obelixtim

No. A freefly friendly rig means you can do freeflying with a lot more safety, and you shouldn't have premature openings because they are built with preventing such accidental deployments in mind. Apart from that everything is normal. You still have to deploy in a normal position. Deploying in an abnormal position will most likely cause a problem of one sort or another. Thats why stability is drilled into first jumpers. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Sorry, can't see that....Edit, can now. A canopy could rip for several reasons, although it is very unusual. A couple of reasons could be.... Could be a manufacturing fault if it was new. Could be wworn out if it was old (canopy fabric weakens over time, especially with exposure to UV light). Could have sustained some damage previously. In this case if he had a premature deployment while head down, his speed, and the subsequent opening shock would be greater than normal,. and if his body position put unusual stress on the canopy, combined with an old canopy that might have been enough to blow it up. Its a good reason to deploy in a stable position. These guys took gear that was not suitable for what they attempted, and almost paid a high price for their stupidity. Treat gear properly, and generally it'll treat you properly. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Thats a very interesting response. And to answer your question, not at the moment. Can I ask why you asked?. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

I'd like to PM you about this...its important, but your profile doesn't seem to allow it...can you change that?. To everyone: Be VERY careful what you say here. I strongly suspect that this is a not so subtle attempt to stir up trouble for the DZ involved.... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Edit: I'm talking about NZ here. Normally, at the scene of an incident, the gear is first examined in situ by an investigator before anything is touched (if it is fatal). This can only be by a rated parachute expert. It is always treated as a crime scene until proven otherwise. In NZ every instructor rating holder, and S&TA is trained in accident investigation. On every DZ is a checklist to be followed, and this is usually handed to the first cop on the scene so he can see the procedures to be followed. At this point the investigation is carried out under CAA regulations, which have priority over local LE. But LE, by law must be present in a supervisory role before anything can be touched. The local investigator conducts an initial scene examination and gear inspection,( visual only) and video and photographic evidence is taken. Once that is done, the investigator can advise the cops that the body can be removed. At that point, the gear (which still has still not been touched) is preserved in situ, under LE supervision until an independant parachute investigator arrives (cannot be a local) and takes over the investigation...it becomes his case. The local investigator then becomes an assistant in effect, and it is his task to collect eyewitness accounts and locate relevant records to be made available to the Chief Investigator (paperwork, logs, names addresses etc) which he hands over to the CI The CI will then conduct his own examination of the equipment and collect physical evidence... When he has done his on scene examination, the equipment is then handed over to police custody for safekeeping and is available to the CI for further examination at a later time, when components can be examined in more detail. (AAD's and the like) Any cops who race in and start messing with equipment (unless it is immediately necessary to prevent further danger to people) is liable to heavy sanction for interfereing with evidence, They could easily destroy evidence inadvertantly which could lead to similar accidents in the future. CAA law always takes precedence over anything the police come up with, and that is the reason the DZ carries a document which clearly shows this authority and outlines the procedures, which is handed to the cops at the scene.... The cops are basically only there in a supervisory and custodians role (You can require them to place a guard at a scene for however long it takes to get a CI on site, which could be up to a day) Its a pretty good system which prevents any attempts to "cover up" evidence, which is actually quite easy to do, considering that the cops and CAA don't have any expertise in parachuting. Not sure how it works in other countries, but I believe LE have a lot more influence over what happens, which can be a very bad thing.... I've been called to act as a CI by the police on 3 or 4 occasions....and have had to at times, order the cops to desist from their approach to the situation....I had one beligerent one proclaim loudly that he wanted to arrest the S&TA on the spot, on a manslaughter charge, before we had even looked at anything... He soon calmed down when I informed him in very clear terms of the consequences to himself of going off half cocked.... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

I tend to regard successful AAD fires as a bounce that didn't happen. The events leading up to that point need careful evaluation and EFFECTIVE corrective action should be taken. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Is that fish, or rat I'm smelling here?. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Again, good post. Well said. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

The Last Waltz.... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Perfectly put. Thats exactly what people need to understand. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Good man. You are starting to get the point. No problem. Carry on. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

And if they are not immediately at your beck and call, and immediate action needs to be taken to prevent an unsafe practise or event? Careful!. your halo might slip down and hit you on the head.... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Oh boo hoo...cry me a river.... You think the foolishness should just be ignored. People can learn important lessons from others screw ups, more so if the screwup has been accompanied by wilful ignoring of sound safety practises in attempt to tick the "cool" box.. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

And you think none of us have ever thought of these things?. Well I've yet to see anyone on the other thread say their jump numbers negates all other arguments. You are just making that one up. What I do see are people with vast active experience of running DZ's and dealing with the consequences, trying to get the message across that foolishness is not OK ,and asking for people to get active in the effort to make bad canopy choices and inexperience very uncool. Are you willing to pipe up when you see unsafe behaviour, or are you gonna do nothing, and then after the incident bleat loudly that: "somebody shoulda done something". My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Are you going to come up with anything positive in the way of suggestions, or are you just going to sit on the sidelines taking sly potshots at people who you disagree with?... Take a look in the mirror when you start name calling. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Is there some way of communicating on the net that everyone can live with that we don't know about?. Like real life, people will always disagree, and that is what makes life interesting. Is robust discussion and exchange of views impossible?. See, I just don't get this "internet bullies" tag. As was pointed out, people have got the right of reply, and can defend themselves quite easily if they feel they have a valid argument. Most fail to do so for reasons of their own, but often its because there IS no valid argument to justify their position. On here, several people with a lot of real life experience have come up with their points of view on an ugly cancer in our sport...specifically, senseless injuries and fatalities. I haven't actually seen much posted by these individuals that could truly be classed as bullying. The message is quite simple and clear. And it should be close to the heart of everyone who cares about the sport. Good robust debate should be encouraged, yet some people seem to interpret that as unfair, over the top, or uncalled for, when in reality they have no substantial counter argument to what has been discussed. Look back at the thread that inspired this one, and see in which direction the name calling is going.... Look at the terms I used to start this thread...all used by the PC brigade, to try to discredit the individuals posting what is basically, in skydiving, common sense. Have they come up with better solutions/suggestions even when repeatedly invited to do so?. No. In my book, calling someone an idiot for demonstrated, repeated foolish behaviour, in the face of sound advice and warnings, based on previous experiences with similar individuals, is entirely warranted. I noticed people ignored the post where I pointed out some of these same "assholes" were quick and generous with their praise when this individual posted that he had got the message. Personally, most of us on the experienced side of this bridge are nice guys, who collectively have contributed a massive amount of positive to the sport. The characterisation of us as bullies, assholes etc etc, is unfair and over the line in my opinion... But do we get all whiny about it?. No. We brush it off and make it into a joke. Because we do retain a sense of humour. And for all those who refuse to use DZ.com, thats their perogative. I think its a great site, and I've learnt a lot on it, especially about disciplines which I am not too familiar with. I've seen a lot of newbies helped out as well. If the mockers don't want to come here, its their loss. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Great!!. Women jokes. This should start a shit fight...but remember YOU started it off! Why were shopping trolleys invented?. So wimmin could learn to stand on their hind legs.... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

And how many Aussies does it take to change a lightbulb?. 100...... 1 to hold the bulb, the other 99 to turn the house around. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Reminds me of a joke where a guy asks the farmer how deep is the creek and the farmer indicates with his hands that its only a few inches deep, so the guy drives his car in, which immediately goes completely under the water....he jumps out and screams at the farmer "I thought you said it was only a couple of inches deep".... "Well it only comes halfway up our ducks"...... My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

And I doubt very much whether it is for anyone else either. We've all been around the block enough times to know what is effective, and when. I started this thread as a bit of a light hearted response to some of the "outrage" on display on the other thread. A sense of humour is pretty essential at times. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Ah, thats the same blonde walking down the street, spots a banana skin lying on the footpath in front of her. "Damn, I'm gonna fall down AGAIN!!". Later, being late for work, she told the boss there had been a power cut, and she was stuck on the escalator for an hour. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

You have to be a snivelling cowardly internet hardman as well. Flashman is our god. Tick the boxes... You're in!!., My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Not unless there's beer, clubs, guns, and dirty girls... And a nerd/idiot. Just one. So we can practise our techniques without fear of retaliation. Because we have to be cowards since we are bullies... Are we TOUGH, or what?. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Its why I don't fly long haul anywhere via the US. The nonsense you go through elsewhere is bad enough, but not half as bad as there, even if you are just in transit. In fact, it puts me off even visiting the US again. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

Many different reasons.... Not all are non posters for the single reason that snugly fits your scenario though. A lot of people like to just lurk. Some only PM. Thats fine. And 95 % of skydivers prolly don't even know DZ.com even exists. I'm surprised that some people cannot handle a bit of robust debate and are apparently frightened off by it. How do they handle it when something serious is going down?. And have you ever been on a DZ when someone crashes and burns. Dealing with the blood, guts, splintered bone, shit, snot and pain, while trying to keep your head in the right place so you can actually be of some help. I don't want to be part of that either. Sometimes idiots don't give me a choice though. Somebody has to do it, We can't all drive off, or stand around in small groups speaking in hushed voices and sniffing into our hankerchieves, much as we'd like to. Its a dirty sometimes bloody job, and somebody has to get their hands dirty. People do it so some of you don't have to. I can't fathom why people would protest a bit of lively debate by a few who want to prevent or limit that. Still waiting for some workable suggestions from the anti bully brigade. So far I've seen nothing. My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....