ORANGENBLUE 0 #76 March 27, 2007 QuoteHi, This is addressed to all. I find it interesting that there is now discussion about swoopers yelling at some dude with a 135 because he flies a big pattern. That is interesting because the good swoopers fly a big rectangular pattern too. I start a down wind around 1800-1900' a base around 1300-1400, and a turn to final at 1100 or so. I think a lot of swoopers will agree with me that flying a pattern will give them MUCH better results than flying erraticly. I think there needs to be a deliniation in this argument on wheather it is the pattern or teh turn that is killing people. I agree 110%. It would be very difficult for me to be accurate if i didn't fly a verry strict pattern as Spizzzarko has stated. i can say that all of the people that i compete with here in the NW fly a far more consistant pattern than the majority of the rest of the skydivers that i encounter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #77 March 27, 2007 >I think there needs to be a deliniation in this argument on wheather it is >the pattern or teh turn that is killing people. I think it's absolutely the pattern! The 270 is just how some jumpers blow the pattern - but a 360, 720 etc would have the same effect. The issue isn't that people are swooping, or that they are landing fast. The issue is that they're not following the same pattern everyone else is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #78 March 27, 2007 QuoteHi, This is addressed to all. I find it interesting that there is now discussion about swoopers yelling at some dude with a 135 because he flies a big pattern. That is interesting because the good swoopers fly a big rectangular pattern too. I start a down wind around 1800-1900' a base around 1300-1400, and a turn to final at 1100 or so. I think a lot of swoopers will agree with me that flying a pattern will give them MUCH better results than flying erraticly. I think there needs to be a deliniation in this argument on wheather it is the pattern or teh turn that is killing people. Spizzzarko -- Just because you are flying "a" pattern doesn't mean you are flying "the" pattern. "The" pattern starts 800-1000 feet AGL, upwind and to one side of the intended landing. It continues directly downwind and then turns 90 degrees cross wind until just before a spot in line with the intending landing. At that point it makes one final 90 degree turn into the wind and continues straight in for landing. This landing pattern has been established and used by aviators across the world since the beginning of aviation. There are optional ways of joining this pattern from various altitudes and angles, but none of them have ever been from directly above. THIS IS THE ISSUE.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #79 March 27, 2007 ""The" pattern starts 800-1000 feet AGL" I think that you will find many people flying smaller canopies balking at those numbers to start a down wind. That may be cool for your 190, but not for a 96. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #80 March 27, 2007 "The issue is that they're not following the same pattern everyone else is." True... True... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #81 March 27, 2007 Spizzzarko Did you know that wingloading and glide ratio are not linked? It's true. A canopy loaded at 1.3 and another at 2.3 have the exact same glide ratio.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #82 March 27, 2007 QuoteIt still ignores the big picture though IMO and too many skydivers are reading this as a swooper problem. Because of that, they'll never do what THEY need to do to help reduce these fatalities. Non swooper newbie here. It's not only a swooper problem. I've sat and watched landing areas where no one's swooping and I still think "Holy shit, that's a mess." I've seen landing areas where unless I'm the last one down, I'm going to be over on the edges because I'm not comfortable with the pattern enforcement (or, generally, lack thereof), or I'm not comfortable with the number of people who want to land immediately in front of the packing area, or I'm not comfortable with the speed of many of the people landing around me (whether they generate that speed through a 90, 180, 270 or larger turn). But that's just helping keep me safe(r). It's not doing a damn thing about the overall problems but allows me to avoid them by staying as far away from chaos as possible. It doesn't address the root of the issue(s). Too few skydivers are policing each other. Too few people in positions of authority on DZs are policing jumpers. Too many people are "untouchable" because they are popular, or highly experience,d or employees, or all of the above. Too many of us get attitudes when someone tries to discuss an issue. Too many feel it won't happen to them. Too many figure luck = skill. Hell no it's not just a swooping issue. But at least SDAZ is trying to address at least *part* of the problem. It's a hell of a lot better than doing nothing at all, which, frankly, it seems most DZs do."There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #83 March 27, 2007 "If not, perhaps you should learn a little more about how things fly" My, aren't you derogatory tonight. Stow the tude dude and maybe we can continue this discussion. I'm sure HH would not appreciate his moderators being asses, otherwise he would have asked JP and I to be mods. I realize this but many people who fly the higher loaded canopies do not like turning that low as they really sink out from input. Starting at 800-1000 is not always practicle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #84 March 28, 2007 QuoteSpizzzarko Did you know that wingloading and glide ratio are not linked? It's true. A canopy loaded at 1.3 and another at 2.3 have the exact same glide ratio. you lost me on that one.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #85 March 28, 2007 "It's not only a swooper problem." In the words of the lyrical mastermind of our time Cameo I would have to say "Word Up!" You are correct on that matter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #86 March 28, 2007 Bah...you caught me. I, in a fit of uncontrolled and unbridled passion, suggested you might want to learn something. As soon as I posted it though, it occured to me that you would probably take that as an insult so I chaged it, but alas, not quick enough for you to already have reacted. I'm sorry for any confusion there.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #87 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuoteSpizzzarko Did you know that wingloading and glide ratio are not linked? It's true. A canopy loaded at 1.3 and another at 2.3 have the exact same glide ratio. you lost me on that one.. Really? 'Cause I don't wanna fall into a trap here and get accused of somehow being condescending if I explain it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #88 March 28, 2007 True we can hang out in brakes quite a bit but it slows our forward movement down quite a bit too when we are trying to float. So that doesn't help anyone else behind us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #89 March 28, 2007 >you lost me on that one.. Glide angle does not change significantly with loading. Therefore saying that a heavily loaded canopy must turn higher to maintain the same pattern is not really true. (OTOH, things like trim angle DO change glide angle significantly, which is why a Katana can not cover as much distance as a Stiletto.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #90 March 28, 2007 "in a fit of uncontrolled and unbridled passion" I know I bring out th e"passion" in most. Just make sure you scream out my name next time! hahahaaa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #91 March 28, 2007 Quote>you lost me on that one.. Glide angle does not change significantly with loading. Therefore saying that a heavily loaded canopy must turn higher to maintain the same pattern is not really true. (OTOH, things like trim angle DO change glide angle significantly, which is why a Katana can not cover as much distance as a Stiletto.) thats not what I meant, but nevermind. thanks for the laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #92 March 28, 2007 QuoteTrue we can hang out in brakes quite a bit but it slows our forward movement down quite a bit too when we are trying to float. So that doesn't help anyone else behind us. Brakes ain't got nothin' to do with it. Take two identical canopies. One is loaded at 1.3 and another is loaded at 2.3. Both have the exact same glide ratio. The more heavily loaded canopy will go down the glide slope FASTER, but the glide slope remains the same.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #93 March 28, 2007 ok that is nice and all but we are talking about those that will be going down the slope faster in a group that is going quite a bit slower. Also a velocity will have a signifigant steeper glide than that of a sabre 2 or stilletto or spectre ect ect ect. So is the answer to require certain types of canopies for certain applications? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #94 March 28, 2007 QuoteSo is the answer to require certain types of canopies for certain applications? No. The answer is to have everyone to agree to fly in a predictable manner which is why for nearly 100 years "the pattern" has been around. Nobody expects that everyone is going to fly exactly the same wing or way, but flying the pattern gives people a reliable frame of reference by which to judge what other flyers probably will do. By executing a 270 hook directly overhead of the landing area, a person has removed the option for people below him to even begin to understand where he is and what he is doing. THAT is what causes the accidents.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #95 March 28, 2007 can you imagine a cessna trying to land on an aircraft carrier when there is 15 peeps in the pattern and they are all out of fuel? is it the pattern that is the problem, the wing, or the "small" air craft carrier? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #96 March 28, 2007 Quotecan you imagine a cessna trying to land on an aircraft carrier when there is 15 peeps in the pattern and they are all out of fuel? is it the pattern that is the problem, the wing, or the "small" air craft carrier? The example I have used (for years actually) is "can you imagine an airport with airplanes that ossasionally perform a Split-S to land." Now, I don't actually expect you to fully understand what that sentance means. Hell, I don't actually expect most PILOTS to understand what it means, but it usually gets the discussion going about how silly it would be to perform acrobatics in front of other landing aircraft. Or, ya might wanna give this analogy a shot; Next time you're on a two lane road, while traffic is coming, make a fast u-turn for no reason and see how it comes out. But to directly address your question, "is it the pattern that is the problem, the wing, or the "small" air craft carrier?" It ain't the wing, 'cause we all have them and can only fly the ones attached to us. It ain't the aircraft carrier if it's the only one we have to land on. So the issue IS the pattern because it's really the only variable we can control.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks 0 #97 March 28, 2007 my point is... aww fuck it, I don;t know what my point is.. you cant have a broke down cessna landing on an aircraft carrier when there is 14 broke down jets trying to do the same thing. that is unless, the jets have a substantially larger and higher pattern. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #98 March 28, 2007 Quote>I think there needs to be a deliniation in this argument on wheather it is >the pattern or teh turn that is killing people. I think it's absolutely the pattern! Disagree with you here bill - It is stupid canopy pilots - swooper and non swooper alike that is the problem. Unfortunately you can't institute rules to make people smarter, more aware, etc. As for skydive AZ - their toys, their rules - like it or lump it.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #99 March 28, 2007 Quoteaww fuck it, I don;t know what my point is.. Bwahahah . . . at least you're starting to admit it! "you cant have a broke down cessna landing on an aircraft carrier when there is 14 broke down jets trying to do the same thing. that is unless, the jets have a substantially larger and higher pattern." Again and as I stated earlier in my description, there are optional ways of entering the pattern, just none that make any sense whatsoever from ABOVE final. One such way used in aviation is to fly that downwind and crosswind leg a little closer or a little further away depending on what wing you're flying. Ever notice how a "heavy" jet takes a 5 mile final approach to land, but a little Cessna 150 takes maybe 1/8 to 1/4 mile? Believe it or not, coordinating the landings of both types of aircraft on the same runway can be done.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #100 March 28, 2007 QuoteQuote>I think there needs to be a deliniation in this argument on wheather it is >the pattern or teh turn that is killing people. I think it's absolutely the pattern! Disagree with you here bill - It is stupid canopy pilots - swooper and non swooper alike that is the problem. Unfortunately you can't institute rules to make people smarter, more aware, etc. As for skydive AZ - their toys, their rules - like it or lump it. You can stop graduating them or kicking them off your DZ IF your concern for safety out weighs your concern for money.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f922i30l.jpg)