0
billvon

How should we deal with pattern collisions?

Recommended Posts

  Quote

I mean I'm all for "no 270s in the main LZ" and that sort of thing.



Dude the root of the problem is not the turn type. I can do a 90 degree harness turn and still come in smoking fast under a 2.5 loaded xbraced canopy. No the root of the problem is mixing fast canopies with slow ones in the same concurrent airspace and LZ.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The proposed BSR would have done nothing to fix my close call either.

(Canuck, none of this is directed at you or anyone else for that matter)

He was a low jump number, visiting jumper landing in the experienced landing area. Does any of that really matter? Not until we're both on the ground safely.

Was there anyway to talk to this jumper before getting on the plane? Nope, he was on a different plane and didn't intend on landing there, he got confused.

Shit happens, we both got lucky. I consider myself to be in the wrong since he was low man. I fully agree that low man always has right of way. Once you both get to ground you can sort out what happened if the low man was in the wrong place, but when you are both in the air, none of that matters. Land safely and jump again.


chrismgts:
  Quote

I'm not arguing that they didn't see the jumper. I'm arguing that they could have seen the jumper had they been watching traffic correctly and that during a typical load, with any two jumpers, one of those jumpers should be aware of the other in all situations.



I disagree with you. There are times when two jumpers cannot see each other even though both are looking around.

What do you mean by "watching traffic correctly"? If you mean "being alert, keeping your head on a swivel, looking all around you and trying to find every other jumper who was on your load" then I stick to disagreeing with you. If you mean something else then please let me know.
Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

  Quote

I mean I'm all for "no 270s in the main LZ" and that sort of thing.



Dude the root of the problem is not the turn type. I can do a 90 degree harness turn and still come in smoking fast under a 2.5 loaded xbraced canopy. No the root of the problem is mixing fast canopies with slow ones in the same concurrent airspace and LZ.



You highly misinterpreted what I said.

What I said was I am FOR that rule (just to say that I'm not against some rules that have been made or rules altogether), I didn't say it was the only way any problem occurs.
Rodriguez Brother #1614, Muff Brother #4033
Jumped: Twin Otter, Cessna 182, CASA, Helicopter, Caravan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
> I can do a 90 degree harness turn and still come in smoking fast under
>a 2.5 loaded xbraced canopy.

Yes. And a King Air can share the pattern at an uncontrolled airport with a Super Cub. Why? Because everyone knows what everyone else is doing. That Piper Cub can turn base and final without worrying that the King Air is going to go screaming by them and try to land below and in front of them. Likewise, the King Air knows exactly where that Piper Cub is going to be once he turns base, and can extend his own base as needed. The Cub isn't going to do a 360 without warning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

> I can do a 90 degree harness turn and still come in smoking fast under
>a 2.5 loaded xbraced canopy.

Yes. And a King Air can share the pattern at an uncontrolled airport with a Super Cub. Why? Because everyone knows what everyone else is doing. That Piper Cub can turn base and final without worrying that the King Air is going to go screaming by them and try to land below and in front of them. Likewise, the King Air knows exactly where that Piper Cub is going to be once he turns base, and can extend his own base as needed. The Cub isn't going to do a 360 without warning.



No argument there. But here's a twist for you.

As a private pilot, I fly (not so much right now) Cessnas and Pipers and as long as I am cleared by ATC I am allowed to enter class Bravo airspace and play with the big birds at their airports. However ATC is fulling expecting me to increase my approach speeds when landing at a class Bravo airport. In otherwords, if I am going to play in the same sand box as the other fast airplanes, I am expected to behave like one of the other fast airplanes. If I can't handle it, then I shouldn't be there. The same goes for people wanting to play in the dedicated high performance swoop lanes. If someone is still learning the trade of high performance canopy flight, they need to segregate themselves from as much traffic as they can (be it in dedicated swoop course or even more importantly away from regular loads).

I do not disagree with the proposed BSRs, I'm just saying the proposed BSRs aren't going to solve all canopy collisions. Only we, the respective canopy pilots (that would be all of us) can avoid collisions up there.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

that someone under a 170 or 190 would also want swoop the course.



Yep we're out there and have been swooping our bigass boat canopies longer then you been jumping. And what dose it matter to you if "we" toggle whip it or front riser it, we have as much right to swoop the gates as you do, even if you don't like the size of our canopies.

I wouldn't say a word to you in most cases, but the more I read your postings on this matter the more you sound as if your on a high horse and think your hot shit because you fly a pocket rocket and swoop it, and the rest of us are in your goddam way because we are in the sky. It's comments like yours that tend to make me think "real swoopers" are nothing but a danger to everyone else and you all get your head up your ass and run around thinking your gods gift to human flight, good thing you guys came along to point out the rest of us how wrong we been doing it all these years with our "normal landings" or toggle whipping or front riser 90 into a swoop is all wrong because we fly XXX size, I guess if we all don't fly a sub 100 pocket rocket and pull big ball 270's then anything less is not a "real swoop".

And your not the only one who sounds that way, maybe you guys should pool your money and start a swooping only DZ and then you can keep "us" 170 & 190 canopy pilots out of your airspace and off your DZ...... and the rest of us will work harder to protect our airspace from the likes of you.

Just some food for thought.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What part of fast and slow do you not understand? Go back and read the part about had I known the guy on the larger canopy also wanted to swoop the course and see that had I known this I would have sequenced myself. I made the mistake not talking to him prior to boarding the aircraft and I made the mistake thinking that by exiting last and pulling the highest I am allowed to pull at this DZ would give me free access to the dedicated swoop lanes.

Judge me all you want. I don't give a damn. Just look at my log book or better yet talk to the people who know me and they will tell you that I pull myself off of regular loads only because I want to swoop and I don't like swooping in traffic. Now that I am under the "hated" pocket rocket, I know that I'm coming in really fast and the margin for error is reduced because of this. :P



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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

I guess if we all don't fly a sub 100 pocket rocket and pull big ball 270's then anything less is not a "real swoop".



Your words, not mine. I have already posted in a different thread that says anyone regardless of the canopy they fly who induces speed for their landing is swooping. It's not the turn type nor the canopy that is the problem. It's having fast canopies and slow ones occupying the same concurrent airspace and LZs. Geez ...


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the question becomes - how do you deal with the small percentage of jumpers who are absolutely sure they can swoop through a crowded landing area safely?



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If they truly are that self-centered, arrogant, narrow-minded, short-sighted, stubborn, etc. that they threaten other skydivers, they deserve to be grounded before they kill someone.

However, that "big stick" response is always awkward.

Wiser heads prefer to lead by example: flying predictable patterns towards the designated swoop lane, etc.
Wiser heads pre-empt the problem by explaining - ahead of time - about how cool it is to swoop in the designated swoop lane, how fashionable it is to fly a predictable pattern and how horny chicks get about dudes who throw down phat swoops in the right time and place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

What part of fast and slow do you not understand?



I understand it very clear, however your fast canopy don't trump the slow one just because it's fast. If my bigass boat is setting up for the swoop lane and I'm lower then you, sorry about your luck I have the right of way fast or slow.

  Quote

Judge me all you want.



It's not about judging you at all, it's pointing out how your comments may or may not sound to others, to me it sounds as if "fucking bigass slo boat of 170/190 pilot was in my way and I couldn't swoop the way I wanted to, I had to out fly him to land first because HE got in MY way, and he should have known I was the hotshit local swoop god who always gose for the gates!"

And that seems to be standard thinking among those who think their the "real swoopers".
If you don't want to be lumped into that crowd, don't make hinting statements like that.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>I do not disagree with the proposed BSRs, I'm just saying the proposed
>BSRs aren't going to solve all canopy collisions. Only we, the respective
>canopy pilots (that would be all of us) can avoid collisions up there.

I agree. It will not solve the problem; it will just be a good tool for DZO's and jumpers to help them solve the problem at their DZ's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Said it before and I'll say it again. It's about communication prior to leaving the ground. I made the mistake on that jump of not speaking to this visiting jumper. Had I known that he too also wanted to land in the high performance swoop lanes, I would have sequenced myself before or after him.

But at the same time, just because someone wants to swoop the high performance swoop lanes, doesn't just give them a green light to go for it without determining who else is planning on swooping. This visiting jumper said nothing to anybody. He just toggle whipped himself into the course without any thought of who else was swooping.

Both of us were guilty and both of us are lucky that we didn't collide.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

It's about communication prior to leaving the ground.



Agreed

  Quote

just because someone wants to swoop the high performance swoop lanes, doesn't just give them a green light to go for it without determining who else is planning on swooping.



Agreed

  Quote

Both of us were guilty and both of us are lucky that we didn't collide.



Agreed, now had you just posted something more along the lines of this the first time,

  Quote

This visiting jumper said nothing to anybody. He just toggle whipped himself into the course without any thought of who else was swooping.



And left out all the stuff about canopy size, your post wouldn't have come off as condesending towards those who jump and swoop larger sized canopies as the ones who are the problem.

The only other issue I see as a problem is when you have 2 or 3 AC droping loads, kind of hard for me to tell you I'm swooping my bigass slow saber 170 if your not on my load.

As a person who also likes to swoop even if I have a big boat, I have as much right to shoot the gates/pond as everyone else, if your out after me and on another load and I'm lower slow or not, I have the right of way. Those of us who do fly larger canopies aren't thinking up new ways to hose those who fly pocket rockets, by also swooping the gates, we do however try to fly to be the last ones down on OUR load, it is easy to do these days with so many ground hungery hotrods in the sky with high WL's.

So now maybe we a LZ for students and one for classic A, and one for normal patterns and one for super swoopers with their hotrods, and one for us bigass boat swoop'n types and maybe one for the free for all crowd who don't like rules.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wow, 1123 views, 37 replies and 166 votes.
Based on those numbers it should be easy to make whatever BSRs we can think up pass at USPA Board meetings.....
Get obsessed, stay obsessed....participate in your sport.
Voice your opinion on landing area issues to the USPA Directors, your DZO.....
http://uspa.org/contact/bod.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi All,

This is not rocket science.

Any skydiver with their head screwed on correctly would have to support separate landing areas.

It seems to me that the cost of implementing the second landing area is what is holding back the progress, Therefor a mandatory second landing area would have to be the safest option. without the second landing area....... No high speed approaches, whitout high speed approaches......less customers and less people willing to work at the said dropzone.......less income.

Simple

To discuss this issue on an international website and consider it to be a USPA problem is quite arrogant if you ask me Bill.

Canopy collisions are a concern worldwide, not just in the US of A.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

It seems to me that the cost of implementing the second landing area is what is holding back the progress, Therefor a mandatory second landing area would have to be the safest option.



Separation in time - swoopers out first on a H&P or something similar.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

Hi All,

This is not rocket science.

Any skydiver with their head screwed on correctly would have to support separate landing areas.

  Quote



I agree, and disagree...

Unless the landing areas are WIDELY separated, there will continue to be a chance of collision. This answer will work if it's logistically and economically possible to have two well separated LZ's, but keep in mind that we all fly back in the same general cone if we spot ourselves correctly. Most of us enter the LZ from the same general direction, share the same airspace, and concentrate on our set-ups and landings.

I watch for other canopies like a hawk, but I can't tell you how many times I've glanced away and looked back and lost that brightly colored other canopy in the sky.

If you want to make it truly safe, use timing. Let those that want to perform high speed turns and landings with highly loaded canopies exit first. Just like we do on many night jumps.

If you're flying back to back loads, put the highly loaded canopies in with every other load so we don't jump on top of each other.

Communication was mentioned above. How many of these problems would go away if the BSR didn't call for separate landing areas, but instead called for an experienced canopy pilot to organize each load on the ground before stepping on the plane?

Communication and timing are beautiful things. Saturday an instructor was doing a coach jump exiting after me. The instructor said, Robert do you mind if I swoop. I said no problem and flew in brakes until I saw him, and then followed him in at a good distance. Communication...

When you come across those that insist on doing everthing their way without regard for others, remove them from the mix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever happens will probably only be effective at a small number of DZs and I want to know which ones those are. Over time, it will all be forgotten or ignored anyway so what will we gain in the long run...very little.

I've seen it happening already.

After the Page-Holler fatality there was lots of big talk about landing areas and new rules being implememtned - Separate LZs for pattern and swooping and even an alternate area for anything other than pattern or swooping.

Here it is only 3 months after and DZs are already going back to complacent stupidity...
- Instructors swooping the pattern landing areas - cross-pattern no less.
- An S&TA doing the same claiming it's OK if you carve into final.
- Instructors landing against the pattern.
- Instructor getting on the bullhorn and reminding everyone of the landing pattern then on his very next jump swoops cross-pattern.
- DZO who made the new rules now blowing it off saying "Oh, they'll be alright."

I give up. No amount of talk, bitching, explaining, logic or assholism will change it. I will be making many more intentional off landings around those DZs.

The only ones really trying to follow some sort of logical process is the students and very young jumpers. That won't last long because they see the "more experienced" doing it and will eventually think that because THEY do it, it will be alright for THEM to do it.

I'm pissed. Skydiving is so much fun for me and I'm losing much of that sense because it's being replaced by anger.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If anything is "recommended" or "required" at the USPA level, DZO's will jump on board and take it as gospel. That is why we do not need another BSR. Leave "Big Brother (aka USPA) out of it. Let the DZ’s make their own decisions. They have already turned DZ’s into profit machines, let them shoulder some responsibility. Let them determine what they need at their operation. Besides, BSR's can have waivers. So, how will someone know if there is a BSR swooping segregation waiver on file when they visit a new DZ? You could open the door for greater liability.

No, the solution is not to segregate landing areas. What happens when a newby decides he wants to try swooping and hooks into someone at the swooping area? Is that any different than swooping into someone in the main landing pattern? The result is the same. You may actually add an aggrivating factor by segregating landing areas by increasing 1st response times to anyone who is injured. What happpens at a beach boogie where everyone is landing in the same pattern? You can not easily seperate landing areas. What happens when a student takes a long spot and turns his fial into the swoop area? No, I do not buy into the BSR arguement. The answer is at the local level, not Federal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

What happens when a newby decides he wants to try swooping and hooks into someone at the swooping area?



Newbie??
The ones I am most afraid of are the ones with 1000`s of Jumps. They already know it all and couldn’t possibly make a mistake, right?:S

  Quote

What happpens at a beach boogie where everyone is landing in the same pattern?



Maybe designate the "Swoop" Area a Little Further up the Beach so that people flying a Standard pattern are not obstacles and/or pylons to carve around. Or let the Swoopers out on a lower pass where none of us Standard pattern flyers are in their way.

  Quote

What happens when a student takes a long spot and turns his final into the swoop area?


What happens now? Every where is a Swoop area with the current rules.

  Quote

They have already turned DZ’s into profit machines,



Last I checked that was the reason people take chances on an investment in a business. To make a profit. And with more profit usually comes better planes, Better Student Gear, Better Packing Facilities, and maybe even a new Swoop Pond. More power to them.

  Quote

Let them determine what they need at their operation.


As long as they do not have Swoopers using me as a target, I am cool with that. But if they dont have a rules that says Swoopers should not Swoop through Slower Traffic, then they will loose a lot of that precious Business.

Jumpers do need to make a stand on this. If your DZ is not addressing this issues, Vote with your feet. Maybe an organized Boycott is what it will take to get DZO`s attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*** Larger canopies with a low wing loading have a steeper approach compared to smaller canopies with a high wing loading.
  Quote

I'm new at skydiving and I assumed that a bigger lightly loaded canopie would be slower is this right or am i making an ass out of me again by assuming?

It doesn't have to make sense, It's just the way things are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Newbie?? The ones I am most afraid of are the ones with 1000`s of Jumps. They already know it all and couldn’t possibly make a mistake, right?"
A newby swooper...not a newby skydiver. He will make his approach onto the swooper area and cause problems.

"What happens now? Every where is a Swoop area with the current rules."
But when you intropduce students to the swopop[ area, you introduce increased hazards.

"Last I checked that was the reason people take chances on an investment in a business. To make a profit. And with more profit usually comes better planes, Better Student Gear, Better Packing Facilities, and maybe even a new Swoop Pond. More power to them."
Absolutely. But, don't take the money without accepting the responsibility. DZ's shouldn't push your probems off to someone else. DZ's should make a decision on how to handle and stick to it. Even if it means running off all of the talent on their DZ. Because a safe DZ is, well...safe. And that's cool. Even if I have to visit another DZ to make hot skydives. Similarly, maybe I should dump at 2000ft despite someone tracking over me. After all, I wouldn't want to pull low, right?!?

"As long as they have Swoopers using me as a target..."
I agree there, too. Swoopers should not swoop into traffic. I think they should be on a seperate pass, pull high, something. What dictates a swoop? 90d, 180d, 270+? I do not 270 but many people are quite proficient with it. But seperate landing areas will not always be feasible. What is the smallest DZ you have ever visited? Not all of them are 700 acres? But, I think you missed my point. I do believe there needs to be something...just not dictated by USPA. It is a DZ issue.

But, I did not get your response on the BSR Waiver issue? Care to provide feedback?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote

USPA should publish a series of "best practices," then let individual DZs figure out which "best practice" works best at the local level.



Interesting, maybe a BSR that provides standard definitions of terms for clarity of communications and then offers, say, three different best practices to assess for the DZs to choose from or at least use as examples to determine their custom needs to address the issue?....... hmmmm.

But who'd come up with something like that? And if someone did, wouldn't people knee jerk and make false claims that the recommendation is simply banning swooping or something nonsensical like that? or even argue the futile position of inferred or false blame and appearance just because the recommendation was proposed with good intentions?

it'll never happen

...
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0