Being a safe BASE jumper

[TVPB 0]

Excellent response Tom

The trick is to be honest when you reach this point. Or to attain a sufficient level of knowledge so that you can make these decisions.

Stay Safe - Have Fun - Good Luck

The above could be crap, thought provoking, useful, or . . But not personal. You decide.

[Ken 0]

Ahhhh....My favourite subject. Anyway, my 2 cents worth from the A.B.A. website.
-------------------------------------------------------
B.A.S.E. jumping is as safe or as dangerous as any other activity humans participate in.

In fact for the reasons I will outline one could argue that B.A.S.E. jumping is inherently safe!

Any activity, to be safely conducted, requires that the participant:

1. has received sufficient:

* information,
* instruction,
* training and
* supervision.



2. Participates in the activity at a venue that is:

* graded, and
* within the demonstrated ability of the participant.



3. Uses only B.A.S.E. specific equipment.

4. Uses equipment configured correctly for the particular jump.

5. Participates only when the environmental conditions are suitable, E.g; wind, rain, LZ clear etc.

6. Training has occured progresively, e.g:

* a controlled 'low level of risk' environment,(E.g: For B.A.S.E. jumping: Pylonless bridge into water.)
* a controlled simulated higher risk environment,(For B.A.S.E. jumping: Employ object avoidence and other drills from pylonless bridge.), and
* an environment commensurate with the jumpers skill and ability.


B.A.S.E. equipment and techniques are different to regular skydiving and jumpers minimise the "real risk" by using only the latest B.A.S.E. specific equipment and up-to-date training.

Jumpers mentored by persons that by concensus have been deemed competent by the Australian B.A.S.E. community are given information, instruction, training and supervision to enable that student to be deemed a competent jumper.

A high level of "perceived risk" will always follow this sport, but, to the majority of the long term participants it is a safe sport.

When we look at professional racing car teams they are 'inherently safe.' that is the risk can be turned up to suit the racers. e.g: the cars despite appearances are not your standard car that are available to us.

1. These cars are designed with safety in mind a long time before the first bolt is purchased.

2. Highly qualified people pilot these machines.

3. They are raced around tracks that are purpose built and free of obstacles such as trees and power poles etc.

From this 'inherently safe' starting point we then turn up the risk by introducing onto the track:

a. other cars,

b. lessor skilled drivers,

c. permission to drive in inclement weather.

It is very similar in B.A.S.E. in that it would not be inherently safe if we were to say "I want to jump off a 300' cliff. I might need some padding for that."

Next person comes along and says "instead of padding, which didn't work, I'll use a parachute!"

Another person comes along and etc, etc.

As in the racing car analogy we start with:

1. a highly evolved B.A.S.E. specific canopy and container,

2. a very competant skydiver that understands how and why a canopy behaves the way it does given the variables it experiences during flight,

3. an extremly capable operator of the parachute that can position the canopy with precision in the tightest of landing areas.

We as jumpers, inadvertantly sometimes, add the risk by exersising poor judgement by jumping in less that perfect conditions, not configuring our equipment optimally and/or not performing the correct drills in a timely manner when required. The latter point is usually, but not always, an indicator that we were attempting a jump beyond our level of ability.

So as long as the first three points raised are followed one can see that it is an 'inherently Safe' activity to start with. We then add the risk.

On the other side of the coin are activities that are incredibly dangerous, however, have become socially acceptable.

These activities include:
driving a car, (600+ deaths a year in Australia)
smoking and drinking, (22000+ deaths per year in Australia)
rock fishing,(50+ deaths per year in Australia)
illicit drug consumption, (600+ deaths per year in Australia)
And the list goes on....and on....and on.

O.K.....But, more people drive than B.A.S.E. jump!? How can you compare them?

Answer - It's all about REAL RISK and PERCEIVED RISK.

People causing car crashes that result in fatalities do so knowing that people crash and die but, think it will never happen to them as they have either superior driving skills and/or a superior vehicle and/or driving on a familiar section of road or a section of road they believe is within their ability.

Of course, because they haven't either superior driving skills and/or a superior handling car and/or have the ability/equipment to overcome the
environmental demands of the driving surface they crash and die or kill someone else.

On the other hand, the vast majority of B.A.S.E. jumpers understand the ramifications of her/his actions and ensure they apply sound judgement to each and every jump they decide is within their ability. They understand the concept of real and perceived risk and can aportion it commensurate within the existing range of variables.

In the exceptionally rare occaisions, a minority of sound jumpers may have a lapse in judgement and kill or injure themselves. This is also known as "The Darwin Theory."

Idiot jumpers were going to die that day whether they were B.A.S.E. jumping, driving a car or rock fishing etc anyway.

It's all about "cause and effect."

So..When put into perspective B.A.S.E. jumping to a trained jumper is a relatively SAFE activity.

AB#78 IB#751 BF#???
[email protected]