0
faulknerwn

Mandatory AADS and Banning Swooping/Small Canopies

Recommended Posts

I decided to make this poll because I regularly see people who want to mandate AADS but who aren't against banning an activity which kills far more people every year for at least the past 20 years. So I want to hear it - if you are for mandatory AADs but against banning swooping - how can you rationalize that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think RSL should be mandatory, except the CRW dudes/girls.

Having no RSL has contributed to many preventable deaths.

Not having an AAD mean you are okay with death, and you've accepted the term.

However, when you open up your main and decided to cutaway, you are actively engaging in an act of survival, so many have gone in trying to get stable, so many preventable deaths.

Those who can't afford an AAD, they still want to jump. Think about it, if they can't afford 1200 dollar device, their life ain't worth so much. Or some can afford it, but they just don't want to. Like I said in earlier post, conscious effort of accidental suicide. They don't want to kill themselves but they don't mind getting killed. Or they secretly wishes they get killed at one point.

I jump without it. I really do not care if someone crashes into me and knock me out in middle of the sky. No pets, No Kids.

YOLO. :P
Bernie Sanders for President 2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want safe, you could sit around at home in your underwear playing WoW all day. Of course, 90,000 people a year in the USA die in household accidents, so best not move for your seat for much. You can probably get Doritos on amazon.com.

20 years they'll probably look back on this post and say "Wow, think of how many people would still be alive if that guy hadn't pointed out that you could buy Doritos on amazon.com."
I'm trying to teach myself how to set things on fire with my mind. Hey... is it hot in here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As noted in the other thread I'm not pro-mandatory AADs (I *might* support them up to a certain license/experience level but even that I don't feel *that* strongly about).

I'd also never advocate banning swooping. I'm all for limiting it under certain circumstances (like you don't bust a 270 through the normal pattern, or you restrict it at higher-traffic events). In general I support managing it through separated landing areas (which help manage risk for the non-swoopers as well as the swoopers). I can see some benefits to mandated canopy downsizing progressions as some national associations (and individual dropzones) have implemented. But I'd never call for banning it altogether.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
faulknerwn

I decided to make this poll because I regularly see people who want to mandate AADS but who aren't against banning an activity which kills far more people every year for at least the past 20 years. So I want to hear it - if you are for mandatory AADs but against banning swooping - how can you rationalize that?

Quote

These are two completely different situations. I don't use AAD's on my containers. I don't want to be told I must have one. During freefall I know what altitude I/we are at. How jumpers can go low without knowing is beyond me. On the subject of swooping. I have regularly jumped on the same jump runs, side by side, with jumpers who I know will be swooping in the landing area. They know where I am and I know where they are. I will do both of these things all day long. Let the swoopers swoop, and let the jumpers jump ........

Life is short ... jump often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've owned a number of AAD's. You know what I've used them for? Test drops of recovery systems. I've never bothered to install one in my rig. Then again they were FXC's and expired cypresses. Haveing said that I'm not anti AAD. It's just never been that high of a priority for me. There are simply other things that weigh more heavily on my mind when I exit a plane. If some one were to just give me one. One that wasn't expired that is. I'd probably jump it. I might even actually repack my rig when the batteries needed changing. But if some one gave me a choice between an AAD and a new reserve. Say a new Optimum where I could put one size larger canopy in my container, I'd take the canopy hands down. If it was a choice of having an AAD in a tight rig and having one size larger canopy I'd advocate for the larger canopy every time.

You want to regulate safety? How about this. Require people to follow the maximum recommended wing loading's published by the manufacturers. Even better. The new TSO has a maximum total velocity limitation with the breaks set. Make that retroactive. Require manufacturers to demonstrate the maximum wing loading that will meet that limit. In other words no small reserves. Include density altitude in that if you really want to be mean. While we're on a roll enforce volume compatibility on the reserve as well.

I mean that would go a hell of a lot farther towards improving safety the mandatory AAD's.

Lee
Lee
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure how I want to respond to your survey, but I often wonder how much the sport could advance in terms of participation and membership if we were to drastically cut the fatality rate. You might have noticed that the media loves stories about a skydive gone bad. Every death is bad public relations, turning people off to giving skydiving a try. So what if we did ban swooping, and did mandate AADs, RSLs, etc., and managed to cut our fatality rate in half? Would we see the sport explode with popularity, as it has in recent years compared with the less-safe decades past? Would we have more and better DZs, more and better aircraft, etc.? Imagine if skydiving deaths were so rare that most people had never even heard of one. What could the sport be like then?

"So many fatalities and injuries are caused by decisions jumpers make before even getting into the aircraft. Skydiving can be safe AND fun at the same time...Honest." - Bill Booth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually the sport would probable shrink. Fatalities are not necessarily bad for business. The media coverage can really help a drop zone. Also notice that fatality rates go through waves with the introduction of new technology but with that factored out they remain relatively steady. As the gear becomes safer skydivers become more dangerous to compensate for it. The term is risk homeostasis. The truth of the mater is that we like the fact that it's dangerous and that people occasionally die. I can only conclude that we like death in our sport and will alter our behavior to maintain it at a certain rate.

Lee
Lee
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RiggerLee

Actually the sport would probable shrink. Fatalities are not necessarily bad for business. The media coverage can really help a drop zone. Also notice that fatality rates go through waves with the introduction of new technology but with that factored out they remain relatively steady. As the gear becomes safer skydivers become more dangerous to compensate for it. The term is risk homeostasis. The truth of the mater is that we like the fact that it's dangerous and that people occasionally die. I can only conclude that we like death in our sport and will alter our behavior to maintain it at a certain rate.

Lee



Booths Law, no?

USPA reports that membership is at an all-time high, and also that fatalities (averaged over each decade) are at an all-time low. Do you think there's a point where this correlation starts to reverse?

"So many fatalities and injuries are caused by decisions jumpers make before even getting into the aircraft. Skydiving can be safe AND fun at the same time...Honest." - Bill Booth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
General rule of thumb for the sport as far as I'm concerned:

Do whatever the fuck you want as long as you don't hurt or kill someone else.

If you kill yourself, it's sad and you'll hopefully be remembered fondly. If you kill another jumper, you shall be remembered as a reckless asswipe. If you kill a student or a whuffo, your legacy shall be that of the cuntiest shitlord, and your memory shall be damned by a thousand generations.
cavete terrae.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that AAD's should be used - and that DZO's have the right to require them. But USPA need not mandate them, since their lack typically contributes only to that skydiver's injury or death.

I also think that swooping should be physically separated from all other skydivers as called out in the group pledge. And that SHOULD be mandatory via the USPA, since swoopers kill other jumpers with some regularity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I always find the cost per month argument interesting. People argue the AAD is only $6 a month and so everyone can afford them but nobody takes a $6 a month payment. How many of you would own a house if your realtor told you the house was only $1000 a month but when it came down to it they required $150,000 all at once? The cost per month doesn't matter unless you can pay it per month. It is a legitimate concern that people can't afford them.
www.facebook.com/FlintHillsRigging

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mcordell

I always find the cost per month argument interesting. People argue the AAD is only $6 a month and so everyone can afford them but nobody takes a $6 a month payment. How many of you would own a house if your realtor told you the house was only $1000 a month but when it came down to it they required $150,000 all at once? The cost per month doesn't matter unless you can pay it per month. It is a legitimate concern that people can't afford them.



Wicked Wingsuits rents them at a very affordable rate, per month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anachronist

Stupid poll because you can't ban stupid, and that is what actually kills most people.

This argument has been around since I started jumping over 25 years ago. I hope it makes you feel better. "He died from stupid, I'm not stupid, so I won't die".
People die from mistakes mostly, not from stupid. EVERYONE makes mistakes. If you want to think it can't/won't happen to you, fine. Just stay away from me.
This is not to take one side or the other on AADs, RSL's, or hook-turns.
When this sport is no longer about personal freedom to choose (not including injuring/killing someone else) I think it will be much less attractive to me and most others.
This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JeffCa

***Actually the sport would probable shrink. Fatalities are not necessarily bad for business. The media coverage can really help a drop zone. Also notice that fatality rates go through waves with the introduction of new technology but with that factored out they remain relatively steady. As the gear becomes safer skydivers become more dangerous to compensate for it. The term is risk homeostasis. The truth of the mater is that we like the fact that it's dangerous and that people occasionally die. I can only conclude that we like death in our sport and will alter our behavior to maintain it at a certain rate.

Lee



Booths Law, no?

USPA reports that membership is at an all-time high, and also that fatalities (averaged over each decade) are at an all-time low. Do you think there's a point where this correlation starts to reverse?

no. after a fatality, number of students increases because of the publicity. It's well documented
If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you define in specific terms what you mean by 'swooping' as it relates to canopy flight? Would that include the landing techniques used by some of your fellow CRW dawgs?

Also, what is the specific definition of 'small' as it relates to canopies?


Not trying to be a smarta$$, but you are referring to swooping and small canopies when you know that some of the CRW competitors are jumping smallish canopies and using various techniques to land ... some of which could qualify as 'swooping'.


FWIW: I would only mandate more and better training regarding CC. RSLs, AADs, etc. are merely backup devices that are not always appropriate depending on the type of jump and should be entirely up to the individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
faulknerwn

I decided to make this poll because I regularly see people who want to mandate AADS but who aren't against banning an activity which kills far more people every year for at least the past 20 years. So I want to hear it - if you are for mandatory AADs but against banning swooping - how can you rationalize that?



It's simple. Swooping is a choice. Going in unconscious isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
True - unless you are one of the unlucky ones who get taken out by a swooper. But I can tell you I see rookies all the time going on skydives that are too "zoo-ey" than I would want to go on. I make a conscious choice not to take those extra risks, which makes the odds of me going unconscious far less. Its a choice I make.

Isn't skydiving about choices?

And for the person who asked about the small CRW canopies that CRWdogs are swooping - they qualify too. I personally have no desire to do CRW on canopies that small, or to ever do a swoop turn. My choice.

Am I really more unsafe than someone with an AAD who jumps on the 150 way head down skydives on a Velocity 86? I think I am less likely to kill or maim myself on my Triathlon 135 loaded at 1.2 doing a 4 way without an AAD than practically anyone who jumps a sub-100 crossbraced canopy.

Its my choice. Others make different choices. I believe skydivers should have the freedom to make choices that are right for them. Swoop? Sure, as long as you are doing it in a separate landing area where you aren't likely to kill an innocent victim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
faulknerwn

True - unless you are one of the unlucky ones who get taken out by a swooper. But I can tell you I see rookies all the time going on skydives that are too "zoo-ey" than I would want to go on. I make a conscious choice not to take those extra risks, which makes the odds of me going unconscious far less. Its a choice I make.

Isn't skydiving about choices?

And for the person who asked about the small CRW canopies that CRWdogs are swooping - they qualify too. I personally have no desire to do CRW on canopies that small, or to ever do a swoop turn. My choice.

Am I really more unsafe than someone with an AAD who jumps on the 150 way head down skydives on a Velocity 86? I think I am less likely to kill or maim myself on my Triathlon 135 loaded at 1.2 doing a 4 way without an AAD than practically anyone who jumps a sub-100 crossbraced canopy.

Its my choice. Others make different choices. I believe skydivers should have the freedom to make choices that are right for them. Swoop? Sure, as long as you are doing it in a separate landing area where you aren't likely to kill an innocent victim.




+1 A few years back I was on final and nearly got taken out by a swooper. So far no one without an AAD has ever been a danger to me. You can keep your head on a swivel all day but when a dick who got out after you does a 270 above you when you are 100 feet in the air you won't see him either. Swooping is great stuff--I'm not in favor of banning it. But somehow swoopers must be separated from slow pokes like me.
"Here's a good specimen of my own wisdom. Something is so, except when it isn't so."

Charles Fort, commenting on the many contradictions of astronomy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Croc

***True - unless you are one of the unlucky ones who get taken out by a swooper. But I can tell you I see rookies all the time going on skydives that are too "zoo-ey" than I would want to go on. I make a conscious choice not to take those extra risks, which makes the odds of me going unconscious far less. Its a choice I make.

Isn't skydiving about choices?

And for the person who asked about the small CRW canopies that CRWdogs are swooping - they qualify too. I personally have no desire to do CRW on canopies that small, or to ever do a swoop turn. My choice.

Am I really more unsafe than someone with an AAD who jumps on the 150 way head down skydives on a Velocity 86? I think I am less likely to kill or maim myself on my Triathlon 135 loaded at 1.2 doing a 4 way without an AAD than practically anyone who jumps a sub-100 crossbraced canopy.

Its my choice. Others make different choices. I believe skydivers should have the freedom to make choices that are right for them. Swoop? Sure, as long as you are doing it in a separate landing area where you aren't likely to kill an innocent victim.




+1 A few years back I was on final and nearly got taken out by a swooper. So far no one without an AAD has ever been a danger to me. You can keep your head on a swivel all day but when a dick who got out after you does a 270 above you when you are 100 feet in the air you won't see him either. Swooping is great stuff--I'm not in favor of banning it. But somehow swoopers must be separated from slow pokes like me.


Both these comments made me fucking laugh!!!' Lame, typical, BS!!! How about this? Lets just ban ALL non swoopers and call it a fucking day!!! Boom done...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think almost all skydivers should use an AAD and an RSL (FYI...I use both...) but am satisfied with experienced jumpers and DZO's making the decision on mandatory use for their facility. USPA should probably stay out of mandating equipment for D licensed jumpers. Swooping and small canopies, let the DZO decide, they assume much of the potential legal liability.

Interestingly, in the mid '70s there were some that were pushing USPA hard to adopt a mandatory helmet rule for all, frap hats or no helmet being some sort of a controversy for some. Fortunately, saner voices prevailed...

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