Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread

 

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

JohnSherman  (D 2105)

Mar 28, 2013, 12:47 PM
Post #51 of 157 (2557 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
IIRC the 3second 300' doesn't mean from when an AAD fires, it's taken from when deployment starts.

Clairification:
Actually the 3 seconds is from "Pack Opening" per TS-135
TS-112 looks at the potential delay between AAD fire and pack opening. All the test I have seen show this as only miliseconds apart. Not an issue today while it may have been on some rigs in time past. I believe it has been cleaned up.


evan85  (C 41367)

Mar 28, 2013, 1:07 PM
Post #52 of 157 (2540 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Sorry, there are no guarantees so you can't know with certainty.

Pops, you make a fair point here. I acknowledge that there is inherent risk and uncertainty in everything, let alone hucking yourself out of a plane with some metal and fabric strapped to your back Wink. That being said, I suppose what I meant to express is that I want to know those risks and weaknesses of the system I may have to rely on for my own safety to the fullest extent possible. For me, one aspect of this is gaining a better understanding of the AAD -- what it does, what it doesn't do, etc. Of course, I hope never to have to use it and I would never knowingly "rely" on it. But in at least one way, there is something I can do -- change the activation altitude on my Cypres 2. To the extent I can learn more here that helps me make that decision, I think that's very important.


faulk04  (D 32457)

Mar 28, 2013, 1:18 PM
Post #53 of 157 (2521 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Divalent] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
"all the gear worked exactly as it should."

will be interesting to see how this can be true...

Exactly. If "all the gear worked exactly as it should", then:

1. the AADs activated at ~700 ft if in belly-to-earth orientation, or ~200+ ft higher if on back or head-down, and

Does Cypres have the +2xx ft offset built in?

For example the vigil will fire at 1100 AGL in in any positions besides belly and a min of 840 on belly to earth (but it thinks it fired at 1100) due the decompression zone


(This post was edited by faulk04 on Mar 28, 2013, 1:37 PM)


airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 28, 2013, 1:29 PM
Post #54 of 157 (2506 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JohnSherman] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
IIRC the 3second 300' doesn't mean from when an AAD fires, it's taken from when deployment starts.

Clairification:
Actually the 3 seconds is from "Pack Opening" per TS-135
TS-112 looks at the potential delay between AAD fire and pack opening. All the test I have seen show this as only miliseconds apart. Not an issue today while it may have been on some rigs in time past. I believe it has been cleaned up.

Thanks for the clarification John.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 2:50 PM
Post #55 of 157 (2451 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Which is EXACTLY why both AAD's in this incident fired within their parameters.

AADs should never be expected to save your sorry ass.

Mark,
Have the units been checked? Nope, not unless you have info from the AAD download that we don't have yet.

If you have it, please share the report.

If not checked, there is NO WAY to know if they operated within parameters nor even what those parameters were. Offset? Yes? No? Delayed activation? What?


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 2:55 PM
Post #56 of 157 (2445 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
"all the gear worked exactly as it should." will be interesting to see how this can be true...

Since it's a speculation thread I'll toss in my .02~

Unconscious student probably falling back to earth with no arch...Diving instructor trying to catch him ~

IF they're doing 160 mph that's 234 FPS or 3 seconds from impact at 700'.

180mph = 264fps or 2.6 seconds from impact.

200mph = 293fps or 2.3 seconds from impact.

It doesn't take much imagination to believe that the gear all worked pretty much within it's design parameters yet the resulting incident still occurred.



Personally ~ I have NO FRIENDS below 2000'.

Call me stoopid but, ........

All that assumes a constant time extraction-to-inflation regardless if airspeed. Can that be true? Vertical speed has no impact on time to inflation after extraction?

I'll answer...nope, not true. If it were, we'd rarely, if ever, have hard openings.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 2:57 PM
Post #57 of 157 (2442 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Anything that gets one thinking about & discussing the possibilities is a good thing IMO.

Yep...the point of it all.
Kudos to the OP for opening the thread.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 3:13 PM
Post #58 of 157 (2419 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The reserve activation was initiated at too low of an altitude for full deployment.
Cause of death: Impact.

How do you know that?
How do you know it didn't activate at 2K, say?


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 3:28 PM
Post #59 of 157 (2400 views)
Shortcut
Re: [evan85] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I want to know those risks and weaknesses of the system I may have to rely on for my own safety to the fullest extent possible. For me, one aspect of this is gaining a better understanding of the AAD -- what it does, what it doesn't do, etc.

FWIW, I'm highly impressed with your desire and willingness to learn. Knowledge is Power. Embrace it.
Spread that great attitude to others....especially the new jumpers...the experienced ones weren't listening then and they're not listening now.
Unsure

Here's a place to start:

- Cypres 2
http://www.cypres.cc/...temid=92&lang=en

There's a link on the page for the User's Guide (UG).
You can likewise get the UG for the Cypres 1.

Likewise do a google for:

-Argus

-Vigil

-For grins, FXC or Astra.

Bottom line:
RFM
Read the Manuals.

Disgusting as it sounds, it's a mistake to take the word of other people. If you look around DZ.com for AAD threads, you'll find waaaaayyyyyyy too many jumpers, both new and long-time highly experienced, that have no clue as to how they operate.

Best Bet?
Educate yourself.


In reply to:
But in at least one way, there is something I can do -- change the activation altitude on my Cypres 2.
Not a good idea for the most part. Do a search on DZ.com and you'll see both pros and cons about that idea. It'll give you food for thought for making intelligent decisions for yourself.


In reply to:
To the extent I can learn more here that helps me make that decision, I think that's very important.
It is...glad you have a grasp on that concept. Many don't.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 3:30 PM
Post #60 of 157 (2398 views)
Shortcut
Re: [faulk04] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
"all the gear worked exactly as it should."

will be interesting to see how this can be true...

Exactly. If "all the gear worked exactly as it should", then:

1. the AADs activated at ~700 ft if in belly-to-earth orientation, or ~200+ ft higher if on back or head-down, and

Does Cypres have the +2xx ft offset built in?

For example the vigil will fire at 1100 AGL in in any positions besides belly and a min of 840 on belly to earth (but it thinks it fired at 1100) due the decompression zone

RTFM
UnsureCrazy


jumpinjackflsh  (B 27757)

Mar 28, 2013, 3:35 PM
Post #61 of 157 (2399 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks airtwardo, as is typical you manage to cut to the chase. I think it goes without saying every last one of us in the skydiving community is saddened by the loss of our fellow skydivers. To Tx who is obviously upset, I am also sorry for all of you at ZHills for the loss.

In reference to this post and the incident I gotta say. I don't ever want to be opening at 750 ft, period. However, some years back when I took my static line course, on my third freefall off static line (was supposed to count to five) I lost altitude awareness and was tumbling. All I could think was, get stable get stable, and this was from 5500 feet. Finally I came out of the tumble and got flat, and threw out. I was under canopy at about a grand. The student rig I was jumping had an FXC. I either beat it to the punch, or it didn't fire, period. Either way, had I not thrown, chances are I'd be a dead man.

Years later I came back to the sport, took AFF and got licensed. I jumped with a Vector II with a Cypres. Learned all I could about it and even knowing the "basics" every time I turned the thing on all I could think was "I don't ever want to see this damn thing go off".

Given all the good input here, lessons learned, speculation kicked about, I think it's still goddamn apparent we need to get a canopy out at an acceptable altitude period. If we don't make that happen the odds are in favor we won't live past that.

Given the fact that most people that have a cypress fire are going to have shitty body position, be unconscious, or any number of things I would think, even last ditch, there is a damn good chance you won't live to see another day.

I came back to the sport in October of 2012 with my rig. The Cypress was out of date so I had it pulled. I know I'm likely to get beat up for saying it but I didn't feel any less safe or different than I did every time I jumped with it in place.

For those that have been saved by AAD's, kudos. I'm sure you are thankful everything went the way it was supposed to when the loop was cut. I also believe the devices are necessary and can save someones butt.

However, I think in so many cases where we haven't activated a canopy ourselves, by 750ft, we are throat deep in it and there's a very low chance for survival.

Lastly, I've never seen a jumpers Cypres fire, and a canopy appear at 750ish and I would prefer never to do so. However, is there anyone here that has done so? Either your own or witness another and did they/you survive? I can't imagine it, makes my palms sweat thinking about it.

My heart goes out to the friends and family and ZHills people surrounding this tragic loss.

Jack


airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 28, 2013, 3:45 PM
Post #62 of 157 (2390 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The reserve activation was initiated at too low of an altitude for full deployment.
Cause of death: Impact.

How do you know that?
How do you know it didn't activate at 2K, say?


Because it didn't open...Doesn't matter if it activated @ 10k, it was to low for it to open.

Not tryin to explain why it happen, just what happened.


airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 28, 2013, 3:54 PM
Post #63 of 157 (2385 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
"all the gear worked exactly as it should." will be interesting to see how this can be true...

Since it's a speculation thread I'll toss in my .02~

Unconscious student probably falling back to earth with no arch...Diving instructor trying to catch him ~

IF they're doing 160 mph that's 234 FPS or 3 seconds from impact at 700'.

180mph = 264fps or 2.6 seconds from impact.

200mph = 293fps or 2.3 seconds from impact.

It doesn't take much imagination to believe that the gear all worked pretty much within it's design parameters yet the resulting incident still occurred.



Personally ~ I have NO FRIENDS below 2000'.

Call me stoopid but, ........

All that assumes a constant time extraction-to-inflation regardless if airspeed. Can that be true? Vertical speed has no impact on time to inflation after extraction?

I'll answer...nope, not true. If it were, we'd rarely, if ever, have hard openings.

No...all that illustrates is that when you're hauling ass @ 700', it goes by a lot faster than many people realize. That's all I was trying to point out.

Again...not necessarily pertinent to this incident, but losing a second or two because of any number of possibilities from burble hesitation to...heck name it, and you are out of altitude.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 5:10 PM
Post #64 of 157 (2330 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
The reserve activation was initiated at too low of an altitude for full deployment.
Cause of death: Impact.

How do you know that?
How do you know it didn't activate at 2K, say?


Because it didn't open...Doesn't matter if it activated @ 10k, it was to low for it to open.

Not tryin to explain why it happen, just what happened.

Jim, you said "The reserve activation was initiated at too low ". Whether or not the canopy opened, or even came out of the tray has nothing to do with activation.

Again, do you have info that the AAD activated at any specific, or even ballpark altitude?


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Mar 28, 2013, 5:12 PM
Post #65 of 157 (2327 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
No...all that illustrates is that when you're hauling ass @ 700', it goes by a lot faster than many people realize. That's all I was trying to point out.

Again...not necessarily pertinent to this incident, but losing a second or two because of any number of possibilities from burble hesitation to...heck name it, and you are out of altitude.

OK...I'll buy that.
You're off the hook on that one.
WinkTongue


airtwardo  (D License)

Mar 28, 2013, 5:29 PM
Post #66 of 157 (2319 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
The reserve activation was initiated at too low of an altitude for full deployment.
Cause of death: Impact.

How do you know that?
How do you know it didn't activate at 2K, say?


Because it didn't open...Doesn't matter if it activated @ 10k, it was to low for it to open.

Not tryin to explain why it happen, just what happened.

Jim, you said "The reserve activation was initiated at too low ". Whether or not the canopy opened, or even came out of the tray has nothing to do with activation.

Again, do you have info that the AAD activated at any specific, or even ballpark altitude?


Correct...

Forget about the AAD...IF there wasn't one, if the ripcord were pulled @ 10k...doesn't matter, from the available reported facts -- it was too low.


D00d asked for a simple one line answer to what happened, I gave the USPA Incidents Report 'standard' from 30 years ago...ya want one 'simple' line - - - ya got it.


(This post was edited by airtwardo on Mar 28, 2013, 5:38 PM)


jammindave  (F 666666)

Mar 28, 2013, 8:13 PM
Post #67 of 157 (2196 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

"when you're hauling ass @ 700', it goes by a lot faster than many people realize."
"losing a second or two because of any number of possibilities from burble hesitation to...heck name it, and you are out of altitude."

Exactly right!


DaVincisEnvy  (C License)

Mar 29, 2013, 5:57 AM
Post #68 of 157 (2021 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jumpinjackflsh] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Lastly, I've never seen a jumpers Cypres fire, and a canopy appear at 750ish and I would prefer never to do so. However, is there anyone here that has done so? Either your own or witness another and did they/you survive?

Once. I was at a boogie and talking to some friends when, in my peripheral vision, I saw a body falling fast and low. About a second after I first noticed the jumper and when he was no more than a few seconds from impact, his reserved popped, followed an instant later by his main. He was in a stable belly-to-earth orientation and ended up with two out. Thankfully, the canopies played nicely together, and he landed a biplane a few seconds after deployment.

After he landed, the jumper (an experienced older jumper) said he had trouble pulling his main and that he was "just about to go for his reserve" when he finally got it out right as the Cypres fired. It was scary low, but the jumper was in a good body position and the AAD worked as advertised. He was lucky, and he walked away.


Premier SkymonkeyONE  (D 12501)

Mar 29, 2013, 12:48 PM
Post #69 of 157 (1827 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Well on that note...

We just ordered 2 brand spankin' new AAD's.
I'm pretty sure I'm also converting my RSL to a Skyhook.

Cool

I jumped without an AAD for 18 years, but I have had them in all my rigs for 14 years. My life is worth $1000 bucks.


airdvr  (D 10977)

Mar 29, 2013, 1:34 PM
Post #70 of 157 (1787 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SkymonkeyONE] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Well on that note...

We just ordered 2 brand spankin' new AAD's.
I'm pretty sure I'm also converting my RSL to a Skyhook.

Cool

I jumped without an AAD for 18 years, but I have had them in all my rigs for 14 years. My life is worth $1000 bucks.

Yes but I'll bet you wouldn't hesitate to jump without one if the need ever arose. Lots of device dependent folks now.


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Mar 29, 2013, 5:14 PM
Post #71 of 157 (1669 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airdvr] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

"
In reply to:
... Yes but I'll bet you wouldn't hesitate to jump without one if the need ever arose. Lots of device dependent folks now.
"

...................................................................................

That attitude changed before the turn of the century. hardly any experienced skydivers wore AADs before Tom Piras "went in" during the early 1990s. By 1994, dealers could not keep Cypri on the shelves.
The pivotal moment occurred in the late 1990s when a California rigger called a customer to explain: "I have all the parts for your new rig except the AAD, so how about if I pack it for you to jump this weekend, then I will install the AAD for next weekend."
The customer replied: "No, I can wait until next weekend."


PalmSky

Mar 29, 2013, 6:02 PM
Post #72 of 157 (1645 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airdvr] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Well on that note...

We just ordered 2 brand spankin' new AAD's.
I'm pretty sure I'm also converting my RSL to a Skyhook.

Cool

I jumped without an AAD for 18 years, but I have had them in all my rigs for 14 years. My life is worth $1000 bucks.

Yes but I'll bet you wouldn't hesitate to jump without one if the need ever arose. Lots of device dependent folks now.

device dependent? the cost of my life is much more important than the cost of a brand new rig and all of it's associated components.

Do you pay for auto insurance? and if so what are your premiums for the year? do you pay it willing or complain about being insurance dependent?

Lot's of smarter people now. I'd give up any yearly income figure in exchange for my life as a cost well worth it.

I don't think cars had seat-belts 32 years ago, maybe lap belts, not 3 point seatbelts. I'm seatbelt dependent.... simply because it's a wiser decision.


normiss  (D 28356)

Mar 29, 2013, 6:47 PM
Post #73 of 157 (1619 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airdvr] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

I have for the past 8 years or so.
I'm still not convinced of their success.

But we can afford them, and having any additional tools that could help are worth it.

If I had an AFF rating though, I would not jump without one.

I personally think student AAD's should fire higher.

Those are my AAD thoughts.


fencebuster  (D 29918)

Mar 29, 2013, 6:51 PM
Post #74 of 157 (1616 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

I personally think student AAD's should fire higher.


+1


airdvr  (D 10977)

Mar 30, 2013, 6:01 AM
Post #75 of 157 (1438 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PalmSky] The Z-hills Double Fatal Speculation Thread [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Well on that note...

We just ordered 2 brand spankin' new AAD's.
I'm pretty sure I'm also converting my RSL to a Skyhook.

Cool

I jumped without an AAD for 18 years, but I have had them in all my rigs for 14 years. My life is worth $1000 bucks.

Yes but I'll bet you wouldn't hesitate to jump without one if the need ever arose. Lots of device dependent folks now.

device dependent? the cost of my life is much more important than the cost of a brand new rig and all of it's associated components.

Do you pay for auto insurance? and if so what are your premiums for the year? do you pay it willing or complain about being insurance dependent?

Lot's of smarter people now. I'd give up any yearly income figure in exchange for my life as a cost well worth it.

I don't think cars had seat-belts 32 years ago, maybe lap belts, not 3 point seatbelts. I'm seatbelt dependent.... simply because it's a wiser decision.

Do you have an RSL? Do you have a reserve pilot chute with enough drag to yank your reserve out of your pretty container? Those are the devices you should be concerned about. There have been a few people go in wearing AADs lately. I don't recall anyone going in lately with an RSL.


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

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)