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

[Falko 0]

Quote

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

Given the Risk Matrix #1 I'd assign a 1E (that is hazard category "Catastrophic" and "Improbable" frequence of occurence) to the issue of falling out of a rig through "the hole" in the back.

IMHO, it does not call for a mandatory change in design, but since containers are getting smaller (thus opening "the hole" more) rig manufacturers should think about offering an option like the upside-down-V band or a load-bearing leg strap connector. (See example with the Mirage, mouse over the picture for the "V"-Strap)

I can imagine that falling out backwards could be an issue especially with freestylists (think: bendy girls, tight pants with low friction, acrobatic movements , and now add a premie at 150mph )

Love these forums, I learn something new every day... thanks

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

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Given the Risk Matrix #1 I'd assign a 1E (that is hazard category "Catastrophic" and "Improbable" frequence of occurence) to the issue of falling out of a rig through "the hole" in the back.

I work with this stuff on a daily basis for work. The risk matrices and definitions come from MIL-STD-882C I believe (-D is the latest revision and -E is in draft status, but their definitions of severity and probability don't apply quite as well). BTW, the FAA uses a different set of definitions for civil aviation.

"1E" is a problem in the safety world. We run into it all the time. The problem is that E has no lower limit. In the military aviation industry (which the risk matrices were designed for), we consider it to be something that occurs less than once per million flight hours (not sure how you'd translate that to jumps). Damn near ANYTHING can be a 1E, especially if you read this part:

Quote

If a hazard has several levels of severity, then the most severe one is assigned to the hazard.

If a hazard has several levels of probability of occurrence, then the most frequent level is assigned to the hazard.

You can't do both of those. A hazard can be a 1E and a 4A at the same time. You wouldn't call it a 1A. It's a judgement call. Sometimes a 2C gets more attention than a 1E.

So I can go and invent as many hazards as I want and call them all 1Es. Like the hazard of your hook knife slipping out and cutting through both main lift webs or something. It'd be a 1E. Or maybe the hazard of gravity shutting off while you're in freefall. 1E. It becomes a problem of where to focus attention. Which 1Es are real problems, and which are fantasies? Sometimes we don't know until it happens.

The risk matrix calls falling out of a harness "Acceptable with review." Who's review? The MIL-STD defines exactly who it is in the military world. So who gets to decide for us? Consumer demand? Manufacturers? The FAA? USPA? Who decides if we've got a problem with our gear and if it needs fixing?

Dave

[Falko 0]

Quote

If a hazard has several levels of probability of occurrence, then the most frequent level is assigned to the hazard.

How can that be?

I assume we're looking at different situations then, take the Bellyflyer with customized non-articulated harness or the freestylist with used gear that doesn't fit 100% OR a tandem passenger?

I think we need to look at those separately to assign them a risk value.
As for the "standard" skydiver, I'd say it's on the lowest end of 1E, otherwise we would be hearing about people falling out of their rigs on a regular basis wouldn't we?

Maybe for tandem harnesses and rides it's more of the upper end of 1E, maybe even 1D. THAT then would need to be adressed by _all_ tandem harness manufacturers.

Maybe I'm seeing ghosts and the poster is right wo said this thread is lame... anyway, what do I know. Am off to DFV safety day

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

[pilotdave 0]

Any single hazard can have different potential consequences, each with its own probability. So for example a "canopy malfunction" could be an inconvenience, like linetwists on a lightly loaded canopy or it could be a main-reserve entaglement. That hazard could be classified as a 4A or a 1E, depending on which failure mode happens. Course it'd be useless to try to assign a risk to such a broad hazard.

Jan's article says to go with the higher severity AND the higher probability. But that doesn't work. We'd need to set some ground rules for what gets chosen.

You could take another overly broad hazard like "poorly fitting tandem harness." It might cause minor discomfort on a regular basis. It might also cause a tandem passenger to fall out extremely rarely.

So how do you classify it? The passenger falling out is the highest severity. The discomfort is the highest probability. If you were a manufacturer with $100,000 to spend to improve your tandem harness, would you make it more comfortable or would you add features to prevent students from falling out? Well, one seems a whole lot more important than the other, but check out the risk acceptance matrix... they're both "acceptable with review." We normally classify those as "medium." Is one really more important than the other? What would the probabiltyof the catastrophic event have to be in order to lower it's importance below that of passenger comfort?

See the problem that we often run into is that a 1E can really be impossible. Sure, if it happened, it'd be catastrophic. But it's so unlikely to ever happen that we can say it can't happen, even though maybe if conditions were just right, it could.

So is falling out of a harness a freak occurence, or is it something that will happen every X million jumps? The idea of risk assessment is to prioritize hazards. It just becomes very difficult to prioritize hazards that occur extremely infrequently.

Dave

[billvon 2,400]

>(I am sure that many of you have no experience with a solid
>saddle, having only lived in the split saddle world)

Well, except some of us fly paragliders too, where the solid saddle is still alive and well. (It should be pointed out that a paraglide harness would be even worse for freefall, since it's designed to be loaded in only one direction.)

[AirborneDaddy 0]

skydiving is a sport that can and does result in death if something bad happens and that is part of the thrill of the sport. To cheat death on a regular basis and have fun. If people are really scared about something going wrong then they do not need to be jumping. In this sport you can only do so much to be safe and the rest is up to your riggers packing ability.

It always a good idea to be prepared and do what you think you need to do to be safe and have fun. So if you want to buy an ass bungee then do so. But only about 70 people died last year world wide from shydiving and most of them were from landings.

In this sport like most others nothing will be done until alot of people die. It is true with all things in life. Look at seat belts, they were not even put in cars until the 50's and not made manditory till we noticed a big number ofpeople dying. We just need to make sure that we do what we can to stay out of the statistics column.

Skydiving is fun and dangerous and people are going to get hurt and die most of which are by their own mistakes.

So lets just jump and have fun.

live life with your head in the clouds

[CrazyL 0]

I for one believe the manufacturers are currently and have done their very best to keep parachutists with their equipment during freefall and under canopy all the way to landing on the earth. In short , it's called a 'harness'. Harness is made of tested mil-spec webbing capable of withstanding loads up to 254lbs on most equipment. Proper 'sizing of the harness' is very important for holding ones body sufficiently. Adjusting of a properly fitted harness is even more important before leaving an aircraft. Let's use an analogy, jeans. If your waist size is 32inches you may wear a size 31 to 33 fairly easily. The jeans are within a comfortable range to wear. Any larger or smaller, adjustments will more than likely need to be made for them to fit properly. As for a parachute harness there is little adjustment but first the harness must be within a range to fit properly. Gear is sometimes sold or rather bought by persons even if the harness does not fit correctly, even student harnesses are sometimes too large for smaller persons. As far as I know, all harness/container manufactuerers have and will resize or replace a harness in a rig to more properly fit the user of the equipment. Also manufacturers go to great lengths in making and revising manuals concerning the equipment, which many a skydiver has yet to read, and some riggers for that matter.

[riggerrob 558]

For decades now, manufacturers have been doing something to prevent skydivers from falling out of harnesses.
It is called building the correct size of harness.

The second fix is to install butt bungees. The hold leg straps in their correct position near your buttocks. Harnesses rarely shift while loaded, so if you can keep the leg straps in the correct position until opening shock, chances are they will stay in the correct position until landing.

Only maybe one person per year falls out of their harness. Most of those harnesses were built for someone far larger than them.
For example, in the late 1990s, a petite female student fell out of an extra-large NARO harness.
In another example, a few years back a woman fell head-first out of her harness over Lodi. Her biggest problem was that she forgot to fasten her chest strap.
Finally, the latest tandem student fatality was caused by a loose harness that helpers shifted towards his knees as they helped carry him towards the airplane's ramp. This is an anomaly because paraplegics represent less than 1% of tandem jumps. Now that we understand this problem, tandem instructors will be more careful in the future and I am willing to bet that fewer TIs will be willing to haul disabled students.

[packertom 0]

this is a problem that exists mainly in improperly sized harnesses... in the old days rigs had a "belly band" that snugged you against the back pad... they are apparently coming back in Europe... we make a retrofit belly band that is designed for people with used rigs that aren't 100% fitted or for people who happen to own a certain rig that is known to have a lot of "stagger" in their hip junction... by accident we've found that our belly band is a big help while back flying.. we gave some to Team VIBE after they complained that while back flying (with perfectly sized rigs) they were experiencing some "washing" that was throwing them off.. tehy reported that our belly band snugged the rig into their back and eliminated the "washing" entirely...

Tom Stewart

www.applieddeceleration.com

[email protected]
www.velocitysportswear.com
What's YOUR Zombie Plan?

[riggermick 6]

Quote

this is a problem that exists mainly in improperly sized harnesses... in the old days rigs had a "belly band" that snugged you against the back pad... they are apparently coming back in Europe... we make a retrofit belly band that is designed for people with used rigs that aren't 100% fitted or for people who happen to own a certain rig that is known to have a lot of "stagger" in their hip junction... by accident we've found that our belly band is a big help while back flying.. we gave some to Team VIBE after they complained that while back flying (with perfectly sized rigs) they were experiencing some "washing" that was throwing them off.. tehy reported that our belly band snugged the rig into their back and eliminated the "washing" entirely...

Tom Stewart

www.applieddeceleration.com

Hope your mod is approved by the manufacturers and you have "administrator" approval with the appropriate drawings on file. The belly band is a structural alteration.

Mick.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Hope your mod is approved by the manufacturers and you have "administrator" approval with the appropriate drawings on file. The belly band is a structural alteration.

Mick.

You mean something like this? See attachment.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[riggermick 6]

Quote

Quote

Hope your mod is approved by the manufacturers and you have "administrator" approval with the appropriate drawings on file. The belly band is a structural alteration.

Mick.

You mean something like this? See attachment.

Sparky

Yeah exactly like that!

Mick.