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

mattjw916  (D License)

Aug 23, 2005, 4:53 PM
Post #126 of 183 (1252 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [kelpdiver] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
your post is an admission that you got nothing to say.

So if articulating a point, i.e. your poll is worthless and here's why, is nothing to say, I guess I said nothing, or least you chose to hear nothing.

Quote:
2005 will be a 100+ jump year, so currency is a non issue.

I'll believe it, when I see it.

Quote:
Don't like profile...too bad. It's not germain to the discussion.

It speaks volumes about your ethics, or lack therof.

Quote:
5 incidents between 1997 and 2001 will still lack the signficance you claim.

5 documented ones, could there be more? Quite possibly, there isn't exactly a crack forensics team on-site when someone goes is.

Quote:
As for the WL wars, I'm sure you remember I was more on your side than against you, even though you choose to portray otherwise now. My compromise proposal was exactly that - trying to eliminate the obvious outliers without affecting people like you.

The point was not your position, but that you are quick to try and foist your views on others without experience or currency.

Quote:
Funny - they thought you had a skygod complex then. Now I do, but Derek probably doesn't because you're on his side here.

Participating in a discussion does not make someone a skygod. Launching a fiery sermon from the mound without experience does, and you sir, do a LOT of that.

Quote:
BTW, so how many DZs have you been to?

Over a dozen in five states.

To get this back on track here are the words of a couple people whose opinions I often do not agree with, but do in this instance.

Ron: "...they take away options and complicate emergency procedures"

Derek: "My point is RSL's aren't useless, but their benefits don't outweigh their problems."

My point: "...it's about not betting your life on a little snap-shackle and a tiny length of nylon to do what your brain should be trained to do in a split-second."

If you need clarification on my reasoning behind this, go read the rest of the thread, I'm not going to rehash it.


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Aug 23, 2005, 6:13 PM
Post #127 of 183 (1233 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [mattjw916] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
Ron: "...they take away options and complicate emergency procedures"

Derek: "My point is RSL's aren't useless, but their benefits don't outweigh their problems."

My point: "...it's about not betting your life on a little snap-shackle and a tiny length of nylon to do what your brain should be trained to do in a split-second."

If you need clarification on my reasoning behind this, go read the rest of the thread, I'm not going to rehash it.

Oh, I have no issue with the choice made, though I tend to agree with the number of experienced people on the other side of the fence. Everyone should make up their mind based on a good understanding of the options.

It was your bullshit claim that if everyone used an RSL, we'd see how dangerous this safety device really is that I disagreed with. And Derek's made up 99 to 1 ratio.

The safety section already has an article by billvon - top 5 RSL myths. Perhaps someone on the opposed side should summarize the counterpoints and place it next to it.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 23, 2005, 6:22 PM
Post #128 of 183 (1230 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [kelpdiver] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
Perhaps someone on the opposed side should summarize the counterpoints

http://www.dropzone.com/...rsl%20myths;#1073236

Quote:
Everyone should make up their mind based on a good understanding of the options.

I agree 100%

Quote:
And Derek's made up 99 to 1 ratio.

People got hung up on that. It was to make a point, not a real number. Since people didn't grasp that, I use "vast majaority" instead. Moving on.

Derek


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:08 PM
Post #129 of 183 (1217 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Darius11] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
I dont see what the huge discussion is.
If you have an RSL and have time you can disconnect it so you can be stable for your reserve deployment.
If you dont have enough time to disconnect the RSl then you probably should not discounted as every second counts.

I can reach mine in 1 sec and discounacted in half more.
------

Dude, no offense, but I really doubt you will have the presence of mind to disconect it.....Think about it, folks that are saved by an RSL didn't have the presence of mind to pull the reserve....What really makes you think you will have the presence of mind to disconnect it?

Also you time would be better spent as the recent accidents have shown pulling handles to say your life, not trying to disconnect an RSL.

If you have an RSL.....Really don't unhook it, don't even plan to unhook it.

It will be just one more thing you fuck with, and the time spent fucking with it will put you low...And ironicly thats when an RSL is good.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:13 PM
Post #130 of 183 (1216 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [bmcd308] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

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

I have a cutaway sub 800 feet without an RSL and I am here.

So you don't need one even if you are low.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:18 PM
Post #131 of 183 (1215 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [dbattman] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
You jump a square at 1:1? Why not have one?

Because they can also kill. And you have trained and pay attention to your altitude.

In reply to:
If I'm not mistaken, we lost two people at WFFC from low cutaway/no pull

And in BOTH of those cases they lost track of altitude...AND we just had a student in AZ DIE due to an RSL.

See? They can cause problems.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:22 PM
Post #132 of 183 (1215 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [brettpobastad] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Dude, you said show me one, and he showed you one from THIS MTH.

You say alot of things and then the facts slap you in the face.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:27 PM
Post #133 of 183 (1214 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [goose491] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
Actually, the idea I'm developping is that perhaps Students should be required to jump them (as they are now) and that they should NOT be allowed after student status. At least by diong that, people will have a benchmark moment in time where they remember the responsibility to pull landed on them.

No offense, this I find funny.

Didn't I say the sorta same thing about AAD's?

I think RSL's and AAD's are good for the most part, but I would really love folks to see the bad sides of both devices.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:28 PM
Post #134 of 183 (1214 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [nicknitro71] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
I once read a woman who died because the airbag broke her neck so airbags must kill people

Do you let your kid in a car seat sit in the front seat with an armed Airbag?


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:36 PM
Post #135 of 183 (1208 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Hooknswoop] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

You find it funny that people were allowed to flat out attack you and nothing has happend?

You have been called an idiot, and a dumbshit by one guy.

Others have been throwing around the "Skygod" BS.

Funny.

Oh and then there is this:
Quote:
Of course not, you stupid fuck! That's because you deployed your reserve! You actually DID IT RIGHT! Will wonders never cease?

Have you ever heard of the saying 'You can't prove a negative'?

The reason why RSL's exist is because of idiots like you!

You wouldn't have lasted two months had you started jumping 30 years ago.

Brett

NOTE: will one of you moderators PLEASE ban me for life? PLEASE! There are just too many stupid people on this thing!

Too funny


(This post was edited by Ron on Aug 23, 2005, 7:38 PM)


dbattman  (D 27577)

Aug 23, 2005, 7:37 PM
Post #136 of 183 (1206 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Ron] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

I'm sorry Ron, but will you kindly point out where I said they can't cause problems? Perhaps I missed something in my own post.

Sure, it can kill you on a 1:1 if you have a really bad situation and a streak of bad luck. It can also save your dumb ass when you have fucked up multiple times in a row and are now chopping at under a grand over the high voltage power lines.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 7:46 PM
Post #137 of 183 (1201 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [dbattman] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
I'm sorry Ron, but will you kindly point out where I said they can't cause problems? Perhaps I missed something in my own post.

You said on a 1:1 why not have one right?

heres a 1:1 that killed a guy.

9/30/2001 Opelika, AL DMAL 48 308 Y/Y
Description: Due to a hard opening, this jumper broke one of the D lines on his canopy, a 230 Rascal. it went into a spin, so he cut it away. The rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag. He was found dead at the scene. A second report from someone involved with the investigation reports that the RSL had nothing to do with it; I await further details.
Lessons:RSL's are a mixed blessing. For novice jumpers, they provide insurance against failure to pull the reserve after a cutaway, a relatively frequent occurrence in the pre-CYPRES past. This incident may illustrate the downside of an RSL.

All I said is that they can and have killed.

In reply to:
Sure, it can kill you on a 1:1 if you have a really bad situation and a streak of bad luck. It can also save your dumb ass when you have fucked up multiple times in a row and are now chopping at under a grand over the high voltage power lines.

I have cutaway below 1,000 feet and Im here. The powerlines have nothing to do about anything.

See an RSL is not needed in MOST situations. They can help if you fuck up. People do fuckup. However, it is a device that can be negated by training. A cutaway is a TWO step system. Of the three folks that died this month, after the inital fuckup (and we all fuckup) two would have been saved by an RSL *OR* if they had done the proper procedures. ONE died and there was nothing they could have done to prevent it.

So an RSL would have saved two, but they could have saved themself....One died due to an RSL and their was nothing they could have done to prevent it.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 23, 2005, 7:54 PM
Post #138 of 183 (1196 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Ron] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
You find it funny that people were allowed to flat out attack you and nothing has happend?

Yes, yes I do. It would seem it is open season on PA's.

Derek


dbattman  (D 27577)

Aug 23, 2005, 8:28 PM
Post #139 of 183 (1180 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Ron] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

And again, where did I say that they can't kill you?

Sure, a guy died from an RSL on a 1:1. I've never suggested it can't happen.

Let's look at THE REST of the section where you have taken a fragment and singled it out.

Quote:
If I'm not mistaken, we lost two people at WFFC from low cutaway/no pull. Yes, the RSL is NOT to be depended on. Yes, the RSL is NOT a replacement for acting appropriately in executing your procedure. Yes, we DO NOT rely on electro-mechanical devices, AADs, altimeters to be accurate, or RSLs to pull our handles for us.

BUT- if the shit is really going down, they can throw the odds in your favor. Do you have a GOOD reason for NOT having an RSL? Fine, don't have one. If you DON'T have a good reason for taking it off, perhaps you should reconsider.

Did I correctly state that they are NOT substitutes, that they are NOT to be relied on? Yes, people fuck up- you said it yourself. I don't know why those two guys didn't pull silver- maybe the handle got knocked out of the harness and he couldn't find it. Maybe his glasses got knocked off and he couldn't see where he was or if he was on his back before he pulled. No one knows why but the two deceased, but the simple fact remains that they fucked up and they were trained to know better..

A good reason to not have an RSL is they can kill you. They can and have caused problems and I have not read anyone with acceptable experience in this thread suggest that they CAN'T cause a problem.

Fine.

Do they not have an upside as well, considering that we all fuck up? Sure, but as I closed my post it's a personal decision to have one or not.


Ron

Aug 23, 2005, 8:49 PM
Post #140 of 183 (1173 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [dbattman] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Well maybe I read part of your post wrong.

You seemd to ave said why not have one...And a very good reason is they can kill you and that proper training can do the SAME thing as an RSL and as the AZ fatality (and others) have show is that an RSL can kill.

So is a safety device that can kill you really a safety device?

So, we have two deaths where an RSL could have saved lives....And those same lives could have been saved by not taking a mal low or by ACTUALLY DOING the Emergency procedures like they learned....In the students case NOTHING could be done.

I heard a guy once say that he wanted an RSL and an AAD so he could avoid sitting at the gates to Heaven and having to tell old Saint Pete that he died when he could been saved by some really good devices.......Not a bad logic.

Another guy said imagine how stupid he would feel if he GOT KILLED by the safety devices...Another good point.

My main problem with RSL's are that they remove the choice to delay or not. You have no choice when they will work...Some out there think that even though people die every year when they don't pull TWO handles, they think they will be able to decide and then disconnect the RSL if they don't want it durring a mal?

I think choice is good. If I can take a delay to ensure a stable deployment...Then I can. If I don't have the time, I can pull.

An RSL will not give you that option.

My biggest fear about RSL's is a canopy collision...Which just like a CRW wrap where most think an RSL is bad if you have one, I really doubt you will be able to disconnect it.

But thats my opinion.....I think an RSL is good thing until you have proven you will handle a mal.


billbooth  (D 3546)

Aug 24, 2005, 4:48 PM
Post #141 of 183 (1125 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [dbattman] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

I have read all 140 posts and feel I must put in my two cents.

First, if you say an RSL "can't be relied on" (by which I assume you mean it might accidentally disconnect and not do its job), then you must also say that parachutes can't be relied on. Parachutes fail to open in about 1 in 1,000 deployments. RSL's are more reliable than that. Also, somewhere around 1 in 1,000 members of USPA die every year skydiving. Again, RSL's are more reliable than that. Simply put, RSL's are much more reliable than either the people who use them, or the parachutes they jump.

Secondly, I am going to stop calling the Skyhook an RSL. All of the oft quoted problems RSL's have caused would NOT have been caused by the Skyhook. That's the whole point of the design.

Thirdly, the only line twists we have ever filmed in the whole Skyhook test program were on the simulated total malfunction jumps, where the reserve was deployed by the pilot chute, not the Skyhook. We get letter after letter about Skyhook breakaways from BAD spinners that result in NO reserve line twists. After watching hundreds of reserve deployments on video, I can safely say, believe it or not, that Skyhook deployments, even from spinning malfunctions, yield far fewer line twists than stable pilot chute deployments.

Just ten years ago, an experience jumper wouldn't be caught dead jumping an AAD, (although many of them were caught dead without one). Then the first really good AAD, the Cypres, was invented. Now everyone thinks you have a death wish if you don't jump an AAD. How soon we forget.


nate_1979  (B 27889)

Aug 24, 2005, 5:03 PM
Post #142 of 183 (1120 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billbooth] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

And mabey someday I will happily own a rig thats compatable with the skyhook, I think that's an awsome safety feature and I wouldnt hesitate having one of those hooked up in my rig... Wink

But as far as the RSL, the answer is simply *NO THANKS, I'll pull my own ripcord, thank you very much* Tongue


klafollette  (D 26795)

Aug 24, 2005, 5:38 PM
Post #143 of 183 (1110 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billbooth] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

I got my new Vector-3 with the Skyhook about 3 weeks ago, along with my new Samurai main. On jump number 10 I got to experience the Skyhook in action. I can confirm what Bill is talking about. It works as advertised.

On the jump, my main opened with a couple of line-twists, no big deal....then the fun began. Before I could get the line-twists out, the canopy started diving. The line twists got worse, and I couldn't kick them out. Here I am on my back, twisting as the canopy diving towards the ground, looking between my legs at the horizon. I've never had a cutaway before, so the adrenaline was really pumping. It didn't take long to figure out I wasn't going to fix this.

Reached for the Red - pulled, went for Silver. By the time I started pulling the reserve handle, I already had a perfect reserve over my head with no line twists, despite my spinning on all axis. I estimate that I was under my reserve in about 100-200 feet after chopping.

Forget about that "need to get stable first" stuff people post about. The Skyhook did its job, despite my less than desirable attitude. If I had waited to get stable before deploying my reserve, I could have been dangerously close to being another statistic like the folks at WFFC this year. The added bonus was that the free-bag stayed with my main, so no extra searching through the corn fields.

Thank you Relative Workshop (and Bill Booth). I may have had a successful cutaway if I didn't have the Skyhook, but it was sure nice to be under reserve high enough to take a breath, collect my thoughts, pick a safe landing spot, and practice flare. Without the Skyhook I definitely would have been hundreds of feet lower, with much less time to deal with an off-DZ reserve landing.

Now if I could only get a Skyhook on my backup rig...a Mirage with a standard RSL.


EvilLurker

Aug 24, 2005, 6:00 PM
Post #144 of 183 (1100 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [klafollette] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Bill Booth:

I have a question for you:
You have obviously filmed a lot of cutaway situations; can you explain what actually takes place with the jumper as the 3-rings disconnect, i.e. is the jumper " spinning on all axis. ", or are they flung away at a tangent? I can see someone possibly spinning about one axis, but at the moment following cutaway, are they pretty much traveling in a straight line?

Thanks.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Aug 24, 2005, 7:10 PM
Post #145 of 183 (1082 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billbooth] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

Quote:
Secondly, I am going to stop calling the Skyhook an RSL. All of the oft quoted problems RSL's have caused would NOT have been caused by the Skyhook. That's the whole point of the design.

It isn't fair to the Skyhook to call it an RSL. It is like comparing a round parachute to a square canopy. When we talk about rounds, we make sure to say round canopy, not just canopy.

An RSL is an RSL AKA Steven's Lanyard. A Skyhook is a Skyhook, a Steven's Lanyard, Collin's Lanyard and a Skyhook all rolled into one.

If I were to buy a new rig, I would get the Skyhook. It's not your father's RSL.

Derek


jtlmd

Aug 24, 2005, 7:55 PM
Post #146 of 183 (1072 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billbooth] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

There is an old saying from the bomber pilots in WW Two: "....when we saw the flack coming up through the clouds, we always knew we were right over the target...".


Ron

Aug 24, 2005, 8:11 PM
Post #147 of 183 (1066 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [billbooth] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
First, if you say an RSL "can't be relied on" (by which I assume you mean it might accidentally disconnect and not do its job), then you must also say that parachutes can't be relied on.

Thats why you make a container that fits two canopiesWink

In reply to:
Secondly, I am going to stop calling the Skyhook an RSL. All of the oft quoted problems RSL's have caused would NOT have been caused by the Skyhook. That's the whole point of the design.

And I agree that the Skyhook is totally different than a normal RSL. My only reason for not having a Skyhook is that I still think about canopy collisions and entanglments, and I think it might be better to be able to chose when to fire the reserve in that situation. With any RSL you lose the choice of when the reserve fires.

In reply to:
Now everyone thinks you have a death wish if you don't jump an AAD.

Do you feel that way? Do you think that jumping without an RSL is stupid?

One thing I can say is that you clearly saw a problem with the current RSL's...Otherwise there would have never been a need for a Skyhook.

I remember a very well written letter from you that said that RSL's were not for experienced jumpers.

Before I post this I will say that this is not including the Skyhook. And that the Skyhook was created to eliminate many of these problems.

Quote:
"Facts about the "Reserve Staticline Lanyard"
Posted Thursday, October 15, 1998
By Relative Workshop

Facts about the "Reserve Staticline Lanyard"Lately there has been a big push towards the use of the reserve staticline lanyard (RSL) for experienced jumpers.

Most proponents of the RSL have only been dwelling on the positive aspects of the RSL without considering the negative consequences.

The Relative Workshop wants to educate each jumper regarding the pros and cons of the RSL system so you will be able to make an informed decision about this popular, yet controversial modification.

For those of you unfamiliar with the RSL system, a short description is in order. The RSL is a simple lanyard connecting one or both of the main canopy risers to the reserve ripcord. In the event of a main canopy malfunction, and following a successful breakaway, the reserve ripcord is pulled as the main risers depart with the released main canopy.

In essence, the RSL indirectly connects the breakaway handle to the reserve ripcord handle. Unfortunately, this simple lanyard can easily complicate a routine emergency for those who are more than capable of handling the problem manually.

The RSL has gained much of its notoriety through its use on student equipment. The RSL is ideal for students because the probability is high that a student might breakaway from a malfunction lower than the recommended altitude, and delay longer than necessary before deploying the reserve. Having the reserve deploy in a unstable body position, while far from ideal, is preferential to not having the reserve deploy at all. Waiting for the AAD to fire if the breakaway is extremely low is a chancy situation at best. For these reasons, the RSL is quite compatible for student gear and most instructors would probably agree!

RSL's work great on tandem systems as well. The tandem instructor really has his hands filled during a malfunction so the speedy deployment of the reserve is a big advantage. Stability after a breakaway is generally not a problem as the tandem pair have inherent stability qualities due to the positioning of the passenger and tandem master. If the tandem master has properly prepared the passenger's body position, a tandem breakaway has a greater potential for instant stability than a solo breakaway.

Both student and tandem jumps are carried out at higher altitudes and rarely involve other jumpers in the same airspace, minimizing the chance of canopy entanglements which can complicate matters severely.

RSL's and the experienced jumper - Pros vs. Cons
Remember, the RSL does one thing and one thing only: It will activate (providing it does not physically fail) the reserve container following a main canopy breakaway. That's it! Now lets talk about the disadvantages of the RSL.

1) Most jumpers don't realize that utilizing a RSL correctly requires changing their emergency procedures. Why? The reason is simple: Most RSL systems offer the ability to disconnect it from the riser. If it's disconnectable, then there will be situations that may require a disconnection before proceeding with the breakaway. An obvious one that comes to mind is a canopy entanglement with another jumper. If one or both jumpers have an RSL and they mindlessly breakaway without considering the consequences, they might very well find themselves entangled again, possibly for the last time! Canopy entanglements are happening more frequently now than ever before due to several reasons:

A) More inexperienced jumpers engaging in larger RW formations. B) The recent popularity of ultra-fast zero porosity canopies. The result is: Skies crowded with more inexperienced jumpers flying faster canopies.

Emergency procedures for systems fitted with RSLs would change in the following manner: Before the breakaway, you must ask yourself (considering your present malfunction) if an immediate reserve deployment will be in your own best interest. If not, the RSL must be released before proceeding with the breakaway.

NOTE: Anytime the RSL remains active during a breakaway, the jumper should automatically plan on pulling the reserve handle anyway just in case the RSL connection fails to activate the reserve container for whatever reason. This lack of awareness regarding the need to back up the reserve pull manually is an increasing and disturbing trend among some of today's jumpers.

2) The average jumper will take more than several seconds to analyze and determine if the RSL disconnection is necessary. This can obviously consume valuable time. No doubt the average jumper would be better off handling the emergency manually by pulling both handles, which is not a difficult task.

3) Lets examine the cause of malfunctions in the first place. The biggest culprits are improper packing and rigging, or bad body position during deployment. (Bad body position can be defined as shoulders not perpendicular to the relative wind.)

s almost impossible to be stable within the first second and a half following a breakaway from a malfunctioning high performance main canopy. Therefore, the typical RSL user is most likely unstable during the reserve deployment.

Instability causes malfunctions and allowing the RSL to open the reserve container for you will increase the chance that the reserve canopy will malfunction as well.
One might argue that this would be a rare occurrence, but why would an experienced jumper take the chance? Some would consider this an unacceptable risk!

4) CRW enthusiasts, for the obvious reasons mentioned in point 1, do not want or need a RSL. For those that have one, it should be disconnected prior to boarding the aircraft on a planned CRW jump.

Freefall videographers should never jump with an active RSL systemThe last thing a camera-person needs is the reserve deploying while they're unstable. Just recently in France a fatality occurred when a RSL-activated reserve canopy entangled with the jumpers helmet-mounted camera equipment.

6) The RSL will not work during a total malfunction of the main container, and do not assume that it can take the place of a functioning, properly calibrated automatic activation device. An RSL is not an AAD.

Summation
The RSL system was developed over 25 years ago and found its proper place on student equipment. Due to the fact the skydiving community encounters several deaths each year attributed to the "no-reserve-pull-following-a-breakaway scenario," we have many individuals who feel the RSL is the answer for the experienced jumper. Our belief is quite simple: If every jumper had a RSL, then the amount of RSL related deaths each year would be many more than we now encounter with no-pull situations.

Naturally we have tremendous concern whenever someone wants to take a simple, 3-handle system and turn it into some complicated apparatus in an attempt to make up for the inadequacies of the poorly trained or ill-prepared jumper. We believe if you stick to the basics, constantly rehearse your emergency procedures, and assume you'll have a malfunction on every jump - you'll be much better off.

Remember: The RSL is not a safety device for experienced jumpers because it takes more time to operate it correctly than to pull the breakaway and reserve handles manually. Now that you have been presented with the all the facts, we hope you'll make the right decision for yourself regarding the RSL.

If you would like to have a consultation on your personal skydiving equipment needs, please call Relative Workshop at anytime during the hours of 8am - 6pm EST. We have a highly experienced staff of riggers and instructors who are anxiously awaiting to assist you. If we don't have the answers to your questions, we probably know who does! Remember, we're here to help you make the right decisions concerning your skydiving equipment and its proper use."

The Skyhook dos NOT solve the collision problem yet....And it is the reason I don't want one yet.

But I really feel that a standard RSL is not that great of a device for an experienced jumper for all the reasons you mentioned.


mnealtx  (B 30496)

Aug 25, 2005, 2:54 AM
Post #148 of 183 (1042 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [Ron] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
The Skyhook dos NOT solve the collision problem yet....And it is the reason I don't want one yet.

But I really feel that a standard RSL is not that great of a device for an experienced jumper for all the reasons you mentioned.

Skyhook is no different from an RSL in a collision/wrap situation - you unhook it and cut away...or am I misunderstanding you?


billbooth  (D 3546)

Aug 25, 2005, 5:17 AM
Post #149 of 183 (1023 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [EvilLurker] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

There is a frame-by-frame shot of a breakaway from a spinning malfunction, with the jumper face to earth, on the Skyhook video at relativeworkshop.com. You will see that the test jumper rotates about 170 degrees on the horizontal axis between breakaway and opening. This is a toggle induced spin, and is probably not as violent as you might get in a real malfunction. There is also a breakaway from a spinner with the main attached to the jumper backwards. In both of these clips, notice that even while spinning, the Skyhook deploys or "places" the reserve right where the main was, in a direct line with the jumper's vertical axis, resulting the the beautifully even line groups you see. But, because the jumper is sliding, as well as rotating, a pilot chute controlled deployment, initiated at the same moment would, of course, deploy into the relative wind, or across the jumper's body, which would result in uneven line lengths at line stretch, which could cause line twists or induce a spin. As I've said before, Skyhook deployments simply look "better" and "cleaner" than freefall deployments, and this is the only way I can explain it.


kallend  (D 23151)

Aug 25, 2005, 5:52 AM
Post #150 of 183 (1015 views)
Shortcut
     Re: [nate_1979] RSL's-Again [In reply to]  

In reply to:
And mabey someday I will happily own a rig thats compatable with the skyhook, I think that's an awsome safety feature and I wouldnt hesitate having one of those hooked up in my rig... Wink

But as far as the RSL, the answer is simply *NO THANKS, I'll pull my own ripcord, thank you very much* Tongue

I wonder how many now-dead skydivers who went in with nothing out were absolutely, supremely confident that they would pull their own ripcord when the time came?


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)