Is it usual practice to prevent a skydiver of participating in a boogie if he (or she) is known for having risky behavior?

[pkasdorf 0]

The idea for this thread came because of an incident report in the Incident Forum about a skydiver that killed himself in a low turn in a boogie in Salto, Uruguay. He was very well known to consistently take too many risks. As far as I know it is up to the individual DZ's to accept or not a skydiver based on his record. But what happens with boogies as was this the case? Do boogie organizers take into account information regarding each skydivers safety behavior when it is available and decide on accepting him or not? Shouldn't it be as much part of the safety procedures as the rig inspection is? Of course it is not as objective as a rig inspection but does this fact invalidate it? I don't think it should because of the potential danger to the skydiver himself and to other ones, even for the first jump as this was the case.

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[rgoper 0]

generally most sky divers will avoid loads with such careless sky divers. i have seen a few chastized, they usaully get mad and leave for the day. at boogies if you are unsafe, you will be asked to leave.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[PhreeZone 20]

At places like WFFC its more of a peer pressure thing. If you screw up your going to do it in front of hundreds of people watching that will see you that night at the beer tent and for the rest of the week.

I saw some wicked toggle hooks, spirls through patterns, near canopy collisions, hard landings, broken bones, swoops right over the organising tents, etc during the last WFFC but I never saw someone chasing after people asking them to leave.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[pkasdorf 0]

".......generally most sky divers will avoid loads with such careless sky divers. i have seen a few chastized, they usaully get mad and leave for the day. at boogies if you are unsafe, you will be asked to leave......."


".........At places like WFFC its more of a peer pressure thing. If you screw up your going to do it in front of hundreds of people watching that will see you that night at the beer tent and for the rest of the week.
I saw some wicked toggle hooks, spirls through patterns, near canopy collisions, hard landings, broken bones, swoops right over the organising tents, etc during the last WFFC but I never saw someone chasing after people asking them to leave......"


According to the first two replies:

if you are unsafe, in some boogies you are asked to leave and in others not.

The questions are:

1) Shouldn't it be standard practice to ask to leave an unsafe skydiver and not depend on peer pressure that may work or not?

2) Shouldn't it be standard practice to ask not to participate somebody well known for being unsafe?

3) Shouldn't safety in behavior be considered as important as a safe rig?

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[PhreeZone 20]

>Shouldn't it be standard practice to ask not to participate somebody well known for being unsafe?

Lets not allow Icarus team Extreme to our boogie... they are unsafe and perform too high of speed inducing manuvers to land. They often draw a crowd that can interfere in others landings. They swoop through too much of the landing area and are a danger to all those around them....

See how subjective safe and unsafe is?

By the same token you better come up with limits on wingloading and canopy design for each jumper to make sure they are safe, and enforce a limit on no hook turns and the list goes on and on.

As for behavior... people fly thier canopies different after a realy bad jump vs a good jump. There is no way to predict whos going to try a 360 toggle hook at 200 feet at any time...

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[pkasdorf 0]

By unsafe I mean not according to the skydiver's skills. Pros like Icarus Extreme have the skills to do what they do! And so on... Please don't come to me telling that with my criteria I am prohibiting Icarus Extreme!!

I know that the line between safe and unsafe is not very neat in many cases. But in many others it is very neat! When it is known that somebody is consistent in trying performances well above his skills (and that includes wingloadings), I strongly believe that he should not be allowed to participate in a boogie for his own and also our own sake.

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[wmw999 2,584]

I don't know how it works in Uruguay, but here it could happen, but it would be up to whoever was running the boogie or owned the drop zone. And that's best.

The needs have to balanced: If he hurts or kills himself, then he damages the sport as well as himself -- if he hurts or kills others, then obviously it's a much bigger problem. On the other hand, if the boogie or drop zone gets too strict, then people will be less likely to show up, which means a less popular boogie.

If either a national parachute association, or aviation administration, sets up rules, then it might be necessary to have some very clear limits. And the problem with those is that some people will try as hard as they can to go right up against the limit.

The US Parachute Assn (USPA) can ban a jumper, which means he can't jump at member dropzones. But he can still jump at non-member dropzones. But if he's done something really stupid and dangerous, he'll have trouble finding people to jump with, and non-member dropzones aren't very interested in someone who can damage their reputations or business, either.

In this case, he sounds like the kind of person we call "an accident waiting to happen." It's sad, no matter what his personality, because as long as he's alive his personality can improve.

Wendy W.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

Shouldn't safety in behavior be considered as important as a safe rig?

yes, it should be this way. theoretically this is the reason behind the inception of the S&TA, but generally for all intents and purposes they are jumping camera, or doing AFF jumps. i have had a sky diver come up to me once while landing, i was doing a straight in landing under my Cobalt i aimed for right in between 2 other "formation" sky divers that were busy shooting the bull instead of gathering up their gear, and the "formation organizer" asked me to not land like that there that if i wanted to come in like that, to do it by the swoop pond. now, i wasn't being unsafe. what are the rules of the landing area? get your gear gathered up, and move from the area as quickly as possible. but often times, the "formation" sky divers are busy "high fiving" each other, and tend to still be on the landing area even though they are the first out, and the first to land, why is that? not bashing "formation" sky diving, but "give me a break" at the same drop zone maybe two months earlier, the pic was coming in for landing on the grass runway by the swoop pond, which just happened to be where i had landed, i was told to "move off of the grass runway, and not stop to bar-b-que" i was taken before the S&TA by this pic, and when confronted by the situation i simply stated that the rules are the same for the pic as they are for sky divers, the low man has the right of way. again, in this situation i wasn't being unsafe (the winds were strong out of the south that day) i was trying to get my canopy under control when he was coming in for landing, this did not stop his final approach. so i guess i was "fair game?"

all of this said "where do we start, and where do we end?" personally i think i am very safe, in my profession i am required to be, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and i am just as safe at the drop zone, but i have seen a bunch of folks who are not, i never say anything to them, i just avoid them alltogether.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[pkasdorf 0]

Quote

I don't know how it works in Uruguay, but here it could happen, but it would be up to whoever was running the boogie or owned the drop zone. And that's best.
..........................................................................

OK, I agree to that. It is almost impossible to set written rules concerning this issue. But DZ owners and boogie organizers should work with the concept that if somebody is well known to perform beyond his skills and/or mock safety issues he should be grounded. I think it is easier in DZ's because they don't want to have the reputation of letting any fool to jump there. In boogies, it is tougher. Fear of jeopardizing the economic feasibility of the event may make organizers more forgiving. I insist with the fact that there are clearcut cases of people who could never be allowed to board the plane.

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

• Quote

[JPA 0]

Oh god no. Skydiving is regulated enough as it is. If people want to hook low and do other "dangerous" stuff then let 'em...it's their bones and lives. I know accidents are distressing and usually require more work from the people organizing a boogie to get them help, but I don't think the answer lies in increased regulation. However, if someone is putting other people's lives at risk then that may be a different story. I just feel that people have the right to kill themselves parachuting if they so desire ...I don't like it, but I'm not going to try and stop it.

[pkasdorf 0]

I just feel that people have the right to kill themselves parachuting if they so desire ...I don't like it, but I'm not going to try and stop it.

..........................................................................

Does that mean that if you see somebody ready to jump from a 10th floor or with a gun ready to shoot himself you are not going to try to stop him? This is turning philosophical, really. I believe in freedom but I certainly would try to stop somebody commiting suicide...

And those that exercise risky maneuvers beyond their skills in landing potentially put everybody else at risk (it is a different story, as you say). That is why somebody well known for this kind of behavior should be consistently grounded.

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[Michele 1]

Quote

Does that mean that if you see somebody ready to jump from a 10th floor or with a gun ready to shoot himself you are not going to try to stop him? This is turning philosophical, really. I believe in freedom but I certainly would try to stop somebody commiting suicide...

Ohhhh, cool, philosophical stuff!

Y'know, intending to commit suicide is far different than going beyond your skill level and intending to pull it off and survive. Someone jumping from a 10th floor building w/o a rig, or holding a gun to their head, is very different than not listening to advice from better, more experienced jumpers who've been there, done/seen that. A person who intends to suicide (or does suicide) is in a far different situation than someone who, full of ego and lacking skill, tries something they've been warned about and turned away from a dz for doing, but tries it because they honestly believe they can do it.

I honestly don't see the comparison, other than death being the end result. And I could go on and on about ways to die...

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Oh god no. Skydiving is regulated enough as it is. If people want to hook low and do other "dangerous" stuff then let 'em...it's their bones and lives. I know accidents are distressing and usually require more work from the people organizing a boogie to get them help, but I don't think the answer lies in increased regulation. However, if someone is putting other people's lives at risk then that may be a different story. I just feel that people have the right to kill themselves parachuting if they so desire ...I don't like it, but I'm not going to try and stop it.

How do you tell in advance if risky behavior will put other people at risk? There have been several incidents where self proclaimed hot-dog canopy pilots have maimed others. Someone who cares little for their own safety probably cares little for yours and mine too.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pkasdorf 0]

Y'know, intending to commit suicide is far different than going beyond your skill level and intending to pull it off and survive. Someone jumping from a 10th floor building w/o a rig, or holding a gun to their head, is very different than not listening to advice from better, more experienced jumpers who've been there, done/seen that. A person who intends to suicide (or does suicide) is in a far different situation than someone who, full of ego and lacking skill, tries something they've been warned about and turned away from a dz for doing, but tries it because they honestly believe they can do it.

I honestly don't see the comparison, other than death being the end result. And I could go on and on about ways to die...

.........................................................................

You know, Michele, let's keep it it simple and may be we agree. Let's not suppose that somebody performing well above his skills is trying to commit suicide. But by consistently acting as he does he endangers his own life and that of others. Shouldn't that person, who is well known to act that way, be grounded? I certainly think he should.

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[JPA 0]

How do you tell in advance if risky behavior will put other people at risk? There have been several incidents where self proclaimed hot-dog canopy pilots have maimed others. Someone who cares little for their own safety probably cares little for yours and mine too.

[pkasdorf 0]

Quote

......Some will argue that grounding a potential risk may in fact save someone else...and yeah, it might, but this is skydiving, this sport was founded by loose-canons and is in part why I like it. I'd hate to get to the point were I have to ask permission to go hard or risk punishment by doing it.

All right, JPA, it is very clear that to you any behavior should be allowed, even if it endangers others. With due respect, I sure do hope you are in a clear minority. I am starting a poll about it.

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[JPA 0]

Let me clarify. If someone is obviously endangering other people then something should be done. Hooking/pulling low, while it may conceivably harm someone else, does not usually have any negative effect on others. Therefore people doing it should not be grounded in my opinion. The point is, unless you know someone else is going to get hurt, mandatory grounding is ridiculous. If people want to take risks we should let them!!! As I already said, enforcing your standards onto someone else is arrogant at best. I don't condone ANY behavior as you say, I just like to let people make their own choices, even if those choices might hurt them. Regulation and punishment is not the key!
Peace all, and safe swoops.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

The point is, unless you know someone else is going to get hurt, mandatory grounding is ridiculous. If people want to take risks we should let them!!! As I already said, enforcing your standards onto someone else is arrogant at best.

Am I arrogant for not wanting to have drunk or high skydivers on a load with me? I don't know that they will hurt themselves or anyone else.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pds 0]

Quote

Am I arrogant for not wanting to have drunk or high skydivers on a load with me? I don't know that they will hurt themselves or anyone else.

you have the option to stand down and i believe you will also have the opportunity to voice your concerns to the appropriate parties when you attempt to retrieve your ticket.

jmho

namaste, motherfucker.

[pkasdorf 0]

Quote

...i believe you will also have the opportunity to voice your concerns to the appropriate parties when you attempt to retrieve your ticket.

jmho

And shouldn't the "appropiate parties" ground them besides reimbursing your ticket? Of course!

HISPA # 18 POPS # 8757

[Ron 10]

I have been reading this for a while...

If a person is a risk to himself....Then he is a risk to me as well.

An accident happened in Lake Wales not to long ago where one guy turned into another at 100 feet....They both died.

A reckless person has the ability to end my life while ending theirs.

Another thing to look at is with each person who dies, we get closer to having another body impose rules on us (FAA, local legislation ect).

This sport is as free as it is because we regulate ourselves....

If a person is a danger...
Educate him

If he does not listen...
Ground him, and educate him

If he still does not listen...
Banish him. I would rather he die on someone elses DZ.

Ron

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

[Jiggs 0]

I really don't like the way you slid in the last one there Ron. I don't think that the use of that example is the best for this thread. It takes 2 to tango

"Don't blame malice for what stupidity can explain."

"In our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart and in our despair, against our will comes wisdom" - Aeschylus

[cmnorris 0]

Everyone please give me your opinion on this:

I've been planning the collegiate boogie which will be taking place in Jan. Since we are a college club and I don't want anything to cause trouble for us and the university I'm planning on making up a "supplemental waiver" that will be in addition to the DZ waiver and it will contain some boogie "reminders." What do you think should be on it and would you be offended if you were asked to sign something like this?

So far, this is what I'm thinking of including:

1. Direction of landings will be determined at the beginning of the day and will be adjusted throughout the day, if necessary.

2. Illegal drug use is not condoned, however, if it must be done, you must do so outside of the fence.

3. Since this is a collegiate boogie, many jumpers on your load may be relatively inexperienced.

4. Unsafe behavior, as determined by the S&TA, will not be tolerated.

At the end of my little list, I think I'm going to add something like this:

Large skydiving events are inherently dangerous. The University of Florida Falling Gators, the University of Florida, and the University of Florida Board of Trustees will not be held liable for anything that happens on the dates of Jan. 17, 18, 19, and 20 at any location.

It's almost rather sad that skydiving has to be this way. Oh well, tell me what you think.

[tigra 0]

Leave out # 2. By having that clause in there, you are effectivly stating that you DO condone it as long as it is done discreetly.

[PhreeZone 20]

Or alter #2 to state illegal drug use on the boogie grounds will not be tolerated.

Underage drinking is something else that you might need to worry about with College age jumpers.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com