RSL's-Again

[goose491 0]

Quote

You don't feel you needed RSLs and AADs because you think you had superior training and skills. I know that one of those two guys felt exactly like you.

It should not be considered "superior training and skills" to:

a) have chopped a mal by or before your harddeck, or
b) pull a reserve handle before it's too late

The three rules are:

1) pull
2) pull at altitude
3) pull at altitude with stability

It seems to be argued that the RSL's only benefit is for those that break rule number one.

Ron and I had had it out once because he thinks that safety in this sport is hindered by AADs as people get into the sport relying on them. I would still disagree but THIS type of discussion is just how that happens. When defending the RSL, you say "Hey, if you think you have superior skills, then don't jump one."

It is important that we not downplay the "pull" skill. It should not be considered a superior skill.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[nicknitro71 0]

My point is that EVERYONE can fuck up and if you think you cannot then IMHO you are in a very dangerous territory.

I've heard a zillion of times "I know what I'm doing, I don't need no stinkin' RSL, I got 3000 jumps, 40 non-RSL cutaways and I'm still walkin, I invented skydiving, so piss off"

Then one day you pull a little lower than usual to track the shit away from a 30 way, you get line twists on a 2.4 Velo, you are on your back spinning like a mother eating 500' every 360, you go for the red and it feels like your hand is holding a 50 LB dumbell, so you use two hands and chop. Now you are at 800' and you wait to get stable to pull...splash.

When things go wrong they go wrong fast, very fast, sometimes just two seconds can make a difference between life and death.

Memento Audere Semper

903

[goose491 0]

Sure everyone can fuckup.

RSL shoud be treated exactly like AAD. Jump one if you want or don't jump one if you don't want to. But most importantly, don't critisise others decisions.

But today we have to be very careful about the attitudes we develop for tomorow. We already have people deciding the "RSL will do it faster then me anyway". I'm positive there are some that are thinking that nomatter how low they are, they would pull the cutaway and focus on stability, leaving the RSL to do the trick for them.

Just a thought.


Actually, the idea I'm developping is that perhaps Students should be required to jump them (as they are now) and that they should NOT be allowed after student status. At least by diong that, people will have a benchmark moment in time where they remember the responsibility to pull landed on them.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[nicknitro71 0]

I'm with you that additional safety gear should not lead to lack of training or different emergency procedures. However if you carefully read incidence reports for the past 15 years you'll find out that many lives could have been saved if an RSL was properly connected. Those who died I guarantee you that they did not want to fuck up, get low, cutaway low, pull the silver low and many probably felt that they had the right training to overcome any circumstance.

I once read a woman who died because the airbag broke her neck so airbags must kill people

Same with the RSL, there have been probably few incidences where an RSL might have contributed to the tragic outcome BUT I assure you that in general RSLs could have saved more lives than they have killed.

I do CRW and don't have an RSL there. My emergency procedures are not any different if I jump with or without one. For all non-CRW jumps I want one because I know I can fuck up as I have in the past and probably will in the future. Again if you think you have all the training and answers you are in a very dangerous territory.

Socrates used to say "Know to know nothing"...

PS
Only day you will fuck up. When it heppens you will need all the help possible: Training, skills, and additional safey gear.

Memento Audere Semper

903

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Seatbelts are completely different. How often is someone injured in an accident because they were wearing a seatbelt? Not very often, not enough to worry about being harmed by your seatbelt. Can it happen? Sure, but the chances are very remote. You are far better off wearing a seatbelt in any accident that not. You are not far better off with an RSL with a malfunctioning main than you are with one.

My ex-wife'as cousin and her husband were killed when they couldn't get their setabelts undone after their car overturned into a water filled ditch. Death due to drowning. Their daughter, who was not wearing a seatbelt, got away unscathed. Irrelevant, of course, because on balance seat belts save more than they kill.

You present totally misleading (as well as being fabricated) risk analysis. The relevant ratio is not how often they help vs do nothing, it's the ratio of the risk of bouncing without an RSL vs the risk of a fatal reserve mal due to an RSL. AFAIK this ratio is >>1 in normal sport skydives. So unless you can predict the future or have specific special need (such as CRW) then RSL's are beneficial.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

But if more people used RSLs, I'd bet that we'd see a LOT more RSL incidents.

My polling is running pretty close to 50/50 for experienced (over 100 jumps) folks having an rsl on their rig, though a handful tend to disconnect, so it's more like 46/54% with 130 votes.

Unless you believe this self selecting sample is radically different from the general population, I don't see the potential for RSLs becoming a common factor in fatalities.

[pilotdave 0]

Just set up another one: "Poll: Have you ever died because of an RSL?" Then you'll get some real data to work with. I bet it'll show that RSLs are REALLY safe!

Dave

[white_falcon 0]

And people think you cant make a poll say what you want it to.


LMAO, Thats a GOOD one Dave.

Scott

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I can say with 100% authority that neither an RSL nor a reserve caused me, or ever will cause me, a problem over the past five years - even though I have jumped with both.

Of course, but which has the higher probability of causing you a problem vs. helping you with a malfunctioning main?

We already agreed that in a 'normal' cutaway situation, a skydiver is better off without an RSL. The same cannot be said for a reserve.

Derek

[mattjw916 2]

If you'd have ever taken a statistics class you would realize that your poll results are meaningless beyond saying, "of the people who chose to respond, here is the result".

The people who post, click buttons on polls, etc are in no way an accurate representation of the skydiving community as a whole. Your sample size is way too small as well.

Your poll is flawed.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Let us assume for a moment that you or anyone else can come up with an example that having an RSL caused a problem, which you cannot!!! I say again WHICH YOU CANNOT!

Quote

Facts are facts; RSL's can save lives. RSL's do not cost lives.

Quote

WHaaaat? When? Where?

Wrong again Brett. Here ya go:

"Description: The Navy was at Elsinore training Seals; they had their own instructors and their own equipment. At the time of this report, no detailed analysis of the rig has yet been made. This report is based on preliminary examinations and eyewitness accounts. The student ( training under the Navy's equivalent of AFF) deployed his main normally at around 4500 feet. During the main deployment the RSL somehow deployed his reserve which then entangled in the main. Someone supposedly had seen that his main was square and apparently flyable while the reserve was completely fouled and entangled in his main lines. No one directly witnessed the incident while the student was between 4000 and 2500 feet. Somewhere during that interval the student apparently cutaway his main which then collapsed and remained entangled with his fouled reserve. It was believed that if he had not cutaway, he may have been able to land relatively safely on his main. The reserve was apparently NOT deployed by his CYPRES: the preliminary examination revealed a kink in the reserve ripcord where the RSL must have pulled against it while it was still under tension from the closing loop. As soon as the rig is released by the coroner more detailed examinations are going to happen by the DZO, the USPA, the rig manufacturer and the Navy. It is unknown at this time what pulled the RSL, it may have been improperly routed and was pulled on line stretch, or it may have been caught by a toggle. It is also unknown if this type of malfunction is particular to this type of rig or is an industry-wide concern. The Navy has stood down their training and grounded all of their equipment until more is known about the true cause of the incident"

Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL?
1/30/1997 Taupo, New Zealand MAL,DMAL? 35 2500 ?/Y
Description: After cutting away from a malfunction, it appears one riser hung up, while the side with the RSL released, casuing the reserve to deploy between the remaining riser. This riser then seperated, and the main ending up choking off the reserve. The pair decended on the partially inflated main which was caught on the wholly uninflated reserve.
Lessons:Some of the above is speculation, but it's a good reminder to perform your three ring maintenance regularly. If you don't know what I'm referring to, you should talk to your local rigger. In a nutshell, disconnect your main, flex the webbing of the three ring, clean the yellow cable with a dry cloth, (for metal housings) lightly oil the cable, reconnect the main, perform a line check, and pack it.

How about this one?

6/22/1997 Umatilla, FL MAL? 42 7500 Y?/Y
Description: At the end of a normal tandem skydiver, the student pulled the ripcord at about 5500 feet. The left main riser broke, which in turn activated the reserve static line lanyard (RSL). The RSL immediately pulled the reserve ripcord cables while the right-hand main riser was still attached. The reserve pilot chute and free-bag cleared, but the reserve canopy entangled with the spinning main. The main was then cut away, but failed to clear the reserve. The student survived the landing, the JM did not. The Master 425 main was equipped Dacron with suspension lines. The type VII risers were manufactured in May 1996 and had the new heavy duty 3-rings. The rings were properly positioned during drogue fall, and appeared normal. The type VII webbing broke about 1" above the lower end; the type IV holding the small ring broke just below the grommet. Neither of the two rings from the left riser were recovered, nor was the cutaway handle or the reserve ripcord. All equipment was less than three years old and in good condition. Instructor and student total weight was about 380 pounds.
Lessons:Perhaps a defective riser?

Heres another:

Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL?
7/12/2000 Elsinore, CA DMAL 27 Y/Y
Description: The Navy was at Elsinore training Seals; they had their own instructors and their own equipment. At the time of this report, no detailed analysis of the rig has yet been made. This report is based on preliminary examinations and eyewitness accounts. The student ( training under the Navy's equivalent of AFF) deployed his main normally at around 4500 feet. During the main deployment the RSL somehow deployed his reserve which then entangled in the main. Someone supposedly had seen that his main was square and apparently flyable while the reserve was completely fouled and entangled in his main lines. No one directly witnessed the incident while the student was between 4000 and 2500 feet. Somewhere during that interval the student apparently cutaway his main which then collapsed and remained entangled with his fouled reserve. It was believed that if he had not cutaway, he may have been able to land relatively safely on his main. The reserve was apparently NOT deployed by his CYPRES: the preliminary examination revealed a kink in the reserve ripcord where the RSL must have pulled against it while it was still under tension from the closing loop. As soon as the rig is released by the coroner more detailed examinations are going to happen by the DZO, the USPA, the rig manufacturer and the Navy. It is unknown at this time what pulled the RSL, it may have been improperly routed and was pulled on line stretch, or it may have been caught by a toggle. It is also unknown if this type of malfunction is particular to this type of rig or is an industry-wide concern. The Navy has stood down their training and grounded all of their equipment until more is known about the true cause of the incident.
Lessons:Dual canopy out malfunctions are nasty. Discuss appropriate procedures with a local instructor. Cutting away from an inflated main when the reserve fouled is not a recommended course of action.

One that can show the drawbacks of an RSL.

Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL?
9/22/2001 Picton, Australia DMAL 34 360 ?/Y
Description: After a camera jump, this jumper experienced spinning line twists on his Stilleto 135. He was unable to clear them and cutaway at perhaps 1800'. His reserve (an Airforce 120) opened (via RSL, though reserve handle was also pulled roughly simultaneously) slider-up with line twists, and he impacted in a spin still trying to kick out of the twists. The reserve was very highly loaded, at 1.7 lb/ft^2. Video review of the incident shows that the deceased may have been kicking the wrong direction to get the reserve to untwist, and was not observed to be pulling the risers apart to aid the untwisting.
Lessons:There is some reason to believe that pausing briefly after cutting away from a seriously spinning malfunction can aid in reserve deployment. However, pausing also eats up valuable altitude, which is also an increased risk. An RSL removes your choice in this matter, but does insure a rapid deployment after a low cutaway. Note that this forum doesn't post the incidents where someone cutaway low, and their RSL saves them.

Another one.

9/30/2001 Opelika, AL DMAL 48 308 Y/Y
Description: Due to a hard opening, this jumper broke one of the D lines on his canopy, a 230 Rascal. it went into a spin, so he cut it away. The rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag. He was found dead at the scene. A second report from someone involved with the investigation reports that the RSL had nothing to do with it; I await further details.
Lessons:RSL's are a mixed blessing. For novice jumpers, they provide insurance against failure to pull the reserve after a cutaway, a relatively frequent occurrence in the pre-CYPRES past. This incident may illustrate the downside of an RSL.

For having been in the sport so long and claiming to know so much, I’m amazed that someone like me knows about these incidents and you don’t. There are more, if you look for them.

BTW- How’s the anger management going?

Derek

[billvon 2,400]

>We already agreed that in a 'normal' cutaway situation, a skydiver is
>better off without an RSL. The same cannot be said for a reserve.

You are a smart and determined guy, and you are applying your considerable talents towards misunderstanding this.

Any piece of gear can cause you problems. Often, that same piece of gear can save your life. You can jump without a reserve, without an RSL, and without an AAD, and live most of the time. I know people who have done this hundreds of times. That does not mean that RSL's, AAD's and reserves are useless. Indeed, they have saved a lot more people than they have harmed.

I also know people whose reserve and whose AAD have caused them trouble. A reserve nearly killed a planeload of people at Brown when it deployed over the tail. An AAD caused Amy some problems when it fired during a low deployment. We had an RSL cause an unintentional two-out at Brown when it snagged on a riser during deployment. That does not mean that AAD's, reserves and RSL's are dangerous. Indeed, such cases are rare.

I recommend that every skydiver out there jump with an RSL until they have a cutaway or two. At that point they will be better able to make an informed decision as to whether they want to continue to use one or not.

[kelpdiver 2]

quite the contrary, Matt. A sample of 177 people is a pretty decent size. Many national polls during election only use a 1000 people.

There is a danger with self selection, but in this case it is greatly mitigated by the fact that the very active neighbor thread on RSLs (this one) has a lot of people on both sides. The Safety and Training forum may have a bias towards low timers - that's why I made it a two variable survey to separate out the less experienced jumpers. Internet forums used to have a high bias towards urban/tech people, but that's pretty much a past tense attribute. We got plenty of rednecks here!

So in short, it's a solid a polling process as dropzone.com allows. And the results aren't very surprising. I thought it would be over half, Derek thought it would be under half. Seems to be inbetween.

Your claim was that RSL incidents are rare only because so few people use them. Since camera guys and crewdogs never will, I see no reason to think the usage rate could go up more than 100%. Twice nearly nothing is still pretty small. If you want to banter about sample size - tell me the significance of the number of confirmed RSL deaths? And how many saves are you willing to credit to it?

So what do you think is the real usage rate then? And to clarify, is it per jumper or per jump?

[mattjw916 2]

You really have never taken more than a 200-level stat class have you.

If the 177 people were chosen at random, from the current USPA membership list, your poll would mean more. You can't even guarantee that people didn't vote more than once. Plenty of people have multiple usernames.

The only thing your poll says is that amongst the skydiving community, those with access to a computer, free time to read the poll, who chose to respond, here is the result.

I am willing to bet that I have been to 4 or 5 times as many dropzones as you and I can say with quite certainty that this website is not the best representation of those who choose to participate in this sport.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[Hooknswoop 19]

A jumper can be very safe without an RSL.

During a ‘normal’ malfunction and cutaway, an RSL is not a good thing to have.

Of course any piece of gear can cause you problems. An RSL makes it likely you will deploy your reserve unstable. That is bad. It is only good when there is the greater evil of otherwise impacting the ground with nothing out.

So, an RSL is good when it is the lesser of two evils and bad during the vast majority of cutaways.

The problem is the RSL will activate the reserve in either scenario. It doesn’t know if it is helping or not.

For my 14 cutaways, we agree an RSL would have been a bad idea. But if I would have had one for just in case, I would have had 14 cases where I gave the RSL the opportunity to make things worse and none to make things better.

I think we can agree for the majority of reserve rides, where the jumper cuts away and deploys the reserve just fine, the RSL would not have helped and could have made things worse. This means, for the majority of reserve rides where the jumper had an RSL, it made things worse and not better.

If you have an RSL, you are betting that it is more likely to save you than hurt you, but the odds are against you. You are more likely to have a normal cutaway and reserve deployment, not needing an RSL, than be in a situation where you need the RSL.

Out of 100 RSL-equipped malfunctions, how many did the RSL save the jumper? How many does the RSL make things worse. I believe that the RSL makes things worse more often than it saves people simply because on most reserve rides it isn’t needed. If it isn’t needed, it is making things worse.

Quote

I recommend that every skydiver out there jump with an RSL until they have a cutaway or two. At that point they will be better able to make an informed decision as to whether they want to continue to use one or not.

A cutaway or two doesn’t change the odds of the RSL helping the jumper or hurting the jumper.

If you must have an RSL, get a Skyhook.

Derek

[billvon 2,400]

>A cutaway or two doesn’t change the odds of the RSL helping the
>jumper or hurting the jumper.

No, but it allows the jumper to better understand what happens during a cutaway, and that's the time when an RSL might save his life. Once he has a cutaway or two he will have a better opinion on whether he needs it or not. And if he's not sure, it's better to leave it connected (which is why we use them for students.)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

You really have never taken more than a 200-level stat class have you.

If the 177 people were chosen at random, from the current USPA membership list, your poll would mean more. You can't even guarantee that people didn't vote more than once. Plenty of people have multiple usernames.

man, you need to check that ego in at the door. Now you suspect RSL advocates are so passionate that they'll cheat on a poll? How many times did you vote? If anything, I'd expect self selection to favor the I'm too cool to need an RSL vote.

You can make it as complicate as you want. Sure the DZ.com population isn't an exact match of the population. But how different do you really think it will be on a $29 option endorsed by the inventor of the BOC and three ring release? And avoid answering the obvious questions asked of you. Because unless the usage is under 10%, my points hold up.

I think I'm going to do pilotdave's poll suggestion - 'have you ever died from an RSL?' Then see if you argue that the sample isn't valid for that result as well.

Quote

I am willing to bet that I have been to 4 or 5 times as many dropzones as you

You've been to 30-40 dropzones? Somehow I doubt this.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

No, but it allows the jumper to better understand what happens during a cutaway, and that's the time when an RSL might save his life. Once he has a cutaway or two he will have a better opinion on whether he needs it or not. And if he's not sure, it's better to leave it connected (which is why we use them for students.)

OK, that makes sense to me.

Derek

[doorgirl 0]

I'm a newbie and just got my first rig - with a RSL. I understand that sometimes it can fail even when I'm not cutting away, but it's probably a lot more likely that I'll get hit by car car than have that particular malfunction do me in.

So my thought is that if I am cutting away well above my hard deck and everything is "going well" (no broken limbs, not passing out, etc) I will have the time to disconnect my RSL as I move my right hand down to red and left goes to silver. If I don't have time or I don't locate it on first pass, I leave it to do it's thing.

I figure this takes out *some* of the risk of RSLs, and because this was part of my thinking from my first EP and stays in my mind I *think* that I'll be able to do this in an "uneventful" cutaway. And if it is an "eventful" I'll be damn happy have an RSL there to back me up.

So, wise sages, do you think this will get me killed or does this make sense? My procedure is:

1. Oh Shit (realize I need to cut away)
2. Where am I? (think of my altitude, decision may be made for me. and this is when we also may need to just dump the reserve w/o cutting if we're too low)
3. Right to red, pulling on RSL only if a) I've had time to think if I should and b) I should
4. Left to silver
5. Peel/punch right
6. Peel/punch left
7. Look over right

Thanks in advance!

[billvon 2,400]

>So my thought is that if I am cutting away well above my hard deck
> and everything is "going well" (no broken limbs, not passing out,
> etc) I will have the time to disconnect my RSL as I move my right
> hand down to red and left goes to silver. If I don't have time or I
> don't locate it on first pass, I leave it to do it's thing.

I strongly recommend that, when you do emergency procedure drills, you keep them as simple as possible. Recognize malfunction, pull red, pull silver (with whatever details about which hands on which handles you deem wise.) The incident reports are full of people who didn't do those three things quickly enough. There is very little advantage to disconnecting an RSL in the middle of a mal; if you don't want an RSL during a malfunction you should just take it off. However, at your stage, I recommend you keep it on until you have a cutaway or two.

[mattjw916 2]

At has nothing to do with ego, it has to do with a chronically uncurrent jumper trying to pass off an unscientific poll as some sort of factual data that represents a cross-section of the populace, which it doesn't.

It ranks up there with your (and others) attempt to architect an new wingload BSR to govern those of us who jump all time, when you yourself rarely jump. At least when hooknswoop makes recommendations regarding such things, he has years of experience and thousands of jumps to back them up. You have neither, since doing one tandem 7 years or whatever ago doesn't mean you have 10 total years in sport dude. Even your profile is misrepresentative.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[doorgirl 0]

Thanks for the advice Bill.

I always assume my first will be a cutaway with no time to spare and drill that way, but if I ever find myself under a canopy that flies OK in the air but won't land I'll probably go for the release first. In that context, do you think that's ok? My AFF instructor thought that it was ok to do that in that situation as long as I knew it was much more likely a cutaway would not be "nice" and I would need to cut it away as fast as I can and not even think about the release. I'm just looking for other opinions for that situation.

And as a bit of background I'm an ex-floor trader so I'm quite good at split second decisions, although those only FELT like they were life or death.

• Quote

[billvon 2,400]

>but if I ever find myself under a canopy that flies OK in the air
>but won't land I'll probably go for the release first.

Hmm. Why? If you cut away from a canopy that can fly straight, and you have an RSL, you will get a rapid reserve deployment in the ideal body position - head high, not spinning. If you take a delay you may well find yourself unable to get stable right away. It's dead air - you've got nothing to work with, and it feels really creepy the first time you try it. It's similar to a balloon exit.

You can certainly disconnect your RSL if you want to, but I can't see an advantage to it in that situation.

[kelpdiver 2]

your post is an admission that you got nothing to say. 2005 will be a 100+ jump year, so currency is a non issue. Don't like profile...too bad. It's not germain to the discussion. 5 incidents between 1997 and 2001 will still lack the signficance you claim.

As for the WL wars, I'm sure you remember I was more on your side than against you, even though you choose to portray otherwise now. My compromise proposal was exactly that - trying to eliminate the obvious outliers without affecting people like you. Funny - they thought you had a skygod complex then. Now I do, but Derek probably doesn't because you're on his side here.

BTW, so how many DZs have you been to?

[doorgirl 0]

Guess I was just over reacting to the incomplete riser release fear.

I think that you have thought this through more than I have, which is not surprising considering how much more experienced you are.

I will delete the "detach RSL" idea from my head. Thank you.