topdocker 0 #26 December 19, 2013 hillsonedit: in general, IMO, I tend to think the comparison / question is better when you're talking about folks in the 500-1500 range of jumps...when this guy has 9000, that guy has 4500, this dude has 12000 (be they tandem, demos, RW etc) the comparions begin to lose some meaning, I think. In general, I would assume that if someone is doing 1000 a year they're either being paid to teach, compete, are commerical or some combination. Dunno...sort of an odd thing to think about when there are digits bigger than 1 or 2 in front of the comma... ****** Those numbers are mostly meaningless unless you have the percentage of jumps done by D-license jumpers compared to all others. Maybe D-license holders are doing 90% of the jumps.... Anyway, back to the original thesis. The first year guy is "the most current." But current only on the knowledge garnered in one year. Maybe he/she hasn't jumped in marginal conditions, or had to come back after the winter layoff, seen a major injury/fatality at the DZ, competed in a meet, etc etc. So, the guy who has been around three years probably isn't as good at certain aspects of the sport, but has been exposed to more conditions/situations and is probably more seasoned. Currency is not the same as proficiency. Right now I am very proficient at CRW, but more current on RW. That doesn't mean Airspeed is gonna open up a slot for me to compete on the team. More likely, they would laugh when they see my pathetic RW skills in the air and run away from me under canopy.... topJump more, post less! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mattjw916 2 #27 December 19, 2013 the sample size is really far too small for those numbers to really mean much... Dirty Harry said it best, "A man's got to know his limitations." and if you're trying to push your limits on every jump, swoop, whatever... chances are you're going to find them at some point... add ego, drugs, fatigue, poor conditions, lack of currency, etc on top of that and you've just added yourself to the "circling the drain" group regardless of how many standard deviations above or below the norm you fit in...NSCR-2376, SCR-15080 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites psf 1 #28 December 19, 2013 the first guy definitely has more money. one year of experience and made 500 jumps ? how much did that cost? Honestly, I think anyone that is making over 200 jumps a year is current. 200 or 500 a year, I don't think you will see a large difference in currency. Did the 500 a yr guys jump in all conditions and risk it a few times, did the 200 a year jumper sit down when he/she should have ? How many people do you know (other then tandem masters/videographers/AFF instructors) make over 200 jumps a year?ignorance is not bliss Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites yoink 321 #29 December 19, 2013 topdocker Those numbers are mostly meaningless unless you have the percentage of jumps done by D-license jumpers compared to all others. Maybe D-license holders are doing 90% of the jumps.... Not only that, but experienced jumpers are more likely to put themselves in the position to get more severely injured if they make a smaller mistake. In general: Higher wingloadings More eliptical planforms Larger group skydives More complicated jumps when compared to low time jumpers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 369 #30 December 19, 2013 The guy with 500 jumps in a year would probably be a better flyer, but the guy with 3 years in the sport would probably be a better skydiver.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GLIDEANGLE 1 #31 December 19, 2013 Consider the nature of the jumps. 500 similar sloppy belly or freefly jumps landing "somewhere" on the DZ are not the same as 500 jumps distributed thus: 100 4-way belly team training 100 freefly team training 100 classic accuracy training 100 CReW team training 100 "none of the above". I would expect the latter to be the better jumper for two reasons: 1. Breadth of experience 2. Performing against measurable standardsThe choices we make have consequences, for us & for others! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #32 December 19, 2013 Without some knowledge of the individuals you can’t make a call on who is the “better” jumper. I have jumped with newer jumpers that had less than half the jumps I had and could fly circles around me. But they didn’t know what color their reserve was or how to hook up their 3 rings without help. I have also been in the air with jumpers who had twice the time in the sport and couldn’t get out of their own way. On one hand the jumper with 500 in a year could be the next Dan BC or he will be just another nova passing through the sport. While the jumper with 500 in a 3 years could go on to be the next Airtwardo showing us the path to being around tomorrow. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FataMorgana 0 #33 December 19, 2013 Quote Experience should be a real advantage in facing the challenges of skydiving, but overconfidence and complacency are killers.The average number of jumps for the people who died in 2010 was 2,083. In 2010, 83 percent of those who died were D-license qualified. Eleven of those had anywhere from 1,000 to 9,000 jumps. The average for those who died landing their main parachutes was 3,071 jumps. It is obvious that experience will not offset equipment choices and jumping conditions. Hmm...that is pretty consistent with the Risk Homeostasis theory that states that humans optimize their level of risk according to four utility factors: • The expected benefits of risky behavior • The expected costs of risky behavior • The expected benefits of safe behavior • The expected costs of safe behavior The level of risk that provides the greatest net benefit is termed the target level of risk. The theory predicts that people will compare their target level of risk to the perceived level of risk and adjust their behavior until the two are equal. So, it is not totally unexpected that more experienced jumpers are getting themselves in all sorts of troubles. Assuming that this theory is correct it appears that human nature can override any experience level and will continue leading jumpers down the dangerous path no matter how current and experienced they are. Statistics seems to support this….The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dthames 0 #34 December 19, 2013 chuckakersThe guy with 500 jumps in a year would probably be a better flyer, but the guy with 3 years in the sport would probably be a better skydiver. That seems to sum it up very well.Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #35 December 19, 2013 FataMorgana Quote Experience should be a real advantage in facing the challenges of skydiving, but overconfidence and complacency are killers.The average number of jumps for the people who died in 2010 was 2,083. In 2010, 83 percent of those who died were D-license qualified. Eleven of those had anywhere from 1,000 to 9,000 jumps. The average for those who died landing their main parachutes was 3,071 jumps. It is obvious that experience will not offset equipment choices and jumping conditions. Hmm...that is pretty consistent with the Risk Homeostasis theory that states that humans optimize their level of risk according to four utility factors: • The expected benefits of risky behavior • The expected costs of risky behavior • The expected benefits of safe behavior • The expected costs of safe behavior The level of risk that provides the greatest net benefit is termed the target level of risk. The theory predicts that people will compare their target level of risk to the perceived level of risk and adjust their behavior until the two are equal. So, it is not totally unexpected that more experienced jumpers are getting themselves in all sorts of troubles. Assuming that this theory is correct it appears that human nature can override any experience level and will continue leading jumpers down the dangerous path no matter how current and experienced they are. Statistics seems to support this…. I don't but that theory...doesn't jibe with Darwin. Experience tends to allow for a better evaluation of potential risk... ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites 377 20 #36 December 19, 2013 airtwardo Quote I vote for the old guy. There IS something to be said for longevity...and hey WHO's an old guy? Aren't YOU older than me by a week or two?! +1 The type of jump made by someone who is stale matters a lot. If I have to dust the cobwebs off, I make sure it's a solo jump, I am the last to exit and I open higher than normal. That means any problems I have won't be endangering others. I did an 4 way RW jump with a guy who hadnt jumped in a long time. He was a decent belly flyer when current but he was all over the sky on this jump. Won't do that again. 377 first jump 1968, still jumping, no injuries.2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggerrob 558 #37 December 20, 2013 This Tandem Examiner votes in favour of the 3-year man, because he has helped load a few friends into ambulances, seen the results of %$#@! hook turns, etc. and is less likely to make those errors in judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggerrob 558 #38 December 20, 2013 Another way of looking at it is that you are paying a tandem instructor for the mistakes he made BEFORE he stated hauling students. Smart people learn from watching other people's mistakes. They only see mistakes from while spending hundreds of days on the DZ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base698 1 #39 December 20, 2013 Quotelike you said air time is air time and it is equal…it also takes about the same amount of ground time to achieve the same. Someone who has done 500 jumps over three years has possibly spent a total of 180 days at the dz to achieve those 500 jumps. The person who has done 500 in a year has also spent the same number of days to achieve the same number of jumps and has been exposed to the same amount of information if measured with a time value (like you are suggesting)…. that said the point it a stupid one as it suggests we learn by osmosis. Simply sitting in an airport won't make me a pilot. I might learn a bit of cool trivia but it won't make me a pilot. IMHO someone who has done 500 in a year is hungry for success, wants to learn and will seek out knowledge while practising with a much higher of frequency. The 500 in a year guy probably doesn't know a dead skydiver but I'd bet the other guy does. Seen a lot of people in the first group quit when faced with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SStewart 13 #40 December 20, 2013 The guy who makes 500 jumps in 3 years is more current because he actually made 500 jumps. The guy who makes 500 in 1 year really only made 100 jumps but he lies and says he made 500 because he wants people to think he is cool. And there you have it.Onward and Upward! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #41 December 20, 2013 SStewart The guy who makes 500 jumps in 3 years is more current because he actually made 500 jumps. The guy who makes 500 in 1 year really only made 100 jumps but he lies and says he made 500 because he wants people to think he is cool. And there you have it. A little harsh don't you think? SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FataMorgana 0 #42 December 20, 2013 QuoteExperience tends to allow for a better evaluation of potential risk... This is what common sense would suggest. However, statistics are telling a different story (see below the most recent incidents from 2013 USPA fatality report). Recorded number of low turn accidents and corresponding high levels of experience levels seems to be a good example. One would assume that accumulated experience should prevent jumpers from attempting low turns. Yet, year after year highly experienced jumpers continue to go in while performing low turns. Seems to me that the common sense approach is not really grasping the problem here. Part of USPA Fatality Report for 2013 [inline uspa.jpg]The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 6 #43 December 20, 2013 I see your point...tough to argue with the numbers. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #44 December 20, 2013 Time in sport is worth more than jump in the interest of safety and maturity, how ever that time in sport is directly related to how much of it is spent on a DZ.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites davelepka 4 #45 December 20, 2013 QuoteThis is what common sense would suggest. However, statistics are telling a different story Those statistics don't take several important factors into account. More experienced jumpers are more likely to be jumping smaller canopies that are less forgiving of errors. They're more likely to be jumping in challenging conditions or in bigger groups with more traffic. They also have (by definition) more jumps, and thus more exposure to the dangers. I would suggest that if you took two jumpers, one with 100 jumps and one with 1000 jumps, gave them the same equipment and had them do 200 jumps together, the odds would be that the lower time jumper would be more likely to make a mistake or be injured. It's (Bill) Booth's law- the safer you make skydiving, skydivers will come up with dumber shit to do to cancel out the higher level of safety. So as a jumper gains skill and experience, they jump smaller canopies in more challenging conditions to cancel out the benefit of that skill and experience. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 7 #46 December 20, 2013 swoopfly An interesting debate to me came up. One guy has 500 jumps over 3 years. Another guy makes 500 jumps over one year. The guy whose been jumping one year makes the claim he has more currency in a shorter amount of time creating a faster learning curve. The other guys claims he has been in the sport longer over those jump numbers and has seen more. Skill wise which do you think is the better learning curve. This was debated also over the tandem rating but think its a good topic in general. Does time in the sport help more than currency? The guy with 500 in a year has an opportunity to have more basic skills. The guy with 3 years has the opportunity to know more. The difference between the two? In the air, I doubt much. Overall the guy with three years should know more."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FataMorgana 0 #47 December 20, 2013 Quote It's (Bill) Booth's law- the safer you make skydiving, skydivers will come up with dumber shit to do to cancel out the higher level of safety. So as a jumper gains skill and experience, they jump smaller canopies in more challenging conditions to cancel out the benefit of that skill and experience. Could not agree more, especially that this is kind of what I was indicating in my original post. And I do not really have a preference whether we call it the Risk Homeostasis Theory or Booth's law. The basic point is the same though: acquired experience will never catch up with our propensity for increasing risk (inherent urge to downsize comes to mind as a prime example) and being current only slightly tips odds in our favor.The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mjosparky 3 #48 December 20, 2013 Here is a break down for 2011 for deaths under open canopies. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites swoopfly 5 #49 December 21, 2013 hillsonedit: in general, IMO, I tend to think the comparison / question is better when you're talking about folks in the 500-1500 range of jumps...when this guy has 9000, that guy has 4500, this dude has 12000 (be they tandem, demos, RW etc) the comparions begin to lose some meaning, I think. In general, I would assume that if someone is doing 1000 a year they're either being paid to teach, compete, are commerical or some combination. Dunno...sort of an odd thing to think about when there are digits bigger than 1 or 2 in front of the comma... ****** As your stats show, alot of fatalitys are D license holders. I think this is because once alot of experience is gained. you start to push the envelope more and more with smaller and smaller canopies. D license holders are also more than likely doing more jumps than someone just starting out. We see it all the time, another fatality with thousands of jumps. No one is immune. i dont think experienced people are more at risk, i think they jump more and take bigger risk because of knowledge gained to do so. unfortunatly when you do make a mistake at high speeds its never pretty, no matter how many jumps you have! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jonstark 8 #50 December 21, 2013 Old adage SHOULD apply here but doesn't seem to... "There are old skydivers and there are bold skydivers but not a lot of old bold skydivers." I would think it pretty bold to load your canopy up for the ability or rather the necessity to swoop for a good landing on a regular basis and in an uncontrolled environment. Each of us should assess our survival strategy. The senseless "expert" fatalities should give one pause. To the debate here one has to ask why don't the lessons of the past stick? Why do the experts continue to die under fully functioning parachutes? Why do they continue to take each other out in collisions? I don't care how many jumps you make each year. If you can't remember why your old friend isn't here and still insist on behaving just like him I don't think you've learned a thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 2 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
mattjw916 2 #27 December 19, 2013 the sample size is really far too small for those numbers to really mean much... Dirty Harry said it best, "A man's got to know his limitations." and if you're trying to push your limits on every jump, swoop, whatever... chances are you're going to find them at some point... add ego, drugs, fatigue, poor conditions, lack of currency, etc on top of that and you've just added yourself to the "circling the drain" group regardless of how many standard deviations above or below the norm you fit in...NSCR-2376, SCR-15080 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psf 1 #28 December 19, 2013 the first guy definitely has more money. one year of experience and made 500 jumps ? how much did that cost? Honestly, I think anyone that is making over 200 jumps a year is current. 200 or 500 a year, I don't think you will see a large difference in currency. Did the 500 a yr guys jump in all conditions and risk it a few times, did the 200 a year jumper sit down when he/she should have ? How many people do you know (other then tandem masters/videographers/AFF instructors) make over 200 jumps a year?ignorance is not bliss Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yoink 321 #29 December 19, 2013 topdocker Those numbers are mostly meaningless unless you have the percentage of jumps done by D-license jumpers compared to all others. Maybe D-license holders are doing 90% of the jumps.... Not only that, but experienced jumpers are more likely to put themselves in the position to get more severely injured if they make a smaller mistake. In general: Higher wingloadings More eliptical planforms Larger group skydives More complicated jumps when compared to low time jumpers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 369 #30 December 19, 2013 The guy with 500 jumps in a year would probably be a better flyer, but the guy with 3 years in the sport would probably be a better skydiver.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GLIDEANGLE 1 #31 December 19, 2013 Consider the nature of the jumps. 500 similar sloppy belly or freefly jumps landing "somewhere" on the DZ are not the same as 500 jumps distributed thus: 100 4-way belly team training 100 freefly team training 100 classic accuracy training 100 CReW team training 100 "none of the above". I would expect the latter to be the better jumper for two reasons: 1. Breadth of experience 2. Performing against measurable standardsThe choices we make have consequences, for us & for others! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #32 December 19, 2013 Without some knowledge of the individuals you can’t make a call on who is the “better” jumper. I have jumped with newer jumpers that had less than half the jumps I had and could fly circles around me. But they didn’t know what color their reserve was or how to hook up their 3 rings without help. I have also been in the air with jumpers who had twice the time in the sport and couldn’t get out of their own way. On one hand the jumper with 500 in a year could be the next Dan BC or he will be just another nova passing through the sport. While the jumper with 500 in a 3 years could go on to be the next Airtwardo showing us the path to being around tomorrow. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FataMorgana 0 #33 December 19, 2013 Quote Experience should be a real advantage in facing the challenges of skydiving, but overconfidence and complacency are killers.The average number of jumps for the people who died in 2010 was 2,083. In 2010, 83 percent of those who died were D-license qualified. Eleven of those had anywhere from 1,000 to 9,000 jumps. The average for those who died landing their main parachutes was 3,071 jumps. It is obvious that experience will not offset equipment choices and jumping conditions. Hmm...that is pretty consistent with the Risk Homeostasis theory that states that humans optimize their level of risk according to four utility factors: • The expected benefits of risky behavior • The expected costs of risky behavior • The expected benefits of safe behavior • The expected costs of safe behavior The level of risk that provides the greatest net benefit is termed the target level of risk. The theory predicts that people will compare their target level of risk to the perceived level of risk and adjust their behavior until the two are equal. So, it is not totally unexpected that more experienced jumpers are getting themselves in all sorts of troubles. Assuming that this theory is correct it appears that human nature can override any experience level and will continue leading jumpers down the dangerous path no matter how current and experienced they are. Statistics seems to support this….The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dthames 0 #34 December 19, 2013 chuckakersThe guy with 500 jumps in a year would probably be a better flyer, but the guy with 3 years in the sport would probably be a better skydiver. That seems to sum it up very well.Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #35 December 19, 2013 FataMorgana Quote Experience should be a real advantage in facing the challenges of skydiving, but overconfidence and complacency are killers.The average number of jumps for the people who died in 2010 was 2,083. In 2010, 83 percent of those who died were D-license qualified. Eleven of those had anywhere from 1,000 to 9,000 jumps. The average for those who died landing their main parachutes was 3,071 jumps. It is obvious that experience will not offset equipment choices and jumping conditions. Hmm...that is pretty consistent with the Risk Homeostasis theory that states that humans optimize their level of risk according to four utility factors: • The expected benefits of risky behavior • The expected costs of risky behavior • The expected benefits of safe behavior • The expected costs of safe behavior The level of risk that provides the greatest net benefit is termed the target level of risk. The theory predicts that people will compare their target level of risk to the perceived level of risk and adjust their behavior until the two are equal. So, it is not totally unexpected that more experienced jumpers are getting themselves in all sorts of troubles. Assuming that this theory is correct it appears that human nature can override any experience level and will continue leading jumpers down the dangerous path no matter how current and experienced they are. Statistics seems to support this…. I don't but that theory...doesn't jibe with Darwin. Experience tends to allow for a better evaluation of potential risk... ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
377 20 #36 December 19, 2013 airtwardo Quote I vote for the old guy. There IS something to be said for longevity...and hey WHO's an old guy? Aren't YOU older than me by a week or two?! +1 The type of jump made by someone who is stale matters a lot. If I have to dust the cobwebs off, I make sure it's a solo jump, I am the last to exit and I open higher than normal. That means any problems I have won't be endangering others. I did an 4 way RW jump with a guy who hadnt jumped in a long time. He was a decent belly flyer when current but he was all over the sky on this jump. Won't do that again. 377 first jump 1968, still jumping, no injuries.2018 marks half a century as a skydiver. Trained by the late Perry Stevens D-51 in 1968. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #37 December 20, 2013 This Tandem Examiner votes in favour of the 3-year man, because he has helped load a few friends into ambulances, seen the results of %$#@! hook turns, etc. and is less likely to make those errors in judgment. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerrob 558 #38 December 20, 2013 Another way of looking at it is that you are paying a tandem instructor for the mistakes he made BEFORE he stated hauling students. Smart people learn from watching other people's mistakes. They only see mistakes from while spending hundreds of days on the DZ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base698 1 #39 December 20, 2013 Quotelike you said air time is air time and it is equal…it also takes about the same amount of ground time to achieve the same. Someone who has done 500 jumps over three years has possibly spent a total of 180 days at the dz to achieve those 500 jumps. The person who has done 500 in a year has also spent the same number of days to achieve the same number of jumps and has been exposed to the same amount of information if measured with a time value (like you are suggesting)…. that said the point it a stupid one as it suggests we learn by osmosis. Simply sitting in an airport won't make me a pilot. I might learn a bit of cool trivia but it won't make me a pilot. IMHO someone who has done 500 in a year is hungry for success, wants to learn and will seek out knowledge while practising with a much higher of frequency. The 500 in a year guy probably doesn't know a dead skydiver but I'd bet the other guy does. Seen a lot of people in the first group quit when faced with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SStewart 13 #40 December 20, 2013 The guy who makes 500 jumps in 3 years is more current because he actually made 500 jumps. The guy who makes 500 in 1 year really only made 100 jumps but he lies and says he made 500 because he wants people to think he is cool. And there you have it.Onward and Upward! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #41 December 20, 2013 SStewart The guy who makes 500 jumps in 3 years is more current because he actually made 500 jumps. The guy who makes 500 in 1 year really only made 100 jumps but he lies and says he made 500 because he wants people to think he is cool. And there you have it. A little harsh don't you think? SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FataMorgana 0 #42 December 20, 2013 QuoteExperience tends to allow for a better evaluation of potential risk... This is what common sense would suggest. However, statistics are telling a different story (see below the most recent incidents from 2013 USPA fatality report). Recorded number of low turn accidents and corresponding high levels of experience levels seems to be a good example. One would assume that accumulated experience should prevent jumpers from attempting low turns. Yet, year after year highly experienced jumpers continue to go in while performing low turns. Seems to me that the common sense approach is not really grasping the problem here. Part of USPA Fatality Report for 2013 [inline uspa.jpg]The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #43 December 20, 2013 I see your point...tough to argue with the numbers. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #44 December 20, 2013 Time in sport is worth more than jump in the interest of safety and maturity, how ever that time in sport is directly related to how much of it is spent on a DZ.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #45 December 20, 2013 QuoteThis is what common sense would suggest. However, statistics are telling a different story Those statistics don't take several important factors into account. More experienced jumpers are more likely to be jumping smaller canopies that are less forgiving of errors. They're more likely to be jumping in challenging conditions or in bigger groups with more traffic. They also have (by definition) more jumps, and thus more exposure to the dangers. I would suggest that if you took two jumpers, one with 100 jumps and one with 1000 jumps, gave them the same equipment and had them do 200 jumps together, the odds would be that the lower time jumper would be more likely to make a mistake or be injured. It's (Bill) Booth's law- the safer you make skydiving, skydivers will come up with dumber shit to do to cancel out the higher level of safety. So as a jumper gains skill and experience, they jump smaller canopies in more challenging conditions to cancel out the benefit of that skill and experience. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #46 December 20, 2013 swoopfly An interesting debate to me came up. One guy has 500 jumps over 3 years. Another guy makes 500 jumps over one year. The guy whose been jumping one year makes the claim he has more currency in a shorter amount of time creating a faster learning curve. The other guys claims he has been in the sport longer over those jump numbers and has seen more. Skill wise which do you think is the better learning curve. This was debated also over the tandem rating but think its a good topic in general. Does time in the sport help more than currency? The guy with 500 in a year has an opportunity to have more basic skills. The guy with 3 years has the opportunity to know more. The difference between the two? In the air, I doubt much. Overall the guy with three years should know more."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FataMorgana 0 #47 December 20, 2013 Quote It's (Bill) Booth's law- the safer you make skydiving, skydivers will come up with dumber shit to do to cancel out the higher level of safety. So as a jumper gains skill and experience, they jump smaller canopies in more challenging conditions to cancel out the benefit of that skill and experience. Could not agree more, especially that this is kind of what I was indicating in my original post. And I do not really have a preference whether we call it the Risk Homeostasis Theory or Booth's law. The basic point is the same though: acquired experience will never catch up with our propensity for increasing risk (inherent urge to downsize comes to mind as a prime example) and being current only slightly tips odds in our favor.The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #48 December 20, 2013 Here is a break down for 2011 for deaths under open canopies. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swoopfly 5 #49 December 21, 2013 hillsonedit: in general, IMO, I tend to think the comparison / question is better when you're talking about folks in the 500-1500 range of jumps...when this guy has 9000, that guy has 4500, this dude has 12000 (be they tandem, demos, RW etc) the comparions begin to lose some meaning, I think. In general, I would assume that if someone is doing 1000 a year they're either being paid to teach, compete, are commerical or some combination. Dunno...sort of an odd thing to think about when there are digits bigger than 1 or 2 in front of the comma... ****** As your stats show, alot of fatalitys are D license holders. I think this is because once alot of experience is gained. you start to push the envelope more and more with smaller and smaller canopies. D license holders are also more than likely doing more jumps than someone just starting out. We see it all the time, another fatality with thousands of jumps. No one is immune. i dont think experienced people are more at risk, i think they jump more and take bigger risk because of knowledge gained to do so. unfortunatly when you do make a mistake at high speeds its never pretty, no matter how many jumps you have! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jonstark 8 #50 December 21, 2013 Old adage SHOULD apply here but doesn't seem to... "There are old skydivers and there are bold skydivers but not a lot of old bold skydivers." I would think it pretty bold to load your canopy up for the ability or rather the necessity to swoop for a good landing on a regular basis and in an uncontrolled environment. Each of us should assess our survival strategy. The senseless "expert" fatalities should give one pause. To the debate here one has to ask why don't the lessons of the past stick? Why do the experts continue to die under fully functioning parachutes? Why do they continue to take each other out in collisions? I don't care how many jumps you make each year. If you can't remember why your old friend isn't here and still insist on behaving just like him I don't think you've learned a thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 2 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
jonstark 8 #50 December 21, 2013 Old adage SHOULD apply here but doesn't seem to... "There are old skydivers and there are bold skydivers but not a lot of old bold skydivers." I would think it pretty bold to load your canopy up for the ability or rather the necessity to swoop for a good landing on a regular basis and in an uncontrolled environment. Each of us should assess our survival strategy. The senseless "expert" fatalities should give one pause. To the debate here one has to ask why don't the lessons of the past stick? Why do the experts continue to die under fully functioning parachutes? Why do they continue to take each other out in collisions? I don't care how many jumps you make each year. If you can't remember why your old friend isn't here and still insist on behaving just like him I don't think you've learned a thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
