Forums: Skydiving: Incidents:
Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

flyer299  (D 28128)

Apr 1, 2012, 7:36 PM
Post #1 of 64 (6559 views)
Shortcut
Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 Can't Post

Anyone have any information?

http://www.kvue.com/...lems--145704305.html


(This post was edited by PhreeZone on Apr 1, 2012, 10:35 PM)


Premier faulknerwn  (D 17441)
Moderator
Apr 1, 2012, 7:38 PM
Post #2 of 64 (6460 views)
Shortcut
Re: [flyer299] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www.kxan.com/...n-skydiving-accident

http://www.statesman.com/..._outside_lexing.html

I know nothing more.


texasskydiving

Apr 1, 2012, 9:24 PM
Post #3 of 64 (6276 views)
Shortcut
Re: [flyer299] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

We are saddened to report that a jumper cut away from his main parachute at an altitude of about 100 feet and died from injuries sustained during the landing. The incident occurred at about 4:15 this afternoon. The jumper had a fully open parachute after deployment, but then at about 2000 feet was observed to have his main pilot chute wrapped around the right end cell of his canopy, producing a spin and a high rate of descent. No one saw what maneuver caused the pilot chute to interfere with the end cell, nor do we know why he did not initiate emergency procedures earlier. Our deepest sympathies are with his family.


flyer299  (D 28128)

Apr 1, 2012, 9:37 PM
Post #4 of 64 (6249 views)
Shortcut
Re: [texasskydiving] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

Thank you for posting a detailed report so early. I know this dropzone has had a long history of no incidents. This was shocking to hear. Sympathies to the family.

Sounds like the lesson here is... Practice emergency procedures so that no matter at what phase your parachute becomes unflyable, you act quickly to deploy a good parachute.


likearock  (D 24640)

Apr 2, 2012, 4:34 AM
Post #5 of 64 (5890 views)
Shortcut
Re: [texasskydiving] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
We are saddened to report that a jumper cut away from his main parachute at an altitude of about 100 feet and died from injuries sustained during the landing. The incident occurred at about 4:15 this afternoon. The jumper had a fully open parachute after deployment, but then at about 2000 feet was observed to have his main pilot chute wrapped around the right end cell of his canopy, producing a spin and a high rate of descent. No one saw what maneuver caused the pilot chute to interfere with the end cell, nor do we know why he did not initiate emergency procedures earlier. Our deepest sympathies are with his family.

Thanks for the report. Could you confirm whether this jumper was a student or an experienced skydiver?


5.samadhi

Apr 2, 2012, 7:18 AM
Post #6 of 64 (5561 views)
Shortcut
Re: [texasskydiving] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

collapsible or non-collapsible PC?

what size canopy?

what wingloading?

thanks for information...and sorry for the loss Unsure

blue skies


texasskydiving

Apr 2, 2012, 7:39 AM
Post #7 of 64 (5489 views)
Shortcut
Re: [5.samadhi] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

The jumper had 10-12 jumps. Canopy was a PD 260, non-collapsable pilot chute. Jumper's weight was approximately 160 lb. The jump was a coaching jump.


davelepka  (D 21448)

Apr 2, 2012, 8:02 AM
Post #8 of 64 (5424 views)
Shortcut
Re: [texasskydiving] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
The jumper had 10-12 jumps. Canopy was a PD 260, non-collapsable pilot chute. Jumper's weight was approximately 160 lb. The jump was a coaching jump.

Were stalls part of the plan for this jump? Had stalls been taught on an earlier jump? Was this a new canopy to the jumper, and would there be a reason he would be looking for the stall point?

A stall is one of the best ways to flip a PC over the nose once the canopy is open. Without knowing if a stal was a part of this incident, I will say that they can casue this 'problem' as well as line tiwsts, and when teaching stalls to a new jumper, the hard deck needs to be a part of the training.

Many jumpers make the mistake of thinking that any of the hard deck altitudes are only for freefall and malfunctions, but once they get an open canopy they forget about them. Sure the PC over the nose is a malfunciton if it's restricting the jumpers control over the canopy, but again, if the jumper isn't thinking about his 'do not cutaway below' altitude (usually 1200-1500ft for a student), he's not going to be keeping an eye on the altitmeter. For this reason, the idea needs to be mentioned several times during training for stalls that you can induce a malfunction, and it needs to be dealt with in a timely manner and within the pre-determined hard deck altitudes.

As we have seen many, many times before, a straight, open canopy does not mean that you are 'safe'. Hard decks need to be kept in the front of your mind until you get below your 'do not cutaway below' altitude. Ditto for EPs, which will change depending on your altitude/situation, and you should have the correct EPs for your given situation at the ready so you can react when you need to, as opposed to having to pause, think, and then react.


Andy9o8  (D License)

Apr 2, 2012, 2:10 PM
Post #9 of 64 (4773 views)
Shortcut
Re: [flyer299] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

Did his rig have an RSL? If so, the standard kind or a Skyhook or other MARD?


Lonnie  (C 2051)

Apr 2, 2012, 3:04 PM
Post #10 of 64 (4663 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Andy9o8] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Did his rig have an RSL? If so, the standard kind or a Skyhook or other MARD?

Not sure what difference it would make WHAT they had Frown


Andy9o8  (D License)

Apr 2, 2012, 3:19 PM
Post #11 of 64 (4627 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Lonnie] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Did his rig have an RSL? If so, the standard kind or a Skyhook or other MARD?

Not sure what difference it would make WHAT they had Frown

Depends on the actual (not just estimated) cutaway altitude, among other things. Still, it's a reasonable point of raw data to establish in any low cutaway incident.


(This post was edited by Andy9o8 on Apr 2, 2012, 3:19 PM)


andybobolson  (B 35696)

Apr 2, 2012, 8:15 PM
Post #12 of 64 (4317 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

Barring unique weather conditions it would be pretty hard for someone weighing 160 lbs. to toggle stall a 260 Nav. A hard turn would seem to be a more likely culprit.


davelepka  (D 21448)

Apr 2, 2012, 9:15 PM
Post #13 of 64 (4231 views)
Shortcut
Re: [andybobolson] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Barring unique weather conditions it would be pretty hard for someone weighing 160 lbs. to toggle stall a 260 Nav. A hard turn would seem to be a more likely culprit.

I'm not sure why you think weight is a function of being able to stall a canopy. Wing loading will effect the stall speed of the canopy, but at no point does it drop to zero due to a low WL.

I took the idea of a PC over the nose, and used it to make a learning point about manuvering an open canopy, and the idea that hard decks still exist even after the canopy is open.

Truth is, a PC over the nose on a 260 shouldn't produce much in the way of a turn or a control problem, regardless of how it got there. Given the speed a 260 at that WL would have, the amount fo force a PC could exert at that speed, and the amount of effort it would take to induce a turn on a canopy that size and at that loading, none of it adds up to a 'rapid spin' and nothing that a little opposite toggle couldn't stop. I could see a slight drift at best.

I have 'heard' rumors that this DZ is known to have substandard equipment, and is not the habit of following 'the rules' that most DZs do. Poor rigging and gear maintenance was specifically mentioned to me in an unsolicited PM.


andybobolson  (B 35696)

Apr 2, 2012, 10:18 PM
Post #14 of 64 (4171 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not criticizing your point about having a hard deck when doing maneuvers. I think that is solid advice. What I am saying is that, from what we know, I don't think an intentional canopy stall was a factor. I weigh 160 and I can't toggle stall a 240 Navigator without wrapping the steering lines around my wrists. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I think it is pretty unlikely. Either way, your comments about having a hard deck remain applicable.


f94sbu  (D 16017)

Apr 2, 2012, 10:19 PM
Post #15 of 64 (4168 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I'm not sure why you think weight is a function of being able to stall a canopy.
The size (height) of a person usually has a correlation to their weight, so does the length of their arms. It is not a 100% correlation of course, but the conclusion is not very farfetched.


davelepka  (D 21448)

Apr 2, 2012, 10:29 PM
Post #16 of 64 (4154 views)
Shortcut
Re: [andybobolson] Fatality at Lexington, tx? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I weigh 160 and I can't toggle stall a 240 Navigator without wrapping the steering lines around my wrists.

First of all, I hope you mean hands. Even wrapping them around your hands, 'taking a wrap' can be tricky business, doing it around your wrist seems like a much worse idea.

Either way, the reason you need to take a wrap is not your weight, it's the toggle setting of the canopy. Student canopies are always set up with the steering lines 'long', with the idea being that the student can give up a touch of flare stroke in exchange for the security of not being able to stall the canopy close to the ground. The large size of the canopy allows you to give up being able to 'deep' flare the canopy and still have a soft landing.

You can stall any canopy at any wing loading, the only difference will be the speed at which it happens. Less weight will stall at a slower speed, and more weight will stall at a higher speed.


gregpso  (Student)

Apr 2, 2012, 10:52 PM
Post #17 of 64 (4120 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Andy9o8] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Did his rig have an RSL? If so, the standard kind or a Skyhook or other MARD?

Not sure what difference it would make WHAT they had Frown

Depends on the actual (not just estimated) cutaway altitude, among other things. Still, it's a reasonable point of raw data to establish in any low cutaway incident.

If the cutaway was above 100 feet a skyhook could have made the diference quote below






Anatomy of a Spinning Malfunction - Testamonials
I jump an 84 square foot cross braced main and a 106 reserve. Recently, I made a jump with the main completely soaking wet. It opened in an extremely fast turn and began to go into line twists. Witnesses estimated that I was turning more than 2 revolutions per second. After a brief struggle to correct the spin, the G forces were so high that I could barely reach my cutaway handle. I finally got ahold of it and cut away still spinning violently on my back. My skyhook fired my reserve and in less than 100 feet I had a perfect reserve canopy. The Skyhook pulled so quickly and with such force that my reserve opened horizontally and I swung under it with zero line twists. Thank you for saving my life!







Anatomy of a Spinning Malfunction - Testamonials
I jump an 84 square foot cross braced main and a 106 reserve. Recently, I made a jump with the main completely soaking wet. It opened in an extremely fast turn and began to go into line twists. Witnesses estimated that I was turning more than 2 revolutions per second. After a brief struggle to correct the spin, the G forces were so high that I could barely reach my cutaway handle. I finally got ahold of it and cut away still spinning violently on my back. My skyhook fired my reserve and in less than 100 feet I had a perfect reserve canopy. The Skyhook pulled so quickly and with such force that my reserve opened horizontally and I swung under it with zero line twists. Thank you for saving my life!


(This post was edited by gregpso on Apr 2, 2012, 10:56 PM)


nigel99  (D 1)

Apr 3, 2012, 12:49 AM
Post #18 of 64 (4032 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gregpso] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

[quote]If the cutaway was above 100 feet a skyhook could have made the diference quote below [/quote]

This is really flawed thinking, IF you base your decisions on the above. You shouldn't even be contemplating cutting away below 1000 feet regardless of what widgets you have. Reserves are only expected to open in 300 feet in ideal conditions (there is quite a bit of discussion on this).

Below 1000 feet if you don't have a good main, deploy your reserve WITHOUT cutting away. On SOS equipment I have no idea what you do.

Above all else remain altitude aware - if you are below 1000 foot without a good canopy, chances are that you have made mistakes on the skydive.


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Apr 3, 2012, 3:48 AM
Post #19 of 64 (3929 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Below 1000 feet if you don't have a good main, deploy your reserve WITHOUT cutting away.

I wouldn't hum it, but I would have no problem chopping at a grand.


fcajump  (D 15598)

Apr 3, 2012, 5:49 AM
Post #20 of 64 (3826 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
[quote]If the cutaway was above 100 feet a skyhook could have made the diference quote below [/quote]

This is really flawed thinking, IF you base your decisions on the above. You shouldn't even be contemplating cutting away below 1000 feet regardless of what widgets you have. Reserves are only expected to open in 300 feet in ideal conditions (there is quite a bit of discussion on this).

Below 1000 feet if you don't have a good main, deploy your reserve WITHOUT cutting away. On SOS equipment I have no idea what you do.

Above all else remain altitude aware - if you are below 1000 foot without a good canopy, chances are that you have made mistakes on the skydive.

I disagree with your assertion that this is flawed thinking... it might be flawed planning, but I'll address that in a minute...

It has been shown that a Skyhook can deploy a reserve in ~100'. Therefore, if (for what ever reason) he had cutaway above that altitude, and the system was so equipped, it may have made a difference in the outcome.

As to what you or I should plan to do: As much as I think the MARD systems are a good idea nand can save lives in situations where someone unwisely (in the current thinking) cutaway lower than they should have, I do not agree that we should be planning to chop below 1000'.

On SOS systems (without MARD) you loose the option unless you want to reach back and pull the pin directly.

As to your comment on reserves being expected to open in 300' in ideal conditions, you are correct (and that's pushing it)... HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that I wouldn't bother pulling if I found myself below that altitude, and it doesn't take into account this (MARD) alternate method of deployment. To the best of my knowledge, the TSO tests (high and low speed) are only done based on pilot-chute deployment. There is ample evidence that a MARD can shorten that time/altitude loss.

Finally, while I believe in the advantages of the MARDs, I still think they are new enough that we don't have all the kinks worked out, rigging experience on the various designs and lessons learned that time will provide. There is anicdotal evidence of systems being mis-rigged, design tweeks being made and deployments not happening 100% to design. Maybe one day we can suggest that a main-out reserve deployment hard deck is 200', but I would not bet my life on that as a plan at this point.

(I don't plan to use my AAD... but I like that its there and armed... to me a MARD equipped system should be the same.)

Just thoughts,
JW

Disclaimer - while I like the MARD concept, and want one... I must admit I don't have one... yet...

edited to fix my malfunctioning bolds.


(This post was edited by fcajump on Apr 3, 2012, 6:15 AM)


nigel99  (D 1)

Apr 3, 2012, 6:10 AM
Post #21 of 64 (3788 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say. It is certainly a matter of planning. I don't have any idea whether the person who posted about a MARD believes it a magic bullet or not. However I have seen people not understanding their equipment and believing that a widget can perform miracles.

If you don't have a good main under 1000 foot, why wouldn't you simply dump your reserve? I've heard of half a dozen fatalities where people have had a reserve at line stretch or less, but not many fatal main reserve entanglements (as fate would have it this weekend was one of the very few entanglements with a bad ending).


Skyper

Apr 3, 2012, 6:27 AM
Post #22 of 64 (3755 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It has been shown that a Skyhook can deploy a reserve in ~100'.

Is this minimum, average or maximum value? Could you post some links to prove this statement.


labrys  (D 29848)

Apr 3, 2012, 6:32 AM
Post #23 of 64 (3744 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skyper] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Is this minimum, average or maximum value? Could you post some links to prove this statement.


http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/...;id=85&Itemid=70

End of the video


fcajump  (D 15598)

Apr 3, 2012, 7:14 AM
Post #24 of 64 (3690 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skyper] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
It has been shown that a Skyhook can deploy a reserve in ~100'.

Is this minimum, average or maximum value? Could you post some links to prove this statement.

The UPT video is a good one, there are also several on YouTube...

http://www.youtube.com/...g&feature=relmfu

Min/Avg/Max... I would say minimum and I would emphaze that I would never plan on that... just that it might work for you if you F*-ed up that bad.

I would like to see Pro-Track or Alti-Track graphs to compare RSL vs MARD cutaway altitude losses.

I'll even volunteer to do the jumps and post the results if someone would fund the study Wink (might take me years to do it right... just send the funds to "fund my study c/o FCAJUMP..." )

JW

JW


theonlyski  (D License)

Apr 3, 2012, 7:17 AM
Post #25 of 64 (3683 views)
Shortcut
Re: [labrys] Fatality - Lexington, , TX 1 April 2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Is this minimum, average or maximum value? Could you post some links to prove this statement.


http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/...;id=85&Itemid=70

End of the video

Just to point this out, those were SLIDER DOWN. Nobody in their right mind would pack a reserve slider down. That was just as a demonstration (even says so right in the video).


First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Incidents

 


Search for (options)