Bolas

10 mins ago.... watched an exceptionally experienced swooper come way too close to an AFF student that had wandered where they should not have been. Tandem vidiot sets up and begins his turn only to find the student below him (the student was well out of the normal holding area). Yes...he aborted and to his credit, actually landed well away from the main and alternate/swoop pond areas. Can/will everyone do this? Apparently not. Had he "really cleared" his airspace, he shouldn't have set up for the HP turns in the first place, right?... Have you asked him if he saw the student prior? Proof positive that if the primary scan is missed/misjudged that an alter/abort in the turn works.

How often do you see existing rules enforced for all equally or at all? What makes anyone think that this new one being proposed will be any different? Human nature: If you just tell someone not to do something, they're likely to want to do it more, perhaps out of spite. If they get away with it without consequence, the authority of those that made the rule is dminished in their perspective. If you show and tell them what the consequences are, you'll get much further. Invariably, you'll come across those that refuse to learn, say they'll be safe, or insist they're good enough to pull it off: all without explaining how they'll do it. Congratulations!!! You've now identified the target group most of these rules were needed for. Adjust their attitudes appropriately.

And this wasn't? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

1. Before adding additional rules including the ones below, make sure the ones that exist already are enforced for all. Adding new rules that aren't enforced is just a "feel good" thing. 2. Eliminate FMD sets the pattern. 3. On L&V days establish a landing direction for the main landing area prior or even better yet, use a tetrahedron. If someone doesn't want to land that way they have to land in the alternate, no matter how many jumps they have. (This may or may not include tandems as they usually seem to need every bit of wind available sometimes from my observations) 4. Education, education, education, especially for people who break the rules above. Should they refuse or continue to break them, grounding or bannings may be in order. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

I would too but lets phrase the question better: "Do you think someone performing a modern setup and carve turn, that identifies their bailouts prior and initiates only if there is separation by space or time and then alter/aborts if there is an unforseen issue can avoid injuring someone else?" Especially want to make that last part clear as the issue is collisions with others: not the ground or other inanimate objects. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

No they were not. The majority of S-turners and sock followers that are afraid to land any direction but into the wind are the jumpers who have been around longer. They view the canopy that saves their life as a "neccessary evil" and give it and patterns little to no thought. I'd be willing to bet there were more canopy collisions and near misses in the past but since the speeds were lower the consequences were less. As for the drunk driving anology Bill likes to keep throwing, people used to jump drunk and on drugs alot more too. The lack of landing pattern discipline and bad behaviors are not new, it's just the speeds have changed. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Schumer must have just watched this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477080/ Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Funny how the more the gov't tries to help, the more damage it does. Remember Cash for Clunkers and the huge car sales drop afterwards? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Have the rules changed similarly for first time buyers? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Were you able to put $0 down? If the Feds keep supporting these sorts of programs, they're not going to be far off. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Are you talking about Eloy? You'd be wrong then. Last I heard if you wanted to do a turn bigger than 180 you had to do it in the desert. Has this changed? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

If it's so low risk why aren't banks offering it? Seems it would be a great source of new clients. So currently they have to be solid gold creditworthy, What to say the standards aren't going to be forged or change to include more? Completely different as those are/were gov't employees. So being a former govt. employee makes you more credit worthy? Can you explain? It's not a matter of credit worthiness, more of it being a controlled scope. * It's much more limited. * Also know at least one piece of their work history wasn't forged. * While it's a loan, it's an employee/former employee benefit much like many companies offer. Should a large number of forclosures occur, because of this, I'd still expect them to raise the requirements. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Not yet, but sure seems the way some people are trying to head. 1 dropzone bans turns over 180. USPA sets a separation by time or space requirement. 1 DZ bans turns over 90. Another DZ does it. People are now wanting both time and space separation. Some are even wanting to eliminate all canopies loaded over a certain wingloading, Meanwhile, landing patterns are still a mess with S-turners, sock followers, and outdated systems such as FMD. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

That the problem with your opinion Bolas. Everyone who does a big turn thinks they have cleared their airspace. If you want any likelihood to do a big turn, get your own pass. Some may think it others may just say it. If doing modern carving turns they can alter/abort to their predesignated bailout area or perhaps another alternate. People really need to understand the difference between ols school low toggle/riser hooks/spirals and modern safer adjustable carving turns. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

If it's so low risk why aren't banks offering it? Seems it would be a great source of new clients. So currently they have to be solid gold creditworthy, What to say the standards aren't going to be forged or change to include more? Completely different as those are/were gov't employees. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

It's both. I'm of the opinion like the USPA one should be allowed the opportunity to swoop after a skydive provided they have a separate area and/or clear airspace. That's just the opportunity. If while setting up, there's any issues they either hold until clear or land normal. If in their carving turn (not low hook, not spiral) they have any issues, they alter/abort and use their bailout plan that they determined beforehand. If they want a higher likelihood of being able to swoop, then they should get a separate pass. The other side of this is this is the second time all swoopers were blamed and punished for the actions of two people who were not even using modern techniques and practices. In the most recent case a jumper violated an existing rule that may not have been enforced consistently. The DZ has now banned all turns over 90. Are you not seeing a pattern here? A DZ/USPA does not intervene when there's potentially dangerous issues with a persons attitude going on, selectively enforces existing rules, and when something happens all swoopers are the scapegoat and are pushed further away. Additionally, if you want to kill something off, banning isn't the way to do it. Much more effective to make it more and more cumbersome to do. "I can fly with my friends, but if I want to swoop a little I have to go to this other DZ and they only allow swooping on hop and pop loads..." Sure most of the existing people will still put up with it to do it, but many new potential swoopers may not bother. Additionally if you push swoopers off a dropzone there goes about 90% or more of that DZs collective canopy skills. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

And the people they kill, No. Hence why I said themselves... Those people aren't "endangered" just possibly impacted. Most whuffos would probably be surprised our number of deaths is so low... I'm looking at this from all perspectives: from those in our sport in various disciplines, those outside our sport, etc. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

So the government is not backing these loans like the article stated? Do you have any proof of that? FHA loans are government backed. They require a minimum 3.5% down payment. Nothing's changed. No one will ever buy a house with $1 down. We require a $500 deposit to build someone a new home. This builder is simply waiving the required deposit amount to contract to purchase the home. The builder is not financing the home. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Imagine a young person who just left University with a large chunk of debt in student loans. Now add in a modest loan for a decent used car, living expenses, sending mom & pop a few bucks a month to help them out, etc. Now tack on a lease on an average apartment where they most likely live alone. Fo most people on an entry level college grad job there isn't much left over to save. It may take them 5-10 years to get rid of enough debt to start saving for your 20% down payment, then another 5-10 years to have the money saved up. There is nothing wrong with a 0 down loan as long as the home is valued at the amount loaned, and the borrower is capable of making the payments. Where problems arise is when lenders start loaning out funds to people unable to repay or have a bad track record on repayment. I personally know people who are giving up a lot to pay off their mortgage even though the home is no longer vlued anywhere near what they owe on it, and I know a couple cowards who are fully capable of making their payments but chose instead to walk away and allow the bank to foreclose just because they didn't want to continue paying on a devalued home. 20% down? Sure, in some cases. But 0% down can be perfectly acceptable in many cases as well. As stated above, I'd be fine with it if a bank was holding the loans or selling them to another bank. Sluffing off potentially bad loans on the government is where I draw the line. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

So the government is not backing these loans like the article stated? Do you have any proof of that? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

And what I see is paranoia. If you are not part of the problem you have nothing to fear. Sparky Now you sound like Homeland Security when they trample peoples rights... The only right I see you arguing for is the right to endanger other people while doing what you want where you want. No. Only the right for people to "endanger" themselves. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/112677/new-homes-for-dollar-down-moneywatch?mod=realestate-buy Developer Offers New Homes for $1 Down Here's a crazy thought, get rid of or change the rules on these programs so they can't be exploited like this. If a bank/investment bank was willing to provide the loans (and not just sell them to Fannie/Freddie) I'd have no issue. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Going through a hoop in a corset with a potato head piece? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

What have I said that's ridiculous? Is Lodi not in process of appealing the fines/judgement they received for improper maintenance? Do you think we're better off making decisions without more facts and root cause analysis? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

And what I see is paranoia. If you are not part of the problem you have nothing to fear. Sparky Now you sound like Homeland Security when they trample peoples rights... You poor picked on child. If the FAA comes down on skydiving you will think “Homeland Security” is a Boy Scout Meeting. They are all powerful and there is no recourse to what they decide. So you go on living in your la la state of mind it’s not my problem anymore. Sparky You're right. There is no appeals process to FAA fines and judgements. Yep, only a child in a la la state of mind would want actual analysis of the data we have (also determine what we don't have) so we can base our reactions on facts. A mature adult apparently prefers reactionary half cocked heresay and fear mongering... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.