chuckakers

I used time as a reference to demonstrate how long the jumper messed around with a mal that was obviously screwed. There is no sense at all spending as much time as this jumper did - 21 seconds - doing pretty much nothing except risking getting his/her hands caught up in the mess above the twists, especially when doing so means closing in on the jumpers below. But since you mention the whole "it's not about time" thing.... I personally know several jumpers who have had incidents in which they spent too much TIME trying to clear spinning mals that continued to get worse and by the time they cut away they had a hard time doing so because of high G's, hard pulls, and/or disorientation. In fact we lost a good friend earlier this year that all evidence points to him being badly disoriented and partially incapacitated by the time he cut away a highly loaded spinning mal and never pulled his reserve ripcord. So yes, taking too much time to deal with a mal - especially a spinning mal - is a problem. As for the proximity of the other canopies, it is quite clear where they are. Take a look at the video grabs attached to this reply. Unless the camera flyer was using a telephoto lens - which clearly he/she was not - those canopies are closer than anyone I know would call safe under the circumstances. Even if they had been further away it was still dumb luck that the camera flyer ended up where he/she did rather than 100 or 200 feet one way or the other. Under an uncontrollable canopy, it's impossible to know where a jumper will go, making the only good separation vertical separation. This jumper wasted time doing nothing constructive while descending into crowded airspace. What was the point in that? Your last statement borderlines on ridiculous. You say there was nothing wrong with his/her actions except "maybe not looking down while trying to get the twists out", and then admit that doing so wouldn't have done any good anyway. You confirmed my point. The only thing the camera flyer could have done to avoid the scenario was to have chopped sooner - ideally, of course. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCWVt-yusOk The video link provided was posted on the USPA youtube account from the 2013 USPA Nationals 10-way speed formation event. I do not know who this jumper is or what team was being filmed, nor does it matter in the context of this post. I am not posting this to call out this jumper, rather to show just how easy it is to get caught up in the moment (presumably) and make mistakes that can kill you and/or your fellow jumpers. This video depicts a 10-way speed formation team performing bottom-of-the-skydive antics, vying for a “Judges Choice” award. Everything appears normal until the camera flyer releases his/her pilot chute, and then this: Skydive: 10-way FS Break off altitude: unknown Canopy type: cross braced, model unknown Altimeter: wrist mount, right wrist, others unknown Audible altimeter: unknown Timeline on video: 3:39 – pilot chute thrown 3:41 – line twists at line stretch in frame, assumed recognition 3:44 – spin begins, malfunction recognition should be obvious 3:47 – jumper grabs risers at twist, attempts to untwist with grip torque in wrong direction 3:51 – jumper reaches higher on risers above twists, hands interact with excess brake line, toggles, and progressive riser twists – interaction continues for 12 seconds 4:00 – another canopy visible below and very close, flying left to right 4:01 – second canopy visible below and very close flying right to left 4:03 – jumper reaches down with both hands 4:04 – jumper releases main canopy, another canopy visible slightly above and very close after cutaway 4:07 – reserve ripcord pulled 4:09 – reserve open (slider down assumed, not in frame) The jumper presumably recognized the malfunction at or before 3:44, the moment when the spin began. From that point until 4:03 – 21 seconds – the jumper attempted various techniques to fix the problem unsuccessfully – some that could have fatally snagged him/her to the canopy – while spinning and descending into crowded airspace. The jumper stayed with the canopy and descended through and below other jumpers who were under good canopies and in close proximity before finally initiating a cutaway and reserve deployment. In total, 30 full seconds passed from the time the jumper threw out the main pilot chute until the reserve was open. 30 seconds from tossing a pilot chute to getting an open canopy. Think about that…. In taking so long before performing emergency procedures, this jumper literally descended below his/her teammates after initially deploying at breakoff, passing through airspace littered with other canopies. It is by nothing but dumb luck that there was not a collision - main to main, main to reserve, or freefall to canopy or jumper. On a side note, it is possible that the other jumpers visible in the video did not track well enough to create good separation and/or did not break off at an altitude that allowed for time to create good separation. That said, if this jumper had taken emergency procedure sooner, close proximity with the other jumpers would not have occurred. This jump could have turned out much worse than it did. If it had – and if for some reason there wasn’t video of what happened – we would all be scratching our heads asking what happened and possibly memorializing more of our friends. My guess is that the camera flyer in this video never realized how much time he/she was wasting or how dangerous his/her actions were. This was truly a close call. If this was not a mistake and the camera flyer was aware of the scenario as seen in the video, I suggest a serious conversation be conducted behind the hangar and a major league evaluation be conducted of this person’s attitude toward the sport and potential for disaster. Quite frankly I’m surprised that whoever edited the video for USPA left it in the footage. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Unlikely, yes. However, I know of AT LEAST four people who have had them. Yes, all were low pulls with AADs. As you said... not likley time to even think of RSL. Sounds like you have friends that need a little (or maybe a lot of) remedial training. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Actually to make it even more foolproof you should, according to jumpshack, disconnect the RSL any time you have a good canopy over your head. Seems if people did this it would eliminate any issues with fumbling to disconnect the shackle. I don't know anybody who jumps a racer with a double sided RSL, so I don't know if people actually do this or not. That is potentially very deadly logic. My guess is - though John Sherman would probably deny it - that Jump Shack encourages the disconnection of the RSL on every jump more as a statement to protect against liability than anything else. An RSL should not be disconnected as a way to avoid a situation that has not happened and likely won't. Besides, having the reserve deploy with the RSL connected isn't a problem anyway. Only cutting away without disconnecting it (potentially) is. Keeping it connected is essential in case of a malfunction after the deployment of a clean canopy. Historically there have been many canopy collapses, turn or turbulance-induced line twists, canopy damage from collisions, etc. in which an RSL could have or did make the difference between a reserve repack and death. Having a good canopy at deployment in no way insures it will stay good. Jumpers should keep every piece of safety equipment at the ready in case something goes awry on the trip down - especially any device that minimizes the altitude necessary to get a reserve out in a low altitude emergency. If a reserve doesn't deploy before, during, or shortly after main deployment (most typically because of an AAD activation), the odds of it coming out thereafter are miniscule at best. It makes no sense to disconnect the RSL to guard against a highly improbable scenario when doing so also removes it from possible and much more likely scenarios in which it might make all the difference in the outcome of the jump. I am not advising people to do it but it is the official jumpshack advice. Actually John Sherman's article says you should do this with any RSL system, not just the racer. Just so people can look at the article and read for themselves:http://www.jumpshack.com/default.asp?CategoryID=TECH&PageID=2SQUARESOUT&SortBy= Yes, Southern. I did understand that. I believe it's bad advice on the part of Jump Shack intended as protection should someone kill themselves by chopping with 2 out before releasing the RSL - which happened many years ago to a seasoned Racer jumper who purchased an RSL equipped Racer after years of jumping without one. Know your gear, folks. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Actually to make it even more foolproof you should, according to jumpshack, disconnect the RSL any time you have a good canopy over your head. Seems if people did this it would eliminate any issues with fumbling to disconnect the shackle. I don't know anybody who jumps a racer with a double sided RSL, so I don't know if people actually do this or not. That is potentially very deadly logic. My guess is - though John Sherman would probably deny it - that Jump Shack encourages the disconnection of the RSL on every jump more as a statement to protect against liability than anything else. An RSL should not be disconnected as a way to avoid a situation that has not happened and likely won't. Besides, having the reserve deploy with the RSL connected isn't a problem anyway. Only cutting away without disconnecting it (potentially) is. Keeping it connected is essential in case of a malfunction after the deployment of a clean canopy. Historically there have been many canopy collapses, turn or turbulance-induced line twists, canopy damage from collisions, etc. in which an RSL could have or did make the difference between a reserve repack and death. Having a good canopy at deployment in no way insures it will stay good. Jumpers should keep every piece of safety equipment at the ready in case something goes awry on the trip down - especially any device that minimizes the altitude necessary to get a reserve out in a low altitude emergency. If a reserve doesn't deploy before, during, or shortly after main deployment (most typically because of an AAD activation), the odds of it coming out thereafter are miniscule at best. It makes no sense to disconnect the RSL to guard against a highly improbable scenario when doing so also removes it from possible and much more likely scenarios in which it might make all the difference in the outcome of the jump. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I think it's best to have ALL the knowledge, but still use the fool-proof method like the "release in any two-out situation" strategy you have. This is much like the "cutaway or don't cutaway" decision for a pilot chute in tow or a horseshoe. There are so many possible pros and cons to either strategy that some folks take the decision dilemma out of it and just cutaway first regardless of the malfunction to save time and altitude. Still, having the knowledge of the mechanics, the processes, and the potential results of any situation might make the difference if a scenario unfolds in an unexpected way - as they often do. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Might want to read EVERYTHING about your Racer on the Jump Shack website. Lack of knowledge can be fatal and your statement "forget which in front and which in back" demonstrates that your knowledge of this very important issue is lacking. From the Jump Shack website: "The potential for a Double-Sided RSL to lanyard choke the reserve risers can only occur when the main is in back of the reserve canopy and in front at the riser attachment. That would mean a deployment of the reserve occurred before the deployment of the main. You might not want to cutaway the main canopy even without an RSL in this situation because of the twisting of the main lift web and the involvement of the main and reserve risers and toggles with each other. Much of the variance in this scenario has to do with the amount and location of the twists of the lines, if any, on the main." That said, it couldn't hurt to release the shackle regardless of the configuration of the canopies since releasing it wouldn't cause a problem but failing to release it could. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

That's dang funny right there. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I've been using a velcro and binding tape attachment on the collar of my jumpsuit for 25 years. Easy to reach, releases easily in the event of a cutaway after stowing the slider, and no chance of interaction with a reserve deployment. Just sew a piece of 1 inch by 1 inch loop velcro on the back of your jumpsuit collar and sew a 2 inch piece if lightweight trim tape to it with a matching 1 x 1 hook velcro patch on the end of the trim tape. Mate the velcro when not in use. Pull it apart after pulling your slider down, wrap the trim tape around the slider and mate it back. Works perfectly every time. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

It's a good idea to perform a quick line check each time you lay your canopy out. It's quick and easy - just make sure that the brake lines, the outside front lines, and the outside rear lines go from the links to the canopy without crossing any other line. Whether it's your job or the packer's job at your DZ, you're the one that will end up with the problem. Doing it yourself will eliminate the possibility. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Not sure what you mean by "evolved into a carnival ride". Tandems BEGAN as a carnival ride yet many DZ's now use them successfully as part of their student progression and retention programs. Seems to me that if there has been an evolution it has been at least partially in the other direction. I ran a hardcore AFF and up-jumper DZ in the late 90's (4 tandem rigs, 20 student rigs) and shunned tandems as anything more than a way to get people in the air and sell them on AFF and late night drunken, naked DZ antics. It worked well in keeping the hardcore future jumpers around, but I'm sure we ran off many of the less "skydiver" types - which BTW I didn't mind. That said, I am retired now and a load organizer at one of the most successful drop zones in the country and get to observe a very effective tandem progression program every weekend. Every first jump student goes through training on altitude awareness, self deployment, and the basics of canopy control and landing before the first jump. If the student chooses to arch, smile and buy the t-shirt so be it, but the effort to expose them to our real world is there. They are also offered their second jump for 99 bucks if purchased before they leave. It works. While the retention rate of first timers is probably typical of any tandem progression DZ, the pure numbers of first jump students from savvy marketing combined with a well-honed "bring 'em back" strategy results in a better than average second jump population. There's an old saying - "if you want more skydivers, just recruit more first time jumpers." That's as true today as it ever was. Face it - the vast majority of first time jumpers will always be one time jumpers and I don't think that's such a bad thing. Most people aren't cut out for the realities of the potential for tragedy that we are. Most people understand that gravity always works, the ground is always hard, and no one has missed the planet yet. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Maybe YOU haven't. Canopy collisions happen. Deployment proximity canopy collisions aren't caused from opening too high above the ground. They are caused by opening too close to another canopy - be it horizontally or vertically - regardless of the altitude above the ground. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Break-off, 1,000 later, then 1,000 feet later. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

I would agree with that. "Back in the day" most folks had to travel just to find an Otter, making trips on the boogie circuit a near necessity for any serious large or even medium-way action. I'm sure the other big boogies - Carolina Fest and SDC's big summer blowout, for example - are also putting a crunch on Freaks. Times change, I suppose. Here in Texas we have also noticed a decline in interest for spending 3-day weekends at the DZ. My guess is again that it's because there's nothing on a 3-day that jumpers can't get every weekend. The demographics probably also play a part. White collar jumpers seem to blow out earlier and don't come out as much on the last day of the weekend. Guess they need to get home to get ready for their big bucks workweek. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Ah, right you are, Ed. Rob, I owe you an apology. It's bodypilot who won't engage. My 15-hour work days should never be followed by Merlot and dz.com at the same time. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Funny, Rob seems pretty comfortable jabbing and spewing, yet he doesn't want to actually have an honest debate on the issue at hand when I challenge his position with facts. As for my points being lost, we'll just have to disagree on that. My posts typically get replies - often insightful ones - so I guess my "tone" doesn't bother most folks as much as it does you. I prefer not to whitewash my conversations for the pc crowd. There's enough of that bullshit without me playing the game too. But thanks for making me feel special by making a rare post to help improve my web-side manner. Me and my tone really appreciate it. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Actually it does, but you previously made some serious comments and now don't seem interested in defending them. Sarcasm isn't a valid defense to a challenge for you to support your position. What's it going to be? Are you prepared to prop up your previous statements or do you cave? Your call. Don't waste out time. Your comedy isn't that good. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Troll alert. Go do something constructive, dood. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

If you get around to actually discussing the issue at hand, I'd appreciate you addressing my very valid questions. If you're just here to talk crap, don't bother. I'm busy stamping out 40-ways for next weekend. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Acid mesh was just an example of the infinite possibilities. And your comment about a rigger not being able to control how a rig is handled after it leaves the loft makes my point for me. Any number of things can happen to the rig in the field. If it does come into contact with something that can degrade the fabric, the longer it goes before it is discovered the more it can degrade the fabric. Wait long enough (a year??) and it may be so weak it will fail. If it's ok to wait a year, why not 2 or even 3 years??? If we want to have long repackage cycles., I suggest we look into truly sealed systems like some used in ejection seats. Hermetically sealed rigs have a long safe shelf life because nothing can come into contact with the fabric. .............................................................................. Then we only have to worry about skydivers who land too close to barbed wire fences, drag their canopies back to the packing area, leave them laying out in the sun, never untwist brake lines, never replace closing loops, etc. Hah! Hah! At some point, individual skydivers need to take responsibility for their own lives/gear. Not sure what untwisting brake lines has to do with a conversation about reserve repack cycles. If you're talking about reserves I would certainly hope that would be checked by the rigger as the "I" of "I&R". You never answered my question. How long would be too long for you concerning repack cycles? Here's another potential problem with long cycles. I once had the tiniest of burs on a reserve flap grommet that was slowly eating away at the reserve closing loop. As I bent over to tighten my legstraps on the ground (very near the end of the cycle) the loop blew and the reserve p/c launched as advertised. Had that happened 20 minutes later while bent over to climb out of the Cessna we were jumping it could have been very messy. Now imagine if that was happening to your rig but at a slower rate. It might hold for a 90 or 180-day cycle and get caught during an I&R, but maybe not for a year long cycle. How do you plan to insure that invisible wear components like your reserve closing loop aren't a problem during your year-long cycle? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Acid mesh was just an example of the infinite possibilities. And your comment about a rigger not being able to control how a rig is handled after it leaves the loft makes my point for me. Any number of things can happen to the rig in the field. If it does come into contact with something that can degrade the fabric, the longer it goes before it is discovered the more it can degrade the fabric. Wait long enough (a year??) and it may be so weak it will fail. If it's ok to wait a year, why not 2 or even 3 years??? If we want to have long repackage cycles., I suggest we look into truly sealed systems like some used in ejection seats. Hermetically sealed rigs have a long safe shelf life because nothing can come into contact with the fabric. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

What's the point? Hi, Are you against the proposal? If so would you please explain why? (personally, I don't know all of the issues, tis why I ask) I'm not for or against, but.... http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view&post=4529091#last Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

In the US it's the FAA that decides on repack periods. Folks talked about the rigger short repack cycle motivation when we began considering the move to 180 days in the US too. It's crap. Riggers want skydivers to be safe and there are definitely things that can be problems with extended cycles. Just how long can a dead bug sit on your precious nylon decomposing before it weakens the fabric, Hmm? What about a petroleum product that somehow comes into contact with that nylon. How long will it take to weaken it? I personally know the rigger who discovered the "acid mesh" issue. The fabric on his girlfriend's reserve went from passing the strength test to failing like wet toilet paper within a 90 day repack cycle. Had she needed it, it would have blown to crap on deployment. Interestingly, he had repacked that reserve many times before the fabric broke down. How long is too long? We don't know, but in that case the answer was something less than 90 days. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

Really? Are you really using a pack job every 6 months to justify that logic???? Let's see. In 10 freakin' years, a 6 month repack cycle results in 20 pack jobs. 20. Really - 20. It's a wonder we can even stand up the landings - what with all the wear and tear of 20 pack jobs. "Get a life" comes to mind. Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX

What's the point? Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX