Raft Dives and AADs

[billvon 3,121]

> So if I did a solo with someone I totally trusted, hit my head on the
>door during diving exit and knocked myself out, is that saying I should
> not have done the skydive if I didn't want to use an AAD?

Of course you should use an AAD. You should also get good training such that you don't hit your head on the door. Indeed, the latter is more important than the former. By learning how NOT to hit your head on the door (which is pretty easy) then the AAD is truly a backup.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

It should, because if its not, your relying on your AAD to save you.

No, someone that doesn't pull on purpose because they have an AAD is relying on it. Choosing to use one is not relying on it. I wear a hard helmet in case I get kicked or whatever. I don't go throwng my head at peoples' feet or airplane doorways. In fact, I even go as far as trying NOT to get kicked or bump my head. The helmet is there just in case. I never jump without my helmet mostly because I hate over the glasses goggles, but someone else might choose to wear a full face for RW and no helmet for hop n' pops. Is that person NECESSARILY relying on the helmet for RW jumps? Of course not. No more than someone that chooses to wear an AAD for a raft dive relies on the AAD.

If a person EXPECTS to get knocked out on a jump and wears a cypres as their expected means of surviving the jump, that person is relying on the AAD and is putting himself at extreme risk. But a person can also choose to wear an AAD even when they fully expect to not need it on a jump where the risk of needing it is higher than normal. Did that make any sense?

Dave

[billvon 3,121]

>If a person EXPECTS to get knocked out on a jump and wears a
> cypres as their expected means of surviving the jump, that person
> is relying on the AAD and is putting himself at extreme risk. But a
> person can also choose to wear an AAD even when they fully expect
> to not need it on a jump where the risk of needing it is higher than
> normal. Did that make any sense?

That makes perfect sense. But there is an intermediate case also. There are dives where a jumper does not expect to get knocked out, but might be dangerous enough that he'd feel uncomfortable doing it without an AAD. These people are also putting themselves at additional risk whether they use an AAD or not. Better to not make such jumps.

[kallend 2,166]

Quote

Your AAD and your reserve are two completely different pieces of equipement with completely different agendas.

No amount of attention to details can prevent your reserve from being used if you jump long enough.

You can prevent your AAD from ever being used with that same attention to details, regardless of how long you jump.

Surely you've heard:

"You can do everything right and still die"

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

"If you feel you should have an AAD on this jump" because you think that there might actually be a chance it might be used, maybe you shouldnt do the raft jump?

Before the introduction of the cypres, people did big ways and raft jumps and freakflying and other things that definitely had extra risk. If an individual thinks that they would have chosen not to do such jumps back then (before modern AADs were available), then they should not do them now. I think VERY few would choose to not do the jump.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

There are dives where a jumper does not expect to get knocked out, but might be dangerous enough that he'd feel uncomfortable doing it without an AAD. These people are also putting themselves at additional risk whether they use an AAD or not. Better to not make such jumps.

Again, these same jumpers, I contend, WOULD do the jump if it was before the age of cypres. That is the big difference. Now, they don't have to do without it.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

These people are also putting themselves at additional risk whether they use an AAD or not. Better to not make such jumps.

ABSOLUTELY! As I said, we'd all be safer by sitting on the ground instead of making any skydive. An AAD might make a given jump a little safer. Sitting out makes it infinitely safer. But skydivers have this nasty habit of jumping out of planes. It's more of an addiction than a habit really.

I think I'm just going to have to face the fact that I don't understand the "you must be willing to jump without an AAD" argument. I don't understand the logic.

Everyone has this "personal risk threshold," right? Why do you care what mine is or what anyone elses is? Why is it bad for anyone to jump beyond their risk threshold? Who does it affect?

YES, some jumps come with higher risk, AAD or not. I understand being opposed to those types of jumps. I don't understand why somebody's choice to use an AAD should be seen as a reason why that person shouldn't participate in that type of jump though. I'll live with this problem.

Dave

[billvon 3,121]

>Again, these same jumpers, I contend, WOULD do the jump if it
>was before the age of cypres.

Some would, some wouldn't. There are a lot of different skydivers out there with different risk tolerances. Even before the cypres, the people who sat out that jump were the safe ones. It's great that we have that extra margin of safety, but it's still safer to sit the occasional jump out.

[billvon 3,121]

>I think I'm just going to have to face the fact that I don't
>understand the "you must be willing to jump without an AAD" argument.

It's a test to apply. It's like asking yourself "am I willing to land that plane with one engine?" If the answer is "hell no; the prospect terrifies me!" then the answer might well be to fly singles until you get some more training in a twin. If the answer is "yes, I am confident I can do it" then great - that second engine will help you rather than hurt you (usually.)

It doesn't mean you have to land on one engine all the time, nor does it mean you have to jump without a cypres. But you have to be able to, and (sometimes) you have to prove it. In flying you'd have to prove it to a CFI or an examiner. In skydiving you really have no one to prove it to but yourself. But the concept is the same.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Quote

The best take on this came from Kate Cooper at a bigway camp a few months back. Someone asked her if it would be better to not do bigways without an AAD. She thought about it, and said "If you think you need certain kinds of safety equipment for a skydive, you need to re-evaluate doing that skydive."

Ding, ding, ding......winner.

When Sandy Wambach organized the Ga. state record attempt, she probably had more experience and skydives than I will ever have.

She died a month later on the world rec attedmpt in Chicago due to a collision that knocked her unconscious.

I believe that there is no level of talent or experience that makes you safe.

Big-ways are more dangerous. One major reason is that you don't know everyone else on the skydive.

I am extra cautious on big-ways and any additional safety device is more than welcome.

I have also been on a raft dive where a very experienced skydiver was knocked unconscious.

You never know.

[kallend 2,166]

Quote

Quote

"If you feel you should have an AAD on this jump" because you think that there might actually be a chance it might be used, maybe you shouldnt do the raft jump?

Before the introduction of the cypres, people did big ways and raft jumps and freakflying and other things that definitely had extra risk. If an individual thinks that they would have chosen not to do such jumps back then (before modern AADs were available), then they should not do them now. I think VERY few would choose to not do the jump.

A quick comparison of the fatality rates (per 1000 jumpers) from, say 1984 and 2004 suggests that skydivers 20 years ago were willing, in general, to take more risks than now. Does that make them better somehow?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pilotdave 0]

Give up on me. I'll never understand.

The example just doesn't do it for me. Landing a twin with one engine out is a skill that must be learned, practiced, and demonstrated. Skydiving without an AAD is not a skill. Anyone that can jump with an AAD CAN jump without one. There's not a skydiver in the world that physically couldn't do it. There are many that wouldn't do it though.

I mean, if it really was a skill that had to be demonstrated, you'd better take an AFF instructor along in case you found out at pull time that your really needed your cypres. Come on, it's maybe at most a little confidence builder for a small number of jumpers that like having a security blanket. Jumping without a cypres teaches nothing. It demonstrates nothing to the jumper. Maybe it demonstrates something to you, but I don't see how that matters.

Jumping without a cypres is just playing the odds. So is jumping with a cypres. You use one because there's some tiny little chance that you'll need it. When you jump without one, you're taking the chance that this jump will not be that one in a million.

For a million bucks, I'd make a jump without a reserve. Man would that be a confidence booster in my packing when I survived it. But what would it teach me? That I don't NEED a reserve? Of course it wouldn't. It wouldn't teach me anything. Same thing with shutting off my cypres for one jump.

Dave

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I am extra cautious on big-ways and any additional safety device is more than welcome.

To play billvon devil's advocate:

Clearly big-ways are beyond your personal risk threshold and you should not be doing them because they are too dangerous for you. I know this because I have stepped inside your brain based on one sentence you made in a post on dropzone.com and I know what's better for you than you do.

Dave

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

To play billvon devil's advocate:

Clearly big-ways are beyond your personal risk threshold and you should not be doing them because they are too dangerous for you. I know this because I have stepped inside your brain based on one sentence you made in a post on dropzone.com and I know what's better for you than you do.

Dave

Quote

...and I know what's better for you than you do.

Mom, I so rarely hear from you these days.

(You forgot to add an unrelated analogy)

[billvon 3,121]

>The example just doesn't do it for me.

OK, try this one. See if this makes sense to you:

You don't need to solo an airplane. Anyone that can land a plane with an instructor can land without one. There's not a competent pilot in the world that couldn't do it.

Does that work? Is a pilot who has never soloed exactly the same as a pilot who has? After all, you don't learn any new skills the day you solo. And wouldn't it be safer to learn to fly, from PP through instrument through commercial, always having that backup there?

>For a million bucks, I'd make a jump without a reserve. Man would
> that be a confidence booster in my packing when I survived it. But
> what would it teach me? That I don't NEED a reserve?

Many skydivers do this. Try it - make a BASE jump after rigging and packing your own main. It may seem like it shouldn't teach you anything, but believe me - it does.

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

The grammar on your tag line is wrong. It should be "you're still an asshole."

[kallend 2,166]

Quote

***

My point is that if you have to wear an AAD to offset the additional risk of a unique skydive, your not wearing your AAD for its intended purpose. It wasnt invented so that people could do riskier skydives.

I thought it was invented to reduce the number of people bouncing with no reserve deployed. Have you any evidence of additional prupose (or lack of purpose) of the inventor? Where is it written what it was NOT invented for?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[LawnDart21 0]

That cracked me up. Thanks.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[LawnDart21 0]

Quote

I thought it was invented to reduce the number of people bouncing with no reserve deployed

It was. But it is also meant to be an auxillary device, quietly waiting in the shadows to do its job its whole service life. By adding it as a risk mitigator to riskier jumps, it ceases to be an auxilary device and become depended upon to fill the gap in risk tolerance.

Assuming there are some jumps you would do without an AAD, to then say you would only do certain jumps with an AAD based on the percieved risk, is relying on your AAD for all the wrong reasons.

You can point/counter point all you want, but it doesnt change the fact that people in this sport use AADs for more than their intended purposes, which is to be an auxilary safety device.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[pilotdave 0]

Knowing that AADs are widely and easily available, and assuming you own one, why WOULD you do a raft dive without one? Why would you do an AFF jump without one? Why would you do big way RW without one? Why would you coach a newbie at freeflying without one?

AADs DO exist. They ARE widely available. Jumps with an increased risk of collisions or loss of altitude awareness or whatever are the best time to use an AAD.

Do you have a problem with a pro swooper that has 2 rigs... one without a cypres for swooping and another with a cypres for RW?

I know a lot of jumpers that have an accuracy rig and a regular rig. Most don't equip their accuracy rigs with AADs. Does that make RW too dangerous for them?

The choice to use an AAD is a personal decision and says absolutely nothing about the actual amount of risk a jumper is taking or is willing to take.

Dave

[LawnDart21 0]

I am not anti-AAD, I own one and I jump with it.

Before you bent my opinion totally out of whack and started arguing a point I wasnt even attacking, I started this thread with a question about an article on raft dives that stated among its recommendations that an AAD was recommended on a raft dive.

Forget all the other stuff about being willing to jump with or without one, its a waste of all of our time to keep going back and forth on that subject, the info is out there, pro and con, people can decide for themselves.

The original point of my post was to question any skydive that its recommended that an AAD be used, what that recommendation is really saying (presumably that you have a greater than usual probability of being rendered unconsciousand) and what that really means (that you are placing a greater amount of dependency on a mechanical device to save your life).

Here is an example, a police officer is wearing a bullet proof vest (lets call it his AAD). And he approaches an armed robber who in turn points a gun at him. Should he take cover? Or should he stand there and square off with the robber because he is wearing a bullet proof vest? Just because he has the vest on, it doesnt mean he can act recklessly and square off with the robber, he should take cover, because avoiding getting shot is safer than getting shot with a bullet proof vest on.

That was my only point, if a unique skydive requires an AAD as a "good idea" to ensure ones safety, then perhaps its not a "good idea" to go that jump.

Lastly, while however good intentioned the article was/is, it also helps to foster the "if you have an AAD you can do more dangerous jumps" mentality which is not the message we should be sending to our skydiving brothers and sisters.

--
My other ride is a RESERVE.

[jdhill 0]

Quote

I dont consider a raft dive to put me beyond the ability to save my own life, collision or no collision,

It's not really about your ability, its more about the vairiables you can't control once you are in the air, i.e. the other guy... raft dives, bigways, freefly... hell doing a solo, and not knowing the guy behind you... all of those have some element of the other guy casuing you to get knocked out through no action or inaction of you own...

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

You never know.

True. But if you wouldn't get on the dive with out an AAD, then why should an AAD change that decision.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[pilotdave 0]

The AAD doesn't change any decision. The AAD is an available option. "If I go on that jump, I want an AAD." Not "I have an AAD, therefore I will go on that jump."

I know you guys don't see the difference. It's cause and effect - or something. You're assuming they are reversible. I don't agree that they are.

"I won't jump off a bridge unless I have a parachute" is not equivalent to "I have a parachute, therefore I'm going to jump off a bridge."

Knowing that an AAD is more likely to save your life on a raft dive than on a 4-way RW jump, what would be a good reason to decide to go on a raft dive without an AAD? Yeah, I realize you don't mean to be arguing that point. But that's just turning around your argument the same way you're turning around mine.

Dave

[dorbie 0]

Quote

A quick comparison of the fatality rates (per 1000 jumpers) from, say 1984 and 2004 suggests that skydivers 20 years ago were willing, in general, to take more risks than now. Does that make them better somehow?

There's less of them around now so maybe the ones who made it really ARE better?

I'm sure many who didn't survive were better than me and about half of those would almost certainly have been saved by an AAD. It's a no brainer. Any jump you go on you could go in with a no-pull. If anyone really thinks otherwise they should reevaluate what they're doing and maybe take something up where poor risk asessment is not so life threatening.