mustard

Getting ready to go to the BOD meeting and talk with my fellow S&T members about this issue -- there are two things that bother me about a Wingloading BSR: (1) Culture! The current culture of swooping has taken a huge turn for (in my opinion) the worse: look at the cover of the July Parachutist. What does a young 20-year-old guy who can't make his Sabre2 150 do what that guy is doing want? A smaller canopy! The culture of skydiving is changing rapidly, and young testosterone-driven males are not going to take any kind of regulation lightly. They are going to resist and see USPA taking something away from them because *they* can handle it. (2) What is the "opt out" option, really? It's coming up with something that can be implemented at every DZ that has skydivers wanting to downsize. That's every one of the abovemention males. Who is going to do this "testing" and what criteria are they going to use? If every DZ had a billvon or a Skratch or a hooknswoop, this issue would not be so huge. But it is. I don't know how we would get around the buddy S&TA who signs off his friend to jump whatever he wants becauses he doesn't want to see him go to the DZ down the road. These two issues are paramount in my mind right now, because I'm willing to bet these are the ones we will be discussing for most of the three days we're together. And what will be decided? Some kind of field testing, some kind of compromise, I'm betting... *** DJan

The way it works is this: we discuss it in Safety and Training and *then* bring it to the full board with our recommendation(s). And yes, the reason it is on the S&T committee is because of the three (now four, with Bill von Novak's letter of today) letters sent to the BOD already. *** DJan

Not true! If you were jumping at my DZ, Winsor, you would be assigned to coach status, simply because of your vast experience. Remember, the S&TA can waive the coach requirement for non-licensed skydivers, and the people you jump with most of the time already have their A license, so it's a moot point. Now, speaking of the WFFC, when are you arriving? Can't wait to see your smiling face again! Not to mention listening to your latest dissertations... *** DJan

Yes, and even though he may not be posting, he may be reading (make that double for me, since I am totally overwhelmed by the sheer volume of posts). When I can shove some work around and go over to DZ.com, I have to figure out where in the world to start. Then after sampling here and there, I have to go back to the "real" world. But I do enjoy watching people I know well, like konradptr, and those I don't know as well but enjoy listening to, post and respond to what I consider to be some very important threads. I have been following as much of the wingload BSRs as I can, and it seems that the same people have the same ideas, with an occasional changing of viewpoint (Canuck comes to mind). That's what I think is intended here. The main problem with the implementation of any new BSR is figuring out how to do it. It's just not straightforward. As I look at the numbers and ideas being put forward, here in the Mountain region I usually hear myself saying, "yeah, but what about these numbers at altitude?" How do we bring everything into a BSR that makes sense and can be implemented without massive negative feedback? I am still of the opinion that *guidelines* and *recommendations* are a much better idea that *BSRs* -- we haven't even gotten that far yet. *** DJan

Well, if you ever want to get an award like Gold Wings or 12-hour freefall badge, you need a D license first. *** DJan

Jump a Sabre2 135 at about 1.1 for my main, and a MicroRaven 150 for my reserve, at about 1.0 or a little less. I had one ride on it, and boy was I glad for all that yellow stuff over my head. I understand that the MicroRaven doesn't perform very well when overloaded, and I know mine was twitchy when I landed it, but perfectly serviceable. *** DJan

LOL! Ya know, I got on the BOD in order to make some changes in safety & training, and I got a quick wake-up call at my first BOD meeting in January. The USPA BOD is made up of skydivers just like you, and most of us hope to make a difference not just for now, but for the future as well. This may or may not happen, because changing anything *is* like pushing a rope. You've got to be dedicated, and realize that you are a group, not a single person, so the best change comes from those who care enough to put out some effort -- and money. This is not a paid position, it's hard work to make anything happen. It needs to be representative of what the skydivers want to see change. Everybody knew that AFF was just not cutting it, the ISP came out as a first step. It's better but not perfect. But, that said, I am really quite happy to see how many people really do want to effect some real change, and are willing to expend effort to make it happen. Skyslut (Barry) is just one person I've met who impresses me with his dedication to make changes that matter to him. I'm heading off to the BOD meeting in two weeks, and we have a full plate of things to discuss. I will post here my wrapup of what happened in S&T, for sure! *** DJan

I am getting shoved out of the system when I go to read someone's "full profile" -- I get an "Oops, there was a problem logging into the system: invalid/expired user session." this is new, hasn't happened before, and I've had to log back in at least 10 times now. Just tried it again, problem is still there. *** DJan

I don't tip exactly, I figure every pack job costs me $6, even though the packer charges $5. I cannot imagine doing that work for less than $6, and yes, I get taken care of by my packer. At boogies, when I've been using a packer for several days, just before I leave I give him or her a tip over and above the $6. They look for me when I come back (I like that!), and I always get someone to pack for me even when it's busy. And I also set my brakes and unstow the slider. *** DJan

Oh boy, here I go again! (plunge) All of the above. I work at 3 DZs, and one of them has implemented the ISP, using the 4-page card (Front Range Skydivers). FRS took the time and energy, and we worked together to get it in place last year. I used it all last summer there, and really saw how much it changed things up there. But the other two DZs have also made some significant changes to accommodate the requirements of the ISP, more training, etc. The problem is this: how does a coach with 100 jumps begin to teach a non-licensed skydiver canopy skills when he/she never was taught them and never learned themselves? This is the gap we face today. People are learning canopy skills slowly but surely. The ISP has incorporated canopy flight into the A-license card, but they are minimal, they are not the equivalent of a canopy control class. This gap will become less partly because of the passion and desire of people like Ron, Michele, billvon, etc., to see it change. But right now we have the blind leading the blind at some DZs. I know. I was one of the blind ones, and when I had a thousand jumps, I had students asking me to teach them how to fly their canopies. I sent them elsewhere, because *I* had not learned yet. After a thousand jumps! I figured out what worked most of the time and stayed within those boundaries. When I was injured in 2000, those six months recovering from an injury that wasn't necessary if I had known what to do, I made a vow. I would help others learn how to fly their canopies. I said I would return to skydiving and learn how to fly my own. I am a much better pilot today than I was then. I know how to teach people to experiment safely with the flight characteristics of their canopy. I am anxious to attend Scott Miller's class. This is part of the "education" I was talking about earlier. We cannot force people to learn, but we can offer guidelines and field test them. We can help somebody like me not to be broken in order to learn what they need to know. *** DJan

I hope I don't get into too much trouble here at the office. I feel like an addict who cannot let this dang thing go! My work will suffer... but here goes! (plunge) The licenses are being revised to align with the FAI. The world is indeed shrinking. There is plenty of resistance to change throughout our organization, jump numbers for licences too. Yes, it did get changed, even "watered down." It had to reflect *everyone's* concerns. Old timers jump too, old timers are on the BOD too. They represent a valid viewpoint in the organization. But we made a start! We actually got the ball rolling! This is HUGE. Would you be willing to put it to a vote? How do you listen to the membership when we're talking about real live skydivers here who come from all walks of life, all ages, all kinds of emotional makeups? Does "majority rule"? USPA becoming irrelevant? Well, there are lots of skydivers who feel USPA already is. How to make it more relevant to everyone's issues? More rules? I am all for guidelines. Do you think if USPA came up with a set of guidelines, NOT hard-and-fast you-gotta-do-this-or-else BSRs that it would save lives? Could we get started? I want to take something to the BOD that will be discussed in Committee. We *are* going to be discussing this, never fear. Other people on the BOD have been asked to look at this issue. I want to help with guidelines that could be posted at DZs, sent to S&TAs, posted on the USPA website, sent to canopy manufacturers. Whadda think? *** DJan

Can we make them take it? People in the middle of the country won't have one for ages. We haven't been able to get the ISP in place in most places. One thing we don't want to do is cram in more rules that aren't followed. I hear what all of you are saying. I'm not arguing that it's not broke, it is. How to fix it is what we are talking about. Ron, Billvon, all of you all agree. I agree. But how to do it is not simple, or we would have fixed it for all but the most incalcitrant. I feel like I've stepped in a hornet's nest here. I want to help. I'm just not sure that a "wingload BSR" is the solution -- or any solution but just more problem. *** DJan

Ron, I agree with you that there is tremendous pressure to downsize. I see it all the time. We don't start out flying kleenex-sized canopies. The old joke about someone asking what is the correct size canopy is to keep downsizing until you hurt yourself, then go up a size. But I don't agree that education is not working. There are several problems here, as I see it. Here's the first one: canopies are being created that require more and more skill to fly. I don't have to fly that canopy if I don't want to, but if I want to, all I have to do is buy it. Something is wrong here, I hear what you're saying. But if education isn't working, why are we having this conversation? Isn't that education? Aren't you educating others who are reading your responses? Second problem: people aren't using good sense about canopy downsizing. You are suggesting that we put a rule in place that will help to keep people from hurting themselves. That rule does not take into account the variations in learning and skill. Third problem: USPA is like any other organization, it moves slowly when making changes. Rules and regulations are only added when it becomes obvious that something needs to be done. You are saying we are at that point. But there is a huge number of your follow skydivers that feel this is a wrong approach. USPA won't be able to make the changes as fast as educating jumpers about the risks they are taking will. Every heard the old story about the hundredth monkey? In the 1950s, a monkey on an island learned to wash sweet potatoes, and taught her offspring how to do it. Suppose that there were 99 monkeys that learned to wash their potatoes on a particular day. Then when the 100th monkey learned, a breakthrough happened. Once that monkey learned, monkeys on other islands, not in contact with the first ones, also began washing their sweet potatoes. What this teaches us is that when we reach a certain critical mass with awareness, this new awareness is communicated to mind to mind. I believe this is what must happen in creating a new mindset for canopy piloting. This happens through education, not regulation. *** DJan

If the ISP can't be implemented everywhere, how are we ever going to come up with rules and regulations that everyone will follow? In my opinion, it will only lead to people falsifying jump numbers, resentment, and peole complaining about the heavy hand of the USPA. The issue is not how many people need to die before the USPA does something. People will always push the envelope, especially young testosterone-driven males. If you set up a rule, it will give these guys a chance to get more creative in getting around it. The canopies are getting smaller, faster, more extreme. How do you regulate good sense???? *** DJan

Well, most of us have developed some kind of habit after deployment. I pitch, then wait for the familiar feeling of liftoff and the line stretch. As line stretch is happening, I usually look up, rather than over my shoulder. Looking over the shoulder can cause your body to tilt to one side or the other. Camerapersons would never do this. Most look at the horizon while waiting for the familiar feeling. If they don't happen, if I've pitched into my burble, the first thing I do is look over my shoulder. If nothing happens and my hands go to my handles, then I change my body position and the PC catches air. I've done this maybe 3-4 times in 3000 jumps. Lazy throw, nothing happens, I freak out and do one of the above. But getting back to your question, I wouldn't recommend getting in the habit of looking over your shoulder. Best is to look at the horizon and count. We tell students to look over their shoulder to give them a chance to clear the burble before going to EPs. *** DJan

I totally agree with you about these safety priorities. BTW, I read your post several times to try to take it all in, there is a lot there of value to all skydivers. My sense is that skydivers are changing, and quite quickly, it seems. When I began jumping, someone like you would probably have given up, since you seem to want to analyze and fix problems. There was nothing available then, there is now. You may have to look for it, but it's there. AFF and the subsequent ISP are imperfect vehicles to teach someone everything they need to know about the above subjects. But they are a beginning! USPA is trying to fix a problem, and I am willing to take your concerns to the BOD in July. But remember I am only one of 22, although I am one of 6 on the Safety & Training Committee. The ISP coaches are teaching exits and some canopy control and hopefully making students safer than they were before when AFF was all skydivers had. After discussing this issue at the DZ while we waited for the low clouds to clear, most skydivers I spoke to are against any kind of regulation or rule for the simple reason that each situation is unique. Why not have the S&TA and/or the DZO figure out what is appropriate wingloading for someone downsizing? That should be the S&TA's first priority, since that's where most people get hurt: on landing. This means that the S&TA has to be there and be engaged in this issue. Aren't most? I sure hope the answer is yes. *** DJan

I agree with Wendy, this was an excellent post. Here I am catching a few minutes to see what has been posted here since yesterday, I'm on my way to the DZ. But I can't help but respond to this (above). Michele, I am an older and wiser version of you under canopy. Even with hundreds of jumps, I was an accident waiting to happen. There was no canopy control class for me back in 1991. What puzzles me is why you were actively discouraged from taking the class. Did anyone actually desire to see you get hurt? I had a sense of that about me when I was first learning to fly a canopy. Nobody ever offered any instruction at all to me, even when I asked. What's going on here? Are there skydivers out there who are waiting for what they see as us inevitably getting hurt? If so, this is really sad. Michele, you are getting an education about how to fly a canopy because you recognize the need for it. There's really no other way to educate people, if you know you need it and there's an avenue to get it, then you'll get it. That's what you are doing. I believe that your posts are educating others as well. This is the beginning we need, and small beginnings can change the world. *** DJan

Until I got on the BOD, I had no idea how hard it actually is to get anything changed. First you need to be a believer in the necessity of the change, then you have to convince others on the BOD of this fact. (This is where contacting your Regional Director as well as a couple NDs makes a whole lot of sense about issues of importance to you.) Then it comes to a vote in the Committee, and then goes to the Full Board for passage. Lots of things get hashed out and changed in the process from the original because these things are usually controversial. Even very small changes cause big waves. Some people think if it worked in the past it should work now. Anyhow, referring to the above quote, I don't think it's the people getting their B license who are the problem. More and more jumpers are availing themselves of canopy instruction before downsizing. Maybe the whole problem will fix itself as more people on each DZ know more and more about canopy flight. I cannot believe how many more people are aware of canopy flight characteristics in the last two to three years. These people are now sharing their knowledge on the Internet, in these forums, and on the DZs. Rather than regulation, shouldn't we start learning how cool it is to know these things and sharing them with each other as this information is needed?? *** DJan

Education, education, education! It seems to me that the amount of canopy education is sorely lacking -- when I first started jumping (1991), nobody told me anything about canopy control. Today there is much much more information available, and the ISP has incorporated some canopy control into the program. There is a definite trend toward education, so I am heartened. But to me, it's like a new generation of canopies (and canopy pilots) are pushing the envelope of actual survivability, for the same reasons that people probably started skydiving in the first place: to see if it can be done. How do you deal with that aspect of human propensity? And how can it be regulated? There will always be risk-taking (and risk-averse) skydivers. I just hate to see more rules and regulations to deal with this. Just my 2 cents. But I have discovered that anything I say any more carries more weight than it used to, just because I am on the USPA BOD. So I would like to add that this is just my own personal viewpoint, I have had to learn how to be a halfway-decent canopy pilot through trial and error. *** DJan

OK, got it. Nothing new here, same old story of canopy size vs. skill -- I am of the opinion that more regulation is not the answer. So I know what the answer *isn't* but what we should do about this problem is not clear. I think young hotshots will find a way around whatever laws are put in place so that they can swoop at the limit (or beyond) of their ability. This can't be legislated out of existence. *** DJan

What? Who? :-) Yeah, I read this forum when I'm supposed to be working, when I need a break from reading about all the environmental disasters in the world. I am interested in knowing about this windloading issues, but so far I haven't heard anything. Can anybody bring me up to speed? *** DJan

'Nuff said. What's life all about anyway? *** DJan

I've known this about Gary for awhile, since we work together at the WFFC, for many many years now. He does most of the work until the Convention starts, then I do most of the work in my tent (for the youngsters). I think the 2-page or 4-page proficiency card is the best thing USPA has come up with in many years -- you, as the student, have the major responsibility, we show you what we think you should be learning, and DZOs or JMs can't easily schmooze you out of what you deserve in training. Students *know* when someone says to them that they don't really need to know something on the card, they are being cheated. But the paperwork is definitely increased. The proficiency card, and being around when the student is going through the process, tells all of the instructors a lot about who gets it and who needs more work. Just my 2 cents. *** DJan

Ahhh, Aragao, you are NO LONGER a student! And you are no longer a spinner. See? Relaxation is the key, that and a few magic feathers! Thank you so much for making my day brighter and happier. Now you can pass the information you have learned to someone else. When you hear someone telling you that they are a bad student and maybe should stop trying, you can give that person a "magic feather" from you. You are now well on your way to more and more blue skies. I was looking for your post on Dropzone.com because I was sure that you would find your way. Congratulations, and thanks for letting me know how it happened. Be safe and have fun! *** DJan

Well, they *look* pretty much the same, except that a "track" is more of the same thing. Skr is right, technically I meant a "delta" and not a "track." He explains the difference in his post. Skratch is my husband, and when I came home last night we discussed your spinning problem, and he was concerned that I might have confused you. So hopefully this does not confuse you even more! Skratch and I have had many conversations about how students are taught, and when I teach a student how to "track" I am actually teaching them how to "delta," not track. Tracking is an advanced delta, so students hardly ever track until they have many more jumps. I do remember, however, once having a student who *tracked* away from me on a Level VII. I could hardly believe my eyes. When we got down to the ground I asked him how did he know how to track so well? He had been listening to people talk at the DZ, and had asked a friend of his how to do it. Well, believe me I was shocked! He tracked as well as any jumper with thousands of jumps. As an instructor, I don't want my student to track better than *me*!! *** DJan