LouDiamond 1 #251 April 6, 2007 QuoteQuote...... Again, traffic was not an issue as those involved were the only two people attempting to land at that moment in time. ..... ???? huh??? what??? oxymoron??? . Jan, I do understand your brief reply despite it's delivery. However, my mentioning of the lack of traffic/congestion at the time of the accident is in response to the many claims that this only happens due to boogie traffic or congestion in the landing area. The simple fact in both cases is that the entire landing area was available and the air was free of other skydivers(besides those involved) under canopy attempting to land when the accidents occured. That was the salient point I was making."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grue 1 #252 April 10, 2007 Ok, non-swooper entering the discussion, so hold your fire. I realize this is a rather bizarre suggestion, but since for some people the lack of hop 'n' pops seems to be the main issue, is there any reason this wouldn't work? Here's my idea: The main issue with swoop hop 'n' pops seems to be the fact that you have to make multiple passes to give people the ability to set up and separately cleanly. Is there any reason you couldn't do it in a single pass with a tail exit plane in the fastest safe climb the plane can do? First person exits directly over his setup point, next person gets out a few seconds later so is further, but higher so he can get there, and so on until everyone is out and in a clean stack like you'd see being used in an air traffic control situation. You could even organize this by wingload and turn type so people could truly just initiate one-after-the-other and come down safely in a controlled manner. If this were done right (in my mind), you'd almost have to work at getting a collision intentionally to cause one.cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grue 1 #253 April 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteIt's just an accident waiting to happen How do you feel about someone flying their canopy right at you and then turning a 180 at the last possible moment. Under SDAZ's policies this is an accepted maneuver over their north landing area. How could that be possible unless someone sets up for a VERY off-target landing? Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may be), but a swooper is not initiating his 180 at the same point and altitude that a non-swooper is somewhere actually on his final leg, is he? There'd be too much altitude loss for the 180° turner to complete the turn and make it back to the target, if the non-swooper is doing a standard 1000/600/300 pattern, or anything like it.cavete terrae. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #254 April 10, 2007 >Here's my idea: The idea would work fine with a one-otter DZ. At a two-otter DZ, you'd be putting the jumpers out (at say 5000 feet) shortly before the other otter dumped at 12,500. That's the problem with doing it during a boogie, or during normal weekend operations at a DZ like Perris or Eloy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f922i30l.jpg)