Article View: rec.skydiving
Article #2139Re: Thoughts concerning clouds
From: Art Bori
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 16:25
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 16:25
69 lines
3817 bytes
3817 bytes
Jim Beutel (beutel@chdasic.sps.mot.com) wrote: [Stuff deleted regarding jumping through a cloud] : I quess my question would be..: What do the big guys (and gals) say..? : Would you have exited? Should it be avoided? Do it with a good spot? Of course, the first thing that comes to mind is the story about the load that exited over what they thought was the DZ and ended up drowning in Lake Michigan. There was an article in _Parachutist_ not to long ago about that incident. Living in the Pacific Northwest there are more than a few days when clouds are a concern. According to the FARs, skydivers have to observe VFR visibility rules (eg. for altitude >10,000': visibility 5 statute miles, 1,000' below, 1,000' above, and 1 mile horizontally from any clouds). In reality most places "bend" the rules. To hopefully divert any flamage: I do not in any way encourage or advocate jumping through clouds. I have three main concerns about exiting around clouds: spotting, what's in or below the clouds, and where's the actual bottom of the clouds. If you're spotting and there are scattered clouds usually you can find enough references to spot adequately. On days when it's mostly clouds and you're spotting by peeking through what few holes there are, you better have supreme confidence in your spotter. At one DZ that I've jumped at, a not so good spot (much less a really bad one) would put you out over solid forest. Once in freefall, you've got to worry about what you'll find if you enter a cloud. Aircraft flying IFR could definitely be flying through the cloud you just got out over. Guess who wins if you meet in freefall? Nobody! Of greater concern would be the other people you jump with. A good RW load would be flying close and have eye contact. But what if it's not so good a load or the dive just funnels? Is anybody below you or above you or tracking at you? Or what if the cloud is just so thick that you can't see your hand in front of your face much less another jumper? Finally, do you *REALLY* know where the bottoms are? I've made jumps over clear air only to find myself in heavy duty "industrial haze." The exit might have been away from any clouds but a combination of fast moving clouds and freefall drift can put you where you don't want to be. Once you're there, do you *think* you know where the bottoms are? Did the ceiling drop? Did another layer move in below? Do you really want to trust your altimeter and/or Dytter? Do you wait until you can see the ground and possibly too low? Or do you dump in a cloud and not be able to see or be seen? Given all of the above concerns, it certainly doesn't seem very smart to jump around clouds but jumpers stil do. "You've already paid for the altitude, you might as well use it...everyone else wants to go... there aren't any other planes in the area...the pilot used the LORAN and knows where we are..." "Cloud rush" certainly is a wild experience and I've had some memorable jumps in thick air but it still is (and probably always will be) something that scares the hell out of me. I guess my main piece of advise is don't be afraid to stay in the plane. No skydive is worth killing yourself over. If your "friends" give you a lot of grief about it, maybe they're not really friends. Blue skies (or big holes) Art Bori D-11402
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan20.162539.28793@eskimo.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!nwnexus!ole!ssc!fylz!eskimo!artbReferences:
<1993Jan18.152634.11468@newsgate.sps.mot.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: rec.skydiving Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!nwnexus!ole!ssc!fylz!eskimo!artb From: artb@eskimo.com (Art Bori) Subject: Re: Thoughts concerning clouds Message-ID: <1993Jan20.162539.28793@eskimo.com> Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6] References: <1993Jan18.152634.11468@newsgate.sps.mot.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 16:25:39 GMT Lines: 69