Ron 7 #26 March 9, 2011 Not directed at you... Just leading off your comments. QuoteAnyone is free to deploy higher as their comfort level permits This is the key point. QuoteBut he notes that the AAD firing level can only be changed safely if the minimum deployment level is increased, or else there would be a big increase in "2 out" incidents. Before AAD's were popular, 2K deployments were very common. Heck, I can remember our local DZ rule's were something along the lines of 4 way and below, breakoff was 2.5-3k. Bigger than that and it was 3.5k. When AAD's become popular, breakoff and pull altitudes went up. Before - Common to pull at 2k After - 2.5-3k Then the advent of really HP canopy's the pull altitudes went up again... On their own. Heck, just look at this thread and how many people now still pull regularly at 2k. I don't, but will. Making a rule is unnecessary since it is happening anyway. I respect Booth. Let him make the AAD that deploys higher, state his reasons and the market will either accept, or not. But making a rule to try and "build a better mousetrap" is not the way it should work. And when do we stop raising the min pull altitudes? If 3k is safer, then surely 4k is safer still... right? And 5k is SO much safer then. When do we stop? The fact is that the USPA's minimum pull altitudes are exactly that MINIMUM'S. They are not *required*, they are not *suggested*, they are minimums. If you are on a group that wants to break lower than you are comfortable with... don't jump with that group. If you have a canopy that takes a long time to open, either get a new canopy or avoid jumps where you might have to pull low."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
mirage62 0 #27 March 9, 2011 A while back I had a young skydiver who had a slot on a record attempt I was doing. She wasn't comfortable with her assigned deployment altitude. She dropped off the event because of it. A year later she didn't apply for a slot (I believe) because the deployment altitude was the same for the area she most likely would be in. THAT's class, and strength. I mean that. She would like to do the record but she would not compromise her personal deployment altitude. This is the way to handle this problem.Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #28 March 9, 2011 Not aimed at you...just a thought. IF the current AAD settings are a safely problem, wouldn't just setting them a bit higher, say 1000'...kinda 'automatically' raise the recommended opening altitude? ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DocPop 1 #29 March 9, 2011 Or increase the number of two-out situations."The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #30 March 9, 2011 Quote Or increase the number of two-out situations. But isn't raising the ADD fire altitudes the reason for recommending raising over-all altitudes, the catalyst for Booths comment? I do agree with you BTW, just trying to get people to look at it through the backdoor and maybe spark some further discussion . ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DocPop 1 #31 March 9, 2011 Yes, it's a chicken and egg situation!"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,384 #32 March 9, 2011 >with the canopy I jump, should I have any type of malfunction this could >easily put me at sub 1500' before I have to make a decision. Sounds like you should either open higher or buy a better canopy! >what are your thoughts on this? I don't need the extra altitude when I'm jumping my old Sabre 150. If I exit at 2000 feet I am open by 1950 feet, and am aware of any problems by 1800. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #33 March 9, 2011 QuoteI've managed to get a Diablo to open (fairly) consistenly straight and in under 500' for about 1000 jumps. It's possible. eeeeeew! some of the worst (wildest) rides I have been taken on by a canopy was a diablo before the brakes were unstowed."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtnesbitt 0 #34 March 9, 2011 QuoteOr increase the number of two-out situations. No, it shouldn't change anything. If we raise AAD fires to 1000, someone still has to pull by 2000ft. If their canopy takes 1000ft to open then they should CHOOSE to open higher. Or they could CHOOSE not to use an AAD. Other people in this sport do just that for a variety of reasons. It's not rocket surgery. If they do have a two out situation I bet they will learn from it and not do it again. If they dont, well then skydiving isnt for them."If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #35 March 9, 2011 QuoteYes, it's a chicken and egg situation! More like a cart before the horse. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DocPop 1 #36 March 9, 2011 Quote No, it shouldn't change anything. If we raise AAD fires to 1000, someone still has to pull by 2000ft. If their canopy takes 1000ft to open then they should CHOOSE to open higher. Or they could CHOOSE not to use an AAD. Other people in this sport do just that for a variety of reasons. It's not rocket surgery. If they do have a two out situation I bet they will learn from it and not do it again. If they dont, well then skydiving isnt for them. Should. Could. But will they? Nobody wants two canopies out.If x people per year get caught out with current AAD activation altitudes and end up with two canopies out, then raising the activation altitude of AADs will lead to y people getting caught out. y > x"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtnesbitt 0 #37 March 9, 2011 QuoteQuote No, it shouldn't change anything. If we raise AAD fires to 1000, someone still has to pull by 2000ft. If their canopy takes 1000ft to open then they should CHOOSE to open higher. Or they could CHOOSE not to use an AAD. Other people in this sport do just that for a variety of reasons. It's not rocket surgery. If they do have a two out situation I bet they will learn from it and not do it again. If they dont, well then skydiving isnt for them. Should. Could. But will they? If they cant make the decision on their own without someone telling them to then SKYDIVING IS NOT FOR THEM. Seriously. WTF ever happened to being responsible for our own actions? If someone needs an organization to tell them what decisions to make regarding their own safety because common sense just isnt enough then please get the hell out of my sport. If I recall there is a definite line you cannot cross in bowling. Maybe that would suit some people better that need more structure."If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DocPop 1 #38 March 9, 2011 Fine then. If people go in - fuck 'em - they deserved it. We are talking about giving people a little more time when things don't do exactly as planned. "The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #39 March 9, 2011 QuoteWe are talking about giving people a little more time when things don't do exactly as planned. you are not "giving" them any more time, people choose their own opening altitudes - not big brother they have the option to take as much altitude as they need (provided they don't open so high as to be a danger to others) people can choose for themselves someone can always recommend more and more conservative rules until we just don't jump at all - it's a tired old theme. this topic is a real non-starter. 2K minimum is a fine rule for D-license and up. We have higher minimum altitudes for less experienced people. You can't legislate judgment on those without it - you can only insult those that already have good judgment ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtnesbitt 0 #40 March 9, 2011 Quote Fine then. If people go in - fuck 'em - they deserved it. We are talking about giving people a little more time when things don't do exactly as planned. I dont even know why i am still arguing with you. You obviously live in a world where you do the right thing because you HAVE TO. I live in a world where i do the right thing BECAUSE IT'S SMART."If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deyan 31 #41 March 9, 2011 QuoteA noob here, but I did watch the video where Bill Booth explained why he was making that suggestion (so I'm just contributing what I think are facts): He was stating this change as a way to cut down on the number of incidents (not many but there are some) where an AAD fires, but the jumper still did not get a survivable canopy out in time. What I find strange is that Mr. Booth is trying to rise the opening altitude for the AAD's but he's doing nothing to place the cutter on TOP of the reserve PC on his rigs. Blue skies"My belief is that once the doctor whacks you on the butt, all guarantees are off" Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManagingPrime 0 #42 March 9, 2011 Quote You can't legislate judgment on those without it - you can only insult those that already have good judgment +1 And there we have it in a nutshell. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brettski74 0 #43 March 9, 2011 Quote Fine then. If people go in - fuck 'em - they deserved it. That's not it at all. We're all grown-ups here. We all have a brain and are able to make decisions. To be frank, you already have the ability to set your AAD to open at 1200' if you feel safer about it by setting an offset. Would I do it - no - mostly because of laziness and the potential for incorrect manual settings, but at least in part because I don't believe the effect on safety would justify it. It is every jumper's responsibility to understand how their gear works and use it accordingly. If you have an AAD on your back that will fire at 1200' AGL and a canopy that takes 800' or more to open, then you need to plan and execute your jump with appropriate consideration given to those facts. If you toss your pilot chute out too low and end up with a two-out as a result, then you've failed in your obligation to use your equipment responsibly and this is why many dropzones will consider AAD fires a serious infraction worthy of grounding. Does this mean that a two-out will never happen? No. Skydivers are still human. They can still fuck up and equipment can still fail. This remains true regardless of how high you plan pull altitudes or program an AAD to fire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #44 March 9, 2011 QuoteQuoteA noob here, but I did watch the video where Bill Booth explained why he was making that suggestion (so I'm just contributing what I think are facts): He was stating this change as a way to cut down on the number of incidents (not many but there are some) where an AAD fires, but the jumper still did not get a survivable canopy out in time. What I find strange is that Mr. Booth is trying to rise the opening altitude for the AAD's but he's doing nothing to place the cutter on TOP of the reserve PC on his rigs. Blue skies What will that do? If it traps the closing loop instead of cuts it, your fucked! No pulling a pin to fix it! MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DocPop 1 #45 March 9, 2011 Quote 2K minimum is a fine rule for D-license and up. You can't legislate judgment on those without it - you can only insult those that already have good judgment These two statements are contradictory. You are exhibiting the common human trait of resistance to change."The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls." ~ CanuckInUSA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #46 March 9, 2011 QuoteQuote 2K minimum is a fine rule for D-license and up. You can't legislate judgment on those without it - you can only insult those that already have good judgment These two statements are contradictory. You are exhibiting the common human trait of resistance to change. nice - you pulled it out of context and just ignored the rest fine - experienced jumpers shouldn't have any minimum requirement, it's silly to have one that's not enforceable. you can just require AADs on mains and close that final step for the new and improved nanny level BSRs ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jtnesbitt 0 #47 March 9, 2011 You want to change something that doesnt need to be changed. If it's not broken don't fix it."If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deyan 31 #48 March 9, 2011 Quote What will that do? If it traps the closing loop instead of cuts it, your fucked! No pulling a pin to fix it! Matt Since the modern AAD was introduced 20 years ago, we have thousands of activations where the loop was fully cut and only one time where It might jammed the loop. Beside that, jamming the reserve PC and jamming the freebag is the same thing when talking about 1 second difference between life or dead. But those extra 3/4 of an inch closing loop trying to run trough all grommets is making a big difference. Blue skies"My belief is that once the doctor whacks you on the butt, all guarantees are off" Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #49 March 9, 2011 QuoteYou want to change something that doesnt need to be changed. If it's not broken don't fix it. I think he sincerely believes it is broken and he means well. the problem is, that won't fix it ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #50 March 9, 2011 Quote Fine then. If people go in - fuck 'em - they deserved it. We are talking about giving people a little more time when things don't do exactly as planned. You can choose to give yourself more time, if you feel you need it. This is personal responsibility. You cannot choose to tell others how high they should pull. This is personal freedom of choice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
