NWFlyer 2
Recommended Posts
Andy9o8 2
You could give credit to the reduction in no pull/low pull fatalities to AAD's or you could give that same credit to better training and awareness.
The number of experienced jumpers burning in with nothing out has decreased but very few of them are being saved by AADs The numbers don't lie.
Perhaps some of that, compared to 20, 25 or 30 years ago, may be attributable to (a) the advent and increasing use of audible altimeters, and (b) higher average pull altitudes.
Your idea is not new but none other than Bill Booth has an alternative explanation:
Booth's Law #2 - "The safer skydiving gear becomes, the more chances skydivers will take, in order to keep the fatality rate constant."
Taken from here - a post from 2003.
The rest of the post:
"Low hook turns, and high speed collisions on tiny canopies is just the latest example of this law in action. Without this new kind of risk taking, fatalities would be about half what they were 20 years ago.
The sky over most drop zones nowadays is like a busy intersection with no stop signs or traffic lights...for that matter, no rules at all. I just got back from Roger Nelson's funeral and I'm pissed. Too many good people have lost their lives recently because canopy pilots won't follow even the most basic traffic rules while landing their nylon airplanes."
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Booth's Law #2 - "The safer skydiving gear becomes, the more chances skydivers will take, in order to keep the fatality rate constant."
Taken from here - a post from 2003.
The rest of the post:
"Low hook turns, and high speed collisions on tiny canopies is just the latest example of this law in action. Without this new kind of risk taking, fatalities would be about half what they were 20 years ago.
The sky over most drop zones nowadays is like a busy intersection with no stop signs or traffic lights...for that matter, no rules at all. I just got back from Roger Nelson's funeral and I'm pissed. Too many good people have lost their lives recently because canopy pilots won't follow even the most basic traffic rules while landing their nylon airplanes."
My wife is hotter than your wife.
I disagree.
Even an intentional cutaway vastly increases your pulse and focuses your mind.
Intentional cutaways are scary!
... if intentional cutaways don't scare you, you should quit jumping.
I wasn't saying that an intentional cutaway isn't scary. I imagine it will be, and I really want to do one - as soon as I can find someone with a tertiary system that's in date and training on how to use it. I imagine that a cutaway in order to save my life would be a lot more scary, though.
I assume you've done an intentional cutaway. Have you also had to cutaway a malfunction? If so, which was scarier in your opinion?
Here's your best way to answer that (for yourself)...
You are about to get on a jump. You do your gear check and absolutely everything is a-ok. Otherwise perfectly ship-shape EXCEPT your Cypres won't turn on. Do you:
1. Leave it off and go ahead with the jump as planned? or...
2. Go "oh F*** ...now I CAN'T jump!" and scratch?
And why?
Maybe I should make this a "poll"?
Blues,
-Grant
I would jump a rig without a AAD, leave mine off for a jump if needed, or jump without one at all if I was that great of a swooper or I liked to do low downplanes.
I don't think I'd currently own a rig without a Cypres, and I don't think I'd get my reserve packed without one.
FAR 105.43c
If installed, the automatic activation device must be maintained in accordance with manufacturer instructions for that automatic activation device.
If a Cypres 1 can't be packed into a rig that's older than 12.25 years, with an expired battery, or without it's 4 year check, I don't think it would be legal for a non-operational unit to be jumped. Of course like all FARs that one is open to interpretation of the rigger and FAA. That said I'd probably jump it anyway and send it in for an inspection at the end of the day or weekend or at my next reserve repack.
As for the rest of the thread, I think without the added safety features more people would be dying overall just for different reasons statistically.
I would probably get a skyhook installed into my Infinity if I could. I didn't really know anything about them when I ordered my rig two years ago.
councilman24 37
A few years ago I looked at the airtech site to get some perspective. THe number of cypress "saves" were about 1000 at the time. I know the numbers have changed since then,,,,,
Anyway, as I recall the vast majority of saves were from students and the second highest catagory was tandems. After that the breakdown was novice jumpers (below 500 jumps) The number of saves from experienced jumpers was very low and the number of jumpers who were "knocked out" was almost nothing. (percentage wise, there were a few)
Percentage wise cypress saves were almost always novices and tandems with a few exceptions.
But most cypres saves are NOT reported. We have NO idea how many experienced jumpers would have burned in without a cypres. I know of at least 5, and I don't get around much.
Two of these WERE unconscious from a freefall collision. One died of his injuries from the collision, but he had a chance to live by the cypres opening the reserve. NONE of these saves were reported to Airtec.
IMHO the decline in skydivers burning in IS mainly attributable to the wide spread use of AAD's. Unfortunately this coincided with the development of high performance canopies and high performance canopy flying styles.
I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE
councilman24 37
a few months ago i was packing visiting jumper's main. brand new micron with all bells and whistles brand new main and quite obviously an 'almost' brand new jumper.
he was hanging around as i was packing and i asked him what he thought of his skyhook. his reply was: "well, i really like the fact that i only have to pull one handle if something goes wrong."
i tried my best to get him to realize that handles were installed there for a reason and he shouldn't assume that a piece of nylon connected to a piece of metal will work perfectly right after another piece of nylon connected to another piece of metal did not.
i'm not sure that i was successful but i do know that he is far from being the only one with that mentality.
i wish people would realize that safety devices in this sport are nothing more than backup intended to do the work if you can't do it yourself.
PLEASE TELL THE DZO OR S&TA ABOUT THIS CONVERSATION!
What does this guy plan to do when he can't get his PC out of the pocket? If he really wants a SOS system he can get one. I've had to educate several people over the years who had a similar impression. Has nothing to do with Skyhook but just an RSL. I even had one rigging customer who got low, hurried his PC throw, got the bridle looped around the cutaway handle and towed the PC. He pulled the cutaway and waited for the RSL to open the reserve. Luckily he only waited a second or two and realized his mistake.
I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE
A few years ago I looked at the airtech site to get some perspective. THe number of cypress "saves" were about 1000 at the time. I know the numbers have changed since then,,,,,
Anyway, as I recall the vast majority of saves were from students and the second highest catagory was tandems. After that the breakdown was novice jumpers (below 500 jumps) The number of saves from experienced jumpers was very low and the number of jumpers who were "knocked out" was almost nothing. (percentage wise, there were a few)
Percentage wise cypress saves were almost always novices and tandems with a few exceptions.
But most cypres saves are NOT reported. We have NO idea how many experienced jumpers would have burned in without a cypres. I know of at least 5, and I don't get around much.
IMHO the decline in skydivers burning in IS mainly attributable to the wide spread use of AAD's. Unfortunately this coincided with the development of high performance canopies and high performance canopy flying styles.
So the airtech data means nothing because all other "saves" go unreported?
Just replace the cutter and keep it hush-hush?
I guess I was under the mistaken impression that all cypres fires were investigated and the data anylized to determine if it operated under the correct parameters. Stupid me....
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
PS the decline in skydivers burning in seems to be a bit exagerated. I have only been jumping 26 years but this has always been a rare yet tragic occurance.
councilman24 37
Just replace the cutter and keep it hush-hush?
Yep, that's why it's a FIELD REPLACABLE cutter.
Not hush-hush, just no need to report it if you don't want to.
I guess I was under the mistaken impression that all cypres fires were investigated and the data anylized to determine if it operated under the correct parameters. Stupid me....
Maybe when it had to go in for a new cutter. But not for a long time.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
No problem.
PS the decline in skydivers burning in seems to be a bit exagerated. I have only been jumping 26 years but this has always been a rare yet tragic occurance.
Think about it though. In the 80's how many people do you remember dieing under an open and properly functioning canopy? Break things under a stato star maybe.
Most of the fatalities were no pull/low pull either before or after a malfunction. As I used to describe it to people they were having fun all the way to the ground. Now I describe many fatalities under a fully functioning canopy as pointing your Corvette at a brick wall and turning at the last possible moment. If you turn early (high) no problem. The first time you turn too late (low) you die.
And I also used to describe skydiving as one of the few activities that once you start if you do NOTHING you WILL DIE. (Pre AAD era) IMHO this was part of the excitment, thrill, and draw of skydiving. Overcoming the fear of falling and having the confidence in yourself to put your fate in your own hands. Are AAD's a good thing? I think so but they have changed the sport. And I jump them most of the time but certainly don't have to have one.
I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE
Yep, that's why it's a FIELD REPLACABLE cutter.
So when it goes in for the service they don't look at the data and say "hey" this thing has fired 4 times!
Lets add 4 saves to our website!
PS the decline in skydivers burning in seems to be a bit exagerated. I have only been jumping 26 years but this has always been a rare yet tragic occurance.
Think about it though. In the 80's how many people do you remember dieing under an open and properly functioning canopy? Break things under a stato star maybe.
***
I have two cutaways on strato stars. most fatalities were jumpers riding in malfunctions on mains or reserves. They were fighting death. The no pulls were rare and I don't think the cypres would have changed that.
dorbie 0
Now I describe many fatalities under a fully functioning canopy as pointing your Corvette at a brick wall and turning at the last possible moment. If you turn early (high) no problem. The first time you turn too late (low) you die.
What analogy do you use for low pull contests?
So when it goes in for the service they don't look at the data and say "hey" this thing has fired 4 times!
Lets add 4 saves to our website!
They don't count every firing as a save. At this point they claim 334 documented saves since 1991.
AFFI 0
Perhaps the subject of this thread should be:
Safety Features Build Apathy And Complacency?
-
Safety Features Build Apathy And Complacency?
-
Mykel AFF-I10
Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat…
Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat…
They don't count every firing as a save. At this point they claim 334 documented saves since 1991.
From the airtech website:
"To date, as production of CYPRES 1 comes to an end, CYPRES units have saved the lives of more than 1000 skydivers, without a single unit ever refusing to activate when the conditions were met."
aguila 0
Any safety feature can create danger because they add additional technical variables (and human variables like a false sense of safety) to keep in mind, and interact with the environment in ways we cannot always predict.
The post "Attempted exit of aircraft with seatbelt still attached " is a good example
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2730538#2730538
The post "Attempted exit of aircraft with seatbelt still attached " is a good example
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2730538#2730538
Gonzalo
It cannot be done really means I do not know how to do it ... yet
It cannot be done really means I do not know how to do it ... yet
To be fair, I did jump on him a bit quickly and he confirmed his altitude differential is beyond the adjustment capabilities of any AAD. But I'm not necessarily going to disagree with you on the attention spans.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites