DocPop

I believe it depends on the exact canopy you are flying but the theory is that, particularly with a tailwind, using some brakes decreases your sink rate and therefore gives you a longer canopy ride during which to cover the ground. Rears may be better than brakes on some canopies. The advice I was given was to try both and use the accuracy trick to determine which is helping more. Personally I use brakes because rears are so effing tiring! "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I have experienced very off heading openings with my Katana in my Infinity when I put the risers under both flaps. This problem was resolved by stowing them on top of the one set of flaps (as you would with a Wings etc). What is VSE's actual recommendation on this as the manual does not seem to address it? "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

There is nothing wrong with landing downwind if you have to. Good job on not turning low just to face the wind. But.... ...do you mean to say that the only way you knew that it was time to flare was from looking at your alti??? This is a big problem and you need to get some instruction on this, possible going back on the radio. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

My view is that I would rather have more time to deal with a mal, do my post-opening admin, get back to the DZ, fit into a logical place in the landing pattern, set up for my front riser turn etc than to have an extra 5 seconds of freefall. I regularly pull at 4,000'. Personally I think low pulling is an unnecessary risk. But then I suppose so is swooping so whatever. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Why are you attacking me? I am posting here trying to add value and provide legitimate suggestions. You know nothing. Half those jumps are in the past 5 months. Fuck you and stick to the point. Currency does NOT automatically make someone a heads-up safe canopy pilot. So your thinly veiled attack is also wrong. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

How about stripping someone of S&TA status if an investigation shows an accident was entirely predictable and no action was taken (eg. repeated safety violations) ? If it needs to have more teeth than that, then those who lose S&TA status could be "named and shamed" in Parachutist. Hurt feelings might be better than hurt skydivers. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

But it isn't getting into students' heads!! What I am talking about here is an additional course for new jumpers cleared for to self-supervise (exactly when this should happen has been discussed previously). I think the things I listed are important enough to warrant repetition in an environment solely focused on canopy work. My experience is that newer jumpers are not good at accuracy, pattern flying etc. Maybe your experience is different. Anyway you look at it - unacceptable numbers of people are dying. Please feel free to suggest improvements, but merely shooting down ideas without giving better alternatives is not very productive. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

So how about we look at what might need to be included in these courses. Let's assume for this that there will be a compulsory basic course and then an advanced one. I'll start things of, please feel free to add to the lists. I am not trying to make these lists exhaustive - just enough to give someone more 'feel' for their canopy to make them fly safer. Neither is a how-to-swoop course. Basic Accuracy trick Planning, flying and adjusting a pattern Planning an off-landing Flat turns for obstacle avoidance Flaring correctly (height, speed and technique) Advanced Stall point on rears and toggles Braked approach landings Downwind and crosswind landings Landing using double fronts (?) "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Less of the 'peace and love' stuff and more practical canopy piloting tips. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Not if it's packed in your container. Are you seriously suggesting that banning HP canopies is a better option that education? You won't get my support on that one. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

The problem with this is that of enforcement. There is already a requirement for USPA DZs to separate high performance and "normal" landings, but it doesn't happen in all cases and there don't seem to be any consequences for DZs that ignore it. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Why B? Because I don't think there should be any more obstacles put in the way of a jumper attaining their A-license. I think it is an important goal for students to attain and making it more difficult would be demotivational. However, I don't believe that anyone should be allowed to progress beyond 'A' without further potentially life-saving canopy tuition. I agree with the sentiment that perhaps an A license should come with some further restrictions such as not jumping at boogies or with any more that a 4 way (for example) as an added incentive to get the 'B' as well as for safety reasons. Just my opinion. I seem to be the only low-timer chipping in on this discussion so I am prepared to be swayed by others arguments. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I agree. Which is why I said my opinion is that it should be a pre-B-license requirement. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Dave - I know we have had our disagreements in the past (mostly relating to what I, myself, was doing), but I have to say that I agree 100% with what you are saying here. I felt that the AFF course was totally unsatisfactory when it came to even basic canopy control, let alone actually understanding how a canopy flies and what you can do with it. I was one of the minority who went on to seek out (multiple) canopy courses and can attest to how useful they really are for the newbie. We HAVE to get someone to mandate more canopy training. If the USPA won't act, then maybe we should "go over their heads" to the FAA. Or at least threaten to. My personal opinion is that we should let people get their A-license and then mandate more canopy training before their B. I say this because I do think it is important to have some early point of achievement in today's instant gratification society. Thanks for taking this and running with it. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

[edit] Never mind, I think that says it all. What do you think it says? "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

SO, take care of your gear (keep your closing loop in good shape), pack your pilot chute in a way that allows for extration if you do have a loop break. Or jump a pull-out. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I'd think that would be the only way to have 2 out. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

This is a very dangerous path to follow. Everyone knows you don't ask for downsizing advice on dz.com There is only ever one answer - don't. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I see where you're going with this....landing traffic, right? No, I do regular skydives, but I land away from the other jumpers and accept a longer walk. I only jump for the landings so that is acceptable for me. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Thanks for doing this, Wendy. It is very hard data to interpret due to the different numbers of jumpers in each category, different category sizes etc, but this is definitely a starting point. The one thing that does stand out here is that canopy fatalities as a percentage of total fatalities is much lower for the 1-100 group vs the others (8.8% vs 21-37% for all the other bands). This could be due to a number of things including less aggressive wings, less aggressive landing styles or less ability to deal with other issues than landing. The median data does tend to suggest that lowturn fatalities do affect higher jump # people than other accidents, and I suppose all the above reasons could explain that. Thanks again - interesting! "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I assume these are total fatalities, rather than canopy/landing related incidents? Can you confirm? Thanks. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Well put, Dave. I graduated AFF feeling extremely unprepared for the canopy part of the skydive (I never jumped anything larger than a 200). I believe that there should be some more mandatory canopy control tuition for the B and maybe even C licenses. We continue to require jumpers to perform freefall skills for license progression when, as you rightly point out, the real danger is from canopy accidents (both landings and collisions). There needs to be more than just accurate landings as an assessment of canopy skill for licenses beyond the A. The UK has Canopy Handling (1&2) and Canopy Piloting (1&2) syllabuses which would make a great starting point for this. Perhaps young pilots who wish to advance/downsize faster than the recommendations could be allowed to do so if they pass these 'advanced' courses. In other words, you want to do it, you have to earn it with skills, not just by not dying a certain number of times. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I take your point, but are reliable non-fatal incident data available? If not, we just have to work with what we can get. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

I have a mudflap mounted Viso and it is excellent for sit-flying and under canopy. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA

Not trying to make you do a load of work on this (!!!), but could you post the medians? Thanks. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA