Canopy Collision video (thankfully non fatal)

Quote

Quote

I am a newbie myself

Ah my friend, that's where you make a mistake. See, this person isn't a noob because he is wearing a camera and we all know you need 200 jumps before strapping a camera on.

(Note: Sarcasm...)

I wasn't calling the person in the video a newbie. I have no idea who they are. They could have 10 jumps or 10,000 for all I know. Everyone wants to make this about the camera all of a sudden. Do you really think that if there was no camera on his head on this particular jump that things would have somehow gone miraculously better? I personally have no desire to jump a camera, or geek one for that matter (I'm a 36 year old newb, my glory days are long gone ). I just have a problem with the blanket ideology that "cameras" are the issue. People can fly like shit, and make poor decision's whether a camera is present or not.

Quote

Break any link in the chain and you stand a good chance of preventing the incident.

YEP! +1

Quote

Quote

I am a newbie myself

Ah my friend, that's where you make a mistake. See, this person isn't a noob because he is wearing a camera and we all know you need 200 jumps before strapping a camera on.

(Note: Sarcasm...)

Actually, I edited this post because I realized it was a GoPro and we all know that;'s not a distraction as it seems they're strapping them to AFF students now.

Carry on...haha

It might be a really good thing he didn't chop. Some of those lines might have been wrapped around that camera he shouldn't have been wearing.

Quote

Good chance it would have, yes. He might have looked at his canopy instead of staying focused on what he was shooting, and that might have made him realize the damage to it. He may have been looking around more before he pulled had he not been staring straight down at the DZ.

I don't believe for a second he was actually concentrating on what he was shooting. Not only do I think he should not have been wearing a camera, I'm thinking he shouldn't have been on a 4 way.

+1 - if he had been concentrating on what he was shooting and wanting to look cool, wouldn't he have wanted to get his first chop on video?
That video looked like the flight response kicked in when he needed the fight response...

That was drilled into me.
1~ is canopy there?
2~ is canopy square?
3~ can you steer it?
4~ can you flare it?
If answer is no to any its gone, altitude permitting.
Common sense tells me if I cant see the DZ, The plane can land with my ass sitting in it.

I think he missed that part!

Good on you .

That was awesome!!!!

Dude...take it easy. I wasn't dissing you at all. I was making a joke about the camera, and even included a sarcasm comment.

I'm not concerned with the fact that he had a camera on, my comment related to the fact that it's pretty apparent that this guy is a fairly new jumper, made a bunch of poor decisions, broke a bunch of rules and survived.

The camera had little to do with the actual incident but VERY likely contributed to it. That being said...if the other canopy was lower when they collided... Lines+GoPro+No cutaway on helmet (guessing) = Very likely a fatality.


Regardless, it's pretty apparent that this is a newer jumper, or maybe someone with enough jumps to be doing poor-way and carrying a camera, but it seems like they may need to review a few basic training regimes before jumping again. This jump was a shit-show from beginning to end.

Mistakes I saw in that video:
-If it was supposed to be an RW jump...it was terrible
-If he was supposed to be filming the 2 way...it was terrible.
-Tracking...was terrible
-Deployment was stable and seemed ok.
-Reaction to an oncoming canopy could have avoided this
-Not looking at your canopy after a collision
-Not doign a controllability check
-Not cutting away an apparently deformed and barely flying canopy

Basically, the list above indicates to me that this was a very new jumper, probably in the 75-150 jump range and had no business carrying a camera and yes, it likely distracted him because he was trying to get a mega cool video to put on youtube so his friends can see how bad-ass he is.

This guy is lucky to be alive after making so many mistakes..glad I don't jump there...

Quote

... it likely distracted him because he was trying to get a mega cool video to put on youtube so his friends can see how bad-ass he is.

Then why did he purposely not video that gnarly mangled canopy after the collision? That would have made great video to show his mates... "see all those broken lines? Yeah, I landed that" [hard_points++].

I doubt this guy was paying much attention at all to his camera. Sure he lacks the ability to shoot video and shouldn't be wearing a camera, but the biggest contribution his camera made was to give the mob of angry skygods living under the dz.com bridge something to hang him for. And that's a shame because they should be hanging his instructors and mentors for not teaching him enough basic RW skills to survive a 4-way.

Instead the overwhelming learning opportunity we can take from this thread is "if it ain't on video, it never happened". Or worse still "if it ain't on video, it won't happen".

You did read the rest of my post didn't you?

The camera thing is a hot topic because GoPro's aren't being condiered cameras due to their size. That being said, the rest of my post pointed out some other issues. I don't know who his instructors are, so hopefully they will read this thread or hopefully, have already had a chat.

Dropzone.com is hilarious. Everyone fights against GoPro's because they watched a video where it hooked a guy's cutaway handle and chopped his main on exit, but when then in this incident, this guy had every right to jump a camera and we need to support him because it didn't "cause" the incident. Sure, it didn't "cause" it, but it was a factor, and was clearly being worn by someone that doesn't have the skill to be wearing it. Simply as that.

Sorry, I shouldn't have picked on your post. But I tend to think the venom directed at cameras is overshadowing the real problems.

Quote

What a C**T!

He appeared to have zero awareness of anyone else that he jumped with from the moment he left the plane.

Where does this bozo jump?

My impression also. What was he looking at and why? He should have been finding and getting to his friends. Then, not even a glance at the canopy or altimeter, after a canopy collision?

Regardless of other factors, his skill level dictates no more camera for now. Hope they made him leave it on the ground after that.

Quote

And that's a shame because they should be hanging his instructors and mentors for not teaching him enough basic RW skills to survive a 4-way.

Before doing a 4-way, one should be reasonably proficient at doing a 3-way and before doing a 3-way one should be very proficient at doing a 2-way.

This guy could lose himself on a solo.............and he's retarded to have landed that piece of shit.

yeah, and to add to that if you can't fly relative to others then you have no business having a camera on your helmet.

The only good thing about having the camera is to illustrate just how big of a dumbass this guy was. I hope he learns the right lessons from this.

Quote

>Then why did he purposely not video that gnarly mangled canopy after the collision?

Who knows? Maybe he was thinking "oh shit if anyone sees what that thing looks like under canopy they're gonna ground me." Or maybe he had planned to video the landing area and went over it a few times before takeoff - and we do what we train to do in emergencies. Or he may have just plain freaked. Hard to say.

Or maybe he saw more than the camera...eyes moved head didn't?

I can understand him not cutting away, sometimes you are in an unfamiliar situation and make a bad choices.

The actual skydive is what blew me away, all he does is hold that position until pull time. He doesn't look for his buddies, he doesn't turn or do anything. (it didn't even look fun)

I get all the other issues about the camera etc and not cutting away, but what the hell was the goal on that jump? to fall and look in 1 direction avoiding doing anything?

Quote

>Then why did he purposely not video that gnarly mangled canopy after the collision?

Who knows? Maybe he was thinking "oh shit if anyone sees what that thing looks like under canopy they're gonna ground me." Or maybe he had planned to video the landing area and went over it a few times before takeoff - and we do what we train to do in emergencies. Or he may have just plain freaked. Hard to say.

He would have had to look up to manage that thought.

Does anyone know his altitude after the assessment that the lines were blown?

If he was at 700'ish feet or even a grand...maybe he determined it wasn't safe to cutaway?

Quote

Quote

>Then why did he purposely not video that gnarly mangled canopy after the collision?

Who knows? Maybe he was thinking "oh shit if anyone sees what that thing looks like under canopy they're gonna ground me." Or maybe he had planned to video the landing area and went over it a few times before takeoff - and we do what we train to do in emergencies. Or he may have just plain freaked. Hard to say.

He would have had to look up to manage that thought.

At least he found a nice safe place to hide the video where nobody will ever see it.

Good question on altitude.

1:50 alti check, about 3400'
pulls soon after with a snivel
1:53-1:58 canopy inflation, fully open at end
2:02 collision
some diving after collision
2:13 finishes a turn 'to head home'
3:21 landing

With the timing, he should be open at a reasonable alt, although losing some extra right after the collision, and then turning around to get into his approach pattern. Still, 1 min 19 sec from collision to landing is fairly fast when one isn't diving a really small canopy.

I figure altitude might have been a little tight but not terrible. For example, after collision, recovery, and an reflexive turn for home, say something like 1600'. But who knows.

But in any case, as best can be told from the video, it wasn't a case of carefully looking over the canopy, doing a control check, checking alti and then deciding "I'll stay with it". It was more a case of just being glad to be OK, having a flying canopy, and heading for home.

Quote

I really wish he'd have looked up...I'd like to have seen exactly how bad the canopy was.

probably not as bad as this one after a premature followed by collision in free fall...

https://vimeo.com/36065919

Quote

That was drilled into me.
1~ is canopy there?
2~ is canopy square?
3~ can you steer it?
4~ can you flare it?
If answer is no to any its gone, altitude permitting.
Common sense tells me if I cant see the DZ, The plane can land with my ass sitting in it.

5~ If you suffer a collision, see broken lines hanging, & actually can hear extra material flapping in the breeze? You might want to at least look up...