If you disconnect your RSL...

[The111 1]

I've been looking at my new rig (Vector 3). I'm not at a point where I would want to disconnect my RSL for anything, but I know a lot of people do in certain conditions. I was playing with it out of curiosity, and noticed that if I were to disconnect it and then jump, the yellow tab and the metal clasp would probably flap around in the wind quite a bit and possibly even pull out that tuck tab part of the RSL, which would make the flapping part even longer.

Do people who disconnect their RSL's just let it hang, or do something special with it?

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Hooknswoop 19]

Re-connect it to the cutaway cable housing. Make sure it is not routed around or through anything.

Derek

[Spizzzarko 0]

RSL's have been hotley debated since there inception. Most camera jumpers chose not to use them, or to disconnect them when they are jumping cameras. The reason being, there is a large amount of junk attached to their craniums. Take for instance, you are filming a tandem jump and you have a spinning malfunction that has wrapped up into your camera. Do you want to instantaniously cut that away? Choice A. Cut away.... The main separates from the rig but is stil entangled with your camera. Your trusty RSL is attached, now you have the chance of a main reserve entanglement. Choice B. Jetteson the helmet and cut away. Now you are back in freefall but you are clear of entanglements. Your reserve is free to deploy, and after having rolled onto your stomache and deploying your reserve, and making several practice flares, you will land in the peas with a perfect tip toe landing. (assuming the gods are on your side that day. I try not to anger them by consuming offerings of beer on a daily basis) RSL's are a hit or miss subject with different jumpers. Personally, I don't like them, but that's just me. I don't feel comfortable unless I have some sort of material out over my head by 3,000'. I jump a smaller canopy so that gives my a cushion of time to deal with problems. I hope this will help you to make a decision about RSL's. That's all I have to say about that.

[councilman24 37]

DON'T, as I've seen about 3 or 4 times over the years, connect it to the harness ring of the three ring! This will keep your main from leaving.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

DON'T, as I've seen about 3 or 4 times over the years, connect it to the harness ring of the three ring! This will keep your main from leaving.

I agree that connecting it to the large ring of the 3-ring is a bad idea, but I tested it on the ground and couldn't make the 3-ring hang up with a brass RSL shackle connected to the large 3-ring of a mini-ring system.

Derek

[councilman24 37]

It can get by, and probably will. But I'd rather scare 'em into not doing it. The real winner was the guy that ran the RSL lanyard through the big ring before he attached it. Again, it might (probably?) would have cleared but not very bright.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[b1jercat 0]

I disconnect mine when I do crew, I have enough slack to tuck it into the top of my mud flap. whether this is right or wrong I have no idea. ask your rigger.

blue

jerry

[The111 1]

Quote

DON'T, as I've seen about 3 or 4 times over the years, connect it to the harness ring of the three ring! This will keep your main from leaving.

Yeh, I thought of this on my own and had the same thoughts you and Derek are having. It *seems* like it shouldn't prevent a cutaway, but it's still too close to interfering with the 3-ring's function for my comfort. I don't really like the idea of anything sharing space with my 3-ring. Derek's idea of attaching it to the cable housing is the best I think. But for now I'm staying hooked up anyway. :)

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[billbooth 10]

I am not a camera flyer, but it seems to me that if you have a main malfunction, and even suspect a riser (or two) is entangled with your camera helmet, you would release you helmet BEFORE cutting away your main. Otherwise you might end up hanging (and I do mean hanging) from your helmet. This would lead to rapid unconsciousness, if it did not break your neck in the first place. Question: How well do camera helmet releases work with 2 or 3 times your body weight on them during a spinning malfunction.

Following this line of thinking, what difference would an RSL make? If you had an entanglement, your pre-released helmet would simply leave with your malfunction, the RSL would function normally, and not cause any problem.

[dragon2 2]

From what I was told (by a very very experienced camera guy):

You want to be absolutely sure you're stable if you deploy your reserve. If you have your helmet still on (ie it wasn't entangled with your main so you didn't need to get rid of it), and you're unstable when you pull your reserve, you risk getting the reserve entangled with your helmet!

Therefore you need to chop, make sure you're stable, then pull silver. And that's why you should disconnect your RSL when jumping camera.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[rigging65 0]

Quote

...that's why you should disconnect your RSL when jumping camera...

There's also the idea that you might cutaway from a non-entagled situation, have a riser snag your helmet while it's going by, thus turning it into an "entangled" situation. By not wearing an RSL you are basically making sure you have fallen totally free of the main before putting anything else out. CReW works the same way, you want to be sure you've fallen free from the mess before you put anything else out.

Let's not forget one thing though: For the vast majority of jumps, a camera man's job is done by about 4K, so he has time to sort things out if they go wrong. CReW falls in a similar category. Since we're already under canopy from altitude, again, we've got time to work out issues that might arise. Around here, we stop all work at 2K to keep problems from developing low.

This isn't true for most jumpers. If you're opening at 3K or so, a high(er) speed mal...including diving line twists...is going to eat up altitude quickly, resulting in you possibly getting low before you can get away from the problem. This is where the RSL is golden. Down in the basement, you want stuff out fast, but in the correct order. Nothing is faster (in the correct order) than an RSL.

If you were sure you were going to be opening high ALL THE TIME, ON EVERY JUMP, then you might have enough time to deal with whatever arises. IMO, that's not reality for most jumpers...hence why I feel the RSL is a good idea.

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

[riddler 0]

Quote

You want to be absolutely sure you're stable if you deploy your reserve.

Being separated from your main before your reserve is deployed is always more than a good idea. But I think being clear from your main is different than being stable. Read Bill von Novak's article on RSLs and stability (point 1):

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=18

[dragon2 2]

Well yeah, but what I meant is that there is a big difference whether you jump with or without a big snag hazard on your head.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[billbooth 10]

1. I'm curious. Does anyone know of a case where a main riser actually snagged a camera, while the riser was leaving, after a breakaway?

2. Anyone who says it's a good idea for a camera flyer, especially if he is wearing camera "wings", to pull perfectly stable, has never seen the dance a reserve pilot chute and bridle does in a "stable" burble. I can't think of a worse snag hazard for a camera flyer than a burbling pilot chute at the end of a 15 foot bridle.

3. "Getting Stable" after breaking away from a spinning malfunction takes a lot longer than you might think. You can easily eat up 500 feet before you even begin to look for you reserve handle. Then another 500 feet finding, and pulling, one of those pud reserve handles that are becoming so popular. If you have gloves and a full face helmet, it can take even longer.

This is why I developed the Skyhook RSL. An all but guaranteed stable reserve deployment, in under 100 feet, with no chance of a pilot chute burbling around. Please figure the Skyhook's design features before you make a blanket decision not to use an RSL.

[ihateskydivers 0]

Derek, good idea.

Spizarko, you read the post wrong, your startin a debate over the wrong thing...HEX

Bill, good point, i agree, and is why i keep mine connected, with many many camera jumps under my belts. I have heard rumors of snags, but never heard of a fatality.

[KellyF 16]

I personally think that the biggest snag hazard on a camera helmet (as far as a riser is concerned) is the ring sight. I would hope that if a riser were to snag a ring sight, it would simply rip it off the helmet. Of course there are all sorts of different helmet designs with the side mount types being more likely to cause some sort of interference. But we should think for a moment about what it would take to make a riser actually hang up on the camera or mount itself. Within 2-3" (or less) of movement after the riser is released, the front and rear risers would need to spread out maybe 4" to catch the underside of a side mount. Keep in mind that the "crotch" between the front and rear risers is usually going to be real close to the same level as the camera mount. I think that some camera jumper have had to cutaway from a malfunction and maybe felt their helmet get bumped by the hardware on a departing riser and mistakenly interpreted that as a snag.

As far as the getting stable argument, it is more likely that the use of an RSL will result in a clean PC launch (given a "modern" PC design with a good spring) with the POSSIBILITY of line twists on the deployed reserve, than it's use will result in an entangled mess of a reserve malfunction like many jumpers have been led to fear by some well respected individuals in the community. Sure, incidents can be found where people will blame the RSL (maybe correctly), but there are by far more "incidents" where the RSL did the job it was designed to do that we don't hear about because the jumper didn't get hurt or killed.

[cssriggers 0]

Quote

Bill, good point, i agree, and is why i keep mine connected, with many many camera jumps under my belts. I have heard rumors of snags, but never heard of a fatality.

We had a fatality at CSS due to main suspension lines entangling with a ring sight two years ago. I believe there was another fatality in 2001 caused by main lines entangled with camera equipment.

Since Rich's death, our DZ has required that all video staff have a single-point helmet cutaway system. As riggers we worked hard + closely with videographers on the system. It works great on the ground, but has not yet been tested in real life.

I realize most posts in this thread are about a main riser snagging camera equipment ... be aware that microlines can be even more dangerous.

Alpha Mike Foxtrot,
JHL

[KellyF 16]

Quote

We had a fatality at CSS due to main suspension lines entangling with a ring sight two years ago. I believe there was another fatality in 2001 caused by main lines entangled with camera equipment.

Can you elaborate on what caused the lines to get entangled with the ring sight? I can't come up with a scenario in my head where the lines could get near the ring sight (the riser would need to go slack or something really odd).

[kallend 2,121]

As I read this I wonder if you folks are looking at the wrong problem. Why not fix camera helmet design to eliminate snag points? How hard can that be for a nation that put men on the Moon?

...

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

[rigging65 0]

Quote

As I read this I wonder if you folks are looking at the wrong problem. Why not fix camera helmet design to eliminate snag points? How hard can that be for a nation that put men on the Moon?

Hard, no. Expensive, yes.

There are some really cool one-of designs out there that basically eliminate almost every snag point, but they have to be custom built to fit the cameras of the jumper, as well as custom fit for the guy's (or gal's) noggin. None of this is cheap....

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

[billbooth 10]

I'm with Kelly on this one. For the life of me, I can't figure out how to tangle main suspension lines with a ring sight...unless you open in a rapid front loop, that is.

[KellyF 16]

Maybe a real unstable deployment with the main bag going under an arm or something like that, but you would hope that someone jumping a camera would have made it past that stage.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I'm with Kelly on this one. For the life of me, I can't figure out how to tangle main suspension lines with a ring sight...unless you open in a rapid front loop, that is.

The point is moot though, because we know it has happened. There's two dead skydivers to show this. I know it's a risk for me because I had a risers strike me accross the nose about a year back, it took some skin off. If a riser can hit my nose, it can hit a ring sight.

I am not concerned about an entaglement happenening during or after the cuttaway. I AM concerned about an entaglement that happens BEFORE cuttaway, that a canopy cuttaway won't clear. I'm concerned a wayward risers snags my side-mount (I don't have a ring sight) during deployement, and a simple canopy cuttaway won't clear the malfunction.

I don't have an RSL because I want to have time to fully cuttaway my main/helmet entanglement before I deploy a reserve.

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[cssriggers 0]

What AndyMan said.

Sorry man - I can't elaborate, I just know it happened. I certainly don't know HOW it happened ... but it did happen, and did result in a fatality.

I'm kind of surprised that this is news. It was pretty well publicized at the time.

Please see http://www.skydivingfatalities.com/
Year - 2001
Incident - #30

Also check out the intro to the 2001 report.

Alpha Mike Foxtrot,
JHL

[alan 1]

Maybe these don't apply to what you have in mind, but should be food for considerstion. This is just from 2001, if you were to look deeper thwere may be more. The details are in the reports at the web-site.

http://www.skydivingfatalities.com/

2001 U.S. Analysis • Three jumpers have died this year when an entanglement occurred in some way with their helmet/camera combination. Two entanglements were with the main during/after a malfunction+cutaway, and one was with the reserve bridle after a cutaway. Only the person in the latter situation manage to remove the helmet before impact. If you jump with a camera helmet which has any snag points (such as a ring-sight, or camera mounting bracket) you are taking a substantial additional risk. If you further do not have some type of quick release, you are adding even more risk. At a minimum, you should have, built in to your malfunction plan, the intention of removing your helmet in case of an entanglement. Of course, this slows down your malfunction procedure, so deploying slightly higher in general is probably necessary to keep this from adding more risk as well. Weigh your options, think carefully, and consider modifying your helmet to reduce the chance of snags in the first place.

alan