pilotdave

Ok, lemme keep trying to understand. BECAUSE kallend won't do 10-way without an AAD but continues to do 10-way, he is not a safe skydiver? Dave

I'm sorry if I've misquoted you. Point me to a post where I did... I'm not sure what you're referring to. How is that different from "If you want to skydive, you must be willing to skydive without an AAD"? To me, it's exactly the same. If I chose to not do solos without an AAD, you are saying I shouldn't do solos. Therefore, if I want to do solos, I must be willing to do them without an AAD. Is that the concept you have a problem with? You feel that I'm misrepresenting what you're saying? If I won't do ANY skydive without an AAD, skydiving is too dangerous for me so I shouldn't do it at all? Are you not saying that? Dave

I've read the whole thread. Don't have a chip on my shoulder. I'm not even someone that won't jump without an AAD. And I'm not a very argumentative person. I just don't understand your argument. If I'm misreading what you're saying, please correct me. But here's the gist as far as I'm understanding it. If somebody will do a jump with an AAD that they won't do without an AAD, that jump is too dangerous for that person and they should not do it. There are no exceptions. Skill/experience doesn't come into play. It's only about willingness to jump without an AAD. Dave

Yes I totally agree that the guy that doesn't skydive is safer!!! I've said that over and over and over! Who is safer: The guy that will only do 10-way with an AAD, or the guy that will do 10-way with or without an AAD, all else being equal. THAT IS THE EXAMPLE I AM QUESTIONING BECAUSE WE AGREE ON YOUR EXAMPLE! The answer is THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE! One is not safer than the other. But that day when the second guy finds his AAD is shut off on jump run and does his 10-way anyway, he is LESS SAFE because he no longer has a backup. That is perfectly fine. He accepts that risk. I have no problem with that. Turn it around...the other guy finds his AAD off on jump run. He rides the plane down (or does another jump that he feels is safer). He has turned into your example! He sits out a jump he feels has a high collision risk. Dave

Exactly. Hook and ron never say not to use an AAD. But they do say that every skydiver must be willing to jump without an AAD. But they never say why. Either you must be willing to do it, or jumping is too dangerous for you. I have a cypres. If I want to sit out a jump because my cypres isn't available, what is wrong with that? Give me ANY REASON for why I SHOULD be willing to do ANY skydive without my AAD. Anybody? Dave

I live a sad existance... I have nothing better to do. Dave

This is the third time I have asked this...Show me once where I said that. I have said don't go on skydives with an AAD that you think would be too dangerous without one. Seriously, you are missing the point and assuming I said shit I never said.....Find it.... You have told kallend over and over that he should not do 10-way if he isnt willing to do it without an aad. I am asking why he should be willing to do it without an aad. I see no argument at all for why anyone is better off without an aad. But still he should be willing to do it. If my prediction is right, you'll say that you never said he should be willing, only that if he isn't, he shouldnt do 10-way. I'm speaking hypothetically. Why should anyone be willing to do 10-way with no aad? What is the benefit in not having one? We know the downside... Dave

Why can't it be "the risk of a collision is high so therefore i'd only do it with an extra backup?" I just don't get this argument. He's good enough to do 10-way safely. He's unlikely to hurt himself or anyone else doing it. He's proven that. His safety and the safety of the others he jumps with is not affected in any way by his philosophy on cypres usage. I've yet to see any REAL reason why he should stop doing 10-way. You might say that he should sit down and really think about the risks he's taking. But those are his risks to take and they don't affect anyone else and they are no different than anyone of his skill level/experience doing the same types of jumps. I understand how a cypres can lead someone to go on jumps that they don't have the skill to do safely. That affects others. Those people are a danger to themselves and others on their jumps. Accidents affect all of us. I would understand an argument for a wingloading BSR or something which prevents people from being stupid about canopy choice to help prevent fatalities. But kallend doing 10-way has no effect on the rest of us. If 10-way was just too dangerous in your mind, I'd have no problem with you saying we should all stop doing 10-way. But your argument that kallend should stop because he uses a cypres simply makes zero sense to me. Sure, he'd be safer if he stopped. That's not in question. You'd be safer if you stopped jumping too. Compare someone with 100 jumps who'll go do 10-way without an AAD to kallend. You aren't telling the guy with 100 jumps not to do 10-way. You're not telling him it might be too dangerous for him. You're telling him that if he's ok with the risk, that makes it acceptable. While on the other hand, you're telling kallend, who has plenty of skill and experience to be doing 10 way that it's too dangerous for him because he chooses to use an AAD. Simply makes no sense to me. If an AAD has benefit, why should anyone be willing to jump without one? Dave

Sure, why not? I'm not saying there's anything wrong with doing AFF without an AAD. You know the risk. You know that adding an AAD doesn't make it "safe" either. I can't imagine any jump that I'd personally do with an AAD that I wouldn't also do without one. I'm not an AFF instructor and I'm not doing 300 ways. I'd go do my usual small RW jumps with no AAD... a few times. I'd "chance it" that I won't need an AAD on one of those jumps. If I do need one, well, I'd die and that would suck but that's a risk we're all willing to take no matter what equipment we use. I'd just prefer to keep my exposure time without an AAD as low as possible. If I was an AFF instructor or freefly coach or something where the collision risk is much higher than it is for me now, I might feel that no exposure time to jumping without an AAD is reasonable. Who knows. Depends on how much risk of a serious collision there really is. Maybe if my cypres was out, there'd be students I'd refuse to jump with or something. I have no idea. But the fact is, you see benefit in an AAD and you've decided to get one. That sounds like good judgement to me. If you woke up tomorrow and decided you'll stop doing AFF until your AAD arrives, do you think that means you shouldn't do AFF at all? Dave

There most definitely is a blind spot in front of a plane in a climb. The angle the nose is pointed up is not the same as the angle the plane is climbing. Even if it was, traffic climbing in the opposite direction at the same altitude would not be visible. Angle of attack makes the blind spot bigger. When I fly, I won't simply point the nose up and climb at best rate of climb airspeed all the way up. Course I rarely have had the need or desire to go much over 3000 feet. But many pilots that have long climbs drop the nose a little, pick up some airspeed, and do a "cruise climb." I'll just drop the nose every so often and take a look ahead, or s-turn a little to use the side windows to see my path ahead. ATC can help, but they are allowed to ignore VFR aircraft if they're busy. Avoiding traffic is all about looking where you're going. Take a look to the left, see if it's clear, then turn left. Keep flying toward big chunks of empty sky. Dave

No, I'm saying he's NOT a better instructor. The only difference is that he's willing to take higher risks. He has a higher "risk tolerance." A few people have said that anyone that won't do AFF without an AAD shouldn't do AFF at all. I'm saying that their decision to use an AAD does not make them less qualified instructors. The AAD issue isn't black and white. Some people thing they'd be taking more risk by using an AAD. The basic argument there is that they know if they go low they'll pull their main. That's probably true. Whether or not that makes the AAD more dangerous than no AAD is another story. But, if you have an AFF instructor that believes the AAD has a high benefit on jumps with an increased collision risk (AFF jumps) and he chooses to do AFF without one, what does that say about his judgement? I don't think it makes him any less of an instructor...that's all about air skills and teaching ability, right? Edit: A lot of jumpers don't think they NEED AADs. And of course, nobody NEEDS an AAD until they are knocked out or lose altitude awareness. But some of those people that thought they had the skill to avoid EVER needing an AAD really did need one. And died because they didn't have one. What is wrong with a jumper recognizing he is no better than anyone that came before him and choosing to use an AAD? Dave

So you've had a cutaway? Did you continue to jump that same canopy afterward? Would you have if you didn't have a reserve? You do CRW? Will you do CRW without carrying a hook knife? Are you hook knife dependent? Would you do CRW without a reserve (assuming it was legal)? Do you think it's smarter to do 10-way with or without an AAD? Would you do it without one? I might be wrong but I bet you think it's smarter to do it with an AAD but it's even smarter not to do it at all. And I bet you'd do 10-way without an AAD. Now if I'm right, why would you do it without an AAD if you know it's smarter to do it with one? That's intelligent, or is it just macho? If I'm completely wrong, please inform me. Dave

Ron, you're comparing drunk driving with coaching newbies or doing AFF instruction. It's ridiculous. Nobody here is saying "if you're going to skydive drunk, use an AAD. That's not anything like any argument anybody is making. Dave

How the hell can you compare those?? Ron, your argument is ridiculous. You wouldn't have any problem with a freefly coach that doesn't use a cypres (or would do it without one), but you have a problem with a freefly coach that chooses to use a cypres. Assuming we're talking about 2 jumpers of exactly equal skill and experience and both have the same knowledge of past history, how the hell can you say one should be coaching and the other shouldn't? They are taking exactly equal risks. One uses good judgement based on history, recognizing that the odds of a collision are very high when coaching newbies. The other ignores history (or has suicidal tendencies). This is like "if you wanna do dangerous skydives, you better be really freaking macho and be 100% willing to die doing it." Some people don't have that attitude. They'd rather accept that some jumps have a high collision risk and use a backup system in case the odds catch up with them. This whole "that skydive is too dangerous for you but not for me because i'll do it without a cypres" is a bullshit argument. Dave

100% agree. The problem is, choosing to use an AAD on a jump with a higher than normal collision risk is simply not an indication that the person is going on that jump BECAUSE they have an AAD. Kallend won't do 10-way without an AAD. That isn't to say he WILL do it BECAUSE he has an AAD, it simply means he chooses to use an AAD when he does 10-way. Reversing that is not logical. Not saying it can never happen. Some people will do jumps beyond their skill level BECAUSE of an AAD. But choosing to use an AAD on jumps with a higher than normal risk of collision is a smart decision, assuming the jumper has the skill to participate on that jump. AADs don't change the odds of a collision. Nobody uses an AAD to change the odds of a collision. They accept the risk of a collision and use the AAD as a backup in case it happens. Does the fact that you have a reserve ever come into consideration when you choose what main you'll jump and how you pack it Ron? Dave

A powered parachute IS an aircraft. Most are ultralights and fall under FAR 103. But it's entirely possible to create a 20,000 lb powered parachute, powered by turbojet engines. It simply doesn't fall into the same category as "airplane" or "rotorcraft" or "airship." A PPC is it's own sort of thing with it's own flight characteristics and limitations. I don't know why the FAA doesn't define right of way rules for skydivers vs aircraft, but I don't CARE who has right of way. We all need to avoid each other no matter who has the right of way over who. Aside from a recent accident, aircraft/parachute collisions are extremely rare. It's skydivers in freefall that I worry about a lot more. And the simple fact is, a skydiver in freefall is in no possible way an aircraft. And who has the right of way is 100% irrelevant. We need to avoid them, they need to avoid us. Doesn't work as a one way street. Dave

Ever had ATC advise you of traffic delays under VFR flight? Under most circumstances I'd probably just ask for a frequency change and go about my bidness. I could, as a VFR pilot, become familiar with every DZ in the county and go fly VFR over every single one. Becoming familiar with all available information concerning a flight does not stop me from doing anything. Reckless flying is the catch all they'd get me on. Flying over a DZ on a nice saturday afternoon while listening to the wrong frequency is a pretty dumb thing to do. Flying a glider over a gliderport that happens to also be a DZ with no radio is a purely VFR activity and isn't so dumb... necessarily. I have no idea how that DZ/glider operation is set up...maybe they are supposed to stay in different areas. But it looks to me like a failure to spot each other. Both are at fault.... unless there's more information I don't know about like the glider clearly flying in a spot designated specially for skydivers by local procedures. Dave

No idea about the others, but paralog for the neptune is mac compatable. Edit: forgot that paralog is compatable with the protrack and the skytronic too. But get a neptune anyway... Dave

The FAA has ruled that skydivers have right of way over all aircraft except balloons? Do you have a source for that? The quote from 91.103 you gave doesn't seem to mention skydivers. Part (a) doesn't apply as we're not talking about IFR or flights not in the vicinity of an airport. part 91.113 never mentions skydivers, which are clearly not aircraft or gliders by FAA definitions. If the FAA has made a determination about how skydivers fall in right of way rules I'd love to see it. Dave

Can't remember exactly how I found it the first time. There were a few skydiving forums spread around. This one pretty much sucked. Too slow and too hard to navigate compared to rec.skydiving, which actually wasn't too awful then. But I forgot about this site for a while until I saw that someone had come from here to my ftp server. Registered to say hi. By that point rec.skydiving had begun to really die so I stuck around.

Would you think someone with 10 jumps doing a 300-way is wise because they are jumping with an AAD? Course not. That would be stupid. That person could kill someone because he doesn't have the skill be be on that jump. Whether he's ok with that level of risk is irrelevant. I'm sure you could. There are tons of dumbasses in the world. Maybe ask on another website. How many nascar drivers will go without seatbelts around town but would never drive a nascar race without a seatbelt? I bet there are plenty. No. The concept of the AAD is to save somebody's life if he doesn't pull for any reason. Here's the problem with your argument: AADs exist and are easily available. When someone says "I won't do a 100 way without an AAD," assuming they have enough skill to be on a 100-way, they are saying "as long as AADs are easily available, i have no reason to jump on a 100-way without one." As long as AADs are easily available, it isn't a smart choice to jump without one on a jump where it has a significant benefit. History shows that big way RW jumps, freefly coaching with newbies, AFF instruction, etc are jumps where an AAD has a significant benefit because of their increased risk of collisions. Dave

Not sure what questions. Anyway, you had 5 reserve rides on one canopy and continued to jump that canopy. You would have made the same decision if you had no reserve? Be realistic. You're as device dependent as anyone in this sport and as long as you accept the risk you're taking, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT because we have no choice but to be device dependent! There's something wrong with taking stupid risks. You could hurt someone else. There isn't anything wrong with taking whatever risks you're comfortable with. Which is more dangerous, kallend doing 10 way with an AAD because he is totally AAD dependent and it really is beyond his risk threshold or kallend doing 10 way with an AAD because it's simply a backup but he'd do it without one too. THEY ARE NO DIFFERENT! His skill is the same either way, his probabilty of a collision is the same. The chance that he'll hurt someone else is the same. EITHER WAY he would be safer not doing 10-way. That is a fact. Dave

Sorry, but I think that's utter bullshit. I very much doubt you'd pack the same way and choose the same canopy if you were jumping without a reserve. I think I remember you saying you had 6 reserve rides on the same canopy. Had you survived the first one without a reserve, would you have jumped that same canopy again? After the second? After the third? I don't doubt you pack carefully and don't plan to use your reserve, but by your definition you depend on it. Kallend depends on his AAD for 10-way the same way you depend on your reserve. You've done intentional cutaways... have you packed the first "reserve?" Did you pack it the same exact way, spending the same amount of time, as you pack a regular reserve? Dave

We've gone around in circles here enough times, but I think the point is you are absolutely dependent on your reserve. Otherwise I am sure you'd jump a different main and you'd pack it as carefully as a reserve or base canopy. You choose to jump a main with a much higher malfunction rate than a reserve or base canopy because you know you have a backup. Same scenario. Dave

What's the advantage of doing 10 way speedstar without an AAD? What's the advantage of doing 10 way speedstar with an AAD? One IS safer than the other. Why are you RECOMMENDING the one that is less safe? What's that? You aren't recommeding 10 way speedstar without an AAD? Not the way I'm reading it. The way I see it, you're saying that if he won't do it without an AAD, he shouldn't do it with an AAD because that means it's too dangerous for him. Since he likes speedstar, the only way he'd be safe doing speedstar,, if he believes what you're saying, which obviously he doesn't, is to go do a speed star without an AAD. I know you really just think he should stop doing speed stars because you know his risk tolerance better than he does, and you know what's safe for him. I'm sure he appreciates that you want to keep him safe, but I still see the whole argument you have as ridiculous. Dave