Jumping without a cypres

[jumper03 0]

I guess that's what got my hackles up when I kept reading your argument Ron - It seemed to me that you were arguing that in addition to paying for a jump ticket, you had to pass the gonad meter to get on the plane. However, through repeated postings, I see why you say what you say. Doesn't mean I agree but at least now I don't pissed when I read your posts

Scars remind us that the past is real

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

>Ok, maybe for a small minority (or he'd argue a vast majority) of
> skydivers become so complacent due to the cypres that their
> emergency procedures are lacking. Are they really more likely to be
> killed than if they didn't have a cypres at all? More likely to have a
> cypres fire, that's for sure. But more likely to die? I seriously doubt
> it. So, as I think kallend has been pointing out, the cypres saves
> lives. I just can't see how anyone can argue it's a bad thing in
> general.

I agree. The saving of lives is good; the increased reliance on a mechanical device is bad. A jumper who relies on their cypres and uses one religiously, and participates in dangerous activities, is more likely to live than a jumper who does not use a cypres and participates in dangerous activities. Of course, a jumper who uses a cypres, does not rely on it, and also does _not_ participate in dangerous activities is the safest of all. Over the past 12 years or so I have seen the first category increase greatly and the last category decrease a similar amount.

Over the same 12 years the fatalities from no/low pulls have declined - so maybe the attitude you and Ron describe as common is not so widespread after all.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

Or ya just think its the old farts club making up stories? BTW I'm 30.

[reply

I'm from the generation that doesn't trust anyone over 30.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[freakydiver 0]

IMHO - more and more complacent skydivers are being born every day. I see it in canopy patterns, lying about experience, etc, etc...

i think Ron's point is extremely valid if it gets one person to realize that maybe they shouldn't rely on a device to save their life but rather planning and education.

"I'm a big macho guy that doesn't need to rely on anyone or anything else for my safety because I'm a great skydiver."

I don't think he is saying that at all - quite the contrary - he is saying he learned and is still learning procedures and knowledge that helps him stay alive and he is just trying to pass that along.

'I know what's important for my survival. The fact that I have an AAD on my back HAS NO EFFECT on those things.'

Precisly the point Ron is trying to make Dave.

Arguing for the point of arguing as some people do in these forums is counterproductive and detracts from the quality of this medium - not directed towards you Dave.

-- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." --

[sducoach 0]

Bingo!

Quote

A real, tangible respect for what they are doing? Actually, that's precisely my point J.E.
No sir, I see plenty of jumpers out here today who in fact do NOT have that at all.

Scrumpot,
Well I guess if you have that many where you are, I'd hope you keep them there! Then, you move into the question....... "Is it a cypres they need or some one to tell them to take up golf?" Brings up a moral dilemma, doesn't it?

Blues,

J.E.

James 4:8

[sducoach 0]

I have met at least five so far. Two pointed out that they had cypreses, and thus if they did not pull they WOULD survive. I don't know why the third one didn't pull. She just gave up and waited for someone else to open a parachute for her. Good thing she had a cypres so she can continue jumping without fear of dying!

Quote

So, how many skydivers do you know that do not understand that if
> you do not pull, you do not survive? Intimate knowledge or common
> sense

As I said Bill, Intimate knowledge or common sense, neither I think. But your comment beckons the question...... So what did you do, ground them???


Got to love it!!!!!

Blues my Brother,

J.E.

James 4:8

[Scrumpot 1]

I've offered to buy people a set of bowling shoes personally J.E., more than once!

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[billvon 2,380]

>But your comment beckons the question...... So what did you do,
>ground them???

Grounded two of them; they were students. I had no jurisdiction over the others.

[sducoach 0]

***
A guy shows up on a DZ. He has no altimeters. He can't judge altitude; he just pulls when everyone else pulls. You question him on this. "Hey, that's why I have an AAD!" he says.

You honestly wouldn't question his use of the AAD? I would.
***
I would not question his use of an AAD, I'd question how he got there in the first place and what he's doing at your DZ?????

Blues,

J.E.

James 4:8

[sducoach 0]

Good Man!

Blues,

J.E.

edit.

Save this one Bill.

PM

James 4:8

[mikeat10500 9]

Quote

How do you describe the 25 people who died from no/low pull in the USA in 1989 (the good ol' pre-CYPRES days, when all skydivers accepted reponsibility for themselves).

Better yet, how do we explain the drastic drop in low pull/no pulls in 1990? How many people had an
AAD in their rig in '90?

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[billvon 2,380]

>Better yet, how do we explain the drastic drop in low pull/no pulls in
> 1990? How many people had an AAD in their rig in '90?

I think a better question would be "why was there a spike in no-pull fatalities in 1989?" Hard to say without being able to see 1988. I didn't keep any Parachutists from back then (unfortunately.)

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

Quote

How do you describe the 25 people who died from no/low pull in the USA in 1989 (the good ol' pre-CYPRES days, when all skydivers accepted reponsibility for themselves).

Better yet, how do we explain the drastic drop in low pull/no pulls in 1990? How many people had an
AAD in their rig in '90?

Darwin?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[freakydiver 0]

Wow - for the first time I couldn't agree more Mr. K.

I was just thinking that - all of these Cypress arguments and low turn arguments - I've finally come to the point where I can honestly say and believe that Darwin is at work.

Everyone reads and signs the disclaimers - skydiving isn't a safe sport by any means. We can argue all day long about Cypresses and swooping small ass canopies, but as the sport progresses as it will continue to, more people will find new ways to die as Darwin NEVER GOES AWAY EVER!

Well put Mr. K.

-- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." --

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

Wow - for the first time I couldn't agree more Mr. K.

I was just thinking that - all of these Cypress arguments and low turn arguments - I've finally come to the point where I can honestly say and believe that Darwin is at work.

Everyone reads and signs the disclaimers - skydiving isn't a safe sport by any means. We can argue all day long about Cypresses and swooping small ass canopies, but as the sport progresses as it will continue to, more people will find new ways to die as Darwin NEVER GOES AWAY EVER!

Well put Mr. K.

That's Dr. K to you, Mr. K.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[freakydiver 0]

Doh - I should know that by now - Dr. K...

-- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." --

[crwtom 0]

a lot of the effect of how an AAD affects a sense of self-responsibility has to do with how people talk about it and how they explain the function and value of an AAD.

Some will have an issue with that but for example I was never told during my student training that there is a gadget like an AAD on my rig - I though for sure that a no-pull would do me in. Only towards the end of my progression I talked to others and found out. Sure some people will say "Oh have to know what's in your equipment to make proper decisions" - but, really, what complex chain of chain of decisions in a low-altitude-plus- AAD scenario will you be able to expect from a level IV AFF.

In that sense about the worst you can tell someone is "You'll be fine - you have a CYPES" - that's downright wrong, dangerous and irresponsible. The reality is that AAD's can help only in some very few emergency scenarios - self-responsibility still applies to the bulk of all dangeous situations in skydiing. For example:

- the majority of incidents are landing accidents - a CYPRES does nothing here. Others are canopy collisions in most of which an AAD wouldn't have helped either.

- a CYPRES arms only above some altitude (I think 1000ft or 1500 ft ??) , if you bail out at that altitude and don't pull - you're toast even with a CYPRES.

- if you don't cut-away from a malfunction above say 600 ft the CYPRES probably won't help much either.(It'll be a couple fo 100ft before you get to 78mph and then the reserve still needs to deploy).

- if you still have junk hung up on you after malfunction (like a horseshoe or a canopy collision or otherwise hung up lines) you may be either to slow for a CYPRES fire or have your reserve fire into the junk.

- in various freefall or fuselage collision incidents there are usually unending speculations whether the person was already killed during the collision itself or in the subsequent nopull due to unconsciousness.

- even if you are in the "perfect CYPRES" scenario (i.e. you jumped from 2000ft or higher, you are at 1000 ft at terminal with *nothing* out and no intention of pulling) you are still rolling the dices. At that altitude you have no time for picking a landing area or pattern - you thump in where you are, if you're lucky after you unstowed the brakes. Also there's no time to deal with minor reserve malfunctions (line-twists, line-overs, etc.).

... and this list could probably be continued much further, and all these are real incidents that happen(ed).

The point I want to make is that a lot of the bemoaned "CYPRES-complacency" may be more due to the way CYPRES-fans talk about that back-up-piece, rather than the unit itself. I believe much would be done if it were more stressed that an AAD can help you only in a very narrow and very specific set of circumstances, deemphasizing and downplaying the role of the AAD.

blues ones, Thomas

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

a lot of the effect of how an AAD affects a sense of self-responsibility has to do with how people talk about it and how they explain the function and value of an AAD.

Some will have an issue with that but for example I was never told during my student training that there is a gadget like an AAD on my rig - I though for sure that a no-pull would do me in. Only towards the end of my progression I talked to others and found out. Sure some people will say "Oh have to know what's in your equipment to make proper decisions" - but, really, what complex chain of chain of decisions in a low-altitude-plus- AAD scenario will you be able to expect from a level IV AFF.

In that sense about the worst you can tell someone is "You'll be fine - you have a CYPES" - that's downright wrong, dangerous and irresponsible. The reality is that AAD's can help only in some very few emergency scenarios - self-responsibility still applies to the bulk of all dangeous situations in skydiing. For example:

- the majority of incidents are landing accidents - a CYPRES does nothing here. Others are canopy collisions in most of which an AAD wouldn't have helped either.

- a CYPRES arms only above some altitude (I think 1000ft or 1500 ft ??) , if you bail out at that altitude and don't pull - you're toast even with a CYPRES.

- if you don't cut-away from a malfunction above say 600 ft the CYPRES probably won't help much either.(It'll be a couple fo 100ft before you get to 78mph and then the reserve still needs to deploy).

- if you still have junk hung up on you after malfunction (like a horseshoe or a canopy collision or otherwise hung up lines) you may be either to slow for a CYPRES fire or have your reserve fire into the junk.

- in various freefall or fuselage collision incidents there are usually unending speculations whether the person was already killed during the collision itself or in the subsequent nopull due to unconsciousness.

- even if you are in the "perfect CYPRES" scenario (i.e. you jumped from 2000ft or higher, you are at 1000 ft at terminal with *nothing* out and no intention of pulling) you are still rolling the dices. At that altitude you have no time for picking a landing area or pattern - you thump in where you are, if you're lucky after you unstowed the brakes. Also there's no time to deal with minor reserve malfunctions (line-twists, line-overs, etc.).

... and this list could probably be continued much further, and all these are real incidents that happen(ed).

The point I want to make is that a lot of the bemoaned "CYPRES-complacency" may be more due to the way CYPRES-fans talk about that back-up-piece, rather than the unit itself. I believe much would be done if it were more stressed that an AAD can help you only in a very narrow and very specific set of circumstances, deemphasizing and downplaying the role of the AAD.

blues ones, Thomas

Given the known and well documented reluctance of Americans to read instruction manuals, surely the briefing on the purpose and use of the CYPRES should take place during training by the instructor.

If students graduate with a "bad attitude" and misunderstanding of their equipment, surely much of the blame should lie at the feet of the instructor who signed them off.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skydiveacapulco 0]

my two dollers.
if it makes skydiving safer use it.
if its made by man dont reliey on it.
if its used by idoits dont trust it.
forget it,s there god gave you two hands and a brain far more complex than a computer chip and far more expensive use them its safer.
the cyprus is an aid a back upu a just in case thats all.

blue sky sand and sun.

[OATSF14 0]

Nice post. Agree with you 100%. Wendy has also made some excellent observations. I continually find myself in awe (usually after many beers) when a newbie considers me a "death wish type of jumper" due to my rig having no cypres, no rsl, and I jump with no helmet. (there are people out there Bill who would not jump without a helmet also) Safety is great. God bless all the bells and whistles. However bells and whistles can fail. It still comes down to the brain in your head. You must accept the attitude that a cypres is a final back up device. If you as a jumper mentally cannot jump without one, you are at risk. Everyone jump safely this year.

[virgin-burner 1]

the time is six years later, do you think its acceptable, say for a jumper of my numbers, to jump without an AAD!?

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[piisfish 135]

to me, yes it is acceptable.

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Baksteen 84]

Over here it's not a jump# requirement, but to jump without a cypres you must either have a C-licence, do a static-line round jump, or have a Vigil (I or II), argus, FXC12000, Sentinel MK2, Kap3, Heightfinder, EFA or Astra, the latter 9 of which must be turned on and function within the specs set by the manufacturer and the RDAA AND have approval of a licenced RDAA instructor.

But since you don't fall under Dutch rules and regulations, all I can say to you (not being hindered by knowledge of the Swiss rules) is:

Knock yourself out.




Edited to specify Vigil: I or II

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[virgin-burner 1]

from you, i expected a different answer; since its in regard to ME asking the question, maybe not so much..

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[robskydiv 0]

Great post Bill and I agree. Almost all of my jumps post student training have been without an AAD. But now with two kids that depend on me, I'll probably get one before I start back up again. The only thing that bothers me is the two-out scenario if I pull a litle low.