MakeItHappen

It is kind of like 'adequate separation' on opening. Fifty feet is too close on a 4-way, but on a 300-way it may be all you get. I wouldn't call the BOD hell bent on anything. But the FAA has us on their radar now. They are looking for some self-regulation in this area. If we don't provide it, they will. Sentence A, cited above, will empower every jumper to say to another jumper that does s-turns, spirals or 270s in a conventional pattern, that he is endangering others. There was a nearly unanimous consensus for statement A by the BOD. The reason it was not voted on was because it was an 11th hour suggestion. It was written Saturday night and presented to the S&T Comm Sunday morning. Without the Comm voting, it was also presented to the FB in the plenary session to get more opinions on it. The decision was to take it back to the members and get more feedback on it. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Jan, I'm surprised that you'd appear to accept at face value, what you're "told" when there is plenty of evidence that what is being said isn't the complete story. Here's the situation. Stuart called and asked about the bad-mouthing that he was getting because some people erroneously jumped to the conclusion that he was part of the SR network. I told him that I could make a statement that he was not involved with SR. I make no endorsements of his business, either positive or negative. All I am saying is that he is NOT associated with SR. All of you can say whatever you want about his business. All I wanted to correct was that he was not associated with SkyRide. I do not have an opinion of his business, but I do know he is NOT associated with SkyRide. That's it - the whole shebang. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I just want to mention that Skydive4Free is NOT associated with SkyRide. The owner called me yesterday and explained his business model to me. (The RD refered him to me.) He charges $45 to set up a tandem jump at a nearby DZ. The person(s) raising money have to cover the cost of the tandem jump and then everything else goes to a charity. He has written contractual relationships with both the charities and the DZs. He also pays the DZ in advance for the tandem jump. Stuart is a Brit living in the SD area now. He did this same business over in the UK for a number of years. He plans on changing his company to a charitable organization by the end of the year. Feel free to express your opinions on the business model, but please do NOT associate or mistake his business with SkyRide. He has no relationship with SkyRide. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

This is an email I sent to the FB and BillVon's group. Below is the current version of a proposed BSR for USPA. I have split it into A and B sections, so that you can respond with reference to a specific section. A: No canopy pilot may intentionally fly a canopy in a manner that: - creates a hazard to persons (in the air or on the ground) or property or - is contrary to local rules. B: However, this section does not prohibit manuevers if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid injury or damage to persons or property. The FAR text that this was adapted from is Sec. 91.15 Dropping objects No pilot in command of a civil aircraft may allow any object to be dropped from that aircraft in flight that creates a hazard to persons or property. However, this section does not prohibit the dropping of any object if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid injury or damage to persons or property. I'd like to get more feedback on this from you and the jumpers you come in contact with. Please go out and show people this and get their opinion. At one time I thought there was no way we could craft a generalized BSR that would create separate landing patterns. I have since changed my mind since Jessie pointed out this FAR. I specifically want to know the reasons that this would impose liability upon a DZO or USPA. By all means, be very critical of this proposal. This needs to be iterated and we can find something that will work. We all have a common goal of reducing or eliminating canopy collisions and canopy related deaths. Our paths to that solution may be different today, but I believe that a common path can be found. Let's try really hard to find that common ground and then pave it. Thank you for your help. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

This might help. BTW, Kevin Donnelly, who is mentioned in that article, lives in Elsinore. He would be a good 'go-to' guy for your project. If you need contact info, email me at aerosoftware_AT_MakeItHappen.com (_AT_ = @) Mike Owens would be another that could help you out. They are both retired and just wandering around wandering what to do with themselves..... ;) They are both riggers and may know who has expired cyprii coming up. You can scavenge the cutters from those folks. I also have some containers from the 'Dirty Ed' collection that may be of use. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Wow - what a great place to create rules of the air for skydivers. I did my first cut at adapting these rules to skydiving. Paragraph numbers are a bit skewed. Every skydiver shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account: (a) By all skydivers: 1. The state of visibility; 2. The traffic density; 3. The maneuverability of the skydiver with special reference to airspeed and turning ability in the prevailing conditions; 5. The state of weather hazards; RULE 8 ACTION TO AVOID COLLISION (a) Any action taken to avoid collision shall be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good skydivership. (b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another skydiver observing visually; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided. (c) If there is sufficient airspace, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation. (d) Action taken to avoid collision with another skydiver shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other skydiver is finally past and clear. (e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to asses the situation, a skydiver may slacken her speed. RULE 10 TRAFFIC SEPARATION SCHEMES (a) This Rule applies to traffic separation schemes and does not relieve any skydiver of her obligation under any other rule. (b) A skydiver using a traffic separation scheme shall: 1. Proceed in the appropriate traffic lane in the general direction of traffic flow for that lane. 2. So far as is practicable keep clear of a traffic separation line or separation zone. 3. Normally join or leave a traffic lane at the termination of the lane, but when joining or leaving from either side shall do so at as small an angle to the general direction of traffic flow as practicable. (c) A skydiver, shall so far as practicable, avoid crossing traffic lanes but if obliged to do so shall cross on a heading as nearly as practicable at right angles to the general direction of traffic flow. (d) 1. A HP skydiver shall not use a conventional pattern traffic zone when she can safely use the appropriate traffic lane within the adjacent traffic separation scheme. (e) A skydiver, other than a crossing skydiver or a skydiver joining or leaving a lane shall not normally enter a separation zone or cross a separation line except: 1. in cases of emergency to avoid immediate danger; (f) A skydiver navigating in areas near the terminations of traffic separation schemes shall do so with particular caution. (g) A skydiver shall so far as practicable avoid engaging in slow flight in a traffic separation scheme or in areas near its terminations. (h) A skydiver not using a traffic separating scheme shall avoid it by as wide a margin as is practicable. (i) A skydiver engaged in a HP landing shall not impede the passage of any skydiver following a traffic lane. (k) A skydiver restricted in her ability to maneuver, such as under a malfunction, line twists or reserve, is exempted from complying with this Rule to the extent necessary to land safely. OVERTAKING (a) Any skydiver overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the skydiver being overtaken. (b) A skydiver shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with a another skydiver from a direction more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam, that is, in such a position with reference to the vessel she is overtaking. (c) When a skydiver is in any doubt as to whether she is overtaking another, she shall assume that this is the case and act accordingly. (d) Any subsequent alteration of the bearing between the two vessels shall not make the overtaking skydiver a crossing vessel within the meaning of these Rules or relieve her of the duty of keeping clear of the overtaken skydiver until she is finally past and clear. Rule 16 Every skydiver that is directed to keep out of the way of another skydiver shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear. Rule 17 (a) 1. Where one of two skydivers is to keep out of the way, the other shall keep her course and speed. 2. The latter skydiver may however take action to avoid collision by her maneuver alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the skydiver required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules. (b) When, from any cause, the skydiver required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way skydiver alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision. (d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way skydiver of her obligation to keep out of the way. Except where Rules 9, 10, and 13 otherwise require: (a) A HP skydiver underway shall keep out of the way of: 1. a skydiver with a malfunction; 2. a skydiver with line twists; 3. a skydiver under a reserve; 4. a student skydiver 5. a skydiver performing a conventional pattern (b) A skydiver performing a conventional pattern underway shall keep out of the way of: 1. a skydiver with a malfunction; 2. a skydiver with line twists; 3. a skydiver under a reserve; 4. a student skydiver (d) 1. Any skydiver other than a skydiver restricted in her ability to maneuver shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid impeding the safe passage of a skydiver constrained by her wake. ------- BTW, I am not proposing this as a BSR, but it might lead to a good section of the SIM. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

There are no 'official', published or standardized 'penalties' for any BSR violation. As I said before, there is no menu of penalties. What happens in real life is that the RD tries to correct the situation with persuasive arguments, aka diplomacy. If that does not work, the issue may be elevated to a formal disciplinary action. Also serious safety violations usually end up with a formal action, but not always (The reason for that is another topic.). The formal action procedure is detailed in the Governance Manual Sec 1-6, available on the USPA web site. No, it won't change, and shouldn't. What it DOES do is make the DZO create a plan to separate traffic. It doesn't leave it up to whether or not they WANT to (like the failed education option does), it says they WILL. Consider this illustrative example: Say there was a BSR that said: "DZOs will create a plan for minimum pull altitudes based on jumpers' license level." DZO A says "Pull whenever you want, just don't hit the dirt at high speed." DZO B says "Pull by 2000 ft AGL for all experience levels." DZO C says " " Each DZO fulfilled the BSR requirement. Does this create an 'industry standard'? Does this put additional liability upon the DZO? Does this correct the behavior of a low puller? Does this educate jumpers about the hazards of pulling low? No they don't. USPA is a voluntary organization. No one is 'forced' to do anything. If someone doesn't do something that USPA 'requests' they may be kicked out or denied membership. USPA is not the FAA or police. USPA does not have the clout to go into a DZ and say 'you must do yadda, yadda. yadda or else'. USPA politely asks DZOs to do 'yadda, yadda, yadda.' And if they don't, they lose their Group membership and the other advantages and perqs that go with that. DZO and STA could lose certifications / licenses, based on the severity of the problem - or are you saying that USPA would ignore a willful safety violation and do nothing? see above and read the Governance Manual. No, this is incorrect. Try reading this. You forget about all the staff and customers a DZO has. A free market will compel DZOs to make their operations safer. There have been lots and lots of big ways that have traffic patterns set by organizers and the jumpers. These pattern rules, when followed, allow many jumpers to land safely at the same time. Since your experience is low, have you ever seen a 100-way from the ground? You'll be amazed at the staged break-off procedures and pull altitudes that happen on these dives. Then after all are open, they proceed to the ground in an orderly fashion. This is all arranged by the organizers and jumpers. DZOs rarely are involved with these rules. USPA is never involved. Organizers take corrective actions. They don't call up USPA and ask 'Can you cut Jimmy Jumper off my load because he did a HP landing in the middle of a 100-way?'. You really need to read the book I mentioned. The usual 'slap up the side of the head' will work. (Figuratively speaking) . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

There are no 'official', published or standardized 'penalties' for any BSR violation. Now, as you have noted, the 'penalties for individual jumpers have to come from the STA/DZO.' That is exactly the point. That is in place today. Twenty words written in a one-inch thick manual, sitting in the school, will not have any impact upon the implementation of how a DZO runs the DZ. The 'enforcement' comes from the DZO or S&TA. That won't change with a new BSR. No they don't. USPA is a voluntary organization. No one is 'forced' to do anything. If someone doesn't do something that USPA 'requests' they may be kicked out or denied membership. USPA is not the FAA or police. USPA does not have the clout to go into a DZ and say 'you must do yadda, yadda. yadda or else'. USPA politely asks DZOs to do 'yadda, yadda, yadda.' Excuse me, but just when did I say separated patterns were not a good idea? Do you REALLY think that the scenario above ISN'T going to happen in the future? If not, then you're probably not being very realistic. This has to be the most fucking stupid arguments posted on these threads combined. Look - skydiving is dangerous. Oh so Mr. DZO allowed skydiving to happen at his DZ. Sue him - he shudda known better. You too need to read 'Jumping Through Clouds'. You are 'Jane Seymore'-ing the event. Danny's 'problem' was not one of education. It was one of ego. You gotta a BSR for egos? Just out of curiosity, do you really only have 45 jumps in 12 years?? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Nobody is disputing that - we just want the DZOs to make it safer for everyone. This gives them more teeth to take action against fucktard jumpers that put others in danger. I don't know what reality you live in, but the reality that I live in, already has DZOs with the right to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason. "If you don't wear the red tshirt on Thursdays, you cannot jump." or "If you don't have an AAD you cannot jump here." There is no reality to 'more teeth' given to the DZO by these proposed BSRs. DZOs already have teeth and use it. Trust me, I know from experience. Probably the worst aspect of these proposed BSRs is that they do not address the problem. The problem is, as you say, 'fucktard jumpers that put others in danger'. That may be the next person 'pulling a Danny', or someone spiraling in the pattern or someone s-turning or someone crossing over to the wrong side of the landing area. These proposed BSRs do not address or correct the behavior of the problem child. Option 3 tends to put accountability on a DZO for the 'fucktard jumper that put others in danger'. That is why these proposed BSRs are not right. They introduce problems and liabilities for the DZO and USPA. If you did a swoop turn that 'went bad' would you hold the DZO accountable for it? These BSRs propose to do just that. I fully agree that we need to correct the behavior of jumpers that either don't know any better or are a 'fucktard jumper that put others in danger'. Education is the way to do that. Word gets out about a 'fucktard jumper that put others in danger' pretty quickly. There is a lot to be said about peer pressure correcting the behavior of a miscreant. Maybe what we need are t-shirts that morph a hotdog into a responsible jumper or one that says 'Don't do a Danny' or more articles in the mags or more 'everyday average jumpers' 'talking to' the ones that do something that could cause a collision or more watchdogs at the busy DZs It's like you are pounding away with a hammer to try and open a trunk, but forgot that you have a key that will open it. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I don't know where to start. When I read Mike's post on Sunday, I called Marge right away. I knew Jim was not doing well. This past Symposium was the first one where Jim and Marge weren't there. They were steadfast participants in the Symposiums and worked the press room, doors and other non-glamorous jobs more than anyone. A large part of the Symposium's success is because of Jim and Marge. Marge even found the Reno site - that worked out very well. I'm not really sure when I first met Jim, but it was probably sometime in the late 1980s. Jim and I corresponded a lot over the years, mostly about parachute history. (Go figure?) Sometimes he'd have a question for me, sometimes the other way around. Sometimes we could find an answer, sometimes not. From November 1991 to October 1993, Jim published "Parachutes - Yesterday/Today/Tomorrow" or PYTT for short. It was a newsprint type newsletter that was chock full of interesting history on parachutes and skydiving. We also traded stories about how to get advertisers - something neither of us did particularly well. We just liked to do the research and writing part, not the sales side. (I'm sure Nick can identify with that.) His articles in Atlantic Flyer were also great reading. Jim also sent me articles for my web site at no cost too. 90-Year-Old Arizona Woman Becomes Parachuting World Record-Holder Rayelene (or Raye) Wilson Koontz Marge also sent me this one. A couple of years ago, Jim and I got pissed off at Parachutist for the same reason. At the time I was sending out an electronic newsletter from ParachuteHistory.com. Jim reprinted some of the articles, with permission and full and proper accreditation in the CPI newsletter. Well, Parachutist took those stories and accredited the articles to Jim. Jim was pissed, I was pissed and Parachutist never printed a correction. Jim, I don't know how we can fill the parachute history void that your passing has created. You did most of the work. You were consistent about doing that work too. Maybe Howard, Dan and I can try to do what you did. But that's a tall order. We will miss you and your writings. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

High Wind Landing Approaches plus links therein. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

John, quit comparing apples and oranges. You want to compare a heavy landing atop a light weight AC to a swooper overtaking a 'low and slow' canopy. There is no airport anywhere in the US that would consider a 270 approach as an acceptable approach. You are trying to compare totally different scenarios. Canopies do not have an ATC (radio contact) to direct traffic. Canopies do not have transponders. Canopies do not have 'go-around' capabilities. If you really want to live in your imaginary world go read this. Your BS commentaries tend to polarize people as opposed to bringing them together to find a solution as much as Billvon's exaggerations of "we're looking at another few hundred deaths before we see most DZ's change over." You and Bill, and DOB and Flip to lesser extent, are now into polarizing people's views on this instead of trying to come up with workable solutions that can be implemented at each individual DZ. Look at the situation this way, if you cannot have a BSR implemented to your desires, what would you like to see happen? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Mark asked: Billvon replied: Kallend replied: We have now entered the Twilight Zone. The low person has the right of way. That rule should not change. The advantage gained by having separate areas is that it will be much easier for the higher person - about to execute a HP landing - to see potential traffic. That advantage does not give the higher person carte blanche to swoop into a lower person. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

And here in lies the rub. For a National organization that represents ALL members wherever they jump, a non-mandatory request, will get what you already alluded to above: less than 100% compliance. So some percentage of our USPA membership will be jumping at drop zones that may not have re-evaluated their landing patterns for safety in light of the recent spate of fatalities. The participation I was refering to was DZOs sending me or giving me urls that explained their plans. It did not refer to whether or not they have a plan. (No one likes surveys.) And a plan that said 'let the jumpers figure it out at the loading area' would comply too. Your BSR proposals do not address the problem. The problem is correcting the behavior of errant jumpers. Those jumpers could be s-turners, swoopers thru traffic, tunnel vision NG, spiraling NGs etc. We need more eyes out there looking and observing patterns and correcting people that do something that jeapordizes themself and others. We already have the rules. We need uniform and consistent application of the local DZ rules. None of this 'if you have the DZO's permission, you can do 270s in traffic.' (aka No sky-god shit.) . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

You know the polls here are skewed and do not necessarily represent what 'most' jumpers want. At the DZ, in real life, I get the exact opposite opinion. Everyone says to me 'no BSR', please 'no BSR'. In fact there is still another objection that a USPA member told me that has not appeared on any of these threads. He claims that DZOs could sue USPA for restriction of trade. There is some merit to this view too. USPA really cannot demand that DZOs offer swooping and non-swooping sections at their DZ any more than PIA can tell retailers that they have to sell classic accuracy canopies as well as pocket rockets. I agree that under canopy is a time when most jumpers are in fear of being taken out. I know that feeling and have it myself. I downsized because people on the following load were strafing me 50 ft off the deck. I do not agree that 'many/most dzs are not stepping up to the plate'. In fact, I see the opposite. Many/most DZs do have plans in place and reprimand accordingly. There have been jumpers from The Farm, SDC, CrossKeys, Perris, Elsinore, San Diego, Byron, Lodi, Wissota, even Dublin and a few other places that have specifically mentioned rules at their DZ and how the rules get enforced. There's one guy, from who knows where, that claims an instructor cut off some people and landed cross wind. That guy should seek help from his RD, if the DZO or S&TA will not address the situation. As to your last question, I'll give you a comparison that hopefully will shed some light on this. About two years ago, Lou Douva started a 'save skysurfing' campaign. In about 24-36 hours the USPA/BOD received almost 100 emails about why skysurfing should be saved. It all happened a day or 2 before the summer mtg. In this particular situation, the full BOD has not received emails about this issue except for the original email from Molly with the original BSR proposals. I answered that email and asked that it be forwarded to her group because I did not have emails for everyone. Molly and I passed a few emails back-n-forth, but I never heard from anyone else in that group. And I know all those people, except Bob's relative. Anyone can use uspabod_AT_skydivehard.com (_AT_ = @) to contact the BOD members or they can use direct emails available on the USPA web site and in Parachutist. I was also moved to 'do something' about the canopy collision issue. I wrote an article that appeared in the June SNM issue. This article, in one form or another is also slated to be published in the APF and BPA mags sometime this summer. What other BOD member has actually done something? Ok Larry changed his acceptable landing patterns at his DZ, but does that help jumpers everywhere? I spent hours upon hours writing and emailing people across the world to create a comprehensive educational article. I would have done that whether or not I was on the BOD. Thank you for voting for me. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

You are so wrong on that account. I do not post here as a BOD member. My posts do not in any way represent USPA positions. I post here as a regular jumper. In fact, you have to look long and hard to realize that I'm a BOD member. I don't even own one of those USPA polo shirts that say "National Director" with your name embroidered beneath the logo. I am not pushing my opinion. I am discussing a very important issue with other jumpers, just like I do at the DZ. You may not realize this, but there are other BOD members that have 'decided' what to do about this long ago and have no desire to even talk with others about it. I asked someone to put something on a committee agenda about this issue and was summarily refused. Not all is lost, because it will come up anyway. Politics is a really strange place. People bitch about not being able to converse with their representatives. Then when the representatives do exchange ideas, they get lambasted for 'pushing their opinion' upon others. You can't have it both ways. Posts like yours that have invalid accusations are the number one reason most BOD members do not post here or on any other forum. Maybe you didn't 'get' the discourse between Flip and me. That may be because we've know each other for ~15 years or more and we probably put in subtext that others would not 'get' without even noticing it. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

We are talking on the same wavelength. We just disagree on how to frequency shift. [nerd] With semi-conductor lasers you can shift by temperature changes. With IR lasers you can change the absorption by the atmosphere. A message will get across when the recipient can read it and understand it. [/nerd] As for your group, I know everyone, most for many years, except Bob's relative. I know you have thought about this. I know you have jumpers' interests at heart. And so do I. Ah, but the last to leave the field of battle sees the backside of those that depart first. I hope you stay on here and let's banter back and forth. Keeping landing patterns in the 'front and center' is what we want. We happen to think having a BSR will do that. But if witty reparte between you and me ACCOMPLISHES the same thing, who am I to argue. I KNEW it, you just wanted to check out my ass! A resurrection of those 'Don't be a Dick' tshirts might be something that would work. Well, we certainly will find out as I think this will come to a vote in July. Just like every DZO has their own world view and what they see as tolerable risk, each Board member will look at this issue the same way. I think that a Board member first and foremost represents the members at large. So the real question is what do we want for each and every individual member when they are jumping at USPA drop zones? The Board will answer this in July. Well, as someone (a former BOD member) told me years ago, don't put up a motion to the BOD until you know you have the votes. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

How about if I provide you with landing patterns/rules for a sample (large and small DZs) of USPA GMs? I doubt if I could get 100% participation, but I know I can get some DZOs to submit a plan that includes an aerial photo plus do's and do nots. You claim that some DZs do not take this issue seriously. I claim that the DZs do take it seriously. Let's find out who the misfits are. How many of them are really 'out there'? IOW, are you on this campaign because at one DZ, one jumper did something really bad and you want all DZs to 'comply' with the decree you set? A systemic problem would occur at all DZs. We don't see a systemic problem. What we do see is a problem at boogies or larger DZs. Those call for isolated cures. Cures that we already know the solution for. Cures that have been implemented already by the DZs that experience these problems. Formatting is much better. You are a quick study. But we already knew that! . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Bill, you need to go read 'Jumping Through Clouds' by Jane Seymore and see the similarities between what you are asking and what is reality. You can get the book, pretty cheap on Amazon. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Excellent, Flip! You are now the 5 Gold-star DZ.com Most Improved Poster for June 2007! Now, Flip, Sit! Flip, Down! Flip, Speak! ;) (That might come in handy at the BOD mtg.) I could repeat my position over and over again, but that gets tedious. The last poster does not always 'win' the argument. I am curious about how many BOD members support your BSR, in one form or another. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

If this is the wording of the final BSR, then no. No BSR violation. However, the Drop Zone rules about landing patterns would have been violated. The real question is whether or not for this one DZ, would they have established safe landing pattern procedures without the BSR? Flip, I have a more optimistic attitude towards DZOs than you. I think that DZOs can be convinced to implement local rules via conversations from the local jumpers. I base this on the meeting in 2000 that Elsinore and it's jumpers had after a canopy collision. Jumpers demanded that the rules be changed and the landing areas be separated. USPA had nothing to do with the process, although the RD was present at the meeting. You tell me, what does the S&TA do today when someone pulls low? What does the DZO do? Now you have your answer for landing pattern issues. The DZO may ground the jumper. This is not a formal disciplinary action taken by USPA. A DZO has the right to 'refuse service' to customers. Years ago, in BC days, a bunch of Elsinore jumpers used to come over the hill to Perris for a 'Grand Opening' celebration. They would do their low pull and promptly get grounded at Perris and Elsinore also recognized the groundings. USPA was not in the loop. Everything was handled at the local level. Nothing prevents on the spot corrective action by a DZO because there is or is not a BSR. Having the BSR in place reinforces safe landing practices so the DZO does not have to discipline as much. In the real world, DZOs do the bulk of disciplinary actions. It is rare that USPA gets involved. Great! We just want them TO have a set of rules so that all USPA jumpers can expect safe landing patterns at all USPA DZs. What DZ does not have such rules? Stop right there. You can't have it both ways. It either is, or is not a BSR. Don't be a sea lawyer on this. Sea lawyer??? If I'm at 1999 feet AGL or lower, I know with certainty that the DZO, USPA and you would want me to pull and not 'wait for my AAD to fire' or aliens to pull for me. IOW, I break the 'Thou shall pull above 2000 ft rule' in order to save myself. Been there, done that and no one grounded me. If a separate area had been set up for swoopers at this event, which may have happened if a USPA BSR was in place, the odds would have been far greater that both men would still be alive today. As USPA goes, so does the membership. Several people at the boogie said there were separate areas and that it was announced on the PA system. No leaping of faith here. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

. Flip, you almost have it mastered. You need to close the tags with either [/ reply] or [/ quote]. (There is an extra space in there so it will show up in this reply, but in your replies there should be no space. Hope that made sense.) Use the close tag that matches the open tag. What you did was use the opening tags as close tags. Also you do not need to put tags around your response. I changed the tags in your reply so that it displays better, but it is confusing with quote tags around your reply. Anyway, back to the mission.... It's not a rule in the books that people follow. It's rules that keep them safe. We stop at red lights because that's the safe thing to do, not because we'd get ticketed if we ran them. Drunk or reckless drivers that blow thru red lights are taken aside and slapped up-side of the head. As Pops mentions, the rules are only as good as the DZO that enforces them. It is up to jumpers to DEMAND that local rules are in place and are enforced. Why do I say that and still do not want a BSR? A BSR that says something to the effect 'DZOs shall do blah, blah,blah....' is not USPA's mission. USPA does not run DZs. DZOs run DZs. Such a BSR would also open up liability paths for the DZO and USPA. IOW, when the next Danny takes out someone, the victim will have clear legal paths to sue the DZO and USPA. A BSR could place legal responsibility upon the DZO and USPA for the reckless behavior of a jumper. Also we don't need another rule to fix this problem. We need DZOs to implement and enforce their local rules. This is in place at many DZs. A few DZs may need some additional coaxing. USPA can run articles in Parachutist and DZO Incoming. Jumpers can talk to their DZO. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Flip, you really need to learn how these BBCode tags work. They are containers with an opening and closing tag. First off, I want to make clear that we agree that patterns should be separated in time or space. Secondly, we disagree upon the methodology used to accomplish this goal. You say, " Because there is NO requirement right now for any DZ to take any action to make the landing patterns any safer than they are currently." I agree that there is no requirement to do this. But that does not mean that DZs do not implement their rules as needed. In fact, the opposite is true. Most DZs add in 'rules' to fit the situation. Most DZs addin what you call the 'hinting and hoping' rules all the time. Exactly when and how did a DZO NOT implement 'additional' rules that did the same thing of separating patterns? This issue that you have put forth is because - excuse my candid remarks - 'some asshole thought he was better than the rest of us and could get away with such-n-such maneuver - even when the DZ said that patterns shall be separated.' . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Start price comparing and test riding now. That way you can find the car (make/model) that you want. Then when you buy you just look around for the best deal on that make/model. Last year my Nissan Frontier truck was totaled. After 6 long weeks of driving rentals around, the insurance company said my truck was totaled, (something I knew the night of the accident). They gave me 3 days to find a replacement. (The rental disappears after 3 days). I knew I wanted another Frontier (new or used) and only looked at those, except for an occasional test ride in Toyotas, Chevy, or Fords. That was to verify that I liked the Frontier best. I did one more search on a Sunday night on AutoTrader and found a truck that was almost an exact replacement for my truck. It was newer and had fewer miles. I looked at and drove the truck Monday morning and went home in my new to me 2000 Frontier, less than 40k miles. Only cost $8k, plus taxes and licenses. I was essentially reset to where I was before the accident. I made $1500 on the insurance settlement because the insurance company gave my 98 Nissan with 90k miles, an automatic and power windows/locks. This is my 3rd Nissan truck, so I know a lot about the different year models. The new ones are cheaper than 2 year old models, but have less leg room and jump seats that fold up towards the back wall and not the sides. They are still in the way when tucked up. So if you find some car that you like, do test drives in various year's models. You'll learn all about the features and how they changed, much better than surfing. If you know how to check out a car/truck buy used from private individuals. You can talk them down below Blue Book because you will be giving them more than a dealer would. That's your pitch, 'Hey, you can't get this much from a dealer.' Dealer prices are overpriced, but sometimes include a warranty (for more $$). You should pay less than blue book from an individual. Pay cash for your car. Living without car payments is heaven. Never finance anything that depreciates. It doesn't make any sense. The money that you would be paying in interest is the savings toward a newer and more expensive car, the next time around. I've owned 3 motorcycles, 1 car and 4 trucks. I financed the first car and the first truck. The mistakes in financing were agreeing to buy insurance that would payoff the loan if I died. Somehow, they convinced me that I HAD to do that. I did not understand how you sell a car that has a loan on it. I still don't know the details on that. I sold my Mustang (my first car), with a dead engine, to some Mustang restoration place. When my first truck was near death, the dealers tried talking me into $100 payments for a new truck. I said 'Nope I do not want car payments. I want my out the door price to be $xxx". That's what I got. They adjusted my trade-in (the near dead Mits) and sale price to accommodate me. It also helped to buy at the end of a month. When I bought the 98 Nissan Frontier in 2000, I had the luxury of planning the purchase. I bought from a dealer. In retrospect, I paid too much, but I still got my money's worth from it. Paid cash for it too. Do not buy a vehicle with a salvage title. I could write another chapter on the tactics the sales people use and how they pressure you into buying. If there were some things that I know now, that I wish I knew then (in my 20s), it's that financing is NOT the thing to do, have someone check out the vehicle, if you can't do it yourself. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Well, I am glad to see that you agree that the environment to create separate landing areas in time or space already exists and it is already on the shoulders of the DZO (or organizers). Just for clarification, who do you mean by 'them'? Perris management or DZOs in general or DZOs that 'allowed' a canopy collision or ??? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker