Back to Article Index

The state of sport parachuting in 2007

in general and in particular

by André Lemaire, 2007

As a group, can we just watch that many members leave?

As I’ve been jumping for over thirty years without interruption, I have, I believe, a certain perspective on our sport, which allows me to analyze it. I would like to go over the causes which motivate people to adopt parachuting and also the reasons why they drop out after years of intense activity. Has our parachutist image changed with the novelties in sports?

Motivation

Motivation can be multifaceted. People jump or continue to jump to feel different from others, to take calculated risks and feel 100% alive, for the well-being they experience after a day of parachuting, for the sense of fellowship that comes from being part of a restricted group, for the thrill of it, to catch the attention of the opposite sex when you’re part of the minority gender group in that sport, for the joy of the open air, for the pleasure of working in 3D, for the rush of speed, for the Saturday night parties, for the competitive aspect of the sport, to be with others in a “dangerous” yet mastered and thus rewarding activity, to impress the ordinary mortals, to have an aura of courage in the eyes of others, to prove to ourselves that we can, to prove to others that we can, and so on and so forth…

I’ve known a lot of people who, having met their soul mate, left parachuting after a number of years only to return to the sport once their mate made off. Others leave because they completely lose interest after a bad injury. I also think that the majority of people who leave parachuting do so for a lack of encouragement on the part of experienced jumpers who somewhat neglect beginners. These people, experienced or newbies, did they start in the sport with the right motivation? Or are there good and not so good motivations? Or could one’s motivation change as the years go by? Any motivation may appear good if the person sees actual physical and psychological benefits and if it’s profitable for the whole community, but it seems to me that some motivations are better than others which I’ll cover later.

Tandem jumps! Improving or demystifying the sport? Or a machine to create instant stars?

I’ve seen the first tandem jumps in 1984. In those days, the Vector system didn’t have a drogue pilot chute yet.

The tandem jump is an important invention for it allows one to bring down from the skies an uninitiated passenger with a minimum of training (about ten minutes) to a specific point on Earth. I’m thinking of a doctor who might need to provide emergency care to someone who’s stuck somewhere out-of-reach of an ambulance, and I’m thinking of the military who might need to help the injured or to infiltrate the enemy. Tandem jumping can be used to bring non-skydiving specialists where needed. I’m also thinking of “tourists” who might simply want a skydiving tour, much as someone else might want a ride behind an experienced motorcycle rider.

Nowadays, the tandem jump is more and more used to train skydiving students before they go on to the progressive free fall (PFF) program. I can see why a skydiving center could want to use that system as the student is closely monitored (couldn’t be any closer, as a matter of fact). I believe that for some students this is probably the best way though several aspects of this type of jumps are missing with this new approach, like : spotting, checking the canopy airworthiness, the orientation and the circuit to come back to the landing area, and the touchdown techniques. Of course, all that is shown by the tandem master, but the student remains passive or relies on what he’s told when he uses the double commands. On the other hand, with the PFF, the student is practically self-sufficient after about ten jumps or so.

Nonetheless, I think that the PFF method with two instructors from the very first jump and even the good old IAD method, and why not the older still with the Static Line system, are all valuable methods which allow parachutists to progress at their own pace and the way they want. Those methods, especially the last two, provide maturing over time and that’s quite fine for a lot of people. Who says time (time fixes a lot of things) also says additional learning through reading, discussions, watching videos, other people’s example, and so on. Unfortunately, those last methods are losing ground as we nowadays have to go faster at lowest cost.

Lower cost remains to be seen: in the short term or the long term? If our client base disappears in the long or medium term, are we really more efficient? In 1997, I had taken statistics on CSPA membership in the province of Quebec, and I was able to show that, at that time, 73% of our skydivers had been members of the association for 3 years or less. The question that came up was: “Are we doing all we can to keep our members?”

One day, I asked a friend what he thought about the new trend with tandem jumps and how useful those were for our sport. He said that tandem jumps have probably saved certain centers from going bankrupt. If that’s true then it’s a good thing but, in the long term, will this type of jumps help us keep our members? I’ve met people who once I told them I’m into skydiving told me they were too. After talking some more, I discovered that they only jumped once, in tandem. They reminded me of others who come up on the plane with me and I give them the controls for 5 or 10 minutes once the plane is entirely stable in an horizontal flight, and they turn around afterwards and they tell their friends that they flew a plane… Just as they would after a tandem jump, don’t these people become instant stars among their friends?

I also know that certain “tourists” who jump in tandem come back for another jump and sign up for the PFF program, but how many of them do? I believe it’s the exception (I’m not talking here about those centers where they begin their students in tandem).

Wearing an automatic activation device or AAD! Modernity, trend, crutch or psychological comfort?

Well, after many years of practicing the sport, I’ve finally decided to equip myself with an AAD; could the weight of years be creeping up on me? Have I ever been against wearing an AAD? Not at all, but I’ve always been against it being imposed by anyone, be it skydiving centers, a federation, or a government. Why? Because the financial burden is on the skydiver and nobody’s asked him for his opinion, and for other reasons I’ll go over later. Those who want to make wearing an AAD mandatory should answer this next question: “Would they like it if the Department of Transport made it mandatory for any commercial aircraft to be equipped with an anti-collision system as it’s more and more the case for the big airliners, as a safety measure of course?” The skydivers know that the planes they jump from will very often “skim” the clouds and are therefore at risk of mid-air collisions. Of course such an alarm system could be justified, but at 150,000$ per system, I can’t imagine what centers could afford it. That would probably be the end of our sport.

I’ve met some very active people in the sport who, being finishing students in college or university, did not have an AAD because they didn’t have the money to buy it. They had scraped and scrimped to buy their second-hand rig and were working hard to pay for their jumps.

An ex-rigger, famous in Western US, wrote in SKYDIVING magazine a few years back (Al Freesby) that he expected many new skydivers equipped with an AAD would tend to neglect to maintain their emergency methods skills and would show little interest in the maintenance of their equipment. I’ve seen that happen myself. This situation is supported by the ultra-quick training that the newbies get nowadays, where after the PFF program (about ten jumps in all), in a lot of places, the student is practically left to his own devices. No problem, he’s got an AAD!

The AAD is in itself, as is the tandem jump, a very good thing, but it doesn’t solve every problem and can even create some. It all depends on the user’s state of mind. A senior skydiver like me, even with an AAD, will not change his good habits like the one that consists in strapping myself in a harness every Spring to practice my emergency methods skills with a real drop on a mattress. It’s a whole other story for new skydivers who very often only get a short safety seminar (if they bother attending) at the top of the season. There should be more of those seminars all along the season. But what the use, since jumpers have AADs! In that mindset, wearing the AAD provides a false sense of security. To those who take good care of their equipment and keep up their emergency methods skills, the AAD gives them more confidence and good for them!

The foundations of high-risk sports such as skydiving, mountain climbing, sailing out at sea … are such that those who practice them must have a high degree of technical knowledge and know-how, they have to use the proper equipment and keep up to date. It seems to me that skydiving lags a bit in that perspective. The speeded-up courses, the AADs, the tandem jumps may propel the sport so much that many will want to try it. But too often we must guarantee a maximum of excitement and a minimum of time investment to train the newcomers. Good for the skydiving business, good to popularize the sport, but maybe not so good for the overall competence of each parachutist. Do jumpers with a high level of knowledge and skills find themselves demotivated at times when they see everybody and everyone jump after such quick and often little training? Is it possible to lose one’s motivation when we witness that kind of trivialization of our sport? This is why a serious follow-up must be undertaken with each new divers once they get their Solo or self supervised license. One need only look at the CSPA’s basic and recreational skills grids or US equivalent to be convinced. The serious work has only just begun and the skydiving center has a major role to play in motivating and keeping our membership up at this time.

Packing (and understanding) the parachute. Who’s job should that be? The user’s or a “professional” packer’s?

More and more, the packing of the parachute by the user is losing ground. I’m very glad that packing has become a prerequisite for obtaining the A license (in Canada). At least, those who have their A license can fold a parachute, theoretically. But do they understand their parachute? Do they know how to inspect it and carry out preventative maintenance? Do they have the minimum technical knowledge they need to be able to see the progress in the deterioration of a component of the parachute system? It is they who will be suspended from their parachute, and it will be submitted to some very important forces; do they know that? Do they know how to untangle a parachute? They do if those who signed their packing endorsement have seen to it that all the prerequisites were met. Who has ever looked at the CSPA’s evaluation grid for a packing course? It exists all the same and I can tell you there’s a lot of work involved.

I like to think of the skydiver’s situation as akin to that of the captain of a sailboat out at sea, or that of a mountain climber hanging tight along the side of a mountain. None of them can afford to not be familiar with their equipment, to not master their techniques, and to not know what to do in case of emergency. They all need a high level of technical knowledge and know-how which can only come from solid and extensive training. Their very life depends on it. The documents of our Association are an excellent source of information, and following the concepts and practices they describe will guarantee success (and life). There again, seminars should be held several times per season to recall or illustrate the techniques and demonstrate the equipment
as well as any new problem or failure encountered with them.

One example of an original problem that I’ve read about in a magazine goes like this: You know the end of the reserve’s activation cable (the cable and cable stop) which sticks out from the metallic handle. Well, at one time, during a jump in Germany, it appears that that little bit of cable (with the little ball at the end) got stuck in the structure of the plane, which provoked the activation of the reserve and could have ended in a major catastrophe. The jumper was out and hanging from the plane but real close; I imagine he was near the back vertical edge of the door. Another jumper was already in floater position behind him. Anyway, the reserve started to open and got tangled up in the tail of the plane which got into a dive. The reserve fortunately got loose but had a partial malfunction. The jumper was able to make it without too much problems but a good scare shared with everybody on that flight. And all that for a little bit of cable 3 inches long with a little metal ball at the end.

Well, I don’t know why (a vague intuition,) but that little 2- or 3-inch length of cable terminated by a the little ball of swaged steel, I always put it away in the pocket of the metallic handle. It appears we have to imagine the unthinkable at times. Think about it!

To you jumpers who use the services of a packer, I recommend to keep in mind the following advice. Tell the packer how you want your breaks to be set up or better yet do it yourself. Tell them they need to remove their pull-up cord gently from underneath the pin so it doesn’t damage the closing loop. Tell them that if an elastic should break on the deployment bag they are to remove it with using something like a nail file under it to avoid damaging the loop. I’ve seen packers use their pull cord and sawing the elastic by friction thus damaging the loop. There again, if you replace the broken elastic yourself, all the better.

How can we make everyone feel comfortable in a DZ and make them want to make it their hang out?

A number of articles have already been written on that very important point of welcoming new beginners or even the general public from whence come our future jumpers as a matter of fact. But we’ll never stress it enough: this is everyone’s job. Talking to a newcomer to the sport, getting him to talk about how he felt before and after the jump, is the best guarantee of growth of parachuting.

We must be aware of one thing. We’re into a technical sport but our sport is strongly psychological: it requires self-confidence,
mastering one’s emotions, capacity to resist one’s natural instincts, trusting those who teach us, having faith in our equipment and the techniques used, believing in modern technology… That’s why a beginner so needs to hear that all he’s feeling is normal. He also needs psychological support, and that’s just where our role of experienced jumper comes into play. If all the experienced people are in a hurry, never stop or only talk among themselves, they just knocked down the sport they adore by neglecting to take a little time to go and meet the beginners. If those experienced jumpers had the proper motivation in our sport, then why would they neglect to take care of the sport’s growth factors that are the newcomers. When you’re attached to a plant and you want it to grow don’t you water its roots?

Answering the questions of the public, talking with a student, jumping in RW with new B licensees, explaining a technique or how a piece of equipment works to newcomers, or simply discussing life’s problems with them, all are opportunities to make the beginner feel part of the gang and want to continue, thus participating in the growth of the sport. Some skydiving centers have even started a social club, which shows that they understand the importance of maintaining membership and growing the sport. But in the field, it’s easy to do your part. All you have to do is look around and see who looks a little uneasy or timid, and to go make contact and spend a little time with that person. It’s uncanny what people can learn from each other.

And above all don’t trust appearances. After one of my demo jumps on the 1st of July in Ottawa Canada, a senior citizen came to me and asked me some questions about my parachute. I had, in spite of the excitement of a demo, the good reaction to answer all his question, and I even showed him some technical characteristics on the container and the parachute. After about 5 minutes of conversation, the man introduced himself and gave me a little pin by way of thanks. He belonged to the well-known Caterpillar Club, the club for those who have had their lives saved by using a parachute to jump off a plane in distress or on fire. This man had jumped over Germany, from his burning Bomber, during World War II. In time and in the same line of thought, I had the opportunity to dispatch from a Cessna 206 as students Peter Lang, then Liberal MP from Kitchener Ontario on the federal scene, and his assistant, David Pratt, who later became the Minister of National Defense under Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. You never know who you’re dealing with, do you. Still, some beginners will come to you quite unexpectedly, but for the most part they’re typically unsure and it’s on them that we have to concentrate; they’re the future and the survival of our sport.

In the 80’s, our Association had two offices in the Sports Canada buildings in Ottawa-Vanier. We then had a membership of a little more than 2000 members. When the membership fell under 2000 for a 2nd year, we lost of offices. Since then, we haven’t really made any progress as our average membership is still around 2000 with ups and downs between 1900 to 2400.

The importance of a critical mass and maintaining a population in spite of winter

The critical mass is what we have to reach in order for a mechanism or a group to become easy and effective to maintain and allow a certain progression.

Over the last 3 years, our Association averaged about 2200 members. It’s very little when compared to other similar technical sports such as scuba diving, sailboarding, sailing, general aviation, and so on. This also means we don’t have much negotiation power when it comes to defending our interests to the governments. By way of comparison, there are 70,000 pilots in Canada, 30,000 of which belong to the COPA (Canadian Owners and Pilots Association). Now that’s a group with a critical mass and they use it with the governments to promote their requests.

We, skydivers in Canada, are far from those numbers but, in my wildest dreams, I’m seeing 5000 and even 10,000 members. Then we’d be in business.

To mention only one problem that you will recognize right away: the Canadian government has made it so that some very strenuous and expensive procedures must be followed to obtain a license to operate a parachuting airplane. We didn’t have much to say about that, simply because we haven’t been consulted that much as with a force of 2200 members we didn’t weigh much in the balance. The insurance companies had free reins to ask for big money to insure the parachuting planes and the free trade agreement with the States has done the rest.

The result is that it’s very rare to see big planes licensed in Canada at Canadian boogies. As you know it, and it’s true from coast to coast, most boogies use Twin Otters registered for the most part in the US. However, in the past, I have jumped from Twin Otters and Caribous from Canada, but that’s almost impossible now. The insurance fees and the cost of the operating license seem to forbid this kind of thing nowadays. So American companies, important in the service they offer, provide the planes for most Canadian boogies. What takes the cake is that the Twin Otter was made in Canada.

Are you beginning to see the importance of a critical mass? I’m sure things would have turned out quite differently if we’d been 10,000 strong.

The Canadian winter

The Canadian winter, that infamous winter that can last 5 or 6 months, well, we have to live with it. In smaller clubs and before the exorbitant insurance fees and operating license costs, the centers remained open during the winter. Of course they would slow down but they continued to train students and make them jump. Visiting the center was naturally a very important source of social gatherings even if we didn’t jump as much. Gone is that time, though some centers still organize parachuting events during the winter.

But the insurance costs and the smaller number of jumpers during the bad season means that most skydiving center managers
now lock up for the winter months. And the vicious circle has begun. The centers are closed for the winter so the jumpers go South as do a lot of DZ owners and managers of course, and those who could open don’t do so because the jumpers have gone South or have come to adopt other activities during the winter.

In spite of all that, I believe it’s important to have social gatherings and even organize some jumps during the winter, at least from time to time. This keeps the cohesion among the members, the spirit of the group… and we could use the time to perform time-consuming tasks such as to show beginners how to fold a parachute, and organize seminars on numerous topics related to parachuting. As I like to say, it’s good for the morale of the troops and it may keep them from spending too much money elsewhere on other sports, or even prevent us from losing members to other sports. Six months of winter; there’s a lot that can be done then, but if the doors are locked for all that time, of course we’re going to lose some people.

Sport parachuting and the army

As a number of articles have demonstrated it in different magazines, we owe a lot to the army. The army equipments were practically the only ones available during the 50’s and part of the 60’s, and they have contributed to the launching of sport parachuting. In the 70’s and after that, things have changed dramatically and equipments designed by civilians started to emerge with more innovations than ever: vented parachutes like the Para-Commander, the 3-ring cutaway system, the all-in-the-back system, the cell parachutes, the zero porosity fabric… and the list goes on. To the point where the situation got turned around and it’s now the military who adopt civilian equipments and adapt them for their needs. Better than that, we now see the military depend on civilians for skydiving training in such disciplines as involving prolonged free fall for example. But the greatest turnaround is to see the military use civilian planes for their training. I know of at least two cases: the Skyhawks of the Canadian army who train in Trenton Ontario using a civilian Twin Otter registered in the US, and the SEALS of the US army also using a civilian Twin Otter at San Diego Skydiving CA.

I had one day written a letter to the minister of National Defense to see if we could possibly use military planes for special events such as national and international records and competitions. They had answered not-too-kindly that the Canadian Hercules were very busy everywhere in the world (which I knew) and that the army was not in the habit of competing with the private sector. What a joke! And what about the air shows that the army organizes and those they participate in… !

When countries such as Sweden (to which Canada likes to compare itself) Belgium, Thailand, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and probably many more provide planes for special events, they gain, as I pointed out to the minister in my letter, great visibility in the public eye, and a good opportunity for pilot training.

Another special case concerning the army here, in Canada: civilians participating in “search and rescue” missions are allowed on board the army Hercules and, as it happened apparently in the New Brunswick province, some civilian parachutists were able to jump from them. How surprising! I’d be ready to sign a discharge of liability at any time to be able to jump from a Hercules, a Buffalo, or an army helicopter during special events.

Here again, we can see that we don’t carry much weight without a critical mass. In the summer of 2005, I have learned from a reliable source that some military in Canada, are using a civilian Casa registered in the USA. The Casa is not a certified plane for civilian parachuting in Canada, but the military seem to have no problem with that. Again, this is baffling! It should be noted that those soldiers were jumping off a civilian Casa and those were not strategic jumps, militarily speaking.

The military are also facing budgetary constraints, but it seems that from an MOT and a military standpoint, regulations for civilians become different for the military. What’s there to understand? Jumping out of a plane is jumping out of a plane for anyone…

New disciplines and videotapes

Over the last 10 years a whole new set of skydiving disciplines have emerged. When I started in 1973, there was style, accuracy landing and relative work (but not yet sequential). Today, in 2006, they’re still fashionable, but a lot more disciplines are currently recognized by the FAI (the world air sports federation) such as pond swooping (distance, accuracy, and artistic side), freefly, freestyle, skysurfing, skygliding in a Birdman suit, the speed RW10, RW16… and so on. There are also extravagant jumps such as the Mr. Potato, jumping through a hoop, jumping with an inflatable raft or dolphin, etc. And, of course, with the advent of the mini digital cameras, the video jumps. In this last case, the video jumps, it seems that most everybody is now into that. Filming others in free fall is another way of having fun. So we have instant videographers by the hundreds.

Some are quite serious and they’ve invested a lot of money into their equipment; others, and it’s the vast majority, are more amateurish. I’ve seen some good videos, but I’ve seen a lot more not so good. With things moving so fast, it seems that some videographers have forgotten or simply don’t know that to be good at it you have to know something about photography (backlighting, shooting angle, type of objectives, opening of the diaphragm, speed of exposure…) Of course, they also have to be good jumpers to be exactly where they need to be, at the right time, which is rather rare. For sure, those new skydiving-artists need some experience, and to get it they have to jump but, still, the basics of photography and of relative work are often in short supply.

Let’s hope that this great variety of disciplines and freefall activities will allow every jumper to find a specialty in their field of interest. It’s interesting to note, though, that most of the above activities rely on relative work, and I find that many neglect that aspect. I wonder if the lack of welcoming skills of some leaders in relative work is not the reason why many with a B license are a bit too quick to go to those alternative disciplines without first developing more solid skills in relative work.

The experienced RWers should make it their duty to devote some of their time to beginners, as they, themselves, have received from others when they started out.

Skydiving, regional and provincial competitions, and the Olympic Games

We see it more and more, the number of competitors is going down in provincial competitions (where they still exist) and in the nationals. It seems that jumpers (the majority) want to play at their own pace and avoid the comparisons born of competitions. But that’s the only way of knowing where you stand, exactly, and seeing how to go even farther by watching others do the same thing, sometimes better.

That state of affairs is nothing to help our case with the Olympic Games. At the Seoul games, parachuters were invited to give demonstrations of relative work and precision in the stadium during the opening ceremonies. Those demonstrations were nothing short of spectacular, and one would have hoped to see more in the following years. And then nothing much so far. But what has parachuting ever done to displease the International Olympic Committee so? Sport parachuting is practiced in many countries (in all or almost all the European countries, those of North America, some of Central America and South America, in Russia, South Africa, China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand…) maybe sixty countries all in all. What more does the International Olympic Committee want? They could at least try accuracy landing, which is quite spectacular, canopy piloting which is even more so, and even RW4 and RW8 which, with modern technology, can be broadcasted live and in real time by the free fall cameraman. Furthermore, the necessary ground facilities are relatively modest – a field, a pond, target mattresses, electronic targets… and also we know that the judging system already exists. But what have we done to them when we know that much less popular sports, practiced by few, are included.

I believe that we, as skydivers, could greatly improve our image in the public eye if we all behaved more like ambassadors of our sport by explaining it and discussing it with those who come to visit us.

I sometimes come to believe that parachuting could very well be the sport of the underdogs.

There is a lot more to be said. I haven’t even talked about activities such as the training of beginners in the centers, coaching in boogies and wind tunnels, nor about what happens during competitions or about parachutist communications such as through chatting and the CanPara.

And speaking of communications, I’m in favor of a modern and quick way of spreading information, and the only worthy tool we have to do so is, of course, the Internet. We don’t use it enough and I hope that the volunteers who have the heart to develop the website of our Association will be warmly supported by all and will receive the necessary means and the heartfelt encouragement they need to continue to develop this extraordinary communication tool which is unfortunately, still today, sadly underused.

Back to Article Index