wrightskyguy 1 #51 August 5, 2007 QuotePlease where did I say that it is "not the swoopers problem"? It's everyone's responsibility to create separation *** They way I read it, you're saying competitive swoopers have it all figured out, everyone else needs to get up to speed. Forgive me, but that's a little bit arrogant. To say swoopers know more about canopies, seperation, and the dynamics of a safe landing pattern because of their chosen discipline is silly. Seperate landing areas is the easiest way to maintain canopy seperation, during the landing phase anyway. John Wright World's most beloved skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CanuckInUSA 0 #52 August 5, 2007 Dude you need to go back and read what is written and stopped trying to put things out of context to force your own agenda. I am sorry if it is hard for you to understand this. Competitive swoopers are forced to put separation into our jumps. If a competitive swooper lands out of sequence or does not provide adequate separation, not only do they get a big fat donut for the round but they risk getting a yellow card or worse maybe even a red one. Where is the arrogance in that? It is our reality that compete and train in. Oh and go back and read this thread from beginning to end before you start labelling people as arrogant. If and when you do this, you will see that I AM IN FAVOR OF SEPARATE LANDING AREAS based on time or distance. Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ... I just happened to agree with Ray when he states "canopy collisions would not happen if people were more proactive in seeking separation". Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wrightskyguy 1 #53 August 5, 2007 First of all, don't me dude, this is 2007 and I'm 47. I can only read what you wrote, not what you were thinking when you wrote it. How do I know, or care what goes on in an organized swwop comp. Perhaps if you had written "comp swoopers are forced to put separation into our jumps and therefore are familiar with importance of canopy separation", I would have better understood the point you were trying to make. I have no agenda, I'm an occasional swooper myself, I just have no interest in competition, besides, capri pants make me look fat. John Wright World's most beloved skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CanuckInUSA 0 #54 August 6, 2007 Quote I can only read what you wrote and I sure as hell didn't say that swoopers knew more about canopies. So tell me, where did I say this? Where is the quote in this thread or any other thread? Why are you implying that I said something that I DID NOT SAY and then you turn around in a smug way and say "I can only read what you wrote". What a load of crap. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites The111 1 #55 August 6, 2007 Quote Quote I can only read what you wrote and I sure as hell didn't say that swoopers knew more about canopies. So tell me, where did I say this? Where is the quote in this thread or any other thread? Why are you implying that I said something that I DID NOT SAY and then you turn around in a smug way and say "I can only read what you wrote". What a load of crap. I believe these are the words he is focusing on (emphasis in bold): We as competitive swoopers Ray know this is a no no ... time for everyone else to start being more proactive in creating separation up there.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CanuckInUSA 0 #56 August 6, 2007 QuoteWe as competitive swoopers Ray know this is a no no ... time for everyone else to start being more proactive in creating separation up there. OMG ... no wonder people are colliding with each other out there. Is it arrogant to say "competitive swoopers know NOT to land at the same time" and is it arrogant to say "time for everyone else up there to be more proactive in creating separation on landing". Well if this arrogance, then I am an arrogant SOB ... and it's time for the rest of you mother ####ers to become arrogant as well and stop trying to land all at the same time. Isn't this the premise behind Ray's post? WTF? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wrightskyguy 1 #57 August 6, 2007 QuoteI believe these are the words he is focusing on (emphasis in bold): You are correct, it implies that everyone else is the problem. Maybe that's not what he meant, but that's the way it reads. Everyone else is not the problem, but everyone has to be part of the solution. Now calm down Canuck. John Wright World's most beloved skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skypuppy 1 #58 August 6, 2007 "Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ..." And you claim not to be arrogant?If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CanuckInUSA 0 #59 August 6, 2007 Quote "Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ..." And you claim not to be arrogant? The reality is because of my canopy choice and the way I choose to fly it, I come in very fast. Because of this, I choose to do these landings in the controlled environments of a hop n' pop (or high pulls) versus doing the same thing on a regular load. Isn't that what people are advocating? That we separate fast and slow canopies? If this is arrogance, well then I guess I need a new dictionary. Canopy piloting is my preferred discipline in this sport. Freefall is cool, but it is the canopy flight that I enjoy the most. I know I am not alone here. However to sound like a broken record by now ... I still agree with Ray Dutch that we wouldn't be having all these canopy collision issues if people would just do a better job NOT all trying to land at the same time. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #60 August 6, 2007 A great post. A few additional comments: >Skydivers attempting a straight in landing turn to final the lowest, >and remain in final the longest this creates a window from a low altitude >for a long amount of time, I understand the basics of this theory, but it seems to be akin to saying "the faster you drive through a dangerous intersection the safer you are, because you are in the dangerous intersection for the shortest amount of time." There's something to that, but IMO the additional risk from the higher speed (or more aggressive manuever) outweighs the savings. >The old standard is that a 10 way exits before a 4 way because a 10 way >takes more time to climb out. And because the 10-way will track farther at breakoff time; the next largest group will take the next longest to climb out, so it makes sense to put them next for opening separation purposes. I definitely agree that for similar groups (i.e. three four-ways) canopy loading might be a good consideration. If there are three such teams, and the first team has sub-100 sq ft canopies and are pulling at 2500, and the last team has 200 sq ft canopies pulling at 3500, then the order is obvious. If, however, the pull altitudes are reversed, it may not be wise to put the higher pullers out first, even if they have smaller canopies. The groups are only about 10 seconds apart even with lots of separation, and the difference in pull altitudes far outweighs the extra descent time. Also, putting the sub-100 canopies out last (of the 3 groups) will tend to put them right over the DZ, where it is easier to get down faster. If they are the first group out, they may have to work to get back, and that generally involves not descending rapidly even if that would be good for separation. >instead of exiting after and finding themselves in the middle of a landing > pattern of 10 big canopies that intend to do straight in landings. Of >course when using this method exit order = landing order, it should be this >way with any scenario. Agreed - but again, if those big canopies get out first, they are going to be working to get back, while the smaller canopies will be closer to the DZ. If the pull altitudes work, though (smallest pull lowest) then such an order can still work - although that makes out landings more likely. >I personally would be under brakes letting everyone jihad each other >and find some nice clear airspace to land in, even with my sub 100 >canopy. On bigways everyone shares the responsibility for separation, both vertical and horizontal, and trying to be the last to land is often just as bad as trying to be the first to land. Ideally you want the smaller canopies descending as rapidly as possible and the larger canopies floating; this provides as much room as possible for getting everyone down safely. Note that spiraling is almost never a good idea unless someone is definitely the lowest. Flying the pattern in front risers results in rapid descents but without the unpredictable results of spiraling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rdutch 0 #61 August 6, 2007 QuoteA great post. A few additional comments: >Skydivers attempting a straight in landing turn to final the lowest, >and remain in final the longest this creates a window from a low altitude >for a long amount of time, I understand the basics of this theory, but it seems to be akin to saying "the faster you drive through a dangerous intersection the safer you are, because you are in the dangerous intersection for the shortest amount of time." There's something to that, but IMO the additional risk from the higher speed (or more aggressive manuever) outweighs the savings.Quote I was just trying to describe the difference in landing techniques, where the straight in landers are in final for the longest amount of time at a low altitude, and the hp turning landings are in final for less time and from a higher altitude. I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and encourage ways to provide seperation. The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. I have had occasions where we had the smallest canopies by a large margin and have teams that insist on landing first no matter where they exit, in that case we let them go first instead of trying to race them to the ground. Some of the more experienced freeflyers adopted this method also, and exit canopy size vs group size, and established landing orders within the group. This has worked very well for many years now. Thanks for taking a minute to actually read the post, it seems some people just read a post looking for what they can argue with, instead of finding the positive parts in it. I just wanted to show a few ways/ideas that could in one way or another keep people safer in the air. Ray Small and fast what every girl dreams of! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #62 August 6, 2007 > I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and >encourage ways to provide seperation. Definitely agree there. >The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it >working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes >first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #63 August 7, 2007 Quote > Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. and, like he noted, sometimes when they are argumentative about it, just let them out first and wait until they get out of the way. we get that with jumpers at meets here almost every time. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #64 August 8, 2007 There are some competitive swoopers at Zhills. If they are specifically going to head for the pond, they get out at 5K. If they get out with the load, they just open high and sit in brakes until the airspace clears. I rarely see swoopers having traffic issues with others. Exit order may help with separation, but think about how much time that people have after their canopies are open to avoid each other. On a 40+ way, there are people near you on opening. I actually saw one collision on the closing Sunday at WFFC. There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #65 August 8, 2007 >There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #66 August 8, 2007 Quote>There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. I agree. I guess that is the difficulty in all this. - I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. They usually plan their exit/setup/approach. (I think this is true for the large majority) - I don't see crowds as the issue. I worry more about the people who are not as careful as their skill warrants. The problem being that they believe that they are. I can't figure out a solution that overcomes that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites redlegphi 0 #67 August 8, 2007 Since you apparently can't be a skydiver without having an opinion on this, I'm gonna drop my two cents in. First off, while I do see the point you're making about using exit order to gain separation between people of different canopy types, I don't think that's the best solution to the problem, for two reasons. First, we're already using exit order to keep a reasonable distance between people while in freefall and opening their canopies. It seems like if we try to throw landing separation in on top of that, one of them is eventually going to have to give; either people are going to hit each other in freefall or they're going to hit each other when landing. You can't prioritize two things. Second, while your plan works for the load you described (3 groups of 4-way RW teams) it can get alot more complicated than that. For example, I was used to seeing 4-way RW teams, smaller groups of belly-flyers, groups of freeflyers, single freeflyers, students, and tandems all leave the same Otter. Even starting to try to figure out canopy separation for those various groups while still keeping them separated in freefall causes my brain to lock up. I don't even want to think about trying to figure that out for every single load. Especially when it seems like there's an easier answer. So, if we aren't going to use exit order, then the only method we seem to have left is separation of canopies once they're open. As has been said, there are three basic ways to do this: space, time, and space and time. So first off there's space, meaning that if the DZ has room, than they partition off two different landing areas: 1 for HP landings and 1 for straight in landings. I realize this doesn't solve the problem, as people could still fuck up and run into each other in either area, but it at least simplifies things and reduces the number of potential obstacles a person might encounter when landing. Second up is time, meaning that all the jumpers use the same landing area, but HP landers land either before or after straight in landers. There are a couple ways to accomplish this, the best being high openings or hop n' pops. Less ideal would be just having HP landers hold in brakes until they can see that EVERYBODY else is down, since it can take a hell of a long time for student rigs and tandems to land and there's always the possibility that the HP lander could not see a straight-in lander still in the pattern. Of course, if the holding in brakes option is tossed out, then that means that a person couldn't do a 4-way RW dive AND swoop on the same jump, but maybe that's the price that has to be paid for increased safety at DZs that can't establish a separate swooping area. Finally, the best way (I think) to achieve separation is using space and time, meaning that the DZ establishes separate swooping and straight-in landing areas. On top of this, the people within each area coordinate so that not everybody is landing at the same time. For example, the swoopers talk ahead of time and establish a landing order, with individuals holding in breaks above the landing area until it's their turn (from what I've seen of swooping, I think most swoopers already do this?). The same would be done in the straight-in landing area. This doesn't guarantee that there'll never be another canopy collision, but it at least mitigates most of the risk by providing maximum separation between landing canopies. Such is my two cents, for what it's worth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #68 August 8, 2007 >I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. I agree - but I know very, very few swoopers who consider themselves not very good. If we come up with a solution that is intended to apply to only less-competent swoopers, no one will place themselves in that category. >I don't see crowds as the issue. I don't think crowds are _the_ issue (witness all the collisions with only two people in the air) but I think they can make a separation problem worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Mozencrath 0 #69 August 10, 2007 This is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #70 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... yes in which every person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style. btw once again we at the ranch survive for two reasons... 1. we communicate 2.most of the swoopers dont land by the hanger (but we tell everyone that we arent told that) Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #71 August 10, 2007 Quoteevery person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style Nonsense, there's plenty of good thoughts and discussions here - just ignore the knee jerk responses from the idiots on both positions. There's more exceptions to your cynical response other than just rdutch and kissing up to a moderator. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NeedToJump 0 #72 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Perhaps that's because of comments like these that don't contribute anything to what could have been a very informative thread. Instead people feel the need to find things to bash instead of contributing anything toward a positive discussion. How about if you don't have something constructive to add (disagreements are constructive) you just don't post? I still don't understand why so many people have so many problems with the original post. Ray is advocating separating different landing styles and offering insight into *some* of the possible ways this can happen.Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #73 August 10, 2007 that was being a wise ass not kissing up the thing that I am saying is that hey man if people communicate what they are doing and where and talk about things amongst loads it helps a lot Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #74 August 10, 2007 Wiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #75 August 10, 2007 QuoteWiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) can I use those terms if I pay you 5 cents a use? we have a few people that dont like to listen (I have never ever ever ever ever been that person I swear) I like to think that I approach things in a manner that people dont think is accostive so often when I tell people what is going on they listen... I love explaining why I use a right hand pattern to a left hand turn to people they get this look on their face at first like what the F and then when they get it they get this dawning look on thier face Cheers Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
CanuckInUSA 0 #52 August 5, 2007 Dude you need to go back and read what is written and stopped trying to put things out of context to force your own agenda. I am sorry if it is hard for you to understand this. Competitive swoopers are forced to put separation into our jumps. If a competitive swooper lands out of sequence or does not provide adequate separation, not only do they get a big fat donut for the round but they risk getting a yellow card or worse maybe even a red one. Where is the arrogance in that? It is our reality that compete and train in. Oh and go back and read this thread from beginning to end before you start labelling people as arrogant. If and when you do this, you will see that I AM IN FAVOR OF SEPARATE LANDING AREAS based on time or distance. Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ... I just happened to agree with Ray when he states "canopy collisions would not happen if people were more proactive in seeking separation". Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wrightskyguy 1 #53 August 5, 2007 First of all, don't me dude, this is 2007 and I'm 47. I can only read what you wrote, not what you were thinking when you wrote it. How do I know, or care what goes on in an organized swwop comp. Perhaps if you had written "comp swoopers are forced to put separation into our jumps and therefore are familiar with importance of canopy separation", I would have better understood the point you were trying to make. I have no agenda, I'm an occasional swooper myself, I just have no interest in competition, besides, capri pants make me look fat. John Wright World's most beloved skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #54 August 6, 2007 Quote I can only read what you wrote and I sure as hell didn't say that swoopers knew more about canopies. So tell me, where did I say this? Where is the quote in this thread or any other thread? Why are you implying that I said something that I DID NOT SAY and then you turn around in a smug way and say "I can only read what you wrote". What a load of crap. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #55 August 6, 2007 Quote Quote I can only read what you wrote and I sure as hell didn't say that swoopers knew more about canopies. So tell me, where did I say this? Where is the quote in this thread or any other thread? Why are you implying that I said something that I DID NOT SAY and then you turn around in a smug way and say "I can only read what you wrote". What a load of crap. I believe these are the words he is focusing on (emphasis in bold): We as competitive swoopers Ray know this is a no no ... time for everyone else to start being more proactive in creating separation up there.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #56 August 6, 2007 QuoteWe as competitive swoopers Ray know this is a no no ... time for everyone else to start being more proactive in creating separation up there. OMG ... no wonder people are colliding with each other out there. Is it arrogant to say "competitive swoopers know NOT to land at the same time" and is it arrogant to say "time for everyone else up there to be more proactive in creating separation on landing". Well if this arrogance, then I am an arrogant SOB ... and it's time for the rest of you mother ####ers to become arrogant as well and stop trying to land all at the same time. Isn't this the premise behind Ray's post? WTF? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wrightskyguy 1 #57 August 6, 2007 QuoteI believe these are the words he is focusing on (emphasis in bold): You are correct, it implies that everyone else is the problem. Maybe that's not what he meant, but that's the way it reads. Everyone else is not the problem, but everyone has to be part of the solution. Now calm down Canuck. John Wright World's most beloved skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skypuppy 1 #58 August 6, 2007 "Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ..." And you claim not to be arrogant?If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CanuckInUSA 0 #59 August 6, 2007 Quote "Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ..." And you claim not to be arrogant? The reality is because of my canopy choice and the way I choose to fly it, I come in very fast. Because of this, I choose to do these landings in the controlled environments of a hop n' pop (or high pulls) versus doing the same thing on a regular load. Isn't that what people are advocating? That we separate fast and slow canopies? If this is arrogance, well then I guess I need a new dictionary. Canopy piloting is my preferred discipline in this sport. Freefall is cool, but it is the canopy flight that I enjoy the most. I know I am not alone here. However to sound like a broken record by now ... I still agree with Ray Dutch that we wouldn't be having all these canopy collision issues if people would just do a better job NOT all trying to land at the same time. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #60 August 6, 2007 A great post. A few additional comments: >Skydivers attempting a straight in landing turn to final the lowest, >and remain in final the longest this creates a window from a low altitude >for a long amount of time, I understand the basics of this theory, but it seems to be akin to saying "the faster you drive through a dangerous intersection the safer you are, because you are in the dangerous intersection for the shortest amount of time." There's something to that, but IMO the additional risk from the higher speed (or more aggressive manuever) outweighs the savings. >The old standard is that a 10 way exits before a 4 way because a 10 way >takes more time to climb out. And because the 10-way will track farther at breakoff time; the next largest group will take the next longest to climb out, so it makes sense to put them next for opening separation purposes. I definitely agree that for similar groups (i.e. three four-ways) canopy loading might be a good consideration. If there are three such teams, and the first team has sub-100 sq ft canopies and are pulling at 2500, and the last team has 200 sq ft canopies pulling at 3500, then the order is obvious. If, however, the pull altitudes are reversed, it may not be wise to put the higher pullers out first, even if they have smaller canopies. The groups are only about 10 seconds apart even with lots of separation, and the difference in pull altitudes far outweighs the extra descent time. Also, putting the sub-100 canopies out last (of the 3 groups) will tend to put them right over the DZ, where it is easier to get down faster. If they are the first group out, they may have to work to get back, and that generally involves not descending rapidly even if that would be good for separation. >instead of exiting after and finding themselves in the middle of a landing > pattern of 10 big canopies that intend to do straight in landings. Of >course when using this method exit order = landing order, it should be this >way with any scenario. Agreed - but again, if those big canopies get out first, they are going to be working to get back, while the smaller canopies will be closer to the DZ. If the pull altitudes work, though (smallest pull lowest) then such an order can still work - although that makes out landings more likely. >I personally would be under brakes letting everyone jihad each other >and find some nice clear airspace to land in, even with my sub 100 >canopy. On bigways everyone shares the responsibility for separation, both vertical and horizontal, and trying to be the last to land is often just as bad as trying to be the first to land. Ideally you want the smaller canopies descending as rapidly as possible and the larger canopies floating; this provides as much room as possible for getting everyone down safely. Note that spiraling is almost never a good idea unless someone is definitely the lowest. Flying the pattern in front risers results in rapid descents but without the unpredictable results of spiraling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rdutch 0 #61 August 6, 2007 QuoteA great post. A few additional comments: >Skydivers attempting a straight in landing turn to final the lowest, >and remain in final the longest this creates a window from a low altitude >for a long amount of time, I understand the basics of this theory, but it seems to be akin to saying "the faster you drive through a dangerous intersection the safer you are, because you are in the dangerous intersection for the shortest amount of time." There's something to that, but IMO the additional risk from the higher speed (or more aggressive manuever) outweighs the savings.Quote I was just trying to describe the difference in landing techniques, where the straight in landers are in final for the longest amount of time at a low altitude, and the hp turning landings are in final for less time and from a higher altitude. I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and encourage ways to provide seperation. The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. I have had occasions where we had the smallest canopies by a large margin and have teams that insist on landing first no matter where they exit, in that case we let them go first instead of trying to race them to the ground. Some of the more experienced freeflyers adopted this method also, and exit canopy size vs group size, and established landing orders within the group. This has worked very well for many years now. Thanks for taking a minute to actually read the post, it seems some people just read a post looking for what they can argue with, instead of finding the positive parts in it. I just wanted to show a few ways/ideas that could in one way or another keep people safer in the air. Ray Small and fast what every girl dreams of! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #62 August 6, 2007 > I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and >encourage ways to provide seperation. Definitely agree there. >The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it >working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes >first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #63 August 7, 2007 Quote > Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. and, like he noted, sometimes when they are argumentative about it, just let them out first and wait until they get out of the way. we get that with jumpers at meets here almost every time. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #64 August 8, 2007 There are some competitive swoopers at Zhills. If they are specifically going to head for the pond, they get out at 5K. If they get out with the load, they just open high and sit in brakes until the airspace clears. I rarely see swoopers having traffic issues with others. Exit order may help with separation, but think about how much time that people have after their canopies are open to avoid each other. On a 40+ way, there are people near you on opening. I actually saw one collision on the closing Sunday at WFFC. There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #65 August 8, 2007 >There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #66 August 8, 2007 Quote>There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. I agree. I guess that is the difficulty in all this. - I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. They usually plan their exit/setup/approach. (I think this is true for the large majority) - I don't see crowds as the issue. I worry more about the people who are not as careful as their skill warrants. The problem being that they believe that they are. I can't figure out a solution that overcomes that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites redlegphi 0 #67 August 8, 2007 Since you apparently can't be a skydiver without having an opinion on this, I'm gonna drop my two cents in. First off, while I do see the point you're making about using exit order to gain separation between people of different canopy types, I don't think that's the best solution to the problem, for two reasons. First, we're already using exit order to keep a reasonable distance between people while in freefall and opening their canopies. It seems like if we try to throw landing separation in on top of that, one of them is eventually going to have to give; either people are going to hit each other in freefall or they're going to hit each other when landing. You can't prioritize two things. Second, while your plan works for the load you described (3 groups of 4-way RW teams) it can get alot more complicated than that. For example, I was used to seeing 4-way RW teams, smaller groups of belly-flyers, groups of freeflyers, single freeflyers, students, and tandems all leave the same Otter. Even starting to try to figure out canopy separation for those various groups while still keeping them separated in freefall causes my brain to lock up. I don't even want to think about trying to figure that out for every single load. Especially when it seems like there's an easier answer. So, if we aren't going to use exit order, then the only method we seem to have left is separation of canopies once they're open. As has been said, there are three basic ways to do this: space, time, and space and time. So first off there's space, meaning that if the DZ has room, than they partition off two different landing areas: 1 for HP landings and 1 for straight in landings. I realize this doesn't solve the problem, as people could still fuck up and run into each other in either area, but it at least simplifies things and reduces the number of potential obstacles a person might encounter when landing. Second up is time, meaning that all the jumpers use the same landing area, but HP landers land either before or after straight in landers. There are a couple ways to accomplish this, the best being high openings or hop n' pops. Less ideal would be just having HP landers hold in brakes until they can see that EVERYBODY else is down, since it can take a hell of a long time for student rigs and tandems to land and there's always the possibility that the HP lander could not see a straight-in lander still in the pattern. Of course, if the holding in brakes option is tossed out, then that means that a person couldn't do a 4-way RW dive AND swoop on the same jump, but maybe that's the price that has to be paid for increased safety at DZs that can't establish a separate swooping area. Finally, the best way (I think) to achieve separation is using space and time, meaning that the DZ establishes separate swooping and straight-in landing areas. On top of this, the people within each area coordinate so that not everybody is landing at the same time. For example, the swoopers talk ahead of time and establish a landing order, with individuals holding in breaks above the landing area until it's their turn (from what I've seen of swooping, I think most swoopers already do this?). The same would be done in the straight-in landing area. This doesn't guarantee that there'll never be another canopy collision, but it at least mitigates most of the risk by providing maximum separation between landing canopies. Such is my two cents, for what it's worth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #68 August 8, 2007 >I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. I agree - but I know very, very few swoopers who consider themselves not very good. If we come up with a solution that is intended to apply to only less-competent swoopers, no one will place themselves in that category. >I don't see crowds as the issue. I don't think crowds are _the_ issue (witness all the collisions with only two people in the air) but I think they can make a separation problem worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Mozencrath 0 #69 August 10, 2007 This is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #70 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... yes in which every person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style. btw once again we at the ranch survive for two reasons... 1. we communicate 2.most of the swoopers dont land by the hanger (but we tell everyone that we arent told that) Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #71 August 10, 2007 Quoteevery person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style Nonsense, there's plenty of good thoughts and discussions here - just ignore the knee jerk responses from the idiots on both positions. There's more exceptions to your cynical response other than just rdutch and kissing up to a moderator. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NeedToJump 0 #72 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Perhaps that's because of comments like these that don't contribute anything to what could have been a very informative thread. Instead people feel the need to find things to bash instead of contributing anything toward a positive discussion. How about if you don't have something constructive to add (disagreements are constructive) you just don't post? I still don't understand why so many people have so many problems with the original post. Ray is advocating separating different landing styles and offering insight into *some* of the possible ways this can happen.Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #73 August 10, 2007 that was being a wise ass not kissing up the thing that I am saying is that hey man if people communicate what they are doing and where and talk about things amongst loads it helps a lot Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #74 August 10, 2007 Wiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #75 August 10, 2007 QuoteWiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) can I use those terms if I pay you 5 cents a use? we have a few people that dont like to listen (I have never ever ever ever ever been that person I swear) I like to think that I approach things in a manner that people dont think is accostive so often when I tell people what is going on they listen... I love explaining why I use a right hand pattern to a left hand turn to people they get this look on their face at first like what the F and then when they get it they get this dawning look on thier face Cheers Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
skypuppy 1 #58 August 6, 2007 "Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ..." And you claim not to be arrogant?If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #59 August 6, 2007 Quote "Do I need to fax you copies of my log books to get it through into your thick skull that the vast majority of my jumps now are hop n' pops and high pulls. Why? Because I come in too fast now to want to deal with anything other than a controlled environment. Maybe you should get to know me before you label me. WTF ..." And you claim not to be arrogant? The reality is because of my canopy choice and the way I choose to fly it, I come in very fast. Because of this, I choose to do these landings in the controlled environments of a hop n' pop (or high pulls) versus doing the same thing on a regular load. Isn't that what people are advocating? That we separate fast and slow canopies? If this is arrogance, well then I guess I need a new dictionary. Canopy piloting is my preferred discipline in this sport. Freefall is cool, but it is the canopy flight that I enjoy the most. I know I am not alone here. However to sound like a broken record by now ... I still agree with Ray Dutch that we wouldn't be having all these canopy collision issues if people would just do a better job NOT all trying to land at the same time. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #60 August 6, 2007 A great post. A few additional comments: >Skydivers attempting a straight in landing turn to final the lowest, >and remain in final the longest this creates a window from a low altitude >for a long amount of time, I understand the basics of this theory, but it seems to be akin to saying "the faster you drive through a dangerous intersection the safer you are, because you are in the dangerous intersection for the shortest amount of time." There's something to that, but IMO the additional risk from the higher speed (or more aggressive manuever) outweighs the savings. >The old standard is that a 10 way exits before a 4 way because a 10 way >takes more time to climb out. And because the 10-way will track farther at breakoff time; the next largest group will take the next longest to climb out, so it makes sense to put them next for opening separation purposes. I definitely agree that for similar groups (i.e. three four-ways) canopy loading might be a good consideration. If there are three such teams, and the first team has sub-100 sq ft canopies and are pulling at 2500, and the last team has 200 sq ft canopies pulling at 3500, then the order is obvious. If, however, the pull altitudes are reversed, it may not be wise to put the higher pullers out first, even if they have smaller canopies. The groups are only about 10 seconds apart even with lots of separation, and the difference in pull altitudes far outweighs the extra descent time. Also, putting the sub-100 canopies out last (of the 3 groups) will tend to put them right over the DZ, where it is easier to get down faster. If they are the first group out, they may have to work to get back, and that generally involves not descending rapidly even if that would be good for separation. >instead of exiting after and finding themselves in the middle of a landing > pattern of 10 big canopies that intend to do straight in landings. Of >course when using this method exit order = landing order, it should be this >way with any scenario. Agreed - but again, if those big canopies get out first, they are going to be working to get back, while the smaller canopies will be closer to the DZ. If the pull altitudes work, though (smallest pull lowest) then such an order can still work - although that makes out landings more likely. >I personally would be under brakes letting everyone jihad each other >and find some nice clear airspace to land in, even with my sub 100 >canopy. On bigways everyone shares the responsibility for separation, both vertical and horizontal, and trying to be the last to land is often just as bad as trying to be the first to land. Ideally you want the smaller canopies descending as rapidly as possible and the larger canopies floating; this provides as much room as possible for getting everyone down safely. Note that spiraling is almost never a good idea unless someone is definitely the lowest. Flying the pattern in front risers results in rapid descents but without the unpredictable results of spiraling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rdutch 0 #61 August 6, 2007 QuoteA great post. A few additional comments: >Skydivers attempting a straight in landing turn to final the lowest, >and remain in final the longest this creates a window from a low altitude >for a long amount of time, I understand the basics of this theory, but it seems to be akin to saying "the faster you drive through a dangerous intersection the safer you are, because you are in the dangerous intersection for the shortest amount of time." There's something to that, but IMO the additional risk from the higher speed (or more aggressive manuever) outweighs the savings.Quote I was just trying to describe the difference in landing techniques, where the straight in landers are in final for the longest amount of time at a low altitude, and the hp turning landings are in final for less time and from a higher altitude. I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and encourage ways to provide seperation. The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. I have had occasions where we had the smallest canopies by a large margin and have teams that insist on landing first no matter where they exit, in that case we let them go first instead of trying to race them to the ground. Some of the more experienced freeflyers adopted this method also, and exit canopy size vs group size, and established landing orders within the group. This has worked very well for many years now. Thanks for taking a minute to actually read the post, it seems some people just read a post looking for what they can argue with, instead of finding the positive parts in it. I just wanted to show a few ways/ideas that could in one way or another keep people safer in the air. Ray Small and fast what every girl dreams of! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #62 August 6, 2007 > I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and >encourage ways to provide seperation. Definitely agree there. >The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it >working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes >first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #63 August 7, 2007 Quote > Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. and, like he noted, sometimes when they are argumentative about it, just let them out first and wait until they get out of the way. we get that with jumpers at meets here almost every time. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #64 August 8, 2007 There are some competitive swoopers at Zhills. If they are specifically going to head for the pond, they get out at 5K. If they get out with the load, they just open high and sit in brakes until the airspace clears. I rarely see swoopers having traffic issues with others. Exit order may help with separation, but think about how much time that people have after their canopies are open to avoid each other. On a 40+ way, there are people near you on opening. I actually saw one collision on the closing Sunday at WFFC. There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #65 August 8, 2007 >There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #66 August 8, 2007 Quote>There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. I agree. I guess that is the difficulty in all this. - I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. They usually plan their exit/setup/approach. (I think this is true for the large majority) - I don't see crowds as the issue. I worry more about the people who are not as careful as their skill warrants. The problem being that they believe that they are. I can't figure out a solution that overcomes that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites redlegphi 0 #67 August 8, 2007 Since you apparently can't be a skydiver without having an opinion on this, I'm gonna drop my two cents in. First off, while I do see the point you're making about using exit order to gain separation between people of different canopy types, I don't think that's the best solution to the problem, for two reasons. First, we're already using exit order to keep a reasonable distance between people while in freefall and opening their canopies. It seems like if we try to throw landing separation in on top of that, one of them is eventually going to have to give; either people are going to hit each other in freefall or they're going to hit each other when landing. You can't prioritize two things. Second, while your plan works for the load you described (3 groups of 4-way RW teams) it can get alot more complicated than that. For example, I was used to seeing 4-way RW teams, smaller groups of belly-flyers, groups of freeflyers, single freeflyers, students, and tandems all leave the same Otter. Even starting to try to figure out canopy separation for those various groups while still keeping them separated in freefall causes my brain to lock up. I don't even want to think about trying to figure that out for every single load. Especially when it seems like there's an easier answer. So, if we aren't going to use exit order, then the only method we seem to have left is separation of canopies once they're open. As has been said, there are three basic ways to do this: space, time, and space and time. So first off there's space, meaning that if the DZ has room, than they partition off two different landing areas: 1 for HP landings and 1 for straight in landings. I realize this doesn't solve the problem, as people could still fuck up and run into each other in either area, but it at least simplifies things and reduces the number of potential obstacles a person might encounter when landing. Second up is time, meaning that all the jumpers use the same landing area, but HP landers land either before or after straight in landers. There are a couple ways to accomplish this, the best being high openings or hop n' pops. Less ideal would be just having HP landers hold in brakes until they can see that EVERYBODY else is down, since it can take a hell of a long time for student rigs and tandems to land and there's always the possibility that the HP lander could not see a straight-in lander still in the pattern. Of course, if the holding in brakes option is tossed out, then that means that a person couldn't do a 4-way RW dive AND swoop on the same jump, but maybe that's the price that has to be paid for increased safety at DZs that can't establish a separate swooping area. Finally, the best way (I think) to achieve separation is using space and time, meaning that the DZ establishes separate swooping and straight-in landing areas. On top of this, the people within each area coordinate so that not everybody is landing at the same time. For example, the swoopers talk ahead of time and establish a landing order, with individuals holding in breaks above the landing area until it's their turn (from what I've seen of swooping, I think most swoopers already do this?). The same would be done in the straight-in landing area. This doesn't guarantee that there'll never be another canopy collision, but it at least mitigates most of the risk by providing maximum separation between landing canopies. Such is my two cents, for what it's worth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,111 #68 August 8, 2007 >I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. I agree - but I know very, very few swoopers who consider themselves not very good. If we come up with a solution that is intended to apply to only less-competent swoopers, no one will place themselves in that category. >I don't see crowds as the issue. I don't think crowds are _the_ issue (witness all the collisions with only two people in the air) but I think they can make a separation problem worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Mozencrath 0 #69 August 10, 2007 This is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #70 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... yes in which every person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style. btw once again we at the ranch survive for two reasons... 1. we communicate 2.most of the swoopers dont land by the hanger (but we tell everyone that we arent told that) Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #71 August 10, 2007 Quoteevery person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style Nonsense, there's plenty of good thoughts and discussions here - just ignore the knee jerk responses from the idiots on both positions. There's more exceptions to your cynical response other than just rdutch and kissing up to a moderator. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NeedToJump 0 #72 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Perhaps that's because of comments like these that don't contribute anything to what could have been a very informative thread. Instead people feel the need to find things to bash instead of contributing anything toward a positive discussion. How about if you don't have something constructive to add (disagreements are constructive) you just don't post? I still don't understand why so many people have so many problems with the original post. Ray is advocating separating different landing styles and offering insight into *some* of the possible ways this can happen.Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #73 August 10, 2007 that was being a wise ass not kissing up the thing that I am saying is that hey man if people communicate what they are doing and where and talk about things amongst loads it helps a lot Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #74 August 10, 2007 Wiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dharma1976 0 #75 August 10, 2007 QuoteWiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) can I use those terms if I pay you 5 cents a use? we have a few people that dont like to listen (I have never ever ever ever ever been that person I swear) I like to think that I approach things in a manner that people dont think is accostive so often when I tell people what is going on they listen... I love explaining why I use a right hand pattern to a left hand turn to people they get this look on their face at first like what the F and then when they get it they get this dawning look on thier face Cheers Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 3,111 #62 August 6, 2007 > I was trying to show how its bad to mix the two landings, and >encourage ways to provide seperation. Definitely agree there. >The canopy size idea is based on many years of experience with it >working in DeLand with 4way teams, we usually pick which team goes >first based on canopy size or desire to get to the ground. Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #63 August 7, 2007 Quote > Yeah, when the issue is several 4-way teams deciding where to exit/open, I can see that working well. In many cases, the effort put into talking to other teams about where they are exiting/pulling (keeping camera flyers in mind as well of course!) goes a long way towards solving the problem IMO. and, like he noted, sometimes when they are argumentative about it, just let them out first and wait until they get out of the way. we get that with jumpers at meets here almost every time. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #64 August 8, 2007 There are some competitive swoopers at Zhills. If they are specifically going to head for the pond, they get out at 5K. If they get out with the load, they just open high and sit in brakes until the airspace clears. I rarely see swoopers having traffic issues with others. Exit order may help with separation, but think about how much time that people have after their canopies are open to avoid each other. On a 40+ way, there are people near you on opening. I actually saw one collision on the closing Sunday at WFFC. There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #65 August 8, 2007 >There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #66 August 8, 2007 Quote>There were only TWO people landing in the main landing area in front >of manifest. One person did a carving turn into the other. This has been an issue in several canopy collisions; often they are the only two people in the air. I think this is because the high jumper thinks "I'm clear; there's only one other person in the air and I can certainly avoid one person!" It's one of the reasons I am leery of the "just don't do 270's in crowds" approach, It only takes one other jumper in the air flying an incompatible pattern to cause a collision/fatality. I agree. I guess that is the difficulty in all this. - I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. They usually plan their exit/setup/approach. (I think this is true for the large majority) - I don't see crowds as the issue. I worry more about the people who are not as careful as their skill warrants. The problem being that they believe that they are. I can't figure out a solution that overcomes that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #67 August 8, 2007 Since you apparently can't be a skydiver without having an opinion on this, I'm gonna drop my two cents in. First off, while I do see the point you're making about using exit order to gain separation between people of different canopy types, I don't think that's the best solution to the problem, for two reasons. First, we're already using exit order to keep a reasonable distance between people while in freefall and opening their canopies. It seems like if we try to throw landing separation in on top of that, one of them is eventually going to have to give; either people are going to hit each other in freefall or they're going to hit each other when landing. You can't prioritize two things. Second, while your plan works for the load you described (3 groups of 4-way RW teams) it can get alot more complicated than that. For example, I was used to seeing 4-way RW teams, smaller groups of belly-flyers, groups of freeflyers, single freeflyers, students, and tandems all leave the same Otter. Even starting to try to figure out canopy separation for those various groups while still keeping them separated in freefall causes my brain to lock up. I don't even want to think about trying to figure that out for every single load. Especially when it seems like there's an easier answer. So, if we aren't going to use exit order, then the only method we seem to have left is separation of canopies once they're open. As has been said, there are three basic ways to do this: space, time, and space and time. So first off there's space, meaning that if the DZ has room, than they partition off two different landing areas: 1 for HP landings and 1 for straight in landings. I realize this doesn't solve the problem, as people could still fuck up and run into each other in either area, but it at least simplifies things and reduces the number of potential obstacles a person might encounter when landing. Second up is time, meaning that all the jumpers use the same landing area, but HP landers land either before or after straight in landers. There are a couple ways to accomplish this, the best being high openings or hop n' pops. Less ideal would be just having HP landers hold in brakes until they can see that EVERYBODY else is down, since it can take a hell of a long time for student rigs and tandems to land and there's always the possibility that the HP lander could not see a straight-in lander still in the pattern. Of course, if the holding in brakes option is tossed out, then that means that a person couldn't do a 4-way RW dive AND swoop on the same jump, but maybe that's the price that has to be paid for increased safety at DZs that can't establish a separate swooping area. Finally, the best way (I think) to achieve separation is using space and time, meaning that the DZ establishes separate swooping and straight-in landing areas. On top of this, the people within each area coordinate so that not everybody is landing at the same time. For example, the swoopers talk ahead of time and establish a landing order, with individuals holding in breaks above the landing area until it's their turn (from what I've seen of swooping, I think most swoopers already do this?). The same would be done in the straight-in landing area. This doesn't guarantee that there'll never be another canopy collision, but it at least mitigates most of the risk by providing maximum separation between landing canopies. Such is my two cents, for what it's worth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #68 August 8, 2007 >I don't see the really good swoopers as part of the problem. I agree - but I know very, very few swoopers who consider themselves not very good. If we come up with a solution that is intended to apply to only less-competent swoopers, no one will place themselves in that category. >I don't see crowds as the issue. I don't think crowds are _the_ issue (witness all the collisions with only two people in the air) but I think they can make a separation problem worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mozencrath 0 #69 August 10, 2007 This is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #70 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... yes in which every person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style. btw once again we at the ranch survive for two reasons... 1. we communicate 2.most of the swoopers dont land by the hanger (but we tell everyone that we arent told that) Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #71 August 10, 2007 Quoteevery person except bill von and rdutch (hey do I get points for giving you guys a personal compliment???) has read 1/16th of what anyone else has written and just spewed forth whatever they feel about which ever form of landing is not their style Nonsense, there's plenty of good thoughts and discussions here - just ignore the knee jerk responses from the idiots on both positions. There's more exceptions to your cynical response other than just rdutch and kissing up to a moderator. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeedToJump 0 #72 August 10, 2007 QuoteThis is the most ridiculous thread I have ever read....in my life... Perhaps that's because of comments like these that don't contribute anything to what could have been a very informative thread. Instead people feel the need to find things to bash instead of contributing anything toward a positive discussion. How about if you don't have something constructive to add (disagreements are constructive) you just don't post? I still don't understand why so many people have so many problems with the original post. Ray is advocating separating different landing styles and offering insight into *some* of the possible ways this can happen.Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #73 August 10, 2007 that was being a wise ass not kissing up the thing that I am saying is that hey man if people communicate what they are doing and where and talk about things amongst loads it helps a lot Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #74 August 10, 2007 Wiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #75 August 10, 2007 QuoteWiseassiness I can understand and appreciate. Funny, if people communicate a lot, they end up figuring out most of this stuff on their own (separate landing areas, etc...) It's the 20% that don't care to listen to the communication that'll screw the rest of us over. (and, yes, that applies to any canopy owner, I'm not singling out BoatDrivers (TM) or RealSwoopers (TM) or SwoopPretenders (TM)) can I use those terms if I pay you 5 cents a use? we have a few people that dont like to listen (I have never ever ever ever ever been that person I swear) I like to think that I approach things in a manner that people dont think is accostive so often when I tell people what is going on they listen... I love explaining why I use a right hand pattern to a left hand turn to people they get this look on their face at first like what the F and then when they get it they get this dawning look on thier face Cheers Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
