Should gear manufacturers be putting something on rigs to stop us (potentially) falling out of them?

[Newbie 0]

With the slew of recent posts and video demonstrations here, (and Jan Meyers research on the topic), i think it's quite obvious that unless something is done, we're going to have a sport parachutist fatality (or at the very least, another near miss) at some point due to this issue, especially due to the increasing propensity for skydivers to experiment and get into 3 dimensional flight.

Should manufacturers be doing something about this now, now that it's been identified as a real and potentially very serious issue?
Why should someone have to die first for the whole industry to be changed?
Just how much time and money would it cost them (or heck even us, if we paid them, or could spec it as an option? I would pay $20 for a back strap, or webbed leg strap connector if it helped to keep me in my rig, which in itself had cost me $1000's).

Do gear manufacturers think that because the rigs are fine, have been fine, then they will be - more or less fine? If we want to worry about this, we should mod it ourselves (or rather get a rigger to do so, as per Jan's example?).

I would welcome comments from Bill Booth and other equipment manufacturers here on what they think of this issue, as the way i see it, it is something we deserve to have comments from the gear manufacturers about.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Scoop 0]

Id like to see this demonstrated in a tunnel. Or the tunnel used by manufacturesrs to test this very thing (though im sure they already do to a certain degree)

[Newbie 0]

Quote

Id like to see this demonstrated in a tunnel. Or the tunnel used by manufacturesrs to test this very thing (though im sure they already do to a certain degree)

See what tested? Someone potentially coming out of their rig in a tunnel? I don't think that's possible, you need the deploying main (often when you aren't expecting it, such as a premature in an upright or inverted body position)

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Scoop 0]

Oh, I get ya. But could certainly help locate 'voids' or highlight weak areas in design surely. I mean in order for a rig to fall off, it must be poorly fitting in certain positions right? That could be tunnel tested

You cant do enough research when it comes to safety

[Newbie 0]

Quote

Oh, i get ya. But could certainly help locate 'voids' or highlight weak areas in design surely.

You cant do enough research when it comes to safety

As far as i'm concerned, and i'm not rigger, the "void" has already been found on sport rigs.

How it's possible to fall (be pulled) out of your rig

What we are now seeing in light of the recent tandem passenger fatality, is a propensity for many people to be able to seemingly come out of their rigs easily (edited to add: while experimenting on the ground!). Jan Meyer has already made a work around (which i plan on looking into for my own rig) but i'm curious to know the gear manufacturers thoughts on this topic, being they are eminently more knowledgeable on this than I.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

That could be tunnel tested

It would depend on the tunnel.. You couldn't do it in the Skyventure wind tunnels, since the rig would destroy them when it came off the jumper. Fans don't like solid objects going through them.

Derek

[Scoop 0]

I didnt mean, phsyically get out of the rig in the tunnel. That would be daft

But by adopting the flying positions in the tunnel, you could identify accurately where there are weaknesses. LIke for example. I see the sit fly video posted. Kinda scary but thats not accurate body position.

In the tunnel you can actually observe things and because your not gonna be deploying theres no need to be smashing things.

I just think, the reason wind tunnels were ever invented was as a developmental or scientific purpose. Maybe weve forgot along the way and just like to play in em

F1 cars, aircraft etc are all tested in windtunnels because its controlled environment and its safe. You could also use it to test the proposed modifications on rigs to see if it does reduce the 'holes'

[highfly 0]

If you check Phreezones original post here it's dated back in March 2002.

Manufacturers have been well aware of this and still nothing has been done, but with that said exactly how many fatalities have occured from this oversight.
Not too many I guess.

Quote

This is extremely rare however, so don’t let it keep you up at night . . . Nick DG

www.myspace.com/durtymac

[Newbie 0]

Thanks mate, i was reading that post last night and didn't even see the post date of Phree's original post, thanks for pointing that out.

We might not have had any fatalities from this yet. But i think that's more because we have been lucky. It would only take one fatality before we would see an industry wide move to address this issue, i'm pretty sure. I'm wondering why we have to wait for someone to die first though? I know it's an extra cost, but if push came to shove, i would pay a little extra to have this as an option. It might be worrying over nothing, but the last thing i want is to be back in freefall looking up at my rig, with an inflated main as i fall away wondering why i didn't address this when i had the opportunity to do so.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Newbie 0]

Quote

I didnt mean, phsyically get out of the rig in the tunnel. That would be daft

But by adopting the flying positions in the tunnel, you could identify accurately where there are weaknesses. LIke for example. I see the sit fly video posted. Kinda scary but thats not accurate body position.

In the tunnel you can actually observe things and because your not gonna be deploying theres no need to be smashing things.

I just think, the reason wind tunnels were ever invented was as a developmental or scientific purpose. Maybe weve forgot along the way and just like to play in em

F1 cars, aircraft etc are all tested in windtunnels because its controlled environment and its safe. You could also use it to test the proposed modifications on rigs to see if it does reduce the 'holes'

It's all superflous - you need a prematurely deploying parachute to test this properly, when you are not in a flat, arched body position. That can't be done in a wind tunnel, and we already know people can fall out of their rigs (see that article i linked you). Besides there is no need to test anything - simulating this on the ground shows it can happen in the air and the guy in the CRW wrap on Jan's page has shown us it happens in the air too.

I want to hear from the people making our rigs why they aren't doing something to close the hole. Am i missing somehting here? Does it make the rig less comfortable (therefore less sellable), or somehow unsafe? Do manufacturers not take it seriously because we are too busy killing ourselves under perfectly good mains, and not falling through the hole for them to worry about it as an issue?

I don't know, but i hope some of them might enlighten us.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Erroll 49]

Quote

We might not have had any fatalities from this yet.

I don't think your line of thinking is unreasonable. The threat of a Cypres firing during a swoop was indentified several years ago, yet it took a fatality for people to really sit up and take notice.

With freeflying become more popular by the day, and sport rigs getting smaller and smaller, it is, in my opinion, only a matter of time before something really bad happens.

[badlock 0]

I'm wondering, if we're talking about a non-existing problem.
How many jumpers felt out of their harness during the centuries (with a perfect fine harness)?
I guess, they can be easily counted with two hands.
And what happens if the problem is fixed with a hip-strap?
Is the problem of jumpers falling out in HD-position (because the chest-strap wasn't enough) during a prem the next problem we should fix?

Don't be a Lutz!

[Falko 0]

Quote

I'm wondering, if we're talking about a non-existing problem.

Sorry for picking on semantics, but it obviously is existing. The probability seems to be small, but still. What I don't like about some of the potential problems with "small probability" is that if they occur in reality, they inevitably result in death.

The way I see it, the only task of a harness is to keep my body attached to my parachute, or to my TI under all circumstances! If I can manage to slip out of a properly sized and properly fastened harness, it calls for a change in design. Maybe only a minor change, but still.

Quote

And what happens if the problem is fixed with a hip-strap?

Well, would be fine, wouldn't it?

Ich betrachte die Religion als Krankheit, als Quelle unnennbaren Elends für die menschliche Rasse.
(Bertrand Russell, engl. Philosoph, 1872-1970)

[mattjw916 2]

This whole thread is lame...

The OP makes it seem like this is a common problem and people are falling out of rigs left and right. While the accident that took place is tragic, I find the knee jerk reactions to them comical at best. I can only recall one other case of someone falling out of their rig and going in using modern sport gear and it had to do with the chest strap separating from the MLW.

The amount of fear-mongering that goes on in this forum is positively staggering. You have the vocal minority (many of which don't even skydive very often) perpetuating myths that Stilettos are black-death canopies for anyone under 500 jumps, your AAD can fire at any time while swooping, and now you can fall out of your rig.

While there are isolated incidents of people getting killed as a result of these obscure occurences, they certainly are not the "big killers" people make them out to be. Perhaps if the fear-mongerers spent more time highlighting the hazards of not knowing how AADs and RSLs operate, why you should take a few minutes and ensure you and your buddy's gear is safe to freefly in, not jumping while drunk or on drugs, and perhaps learning to fly that "hot" canopy instead of PFL'ing it in on every jump we'd have less time to split hairs over something that really isn't a problem.

The law of unintended consequences will ruin this sport if everytime someone goes in we try and force a gear change or try to add a new BSR.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[Newbie 0]

While i do admit this is far from a common problem, why should anyone have to die before it becomes a problem worth doing something about?

Am i asking for more regulation or mandatory gear changes? No. I'm simply wondering if gear manufacturers think this is an issue, or might become an issue, or is even something worth pondering.

You might call it scare mongering, but to me, the fact you are not even prepared to think this is a potential issue, given Jan Meyer's analysis and documentation showing it can and has happened, shows me you are on the side of cautious that i personally would rather not be on, but that's just me, each to their own and all that.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[davelepka 4]

OK, lets just end this right now.

Mirage has a strappy seat thingy you can get on your rig if you wish. It holds your legstraps in place so they could never slip far enough for you to slide out, and it's made of two straps of some sort of beefy material so breakage is unlikely.

It's out there, and it's not top secret, and it's not hard or expensive for a rigger to put something similar on any rig. I also don't belive it's under any sort of patend, so other manufacturers are free to offer a similar product.

[Newbie 0]

Quote

OK, lets just end this right now.

Mirage has a strappy seat thingy you can get on your rig if you wish. It holds your legstraps in place so they could never slip far enough for you to slide out, and it's made of two straps of some sort of beefy material so breakage is unlikely.

It's out there, and it's not top secret, and it's not hard or expensive for a rigger to put something similar on any rig. I also don't belive it's under any sort of patend, so other manufacturers are free to offer a similar product.

Dave could you please post a link? Couldn't find anything other than this...

http://www.miragesys.com/ProductInfo/LegStrapRetainers.aspx?Prod=1

which is the standard bungee connector.

Thanks

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[MrBester 0]

Move the mouse over the picture on the right - et voila!

[JerryBaumchen 1,065]

This is a personal comment so please take it that way. Back in '68 Strong Entr ( SE, Inc ) came out with a StyleMaster rig. It had a Solid-Split Saddle. I had one and it is still the most comfortable saddle I have ever sat/hung in. I used the design on a number of my rigs for quite a few years ( we really didn't worry about the TSO-thing back in those days ). It was built of Type 6 and was just like a split saddle but it had another piece of T-6 going across, under your butt like a solid saddle would (I am sure that many of you have no experience with a solid saddle, having only lived in the split saddle world). You then had the option of using the harness as it came or you could cut the piece of T-6 off and have a true split saddle. I have just written to SE to see if they might still have some dimensional information on this saddle.
I agree with your thinking that would be a nice option for those that would like it; doesn't seem to force it onto anyone who doesn't want it.
Just my $.02 worth.
PS) and while laying bed this morning deciding whether to get up or not, I figured how to make the leg comfort pad slip onto the Solid-Split Saddle. I do enjoy the mental challenges; it's that old engineer in me.

[Andy9o8 0]

This is being discussed in a thread in the S&T forum, too:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1907002#1907002

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

If you check Phreezones original post here it's dated back in March 2002.

Eric's original post is a quote of a post I made on rec.skydiving. In fact, that text was a rough draft of the article many have been reading this week without the supporting photos.

Quote

Manufacturers have been well aware of this and still nothing has been done, but with that said exactly how many fatalities have occured from this oversight.
Not too many I guess.

Quote

Quote

This is extremely rare however, so don’t let it keep you up at night . . . Nick DG

Sometimes it takes a fatality for people to take notice of a problem.

In the recent past:
We had lines snagging on grommets that was a miniscule problem before but then someone died. Then a few months later someone else died.
We had AAD firings when a swooper, with a perfect canopy, made a HP maneuver. It happened a couple of times and no one died. Then someone did die from that scenario.

In the distant past:
We had cutaway mains hanging up on ripcords held in place by ripcord stops.
We had hard pulls because gravel ban plugs kept gravel inside the housing causing a harder pull.
We had pilot chute in tows because bridle lines were wrapped around harnesses.
We had blast handles that had a directional dependency of the pull.
etc, etc etc.

For the vast majority of jumpers, the split saddle will work just fine.
There is a small percentage of scenarios that a split saddle combined with a premme or canopy collision or CRW or something else that may it not work for them. When it fails, it will be catastrophic, ie death of the jumper.

To reduce risk you can either reduce probability of occurrence or reduce severity of occurrence or both. In the case of falling out of a harness, you can only reduce the probability of occurrence. That is done by properly adjusting a harness (for tandem passengers or students) or maybe an extra horizontal strap (for sport rigs).

I'd like to EMPHASIZE that a properly adjusted harness is the best way to reduce this problem, especially for tandem passengers. See RWS FMI.

As far as I know, a properly adjusted tandem harness will prevent a passenger from falling out. This has been demonstrated millions of times.

FMI on risk, hazards, probability of occurrence, severity of occurrence see:
Risk and Safety


.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[riggermick 6]

For the vast majority of jumpers, the split saddle will work just fine.
There is a small percentage of scenarios that a split saddle combined with a premme or canopy collision or CRW or something else that may it not work for them. When it fails, it will be catastrophic, ie death of the jumper.

To reduce risk you can either reduce probability of occurrence or reduce severity of occurrence or both. In the case of falling out of a harness, you can only reduce the probability of occurrence. That is done by properly adjusting a harness (for tandem passengers or students) or maybe an extra horizontal strap (for sport rigs).

I'd like to EMPHASIZE that a properly adjusted harness is the best way to reduce this problem, especially for tandem passengers. See RWS FMI.

As far as I know, a properly adjusted tandem harness will prevent a passenger from falling out. This has been demonstrated millions of times.





I thought about this a few years ago and built a prototype harness/ container based on a climbing harness's lower design. If anyone has seen a climbing harness then they will know what I am talking about. Picture a normal split saddle design with webbing eminating from the bottom of the main container at the backpad (at the centerline) and then structurly secured to each leg strap, forming an upside down "v". If the new webbing "vee" is secured to the diagonal behind the backpad as well as to the leg straps then it will take the dynamic load of a premature opening. The down side of a "vee" strap is it would have to be adjustable requireing additional hardware. This creates comfort issues complexity of construction issues etc. In order to have it work correctly in all body positions it would have to stretch and retract along with the jumpers movements, otherwise it would have to set in its loosest position to allow for a sit. The resulting twin snag loops (that are structural) from the loosest position would create a whole mess of issues on their own. A non structural version would work also but not in a premature opening/ sit fly scenario.

The simplist solution would be a return of the belly band that is routed behind the main lift webs instesd of in front them. Snugged up enough it would hold one in the harness head up or down long enough ride out the opening shock, but it would hurt like hell!!!! Food for thought.

Mick.

[JerryBaumchen 1,065]

Correction: Where I said Type 6 it should read Type 7. Further proof that I should not be keyboarding before my morning coffee.
Apologies to all.

[diablopilot 2]

No. Rigs are fine as is. Insist on a proper fit, and accept the consequences of your actions. If you use the rig outside of it's design limits, you accept the additional risk.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Id like to see this demonstrated in a tunnel. Or the tunnel used by manufacturesrs to test this very thing (though im sure they already do to a certain degree)

Perhapse you don't understand a) the problem, and b) the limitations of vetical wind tunnels. What you suggest is not practical, safe, nor will it simulate the situation properly.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.