0
TheCaptain

the links in the chain.

Recommended Posts

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-03/parachutist-describes-near-death-experience/10576884?fbclid=IwAR3wCuFFICDbbme5IVtV8KqYt7E8UnV-gPTFMtWFgsbbSF8IMC99sAFCWs4
First link in the chain not leaving into the relative wind.
An instructor needs to be able to fly the exit without counting on the drogue to fix it for him IMHO
Kirk
He's dead Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have heard that doing a gainer works very effectively to get belly to earth( where I work they don't allow any gainers on tandem exits). I would think before going the gainer route you should be comfortable flying the exit and getting stable first prior to throwing the drogue otherwise a standard into the relative wind exit would be the best option IMHO
The drogue throw is very slow and awkward when he does throw it too
Kirk
He's dead Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, where should we start?

The great exit?
The great drogue throw?
The great execution of emergency procedures?

Maybe with the thing that surprises me the most about these videos, why the hell would you let a copy of it get out to the student?
"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the one thing I do not understand.whybin the he'll would they let the video get out instead of saying I am sorry the camera malfunctioned and we didn't get any video of the freefall.
I do love how the article calls the instructor a hero for saving their lives that he put in danger
Kirk
He's dead Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheCaptain

That is the one thing I do not understand.whybin the he'll would they let the video get out instead of saying I am sorry the camera malfunctioned and we didn't get any video of the freefall.



Maybe because dishonestly doesent come off as natural to everyone? The camera did not malfunction. It worked perfectly fine and the student did pay for a video. If anything, I'd give the TI props for releasing a video that he knows he will take on a shit load of heat for, as opposed to trying his best to cover it up like nothing happened. He may have messed up big time, but if he is willing to release to the public a video showing his mistakes and he is willing to admit his mistakes, that puts him higher on the list than a lot of people I've met in my life.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

***That is the one thing I do not understand.whybin the he'll would they let the video get out instead of saying I am sorry the camera malfunctioned and we didn't get any video of the freefall.



Maybe because dishonestly doesent come off as natural to everyone? T
From my perspective it is called being a professional. I will not let any video out that does not hit my quality standards period, I would rather refund the money than put out a product I wasn't proud of.
I personally wonder if he just gave it to the student and went on about his day, rather than bring it to the attention of the DZO and then the S&TA or DZO take appropriate action on retraining the instructor
Kirk
He's dead Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheCaptain

******That is the one thing I do not understand.whybin the he'll would they let the video get out instead of saying I am sorry the camera malfunctioned and we didn't get any video of the freefall.



Maybe because dishonestly doesent come off as natural to everyone? T
From my perspective it is called being a professional. I will not let any video out that does not hit my quality standards period, I would rather refund the money than put out a product I wasn't proud of.
I personally wonder if he just gave it to the student and went on about his day, rather than bring it to the attention of the DZO and then the S&TA or DZO take appropriate action on retraining the instructor

I agree, there's more to it than being "honest". I'm guessing Westerly has zero experience as a TI or in that business in general. This guy obviously screwed the pooch pretty bad on this jump, but I would have refunded the video money also. This lady is soaking up the attention big time, and I wouldn't be surprised if some legal entity contacts her about seeking compensation for her "emotional trauma". If that happens, he's going to wish that video didn't exist.
"Are you coming to the party?
Oh I'm coming, but I won't be there!"
Flying Hellfish #828
Dudist #52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

***That is the one thing I do not understand.whybin the he'll would they let the video get out instead of saying I am sorry the camera malfunctioned and we didn't get any video of the freefall.



Maybe because dishonestly doesent come off as natural to everyone? The camera did not malfunction. It worked perfectly fine and the student did pay for a video. If anything, I'd give the TI props for releasing a video that he knows he will take on a shit load of heat for, as opposed to trying his best to cover it up like nothing happened. He may have messed up big time, but if he is willing to release to the public a video showing his mistakes and he is willing to admit his mistakes, that puts him higher on the list than a lot of people I've met in my life.

As usual, what the hell do you know. :ph34r:

It doesn't have to be dishonest, you simply refuse the hand over the video. You explain what happened, and tell them that the video doesn't meet the drop zones standards. You refund all of the students money, you kiss the students ass, and you dig deep when you consider what happened and if the instructor can be retrained, or if maybe he should stick to fun jumping.

You can also add hoping and praying that you have a good waiver, and that your manifest did all their diligence involving the waiver.

The video does nothing good for tandem skydiving.

As far as the instructor and the drop zone... They obviously sugar coated what happened, GREATLY, so the release of the video has nothing to do with full disclosure or honesty.
"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sometimes videos like these that get out force a net positive...such as the Y-mod being mandatory. Had the grandma video not been given out and y-mods not the standard it's entirely conceivable there could have been another person falling out of the harness...with disastrous consequences for the industry as a whole.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't grandma a few years post Y-mod, I thought that was around 2012.

The two fatalities before the near-miss with the grandmother video were what pushed the Y mod requirement. I forget when Strong started requiring it, but it was probably back in 2007-8.

I get what you are saying Tony, but I don't think this is revealing anything new. The tandem commandments already cover all the elements of this jump that nearly killed the pair.
"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Lodi Grandma was when UPT added the Y mod to their harness. I my opinion the Y mod is a response to complacent/ idiotic tandem instructor. The harness is perfectly fine without the mod as long as the tandem instructor does their job properly.
Kirk
He's dead Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Wasn't grandma a few years post Y-mod, I thought that was around 2012



The grandma was before y-mod on the sigma harness.

While I'll agree with you in regards to this particular video not giving us anything new to learn, it's the culture of cover-up that's the problem. The FAA was livid when they found out about grandma after the fact..
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't recall the exact sequence of events, but I looked stuff up to summarize:

- Oct 2005 - Skydive Atlanta - first lost tandem student, the one who was paraplegic. It seemed then like a one-off, special case.

- May 2006 -- Aerohio - second lost tandem student, the more pear-shaped one.

Strong came out with their Y-mod after that, and made it mandatory by the end of 2006 or 2007, I don't recall exactly.

Things seemed quieter for a while, until hanging-grandma went viral:
"In May, 2011, 80-year-old Laverne Everett went skydiving in Lodi for her birthday"

UPT then came up with their Y-strap modification, and with bulletin #2013205 made it mandatory by the end of 2013.

Tom Noonan in 2013 summed things up:

Quote


So, why now is the question? Well, its been made clear by the FAA that the next time a tandem student is ejected from a harness, tandem skydiving, as we know it today, a self regulating industry will cease to exist as we know it.

After the two incidents that occurred across both systems, both outlier events to a certain extent based on body mass and unforseen circumstances. It was rationalized by many that "after all that", no tandem instructor would allow a tandem student to enter an aircraft, let alone exit an aircraft without a properly fitted student harness.

Then the video that went viral around the world surfaced, with a grandmother holding onto to her harness for (literally) dear life. Her harness had not properly been fitted. For the tandem industry and the organization (USPA) it was a cold hard wake up call that passenger harness fitting, was and will continue to be the Achilles Heal of the tandem industry. This left little choice on the part of the SB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unstable exits happen. I doubt there are any TI’s who can honestly say they have “never” had un unstable exit but using the drogue to try to get stable or throwing it while on your back is scary. I’d love to hear from the TI about his thoughts on this jump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheCaptain

******That is the one thing I do not understand.whybin the he'll would they let the video get out instead of saying I am sorry the camera malfunctioned and we didn't get any video of the freefall.



Maybe because dishonestly doesent come off as natural to everyone? T
From my perspective it is called being a professional. I will not let any video out that does not hit my quality standards period, I would rather refund the money than put out a product I wasn't proud of.
I personally wonder if he just gave it to the student and went on about his day, rather than bring it to the attention of the DZO and then the S&TA or DZO take appropriate action on retraining the instructor
What was wrong with the quality of the video? Nothing as far as I can see.

What *might* have been "wrong" is the technique of the TI revealed in the video (although we really need to wait for ChrisD2.0 to weigh in on that before we can be sure :)
The "hanging gramma" video didn't surface until 2 years after the event, but when it did, it caused the mfg to quickly make an addition to the harness to improve safety. If that 2-year late release had not occured, that improvement might not (yet) have been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy's exit wasn't terrible. Weak arch and a fetile position from the student caused a back to earth freefall position. He reached for the drogue at the 5 sec mark, held it for a bout a sec and a half and then just let it go. Well past the hill and solidly back to earth. Though I agree about your relative wind "splainin", my original statement about being back to earth is accurate in this scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
baronn

The guy's exit wasn't terrible.



Are we watching the same video?

He exited back towards the relative wind, and it isn't like he did a diving exit, or a gainer that would have transitioned into positioning him back into a good orientation to the relative wind on the hill.

If he got back to the basics that we teach students would we even be talking about him right now? Up - down - prop - arch. Present into the relative wind, watch the plane fly away.

A large percentage of students don't arch from their hips right out the door, especially if they are crouched down on exit like in an aircraft with a shorter door like a caravan. They leave knees bent and down.

How can you place this on the student? :S
"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It appears the TI had his knees brought forward on exit with 0 arch. No attempt to fly his exit. I especially like how he continued to attempt to shoot video through the entire free fall. This will be a good video to show during any TI course of what can happen when you quit flying your exits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
6 hours ago, Justincblount said:

I strongly disagree that skydiving is somehow different when it comes to owning your failures. I've heard of people denied videos because of a cutaway before, to me that's BS. If that happened to me on my first tandem, I'd be so pissed.

I see your point about owning failure. We would do that in the debrief. But in the age of YouTube I will decline to release for publication anything that might damage my business. Video is never guaranteed, many things can go wrong leading to a refund. Including editorial choice. The primary product is the jump. The video is secondary. I can live with your anger if you feel that way.

I would also add that a cutaway alone would probably not cause me to not release the video.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0