skypuppy

I can't believe how many people here seem to think it's fine to require me, with thousands of jumps, to buy an aad for my rig, but it's a cop-out to put a radio on a student. I'm glad I came up the way I did.... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Ask Ian about feathering the wrong engine.... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

And how would you define an alcoholic? I'm sure there are lots of us out there in the skydiving world.... I'm humourously reminded of my buddy's son, an officer in the armed forces. On his medical the doctor (female) asked him if he drank beer every day. As a young single guy in his 20's, living on base with a bunch of other young single guys who would all get together at the mess each day, what do think they would be doing? He couldn't believe a doctor in the forces would be surprised that a young single guy in the forces would have a beer or two each day.... I'd be more tempted to pull the doctor's licence than tell the guy he's an alcoholic. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I see why they call it dramazone dot come. ______________________________________________ If it seems that way why bother with the 2500+ word posts (I didn't read it by the way) If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

In Canada they have actually taken away the right for c and d Certificated jumpers to do demos. In order to do any demo in Canada a jumper needs AT LEAST a C AND an exhibition jump rating.... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I believe your country is also the site of the first confirmed aad fatality, eh? but if you're used to it. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Once you've established you can legitimately remove an a-licenced >jumper's right to choose, it's a simple matter to say, 'I know this D-licenced > person should be able to make his own decision, but this one is too >important to allow him a choice, so I'll make it for him". We do that now; we don't let A-licensed jumpers do demos, night jumps, live water jumps etc. It seems to have worked out OK. ______________________________________________ Again, as far as I'm concerned that's two different things. The examples you list are things they have to qualify and get endorsements in order to do -- not a piece of equipment to do without. And again, if they can make a-licence people wear them, why not b-licence, why not c-licence -- dammit just makem all wearem..... Besides -- in canada we do allow a-licence people to do night/water jumps -- they just need to get the endorsement.... I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Glad there weren't any kids out there watching the jumpers .... When the helmet came down.... If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

>The question is, where is that point? That is indeed the question. A license is a good point. You could make an argument for later (B license? C?) but that should be on a DZ to DZ basis, not a national one. ________________________________________________ Here I tend to agree with you. The problem I have with making it mandatory for a-licenced people is you're saying 'I know they should be able to make their own decision, but this one is too important to allow them the choice, and we'll make it for them'. Once you've established you can legitimately remove an a-licenced jumper's right to choose, it's a simple matter to say, 'I know this D-licenced person should be able to make his own decision, but this one is too important to allow him a choice, so I'll make it for him". So I go with as soon as a person has an a-licence, we're saying he knows enough about the sport to determine his own advancement, or at least where to go to for advise, etc., to decide his path. And therefore he should be able to dictate his own progression, within the established guidelines.... In other words, I really don't agree with dzo's making rules about mandatory aads above and beyond the national organizations, but I will agree with it grudgingly as long as I still have the choice of withdrawing from that dropzone and going down the road to one that doesn't infringe on my right of choice. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I thought that in the States aads WERE mandatory for all students, and had been for a while. I KNOW that in Canada, aads have been mandatory for students since before I started jumping in 1979, and no one on this thread has ever suggested (afaik) that that should be changed. In fact I believe that generally it is accepted almost world-wide that students should have aads. So I don't know why students would ever even enter into a discussion on aads. (this is directed more to Bill von than tjm) I do agree that even when they may technically have a choice, as they become a-licenced jumpers and begin looking for that first rig -- most never consider not getting an aad. As long as they realize what it means once they have it and decide to hum it a bit, that is still fine with me. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

As an instructor I sometimes say just that. I agree that experienced jumpers should have the option, but before a certain point they simply do not understand the risks. _________________________________________________ The question is, where is that point? I believe it is when they are deemed to be able to look after themselves -- ie, when they get an 'a' licence.... Unless some other reason such as a chronic inability to maintain altitude awareness, or a medical issue, raises itself. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

IOW -- don't fly with a hard-on! If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

What about Viagra? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

That is really cool. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Pete Luter just went in at Z-Hills, an RSL or Skyhook may have saved his life. He is 'cooler' than you are and highly experienced, but he got 'bit' by something. Safety equipment is there for a reason. You and anyone else are not immune to the chain of events that lead to accidents REGARDLESS of your skill or 'cool' level. __________________________________________________ Now I've taken the time to think. Unless I've had 4 or 5 beers, I don't think I ever claimed to be cool... While I do hope to be average, I know I'll never be a walk-on for a casual big-way in lotus land. My comment about the reserve ride was simply an example in reply to Peter's post above - 'chops at 2000' and tumbles away, some might pull right away, others might get stable before the reserve pull. That could be a thread of its own.' I didn't realize we were talking about RSL's, I have no problem with them, and in fact have one on one of my main rigs. The other is a crw rig and doesn't have one. The earlier seat-belt analogy you used works perfectly with RSL's -- they're added to virtually all rigs at the factory for very little cost and add immensely to safety. The same is not true of a $1300 aad, which can add 50% or more to cost of a decent used rig. They work well in certain situations, but it should be a personal choice whether to have one or not. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

have more time to actually figure out where I am going to land, Well, it was right over the middle of Love's field, and a round reserve (24' army surpus, tri-mesh, no diaper), so I didn't have a lot of choice in the matter. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

And AADs fire on swoopers all the time right? You are naming a very specific group (small group) of skydivers, who are generally highly experienced and are capable of handling their own AAD decision/situation for a particular jump, not on all jumps. Not necessarily 'relying on an AAD', but able to turn it off, or even purchase the right product for their type of activity. The Swoop does not negate the possible need for an AAD, it just demonstrates a situation where having one requires perhaps more planning for your particular jump. And what are the 'other types of jumps' you suggest where you might not want one? __________________________________________________ Do you really believe that swoopers are a small group? I'm asking you here as a dzo of a busy dropzone. And yes, I hear regularly about them firing, we've even had a few here. I also don't believe that the so-called swoop-ready aads actually work much better than the general class, I've heard of situations where they have fired as well. As far as 'other types of jumps', I'm mainly talking about crw. Most experienced crw jumpers I've talked to do not want to wear aads (I know there are a few that do). Are aads mandatory at your dz? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Actually, you said this.... "but don't ague against a piece of safety equipment, that has been proven to save lives." End of quote/. Earlier you said 'no one' waits for their cypres to fire, then after you read the list, you said almost 99%. Actually I'd say 99% is being generous, that would mean only 3-4 people, and there were more than that, but I don't see the point of arguing. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Like I told Wendy, I don't really "care" if people use them or not, that is your decision, but don't ague against a piece of safety equipment, that has been proven to save lives. Regardless if it could possibly kill you, the chances of it saving you are greater, even if by 1%, and that is enough for people to use them, and enough to keep people alive, no matter the reason for their use. If you want to see people stop relying on an AAD like you say, then in-doctrine that training into an AAF course, make it clearly known the risks and benefits and that they are only back-ups and teach them that they don't work 100% of the time, but don't argue against their use, as if its a black and white situation. Help bolster the educated use of them, not breed blind absence of them. ________________________________________________ If you don't care -- then stop telling ME what to do. And if you can argue for them, then I can damn well argue that people should be able to decide themselves, instead of having them forced down their throats. Surprising how many people say they don't care, but then try to insist everyone have one, instead of putting one on their own rig and just shutting up. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

My first chop was at Swoop in 1980 -- hi-speed bag-lock at @2000, cutaway the r-3's and did an unintentional backloop, levelled out, figured 'only one chance left, if it's not going to work I figure I'd rather not have too long to worry about it" and did another couple of backloops before dumping the 24 foot rip at about a grand. The reserve doesn't turn into a pumpkin below 1000 feet. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

________________________________________________ The increase as a percent in cost of adding seatbelts to a car is way less than the percentage increase in cost of a used rig you might buy for $2-3000. And then you have people with multiple rigs. And then there's the fact of aads firing during swoops or on other types of jumps where they're not desired. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Like you said, you're guessing. I'm figuring that they do get reported, since the cutter needs replacing. And the fact someone is already in the act of pulling their handle means it isn't a save. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

haha no but seriously...lets be serious, nobody relies on an AAD, if we have an AAD fire, we needed it, not wanted it. I don't think you will ever meet anyone who regularly has a cypress fire, because they think it is fail proof, thats making a very gross assumption and overplaying the situation greatly. ________________________________________________ And you know this because -- read the list, there are saves listed because the person decided to wait for it, just as some people are on the list more than once. Who's the drama queen now? If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

The Cypres saves list is way overblown. To begin with, if you read it over, close to 50% of the saves are tandems or students, who genereally wear aads anyway. Then, even though they say they don't list it unless it is a 'real' save, as they got into more recent years, there are saves listed where the victim actually had the handle in his hand, yet it is counted as a save. If you take out the 8-12% of saves that occurred during the transition from belly-band to leg-strap to boc, with twisted harnesses etc. that are not easily replicated with today's rigs, you're left with about 170 saves over the life of the list, or less than half. The Cypres saves list is a marketing tool for the company and even for the associations such as the French national association who look to gov't and say -- see, we can make it idiot-proof.... Vigil and Argus lists are even worse. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

I recall reading about a cypres save when a dude doing crw thought he deployed his reserve but it was someone elses canopy on him. Yeah, I remember reading about that. Maybe a decade back?? Guy tracked for a lake, figuring it was worth a shot, after someone hacked a canopy away that wasn't his reserve as he thought. Still, the original question is a valid one when it comes to the usefulness (or danger) of AAD's for CRW. ______________________________________________ I guess in that case the aad really did interrupt the process of natural selection. It's one thing to run out of time. It's another thing to give up. If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone