kimemerson 7 #26 October 20, 2009 If he did this regularly during training with the team then they would have known about it and even planned for it. If he did it on that round for the first time, and as a competitive jump at Nationals, then he did his team a disservice just for trying something new without proving it could be done satisfactorily enough for competition. Competition is not the time to experiment with new ideas. Yes, this can be dangerous but with handles on the top of the plane it is less dangerous than those who have not done it might think. I've done it twice but we who did it were stopped because of the paint job on the Otter, not for safety. I've seen plenty of photos of similar things, mostly from the '70's and concerning Beech's and DC-3s. and while I'm not saying danger did not occur, i can't say I ever heard of anything going wrong. The photos survive but so far few if any horror tales have surfaced. My point: You know how we hear it said, "It's only fun until someone loses an eye." Well, how many people do you see with one eye? Yeah, that's what I thought. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,555 #27 October 20, 2009 I know several members of his team. I can't imagine all of them having agreed to this ahead of time. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilot-one 0 #28 October 20, 2009 Quote>Not a dangerous person. That stunt sorta disproves that. >Possibly a bit crazy but can out fly most jumpers I know. Hmm. That's not evident looking at that video. This stunt doesn't prove or disprove anything. That's thinking with a very small mind. It is what it is. He may be dangerous but maybe not. It is completely impossible to tell from this tiny little part of a snapshot into one's skydiving career. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,084 #29 October 20, 2009 >This stunt doesn't prove or disprove anything. If you see someone intentionally pull under someone else, then they're being dangerous. They may not be that way all the time, but if that one jump is all you see, that's the only judgment you can come to. Heck, this guy may have just made this one mistake, and the rest of the time he's a paragon of safety. But from what people here defending him have said, this isn't something they're surprised at. And that's a lot more worrisome than one incident. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilot-one 0 #30 October 20, 2009 Quotebut if that one jump is all you see, that's the only judgment you can come to. That is what I hate about skydiving. I know this guy personally. I neither condone nor defend his action. I can say he is very safety conscience and looks out for others pretty well. Definitely more than the average. It doesn't surprise me either that he would do this but that's the nature of is personality and not indicative of his normal safety habits. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,084 #31 October 20, 2009 I'm sure he's a really nice guy with a lot of concern for others. Do you think he will do this (or stunts like this) again due to "the nature of is personality?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #32 October 20, 2009 I think everyone is making a big deal about nothing. I have done a hang load on a Beech and a DC-3. Issues about being on top of the fuselage is no greater or less than issues of being a 'regular' floater. The risks are the same. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kirkverner 0 #33 October 20, 2009 Unless he snags his reserve ripcord while belly crawling on top of the Otter and goes through the vertical stabilizer. ParacleteXP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 866 #34 October 20, 2009 Like any other camera step or rear rear float risks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kirkverner 0 #35 October 20, 2009 Vertical stabilizer not horizontal. ParacleteXP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #36 October 20, 2009 QuoteVertical stabilizer not horizontal. So if you think it's a big issue then why did USPA republish the hang load I was on a couple of years ago in the mag? It was a centerfold pic in the middle of summer, but I don't feel like looking through the mags to find it. When USPA publishes something, it's an endorsement. They've published cover photos with people wearing casts on their legs too. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kirkverner 0 #37 October 20, 2009 I dont think hang loads are a good idea. That went out in the 80's. I think if you are videoing at the Nationals you should stick with protocol, the DZO doesn't want you climbing on the top of his aircraft for any reason. ParacleteXP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kirkverner 0 #38 October 20, 2009 They publish fatality reports and I assure you that they dont endorse that activity ParacleteXP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #39 October 20, 2009 QuoteI dont think hang loads are a good idea. That went out in the 80's. I think if you are videoing at the Nationals you should stick with protocol, the DZO doesn't want you climbing on the top of his aircraft for any reason. I can certainly agree that at nationals one ought to follow the prescribed protocol. The issue about the 'stunt' being outrageously dangerous to others is absurd. Stunts that would fall in the category of outrageously dangerous would be a chuteless jump or base rig jumps from AC. But USPA endorses those too. Why don't you ask Mr. Blow Job about his experiences on climbing on top of the fuselage? He seemed to do it quite well without any altercations. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kirkverner 0 #40 October 20, 2009 You should have ended your reply after your first sentence. Enough said. As far as Mr Blow Job, I have no idea what you're talking about. Typical vague cryptic answer that has nothing to do with this guy breaking protocol. Please spend some time getting your knees in the breeze. ParacleteXP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #41 October 20, 2009 QuoteAs far as Mr Blow Job, I have no idea what you're talking about. Typical vague cryptic answer that has nothing to do with this guy breaking protocol. Please turn to page 49 of the October 2009 issue of Parachutist and look at the upper right hand corner. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kirkverner 0 #42 October 20, 2009 No. I don't have piles of old Parachutists around to flip through, I'm too busy SKYDIVING. ParacleteXP Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpwally 0 #43 October 20, 2009 Usually a hang load is pre organized,,where by every one on the dive gets to chose to be on it or not,,thats entirely different than a moments notice and some guy does something he may have planned in his head that no one else knows about,,thats BS man...entirely. Quite frankly im surprised at your comments on this issue,,,and yet the next time a tail gets ripped off and folks die,,,you'll be all blah blah blah with your expert opinion.... as the poster above said,,,,go skydive... smile, be nice, enjoy life FB # - 1083 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,084 #44 October 20, 2009 >The issue about the 'stunt' being outrageously dangerous to others is absurd. No one is claiming it's outrageously dangerous. It is more dangerous than a normal exit for several reasons. Does that make it way too dangerous for anyone to ever do? Not at all. Talk to the pilot/DZO/other jumpers, plan the load, plan for contingencies and knock yourself out. (Well, not literally.) Is it a bad idea to do it on a load without telling anyone? Yes. Even if nothing goes wrong, suddenly losing some rudder authority while one engine is throttled back and there's a whole lot of drag out there is not up there on the list of "good things to have happen during a competition." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #45 October 20, 2009 One thing is for sure though: People sure like to point fingers on others over the internet. For the OP it wasnt enough that this person had been penalized by the DZ. Furhtermore he MUST know his name and he MUST publish it here so that everyone may condemn his actions... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,084 #46 October 20, 2009 >People sure like to point fingers on others over the internet. No need to point fingers; the DZ talked to him and hopefully he learned something. If so, all's well that ends well. It's not like he cost them a medal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #47 October 20, 2009 QuoteIt's not like he cost them a medal. It's not like the "0" they earned on that jump improved their chances of one, either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azureriders 0 #48 October 20, 2009 So maybe he can fly, and maybe he is dangerous. At least now he will be remembered. The man who sucks one cock, although a cock sucker he will probably be forgotten. The man who builds 1000 bridges will probably be remember as a great bridge builder. The man who does both, will for sure be remember as a cock sucking bridge builder. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
feuergnom 29 #49 October 21, 2009 dz.com kangaroo-court once againThe universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle dudeist skydiver # 666 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #50 October 21, 2009 QuoteStunts that would fall in the category of outrageously dangerous would be a chuteless jump or base rig jumps from AC. But USPA endorses those too. The USPA endorses chuteless jumps? I don't think so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
