Forums: Skydiving: Incidents:
Fatality (Was injury) - Perris, CA - 23 Sept 2012

 

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

airborne47  (A 43475)

Sep 28, 2012, 10:34 PM
Post #76 of 228 (4162 views)
Shortcut
Re: [miconar] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Miconar.
The reason my last post was so short was because I was done beating my head against the wall. And was going to give up.
But I want to respond to you. First of all I have nothing but praise for the lady and how she handled the situation.
I knew at the time that I was looking at an experienced jumper because world record attempts are not for amateurs like me. And she demonstrated a high level of competence.
The fact is she stayed focused and kept fighting until she got out of an entanglement. Then cut away and deployed her reserve.
Which I was extremely grateful to see because I have watched two experienced jumpers die in emergencies that were salvageable.
One cut away a malfunction and went in without ever pulling his reserve in front of a crowd of a few thousand. Including his wife and child who were standing right next to me.
The other did a low altitude downwind hook turn (below 200 feet) in 20 plus mph winds to avoid a tree landing.
And as I watched her get lower and lower I honestly thought I was about to watch another jumper die once again.
So seeing her reserve deploy was an immense relief to me. And I hope to god she pulls through this and fully recovers!
But I did get frustrated with what appears to be a snobbish attitude by some people who seem to think that without high jump numbers a person is unable to think.
The fact is the only people who claim to have witnessed this terrible event first hand and have given an account of it in this thread.
Are myself and two other jumpers. And we all saw the exact same thing. A jumper coming straight down under a bad canopy cut away at a low altitude.
But it appears that because a highly experienced and respected jumper is (reported) to have said something else in a newspaper article.
What the three of us claim to have seen is disputed or questioned by some for what appears to be a lack of jump numbers. And a newspaper article.
That I could just shrug off. But when a statement which if believed could lead to a fatality is totally ignored.
Even after I point it out several times. For what would appear to be nothing more than a snobbish attitude.
Such as addressing someone as Dear intermediate jumpers. That does frustrate the hell out of me. I do not need high jump numbers to be able to think.
And the newspaper article claimed that she had a good canopy above her. And a cut away canopy wrapped around her (body.) Streamering behind her like a banner.
Now here’s the part I STRONGLY DISPUTE. It says that at that point. Her options were to try and land like that. Or cut away and deploy her reserve.
The fact that that is not what happened is irrelevant. But to say those are the options in that scenario is highly relevant.
Even with my lack of jump numbers I can think of a far better option than chopping in that scenario. And that is to keep the good canopy above your head. While trying to clear the entanglement.
Because if you chop while your body is still wrapped. You will have virtually no chance to clear the entanglement.
As it will get much tighter as you accelerate because the canopy will create a lot more drag. You will also have far less time to do so.
Giving you no choice but to try and deploy a reserve through an entanglement. And if you get lucky and get a clean deployment?
You will be right back where you started. With a good canopy above you and entangled with another. But at a far lower altitude.
With one less option. Because if the worst case scenario happens? And the canopy which you are wrapped in entangles with your reserve.
You will not be able to attempt to put your reserve out.
I hope to god no one read that crap and believed it. Just because an intermediate jumper said it was wrong. And was ignored by the sky gods. Because it could easily kill them.
I’m done here and have nothing else to say except to once again state that I hope to god she pulls through this and fully recovers.
And that my thoughts and prayers are with her and her loved ones.


miconar  (D 1084)

Sep 28, 2012, 11:20 PM
Post #77 of 228 (4137 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

I apologise. I wasn't suggesting you need high jump numbers to think, and while I doubt you were seeking my approval, your posts clearly show you to be a critical, thinking individual. Thank you for sharing your info with everyone. Though I was on that jump, I never saw anyone get hurt that bad or worse and can only imagine the difficulty for you.

I do see a link between jump numbers and energy levels that bothered me. A discussion like this should not have the energy levels of an angry argument, or so I feel.

My reply was meant for more then one person, you were simply the last poster To use multiple !!s. Perhaps I was as you say, being condescending, and for that I apologize. I will leave this at that since by now I am very off topic, and we can continue this via pm if you wish.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 29, 2012, 3:09 AM
Post #78 of 228 (4102 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Have you considered the possibility that what you saw was not a cutaway but the other persons canopy clearing her body after she cutaway her main? Maybe that was why she was coming straight down.

Sparky


airborne47  (A 43475)

Sep 29, 2012, 7:56 AM
Post #79 of 228 (4027 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes i have.
Which is why i suggested exactly that as a possibility early on when i stated i did not see the collision. Nor it's immediate aftermath.
And was wondering what happened before i saw her falling. Because what i saw was not what the story stated.
But no eye witness claimed to have seen such a thing.
And two did claim to see exactly what i did. There are still a lot of unknowens and always will be.
But that does not take away from the articles statement being wrong in saying (in the scenerio described.)
That the choices are to try and land like that. Or cut away and deploy a reserve.
I can see how someone disoreintated after a collision might cut away?
But to say those are your choices is the part i strongly disagree with.
And am trying to point out. And why i chose to respond again.
I watched a static line student doing a prcp cut away a perfect canopy once.
And when he was asked why he did it? His response was that he got confused.
And couldn't remember which handle he was supposed to pull. So he pulled the red one.
And i'm sure everyone else has seen newbies do some entertaining things.
The point i'm trying to make here is that you don't know what a person will remember in a stress situation.
And i am worried that someone some day will have a good canopy above their head.
With a deflated cut away wrapped around their body. And remember this. And cut away!
Which is why i keep trying to steer the conversation back to that.
And am having a real hard time understanding why not one person has said.
Yeah there are other options then trying to land like that? Or chopping a good canopy while your (body) is wrapped




mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 29, 2012, 11:33 AM
Post #81 of 228 (3933 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
But that does not take away from the articles statement being wrong in saying (in the scenerio described.)
That the choices are to try and land like that. Or cut away and deploy a reserve.

Are you saying there is a third choice? The way you write makes it hard to understand your meaning.

Sparky


Premier WickedWingsuits  (D 30916)

Sep 29, 2012, 3:16 PM
Post #82 of 228 (3844 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
A.
Because i'm no longer there.

You seem to still have a lot of unanswered questions about what you saw and the outcome of the events. At least I think that is your point.

I suggest you use the magic of technology, either phone or email to contact the guy you think made a statement that is contrary to yours.

Regardless of what reality is I bet you will learn something from the conversation. Try it.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Sep 29, 2012, 4:29 PM
Post #83 of 228 (3811 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

WTF...was her problem a wrap or an entanglement?

You guys are all over the place using one term and then the other as if they are the same thing. Not so.


(This post was edited by popsjumper on Sep 29, 2012, 4:39 PM)


5.samadhi

Sep 29, 2012, 7:51 PM
Post #84 of 228 (3736 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

^ for those who don't know what this good sir is talking about: http://parachutistonline.com/...ing-canopy-collision

I thought this part of Crouch's article was particularly pertinent to this discussion:

Quote:
The higher the wing loading, the more violent the collision will be, and the less likely it will be that one or both pilots will survive. Avoidance is truly the only solution when it comes to canopy collisions at high wing loadings.
blue skies Unsure


(This post was edited by 5.samadhi on Sep 29, 2012, 7:54 PM)


miconar  (D 1084)

Sep 29, 2012, 8:14 PM
Post #85 of 228 (3715 views)
Shortcut
Re: [5.samadhi] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
^ for those who don't know what this good sir is talking about: http://parachutistonline.com/...ing-canopy-collision

I thought this part of Crouch's article was particularly pertinent to this discussion:

Quote:
The higher the wing loading, the more violent the collision will be, and the less likely it will be that one or both pilots will survive. Avoidance is truly the only solution when it comes to canopy collisions at high wing loadings.
blue skies Unsure

So now we are done with square vs elliptical and on to WL. Ill bite: do you know what were the WL of the canopies involved, and if you don't, why do you think that part of the article is particularly pertinent to this discussion?


Divalent  (C 40494)

Sep 29, 2012, 8:39 PM
Post #86 of 228 (3701 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

This apparently is a video (from a long distance away) of the incident.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nVF1IvKqLc


airborne47  (A 43475)

Sep 29, 2012, 8:40 PM
Post #87 of 228 (3698 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

No i am saying there is a third choice in the scenerio described in the paper. And have said so. More then once.
Here once again is a copied and pasted section from the article.
It's on page one 15th posting down with a link. And (supposedly) qoutes Dan.
Sorry that my computer skills suck.
Notice at no point does it even suggest trying to clear the body wrap (according to article)
It just says try to land like that. Without trying to untangle?
Or cut away and deploy the reserve. Without trying to untangle?
I say keeping a good canopy above your head and trying to clear the wrap/entanglement.
Leaving your reserve deployable in the event that it does move up and entangle with the main is a MUCH BETTER choice.
Then simply chopping a good canopy while wrapped or entangled with another.
And then trying to deploy a reserve through the mess.
But it appears that because the article mentions Dan as its source.
That many want to to just dismiss what i have said. And instead focus on my experience level.
Or what me and two other jumppers saw. Which has not been refuted by anyone.
Except for a news paper article. So for the sake of discussion.
And in an attempt to help educate others so they might survive such a situation.
Let's assume the article is a correct description of what happend.
And the only 3 jumpers to say what we saw are all wrong.
With that in mind. Would you agree with how the article says to handle such a situation? Or the way i suggest?

But roughly five seconds after opening their chutes, Sinitsina and a male skydiver collided, said Dan Brodsky-Chenfeld, manager of Perris Valley Skydiving.

“He is fine. He says (Sinitsina’s) foot brushed his head,” Brodsky-Chenfeld said. “That (initially) was the extent of it.”

But the parachute of the male skydiver, whose name has not been released, wrapped around Sinitsina’s body. So the male jumper jettisoned his deflated chute and landed safely beneath his emergency chute.

Sinitsina then faced a choice: She could land her fully inflated parachute, towing her companion’s deflated chute as if it were a banner, or she could jettison her main parachute and use her emergency chute.


(This post was edited by airborne47 on Sep 29, 2012, 9:03 PM)


airborne47  (A 43475)

Sep 29, 2012, 8:45 PM
Post #88 of 228 (3692 views)
Shortcut
Re: [WickedWingsuits] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

No my questions as to what i saw have been answered by the only two jumpers who have posted what they saw as well.
And it was the exact same thing i saw. And i never had any questions as to what the outcome was.
But that is not what is relevent. Or what i have been attempting to point out.


airborne47  (A 43475)

Sep 29, 2012, 9:01 PM
Post #89 of 228 (3681 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Divalent] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Please watch the video Divalent has posted a few postings up.
This is what me and two others claim to have seen.
And it about made me puke seeing it again. But it does demonstrate why people with low levels of experience should not simply be ignored.
Just becasue you read something else in the newspaper.
THAT CANOPY WAS NOT LANDABLE as the article claims. No matter how experienced the person it claims to qoute is.
I also stated that i thought she went to low trying to clear it and should have put her reserve out sooner.
Which DOES NOT take away from the awesom job she did do on fighting to clear it.
And getting her reserve out in a nightmare situation. It was just my opinion that she should have pulled silver sooner.
In a perfect world. But she was not in a perfect world! And rather she lost alltitude awarness for a few seconds?
Or knew exactly where she was at and how low she could go?
As some have suggested due to her experience level.
Does not take away that she fought it all the way and never gave up. And got her resereve out in time.


(This post was edited by airborne47 on Sep 29, 2012, 9:18 PM)


AMax

Sep 30, 2012, 12:23 AM
Post #90 of 228 (3596 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Airborne47,

Are you confusing the incidents forum with a personal blog?


Kynan1  (A 50652)

Sep 30, 2012, 12:52 AM
Post #91 of 228 (3589 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Divalent] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

I guess the video was pretty much exactly how I recalled it.
Along with the winded low jump number guy on this thread.
She was coming down even faster than I thought though.


airborne47  (A 43475)

Sep 30, 2012, 8:37 AM
Post #92 of 228 (3415 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AMax] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Nope.
Just responding to the bad advice of others. I.E. cutting away a good canopy while your body is wrapped with another is a good idea.
Or not cutting away below 1000 feet is an aff mimamum for ammatuers.
I'm done here and will post a warning about (expert) advice in safey and training.


5.samadhi

Sep 30, 2012, 3:03 PM
Post #93 of 228 (3234 views)
Shortcut
Re: [miconar] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
^ for those who don't know what this good sir is talking about: http://parachutistonline.com/...ing-canopy-collision

I thought this part of Crouch's article was particularly pertinent to this discussion:

Quote:
The higher the wing loading, the more violent the collision will be, and the less likely it will be that one or both pilots will survive. Avoidance is truly the only solution when it comes to canopy collisions at high wing loadings.
blue skies Unsure

So now we are done with square vs elliptical and on to WL. Ill bite: do you know what were the WL of the canopies involved, and if you don't, why do you think that part of the article is particularly pertinent to this discussion?
somebody mentioned that the crossfire2 was loaded at 1.6-1.7. Is that incorrect?


pchapman  (D 1014)

Sep 30, 2012, 7:28 PM
Post #94 of 228 (3092 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airborne47] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'll leave aside the little issue about how someone's opinion isn't given as much weight because he's not experienced as another witness or a reporter.

I'm not involved in all this but just to summarize what we seem to have:

- The newspaper report made it sound like a textbook wrap with the accident jumper having a perfectly good parachute. That may have been based on assumptions and could well be incorrect:

- The video suggests the jumper was later under some sort of high speed streamer to a low altitude before cutting away.

- The reserve canopy did some turning and diving in the few seconds until impact.

It isn't clear how long the jumper might have had her body entangled with the other jumper's main. Knowing that is crucial to understanding her actions.

Confusingly for many, it was a "wrap" if she personally were entangled, but as soon as she were not entangled, she would have an "entanglement", because that refers to the canopies and not the jumpers. But wait, some descriptions of a "wrap" mention the canopy. It isn't clear if they mean the canopy surface itself or the canopy lines, which are part of the canopy but not the actual canopy in another sense. And some descriptions of "wrap" say that the upper canopy is flying fine. But what if it is line twisted and spinning, yet not entangled with the other canopy? That makes it sound like it isn't by definition either a wrap or entanglement, as if it were no emergency at all, even though the jumper is clearly wrapped by canopy. No wonder many jumpers don't follow the definitions of "wrap" and "entanglement" very precisely, and use them nearly interchangeably...

The USPA SIM just mentions "entanglements" as a generic term, never using the word "wrap" in relation to emergencies -- So that's how skydivers are being educated; whether or not CRW guys used different definitions in 1982. The SIM suggestions for standard procedures to just deploy your reserve below 1000' when entangled without a good chance of being able to separate canopies and land OK.

Going back to the accident, it's hard to judge her actions without knowing more about what she was facing. The sorts of issues are pretty obvious: If you have one last line wrapped around your body and you are getting low under an entangled mess -- do you try to clear it and then do a low chop, or do you chop while still entangled with a line or do you dump your reserve into it the mess now? No clear good answer, even if you follow the SIM.

She did manage to get her reserve open with a little altitude, enough to stabilize its flight path. The next unknown is why the reserve seemed to spiral in.

Feel free to attack / correct / expand on any of this.


robinheid  (D 5533)

Sep 30, 2012, 9:28 PM
Post #95 of 228 (3030 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

<snip>

She did manage to get her reserve open with a little altitude, enough to stabilize its flight path. The next unknown is why the reserve seemed to spiral in.

Feel free to attack / correct / expand on any of this.

So... has anyone heard yet whether her arm wings were unzipped or released when they found her?

44
Frown


(This post was edited by robinheid on Sep 30, 2012, 9:30 PM)


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Sep 30, 2012, 10:52 PM
Post #96 of 228 (2977 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
.. But what if it is line twisted and spinning, yet not entangled with the other canopy? That makes it sound like it isn't by definition either a wrap or entanglement,
Yes indeed it is still a wrap.
IMO, it's simple. It involves the canopies.
If the canopies (including lines) are mixed up together you have an entanglement. If the other jumper's canopy is connected to you and not entangled with your canopy, it is a wrap on you.

EPs apply regardless of what the upper canopy is doing.
In the case of a wrap, the lower jumper will cutaway first.

Take note guys...if you are involved in a collision where both jumpers need to cutaway, be aware that the first one is going to be directly below the second one until one of you actively gets horizontal separation.


In reply to:
No wonder many jumpers don't follow the definitions of "wrap" and "entanglement" very precisely, and use them nearly interchangeably...
I believe that they are defined in the SIM. I'm going to go ahead and post this and go look it up to be sure. I believe the reason that they get mixed up in most cases is because so few people actually read the SIMx

In reply to:
The SIM suggestions for standard procedures to just deploy your reserve below 1000' when entangled without a good chance of being able to separate canopies and land OK.
This is incorrect as far as I can tell. Will you cite the section?

In reply to:
If you have one last line wrapped around your body and you are getting low under an entangled mess -- do you try to clear it and then do a low chop, or do you chop while still entangled with a line or do you dump your reserve into it the mess now? No clear good answer, even if you follow the SIM.
Procedures for a Horseshoe malfunction.



I will note this also:

In Category A...........
9. Cut away above 1,000 feet.

a. If a malfunction procedure has not resolved the problem by then, deploy the reserve (requires a cutaway with an SOS system).

b. In the event of any malfunction and regardless of the planned procedure or equipment, the reserve ripcord must be pulled by no lower than 1,000 feet.

In Category B...............
8. Review minimum cutaway altitude and reserve deployment without cutaway if necessary.

a. Decide to cut away by 2,500 feet and act.

b. If below 1,000 feet without a functioning canopy, deploy the reserve (will result in a cutaway on an SOS system).


(This post was edited by popsjumper on Sep 30, 2012, 11:05 PM)


pchapman  (D 1014)

Oct 1, 2012, 10:39 AM
Post #97 of 228 (2749 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The SIM suggestions for standard procedures to just deploy your reserve below 1000' when entangled without a good chance of being able to separate canopies and land OK.
This is incorrect as far as I can tell. Will you cite the section?

Your quote about just deploying the reserve if under 1,000' is from 4.CatB.C.8.b. (Not sure if I got the nomenclature right!)

I was using the statement right after it, 4.CatB.C.8.c, which is about a canopy entanglement with another jumper only (something I didn't mention in my previous post). It similarly suggests just using the reserve, but in the case where it looks like one isn't likely to successfully separate for landing.

If going outside of the 'student sections', there's also 5-1.H.3.5 which talks about canopy collisions. It talks about cutaways but then mentions "At some point below a safe cutaway altitude (1,000 feet), it may become necessary to deploy one or both reserves"

Who knows, the exact wrap & entanglement definition thing might need its own thread some day.

If you find other stuff I've missed in the SIM, no problem.


textandstage  (A 66497)

Oct 1, 2012, 1:49 PM
Post #98 of 228 (2602 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Does anyone have an update on the diver's condition? I did my first AFF at Perris the day after the accident. People were shaken up......

That video is awful, and the situation is incredibly tragic...

I hope (but unfortunately doubt) that she'll make a full recovery.

Blue Skies


mightyduck

Oct 1, 2012, 11:20 PM
Post #99 of 228 (2350 views)
Shortcut
Re: [textandstage] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

Irina's brother, Boris said to media that Irina passed away today.

Hope it is not true, but..


(This post was edited by mightyduck on Oct 1, 2012, 11:22 PM)


BigBUG  (D License)

Oct 2, 2012, 12:06 AM
Post #100 of 228 (2308 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mightyduck] Injury at Perris????? [In reply to] Can't Post

This is sad true.
Irina passed away in Burdenko neurophysical facility this morning.

Fly free...


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

Forums : Skydiving : Incidents

 


Search for (options)