Let's talk about 'no pulls'

[Beachbum 0]

Quote

I agree! The real point is that a higher activation will result in a high success rate.

... and a higher activation altitude is also that much more likely to result in a two out situation! If you really want to stick with a higher activation, I suppose you could put a student Cypres into a sport rig, but I don't think many (if any) very experienced people would recommend it. They didn't determine those altitude/speed parameters by reaching into a hat for numbers ...

As long as you are happy with yourself ... who cares what the rest of the world thinks?

[absane 0]

Quote

Get to know what the ground looks like at any given altitude.

Excellent advice. For my first solo dive off AFF was dedicated to doing nothing more than watching my altimeter and the ground. I've done a few jumps like this and it's really helped. Sure, it may not be cool or exciting... but it's an essential skill to learn.

Don't forget to pull!

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

Quote

Get to know what the ground looks like at any given altitude.

Excellent advice. For my first solo dive off AFF was dedicated to doing nothing more than watching my altimeter and the ground. I've done a few jumps like this and it's really helped. Sure, it may not be cool or exciting... but it's an essential skill to learn.

Play a game on the ride up. Look out the window, estimate the altitude, then check your alti to see how close you are. You may not be able to tell the difference between 4,000 and 5,000 feet but you should be able to tell the difference between 4,000 and 9,000. The more you do that the more your visual instincts will improve.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[Hvance 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Get to know what the ground looks like at any given altitude.

Excellent advice. For my first solo dive off AFF was dedicated to doing nothing more than watching my altimeter and the ground. I've done a few jumps like this and it's really helped. Sure, it may not be cool or exciting... but it's an essential skill to learn.

Play a game on the ride up. Look out the window, estimate the altitude, then check your alti to see how close you are. You may not be able to tell the difference between 4,000 and 5,000 feet but you should be able to tell the difference between 4,000 and 9,000. The more you do that the more your visual instincts will improve.

That's a good idea.

I wish Google Maps had an "Avoid Ghetto" routing option.

[ps5601 0]

Tying to guess your altitude also depends on where you are jumping. If you are in the mountains you get ground rush pretty high up as you see the tops of the mountains coming up (or going past) you. You may well still be several thousand feet above the valley (assuming you got out in the right place).

However - if you are somewhere that is very flat with few features and big fields (say mid-west of US) then you have to get much lower to get the same amount of ground rush.

Also, look at the Cypres website and read the reports from some of the early saves. Those saves were the first time anyone could ask a "dead" person what happened and why they didn't pull. There is a very striking one that says after a mal the person cutaway and went belly to Earth then "saw my shadow racing across the ground to meet me and I waited to die. Then my Cyrpes fired". In short they froze when they saw how low they were due to panic.

Blue skies

Paul

[GLIDEANGLE 1]

Quote

It just seems to me like there are many fewer saves from AAD's and many more malfunctions then you would expect from any other piece of electronic equipment. Also, you guys talk about the things that may effect them, such as body position and imperfect air pressure readings, but I ask why have those things not been accounted for such that the device fires at an altitude that, even with those errors, still fires high enough for a reserve deployment? I don't know about you guys but I would rather have an AAD fire 500 feet higher if it means that it will correctly deploy a reserve 90 percent of the time than 500 feet lower and deploy 50 percent of the time

Non-fatal/non-injury incidents are often NOT reported, while fatal incidents are heaving reported. Thus, many AAD saves probably are never reported.

The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

[fcajump 153]

I recall that around the time AirTek was reporting 50,000 Cypres' sold, there was another stat going around stating that Cypres AAD's had saved 1,000 lives.

hmmm... to me, that means that on an average day at my DZ, there is at least one jumper who would (theoretically) be dead but for his AAD... because (at the time) on average 1 in 50 Cypress' had needed to fire.

While I am glad to have my 50th friend still with us, I am very concerned that the need for them is that high.


For what its worth, I did have a Sentinel AAD fire on me as a student and after I had already pulled the reserve (set for 1500'...+/-1500' ). Precipitating event - hard pull on the main PC. Tried thrice and went silver.

JW

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[erdnarob 1]

I was at Skydive Expo in March 2010 attending a seminar on the progression of the equipment in the past 30 years or so. The speaker clearly said that with AADs set up to fire lower than 800 feet and firing, if you get a pilot chute hesitation of one second, you are dead.

Now, what kind of launch many reserve pilot chutes are having ? Most of them launch the pilot chute not high enough to break thru the jumper's burble. As a rigger this is what I have witnessed many times since a lot of people bring me their equipment with reserve not having been pulled.
A pilot chute with a spring too weak to go thru the jumper's burble IMO is more prone to get an hesitation.
How come not too much solution is done for that ? Malfunctions are rare and most of the time the pilot chute is able to clear up and deploy the reserve. A stronger spring pilot chute launching at 5 feet should be able to solve the hesitation problem. I then suspect a pilot chute hesitation could explain why some people having their AAD fired die. This is why I have a Vector 3 equipped with a 45 LBS spring pilot chute and jumping 5 feet high.

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[airdvr 197]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Get to know what the ground looks like at any given altitude.

Excellent advice. For my first solo dive off AFF was dedicated to doing nothing more than watching my altimeter and the ground. I've done a few jumps like this and it's really helped. Sure, it may not be cool or exciting... but it's an essential skill to learn.

Play a game on the ride up. Look out the window, estimate the altitude, then check your alti to see how close you are. You may not be able to tell the difference between 4,000 and 5,000 feet but you should be able to tell the difference between 4,000 and 9,000. The more you do that the more your visual instincts will improve.

When I can I like to use the cloud base as a reference point on the way up. I say to myself ' cloud base is at X. When we go lower than the base we'll have Y time left' etc. Of course it's not always possible.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[airdvr 197]

Quote

The real point is that a higher activation will result in a high success rate.

True...of course the best success rate will be had by not jumping at all .

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[catfishhunter 1]

Quote

It just seems to me like there are many fewer saves from AAD's and many more malfunctions then you would expect from any other piece of electronic equipment. Also, you guys talk about the things that may effect them, such as body position and imperfect air pressure readings, but I ask why have those things not been accounted for such that the device fires at an altitude that, even with those errors, still fires high enough for a reserve deployment? I don't know about you guys but I would rather have an AAD fire 500 feet higher if it means that it will correctly deploy a reserve 90 percent of the time than 500 feet lower and deploy 50 percent of the time

ummm NO. 750-1250 would be 1250-1750. My hard deck is 1500. I deploy at 2200' when i'm in the base on "biggish" ways. That would have me flying two outs on a regular basis if it didn't kill me first. I like my cypress right where it is thank you very much.

MAKE EVERY DAY COUNT
Life is Short and we never know how long we are going to have. We must live life to the fullest EVERY DAY. Everything we do should have a greater purpose.

[billvon 2,400]

>Having a difficult time understanding a true no pull fatality with todays
>equipment.

1) Hard pull fussed with for too long.
2) Lost pud fussed with for too long.
3) Simple loss of altitude awareness (easier when you are sitflying or backflying.)
4) Getting hit hard enough to disorient a jumper.

Really, not much has changed from the 1980's where they were more common. AAD's make them a lot more survivable, and audibles can help with altitude awareness - but both of the above also have the negative effect of reducing the perceived risk of going in with a no-out, and can thus encourage someone to exercise less care than they ordinarily would.

[burtonjm 0]

Quote

When I can I like to use the cloud base as a reference point on the way up. I say to myself ' cloud base is at X. When we go lower than the base we'll have Y time left' etc. Of course it's not always possible.

That's a good idea. I do it myself on every jump, and when I'm coaching students I ask them to note the cloud level and ask them why it's a good thing to take note of

This shit, right here, is OK

[airdvr 197]

Quote

>Having a difficult time understanding a true no pull fatality with todays
>equipment.

1) Hard pull fussed with for too long.
2) Lost pud fussed with for too long.
3) Simple loss of altitude awareness (easier when you are sitflying or backflying.)
4) Getting hit hard enough to disorient a jumper.

Really, not much has changed from the 1980's where they were more common. AAD's make them a lot more survivable, and audibles can help with altitude awareness - but both of the above also have the negative effect of reducing the perceived risk of going in with a no-out, and can thus encourage someone to exercise less care than they ordinarily would.

Agreed. The hard pull/lost pud scenario would most likely leave some trace evidence so you could make an educated guess. I suppose loss of situational awareness is still possible and most certainly getting your bell rung. This most recent one got me to thinking. Went back and looked at what was available in the fatality database and the low pulls are lumped in with the no pulls. No pulls are pretty rare nowadays...I guess they'll never disappear completely.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[erdnarob 1]

Many, many confusions in this thread.
First, if you jump at different places, you cannot always know the ground at a given altitude and even worse, if you try that, you can get confused and take a DZ ground for another one.
Second, AAD's are back up devices. You shouldn't never rely on them
Third, I disagree completely about playing with the AAD modes. I know that the Cypres 2 (still a 2002 design) cannot provide multimodes to choose from (unless done at the factory) but in case of a Vigil or Argus, I do not recommend to use the Student mode while you should be at Pro. Why not then choosing the Tandem mode or better yet use the correction altitude at its maximum which is available on all AADs. The firing altitude of an AAD has been studied to give the benefit of a reserve activation when things are going bad. Setting the device at higher altitude can generate other problems like in this case, for instance, you really have to wait for pulling because of an unusual situation like having people above you on a big way separation.
Also while some canopies now take 800 feet to get completely inflated, pulling at 2200 feet will bring you at 1400 feet. Now, being on a student mode get your firing altitude 200 feet higher. If now your are standing up in your harness because of the beginning of inflation, you add another 260 feet which is the differential pressure between chest and back when falling flat on your stomach.
You understand in that case that you will finnish with two parachutes out.
People giving their advice should be way more careful. They have to try to foresee the possible bad results of their advice depending on different situations.
hen what can we do ? I would say that jumpers shouldN,t rely on one thing to evaluate the altitude. I would recommend a combination of using the eyes with a beeper or beeper and altimeter or eyes and altimeter...always trusting the way or device giving the lowest altitude and act accordingly. Personally I use a Protrack and a Time Out beepers both installed in my helmet and obviously double check with eyes and /or altimeter.

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[skebenga 2]

Yep- and in the days when AAD's weren't around any fatal (no pull/low pull) make a huge impact on us all. (excuse the pun) The result was we continuously educated, reveiwed and amended our training and attitudes to prevent this, and with huge success too. Check out the trend in all those annual USPA fatality reports from way back (Paul Sitter et al) Now we all know that that the wheel has swung to the main culprits being canopy collisions and low turns.

However- more sinister I feel is that every AAD save (and man have there been a bunch!) which as you correctly point out no longer really gets correctly reported, is unfortunately a very valuable and impactive learning opportunity lost. The result- our modern day instructors and experienced group simply don't carry those hard lessons thru any longer. Quite clearly there have been a plethora of really 'soft' AAD saves in the last few years.

[riggerrob 558]

How about "loss of altitude awareness?"

Ask any of your local AFF Instructors if any of their students have lost altitude awareness and the instructor had to open the student's main canopy.

[riggerrob 558]

How about "low blood sugar?"

We did not understand low blood sugar until after we had been doing tandems for a few years. After several students passed out under canopy, we started to see a pattern: poor physical fitness, over-weight, hung-over, too terrified to sleep, skipped breakfast, only ate sugary foods all day, no water, sun-burn, over-heated, etc.

The pattern includes terrified students getting all excited, rapidly burning through most of their blood sugar reserves, then relaxing once the danger has past. That "relaxing" often includes collapsing after opening.

Which also helps explain the one static-line student in a hundred drifting over the forest - under canopy - while totally ignoring arrows, radios or any other attempt at steering advice from the ground.

[chuteless 1]

I don't know if you've ever seen a " no pull ". I have seen two, and I hope your wanting to talk about that subject is respectful.

There are many other things more important, although I suppose you will argue that you want to instill something in the newbies on DZ.com

Bill Cole

[airdvr 197]

Quote

I don't know if you've ever seen a " no pull ". I have seen two, and I hope your wanting to talk about that subject is respectful.

There are many other things more important, although I suppose you will argue that you want to instill something in the newbies on DZ.com

Bill Cole

Assuming this was aimed at me. Anytime I bring up something like this it's for the purposes of education and awareness. Although I haven't seen a true no pull I've seen a few cutaway no pulls in my day. Not something I care to remember very often.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[jurgencamps 0]

Quote

When I can I like to use the cloud base as a reference point on the way up. I say to myself ' cloud base is at X. When we go lower than the base we'll have Y time left' etc. Of course it's not always possible.

But remember that a cloud base can get lower in the time you need to get at full altitude. If you expect that the cloud base is still at 5000 ft and it has descended till 2000 ft, you get a nasty surprise.

It has happened before and it will happen again. It is a tool, but not as reliable as you may think.

[jurgencamps 0]

Quote

That's a good idea. I do it myself on every jump, and when I'm coaching students I ask them to note the cloud level and ask them why it's a good thing to take note of

See my post just above this one. Also mention the possiblity that the cloudbase can get lower.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

We did not understand low blood sugar until after we had been doing tandems for a few years. After several students passed out under canopy, we started to see a pattern: poor physical fitness, over-weight, hung-over, too terrified to sleep, skipped breakfast, only ate sugary foods all day, no water, sun-burn, over-heated, etc.

You left out the poor fitting harness that presses on the femoral artery when hanging under canopy. Tandem gear isn't comfortable.

However, I had something similar happen on one of the last of my student jumps. It wouldn't surprise me if the factors you listed exacerbated it. It was difficult to focus and I could easily see someone passing out in the circumstance.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

It just seems to me like there are many fewer saves from AAD's and many more malfunctions then you would expect from any other piece of electronic equipment. Also, you guys talk about the things that may effect them, such as body position and imperfect air pressure readings, but I ask why have those things not been accounted for such that the device fires at an altitude that, even with those errors, still fires high enough for a reserve deployment? I don't know about you guys but I would rather have an AAD fire 500 feet higher if it means that it will correctly deploy a reserve 90 percent of the time than 500 feet lower and deploy 50 percent of the time

Your perception is wrong then. There are literally hundreds of people who are alive because of a cypres fire after they lost altitude awareness.

...

If you feel the need to have one go off higher, you can get the STUDENT MODEL instead of the EXPERT MODEL. Please talk with your instructors and S & TA about this.

I think using the altitude offset would be better than switching to a student model, but more I think your initial paragraph is the key. There are extremely few malfunctions, usually explained by operator error (like turning on the AAD at home rather than at the DZ). The swooping deaths are the ones that come to mind, outside of that I can only recall suspicions on a couple incidents over the past 7 years.

At 11 jumps, one has to really screw the pooch to get to the point where the AAD fire is necessary. Don't.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It just seems to me like there are many fewer saves from AAD's and many more malfunctions then you would expect from any other piece of electronic equipment. Also, you guys talk about the things that may effect them, such as body position and imperfect air pressure readings, but I ask why have those things not been accounted for such that the device fires at an altitude that, even with those errors, still fires high enough for a reserve deployment? I don't know about you guys but I would rather have an AAD fire 500 feet higher if it means that it will correctly deploy a reserve 90 percent of the time than 500 feet lower and deploy 50 percent of the time

Your perception is wrong then. There are literally hundreds of people who are alive because of a cypres fire after they lost altitude awareness.

...

If you feel the need to have one go off higher, you can get the STUDENT MODEL instead of the EXPERT MODEL. Please talk with your instructors and S & TA about this.

I think using the altitude offset would be better than switching to a student model, but more I think your initial paragraph is the key. There are extremely few malfunctions, usually explained by operator error (like turning on the AAD at home rather than at the DZ). The swooping deaths are the ones that come to mind, outside of that I can only recall suspicions on a couple incidents over the past 7 years.

At 11 jumps, one has to really screw the pooch to get to the point where the AAD fire is necessary. Don't.

I thought about that.. the altitude offset.. but I really do not like the idea of low time jumpers futzing with that feature. In my experience its just too easy to have it set LOW instead of HIGH as it flips back and forth from + to -.

There are some DZ's where the LZ is quite a bit different than the airport where they are taking off from.. such as Hollister, but I do not think very many people who have jumped at a place like that, jump at other places and have the requisite skills and who are experienced enough to teach those skills.

I would DEFINITELY not be comfortable teaching that skill and then being responsible for some newbie going in because he thought he knew how to do it... and did not. Set it the wrong way.... and you are back to a no pull if someone loses altitude awareness when they are at the most vulnerable, being new to the sport.

Most of the turbine babies out there nowadays are deploying at well above 3K... hell 4 k seems to be scaring the shit out of many I have met.

I just do not see all that many people deploying at the altitude that I did in the old days...... and still do on bigways. I am comfortable deploying at 2000' and with my CYPRES 2 I am always saddled and under canopy well above scaring my AAD into doing something about it. Perhaps it still might be a good idea for newer jumpers to stick with the student versions for a while, I would rather see a very few 2 outs.