close to the ground...

"Don't turn too radical too close to the ground"

(and yes, I'm in one of my more cynical moods...)

BTW: I managed to land a ram-air canopy well over 2700 times without fracturing a single bone in my body. Should I start giving courses and charge people for the knowledge as described here above?

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[Samurai136 0]

Quote

"Don't turn too radical too close to the ground"

Unfortunately it's difficult to define too radical of a turn until you've exceeded that threashold. How would you teach that?

The USPA advice from incident reports conveys the most accurate information. It's true for every skydiver independent of skill level, canopy type, degree of turn and altitude.

"All turns must be completed with enough altitude for the canopy to return to straight and level flight for the landing flare."

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[selbbub78 0]

Well, I know I've had a lot of canopy coaching. Taken courses, talked to people, had people watch me, video me, and I still broke my femur. Granted, what I did, I still don't know why I did it, because I knew better, and it was something that was drilled into my head since I was a student in IAF. I think Canopy Coaching is an important thing to learn, and know, but I think there are a bunch of other factors that are taken into place for keeping people safe.

CReW Skies,

"Women fake orgasms - men fake whole relationships" – Sharon Stone
"The world is my dropzone" (wise crewdog quote)
"The light dims, until full darkness pierces into the world."-KDM

[MarkM 0]

Were you under your 126 when you broke it?

[dharma1976 0]

Quote

You positively do not need to PAY for the coaching you need to be safe. You must simply ask the right, qualified people. Every dropzone has those people, but the few people out there that have chosen to hang a shingle and make money off the information are the ones that Parachutist seem to mention all the time. Don't believe for a second that you have to pay for that training.

Chuck Blue

and there is this cool guy Chuck who is more than willing to talk to you about questions you have as I now know from personal experience....

and a shitload of people at the two dz's I jump at most of the time are always willing to help me learn more...I have taken a canopy course and learned a lot from it, but that was after hours and hours of free coaching at my regular DZ's

The earliest one of course being Capt Kim running out onto the landing area screaming flare you fucking pussy flare...(thanks Kimmy)

Cheers

Dave

http://www.skyjunky.com

CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing.

[peek 21]

Quote

I took some "local" advice on modifications to my brake lines that has only worsened my landings, ...

Care to elaborate? Not mentioning names of course.