RSL, good or bad ?

[mattjw916 2]

Quote

Choosing to use an AAD or RSL says nothing about confidence or training.

I completely disagree, and after almost a decade in the Army spent mostly in combat-arms units, I have seen how a lack of confidence leads to hesitation and a failure to perform under stress. This is exactly why just about every bit of training from Basic through AIT and up to PLDC and BNCOC is done in a high-stress environment combined with sleep-deprivation. At least that's the way it was done when I was a soldier.

For the record I am not for or against them... I just think people should make an _informed_ decision and not just slap every gadget on their rig as a prerequisite for making a jump. Some of the people that I know that changed their tune regarding jumping with or without those _backup_ devices did so after they amassed enough jumps to build their confidence level up. It is very apparent in my discussions with all levels of skydivers over the years that confidence plays a _huge_ part in their decision-making process.

In the end, I am generally pro-AAD and RSL but there is no way I'd ever support mandating either of them under any circumstances. Countries and organizations that do so are doing skydivers a disservice.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[pilotdave 0]

The FACTS of both accidents are jumpers failing to deploy their reserves in time. The REASONS are unknown. Don't assume you know why either one didn't pull their reserve in time unless you have information that didn't make it into those accident reports. Those accidents prove my case as much as they prove yours.

Guy with 4000 jumps loses altitude awareness during a malfunction and dies. Guy with 600 jumps reading this is wondering why anybody would ever take such a long delay before pulling a reserve. The answer will never be known. I don't assume a guy with 4000 jumps was less prepared for that malfunction that I'd be.

Ugh, the device dependence crap again. Refusing to jump without an AAD could be one symptom of a jumper that lacks training or confidence. But it's irrational to assume it. If coughing is a sympom of ebola, you don't go assuming that everybody that coughs has ebola. On the other hand you can assume everybody with ebola coughs. You can't just flip flop the order. It isn't logical. History has proven that AADs increase your chance of surviving any given jump, with exceptions. It is logical to choose to use an AAD. When participating in a jump with higher risk, it makes even more sense to have an AAD. Jumping without an AAD proves nothing (nothing useful anyway).

I'll jump without an AAD or an RSL and think nothing of it. But that's only because I'll happily accept the slight increased risk of hitting the ground really really hard. If someone chose to sit out when an AAD or RSL wasn't available, they'd miss some jumping. When they're back in the air, they're no less safe than you are just because they chose to be RSL/AAD equipped. Now if they are lacking some skills they need to survive like the ability to pull both handles or maintain altitude awareness, then they're less safe. But that has nothing to do with the RSL or AAD.

Dave

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

after almost a decade in the Army spent mostly in combat-arms units, I have seen how a lack of confidence leads to hesitation and a failure to perform under stress.

I believe that. Confidence definitely matters. But choosing to use an AAD or RSL says nothing about one's confidence.

Quote

Some of the people that I know that changed their tune regarding jumping with or without those _backup_ devices did so after they amassed enough jumps to build their confidence level up.

I've made over 600 jumps and never had a cutaway. I'm so freaking confident in my ability to pack my main that I don't think I need a reserve. I don't have to worry about malfunctions at all. Well, obviously I don't really think that way. How many low time jumpers survive a few jumps on a canopy that's way too small and then get the confidence to try a new trick like breaking a femur? Confidence might help performance, but it can also give a false impression of skill or risk level. Guy with 4000 jumps at the WFFC last year had never needed an RSL on any of his other cutaways, so why would he need one that day?

Backup devices are for after you've screwed up. If all goes well, ya never screw up. Accident reports prove skydivers at all levels do screw up though. It's great to have the confidence to know you're different from them, isn't it?

Dave

[bob.dino 0]

Quote

I've made over 600 jumps and never had a cutaway. I'm so freaking confident in my ability to pack my main that I don't think I need a reserve. I don't have to worry about malfunctions at all. Well, obviously I don't really think that way. How many low time jumpers survive a few jumps on a canopy that's way too small and then get the confidence to try a new trick like breaking a femur? Confidence might help performance, but it can also give a false impression of skill or risk level. Guy with 4000 jumps at the WFFC last year had never needed an RSL on any of his other cutaways, so why would he need one that day?

Backup devices are for after you've screwed up. If all goes well, ya never screw up. Accident reports prove skydivers at all levels do screw up though. It's great to have the confidence to know you're different from them, isn't it?

Thanks mate. I tried a couple of times to put down my thoughts on this matter without ranting, but failed. You've gone and done the hard work for me.

[mattjw916 2]

Quote

But choosing to use an AAD or RSL says nothing about one's confidence.

Yes it does, _if_ they are using it as a crutch... which many people are, based on conversations I have had.

Quote

But that's only because I'll happily accept the slight increased risk of hitting the ground really really hard.

This is another incorrect assumption IMO. Whether or not an AAD or RSL is present doesn't make your skydive safer. In fact, up until the point you have utterly failed to pull that little silver handle and are mere moments from death, they serve only as yet another device that can fail, or lead to an unforeseen consequence. The principle of "keep it simple, stupid" would probably save more skydivers than all the skyhooks in the world, i.e. deploy a canopy.

The problem is the people that pimp these devices with a mindset of, "Don't worry, if you fuck up, your will save you." This is not a good concept to teach new skydivers. Everyone needs to save themselves, every time, without exception. If you think you _need_ your reserve to skydive, maybe you should reevaluate your packing. ;)

Being confident is only one aspect of having a successful skydive. Combine it with good training, well-maintained gear, and good judgement; you have all the components of a successful skydive. Airtec's website has a great list of all the people that failed to meet at least two of those above criteria who cutaway, got stable, made no further attempt to deploy a reserve and simply waited until their Cypres fired. That's a prime example of poor training plus poor judgement. By the same token, those people that cutaway and would not have pulled silver because they assumed their RSL would function perfectly also manifested the same flaws with the exception being there is no proof after the fact (e.g. an expended cutter after an AAD fire).

The fact there is a thread in the other forum about someone with 40-something jumps that thinks he can chop at 100ft with a Skyhook because some retard, who didn't know how a "slider down" or "slider off" deployment differs from a proper reserve packjob, told him so is _really_ scary and yet another indication we, as skydivers, are using the advances in gear technology to replace proper judgement and training. In that case the better concept to teach that jumper would have been, respect and adhere to your hard-deck... which should be waaaay above 100ft.

Maybe they should ask Todd from Airspeed what happens when you dump your reserve at under 500ft (regardless of why). You impact during inflation and break basically everything... he actually recovered amazingly, but would everyone be so lucky?

Once again, I am all for AADs and RSLs, when used for the right reasons and under the right circumstances. For example: if I was competing in the CPC (under a highly loaded canopy): RSL off, AAD off. Doing CReW: RSL off, AAD optional. Video: RSL off, AAD on. RW/FF: RSL optional, AAD on. That's just my opinion. In the quest to keep it simple though, I removed my RSL and always use an AAD because I know there is no way on earth I can hit activation speeds under my canopy.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[Ron 7]

Quote

Ugh, the device dependence crap again

Yep, cause people like you try to ignore it exists.

Quote

Refusing to jump without an AAD could be one symptom of a jumper that lacks training or confidence. But it's irrational to assume it.

Again, its pretty simple. If you would not make a hop n pop without a device you ARE dependant on it. Thats not opinion, thats fact. You could try and debate if thats bad, but you can't debate that there is device dependance.

Its not irrational to assume it if they tell you that they will not jump without it. It then become a question of why.

"I might get knocked out" ....OK but very few jumpers are "saved" by an AAD due to being knocked out. Most are saved for just screwing up.

So if they are afraid of screwing up...Then they should train more, or get another hobby. THEN once they feel safe enough to jump without the toys then they can add them for even more saftey, not just use them as a substitute for confidence and training.

Quote

When participating in a jump with higher risk, it makes even more sense to have an AAD.

It makes even MORE sense to avoid that jump. Why put yourself into a situation that you might need a device to save your ass?

Going on more dangerous jumps than with a device than you would without it...IS device dependancy. You are allowing your personal danger level to excede what you would be comfertable with due to the device...That IS THE DEFINITION OF DEPENDANCY.

Quote

Now if they are lacking some skills they need to survive like the ability to pull both handles or maintain altitude awareness, then they're less safe. But that has nothing to do with the RSL or AAD.

Sure it does if they use those devices as a saftey blanket. And I know people who do. Its pretty clear that a person who will not jump without those devices is not comfertable with the danger level of the sport...If they must have those devices they are dependant on them. Thats not really debatable.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 7]

Quote

Yes it does, _if_ they are using it as a crutch... which many people are, based on conversations I have had.

Quote

The problem is the people that pimp these devices with a mindset of, "Don't worry, if you fuck up, your will save you." This is not a good concept to teach new skydivers. Everyone needs to save themselves, every time, without exception. If you think you _need_ your reserve to skydive, maybe you should reevaluate your packing. ;)

Quote

The fact there is a thread in the other forum about someone with 40-something jumps that thinks he can chop at 100ft with a Skyhook because some retard, who didn't know how a "slider down" or "slider off" deployment differs from a proper reserve packjob, told him so is _really_ scary and yet another indication we, as skydivers, are using the advances in gear technology to replace proper judgement and training. In that case the better concept to teach that jumper would have been, respect and adhere to your hard-deck... which should be waaaay above 100ft.

Thank God someon gets it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

What I argue with is statements you make that suggest that only idiots need these devices

Show me where I said that. You make a ton of claims that are not based in fact.

"Difference is that 100% of the people that died due to an RSL had no chance and 100% of the people that could have been saved by an RSL could have saved themselves."

If 100% of the time, people could save themselves without it, and as you repeated say, people get killed by them, only an idiot would use one.

But fuck the sniping and let's get productive. How do you suggest people train, either in effort or in $$, to do better at handling malfunctions? As you know, training for panic/stress situations is tricky to do without making the cure more dangerous than the disease. How do you truly experience a mal, without actually having one?

Are we talking hanging harness? Even simpler stand with the rig and have someone shout scenarios at you? Or advanced packing instruction/review to reduce likelihood of inducing a mal?

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

How do you suggest people train, either in effort or in $$, to do better at handling malfunctions? As you know, training for panic/stress situations is tricky to do without making the cure more dangerous than the disease. How do you truly experience a mal, without actually having one?

Good question. That is exactly why Ron and others have suggested always using an RSL until you have actually been faced with a malfunction, and handle it properly, pulling both handles yourself.

For Great Deals on Gear

[Ron 7]

Quote

"Difference is that 100% of the people that died due to an RSL had no chance and 100% of the people that could have been saved by an RSL could have saved themselves."

If 100% of the time, people could save themselves without it, and as you repeated say, people get killed by them, only an idiot would use one.

OK so you admit I never said that only an idiot would use one and that you just assumed that.

One thing you should really know about me is I tend to just say what I think.

I think people who rely on them are idiots. Not people who learn both the benefits and risks and make an informed choice.

I think anyone that adds or removes a device without knowing the good and the bad sides is an idiot.

Quote

How do you suggest people train, either in effort or in $$, to do better at handling malfunctions?

1. Have 4 malfunctions a year. That is at every repack actually pull your handles with your rigger watching. I try to do this if I can with BOTH my rigs.

2. Ride the harness. Don't be afraid to go ask an instructor to use the hanging harness. Saftey day is coming and a great opportunity to do it....But it does not have to be saftey day. I know very few instructors that would turn someone away that wanted to practice or learn.

3. PLAN ahead. Not sure if you can handle a violent mal? Then don't be in a hurry to jump a super HP canopy. One thing a ton of folks forget is they think they can fly a "Hyperstyle 50", but the canopy is gonna mal much more violent and they have to be ready for ALL aspects of jumping a canopy.

How many have read where I told people to do a hop n pop on their current main and keep the brakes stowed. At about 4 grand release only one (With your hand in the other toggle ready to release it). Let it spin for about 500-1000 feet and count how many revolutions it took to lose that altitude....Know that a real deal mal will be worse, but if it took 10 revolutions to lose 1,000 feet then know that if you pull at 2500 you have about 7 revolutions before you are past your hard deck...So make the choice that if it spins more than 5 you get rid of it.

And how many have actually done it?

There are three things and only one of them carries ANY risk. And that risk is tiny.

The #1 thing you could do and I wish we could make it happen?....Real live cutaways with 3 canopies. Sunpath had a great rig that had a normal main and reserve AND a reserve that attached to the front with a CYPRES in it. A GREAT setup.

Have a guy do a hop n pop for his 100th jump and pull both handles. More dangerous yes, but not unworkable.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

There are three things and only one of them carries ANY risk. And that risk is tiny.

good stuff, very high ROI.