Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
RSL's-Again

 

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

Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Aug 22, 2005, 1:59 PM
Post #26 of 183 (1232 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

I have about 5 cutaways. One with an RSL (plenty of altutide). I'm still here, so obviously I didn't need it. Equally obviously, it didn't hurt me the time it did come into play.

At least one of the other cutaways had me opening my reserve while heading to my back (I'd just transitioned from conventional gear and old habits kicked in). So opening unstable is also not a guarantee.

Wendy W.


dragonfyr  (D 22012)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:00 PM
Post #27 of 183 (1231 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Darius11] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

I know I have never had a real spinner so youíre right maybe when I do have one I will change my mind.
But if I really donít have 1.5 secs to disconnect an RSL would I have enough time to get stable from spinning on my back and then pull? I donít know I am asking the guys who have had spinners on their backs and have cutaway with out an RSL how long does it take to get stable?
In reply to:

From my experience, you will not have the time or the mindset to try and disconnect a small clip on your shoulder during a high speed spinner. My spinner happened fast and you lose altitude even faster.

The key is, why wait to get stable? If you know you are low, get the reserve out! Getting stable is a nice-ity, not a necessity for a reserve deployment. There have been many threads discussing this already. I know I was not stable after my cutaway, but I knew I was low. I chopped and pulled my reserve handle within 1 second of my cutaway. My reserve opened perfect with no twists or anything. This is what they are designed to do.

IMO, RSLs are great for students and low experience jumpers. I agree with Tom though that once you have a couple hundred jumps, you can make your own call. I prefer to jump without one because I know I will get my reserve out fast and I personally want to get a little separation from my main.

Don


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:00 PM
Post #28 of 183 (1231 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [pilotdave] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
I hate to do it, but compare your anti-RSL argument with an argument againt AADs. An AAD is FAR FAR FAR more likely to cause a 2-out than ever save anyones life.

If you are that low, going that fast, you deserve what you get. If AAD fires causeing 2-outs killed an appreciable number of jumpers/year, less people would jump with an AAD. As it is, they are rare, kind of like being killed by a seatbelt or airbag.

Derek


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:07 PM
Post #29 of 183 (1227 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [wmw999] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
I have about 5 cutaways. One with an RSL (plenty of altutide). I'm still here, so obviously I didn't need it. Equally obviously, it didn't hurt me the time it did come into play.

An RSl-deployed reserve is not a guaranteed line twists/malfunctioning reserve, but it can. Why chance it if you donít need it?

Quote:
At least one of the other cutaways had me opening my reserve while heading to my back (I'd just transitioned from conventional gear and old habits kicked in). So opening unstable is also not a guarantee.

Nope, no guarantees, but it is well known that deploying unstable is a primary cause of malfunctions. Why open unstable if you donít have too? You can always still fire off the reserve unstable if you are out of altitude.

I think people focus too much on stuff like RSLís and not enough on proper gear selection, maintenance, training, etc.

Derek


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:11 PM
Post #30 of 183 (1223 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
I think people focus too much on stuff like RSLís and not enough on proper gear selection, maintenance, training, etc.
I think you're dead on there. It's a system. If people focus on how the system pieces work and interact, they have a much better chance of remembering it in a pinch.
But they'd rather get packers Unimpressed

As far as the RSL is concerned, I'm betting my life that I'm more likely to end up in a basement situation than to end up in an entanglement situation. I've been around a long time, and for the kind of jumper I am, that's probably a decent bet. Hopefully I'll never find out, because hopefully it's the difference between .0X percent and .0X/2 percent.

Wendy W.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Aug 22, 2005, 2:12 PM
Post #31 of 183 (1220 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

> Now if I would have had an RSL for those 14 reserve rides, it may
> have caused my reserve to malfunction. Not very likely, but
> possible. No help, but could have caused a problem.

I have not had a malfunction in the past 5 years. I could therefore conclude with great certainty that my reserve did nothing to help me over the past five years, and only could have hurt me. Again, that's a very misleading statement; it would be foolish to use it to recommend that people not jump with reserves.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:16 PM
Post #32 of 183 (1215 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billvon] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
I have not had a malfunction in the past 5 years. I could therefore conclude with great certainty that my reserve did nothing to help me over the past five years, and only could have hurt me. Again, that's a very misleading statement; it would be foolish to use it to recommend that people not jump with reserves.

How could having an RSL helped me?

How could the RSL have made things worse for me?

Derek


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:18 PM
Post #33 of 183 (1215 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [kelpdiver] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
Derek - this argument might be more compelling if you didn't make up all the statistics to support your conclusion. Normally these threads at least have real metrics, albeit grossly manipulated ones.

OK, give me the numbers.

Derek


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Aug 22, 2005, 2:22 PM
Post #34 of 183 (1211 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

>How could having an RSL helped me?
>How could the RSL have made things worse for me?

The same way a reserve could have helped me/made things worse for me.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:24 PM
Post #35 of 183 (1209 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billvon] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
The same way a reserve could have helped me/made things worse for me.

I don't understand what you mean. Your reserve could have caused your reserve to malfunction the same way an RSL could have cause my reserve to malfunction?

Derek


(This post was edited by Hooknswoop on Aug 22, 2005, 2:25 PM)


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:44 PM
Post #36 of 183 (1216 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
Quote:
Derek - this argument might be more compelling if you didn't make up all the statistics to support your conclusion. Normally these threads at least have real metrics, albeit grossly manipulated ones.

OK, give me the numbers.

It's your argument. It was your choice to make up numbers.

At the end you mentioned 14 cutaways. That's better. But your claim that an RSL would have made no contribution and might have instead hurt you came after the fact, and you provided no evidence that your experience would extend to the jumping population.

But there are often tradeoffs to make in emergency proceedures. As Bill suggested, in the aggregate the skydiving world is better off with the RSL than without. I suspect 'numbers' exist that will back that.

Clear exceptions exist, and if you're sure you're an exceptional skydiver, you have the choice to not use it. Most of your argument that wasn't not thin air number based was about not getting into a bad situation where the RSL's speed might matter. Which is great up until the person screws up.

This conversation is quite similar to one I read last week in a diving forum about whether or not it was worse to donate the primary regulator to an out of air person underwater. Someone had a long list of worst case scenarios that made it better to him to donate the secondary. Struck me as seeing 3 trees and missing the forest. Akin to yanking the RSL because of a fear of the wrong mini riser breaking.


pilotdave  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:49 PM
Post #37 of 183 (1212 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
If you are that low, going that fast, you deserve what you get.

People screw up. Happens all the time. I personally don't believe people deserve to die for making a mistake. Sure, that's a BIG mistake which SHOULD have killed them. They deserve a really hard reserve opening that leaves em sore for days, a grounding at the very least, etc.

How many people die per year due to RSLs? How many people die that MAY have been saved if they had an RSL? I bet more die that could have been saved than die directly because of the RSL, on average.

Dave


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 2:54 PM
Post #38 of 183 (1206 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [pilotdave] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
People screw up. Happens all the time. I personally don't believe people deserve to die for making a mistake.

I don't think they deserve to die either. They do deserve 2-out, which isn't likely to kill them.

Quote:
How many people die per year due to RSLs? How many people die that MAY have been saved if they had an RSL? I bet more die that could have been saved than die directly because of the RSL, on average.

The numbers don't exist. It would be nice if they did.

But is saving more than it kills enough? What should the minumum help/hinder ratio be?

Derek


pilotdave  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 3:06 PM
Post #39 of 183 (1199 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
But is saving more than it kills enough? What should the minumum help/hinder ratio be?

If the numbers are skewed far in favor of help over hinder, sure. I don't know what the number has to be. I'm searching the fatality reports now to get some idea. Would you count all incidents where the RSL may have contributed to reserve line twists which endd up killing the jumper? No way to know the jumpers would have tried to get stable before pulling, and no way to know if they would have pulled too low trying to get stable...

Dave


mattjw916  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 3:09 PM
Post #40 of 183 (1196 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [pilotdave] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

But if more people used RSLs, I'd bet that we'd see a LOT more RSL incidents.

The problem is the people who think that if they have the latest safety widget installed on their rig, they are somehow "safer" than the rest of us. They aren't. It is undeniable that RSLs complicate a relatively straight forward process, i.e. chop main, deploy reserve, excluding a couple rare exceptions.

I'm quite comfortable without an RSL. Even if Derek's numbers were 70-30 or 60-40, I still don't think the merits of an RSL warrant the additional risks.

This sport requires you to have your shit together on every jump, if anyone thinks they need an RSL to be "safe", that sets off a huge red flag IMO. And yes, I know many people that won't jump without an AAD and an RSL on their rig, period.


pilotdave  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 3:43 PM
Post #41 of 183 (1194 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [mattjw916] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
I'm quite comfortable without an RSL.

I am willing to bet that every jumper that has ever gone in without an AAD was quite comfortable without an AAD. I don't see how comfort matters.

An RSL is for the worst times, not the best times. When you find yourself cutting away at 500 feet for whatever reason, let me know how comfortable you are. Of course you never plan to do something so stupid. Neither did all those people whose fatality reports say "an RSL may have helped..."

You think you're better than them. I don't know anything about them so I see no reason to think I'm any different.

Dave


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Aug 22, 2005, 3:49 PM
Post #42 of 183 (1187 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

>I don't understand what you mean.

You claimed that during your 14 cutaways you never needed an RSL so it couldn't have helped you, but it might have done something bad and injured/killed you. In the past 5 years I never needed my reserve, so a reserve couldn't have helped me. Had it deployed accidentally (say, on the step) it could have killed me. Using your logic, I might conclude that having a reserve is therefore dangerous.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 3:51 PM
Post #43 of 183 (1182 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billvon] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Apples and oranges. How could an RSL have helped me on those 14 mals?

Your reserve would have been a great help if your main had mal'd.

Derek


pilotdave  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 3:55 PM
Post #44 of 183 (1181 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
How could an RSL have helped me on those 14 mals?

Why bother writing all these posts about statistics and whatever if you simply believe that an RSL is absolutely useless. Just say so.

Dave


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 4:00 PM
Post #45 of 183 (1176 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [pilotdave] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
Why bother writing all these posts about statistics and whatever if you simply believe that an RSL is absolutely useless. Just say so.

Because that would miss the point. Why is everything. My point is RSL's aren't useless, but their benefits don't outweight their problems.

The best analogy I can think of is the airbags one. If airbags fired when you put the brake petal to the floor, few people would use them. But because they only fire in the event of a collisions, they are widely used and work very well.

RSL's activate the reserve regardless if it is the right thing to do at the time or not.

Derek


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Aug 22, 2005, 4:01 PM
Post #46 of 183 (1175 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [mattjw916] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
But if more people used RSLs, I'd bet that we'd see a LOT more RSL incidents.

Do we have any guesstimates on RSL usage rates? Manufacturers would likely be the best source for this, though it may overstate because people are more likely to use the RSL in the beginning when they purchase a container.

I'm imagining it's 50% or greater (which means the incident count wouldn't change above the noise level), but I really don't know. During my rental phase at various DZs I only encountered one without, and used it a handful of times.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 4:05 PM
Post #47 of 183 (1172 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [kelpdiver] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
It's your argument. It was your choice to make up numbers.

Quote:
I'm imagining it's 50% or greater

Crazy

I would guess less than 50%.

Derek


pilotdave  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 4:08 PM
Post #48 of 183 (1171 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Hmmm, you've got me really confused, which is easy to do.

An RSL could not have done anything for you on any of your 14 cutaways. But in the last 5 years of jumping, a reserve could have helped billvon?

You're not making any sense to me. For a reserve to have helped billvon, you'd have to make up a story about something happening like his main malfunctioning. But if you're gonna make something crazy up like that, why not think you could be in a situation where an RSL might save you?

If no such situation exists, an RSL is a useless device, at least for you. And since you are using your cutaways as an example for the rest of us, I'd take it to mean an RSL is useless in general.

Dave


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 22, 2005, 4:14 PM
Post #49 of 183 (1165 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [pilotdave] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

I'm using my cutaways to make a point. I was fine w/o an RSL, but I could have had a problem had I had one. The only time an RSL (or reserve for that matter)makes a difference is during a malfunction. No mal, RSL and reserve is moot. So, comparing apples to apples, during a mal, a reserve will definately help, whereas an RSL may help or hurt.

So, if everyone had RSL's, that is a lot of malfunctions witht he reserve being deployed as the main is cutaway, wether that is the best course of action or not. That would mean an increase in RSL-caused reserve malfunctions.

Derek

Derek


bmcd308  (D 27472)

Aug 22, 2005, 4:17 PM
Post #50 of 183 (1161 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

>>How could an RSL have helped me on those 14 mals?

Your reserve would have been a great help if your main had mal'd. <<

The analogy is pretty clear - your rsl could have helped you if one of those cutaways had been at 800 feet.


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

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)