0
lopullterri

Airchway Skydiving Sued

Recommended Posts

Quote

***due to not being installed and maintained per the manufacturer's instructions, it was non-functional.


The AAD was perfectly functional. The closing loop was improperly rigged.
All of this boils down to a very simple difference of premises:

What is the function of the AAD?

1. The function of the AAD is to fire when it's at a certain altitude and speed. (Yes, I know it's pressure, this is a short-cut analogy.)

2. The function of the AAD is to cut the reserve closing loop when it's at a certain altitude and speed as long as it's installed in the rig in some way where it's not readily apparent that it's installed improperly.

If you believe 1, then the AAD functioned perfectly. If you believe 2, then the AAD did not function at all.

Most skydivers (myself included) believe 1. Some apparently believe 2.

But until you convince the person in the other camp to switch premises, you are never going to convince them that you are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But until you convince the person in the other camp to switch premises, you are never going to convince them that you are right.



Absolutely true.

In the mean time, it's good to (IMO) keep trying to present the other side of the coin for the whuffos and lawyers participating in and reading this thread.

One whuffo can attempt to lay blame at the feet of the AAD manufacturer and if no one tries to add an element of reality to his rants, any number of other readers outside the community of people who understand both the risks and the joys of skydiving will assume he's correct.
Owned by Remi #?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

due to not being installed and maintained per the manufacturer's instructions, it was non-functional.



The AAD was perfectly functional. The closing loop was improperly rigged.



This isn't a question of semantics. The AAD was useless whether it fired or not, i.e. non-functional.

Airtec isn't going to count this as a SAVE just because the unit fired the cutter. Airtec has hung its hat on the claim that the "function" of a Cypres is to cut the closing loop.
It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me ask you sacex250, is it your opinion...that no matter the cost, that a aad should tell a jumper if the closing loop has been properly rigged?


Let me add to that....if the cost of such a device was that 25% of skydivers no longer purchased the aad because of added gizmos and costs, would the sport of skydiving be better off?
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Airtec isn't going to count this as a SAVE just because the unit fired the cutter. Airtec has hung its hat on the claim that the "function" of a Cypres is to cut the closing loop.



I would rather die than live my life with this line of thinking. AAD's have made this sport more idiot proof than its ever been, and now you want to hold them liable for something they were in no way responible for.

Why don't you sue the deceased skydiver for not foreseeing that thy might not be able to deal with an emergency situation? Oh yeah, their dead. Can't get money from them.
Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Give it up, Jim. The guy just doesn't get it.

Sad that in these days and times that people blindly look for anything and everything to excuse their lack of personal responsibility.

Holding an AAD manufacturer responsible for a rigging mistake is his admission that he is searching....searching for anything and everything to excuse the lack of personal responsibility.

He's locked in and has put on the blinders.
It's pointless to continue to say anything to him at all.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Give it up, Jim. The guy just doesn't get it.

Sad that in these days and times that people blindly look for anything and everything to excuse their lack of personal responsibility.

Holding an AAD manufacturer responsible for a rigging mistake is his admission that he is searching....searching for anything and everything to excuse the lack of personal responsibility.

He's locked in and has put on the blinders.
It's pointless to continue to say anything to him at all.




Yeah I know Pops...I do think it's quite entertaining how the argument changes ~ earlier it's stated: "I don't think Airtec and SSK should be the held accountable for a device that wasn't installed correctly" http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4137099#4137099 :D:D

NOW quick 180 & a proud member of the moral minority, what cross will be carried next is anyone's guess.;):ph34r:










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Let me ask you sacex250, is it your opinion...that no matter the cost, that a aad should tell a jumper if the closing loop has been properly rigged?


Let me add to that....if the cost of such a device was that 25% of skydivers no longer purchased the aad because of added gizmos and costs, would the sport of skydiving be better off?



So let's just ban AADs all together then. Jumpers take full responsibility for their actions, no one has to spend a dime on an AAD, no AAD lawsuits, and no saves.

Now, if you honestly think that the only person that an AAD protects is the jumper, you'd be a fool. All of the equipment manufacturers, dropzones, riggers, instructors, and the sport of skydiving itself has something to gain by embracing AADs. Each time that an AAD saves someone's life the sport reaps an immeasurable benefit.

If you don't think that a large chunk of the cost of an AAD goes straight to a product liability insurance fund then you'd also be wrong. Do you really think an AAD is physically worth $1500.00? Of course, not. There's a reason that an AAD costs five to ten times more than an audible altimeter and has to be installed by a certified rigger.

Either way, you end up paying, either for a safer product that is more likely to prevent a fatality or for the product liability insurance to cover the potential fatality. So, the best way to decrease the cost of an AAD is to have more people using them while decreasing the number of fatalities while using them.

Are you familiar with those Downfall Hitler rant spoofs on YouTube? I keep imaging Airtec's reaction to this accident as one of those rants since it's a German company after all.

One of Hitler's officers [an Airtec engineer] is calmly explaining that there's a student skydiver who is in the midst of a no-pull free fall as he points to the spot on the map where the skydiver will bounce.

Hitler [the CEO of Airtec] calmly reassures everyone that the Cypres will save the skydiver's life and the company will get credit for another save.

Suddenly another officer chimes in, "My Fuhrer," and becomes speechless.

Another officer finishes the statement, "My Fuhrer, the Cypres unit fired the cutter, but it didn't cut the closing loop because it wasn't routed through the cutter by the rigger. The skydiver has died."

Hitler now tells anyone who thinks that the jumper deserved to die to leave the room.

Let the rant begin...
It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Let me ask you sacex250, is it your opinion...that no matter the cost, that a aad should tell a jumper if the closing loop has been properly rigged?


Let me add to that....if the cost of such a device was that 25% of skydivers no longer purchased the aad because of added gizmos and costs, would the sport of skydiving be better off?



So let's just ban AADs all together then. Jumpers take full responsibility for their actions, no one has to spend a dime on an AAD, no AAD lawsuits, and no saves.

Now, if you honestly think that the only person that an AAD protects is the jumper, you'd be a fool. All of the equipment manufacturers, dropzones, riggers, instructors, and the sport of skydiving itself has something to gain by embracing AADs. Each time that an AAD saves someone's life the sport reaps an immeasurable benefit.

If you don't think that a large chunk of the cost of an AAD goes straight to a product liability insurance fund then you'd also be wrong. Do you really think an AAD is physically worth $1500.00? Of course, not. There's a reason that an AAD costs five to ten times more than an audible altimeter and has to be installed by a certified rigger.

Either way, you end up paying, either for a safer product that is more likely to prevent a fatality or for the product liability insurance to cover the potential fatality. So, the best way to decrease the cost of an AAD is to have more people using them while decreasing the number of fatalities while using them.

Are you familiar with those Downfall Hitler rant spoofs on YouTube? I keep imaging Airtec's reaction to this accident as one of those rants since it's a German company after all.

One of Hitler's officers [an Airtec engineer] is calmly explaining that there's a student skydiver who is in the midst of a no-pull free fall as he points to the spot on the map where the skydiver will bounce.

Hitler [the CEO of Airtec] calmly reassures everyone that the Cypres will save the skydiver's life and the company will get credit for another save.

Suddenly another officer chimes in, "My Fuhrer," and becomes speechless.

Another officer finishes the statement, "My Fuhrer, the Cypres unit fired the cutter, but it didn't cut the closing loop because it wasn't routed through the cutter by the rigger. The skydiver has died."

Hitler now tells anyone who thinks that the jumper deserved to die to leave the room.

Let the rant begin...









:Dhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law :D


Thanks for playing...:)










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Godwin's law itself can be abused, as a distraction, diversion or even censorship, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.



Like I was comparing Airtec to the Nazi's? Please, you fail.

I have nothing but respect for Airtec, and as someone else pointed out, at the beginning of this thread I stated that I hoped that SSK and Airtec wouldn't be found liable. If you think I'm trying to villify Airtec you're dead wrong. I'm simply discussing a likely outcome of the case, if you think attacking me personally will change that, well, I don't know how anyone could possibly think that could happen.
It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Godwin's law itself can be abused, as a distraction, diversion or even censorship, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.



Like I was comparing Airtec to the Nazi's? Please, you fail.

I have nothing for respect for Airtec, and as someone else pointed out, at the beginning of this thread I stated that I hoped that SSK and Airtec weren't found liable. If you think I'm trying to villify Airtec you're dead wrong. I'm simply discussing a likely outcome of the case, if you think attacking me personally will change that, well, I don't how anyone could possibly think that could happen.



Okey Dokey :D




"One of Hitler's officers [an Airtec engineer] is calmly explaining that there's a student skydiver who is in the midst of a no-pull free fall as he points to the spot on the map where the skydiver will bounce.

Hitler [the CEO of Airtec] calmly reassures everyone that the Cypres will save the skydiver's life and the company will get credit for another save. "











~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Godwin's law itself can be abused, as a distraction, diversion or even censorship, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.



Like I was comparing Airtec to the Nazi's? Please, you fail.

I have nothing for respect for Airtec, and as someone else pointed out, at the beginning of this thread I stated that I hoped that SSK and Airtec weren't found liable. If you think I'm trying to villify Airtec you're dead wrong. I'm simply discussing a likely outcome of the case, if you think attacking me personally will change that, well, I don't how anyone could possibly think that could happen.



Okey Dokey :D




"One of Hitler's officers [an Airtec engineer] is calmly explaining that there's a student skydiver who is in the midst of a no-pull free fall as he points to the spot on the map where the skydiver will bounce.

Hitler [the CEO of Airtec] calmly reassures everyone that the Cypres will save the skydiver's life and the company will get credit for another save. "


So, I guess you've never seen one of the Downfall parodies then? I was clearly making Airtec look like the good guy in this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsAu9NG-V_4
It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Godwin's law itself can be abused, as a distraction, diversion or even censorship, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.



Like I was comparing Airtec to the Nazi's? Please, you fail.

I have nothing for respect for Airtec, and as someone else pointed out, at the beginning of this thread I stated that I hoped that SSK and Airtec weren't found liable. If you think I'm trying to villify Airtec you're dead wrong. I'm simply discussing a likely outcome of the case, if you think attacking me personally will change that, well, I don't how anyone could possibly think that could happen.



Okey Dokey :D




"One of Hitler's officers [an Airtec engineer] is calmly explaining that there's a student skydiver who is in the midst of a no-pull free fall as he points to the spot on the map where the skydiver will bounce.

Hitler [the CEO of Airtec] calmly reassures everyone that the Cypres will save the skydiver's life and the company will get credit for another save. "


So, I guess you've never seen one of the Downfall parodies then? I was clearly making Airtec look like the good guy in this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsAu9NG-V_4








Whatever you say...:)

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071106081016AAhsNyH










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Get a sense of humor!




:D:D Never thought I would see the day someone told Jim to get a sense of humor! :D:D

Hey sacex250... howabout a reply to http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4140602#4140602 ?
"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey –

I have to chime in on this one, being of German origin and proud to be an American. But when you state

“Are you familiar with those Downfall Hitler rant spoofs on YouTube? I keep imaging Airtec's reaction to this accident as one of those rants since it's a German company after all.”

This is a highly prejudiced statement, which in turn belies your basically prejudiced personality. Are you now saying that everyone from Germany is a Hitler? That’s what your statement easily indicates about your personal makeup. Prejudice within a psychologist personality, shame on you.

Sorry for posting this in the morning at a decent hour, but at 4am I’m in bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hey –

I have to chime in on this one, being of German origin and proud to be an American. But when you state

“Are you familiar with those Downfall Hitler rant spoofs on YouTube? I keep imaging Airtec's reaction to this accident as one of those rants since it's a German company after all.”

This is a highly prejudiced statement, which in turn belies your basically prejudiced personality. Are you now saying that everyone from Germany is a Hitler? That’s what your statement easily indicates about your personal makeup. Prejudice within a psychologist personality, shame on you.

Sorry for posting this in the morning at a decent hour, but at 4am I’m in bed.



Wait, wait, wait. You mean Germans don't speak German? How could I have been so ignorant? I mean I was making reference to a German speaking German who was livid that a German manufactured piece of equipment could be implicated in the death of an American skydiver when the German was sure that the device would have worked to save the life of said American. How dare I make a mockery out of German history by making Hitler look like he actually cares about human life? Oh the shame! How will I ever face the hordes of skydivers on this board who think that a dead student skydiver got what he deserved?
It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Think of it this way 'lo-pull'...

Say you're a bike mechanic & shop owner~ "Rent One Today @ Terri's Pedal Your Butt"
...someone with 12 miles of riding experience rents from you a bike with the radar operated 'backup' emergency brakes, like a new Mercedes has.

You show the renter how to stop and go with the manual brakes, he shows you he can do it.

You also tell the guy you're not sure the radar brakes will work and that they should not depend on them.



Not the same thing at all. The AAD is "required" on student gear. And a novice 'cycler' isn't as likely to make a catastrophic screw up as a 'student' skydiver. And the 'radar brakes' are not a requirement like say a 'helmet' in some states. So if I rented the bike to this person w/o a helmet, then yes...I am negligent, and would most likely be charged as such. As a matter of fact, unless the 'radar brakes' were required by law, I wouldn't even have them as an option on my rentals.
~"I am not afraid. I was born to do this"~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I guess we'll have to disagree, Jim. [:/]

But I don't use an AAD either - never have except for those 15 or so student jumps with an FXC12000.

But that's the balance point: students should be equipped with fully-functioning AADs. If the JM fails to arm it and the student goes in the JM should answer for the screw up.

Same thing for the mis-rig. IMO that rigger should hang his head in shame as he surrenders his tick to the FAA. He screwed up and somebody died. It just doesn't get any worse than that.

Students are under another's care and whether or not they pass the program, they get the added benefit of BSRs that specifically protect them.

Doesn't mean they won't bounce, but it means they have another weight on their side.

Had the closing loop been properly routed and the reserve simply didn't inflate in time to save this guys life, well that's BSBD.

The rigging error puts the rigger right in the bullseye of the shitstorm that follows a fatality. Right where he ought to be.

As a rigger I know I'm not infallable so I take as much care as the next rigger to make sure my shit is straight, my work is good, tools counted, etc. Like 99% of the riggers I know I follow the rules and regs and don't expose myself by rigging on the wild side.

God forbid I am ever connected to a fatality so I rig with the thought in mind that another's life is dependent on my work.

If it happens and I'm in the causative chain, that'll be the day I surrender my ticket. That's where the personal responsibility rests, IMO.

Just my thoughts on the matter.



+1 I do, however, have an AAD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi terri,

Quote

This DZO doesn't just need to be sued...he needs to be charged with negligent homicide.



This is what happened to Ted Mayfield. He mis-rigged a static line, the student did nothing to save himself and was killed.

I wonder how many people on this site bashed Ted Mayfield for what he did?

And so nobody misunderstands; I do not believe SSK or AirTec should be included in this lawsuit. However, I am not making that determination; the courts will.

JerryBaumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread has taken a turn for the worse.

It is sad to see the Vandalia Park District and municipal airport named in the suit.

Does anyone know if there is a state law exempting public entities from being sued over adventure sports related mishaps like we have here in California?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0