Hooknswoop

An AAD is optional. The concept is an AAD will increase a jumper's level of safety. If the jumper goes beyond their personal acceptable threshold of risk because they have an AAD, then they are negating the added safety an AAD should offer. They are also going beyond their risk threshold based on a back up safety device that may not work. If you are staying within what you consider an acceptable level of risk and have an AAD as further back-up, great. Bottom line: Do not rely on an AAD to save your ass. Rely on you to save your ass and have an AAD to back you up. Derek

Nah, I just liked the visibility and how quiet and warm full face helmets are. Derek

I suppose there is a part of me that hopes skydiving will change. I don't see how an AAD allows you to exceed your personal acceptable risk threshold. An AAD does not reduce the risk of a collision. If the risk is too high, the risk is too high. I think it is good you think about these things, I just disagree with using an AAD to do something you normally consider too risky. I know you disagree and that's OK. Derek

How does an AAD decrease the chances of a collision on a freefly coach jump, odds that you find too high? Derek

That's fine, if they don't feel coaching freeflyers is beyond their personnel acceptable risk threshold. I don't they have to prove anything. Like I said in the other thread: "Each skydiver must honestly determine for themselves their acceptable risk threshold. How much risk is acceptable to you is a personal decision, make an informed and honest decision. How high of winds will you jump in? How big of a RW or free-fly jump will you do, etc. Set these limits and periodically review them as you gain experience abilities and possible how much risk you are willing to accept changes (more or less risk). " and; "How do you determine if you are using a Cypres to exceed your personal risk threshold or just feel you should always jump with one because it is a good idea to have one? I know of no pass/fail test you can do to make that determination. You have to be honest with yourself and make an honest assessment of how much risk is acceptable and how much risks you are taking, leaving the Cypres out of this determination. Do this the same way you would decide if running a red light is too risky or not without taking the airbags into account. " If they say they won't do xyz because it is too risky, they shouldn't do it w/ an AAD. Derek

How did you get; “The end result of these threads encourages non use.” Out of; “I have never said don't use an AAD. In fact, I have said using an AAD is a good idea. I am [not] posting negatively about AAD usage, I am posting negatively about how some people use them. " Or; “* Jumping with an AAD, helmet, etc is a good thing and everyone should have these things.”?????? What? No, that is not what I am saying at all. Not even close. I am saying, for Sunshine’s example, her personal acceptable risk threshold is below coaching newer free flyer. Since she has determined that jumping with them there is too high of a chance for a collision, she should not coach newer freeflyers. I am saying she should NOT do the coaching jumps, since she feels they are too risky. How did you get; Out of; “Refusing not to jump w/o a Cypres is OK. They are great and you should jump with one. Using a AAD to exceed your personal acceptable risk threshold is not OK because it isn’t smart to use back up safety devices that may not work to justify doing something you feel is too risky.”?????? Hopefully having an AAD or not having an AAD would have made no difference to how good of a skydiver you ended up. An AAD doesn’t make you a better skydiver or a better canopy pilot. Not sure where you are going with this question. He started this thread so you could hear what you wanted to hear? He also said someone ALWAYS misunderstands and that I should make sure no one misunderstands. He still hasn't answered how I am supposed to do something he says is impossible. I write; “Jump with an AAD” and you say I wrote; ”Don’t jump with an AAD”. I don’t know how to fix that. I guess I could try saying; “Don’t jump with an AAD” and see if you read that as “Jump with an AAD” Derek

Hence the reason for the new thread. Derek

And still people don' get it, or think I said ABC, when I wrote XYZ. This is besides the issue. Do you have a response to the point(s) of my post? Derek

For people to not exceed their personal acceptable risk thresholds because they have an AAD. I can show you numerous places where I encourage AAD use, just in this thread. Can you show me where I dis courage their use? Again, you are saying I said something I didn't say. Maybe my other post/thread will makie more sense to you. I am tired of having people say things like I am discouraging AAD usage when that clearly is not the case. You are hearing what you want to hear and not what I wrote. Derek

It doesn't. If I felt the chances of a main malfunctioning were too high, I would jump that main. Again, a reserve is mandatory in the U.S for skydiving, an AAD is not (except for tandem jumps). Derek

Nope, we agree. Derek

No, you didn't: "Real Name: No name entered. Homepage: http://www.polisource.com Email: No email entered. Jump Profile Home DZ: No home dropzone entered. Photographer: Yes Gear Container: No container entered. Main Canopy: No main entered. Reserve Canopy: No reserve entered. AAD: No AAD entered. Forum Activity Status: Registered User Registered: Apr 24, 2005, 11:44 PM Last Logon: Apr 25, 2005, 2:01 PM Local Time: Apr 25, 2005, 2:45 PM Posts: 5 (5.0 per day)" Derek

They are not contradictary. "Everyone must jump with an AAD" and, "Each skydiver must honestly determine for themselves their acceptable risk threshold. How much risk is acceptable to you is a personal decision..." Are contradictory. People 'should' do a lot of things, but that doesn't mean they must do something. I have to be careful to put that in there since some people think I am saying don't jump w/ an AAD. I think people 'should' jump an AAD, but it is their choice if they do or not (except for students). Derek

It is even more 'exciting' with a 9-cell, all other things beging equal. Derek

USPA argued against FAA-mandated incident reporting when the NPRM for FAR Part 105 came around. They are against mandatory incident reporting. Derek

A risk, yes. A foolish one in your opinion. But the fact is they are not required. I go mountain biking all the time without a helmet. Does it increase the chances I'll be injured if i crash? Yes. It does not affect at all the chances that I will crash. I am not ignoring the statistics at all. I've said several times AAD's are good and can save you (read my new post/thread on the topic). People seem to think that because of an AAD, a jump that was too risky is now accaptable. If the chances of a collision aqre to high on a jump, an AAD does not change those risks. Jumper "A" feels a 20-way is too risky. Jumper "B" feels a 20-way isn't too risky. Jumper "A does a 20-way because they now have a Cypres. They both have Cypres's, they are both doing a 20-way. Is there a difference between the 2 jumpers? Do you think it is ever OK to exceed you personal acceptable risk threshold because you have a safety device? If your personal limit is class 2 whitewater kayaking, would you kayak class 3 because you have a PFD? Would you run a red light because you have airbags and not run a red light without airbags? Derek

I know I was exceeding 100 mph under a VX-60 in Colorado in the summer. Derek

A TI with a Sigma on their back is safer than the same TI with any other tandem rig on their back, all others things being equal. That there *might* be issues with the rig down the road does not mean it isn't currently the safest tandem rig on the market. There could be issues with other rigs down the road also, no way to predict that sort of thing and doesn;t affect how safe the rig is now since these issues may not even exist. Derek

It isn't as easy as just updating their system. The Sigma is a completely new design with features that can't be retrofitted into other rigs. Derek

I am rapidly nearing the point of simply repeating myself over and over again. Please read what I am writing very carefully and don’t twists the words into something that I didn’t say. I’ll summarize my opinion and everyone can do with as they please. * Jumping with an AAD, helmet, etc is a good thing and everyone should have these things. * An AAD is a back up safety device. You should never rely on it. If you do rely on it and it fails, you are dead. There are a number of reasons why it may not work, some of which you have no way of knowing before the jump. An AAD should increase a jumper’s safety by being there for unseen problems and unavoidable incidents. It is not there to allow a jumper to make riskier skydives than they normally would. * Each skydiver must honestly determine for themselves their acceptable risk threshold. How much risk is acceptable to you is a personal decision, make an informed and honest decision. How high of winds will you jump in? How big of a RW or free-fly jump will you do, etc. Set these limits and periodically review them as you gain experience abilities and possible how much risk you are willing to accept changes (more or less risk). * If you determine, for example, that coach jumps with new free-flyers is too much risk, then do not coach new free-flyers. If you feel a 50-way RW jump is too big with too much risk, do not jump on 50-ways. * An AAD does not reduce the chances of a collision on the jump. It can save you if a collision does happen, but may not. It must function to have any chance of saving you and is a last ditch effort. The majority of Cypres fires are from the jumper simply losing altitude awareness and failing to pull on time, not from free fall collisions, etc. * No one likes to admit they are device dependant or are exceeding their own risk threshold because they have an AAD. If you fall into this category, be honest with yourself. Make an honest risk assessment and jump within your personal risk threshold. This means deciding whether to make the jump without using a Cypres to off set risk level. * My analogy: If you feel running a red light is beyond your risk threshold because of the chances of a collision, airbags do not reduce the chances of a collision and therefore should not be a factor when determining if running a red light is within your risk threshold. * How do you determine if you are using a Cypres to exceed your personal risk threshold or just feel you should always jump with one because it is a good idea to have one? I know of no pass/fail test you can do to make that determination. You have to be honest with yourself and make an honest assessment of how much risk is acceptable and how much risks you are taking, leaving the Cypres out of this determination. Do this the same way you would decide if running a red light is too risky or not without taking the airbags into account. * Don’t ever fall into the trap of allowing a Cypres to lull you into a false sense of safety. If your AAD ever enters into your decision making process for a jump, stop and really think about the jump. * Refusing not to jump w/o a Cypres is OK. They are great and you should jump with one. Using a AAD to exceed your personal acceptable risk threshold is not OK because it isn’t smart to use back up safety devices that may not work to justify doing something you feel is too risky. * Determine your personal acceptable risk threshold and don't exceed it because you have a Cypres. If you have questions, please PM me. Derek

Then don't do the jump. How does having an AAD decrease the chances of getting knocked unconscious that you find unacceptable? How does an airbag reduce the odds of getting in a collision while running a red light? It doesn't. So then you are now making a jump with a risk level that you are not wiling to accept and are depending on the AAD to offset that risk. You are now device-dependant. Jumper "A" feels that anything over a 10-way is too much risk. Jumper "B" feels that anything over a 20-way is too much risk. They both buy AAD's. Unfortunately both AAD's won't actually fire if needed but there is no way for either jumper to know this. They both go do a 20-way. Which jumper is safer? Which jumper is exceeding their personnal risk threshold without even knowing it? An AAD does not reduce the chances of a collision. If the chances of a collision is too high for a jumper, an AAD does not change those odds. Therefore using an AAD to offset those odss makes no sense. Sure, just like I make the distinction between a harness and an AAD, between a PFD and a kayak. Like it or not, a main, reserve, and harness and contaqiner are required for skydiving. An AAD, RSL, helmet, etc are not. A kayak and a paddle is required to go kayaking, a PFD and helmet is not. If the gear was optional, then a lot of people would jump without it, but thy don't. So jumping w/o a reserve is irrevelent, a what if that doesn't exist. An AAD should not make the difference between acceptable risk and unacceptable risk. Derek

No, it doesn't. The actual risk of having a problem is the same regardless of the presence of an AAD or not. The individuals acceptable risk threshold is a personal determination of how much risk they find personally acceptable. For example, based on my abilities in this case, kayaking class 5 whitewater is beyond my personnal acceptable risk threshold. Adding a PFD to the equation makes absolutely no difference. If a 40-way is beyond your aceptable risk threshold, an AAD doesn't make the 40-way any safer. You do have a higher chance of surviving it with an AAD though which is why you should always wear one. for an anology, running a red light carries a certain level of risk. In this case the risk is getting T-boned by a car that has a green light. Having airbags decreases the chances of injury or death but does not change the risk of getting T-boned. That means if running a red light and exposing yourself to a good chance of getting T-boned is beyong your acceptable risk threshold, then having airbags doesn't change that. It is beyond your acceptable risk threshold regardless of the airbags because airbags do not decrese the odds of a collision, they only decrease the odds of getting hurt/killed from that collision. An AAD doesn't decrease your odds of the freefly student corking and hitting you, it just increases the odds that you will have a reserve out if you are unable to deploy anything because of the collision. Substitute red light for free fly coach jump and airbag for AAD and the concept is exactly the same. I wouldn't run a red light with or without airbags. I wouldn't kayak class 5 whitewater with or without a PFD and if someone wouldn't coach new freeflyers without an AAD, then they shouldn't with an AAD. The odds of a collision are the same even with an AAD which is why you shouldn't exceed your acceptable risk threshold simply because you have an AAD/airbag/PFD. What are the odds of a collision while coaching a freefly jump? Are these odds beyond your acceptable risk threshold? What are the odds of a collision while coaching a freefly jump when you have an AAD? They are the same odds as without an AAD. If they were to high without an AAD, they are the same with an AAD and therefore still too high. Derek

I think you are talking about choosing our acceptable risk threshold. I agree that this is different for everyone. I myself have a high acceptable risk threshold. I don't have a problem with people having high or low acceptable risk thresholds as long as they are honest with themselves. This isn;t about where people should place their acceptable risk threashold, it is about exceeding that threshold because they have an AAD. Derek

Yep, and if EVERYONE thinks I am wrong, that is OK. It's just my opinion. Kinda funny that I am the conservative one though. Derek

The Sigma stands alone as the safest tandem rig on the market. Edit: The Sigma isn't just a few upgrades or changes to amke is safer, it is a completely new design with the safety features built into the design. Most of them couldn't be retrofitted to other designs. Derek