popsjumper 2 #126 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea! Who was that masked man? Photos can be faked. (Not likely here, but they could, especially if enough is at stake.) Photos can be taken and changes occur afterwards. Since the problem we want to deal with here is some sort of carelessness, why expect that there will be any better care for the photo responsibility than the rigging responsibility Well, there are probably some unscrupulous riggers out there who would get the pic as correct and then screw things up afterwards or make sure the pic doesn't show the screw-up. There's not a thing you could do about somebody like that other than have a 24/7 observer in place. The idea's merit is that you do the work knowing you'll be taking a pic and I'm sure you'd want to get the pic right so you'd be more careful on doing the work. If the pic shows some problem, you'd fix it and take another. The pic idea is really more for the rigger's sake than the owner. Yes, we all make mistakes. Having a second eye see it oftentimes brings it to light. Simple as that.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #127 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea! Who was that masked man? Photos can be faked. (Not likely here, but they could, especially if enough is at stake.) Photos can be taken and changes occur afterwards. Since the problem we want to deal with here is some sort of carelessness, why expect that there will be any better care for the photo responsibility than the rigging responsibility Well, there are probably some unscrupulous riggers out there who would get the pic as correct and then screw things up afterwards or make sure the pic doesn't show the screw-up. There's not a thing you could do about somebody like that other than have a 24/7 observer in place. The idea's merit is that you do the work knowing you'll be taking a pic and I'm sure you'd want to get the pic right so you'd be more careful on doing the work. If the pic shows some problem, you'd fix it and take another. The pic idea is really more for the rigger's sake than the owner. Yes, we all make mistakes. Having a second eye see it oftentimes brings it to light. Simple as that. Agree. The question is...would it have caught an oversight similar to what occurred in this incident, I believe it would have. ~On the video taping of pack-jobs. A rigger I used in the 80's use to video every I&R, when I experienced a line over on my reserve we went to the video and it clearly showed lines being way out of place. Made that person a better rigger and me a safer jumper-( I went to another rigger) -probably impractical to tape every I&R, and talk about setting yourself up for a liability suit...but a close out pic would be cheap insurance for everyone. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #128 June 23, 2011 Its not practical on some rigs to have a single photo since you are talking the first step of the pack job is insert the closing loop into the pack tray and then into the AAD cutter. Once that's done there are dozens of steps that a rigger could make that would screw up the pack job and make it an issue. Are you only concerned about getting a photo of the loop being ran through the cutter or are you looking for a photo that shows everything was packed correctly? Those are usually at two separate steps in the process.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerpaul 1 #129 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuote Photos can be faked. (Not likely here, but they could, especially if enough is at stake.) Photos can be taken and changes occur afterwards. Since the problem we want to deal with here is some sort of carelessness, why expect that there will be any better care for the photo responsibility than the rigging responsibility Well, there are probably some unscrupulous riggers out there who would get the pic as correct and then screw things up afterwards or make sure the pic doesn't show the screw-up. There's not a thing you could do about somebody like that other than have a 24/7 observer in place. The idea's merit is that you do the work knowing you'll be taking a pic and I'm sure you'd want to get the pic right so you'd be more careful on doing the work. If the pic shows some problem, you'd fix it and take another. The pic idea is really more for the rigger's sake than the owner. Yes, we all make mistakes. Having a second eye see it oftentimes brings it to light. Simple as that. A mistake after the photo is not about being unscrupulous. It can be a simple mistake. It depends on where the cutter is, and what happens after you have put the loop through the cutter. And you seem to agree that the only true insurance would be another set of eyes. A photo is not, in fact, eyes. If we really want to solve the problem, solve it with something that works. This is just another "makes me feel better" so called "fix". We are all supposed to be careful already. Mostly that is enough. But mistakes still happen. I already do the work knowing that a life depends on it. You think a photo will motivate me better than that? Bunk! If you think it will better motivate your rigger, I suggest you look for another rigger. (Now, Mike G. is likely your rigger. You think he needs a photo to motivate him?) Mistakes will still happen with the photos in place. The only real difference is that it will be even more inconvenient to be a rigger. There are already riggers who lie about their work. They'll lie about the photo too. The good ones don't need a photo, and the bad ones will fake it. Same old same old. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerpaul 1 #130 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea! Who was that masked man? Photos can be faked. (Not likely here, but they could, especially if enough is at stake.) Photos can be taken and changes occur afterwards. Since the problem we want to deal with here is some sort of carelessness, why expect that there will be any better care for the photo responsibility than the rigging responsibility Well, there are probably some unscrupulous riggers out there who would get the pic as correct and then screw things up afterwards or make sure the pic doesn't show the screw-up. There's not a thing you could do about somebody like that other than have a 24/7 observer in place. The idea's merit is that you do the work knowing you'll be taking a pic and I'm sure you'd want to get the pic right so you'd be more careful on doing the work. If the pic shows some problem, you'd fix it and take another. The pic idea is really more for the rigger's sake than the owner. Yes, we all make mistakes. Having a second eye see it oftentimes brings it to light. Simple as that. Agree. The question is...would it have caught an oversight similar to what occurred in this incident, I believe it would have. ~On the video taping of pack-jobs. A rigger I used in the 80's use to video every I&R, when I experienced a line over on my reserve we went to the video and it clearly showed lines being way out of place. Made that person a better rigger and me a safer jumper-( I went to another rigger) -probably impractical to tape every I&R, and talk about setting yourself up for a liability suit...but a close out pic would be cheap insurance for everyone. And yet, that full video DID NOT prevent him from making the mistake. It has been suggested that the photo will help motivate the rigger to do better. Your example clearly illustrates that it will not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaTTT 1 #131 June 23, 2011 Your Post #130: +1 Just what I was thinking."Even in a world where perfection is unattainable, there's still a difference between excellence and mediocrity." Gary73 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #132 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote....The solution here could be a simple as requiring a closeout photo. Now THERE'S a good idea! Who was that masked man? Photos can be faked. (Not likely here, but they could, especially if enough is at stake.) Photos can be taken and changes occur afterwards. Since the problem we want to deal with here is some sort of carelessness, why expect that there will be any better care for the photo responsibility than the rigging responsibility Well, there are probably some unscrupulous riggers out there who would get the pic as correct and then screw things up afterwards or make sure the pic doesn't show the screw-up. There's not a thing you could do about somebody like that other than have a 24/7 observer in place. The idea's merit is that you do the work knowing you'll be taking a pic and I'm sure you'd want to get the pic right so you'd be more careful on doing the work. If the pic shows some problem, you'd fix it and take another. The pic idea is really more for the rigger's sake than the owner. Yes, we all make mistakes. Having a second eye see it oftentimes brings it to light. Simple as that. Agree. The question is...would it have caught an oversight similar to what occurred in this incident, I believe it would have. ~On the video taping of pack-jobs. A rigger I used in the 80's use to video every I&R, when I experienced a line over on my reserve we went to the video and it clearly showed lines being way out of place. Made that person a better rigger and me a safer jumper-( I went to another rigger) -probably impractical to tape every I&R, and talk about setting yourself up for a liability suit...but a close out pic would be cheap insurance for everyone. And yet, that full video DID NOT prevent him from making the mistake. It has been suggested that the photo will help motivate the rigger to do better. Your example clearly illustrates that it will not. However...a packing review WAS offered, and had I been so inclined and not such a lazy bum, I could have looked at the video PRIOR to jumping the rig and caught the error before field testing the airworthiness of it. Riggers 'bad' for packing it wrong, MY 'bad' for not utilizing available resources to check the riggers work. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sacex250 0 #133 June 23, 2011 Paul, I have an innocent question here, because I don't have a clue about this: Is there a big difference between repacking a reserve with or without an AAD? Is it in any way possible that a rigger who's distracted could just plain forget that there's an AAD that has to be set-up since some rigs have AADs and some don't? In this case, I'm still boggled by the idea that this rigger, who owns the DZ, mispacked one of his company's own student rigs. Do you have any ideas on how that could happen?It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sacex250 0 #134 June 23, 2011 QuoteHowever...a packing review WAS offered, and had I been so inclined and not such a lazy bum, I could have looked at the video PRIOR to jumping the rig and caught the error before field testing the airworthiness of it. How many jumpers are actually qualified to recheck work done by a rigger by looking at a video tape?It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #135 June 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteHowever...a packing review WAS offered, and had I been so inclined and not such a lazy bum, I could have looked at the video PRIOR to jumping the rig and caught the error before field testing the airworthiness of it. How many jumpers are actually qualified to recheck work done by a rigger by looking at a video tape? All of them are qualified to recheck and ask questions...whether the points they question are valid is another topic. In my case, had I taken the 20-30 minutes to sit down and watch the video I would have asked about something that didn't 'look quite right', the rigger probably would have reviewed my concern to offer an explanation, thus catching the error. Packing parachutes isn't black magic that skydivers should fear, it's basic and something they should be concerned enough about to educate themselves properly. I've watched & helped riggers pack my reserve dozens of times, it's how we learn. A few months ago I took a jumper with 200 skydives up to the loft to show him hands on what a free-bag is and how it works. . .he had no idea what was on his back or how it is designed to operate! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #136 June 23, 2011 >How many jumpers are actually qualified to recheck work done by a rigger by looking at a video tape? A surprising number, in my experience. Repacking reserves actually isn't all that hard; you could have most competent skydivers repacking their own reserves within about 4 hours. It's primarily attention to detail that's important. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #137 June 23, 2011 QuoteIts not practical on some any rigs to have a single photo .... FIFY. Multiple things to check. Multiple pics, eh? For everyone: There's no panacea here. To reject a suggestion just because it's not perfect is not productive....for any problem, not just this one. The original offer of pics was suggested, I'm sure, for use as another tool to help get it right....not intended as a guarantee. Again, nobody's perfect. IMO, using tools to help get things right, in any endeavor, is a good thing. Pics may or may not be practical here but I would guess that depends on the individual rigger as to what he thinks will help him do a better job. We commonly use tools to make our jobs easier, faster and cheaper. Why not use tools to make our job better? Pics is only one new idea. Anybody got others?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #138 June 23, 2011 QuoteA few months ago I took a jumper with 200 skydives up to the loft to show him hands on what a free-bag is and how it works. . .he had no idea what was on his back or how it is designed to operate! Good job, Jim. I'm distressed to learn that he got to 200 jumps and had not accomplished an understanding. It tells me his training and his desire to learn were something less than what I would have hoped for. Unfortunately, all to common these days in many aspects of skydiving.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #139 June 23, 2011 Quote Repacking reserves actually isn't all that hard; Wellllllll....In my case, I didn't think about the manual labor involved before I went for the training. I know what to do and how to do it....it's just that wrestling, going two falls out of three, with rigs and spring-loaded PCs that want to slip out an pop you in the face is not my "old fart" cup of tea. My class mates were all betting on the rig regardless of the odds offered.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sacex250 0 #140 June 23, 2011 Quote>How many jumpers are actually qualified to recheck work done by a rigger by looking at a video tape? A surprising number, in my experience. Repacking reserves actually isn't all that hard; you could have most competent skydivers repacking their own reserves within about 4 hours. It's primarily attention to detail that's important. So, who rechecks a student rig that the rigger owns?It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #141 June 23, 2011 >So, who rechecks a student rig that the rigger owns? The jumpmaster, on every jump. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #142 June 23, 2011 Quote Quote >How many jumpers are actually qualified to recheck work done by a rigger by looking at a video tape? A surprising number, in my experience. Repacking reserves actually isn't all that hard; you could have most competent skydivers repacking their own reserves within about 4 hours. It's primarily attention to detail that's important. So, who rechecks a student rig that the rigger owns? There ya go sounding like a lawyer again! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sacex250 0 #143 June 23, 2011 You would have the jumpmaster looking at the repack video before each jump?It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sacex250 0 #144 June 23, 2011 QuoteThere ya go sounding like a lawyer again! If you think a lawyer would go to a message board to discuss a case, I think you may need to get out more! Besides lawyers aren't smart enough to be the first to correct the spelling error in the subject line of every post of this thread!It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #145 June 23, 2011 Quote Quote There ya go sounding like a lawyer again! If you think a lawyer would go to a message board to discuss a case, I think you may need to get out more! If you think it hasn't been done on this website before...you need to stay IN more! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riggerpaul 1 #146 June 23, 2011 QuotePaul, I have an innocent question here, because I don't have a clue about this: Is there a big difference between repacking a reserve with or without an AAD? Is it in any way possible that a rigger who's distracted could just plain forget that there's an AAD that has to be set-up since some rigs have AADs and some don't? In this case, I'm still boggled by the idea that this rigger, who owns the DZ, mispacked one of his company's own student rigs. Do you have any ideas on how that could happen? I don't know if you are innocent or not. The devil is always in the details, so I won't even try to answer you. If you want to learn about this, go find a nearby rigger who can show you what's what. Trying to write about it is a slippery enough slope that I don't want to try. Sorry. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jacketsdb23 45 #147 June 23, 2011 There is inherent risk in skydiving. Risk, and associated injuries/fatalities usually involves a mistake by one or more parties. Human beings are not perfect, nor will they ever be. In this case, the first line of defense...the skydiver pulling his own reserve handle did not happen. The secondary backup device, worked, but unfortunately a human made an error to render that device useless. AAD's do a lot more good than harm in the skydiving industry. Lawsuits like this add unnecessary costs to the manufacturer and will end up costing jumpers more to purchase them. They are already at the top end of what most jumpers are willing to spend to use them. This lawsuit is not productive for skydivers. 1 out of tens of thousands of repacks, and saves in the 100's, and some lawyers wants to name a product in a lawsuit that worked. Unbelievable, and wrong on so many levels. The industry should sue those bringing up this suit because the skydiver failed his basic responsibility in getting a parachute over his head. The distress his failed action has placed on manufacturers and the DZO surely has as much merit as the suit in question. Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen God is Good Beer is Great Swoopers are crazy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 173 #148 June 23, 2011 There is a lot of emotion in this thread. No one in the skydiving business likes lawyers or lawsuits. But, What if this same mistake killed a very highly skilled world champion skydiver instead of a student. What if that skydiver was hit on a big way and rendered unconcious? What if he or she had a couple of great young kids and a wife? What would be the conversation then? That rigger would probably be blasted to bits here. IMHO I remember seeing an article about a rigger that left a molar strap on a reserve. When it went in for a repack it was there, wrapped tightly around the reserve. I might have been in jail if it was my rigger for killing him. Choose your rigger wisely. Carry on... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #149 June 23, 2011 QuoteMultiple things to check. Multiple pics, eh? If you were going to mandate the photo thing, I would leave it up to the manufacturers to have in the packing instructions that are already specific to the rig tell you what to photograph (rough angle and field of view guidelines) and after which steps. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jacketsdb23 45 #150 June 23, 2011 The difference is subtle but important. A molar strap leaves a reserve useless. Doesn't matter what the jumper does after he deploys the reserve (or the AAD does it), its useless. A world class jumper is unlikely to go in without pulling the reserve handle himself. If he is knocked unconscious, the backup device, can potentially save him. If the rigger in question made the same mistake, same result except the skydiver was unable to pull for himself. At the end of the day we all roll the dice in some fashion and most of us accept and understand the risks. Even the risk that our reserve won't work because of a rigger mistake. In this case, the reserve was fine. The jumper was fine. All he had to do was pull. We need to get back to some sort of personal responsibility. Skydiving is not for everyone. (Not directed at you grimmie, i know you understand all this.)Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen God is Good Beer is Great Swoopers are crazy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
