Checking Out?

[base698 20]

Has checking a person out on a canopy before they are allowed to fly it been discussed? Perhaps, have a sign off in your logbook after this is done you could show at a new dz. Seems it would get around DZs that have Nazi like policies regarding what you can fly.

Maybe one mandatory jump with an instructor to demonstrate braked turns and other canopy necessities?

[jumpy 0]

Here in oz we have something like that... You have to do a jump with an instructor to demonstrate braked turns, etc. to get ur B license. Also in the litte license holder that you get there's this card that your supposed to get signed off for higher wingloadings but i'm not really sure if its actually used. Still good idea's all the same

[councilman24 37]

Investigating and learning the envelope of a particular canopy can take dozens if not hundreds of jumps, especially for a new person with out much experience. Remember after 100 jumps on a canopy you've flown your parachute maybe 300 minutes. 5 hours sounds like alot but how good were you in a car or airplane after 5 hours? And I submit a parachute might be considered harder being 3D, varying weather conditions, low "power", no go arounds. And this includes only 50 minutes in the approach and landing phase. That's part of the problem. It takes a while to learn all conditions. Too long to be supervised that whole time. And there is something hard in the way.... the ground. One jump won't prove anything.

Now, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to educate jumpers moving to other canopies on their characteristics. But there really is no substitute for time and landings under the canopy. That's why many of us recommend 100 or 200 jumps before moving on to something new. Were not Nazis, we just don't like picking you up off the ground.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[Ron 10]

S&TA's, DZO's, Instructors, and all experianced people should be always looking at what people are doing, and trying to help out.

The problem is that most of this is after the fact.

A guy with 100 jumps buys a pocket rocket X99 with out asking if he should.

Then he flies it like an idiot. What are you going to do?

A long thread on here said to:

1. Talk to him ,and try to teach him.
2. Ground him so that he will listen this time while you teach him.
3. Boot him from your DZ...Allow him to come back if he is willing to listen.

But, he can always buy one. He will just lie...."yes I have 4000 jumps on Stilettos, 100 just last week". Or have his "buddy" buy it for him. (Of course I would tell him no, but thats ME.) Or buy it off of a guy that just wants to sell it.

My thought is pretty simple...If I had the power...I would tell him he is not jumping anything HP until he has shown his ability to handle it. If he wants to jump it somewhere else...thats fine, but at any DZ I could, I would not let him.

This sport is about freedom, but I would not want a guy killing himself at my DZ. If it were my DZ it would be my rules.

I think there should be requirements to jump HP canopies, just like there are requirments to do night jumps, water jumps, pull altitudes, Wind limits ect.

But to many people don't agree.....Here is one thing.

How long do you think before USPA comes out with a canopy BSR?

1/3 of the people that died last year died under a good canopy. ALL of them thought they could handle it....as it was 9 people last year were wrong. Only 1 of the dead had more than 500 jumps....

It is going to come....either from the USPA or the FAA if we don't do something first.

Ron

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[base698 20]

Quote

It takes a while to learn all conditions. Too long to be supervised that whole time. And there is something hard in the way.... the ground. One jump won't prove anything.

But... I was mainly thinking about having to do at least a few hop and pops to learn the recovery arc somewhat and braked turns then a check out dive. In other words you do a hop and pop at altitude for a few jumps. Granted most people when jumping a new canopy do this anyway, but some people are hard headed...

Quote

Were not Nazis, we just don't like picking you up off the ground.

I know a DZ that almost didn't let me jump my 1.8:1 Stiletto at 700 jumps (partly because my logbook said I had 620 something). They had a guy biff in at a wingloading of 2.1:1 (recently downsized from much smaller and was already trying 180 degree hooks) in front of spectators and he had 300 jumps. I can understand not allowing that but their new rules are a bit much I think. I also think the person has much to do with it. Basically all I'm saying is if there was some kind of rule the DZ wouldn't have to enact policies such as the one described.

[councilman24 37]

If all of your jumps had been at 1:1 non ZP I wouldn't have wanted you to jump your stilleto either. I assume they weren't. Lots of jumpers want to go fast and look cool, but we're killing and maiming too many of them. And nobody has figured out how to prevent it. It's too frustrating. At my DZ the DZO hasn't put any hard rules in place. And no offense intended but it seems the guys that do BASE routinely are the one pushing the envelope. Skydiving itself used to be scary enough. Oh, well. I guess I'm just an old fart. And its why I'm doing a First Aid for the DZ "What not to do if someone gets hurt." seminar at PIA.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[Craig 0]

What about DZ's or expierenced jumpers telling students or very low time jumpers that they will be "fine" under a canopy that most would consider to be too high of a loading for them.

[hookitt 1]

Quote

What about DZ's or expierenced jumpers telling students or very low time jumpers that they will be "fine" under a canopy that most would consider to be too high of a loading for them.

Happens all the time. Sucks doesn't it?

Consider when I went to 1:4 wingload....that was Radical at the time. Personally, I would prefer if more people would get hundreds of jumps at, or lower than that, prior to downsizing. But since that doesn't happen much any more, I do my best to share what I do know about HP flight.

Cheers

My grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto

[billvon 3,090]

>I was mainly thinking about having to do at least a few hop and
>pops to learn the recovery arc somewhat . . .

Hop and pops are great, but they don't teach you much about recovery arc. You simply cannot tell with any accuracy at 5000 feet if your canopy recovered in 200 feet or 250, and that's the difference between life and death. Very few people in this sport die because they don't know how to pull the toggles down - they die because they needed another 25 or 50 feet to pull their canopy out of the corner. That's something you have to learn close to the ground.

[rigging65 0]

Not to stir up the pot too much (as I am in agreement with the idea of Canopy Check-outs) but who is going to have the authority or experience to give a check out? Lots of Instructors fly conservative canopies at low loadings because they choose to...how does that qualify them to check out someone on a hot-rod?

I'm a Canopy Instructor for both HP and CReW at our DZ (as well as an AFF/I and other stuff) and I basically designed our advanced canopy curriculum (by stealing others good ideas and adding my own). I've been flying HP canopies for a good bit of time and I can tell you that it takes someone with quite a bit of experience to teach a skill like HP canopy flight, let alone potentially checking someone out to fly a particular canopy. You wouldn't let someone who does nothing ever but Tandems take out fresh AFF students, would you? Sure it's all falling through the air, but we all know it's not the same...

Also, if this sport is about freedom and the ability to do what we wish (within reason) what if a dz simply isn't up-with-the-times when it comes to HP canopy flight? Folks who want to jump HP canopies can't jump there?...do you really think drop zones will give up jumpers that easily??

This is still a business folks, and DZs are in it to make money...which is the same reason why the whole Stiletto-Waiver idea failed...there will always be someone willing to do what others aren't to make business work. I'm not condoning this, but it's the way it is. Established gear dealers HATE trunk dealers for this very reason...undercutting.

In my opinion, and thats all this is, I think we should enact canopy ratings just like we have licenses. I know, I know, no one wants more controls put in place, but the facts are pretty clear...

There are simply too many folks getting killed under working canopies because they don't know how to handle them, or how to handle them when it all starts to go downhill fast. This idea then prompts the introduction of Canopy Instructors (USPA?) and we go down the AFF-style instructional road.

Now, the real question is, are you each willing to pay the extra money in dues or licenses in order to enact this and save lives....???? Wanting change and effecting it are two totally different ducks....

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

[billvon 3,090]

> . . .but who is going to have the authority or experience to give a check out?

I would say that common sense might play a role. At our DZ we have AFF-I's who jump Spectre 170's, Safire 119's (i.e. me) and Velocity 95's at 2.5 to 1. It would make sense to match those people with the loading that the newer jumper has. I might be a good choice for someone who wants to start on a Stiletto 120; Adam might be a good choice if they want to try an Extreme 99.

>Also, if this sport is about freedom and the ability to do what we wish
> (within reason) what if a dz simply isn't up-with-the-times when it
> comes to HP canopy flight? Folks who want to jump HP canopies
> can't jump there?...

There are places where you have to be a USPA member, and where you need a cypres, or where you can't use skyballs. All those places survive. If a place is too far out of touch it goes out of business. That's sort of evolution in action.

>are you each willing to pay the extra money in dues or licenses in
> order to enact this and save lives....????

It doesn't take money, just patience and time. If everyone in the sport made it a point that you _learn_ to fly each canopy before you downsize, then the issue would go away. But it takes a concerted effort.

[rigging65 0]

So now we're just hoping that each DZ is going to take it upon themselves to make the world a better place and teach canopy safety? I love the idea, but somehow I doubt it's going to happen....

Bill, I LOVE the idea of everyone being in-tune enough and wanting to help each other out and taking the time to teach and yadda yadda yadda, but I can't imagine the whole community getting behind this in way you seem to suggest.

Of course, many of us will continue to try and make it better on our own DZs, as we can, but don't you think we could accomplish more with a large scale program (leave the money issues out of this for the time being...)?

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."