AFF-1 two-out landing

[katzurki 0]

stills

video

The student was making his first jump at this Ukranian dropzone. After an apparently uneventful freefall, the reserve pin was pulled by RSL on main canopy deployment due to gear defect or misrigging. Initially a biplane, the two canopies soon moved side-by-side, at which point the instructor repeatedly told the student on radio to cut away, which he never did. Worse yet, he popped a toggle off each canopy and tried to "flare" on landing. End result: one twisted ankle on one confused guy. He got up and wondered if it was normal that he had two parachutes.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

the two canopies soon moved side-by-side, at which point the instructor repeatedly told the student on radio to cut away...

Is this the accepted remedy for a side-by-side?

I recall some video from the dual-canopy study done years ago. I distinctly remember some scary cutaways from side-by-sides. The reason is this: When you release one canopy, say the left one, the right canopy immediatly tilts upward to regain its center of gravity. The tilting upward of that canopy coincides with the risers flying upwards from the canopy that has been released. And on the video, there was a good chance that the three-rings of the released canopy could snag on the end cell or lines of the remaining attached canopy. And the results of this could be disasterous.

So is it better to; 1) fly the side-by-side and hope you don't get a downplane, or; 2) release the main and hope you don't get an entanglement that collapses the remaining good canopy?

What's the accepted wisdom on this?

It occurs to me that with option #1, you have some control over the situation. But with option #2 you are putting your fate entirely into the hands of luck...

[Reginald 0]

OMG! Seeing him flare with one toggle from the outside of each canopy is SCARY!

"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

So is it better to; 1) fly the side-by-side and hope you don't get a downplane, or; 2) release the main and hope you don't get an entanglement that collapses the remaining good canopy?

What's the accepted wisdom on this?

Is there any?

Its my feeling that this is very much a situation by situation problem, and one blanket response can't adequately cover it all.

But then I'm pretty new and have never seen one live.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[bch7773 0]

ideally, you would riser turn one of the canopies away from the other one, so they are clear, then cut away.

for a student though? we teach them if it isn't a downplane, let it fly and land it... WITHOUT flaring.

MB 3528, RB 1182

[karma 3]

Quote

ideally, you would riser turn one of the canopies away from the other one, so they are clear, then cut away.

Why would you want to do that. If you have a stable side by side why not land that configuration. Why would you intentionally want to create a downplane?

Grtz. karma

[piisfish 135]

Quote

OMG! Seeing him flare with one toggle from the outside of each canopy is SCARY!

hopefully he didn't flare 30ft higher

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

ideally, you would riser turn one of the canopies away from the other one, so they are clear, then cut away.

Why would you want to do that. If you have a stable side by side why not land that configuration. Why would you intentionally want to create a downplane?

because the cutaway is cleaner from a downplane and you can choose when to have it, rather than chance it down low. One of my AFF-Is said he'd do that himself, though he directed me to stick with the program until I was qualfied to make that call.

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

ideally, you would riser turn one of the canopies away from the other one, so they are clear, then cut away.

That is certainly one of the routes I have considered in thinking about what I might do - but there are so many variables it can't cover every situation. Example, side by side at 2,000ft, yeah I'd probably try it. At 200ft I almost certainly wouldn't.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kelpdiver 2]

are there many scenarios likely at 2000? Seems like a cypres fire during the main deploy is most likely, and that probably puts you in the 500-800ft range.

The PD 2 out PDF suggests that the side by sides tend to shift to a biplane. True?

[AFFI 0]

Quote

Is this the accepted remedy for a side-by-side?

What's the accepted wisdom on this?

The way we teach it, and it is what I would do...

3) Two Canopies Out
3a) Bi-Plane: Check Altitude, Disconnect the RSL, Using the toggles, gently steer with the dominant parachute towards a large clear area. Do NOT Flare, be prepared to do a PLF.


3b) Side-By-Side: Check Altitude, Disconnect the RSL, Using the toggles, gently steer with the more dominant parachute towards a large clear area. Do NOT Flare, be prepared to do a PLF.


3c) Down-Plane: Under normal circumstances, when you flare at landing, the canopy is above your head. In a down-plane you do not have a canopy above your head. The canopies have separated and are flying straight toward the ground at a high rate of speed. Disconnect the RSL (if time and altitude permits). Cut away the main, steer and land the reserve. Be prepared to do a PLF.


Note: Disconnecting the RSL is the first step in any 2 Canopy out situation.
The purpose of the RSL, to pull the reserve pin when the main is cutaway. If the Reserve is out; the RSL no longer serves a purpose and is a potential hazard. In the event a Down-plane develops be prepared to handle the situation by having your RSL disconnected and remember to release your toggles and anything else that might be in your hands before you cutaway the main.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

The way we teach it, and it is what I would do...

That sounds good to me. If it's flying okay by itself, don't mess with it and make things worse. Fly to maintain the status quo. If it turns ugly, then consider a cut-a-way at that time.

This was the lesson I took away from viewing that "two out" video many years ago. I was just wondering if I should modify my thinking on that. And according to your sound advice, I've been right all along.

Thanks.

[tdog 0]

Quote

Quote

Is this the accepted remedy for a side-by-side?

What's the accepted wisdom on this?

The way we teach it, and it is what I would do...

3) Two Canopies Out
3a) Bi-Plane: Check Altitude, Disconnect the RSL, Using the toggles

We teach "steer with the rear risers of the dominant canopy".

Most two outs are caused by an AAD fire, right - so the likelihood is that both canopies will have the toggles stowed...

If they are flying stable, the thought is, why risk anything by popping the toggles and allowing one canopy to all of a sudden increase it's forward speed and outfly the canopy that has it's toggles still at half brakes.

Ideas, thoughts?

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Initially a biplane, the two canopies soon moved side-by-side, at which point the instructor repeatedly told the student on radio to cut away, which he never did.

I was taught NOT to cutaway side-by-side, or biplane, and SIM also states that. The only thing I need to cutaway is downplane.
Why did the instructor told the student to cutaway side-by-side? What was the student taught to do?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[karma 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

ideally, you would riser turn one of the canopies away from the other one, so they are clear, then cut away.

Why would you want to do that. If you have a stable side by side why not land that configuration. Why would you intentionally want to create a downplane?

because the cutaway is cleaner from a downplane and you can choose when to have it, rather than chance it down low.

Yes I know that a cutaway from a downplane is cleaner. My point is, why would you want to create a downplane when you have a stable flying side-by-side.

IMHO using your frontrisers in a side-by-side situation to create a downplane only adds more risk. I would venture to say that most of the jumpers don't have the skill-set to do this in a relative safe way.

Think about it. You're already in an abnormal situation, would you really want to make the descent more complicated.

Like somebody else said a few post up. Most two-out situations are caused by ADD-fires. That leaves the jumper with little time/altitude to take action. I think that it would be smarter to use this time to concentrate on landing the two out, instead of trying to create a downplane.

Grtz. karma

[BigSky 2]

A few questions I have about this, and first off I dont think I would cut away from a side by side but then again a downplane at 50ft sounds very scary so

1. If you decided to fly the side buy side to the ground would it do you some good to get the inside risers of each canopy in your hand so if they start to separate you could give some input to get them back together?

2. If you decide to try and separate them, would it be better to use rear risers than front so as not to create a step dive, and it seams like you would want to do this with the reserve instead of the main, right?

“Sometimes when I reflect back on all the beer I drink I feel ashamed. Then I look into the glass and think about the workers in the brewery and their hopes and dreams. If I didn’t drink this beer, th

[Reginald 0]

Quote

I was taught NOT to cutaway side-by-side, or biplane, and SIM also states that. The only thing I need to cutaway is downplane.
Why did the instructor told the student to cutaway side-by-side? What was the student taught to do?

I think as a group we need a little review.

SIM 4AH

2. Both parachutes deployed:

a. Biplane
(1) Do not cut away.
(2) Steer the front canopy gently using toggles.
(3) Leave the brakes stowed on the back canopy.
(4) Make a parachute landing fall on landing.

b. Side-by-side (two alternatives)

side-by-side alternative one

If the two canopies are not tangled, cut away
and fly the reserve to a safe landing.

side-by-side alternative two

(1) Steer the dominant (larger) canopy gently
using toggles.
(2) Leave the brakes stowed on the other canopy.
(3) Make a parachute landing fall on landing.

c. Downplane: Cut away the main canopy.

"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP

[astor 0]

Quote

(1) Do not cut away.
(2) Steer the front canopy gently using toggles.
(3) Leave the brakes stowed on the back canopy.
(4) Make a parachute landing fall on landing.

Maybe a stupid newbie question, but what is the reason for leaving the brakes stowed on the back/less dominant canopy in case of biplane/side-by-side situation?

[dorbie 0]

He's lucky he didn't "flare" higher, it looked like he was going to for a while. That would have been a certain downplane. Luckily he limped away but he almost demonstrated the worst possible thing to do with a side by side.

[basejumper1 0]

In response to the bi-plane scenario: In agreement with one of the other posters, I believe rear risers of the more dominant canopy would be a better response. Releasing the brakes only causes things to happen faster and likely could cause separation.
Having never actually been in this scenario (Thank God), I only speculate that that is what I would do. Everything is situational dependant.
I respectfully disagree with the SIM on releasing the brakes.
In the malfunction video that we present to our students, in the bi-plane scenario, the pilot releases the toggles, and just as the video fades to black, it appears that a violent situation starts to occur.

[AFFI 0]

Quote

I believe rear risers of the more dominant canopy would be a better response.
I respectfully disagree with the SIM on releasing the brakes.

We teach students to steer with the main (dominant) canopy with gentle toggle input because it is SIM compliant and mostly for the reason that rear riser control can be more sensitive to control input then when using toggles. Using matched canopies for the main and reserve if one canopy is set in brakes and the other is not, the toggles may need to be adjusted (lowered) until the canopies fly together (which must be taught as well).

Naturally as we progress in our skills and understand in skydiving, the practices we employ may evolve from when we were on student status, in this case after an understanding on the effects of rear riser control affects the canopy flight and becoming proficient using them.

Quote

In the malfunction video that we present to our students, in the bi-plane scenario, the pilot releases the toggles, and just as the video fades to black, it appears that a violent situation starts to occur.

It must not be the break away video.

Mykel AFF-I10
Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat…

[JOHNBSKI 0]

THATS THE FIRST TIME I HEARD TO KEEP BOTH SETS OF TOGGLES STOED AND SOUNDS LIKE A SMART IDEA.

[basejumper1 0]

-----We teach students to steer with the main (dominant) canopy with gentle toggle input because it is SIM compliant and mostly for the reason that rear riser control can be more sensitive to control input then when using toggles. Using matched canopies for the main and reserve if one canopy is set in brakes and the other is not, the toggles may need to be adjusted (lowered) until the canopies fly together (which must be taught as well).------

I appreciate your standpoint! However, I believe that it is easier to explain the concept of flying with rears than it is to explain that "after you release the toggles, the two canopies may not fly at an even pace, so now you must compensate, and fly it in brakes as if they were stowed."

Again, I believe that it is a situational dependent malfunction and I am certain that I am not certain. The easiest route, SIM compliant or not, is that the least amount of input in a stable configuration is probably best. IMHO.