Re: [mjosparky] Fatality: Texel - Adrian Nicolas - 17 September 2005

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

No, Airtec foresaw the issue back in 2000.

This is what they foresaw in 2000. They got it to fire under one canopy, the only canopy of of the type in the world.

Quote

In October 2000, we performed numerous tests with Luigi Cani under the experimental 46 ft² Icarus VX. The 46 ft² Icarus VX, with a wingload of 3.6 is the only canopy to date which, according to our data gathering instrumentation, during an aggressive landing approach reaches the necessary vertical speed to make an Expert CYPRES activate. Under the 60 ft² VX, Luigi Cani was not able to reach the necessary speed for an activation. Even when reaching 78 mph for a moment, the Expert CYPRES would not activate. The reason is that CYPRES does much more than trigger based on measured descent rate and altitude, as it analyses the situation the skydiver is in.

The same manual that says canopy maneuvers can’t set off the cypres says it will fire if the descent rate exceeds 78 mph. It would seem to me that if you even suspect that you may be approaching those speeds under canopy to either shut the unit off or slow down your approach.

It is not Airtec's responsibility to be the speed police for skydivers pushing the limits of ever increasing canopy technology. Jumpers and canopy improvement are changing the playing field not Airtec.

Sparky.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

Quote

Skydivers must rely on others to give good information to make good choices with. When given poor information, can the jumper be totally to blame for a poor choice based on that information?

HnS,

My response to that... YES! In my opinion, a jumper is respsonsible for the outcome of any and all skydives they make. Remember, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO skydive. YOU are the one that stepped off of the plane. There used to be a saying that as soon as you step off of the aircraft, YOU'RE DEAD... Until YOU do something about it. The advent of widespread use of AADs and gear becoming much much more reliable... noticed I said more reliable and not guaranteed to work... has lead many to believe that when we skydive we should expect to be as safe as if we're sitting on the couch at home... if something goes awry, Mr Cypres or gear guarantees will step in and insulate us from the gory shit that can happen when you strap a gloified bed sheet to your back, leave the surface of the earth and hurl you pink and soft body at the planet.

In other words, a jumper is totally responsible for their fate from the time they leave the aircraft to the time they are back on the ground, no matter what the circumstances and no matter what events transpire in between.

YES, everyone should share and present the best and most accurate information always, but that does not apply in hind-sight.

Again... I didn't know him, but I really really really wish Adrian hadn't died. If I could change it I would. If one of his family or friends needed shoulder to cry on, a hand to hold or a beer bought for them to toast his life, I'm there... but realize there is no grand injustice here is all some of us are trying to say.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

The same manual that says canopy maneuvers can’t set off the cypres says it will fire if the descent rate exceeds 78 mph. It would seem to me that if you even suspect that you may be approaching those speeds under canopy to either shut the unit off or slow down your approach.

And how are you supposed to know if you approaching these speeds? I asked in Swooping & CC if anyone knew their descent speed and only got a couple of responses.

Quote

It is not Airtec's responsibility to be the speed police for skydivers pushing the limits of ever increasing canopy technology. Jumpers and canopy improvement are changing the playing field not Airtec.

I would hardly call a Velocity 96 pushing the limits.

How could Adrian have known? The manual tells him he can't fire it under canopy. the 78-mph speed doesn't do any good unless you know your descent rate, not an easy thing to know.

What warning(s) did he have? What assurances did he have that he wouldn't fire it? Where did he fail in his deciscion making process?

Quote

This is what they foresaw in 2000. They got it to fire under one canopy, the only canopy of of the type in the world.

At the time. So they knew it was possible. Thew knew it was possible with larger canopies too, hence the new swooping model.

Derek

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

In other words, a jumper is totally responsible for their fate from the time they leave the aircraft to the time they are back on the ground, no matter what the circumstances and no matter what events transpire in between.

Hmm, wanna send me your rig for a reserve re-pack?.

I feel differently than you do. Airtec made a mistake in not including a warning in the new Cypres2 manual and not putting an amendment to the Cypres1 indicating the possibility of a fire under canopy. They set Adrian up for failure.

Derek

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

Quote

Hmm, wanna send me your rig for a reserve re-pack?.

Thank you... but NO!

Quote

I feel differently than you do. Airtec made a mistake in not including a warning in the new Cypres2 manual and not putting an amendment to the Cypres1 indicating the possibility of a fire under canopy.

You are correct... we feel differently. I think you are being overly dismissive of the clear understanding that a Cypres will fire if it senses an excessive descent rate at a prescirbed altitude... and concentrating on the statements made in the manaul that Cypres cannot fire under canopy, which, granted, now we know that is not true... why?... because now we know that there are folks out there piloting capable canopies in a manner which can fire a Cypres as if in freefall.

Same thing, different words, HnS, you are stuck on earlier statement that Cypres cannot fire under canopy and dismissing the also stated facts of when Cypres will fire, i.e. based on a documented set of inputs... it will go off... unfortunately and tragicly, Adrian managed those set of inputs under canopy. Your statemets that someone performing radical manuvers under canopy setting up for a swoop do not know their descent rate are irrelevant... if you get pulled over by a cop for speeding and he or she asks you how fast you were going and you respond, "I don't know, I don't have a speedometer in my car", do you think that's going to get you out of trouble, be realistic.

HnS, I don't know why, but I think you are stuck in a mindset that someone or something has to be responsible and that Adrian's actions are in no way involved in what happend. I disagree, but understand the psychology of your position... because once someone or something has to be responsible here with no acknowlegement that the manner in which Adiran piloted his canopy was involved, then of course you're going to point the finger of blame.

*sigh*

This thread has pretty much ran its course in my mind.

Again, I wish Adrian's death had not happend.

I'll be interested to see what engineering solution Airtec comes up with for y'all that choose to pilot your canopies in such a manner can satisfy Cypres' fireing parameters. I don't understand why y'all want to fly your canopies such... but that they say is a different story.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

HnS, I don't know why, but I think you are stuck in a mindset that someone or something has to be responsible and that Adrian's actions are in no way involved in what happend.

I am well aware of the manual, but I don't give much credit to the 78-mph activation speed. This is because it is very difficult to know how fast you are descending.

If a pilot tears the tail off an airplane because he flew it faster than the red line on the sirspeed indicator, he doesn't have anyone to blame but himself. If the manufacturer states in the operating manual that you cannot exceed the redline in the airplane, even flying acrobatics or diving as much as you want, but doesn't put an airspeed indicator in the airplane and the pilot rips the tail off from going too fast, who's fault is it? He was under the impression that he could fly the airplane any way he wanted and the tail wouldn't fall off. He didn't have an airspeed indicator to tell him that he was exceeding redline, and he ripped the tail off. Sure the pilot in command is always responsible, but given misleading information and a redline not to exceed without a guage to tell him if he was getting close, how can the pilot ensure he doesn't exceed the redline?

As for your reserve, j/k, I would pack it with the upmost care as I do every reserve
Derek

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

HnS... so you're saying that the 78mph activation speed has no credit since skydivers don't carry vertical velocity indicators... wow.

You're last post proves my point that you're of the mindset that you can always find reason that anything that "bad" happens is someone or soemething else's fault and I believe that the contrivance of logic by which you've arrived at that conclusion and defend that conclusion in the the general and in this specific case is wrong.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

You're last post proves my point that you're of the mindset that you can always find reason that anything that "bad" happens is someone or soemething else's fault and I believe that the contrivance of logic by which you've arrived at that conclusion and defend that conclusion in the the general and in this specific case is wrong.

"If a pilot tears the tail off an airplane because he flew it faster than the red line on the sirspeed indicator, he doesn't have anyone to blame but himself."

My last post proves that there are a lor of cases where the person is at fault. I listed an example, quoted above.

Quote

HnS... so you're saying that the 78mph activation speed has no credit since skydivers don't carry vertical velocity indicators... wow.

I'm saying that I give it very little credit since jumpers can't know their descent rate.

If I tell you to walk north, blindfolded, is it your fault I blindfolded you or didn't give you a compass. How can I expect you to walk North if I withhold the tools you need to accomplish it?

Derek

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

If I tell you to walk north, blindfolded, is it your fault I blindfolded you or didn't give you a compass. How can I expect you to walk North if I withhold the tools you need to accomplish it?

Because there is a good chance I would walk in the wrong direction, I would choose not to walk.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Because there is a good chance I would walk in the wrong direction, I would choose not to walk.

Following the analogy then, people shouldn't jump a Cypres. Of course the problem with the analogy is you know that you have a good chance of walking in the wrong direction. Adrian probably didn't have that benefit. The only information available was the manual, with it's 'you can't fire it under canopy' and 'it fires at 78-mph'. Given that information and nothing to guage your speed by, you have nothing to tell you that you may fire it.

Again, he was set up for failure. Led to believe he couldn't fire it and no way to know that he was getting close to the activation speed.

Derek

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If I tell you to walk north, blindfolded, is it your fault I blindfolded you or didn't give you a compass. How can I expect you to walk North if I withhold the tools you need to accomplish it?

this is a solveable problem given enough time. Wind and sun will lead the way.

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

HnS,

This exchange between you, MJO and I has quickly degraded into a debate over life philosophy.

Back on topic...

1) The parameters by which Cypres will fire are clearly stated.
2) The statement that Cypres cannot be activated under canopy is truthful given the canopy technology of the day and how canopies were typically flown at the time of Cypres' introduction... AND... this statement still holds true for how 99% of jumpers pilot their canopies TODAY.
3) Regardless of the previous statement, the clear firing parameters of Cypres trumps that statement... it doesn't take an engineer to be able to understand this fact... "If I get Cypres coming out of the air too fast close to the ground, it will fire"... "doesn’t' matter if its in freefall, under canopy, or in the trunk of my car and I drive over a cliff, its going to function."
4) The argument that Adrian did not know how fast he was descending under canopy is irrelevant. He achieved the parameters that would activate Cypres and it did exactly what it said it would do... there is NO main canopy gone bit or in the trunk of a car bit in its decision logic... PERIOD.
5) No argument that Adrian got bit by this, I wish he hadn't, but he was not "set-up" as you choose to believe and continue to defend.
6) He was a test jumper expanding the flight envelope of the gear he was using... sometimes things go wrong when doing developmental test.

I am looking forward to Airtec's engineering solution to this problem. In the interim, I hope and encourage all of the few canopy pilots out there with the swoop skills to meet Cypres' firing parameters under canopy to read and study and understand those conditions. HnS has suggested y'all start wearing Vertical Velocity indicators so y'all will know if you are or are not approaching those conditions. Conversely, y'all may consider if you do or do not want to use a Cypres on your rig. I hope that after becoming aware of the potential to fire a Cypres under canopy by doing multiple 360s onto final under a high performance canopy that no one continues to intentionally do so without taking some precautionary measure. I also hope that out of the select few canopy pilots out there that can achieve this condition get the chance to work with Airtec to come up with an a solution to this problem that will suit y'all's needs while allowing Cypres to continue to provide the same level of benefit, or better, that it has and continues to provide to the skydiving community at large.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

1) The parameters by which Cypres will fire are clearly stated.

For all the good it does.

Quote

2) The statement that Cypres cannot be activated under canopy is truthful given the canopy technology of the day and how canopies were typically flown at the time of Cypres' introduction... AND... this statement still holds true for how 99% of jumpers pilot their canopies TODAY.

Not true. The Cypres2 came out long after the Velocity 97 and other much smaller canopies. These aren't niche canopies, they are popular.

Quote

3) Regardless of the previous statement, the clear firing parameters of Cypres trumps that statement... it doesn't take an engineer to be able to understand this fact... "If I get Cypres coming out of the air too fast close to the ground, it will fire"... "doesn’t' matter if its in freefall, under canopy, or in the trunk of my car and I drive over a cliff, its going to function."

I agree.

Quote

4) The argument that Adrian did not know how fast he was descending under canopy is irrelevant. He achieved the parameters that would activate Cypres and it did exactly what it said it would do... there is NO main canopy gone bit or in the trunk of a car bit in its decision logic... PERIOD.

I disagree. I can't say it was Adrian's fault for exceeding 78-mph when he kad no way of knowing he was going that fast. To expect everyone to know their descent rate is silly, since very few actually know or have the equipment to find out.

Quote

) No argument that Adrian got bit by this, I wish he hadn't, but he was not "set-up" as you choose to believe and continue to defend.

He wasn't 'set-up'. he was set up for failure. Told it can't fire under canopy and given a speed limit he can't measure.

Quote

6) He was a test jumper expanding the flight envelope of the gear he was using... sometimes things go wrong when doing developmental test.

I disagree about being a test jumper on a proven canopy. A xaos-21 pilot is a test jumper, not a Velocity 97.

Quote

HnS has suggested y'all start wearing Vertical Velocity indicators so y'all will know if you are or are not approaching those conditions.

Really? I did? Where?

I think swoopers should remove their Cypres's since they can't be sure they aren't close to firing it.

Derek

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

HnS,

I've said my piece. There are clear facts which you choose to ignore... because if you pay attention to them, your argument disolves. You've managed to out type me, I'll give you that and the last word.

DOOR!

[raymod2 1]

It seems to me that the non-swoopers (ZigZagMarquis and mjosparky) feel that swooping is a misuse of their equipment and that swoopers get what they deserve for being so reckless. It is not Hooknswoop who is ignoring the facts:

- the Velocity was designed for swooping
- the Velocity was around long before the CYPRES2 was designed
- the CYPRES2 was marketed towards swoopers
- Airtec declared in their manual that you cannot cause a CYPRES to fire under canopy

ZigZagMarquis and mjosparky: What is the fastest vertical descent rate you have achieved under canopy? If you don't even know how can your argument be based on the premise that everyone should?

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

It seems to me that the non-swoopers (ZigZagMarquis and mjosparky) feel that swooping is a misuse of their equipment and that swoopers get what they deserve for being so reckless. It is not Hooknswoop who is ignoring the facts:

- the Velocity was designed for swooping
- the Velocity was around long before the CYPRES2 was designed
- the CYPRES2 was marketed towards swoopers
- Airtec declared in their manual that you cannot cause a CYPRES to fire under canopy

ZigZagMarquis and mjosparky: What is the fastest vertical descent rate you have achieved under canopy? If you don't even know how can your argument be based on the premise that everyone should?

Come on, get off of it. No one said anything about "misuse" of equipment. You have no idea if either one of us swoop or not and it has no bearing in this discussion. Hook does not even jump anymore, but his input is still valuable.

How come you did not mention in your little list, "if you exceed 78 mph vertical speed the cypress will fire"? Adrian exceeded that speed and the cypress did what it was designed to do, it fired his reserve. That is a fact; now learn to live with it. Until the unit is redesigned it is something swoopers need to think about. All the rest of this is bullshit. You can either learn from this incident and do what you need to do to avoid it, or stand around pointing fingers. That’s up to you, I choose to realize the operating limits of the unit and make my decisions accordingly.

I am done with this.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[ZigZagMarquis 9]

Ditto...

MJO said it better the I would have.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I choose to realize the operating limits of the unit and make my decisions accordingly.

What is your descent rate under canopy? How do you know that you won't fire your Cypres in a hard spiral? How does someone that jumps a slightly smaller canopy than you know, what about a little smaller than that? What are jumpers supposed to base those decisions on?

Derek

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Quote

I choose to realize the operating limits of the unit and make my decisions accordingly.

What is your descent rate under canopy? How do you know that you won't fire your Cypres in a hard spiral? How does someone that jumps a slightly smaller canopy than you know, what about a little smaller than that? What are jumpers supposed to base those decisions on?

Derek

Information now available to them from this and other incidents and common sense. We can't change the past, we can determine the future.

I am done with this.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[raymod2 1]

Quote

Ditto...

MJO said it better the I would have.

And both of you have conveniently ignored my question:

If you don't know your maximum vertical descent rate how can your argument be based on the premise that everyone should?

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

If you don't know your maximum vertical descent rate how can your argument be based on the premise that everyone should?

You do not have to know precisely what your descent rate is.

What people have known, for several years, is that canopy flight and freefall flight speeds overlap.

That cool picture of a birdsuit jumper docking on a canopy indicated about 5 years ago that freefall and canopy speeds overlap.

This is not true for most jumpers, but there are situations where canopy descent rates are comparable to freefall speeds. If you do those canopy maneuvers, close to the ground with an active AAD, then be prepared for an AAD to fire when firing conditions are met.

A downplane may take longer to diagnose than a SBS or stack. It took Adrian 95m or about 2.6 sec to cutaway his main. (estimated from the Airtec report)


.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[nate_1979 9]

Quote

Quote

Ditto...

MJO said it better the I would have.

And both of you have conveniently ignored my question:

If you don't know your maximum vertical descent rate how can your argument be based on the premise that everyone should?

Mabey if your doing things at high speed under canopy, and you still jump an AAD, you should find out what your decent speeds are... Last time I checked some data loggers (i.e. the Neptune) monitor and record canopy speeds. This just seems like one case that ignorance isnt going to help you at all.

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[AndyMan 7]

The Neptune does a very poor job of measuring peak airspeed. It simply isn't accurate enough to bet your life on, especially if it was a jump from full altitude. See here: http://www.alti-2.com/Neptune_Owners_Pages/swoopers.htm.

Secondly, it's entirely unfair to chastise someone for ignorance when it's effectively impossible to measure your vertical airspeed.


_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[nate_1979 9]

Quote

The Neptune does a very poor job of measuring peak airspeed. It simply isn't accurate enough to bet your life on, especially if it was a jump from full altitude. See here: http://www.alti-2.com/Neptune_Owners_Pages/swoopers.htm.

Secondly, it's entirely unfair to chastise someone for ignorance when it's effectively impossible to measure your vertical airspeed.


_Am

Ok, my bad

FGF #???
I miss the sky...
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

If you do those canopy maneuvers, close to the ground with an active AAD, then be prepared for an AAD to fire when firing conditions are met.

Which manuevers, what gear, what WL?

How was Adrian supposed to make a good choice given the information available to him at the time?

Derek