Awesome letter in Parachutist about mandatory AAD at some Dz

[Darius11 12]

I don’t know how I could post the letter if someone is better at scanning and posting please do so.

Michael Smith D8769 wroth exactly what I feel about the safety Nazi and all the overly anal people in Skydiving and BASE-jumping. I think his letter expresses what jumping is about and what some are trying to make it.

I don't know if Michael Smith reads Dz.com but if he does i just wanted to say thank you for the letter he wroth.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[pop 0]

Quote

I feel about the safety Nazi and all the overly anal people in Skydiving and BASE-jumping

I know the feeling you are talking about. I feel the same way.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[funks 1]

anal sex is fun.
Power to the people!

[waltappel 1]

Quote

I don’t know how I could post the letter if someone is better at scanning and posting please do so.

Michael Smith D8769 wroth exactly what I feel about the safety Nazi and all the overly anal people in Skydiving and BASE-jumping. I think his letter expresses what jumping is about and what some are trying to make it.

I don't know if Michael Smith reads Dz.com but if he does i just wanted to say thank you for the letter he wroth.

This is an issue that really pisses me off because some jerkoff with a coach rating recently told a friend who doesn't have an AAD that having a USPA license is a "license to kill yourself". In my view, he deserves to have his coach rating jerked for that crap. He was labelling the jumper as being suicidal for not having an AAD.

Here are excerpts from a note I sent to a friend when we were talking about the issue:

Quote

I cannot fathom what kind of mentality it takes to try and convince a very passionate low-timer that their gear choice is suicidal when the reality is that its perfectly airworthy. I believe he has a coach rating. He should turn it in.

My perspective comes from being in the sport for nearly three decades and seeing the equipment and attitudes evolve over that time. For many years experienced jumpers simply did not use AADs because misfirings, while not common, were considered to be common enough that an AAD was considered a potential hazard to other jumpers on RW loads. That was the void the Cypres filled.

Actually, even the term AAD is second-generation. Originally, the term was AOD (Automatic Opening Device). That was changed to AAD (Automatic Activation Device) because of concerns of the complacency that the term AOD could cause. The device in no way guarantees that you will have an open parachute. Its purpose is to attempt to initiate a deployment under certain conditions. The term was changed to emphasize that it is *purely* a backup device and that they never will be any kind of replacement for altitude awareness and a solid grasp of emergency procedures and the ability and willingness to use those procedures when the situation dictates.

That is a lesson that seems to have faded.

A few months ago I was going up on a load when a tandem instructor said he forgot his altimeter. Without hesitation, I took mine off and handed it to him. I got some very strange looks, but it brings up a good question. Who is the safer skydiver? One who relies strictly on an altimeter, or one who makes damn sure he is aware of what the ground looks like when he is at pull altitude?

I'm pretty sure the jumper with the higher level of awareness is the safer skydiver because he realizes that the altimeter is only one source of information and that it is no substitute for awareness of surroundings.

Likewise, who is the safer skydiver? One who chooses to be lulled into complacency by having an AAD, or one who is absolutely insistent on staying out of situations where one might be needed?

There's no question that my thinking is "old school". I'll choose the jumper who has the higher level of awareness. That coach apparently chooses otherwise, which is fine for himself but to intimidate low-timers with unfounded fears is way out of line.

I'm not saying that having an AAD is bad. I consider it to be a good thing and, until recently, I chose to jump with a Cypres. What's bad is the attitude that it can somehow guarantee a jumper's safety. What's pathetic is preaching that jumping without one is suicidal.

Years ago we used to rib each other about gear choices not because of safety concerns, but out of the desire to do some good-natured trash talking. I'm sure it still happens, but in a lot of cases it seems to have taken a darker turn and has evolved into claims that one gear combination is signficantly safer than another. Is a Mirage safer than a Wings container for freeflying? Sure, just ask any Mirage owner!

The simple fact is that there is *no* gear combination that will guarantee our safety when we jump out of an aircraft and I think that needs to be clear in every jumper's mind. It *is* very clear in the minds of those who have been with the sport for a while. All gear combinations work and, at some point, you can be very sure that they *won't* work. What makes all the difference in that situation is the jumper. What makes the difference in the jumper is training. No device can take the place of that.

Walt

[SkiD_PL8 0]

I don't have an aad, I wouldn't mind having one incase the shit hit the fan though. The only thing that scares me is catching a blow to the head in FF and getting knocked out. I am sure that I will pull everytime with the exception of that scenario.

Greenie in training.

[Taylor610 0]

You are absolutely right. It is a great letter and you should be able to smoke yourself into the ground doing 220 in a head down position and do it all in front of people who live in the neighborhood right beside the DZ. You should also leave it all to be explained by the DZO, to the press, to your loved ones, to the people of the local "quiet community of..." just to keep his business alive.

Guess what, it happens, and it has always been a huge piece of heartburn to me for someone to call a Business Owner a "Safety Nazi" because he said AAD's are mandatory. Well as a DZO I did it, but I did it after I had to do all of the things I listed above and more. If you don't want to wear and AAD, fine, pack your gear bag up and take your $20 and bad attitude somewhere else. I don't want to clean up your mess. Understand this, it is the Business Owners right to decide what he expects of his customers. If you don't want to do business there, fine, go away, but quit your whining. The DZO is being a smart business man, not a nazi.

I hate that this post is in the Bonefire, please feel free to move it to SC so I don't have to see it again.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

I don't have an aad, I wouldn't mind having one incase the shit hit the fan though. The only thing that scares me is catching a blow to the head in FF and getting knocked out. I am sure that I will pull everytime with the exception of that scenario.

SSK has a list (current to 2004, I believe) of Cypres saves on their website. Out of well over 200 Cypres saves, I could only find 11 cases of that scenario.

By and large, it's the loss of altitude awareness that is killing skydivers, not being knocked unconscious.

Quite a number of the saves were students, which I think is significant evidence that requiring AADs for students is a good thing.

We could quite easily cut our fatality rate in half by an absolute ban on high performance landings. Annually that would save more lives than requiring AADs would save unconscious skydivers.

That coach I referred to is a swooper, though, so it's not likely that he's all *that* interested in saving lives. He's more interested in instilling unncessary fear.

BTW, I'm in no way suggesting than banning high performance landings would be a good thing. I think it would be ridiculous.

I think what might save plenty of lives, and at a far lower cost than AADs, is more widespread use of audible altimeters. I use a ProTrack and consider it a wonderful thing for keeping jumers out of situations where an AAD would be useful.

Walt

[waltappel 1]

Quote

If you don't want to do business there, fine, go away...

Exactly what I advised my friend to do. By the way, the DZ in question has no policy requiring AADs--they just have at least one staff member who likes to scare people with misinformation.

Walt

[bmcd308 0]

I think your acquaintance is at least partially correct - a USPA license is a license to kill yourself. It is a license to stop listening to other people. It is a license to jump at unfamiliar dz's without a proper briefing about the outs. It is a license to choose gear with fashion rather than safety in mind. In many cases, it is a license to stop getting pin checks. It is a license to organize a stupid dive plan with three other people who do not know any better - ie - "the four of us will build a round, then two of us will sit fly for a while, and then the two freeflyers will pull at six grand while you two turn points down to four grand..." etc.

Not all pithy euphemisms are devoid of relevant insight.

Brent

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

[Richards 0]

When I got into the sport I was in a low income bracket and could barely afford to scrape enough cash together to by a second hand rig. My progression in the sport was often stunted by financial constraints. If having an AAD had been mandatory I would probably have given up the sport as the extra cash was simply not available. I realize people will respond with "you can't afford to not have one", but the truth was that I could not afford one. I have ran into many people who have had the same dilemna. Mandatory for student rigs is fine but individual liscenced jumpers should be left to decide for themselves or the sport will lose a significant amount of members due to excess startup costs.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[waltappel 1]

Quote

Not all pithy euphemisms are devoid of relevant insight.

Brent

Agreed. In that particular case, though, there was no relevant insight at all--merely intimidation rather than education.

Walt

[waltappel 1]

Quote

When I got into the sport I was in a low income bracket and could barely afford to scrape enough cash together to by a second hand rig. My progression in the sport was often stunted by financial constraints. If having an AAD had been mandatory I would probably have given up the sport as the extra cash was simply not available. I realize people will respond with "you can't afford to not have one", but the truth was that I could not afford one. I have ran into many people who have had the same dilemna. Mandatory for student rigs is fine but individual liscenced jumpers should be left to decide for themselves or the sport will lose a significant amount of members due to excess startup costs.

Richards

You hit the nail right on the head.

Walt

[Broke 0]

The best tool every skydiver needs is that hunk of flesh and bone situated between the shoulders, and also another critical piece of equipment would be a right arm in one piece and functioning properly.

Now of course every DZO has the right to refuse business to anyone they want, but they should keep the rules tight enough to keep people safe without making them feel overburdened.

Divot your source for all things Hillbilly.
Anvil Brother 84
SCR 14192

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Understand this, it is the Business Owners right to decide what he expects of his customers. If you don't want to do business there, fine, go away, but quit your whining.

As it was suggested in the letter people who do disagree with the "Safety Nazis" should take there business some where else and hopefully they will.


Any one who thinks skydiving should be 100% safe has lost touch with the sport. Some of us are adrenaline junkies I understand some are not but some are.

Some like my self who are adults would like to be able to make our own decisions.
I know there are people who want every one to be in a little bubble so they never get hurt but please keep that bubble to your self and any one else who decides to get one. If you are the owner of a DZ you can make whatever decision you like but please don’t try to tell me what I can say and can’t say you simply do not have the right.

I have an AAD and use it, however I felt the points made in the letter were brilliant.

If 100% safety becomes mandatory for every one what will be next. As pointed out by the letter Mandatory size restriction for canopies? No hook turns ever? How about we all are only allowed to jump over a large area filled with foam.

It is getting out of hand. If you feel you need a device to save you then Skydiving is not for you. I don’t think this sport was meant to be for everyone. It is for people who can asses risks and then make the decision to take them or not. Some simply should not be in this sport and a device should not be the reason they change their minds.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[jumpergirl 0]

Quote

Quote

When I got into the sport I was in a low income bracket and could barely afford to scrape enough cash together to by a second hand rig. My progression in the sport was often stunted by financial constraints. If having an AAD had been mandatory I would probably have given up the sport as the extra cash was simply not available. I realize people will respond with "you can't afford to not have one", but the truth was that I could not afford one. I have ran into many people who have had the same dilemna. Mandatory for student rigs is fine but individual liscenced jumpers should be left to decide for themselves or the sport will lose a significant amount of members due to excess startup costs.

Richards

You hit the nail right on the head.

Walt

That was my same situation. I jumped for 6 years without one. I got a small insurance settlement and the first thing I did was buy a Cypress. I haven't jumped without one since. I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

[Taylor610 0]

but they should keep the rules tight enough to keep people safe without making them feel overburdened.
***
And the burden of explaining this "tradgedy" to the FAA, to the Media, to the insuing laywers, the destraught family, the city, the county, the state, the USPA...THAT should be left behind to the DZO who has his lifes savings invested into the DZ, and that should be done because you, with your 25 jumps and "A" license are now smart enough to decide what his future will be based on your current safety track record.

Take your burden to another DZ. I have no interest in your $20. I sold my DZ partly because I got tired of listening to this kind of whining.

[davelepka 4]

You seem to be grazing over the huge giant point that YOU can do whatever you want on YOUR land with YOUR airplane. Nobody is suggesting that an AAD be a requirement of law for every jump.

Some DZO's are saying that if you want to jump from THEIR aircraft over THEIR land, and have your actions relfect on THEIR livelyhood, then you have to follow their rules.

Quote

Some like my self who are adults would like to be able to make our own decisions.

Please do, Make all the decisions you want. Just don't turn around and point fingers at DZOs when they do the same.

[Broke 0]

OK here is a quick question... what is safer operaiting a DZ that allows jumpers not to have a AAD or operaiting a DZ that allows hook turns?

Divot your source for all things Hillbilly.
Anvil Brother 84
SCR 14192

[Buried 0]

Quote

what is safer operaiting a DZ that allows jumpers not to have a AAD or operaiting a DZ that allows hook turns?

one operating a DZ that does not require AADs. There have been more deaths related to canopy flight/swooping/hook turns than legimate AAD saves

Where is my fizzy-lifting drink?

[Darius11 12]

I would think DZOs just like any other business owner should be concerned about what their potential customers think, what would make them come back, or drive the extra time it takes to the other less restrictive DZ.

If you response to every customer inquiry or questions is “stop your whining” you won’t be in business very long. That’s just the nature of business.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

If you are the owner of a DZ you can make whatever decision you like but please don’t try to tell me what I can say and can’t say you simply do not have the right.

Well, they have the right to require AADs if they want to. I think it's a misguided attempt at reducing fatalities, but it is their right. Hell, some entire countries have made that decision already.

I think it would be awesome if we lived in a world where dropzones and manufacturers didn't need to protect themselves, but we don't. Dropzones have the right to make rules. I don't think a 100% AAD requirement is a great idea, but that's not the point.

I think a dropzone should stick with what makes the most sense. AADs required for those most likely to need them. My DZ for example began requiring AADs for everyone involved in student jumps after an instructor fatality and a couple "near misses." Banning hook turns would be effective but horrible for business... instead, watch jumpers and enforce rules, and educate them. If you want to learn how to do hook turns when you have 50 jumps, do it on your own property.

Dave

[Broke 0]

exactly
7% of fatalities have been no pulls vs 34% on landing it dosent specify low turns, but I would believe that most of them would be low turns.

Divot your source for all things Hillbilly.
Anvil Brother 84
SCR 14192

[Taylor610 0]

OK here is a quick question... what is safer operaiting a DZ that allows jumpers not to have a AAD or operaiting a DZ that allows hook turns?
***

Get more experience than 25 jumps and more money invested in the sport than whatever it is that you have and then I will consider that a valid question.

You see, it is not an issue of hook turns vs AADs it is whether on not a DZO (O stands for Owner) to decide what the SOPs are going to be at HIS/HER DZ. If they chose to say yellow jump suits only, it is fine, because it is their decision. If you don't want to wear yellow, fine, take your red jump suit somewhere else.

Get the point yet, it is not whether or not they are safety nazis, it is a Business Owner deciding what is best for his Business.

PS The "Check Spelling" button is right beside the post reply button.

[pilotdave 0]

Alright, I'll ask:

What is safer operaiting a DZ that allows jumpers not to have a AAD or operaiting a DZ that allows hook turns?

I don't see how jump numbers change the validity of the question. He's leading to a good point. Banning hook turns would prevent far more fatalities than requiring AADs, assuming equal number of jumpers at each DZ and all else being equal.

But like you said, it's a business decision. Most jumpers have AADs, so you won't lose as much business requiring them than you would if you banned hook turns. And a lot of DZOs like to do hook turns too.
Dave

[billvon 2,406]

As usual this debate has polarized into two camps:

"if you make everyone do X you might as well ban skydiving cause it's dangerous"

"people dying is unacceptable, and we must do whatever we can to prevent that."

90% of skydivers realize that there's a middle ground. No AAD's at all is one extreme; AAD's for everyone is another. AAD's until an A license, or a D license, are middle ground positions that may work for some places, but not others.

No hook turns? May be critical in a DZ with a tight landing area, but a non-issue in a wide open DZ. Canopy sizing limits? Not needed many places. But at a DZ that has ten fatalities a year from people jumping parachutes way too small for them? Might be a good idea.

How about pull altitudes? At most DZ's they're not strictly enforced. Pull before 1000 feet and you'll probably get away with it. But if there are a few incidents of people pulling low, having cypres fires and getting injured or killed, then perhaps busting people for pulling at 1900 feet is a good call.

It's easy to pick a side and blast away. But most skydivers realize that the real-world solution lies in the middle. Common sense is generally a better choice than an extreme position on either side.