Recipient

British Skydiving

Pin Request correction

First report 15 Nov 2016•Latest report 15 Nov 2016

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Sport governing body. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
100%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
1

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
2

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

100%published responses found
2stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from British Skydiving linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. County Durham and Darlington

    AI-generated summary

    Pamela Gower · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Pamela Gower, who had achondroplasia and was a keen parachutist, died after entering a high-speed spin during a level 6 parachute jump and sustaining fatal injuries on impact with the ground. A concern was raised about whether she had been progressed beyond her abilities, particularly in light of the time between her later jumps; this question remained under active consideration by the BPA.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to British Skydiving; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Potential progression beyond parachutists’ abilities without sufficient regard to time between jumps

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The BPA board of enquiry raised a question as to whether the deceased was progressed beyond her abilities, taking into account the time period between her later jumps. Evidence from the Chief Instructor and owner of the parachute club in question was that the training given to the deceased met all Parachute Association rules and moreover exceeded them. He did not believe that there was any difficulty caused in this case arising from the time periods between her jumps nor that the deceased was progressed beyond her abilities. Notwithstanding this evidence, the BPA Chief Operating Officer remained of the view that the question raised in the report was still a valid one and one which was being actively considered by the BPA. In the circumstances, I have no doubt that the threshold for this report is being met and I am under an obligation to make this report. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Give special consideration to wind-tunnel training before skydiving, including training with equipment and heading control while back-to-earth.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “For (non-tandem) skydive students who have non-standard body morphology (such as caused, for example, restricted growth), disabilities or other special needs:”

    Source location

    2016-0446-Response-by-Bristish-Parachute-Association
    Page 5 · response
    Published 12 February 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Make a formal written risk assessment for non-tandem students with non-standard body morphology, disabilities or other special needs.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “For (non-tandem) skydive students who have non-standard body morphology (such as caused, for example, restricted growth), disabilities or other special needs:”

    Source location

    2016-0446-Response-by-Bristish-Parachute-Association
    Page 5 · response
    Published 12 February 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The interval between the student's previous jump and Peterlee jump was not considered a major factor in the accident.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “There has been some debate about whether or not the length of time between the deceased’s last jump in Spain and her first jump at Peterlee was appropriate. Given that an assessment was made in the wind tunnel as well as the fact that she completed her level five / check out dive without any issues, the Panel do not believe that this was a major factor in her inability to recover from a back to earth position on her final jump.”

    Source location

    2016-0446-Response-by-Bristish-Parachute-Association
    Page 4 · response
    Published 12 February 2017

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    The student was not progressed beyond her abilities for the planned skydive.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “There has been some debate about whether or not the length of time between the deceased’s last jump in Spain and her first jump at Peterlee was appropriate. Given that an assessment was made in the wind tunnel as well as the fact that she completed her level five / check out dive without any issues, the Panel do not believe that this was a major factor in her inability to recover from a back to earth position on her final jump.”

    Source location

    2016-0446-Response-by-Bristish-Parachute-Association
    Page 4 · response
    Published 12 February 2017

    Open published response
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

100%
100%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
100%
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026