Since the risk of being knocked unconscious prior to deployment or losing altitude awareness and pulling low is pretty much nil, having an AAD requirement for CRW seems pretty silly to me. I'd ask the DZ to waive the rule for CRW.
hmmmmmmmmm good question. perhaps people will reply with some thoughtful responses and not just click a button.
here's my attempt
I believe that basic premise of an AAD is to open a reserve container when you are too incapacitated or too unaware to do so.
I don’t think there is a high likelihood of a CReW scenario occurring where the jumper is too unaware to initiate canopy deployment. So, I’m going to ignore that variable, which leaves the incapacitation thing. It’s easy to imagine scenarios where a jumper is injured or unconscious and can not respond to an emergency, ( ever done competitive Rot’s? ). The question then is, how effective would it be to have the container open when the jumper meets certain rate-of-descent / altitude parameters? Gut feeling is that the AAD would probably be useful here., but then there is always the chance that the incapacitated jumper who would have landed under one good parachute, ( or has a buddy who top-docks him and pilots to earth {take a bow Kevin V and Chris G and Ken O and whoever else has done this} ), might spin in under a main / reserve entanglement. That outcome would probably be worse than the single canopy scenario.
Possible reasons to not have an AAD; 1)unintentional opening due to a hardware / software malfunction, not sure how likely this is. 2)unintentional opening due to altitude sensing error because barometric sensor is confused when wrapped in nylon. 3)unintentional opening due to altitude sensing error because barometric sensor is in unusual attitude due to forces generated during a high speed wrap.
I’m sure there’s other things to consider.
Bring em on.
Oh yeah, I vote bad idea, but am willing to listen to reason.
Several teams have been forced to wear aad's in order to compete - and it's bullshit! These teams were competing on the national and world level and had to conform. They didn't feel a need for the device - they carried one to jump at that dz. What a waste of fucking money.
Personally, I will boycott any dz that makes it mandatory that I wear an aad while jumping at their facility.
We had to wear AAD's to compete in the World Parachuting Championships in France in 2003. Apparently all parachutists must wear AAD's in France. Our team was sponsored by the wonderful FREEFALL FACTORY in Melbourne, Austalia. They lent us a cypres each.
I am not even going to attempt to delve into the were they on or off discussion. That is/was a personal decision.
You have to be careful about making blanket statements about anything. For example, there are different types of AAD's that are deliberately or accidently activated under different scenarios. Some good , some bad.
Any AAD that is externally exposed (student FXC's etc) are dangerous due to the danger of lines getting caught on them. So I think we can rule out any external mounted AAD on CRW jumps.
What about internal AAD's (cypres, astra, etc)? There will be scenarios where they can save lives, and there will be scenarios where they will endanger lives. Your decision should be an educated, calculated, factual, non-emotive decision.
1 - List all the possible scenarios. 2 - Go through and write down each possible outcome on each scenario and the realistic possibility of each of these happening. 3 - Write down how each of these can be avoided totally (or reduce the chance of happening) using common sense, procedures, other equipment, etc. 4 - Get someone to cross-check your thoughts. Remember that we each have clouded personal perceptions of everything in life. 5 - Are there any situations that are unacceptable and unmanageable? Then don't put yourself into that situation. Are there any situations that an AAD will change from unacceptable (in terms of risk) to acceptable? If the answer is yes, you should use an AAD.
Base your decision on facts, not personal opinion. Obviously you should consider personal opinion, but run the logic first.
Personally, I prefer not to use an AAD on CRW jumps. I think they are a great idea in many other situations (even though the only AAD I own is my left hand ). However, I also recognise that there are possible scenrios in CRW where an AAD would save my life. My choice.
My preference is to wear one. My rationale is that, small as the possibility may be, it is possible to be rendered incapable of pulling during the short period of freefall involved in CRW.
That "one guy who hit his head" was Brad Foster. He was a good guy and a hell of a CRWDog. For him, on that day, the possibilities were 100%. Are we all good enough to have that never happen ?? We certainly know how to find out, don't we.
In the case of the wrap scenario, I don't think there has been a case of an activation on a CRW jump. My opinion is that if you are in a situation where the activation criteria are met in altitude and vertical rate (i.e. really low and hauling ass) adding nylon can't hurt, and there are very few practical alternatives left at that point.
Having said all that, I feel that the choice should be individual, not legislated. I don't preach the use of AADs in CRW, but if asked, I will give my opinion.
While I don't need it, (and would never advocate rule-breaking) I really liked the idea of using the cut-off CYPRES head to deal with beaurocratic DZ rules.
Kevin K.
faulknerwn (D 17441)
Moderator
Jun 13, 2005, 7:14 AM
Post #9 of 16
(1023 views)
Shortcut
Yeah. What I think could be interesting is the 81-way this fall. We're going to have 81 people wearing radios in very close proximity - there have been enough cases in the past of radios causing accidental firing of Cypres'es that you couldn't pay me to use one on that jump. I'm sure there will probably be a 10-20 people with Cypreses on that load so it might be an interesting test.
I've got Cypres "stickers" in the Cypres pouches in all of my rigs. They look amazingly real :-) I also have an old Astra from a friend who quit jumping I would put in the pouch if I ever had to jump at an AAD required dz..
Well, they are talking about ways to add drag to the outside corners... Maybe the pilot could remotely fire off the ones that are needed
Kevin K.
In reply to:
Yeah. What I think could be interesting is the 81-way this fall. We're going to have 81 people wearing radios in very close proximity - there have been enough cases in the past of radios causing accidental firing of Cypres'es that you couldn't pay me to use one on that jump. ..
wouldn't 'stuffing in the head' of an expired cypres be putting the rigger who packed you rig in the line of fire being that it has to be installed during a repack and if its all f'ed up and you go in 'cause your to cool to wear a cypres' ---- your dead and your riggers in trouble
Sounds like a great idea
when was the last time a cypres fired due to radio interference??? and yeah they fixed that
(This post was edited by voodew1 on Jun 20, 2005, 3:13 PM)
Seems to me I heard some discussion about radio interference having to do with the Thailand record last year. Even if the latest/greatest is fixed, what about the old gear out there?
When you pack a reserve, you keep a log. This log specifies what you packed, any mods, serial numbers, etc. If someone goes in and they contact you (the packer), you just show them your log.
In the USA I believe they still seal reserves - if it is no pull situation it is extra evidence that the gear has been "tampered" with.
Hence, I don't worry about that sort of thing as a packer, as long as my paperwork is up to scratch.
Of all skydiving disciplines, certainly CRWDogs are the last ones you would expect to have "old" gear.
Kevin K.
Yeah? Then who was the short dude that was jumping a 25 year old Warthog container at Chester a couple of weeks ago?? Granted, it looked very clean and well kept. I was impressed.
15 /
35%
