airtwardo 7 #51 December 8, 2009 What does everyone say about the effort to remove the night jump requirements from the D license? We've beaten that horse pretty close to death in other threads...but as long as we're discussion reasons to implement change or not, I'm game! No ~don't need to dumb it down for people afraid of the dark. IMO the reason for these requirements, both accuracy & night jumps is to actually demonstrate the basic skills needed to land a parachute anywhere at anytime. Been discussed before that some feel it's also a good test in as far as it throws something at you, that ya can't really 'train' to do...ya just prepare mentally and go do it. The ' D ' is the highest rating available, in order to qualify to hold it, I believe one should have at least a working knowledge and some general experience in regard to the overall basics...It's dark 1/2 the day, why not jump through the hoops and get some moonlight time in case you ever need it. Had the same argument with my daughter not wanting to practice parallel parking until competent enough for a license..."I'll just make sure I never need to" Can't or won't do it? ~Then don't apply for the license! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #52 December 8, 2009 >The ' D ' is the highest rating available, in order to qualify to hold it, I >believe one should have at least a working knowledge and some general >experience in regard to the overall basics...It's dark 1/2 the day, why not >jump through the hoops and get some moonlight time in case you ever >need it. Agreed. And if you really don't want to/can't get it, you can always get a restricted D license. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
strop45 0 #53 December 8, 2009 QuoteI'll just make sure I never need toNot disagreeing, but note that its easier to ensure that you don't have to jump at night, than to be sure you will never want to parallel park. I don't really have an issue with the accuracy requirements, but do think that they aren't the complete answer to off-landings. When trying for accuracy, I usually use double front risers to give more speed and a longer plane out. Its then relatively easy to 'touch' down near the spot. Landing out is a different game altogether. From my limited experience, I have found it difficult to judge wind without the usual visual clues and this factor alone makes accuracy more difficult. With a round, clearly the ability to land in a backyard was very important, with a modern canopy it is less so? It seems to me that provided that you make a decision high enough, you will generally find something better than a backyard. Perhaps I'm wrong, how many people have actually landed their modern canopies in backyards?The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #54 December 8, 2009 Agreed. And if you really don't want to/can't get it, you can always get a restricted D license. Yeah but that's kinda like kissin' yer sister through a screen door. It's close to ~but 'not quite' the real thing & pretty much goes against the whole idea. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 180 #55 December 8, 2009 I have landed out many times over the years and found myself in a backyard once. We'll get back to that in a minute. Many jumpers get to skydive in very wide open spaces. Eloy and Perris come to mind first. When you always jump at a wide open DZ it is easy to let your canopy skills stay at a certain level without progressing. You look down and always see lots of open area, even on bad spots. Now go jump at the Ranch and be off abit with the spot. You had better be able to land with the rows of an apple orchard. Been there done that at the Ranch. So back to my backyard landing. Guess what DZ that was near? Skydive Arizona. I landed right in a Toltec backyard while the nice resident was out hanging her laundry. It was the best spot to land due to a bunch of dust devils at the moment. The ol' double whammy under canopy. Accuracy and judging the wind under your main and reserve canopies will save your life someday. I lived at Skydive AZ for a few years. You wouldn't believe the canopy carnage from folks hitting non moving objects all around the DZ. Get with an instructor to work out your visuals under canopy to help judge your touchdown area. You WILL need it someday. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
faulknerwn 38 #56 December 8, 2009 Its really about attitude towards learning. I'm at a small dz but the young jumpers watch me land in the peas 99% of my jumps. They desire to learn that kind of accuracy skils and I regularly spread my knowledge. I have guys with a 100 jumps here on Sabre2's and Pilots and such who can land in the peas all the time. Its not hard to learn, but you just have to make an effort. Backyard landings - let's see - my tightest landing ever was in Sebastian on a CRW load. We put 20 jumpers down in a TIGHT backyard surrounded by power lines, trees, a fence and a house. All CRWdogs so they were comfortable with canopy control and all landed fine. The little old lady who lived in the house couldn't figure out why everyone always wanted to land there (hers was by far the best spot I could get to) because a freefaller had tried to land there 6 months before us and accidently went through her roof because he couldn't pull it off.. A friend of mine told me a story once about being on a hundred way somewhere in Virginia. After opening, they all realized they were over a forest. My buddy looked down and saw a small opening in the forest and started aiming for it. He then realized 50 other people were going there too. He made it in fine but he said people were landing in trees and stuff.. Where else - I've landed in a McDonalds parking lot before - best out I had.. I actually landed in a backyard a few weeks ago by choice - long spot and couldn't get back. I could have made a farmer's field but would have had to climb a barbed wire fence to exit. There was a nice manicured backyard that I felt very comfortable landing my 120 in and chose to land in there rather than have to climb the fence. I didn't have too, but being comfortable with accuracy did give me more choices. Oh yeah - my most recent off landing - last jump at Nationals at Spaceland this year. Landed off (earlier that day had landed at an explosives factory and a horse track so spots weren't perfect). This jump was just off the end of the airport but happily there was a bar right there. Landed in the small grass parking lot with a friend and went inside and bought some beer :-) And that was on my Diablo 88. I feel just as comfortable setting my 88 down off-field as I do my 135. But it takes practice. And being comfortable landing accurately will help you avoid "get-home-itis" after iffy spots. If you're practiced at landing accurately, then you don't sweat landing off so much and don't feel the pressure to get back to the field you know.. Learning accuracy is really important to saving your life. We have had 2 fatalities this year of highly experienced people on small canopies who couldn't set them down safely where they needed too. Learning accuracy is way more important than doing 90's and practicing swooping. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #57 December 8, 2009 >Where else - I've landed in a McDonalds parking lot before - best out I had. I had to put a tandem into a McDonald's parking lot years and years ago. On the plus side I had some money with me so I could buy my student and I a soda, and we had a van back then which (eventually) came to pick us up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #58 December 8, 2009 QuoteWhen trying for accuracy, I usually use double front risers to give more speed and a longer plane out. Its then relatively easy to 'touch' down near the spot. Landing out is a different game altogether. From my limited experience, I have found it difficult to judge wind without the usual visual clues and this factor alone makes accuracy more difficult. If you realize that landing out is a different game, then why when you have the chance to safely practice spot landings (on the DZ) would you use a technique not suited to off-field spot landings? If you practice the things that trouble you when they're not a neccisity, then you'll be preparred for when they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
strop45 0 #59 December 8, 2009 QuoteIf you realize that landing out is a different game, then why when you have the chance to safely practice spot landings (on the DZ) would you use a technique not suited to off-field spot landings? Agreed. My point is that the requirements of 2m don't necessarily assist with off-landings and that maybe requirements for touching down and stopping moving would be more appropriate if the object is to assist jumpers with backyard landings. BTW to the OP question, my answer is that we all lie, the questions are how much, whats at stake and who gains from it. Personally I couldn't see any good reason to fake entries in my logbook, but don't always get them signed, and one day....The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
danielcroft 2 #60 December 8, 2009 I'm going to be doing some CRW coaching next year (I'm at the Ranch so it gets cold & snowy & I'm too lame to do a clear & pull when it's below 32 on the ground) because I really want to learn canopy control. I landed off on jump 9 in the field just south of the Ranch - no big deal. I landed off some way from the Ranch after a bad spot and not realizing in freefall that we were so far away (267). I've also landed off right next to the Ranch in someones back yard (273 - amusing story but I'm not telling!). It was pretty big though, I wouldn't call it all that tight. I've had a little bit of practice at it. I've done one night jump and really enjoyed it but I have pretty good night vision, still have to do my night RW jump. I have friends who don't have good depth perception at night so I doubt they'll ever do night jumps. That's not the same as too scared though so I don't know if it's fair to say that they don't deserve the license. I'm not really saying that they do either, just making the point. I wouldn't say that I could land anywhere on any of the canopies I've had, to be honest, I'm not sure. I don't fear landing off, if I'm not going to make it back, I'm landing off so figure it out. I've used the accuracy trick to figure it out & then work out the best place to land based on what I had. So I guess, in that sense, the accuracy concept works but I don't know how effective that would be landing in a tiny back yard, I just don't think a pattern lends itself to that kind of landing. I'm not saying that the accuracy trick isn't useful, it absolutely is, just that if I'm trying to land in a tiny space, can I even see the place I'm landing when I'm that far away? I don't know the answer to these questions, I'm not posing rhetorical questions, I genuinely don't know because it hasn't happened. When/if it does, all I know is that I've practiced canopy control, have been comfortable landing off when necessary and I've performed BillV's canopy downsizing checklist. I don't know what else you can have to prepare yourself for a really tiny landing area. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #61 December 8, 2009 Quote I'll just make sure I never need to Not disagreeing, but note that its easier to ensure that you don't have to jump at night, than to be sure you will never want to parallel park. ~~~ Knew that was coming And to re-hash the rebuttal~ 'insure you don't have to' might be possible in a perfect world, but few of us get to jump there. Might just as well say it, of not knowing your emergency procedures...just insure you don't have to. The longer your in it, the more things you do, the greater the possibility some place, some time, for some reason...you just may find it unavoidable. I don't really have an issue with the accuracy requirements, but do think that they aren't the complete answer to off-landings. When trying for accuracy, I usually use double front risers to give more speed and a longer plane out. Its then relatively easy to 'touch' down near the spot. ~~~Then you don't have the whole set of tools you need. That system works just fine in a set of specific circumstances, but as you appear to be understanding ~has it's definable limits. It's not hard to build up the various types of skills you need to confidently set down safely most anywhere. Like any type of technical physical endeavour, it does take some commitment regarding study and practice...this stuff isn't rocket surgery, stupid old farts like me can handle it! Landing out is a different game altogether. From my limited experience, I have found it difficult to judge wind without the usual visual clues and this factor alone makes accuracy more difficult. With a round, clearly the ability to land in a backyard was very important, with a modern canopy it is less so? It seems to me that provided that you make a decision high enough, you will generally find something better than a backyard. Perhaps I'm wrong, how many people have actually landed their modern canopies in backyards? ~~~ I'm a demonstration jumper, so in fact I tend to land in backyards, and ever smaller places rather regularly. But to address your point- Again keep in mind not all things that happen on every jump are 'planned'. Like I said, you just may find yourself some time down the road in a situation unlike you've ever been exposed to. The confidence of having the whole bag of tricks to reach into where skills are concerned will most likely get you through what your facing. And conversely, that lack of confidence and/or knowledge might negatively effect proper decision making & the action required. We all know we do what we practice when crunch time comes. There are times, attempting something you've never done before or know little about, especially under stress...gets ya an ambulance bill. Removing the 'weak skills' link from the chain of disaster is more than just suggested or desirable... it's imperative! It's insane not to work diligently on this stuff ~ Considering the consequences! Also...I know we're talking mains here, but the principals are the same for reserves. We've all seen the vids of AAD's putting people in backyards, with VERY little time to set-up & land. These are life saving tools...basic SKILLS that if neglected or disregarded, just may cost you more than you ever thought. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,890 #62 December 8, 2009 Quote .It's dark 1/2 the day, why not jump through the hoops and get some moonlight time in case you ever need it. Had the same argument with my daughter not wanting to practice parallel parking until competent enough for a license..."I'll just make sure I never need to" Under what circumstances would one "NEED" to land at night? And don't give the "sunset load" nonsense, since a "D" is not required to get on a sunset load.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybill 22 #63 December 8, 2009 QuotePerhaps my search strategies are weak. I can’t find a discussion about this. I have come to the conclusion that many jumpers lack the integrity to log their jumps accurately. ++ I know of a jumper who admitted to falsifying log entries to show night jumps in order to qualify for a D-license. ++ I know of jumpers who have falsified many log entries to show sufficient 2m accuracy jumps for a C-license. I suspect all sorts of other “pencil whipping” or “gun decking” occurs in logbooks every day. Particularly sad to me is the lack of any sense of shame by these folks. There seems to be a complete lack of a sense of personal integrity. Integrity seems to have been replaced with a sense of “It is only a logbook, it doesn’t really matter.” The concept of telling the truth for its own sake seems lost. Why do I care? I care only because decisions are sometimes made on the basis of logbooks. Some of these decisions are inconsequential, some have potential negative consequences for the jumper, some have potential negative consequences for OTHERS who will rely on the belief that the jumper has the skills reflected in his or her logbook. I guess that this is just another manifestation of the unrestrained selfish/narcissistic attitudes and behavior that I note in far too many skydivers. Fortunately, there are many jumpers who demonstrate sound character, despite the lack of it around them. Hi GLIDE, Yup, everybody pretty much covered it all the way down to the Kurt and Amanda show !! Just a side note for ya', at my old Hammond Airport, La., where I was a Jr. High School kid Airport bum. My buddies and I would try to lurk rides from pilots flying their J-3's and Airknockers on Sundays, 'would hear pilots talk about logging "P-51" time and then smirk!! They weren't talking about the North American Avia. P-51 "Mustang" either, it was the fabulous "Parker 51" Fountain Pen!!!! "Make all your log book entries neat and in ink!!"SCR-2034, SCS-680 III%, Deli-out Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybill 22 #64 December 8, 2009 Quote Hi GLIDE, I made my first jump in Feb '64 and it was taking place then & before then. I personally know of one person who sat down with another jumper one evening and filled in his logbook to get a D license; it was needed for a competition he wanted to attend. Another guy ( really a braggart in the true sense of the word ) would, after a number of beers on a Sat nite, go home and log 'jumps.' Back then we called them P-51 jumps; not out of a Mustang airplane but for the Parker P-51 ballpoint pen. Take the high road & let those who live in their own world remain there. Personally, I have never logged a jump that I have not done, but some do lack details. I probably have a hand-full of jumps never logged; no big deal for me. JerryBaumchen Hi Jerry, I concur. As for the Parker 51, see my post above, I was drinkin beer one night with my old sky bud James Goode at The Aviators Grill and Pub here at Raeford and the subject of P-51's came up. We laughed over the Parker 51 stories and for Christmas, he found a Parker 51 fountain pen on E-bay for me!! Ball point or fountan model, I guess that would be the P-51BP and P-51F models!!SCR-2034, SCS-680 III%, Deli-out Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #65 December 8, 2009 Quote Quote .It's dark 1/2 the day, why not jump through the hoops and get some moonlight time in case you ever need it. Had the same argument with my daughter not wanting to practice parallel parking until competent enough for a license..."I'll just make sure I never need to" Under what circumstances would one "NEED" to land at night? And don't give the "sunset load" nonsense, since a "D" is not required to get on a sunset load. I dunno...Total Eclipse? The real question is~ Under what circumstances would one feel a compelling "NEED" to fore-go the performance of such a simple, practical and potentially beneficial exercise AS the night jump? However, I'll add * to be politically correct, and in the interest of leaving no child behind... *It is of course blatantly obvious to even the most casual observer, that [insert here whatever the individually applicable 'excuse de jure' might be] has merit, and is undoubtedly the reason the restricted 'D' license is available. Real world ~ I have around 100 'intentional' night jumps, and I've gotten out unplanned twice that I can readily recall. 1st time was in a post boogie ferry flight, that because of unforeseen circumstances took a lot longer than planned. Big old clunker plane, rather tight grass strip, safer for all if we got out so we did...that was way back when the 'D' license actually said 'Expert' on it, so ~ a no brainer. The other time was a long cross country following a demo in the Midwest, bad planning pilot guy put us late & low on fuel. ~guess we could have pussyed out, diverted and possibly opted for an overnight stay at an alternate, but having infinitely more experience jumping at night than pussin' out, it was also no brainer. ~and one other time, couldn't but wanted to... ground related incident required a no exit return from a sunset jump. In this case the 'pussying out' option was the call of someone in higher authority than lil' ole me. Relatively low time Otter driver putting it down crosswind on grass, being 'kinda pretty dark' & heavy. If ever a scenario for balling one up existed this was it. But the call was made because, (guess what) some supposedly competent skydivers, with little or no 'kinda pretty dark' experience, worried they might dent up the planet. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhanold 0 #66 December 8, 2009 Quote Under what circumstances would one "NEED" to land at night? And don't give the "sunset load" nonsense, since a "D" is not required to get on a sunset load. In this video starting at 3:40. It was supposed to be a sunset load but might have gotten pushed back a little. on the ride up we talked about who was qualified for this jump and some switched their tinted goggles for clear ones stored in the plane. Is it a night jump? no. were skills taught in night jump exercises used? yes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=756g1YJKZNc Our dropzone supports the night jump qualification and everyone on the jump felt comfortable with the jump. As for the landing in a backyard. I have only jumped "modern" canopies and can think of at least 15 times I have landed in backyards, 2 of those I was in flight under power lines. 1 of which was cut in thirds by wire fences that I did not see until final. I am very thankful of the canopy skills my Instructors and up jumpers at my home DZ taught and stressed to me and try to return the favor with every student and younger jumper I encounter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,822 #67 December 8, 2009 >Under what circumstances would one "NEED" to land at night? Right - that's the same argument as the woman who insists she doesn't NEED to learn to parallel park (or drive on freeways, or cross large intersections.) Not a great idea IMO to leave those things out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackC 0 #68 December 8, 2009 Quote>Under what circumstances would one "NEED" to land at night? Right - that's the same argument as the woman who insists she doesn't NEED to learn to parallel park (or drive on freeways, or cross large intersections.) Not a great idea IMO to leave those things out. I've used the same argument to justify not learning to juggle chainsaws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #69 December 8, 2009 Quote Quote >Under what circumstances would one "NEED" to land at night? Right - that's the same argument as the woman who insists she doesn't NEED to learn to parallel park (or drive on freeways, or cross large intersections.) Not a great idea IMO to leave those things out. I've used the same argument to justify not learning to juggle chainsaws. And if you were actually a professional juggler...you would have to be satisfied with being 'almost' as good as everyone else in your chosen profession. ~ and all the other professional jugglers that do the chainsaw act, would roll their eyes at you calling yourself an 'Expert'. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #70 December 8, 2009 You guys arguing about night jumps are killing me. You're missing it. Nobody is arguing the wisdom of learning about and jumping at night. WoooHooo! That's good stuff to know! I'm certainly glad I learned about it and can practice it when opportunities arise. The question was about the need for it all. Kallend is right....there is no need. If you find yourself in a situation that needs night jump training and experience, it's because you put yourself into that position. It's not necessary to put yourself into those situations...ever. Too bad some of you had to resort to ridicule and name-calling to support your misunderstanding.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 1 #71 December 8, 2009 QuoteNobody is arguing the wisdom of learning about and jumping at night. WoooHooo! That's good stuff to know! I'm certainly glad I learned about it and can practice it when opportunities arise. The question was about the need for it all. Kallend is right....there is no need. Maybe so; but then there's really no need for a D license, because almost always a C license + jump numbers is good enough for just about any kind of jumping at just about any DZ or boogie. That's (arguably) the difference between "experienced" and "expert". But if you want to formally hold yourself out as an "expert", you should demonstrate true expertise. And if the organizers of some specialized event (like a bigway, etc.) stubbornly insist upon jumpers with D licenses, and you can't participate simply because you chose not to qualify for the D license, you simply live with the result of your own decision. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #72 December 9, 2009 If you find yourself in a situation that needs night jump training and experience, it's because you put yourself into that position. It's not necessary to put yourself into those situations...ever. ~~Yup, just like water landing and reserve rides...not necessary but shit happensToo bad some of you had to resort to ridicule and name-calling to support your misunderstanding. ~~Hey you grumpy ole fucker...what else am I suppose to resort to when no matter what amount of logical arguing, a simple recognition that I'm always right isn't and won't be forthcoming?! (Umm...wait, were you even talkin' about me) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But all kidding aside Andy, you & I & Doc & Bill etc. have had this same discussion a few times now. Apologies to all if I offended...but my basic question still stands. ARE there any logical & arguable reasons, citable reference incident data maybe, for relaxing the standards required in earning the sports highest license? Heck even folklore & fantasy will work for reasons of discussion, but simply saying one shouldn't 'have to' because one doesn't 'want to' ... and anyway, with some planning and luck one shouldn't EVER 'need to', borders on ludacris. I understand and even tend to agree with some of the other specific 'question authority & critically examine tradition' issues regarding change. But there, powerful & sometimes overwhelming argument accompanied the general call to arms for said changes to be implemented. Not the case here...tell me how & why the sport of Skydiving in the USA would overall be generally safer, or in any way demonstrably better by lowering a requirement for the D license? If in fact I'm 'supporting a misunderstanding' then enlighten me, what am I not seeing? ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alabamaskydiver 0 #73 December 9, 2009 funny you should mention this. I have seeen an S&TA sign off on a D license momnets after the jumper pencil whipped a night jump after the same S&TA said they could not "waiver" them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
keithbar 1 #74 December 9, 2009 Quote What does everyone say about the effort to remove the night jump requirements from the D license? Can't or won't do it? ~Then don't apply for the license! the very reason I still hold A14048 and thats the only rating i got. I ain't no fricking expert at nothing. never gonna claim to be. got no desire to jump out of a airplane at night. and my landing are not for a demo crowd so I don't do demo's. although i do want to jump into the backyard someday before i cash in my chips. but I got 25 acres of open pasture field here to hit. hell it's bigger than a lot of dz's I've jumped at I think i could pull it off i have on occasion been accused of pulling low . My response. Naw I wasn't low I'm just such a big guy I look closer than I really am . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #75 December 9, 2009 Quotefunny you should mention this. I have seeen an S&TA sign off on a D license momnets after the jumper pencil whipped a night jump after the same S&TA said they could not "waiver" them. Then I would say that puts the both of them in the same shit pile. Lack of character is not a reason to change the exiting requirements. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
