Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next page Last page  View All

happythoughts  (D License)

Oct 15, 2004, 12:28 PM
Post #51 of 239 (1370 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
The number ONE thing in this sport is to survive...EVERYTHING else is SECOND. EVERYTHING.

If you are to busy turning points or going for the "cool carve" to stay focused on the number ONE thing....Your priorities are fucked up. 30 days thinking about it is a SMALL price.

Agreed.


Ron

Oct 15, 2004, 12:28 PM
Post #52 of 239 (1370 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sunshine] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
you can just say you had a streamer that magically inflated after the cypres fired.

If you are under a streamer that goes so low that your CYPRES fires....Its a malfunction. Remember the hard deck according to the USPA is 1800 feet. A CYPRES does not start it's countdown till 1500 feet and I have yet to see one fire above 1100-1200 feet even in a low pull situation.


Ron

Oct 15, 2004, 12:31 PM
Post #53 of 239 (1363 views)
Shortcut
Re: [robertmicp] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Good for you!...Do you think you are going to keep that hard deck for the next 1,000 jumps?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My safty and life for a few extra seconds of freefall?, yes, I can say I will still pull higher then everyone else. Besides, I like the ride :)

PLEASE email me when you get 100 jumps...And then when you get 1,000.

Im not calling you a liar...Well not yetWink

I was NEVER gonna pull low or do hook turns either...

You will be amazed what you will do in the comming years.


ChasingBlueSky  (D License)

Oct 15, 2004, 12:33 PM
Post #54 of 239 (1362 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

 
In reply to:
I approve of the forward thinking at Perris. However, I still think it may cause some damage in the end.

In reply to:
Do you honestly think it could be a BAD thing?

Time will tell. However, if we start seeing more dead bodies over Cyrpes fires again, well....I guess we will have our answer.

The great thing about the Cyrpes? We can kick people off the dz for being stupid instead of going to a funeral. I'd rather piss off a customer then have blood on the ground.


chuckbrown  (D 19538)

Oct 15, 2004, 12:36 PM
Post #55 of 239 (1360 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MWGemini] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

This is a great rule. Doesn't surprise me at all coming from Perris; a very safety conscious DZ. Altitude awareness is probably the number one rule in skydiving (after pulling, but you can't penalize someone for not following that rule) and it needs to be continually stressed to students and experienced jumpers alike. I recently had to tell a student not to come back to my DZ because he wasn't able to maintain altitude awareness. He had multiple instances of low pulls, including one that fired the AAD (all while on student status). I felt bad about banning the student but the alternative was worse. This sport isn't for everybody and it definitely isn't worth dying for.


SkydiveNFlorida  (C License)

Oct 15, 2004, 1:41 PM
Post #56 of 239 (1317 views)
Shortcut
Re: [happythoughts] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
My reserve opens a lot faster than a lot of mains.
If dump your main at the exact instant that your cypres fired, your main would have not opened in time.

The jumper who was "about to" was about to die. They were too late and would have died.

I'm not sure if the main or reserve was out in front, so I don't know which actually came out first. It's a very scary situation, and I certainly hope to never be there and take measures against it (look at ground, 2 dytters, altimeter). I understand it's serious, but sometimes shit happens and if it's a first and the person tossed first, then I think those things should be taken into consideration. After 100+ jumps w/o a cypres, I finally bought into the "sometimes shit is out of your control" line and got one. Besides, you can usually tell how seriously something is taken by a jumper just by talking to them, and I do think this will be enforced on a case by case basis.

I have jumped canopies with long snivels before, so maybe you're right, maybe even if he pitched right before the fire he would've just been a stain. Thankfully, we didn't have to find that out.

Angela.


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Oct 15, 2004, 1:48 PM
Post #57 of 239 (1310 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SkydiveNFlorida] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I understand it's serious, but sometimes shit happens and if it's a first and the person tossed first, then I think those things should be taken into consideration.
From the actual quote, it sounds like there is some consideration given. Even if the reason was that streamer on a big-way that had you opening no higher than 2000', a discussion with the S&TA is in order. Right then.

People used to die from not pulling before the Cypres. They still do sometimes, but not as often. But there are a LOT more Cypres firings these days than there used to be no-pull fatalities.

So complacency is definitely happening, and this is one way to fight it.

Wendy W.


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Oct 15, 2004, 2:32 PM
Post #58 of 239 (1288 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckbrown] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This is a great rule. Doesn't surprise me at all coming from Perris; a very safety conscious DZ. Altitude awareness is probably the number one rule in skydiving (after pulling, but you can't penalize someone for not following that rule) and it needs to be continually stressed to students and experienced jumpers alike. I recently had to tell a student not to come back to my DZ because he wasn't able to maintain altitude awareness. He had multiple instances of low pulls, including one that fired the AAD (all while on student status). I felt bad about banning the student but the alternative was worse. This sport isn't for everybody and it definitely isn't worth dying for.

So students are really a different category on this subject. Grounding them for 30 days puts them out of currency and perhaps gives them too much time to dwell on the negative. If the instructor feels it was a "forgiveable" fuckup, maybe better to sit them one or two weeks and then get them back in the air?

For the rest of us, 30 days seems like a good chance to reflect.


Dagny  (B 28462)

Oct 15, 2004, 2:42 PM
Post #59 of 239 (1279 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wmw999] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
So complacency is definitely happening, and this is one way to fight it.

Complacency is happening, but no matter how much I think about a 30 day suspension, I still don't see how it is the appropriate way to effect change. I'm speaking almost specifically about accidental cypres fire, rather than intentional attempts to cause it to occur.

I don't feel that a 30 day suspension will be an effective deterrant by itself. It is difficult for me to understand how 30 days on the ground will enable a skydiver to become more alti aware in the future. If we, as skydivers, have decided that it is our responsibility to save each others' lives by establishing that rule, then I think we have a responsibility to make sure the rule will be effective. For example, if I get into an car accident while I'm driving because I wasn't watching the road and I rear end another vehicle, I'm really sorry that happened. Take away my driver's license for 30 days and I'm still really sorry it happened, but it was an accident and no matter how much I admonish myself for lack of awareness, it doesn't mean I'll be a more aware driver when I get my license back.

My point is, there should also be re-education for an infraction of this nature and a refresher skydive with the appropriately trained DZ staff. As SkydiveNFlorida stated, I hardly think the best way to handle a complacent skydiver is to make them less current.

Why stop halfway?


(This post was edited by Dagny on Oct 15, 2004, 3:13 PM)


Dagny  (B 28462)

Oct 15, 2004, 2:45 PM
Post #60 of 239 (1277 views)
Shortcut
Re: [winsor] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If you make a low turn and pull it off, good on you. The mandatory suspension from not pulling it off is typically enforced by the policies of the ICU, not the S&TA.

Sometimes the next skydive made after a botched low turn is an ash dive. Check out the fatalities page if you think I'm being overdramatic.

I certainly don't believe you are being overdramatic. However, if a dz wants to penalize a skydiver for cypres fire, then why not also penalize for other risky behavior just as harshly?


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Oct 15, 2004, 2:57 PM
Post #61 of 239 (1271 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dagny] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
It is difficult for me to understand how 30 days on the ground will enable a skydiver to become more alti aware in the future
Most jumpers don't really believe they are likely to die doing it. Whenever someone goes in, people are very careful to figure out in their own minds how they would not have done the same things. Even if they can see that they might have done the same things, they still correct and don't plan on doing that again.

But it's a lot easier to imagine getting grounded -- you CAN imagine doing that; it's not as final. Also, a Cypres fire really is a lethal event; it's just one where you got lucky. So taking a breather, and taking some time off (like a lot of people do when someone close to them dies) might not be a bad idea.

Wendy W.


winsor  (D 13715)

Oct 15, 2004, 3:52 PM
Post #62 of 239 (1249 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kelpdiver] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
This is a great rule. Doesn't surprise me at all coming from Perris; a very safety conscious DZ. Altitude awareness is probably the number one rule in skydiving (after pulling, but you can't penalize someone for not following that rule) and it needs to be continually stressed to students and experienced jumpers alike. I recently had to tell a student not to come back to my DZ because he wasn't able to maintain altitude awareness. He had multiple instances of low pulls, including one that fired the AAD (all while on student status). I felt bad about banning the student but the alternative was worse. This sport isn't for everybody and it definitely isn't worth dying for.

So students are really a different category on this subject. Grounding them for 30 days puts them out of currency and perhaps gives them too much time to dwell on the negative. If the instructor feels it was a "forgiveable" fuckup, maybe better to sit them one or two weeks and then get them back in the air?

For the rest of us, 30 days seems like a good chance to reflect.

If you're a student and aren't paying enough attention to saving your life to stay out of CYPRES territory, maybe 30 days is appropriate to contemplate if this pastime is really your cup of tea.

Screw currency - if you have a CYPRES fire as a student, you might be well advised to start from scratch (if you return at all). There are a couple of very basic principles that you appear to have missed on this go-around.


Blue skies,

Winsor


livendive  (D 21415)

Oct 15, 2004, 4:27 PM
Post #63 of 239 (1243 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dagny] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Just curious, but does anyone think that having a mandatory grounding due to cypres fire will encourage people to stop using a cypres or not buy one for their rig at all?

I had a CYPRES fire once. I sold it soon thereafter and haven't used an AAD since except on tandem jumps. My altitude awareness improved and I've never found myself accidentally in the basement again. I've become pretty well convinced now that I won't make that mistake again and will likely buy a new CYPRES within the next year.

I think this new rule at Perris is a good one and doubt it will discourage many (if any) from buying an AAD. More likely is that visiting jumpers who hear of and don't like the rule will simply not turn their AADs on.

Blues,
Dave


SkydiveNFlorida  (C License)

Oct 15, 2004, 4:38 PM
Post #64 of 239 (1239 views)
Shortcut
Re: [livendive] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
More likely is that visiting jumpers who hear of and don't like the rule will simply not turn their AADs on.

That would be really stupid on the part of the jumper. Why own one if you're not gonna turn it on. They made the decision to buy one for whatever reasons, yet some dumb rule would make them turn it off?.

If that is what the rule would encourage, it would be a much worse scene if someone didn't pull... Can't' teach a dead person a lesson.

-A


Ron

Oct 15, 2004, 5:24 PM
Post #65 of 239 (1224 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dagny] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I don't feel that a 30 day suspension will be an effective deterrant by itself.

That because (no insult intended) you don't jump much.

I you realy jumped alot it would kill you to be grounded for 30 days.

In reply to:
It is difficult for me to understand how 30 days on the ground will enable a skydiver to become more alti aware in the future.

Same concept as a "timeout" or making a kid stand in a corner. They want to do something, and you don't let them. They then in turn try like hell not to do it again.

In reply to:
For example, if I get into an car accident while I'm driving because I wasn't watching the road and I rear end another vehicle, I'm really sorry that happened. Take away my driver's license for 30 days and I'm still really sorry it happened, but it was an accident and no matter how much I admonish myself for lack of awareness, it doesn't mean I'll be a more aware driver when I get my license back.

Works for some DUI's.

The BEST grounding I ever heard was a 30 day grounding where the guy had to show up at the DZ EVERYDAY for the 30 days but could not jump...For every day he didn't show up....It extended his grounding.

In reply to:
I hardly think the best way to handle a complacent skydiver is to make them less current.

Currency brings complacency...so it might just work. People who jump once a mth don't tend to get over confident.


mr2mk1g  (C 103449)

Oct 15, 2004, 5:43 PM
Post #66 of 239 (1217 views)
Shortcut
Re: Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

hmm... let's see... I have a straight choice between owning a cypres and having a 30 day ban... and death...

now which do I choose....

If anyone choses death there I make no applogies when saing they do not belong in this sport.

When chosing "death" you are assuming you are going to have a cypres fire... and no one actually assumes that. So no one is going to be put off from buying a cypres simply because of this rule.


jdfreefly  (D 24037)

Oct 15, 2004, 6:24 PM
Post #67 of 239 (1205 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dagny] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

First of all, I find it very telling that most of the people who are against this rule have an A license listed in their profile, and around a year in the sport. Just about every D license holder who has weighed in on this is for it, and some of them have 10+ years in the sport. Flame away if you lowtimers want - but there is something to be said for experience.

I don't think a 30 day grounding is a good deterant either. But I don't think it is meant to be a deterant. I think it is meant to give the skydiver 30 days to sit on the ground and think about the ramifications of having a cypress fire.

Also, having people be thirty days uncurrent is nowhere near as dangerous as having skydivers who take a cavalier attitude towards altitude awareness. Most of the skydivers in the north will go more than 30 days uncurrent at some point this winter.

I have always said that I have a cypress for one reason, so I can walk away from a sport that would have killed me.

I started in 97, and back then, every dz I went to, it seemed to be a forgone conclusion, that if you had a cypress fire, due to a simple loss of altitude awareness, you were done. No grounding, no probation, you were banned from that dz. Furthermore, many dzs had a policy of calling and informing other dzs in the area that you were banned and for what reason.

For some reason, that policy seems to have changed. I'm not sure why, but I know I don't like it.

Now we have people getting bent out of shape over a 30 day grounding. WTF?


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Oct 15, 2004, 6:31 PM
Post #68 of 239 (1203 views)
Shortcut
Re: [winsor] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If you're a student and aren't paying enough attention to saving your life to stay out of CYPRES territory, maybe 30 days is appropriate to contemplate if this pastime is really your cup of tea.

Or they may instead lose all confidence. If the instructor doesn't think the bowling speech is warranted, I don't think the delay serves a purpose.

You really do have to blow it as a student to have a cypres fire given the planned pull heights, but they are students.


Dagny  (B 28462)

Oct 15, 2004, 7:45 PM
Post #69 of 239 (1188 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
That because (no insult intended) you don't jump much.

I you realy jumped alot it would kill you to be grounded for 30 days.

You're absolutely right. I frequently go a month between jumps due to my school schedule, so perhaps that is one reason I feel less impressed by the efficacy of a 30 day layoff.

So, it punishes those who get out more often and jump frequently enough to become complacent. And, I agree, when I am not current, I am very altitude aware. Then again, I am usually jumping solo and it's hard for me to become so distracted that I don't know where I'm at in relation to the ground.


mattjw916  (D License)

Oct 15, 2004, 8:12 PM
Post #70 of 239 (1183 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jdfreefly] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

I won't flame, but I'll comment since I am a lowtimer. While I personally don't care if there is a 30 day suspension for a Cypres fire, I really don't see it accomplishing much. Perris' rule seems to leave a bit too much room for interpretation or opinion though. But that could be by design, so that is fine.

What does concern me, is that if an individual or group of individuals is distracted or inattentive to such an extent as to "forget" to pull, what other safety issues are they also neglecting?!! Perhaps that, in and of itself, is just as good a reason for a suspension.

Or maybe it is all just a big plot to get people to buy tunnel time since they won't be able to jump. Wink

The rule is fine IMHO, since I really don't see it ever applying to me... knock on wood.


Dagny  (B 28462)

Oct 15, 2004, 8:23 PM
Post #71 of 239 (1180 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jdfreefly] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Flame away if you lowtimers want - but there is something to be said for experience.

I know I'm a lowtimer and I'm not trying to flame the new rule, I'm just trying to understand how it can be efficacious by itself. I really believe that it would be better if, as I stated before, it included a re-education aspect on safety and a coach jump before allowing the offender to resume jumping. A little time away, a reminder about sky safety, and a some money out-of-pocket might serve as a better deterrant. If you're going to make the effort to penalize, then I think you should do it right. And, personally, I think a 30 day grounding is nothing more than a minor irritation to the regular jumper and essentially irrelevant to those who jump on only one or two occassions per month.

I am well aware of the popular opinion here and that those of you who are D licensed are proponents of it. And I am well aware that as a low time jumper, my opinion means little to nothing around here. But, I am an adult and I consider myself to be a responsible skydiver, so I'd like to both understand upcoming policy in a field that I participate in as well as offer my constructive criticism of what I believe isn't a fully efficacious decree. I value the voice of experience as well as the merit of my own opinion. And, I appreciate the ongoing rhetoric concering this topic.


Lindsey  (D 17865)

Oct 15, 2004, 8:54 PM
Post #72 of 239 (1173 views)
Shortcut
Re: Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

In my mind, a 30-day lay off would not be a punitive measure or something to serve as a deterrant, but rather some time on the ground to rethink my attitudes in the air and examine my priorities while skydiving. Coach jumps would not be necessary. Education, while always good, would not teach what I would need to learn about maintaining altitude awareness. I think this discussion demonstrates the degree to which people have come to rely on AADs as a back-up to altitude awareness. Be grateful that we have them for the lives they have saved. And I'd say 30 days on the ground is nothing compared to forever cold in the ground.

Peace~
linz


sundevil777  (D License)

Oct 15, 2004, 9:03 PM
Post #73 of 239 (1171 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bbarnhouse] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

When I started, the threat to be grounded for pulling low was well understood. Now, the box on your back is just the witness to your transgression that cannot be denied. Hanging in brakes to increase your canopy time/cover up a low pull doesn't work if that gizmo gets activated.

Pulling low used to be much more common. Now we are rightly afraid of the risk of a 2-out, instead of just the risk of how little time would be left for emergency procedures. For this reason I think it is not true that people are not minding their altitude, at least compared to times past.

Some world class competitors and other extremely well respected jumpers have gone low by accident and been saved by the box on their back. Not many would have been so arrogant as to tell them to take up bowling. Instead, they were given the chance to reflect and learn from their mistake.

When was the last time you heard someone warned about pulling low? I don't think it happens so much now. In part because people don't pull low as often, and in part because we let the gizmo do the determination of a low pull, when we should get warned/grounded even when it isn't low enough to activate the brain on our backs.


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Oct 15, 2004, 9:05 PM)


diablopilot  (D License)

Oct 15, 2004, 10:00 PM
Post #74 of 239 (1159 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sunshine] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Sometimes shit happens.

Exactly, which is why the rule is for a legitimate save you don't get grounded.

If you loose altitude awareness cause you were having too much fun, or goofing off on the jump (as these recent situations were) then you deserve to sit your ass down for a month.

Quote:
Oh well, just my opinion but i think a cypres fire once would ensure someone to not lose awareness again.

I'm rather shocked by that statement. IF a person survives a cypres fire, the REALLY ought to have a handle on the fact they were VERY close to death on that jump.


diablopilot  (D License)

Oct 15, 2004, 10:02 PM
Post #75 of 239 (1156 views)
Shortcut
Re: [winsor] Cypress Fires New Rule- Perris [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
having a mechanical gizmo change your life expectancy from 6 seconds to decades is hardly a non-event.


Is there a way to turn text into a big flashing red neon sign?


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)