Reasons not to buy an AAD

[BrianM 1]

Quote

unneeded and unwanted cypres fire: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLqaMGIqWe4

Velo 96, 2.7 wingloading, 450 degree turn. AAD was used outside of its design criteria. AAD firing criteria were met, AAD did what it was supposed to do. Improper equipment selection/use by jumper. Operator error.

Quote

unneeded and unwanted vigil fire: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDUPAkuWP4Y

If I remember correctly, this guy knowingly jumped with a malfunctioning AAD. Poor judgement and decision making by jumper. Operator error.

"It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

[pchapman 261]

Quote

As an instructor, do you teach your students to sacrifice altitude for stability?

No.
But it is an interesting issue. Would you rather take a head down, on your side reserve opening at 1100' or a stable reserve opening at 750'? Maybe the first option is better but I'm not sure it is absolutely clear cut.
(In the original example of the goof who waited for his AAD to fire, I was thinking of a guy who was already down really low, not one who still had say 6 seconds until AAD firing.)

And experienced jumpers often do sacrifice altitude for stability! If someone chops at 2000' and tumbles away, some might pull right away, others might get stable before the reserve pull. That could be a thread of its own.

[BrianM 1]

Quote

Quote

As an instructor, do you teach your students to sacrifice altitude for stability?

No.

Um... that was a rhetorical question, ya know...

Quote

Would you rather take a head down, on your side reserve opening at 1100' or a stable reserve opening at 750'?

Both have their risks. This is also not the same question as "pull while unstable vs let the AAD fire while stable" - there is more than just altitude vs stability at play. But I'll answer the question anyway - given that in a real world situation, there will be a lot of variables out of my control in either option, I will take the extra altitude. I'll also take the manual pull vs the AAD fire every time - since that is where this started.

Quote

And experienced jumpers often do sacrifice altitude for stability! If someone chops at 2000' and tumbles away, some might pull right away, others might get stable before the reserve pull. That could be a thread of its own.

Again, that's a different question - "manual pull now vs manual pull later" is not the same as "manual pull vs wait for AAD".

Hey, have we successfully hijacked this thread yet?

"It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg

[skypuppy 1]

Quote

there is no reason to NOT buy an AAD. More people suffer from your demise than just you - your family and friends.

Would you buy a car without seatbelts? Not in this day and age.

AADs save lives, regularly. No one deserves to die just because they made some small mistake.

________________________________________________

The increase as a percent in cost of adding seatbelts to a car is way less than the percentage increase in cost of a used rig you might buy for $2-3000. And then you have people with multiple rigs.

And then there's the fact of aads firing during swoops or on other types of jumps where they're not desired.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

My first chop was at Swoop in 1980 -- hi-speed bag-lock at @2000, cutaway the r-3's and did an unintentional backloop, levelled out, figured 'only one chance left, if it's not going to work I figure I'd rather not have too long to worry about it" and did another couple of backloops before dumping the 24 foot rip at about a grand.

The reserve doesn't turn into a pumpkin below 1000 feet.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[Will_Evo 0]

Quote

I know a person that, in "malfuncton" situation (flat spin), decided to stop fighting and just wait for the AAD. I witnessed the event. Also I heard at least about one more person that did the same. You know, stop fighting and just wait for it.
Could that maybe be categorized as relying on an AAD?

I honestly don't know, I wasn't there and I was not in that situation. I would only argue that someone in a flat-spin, who you say "gave-up" , only had a few seconds to spare anyways, so he/she probably had no other choice but to hope the cypress fired, cause I'm sure in those few seconds they had, they were trying to fix the problem.

I have heard of other instances where people waited, but again not because they wanted to, it was because they needed it. The other one I heard of pulled his/her main, nothing happened, then reserve, nothing happened, and without any other option, waited for the cypress. I wouldn't call that relying, Id call that a lucky deal.(I think there is a video of that save)

Quote

And you know this because -- read the list, there are saves listed because the person decided to wait for it, just as some people are on the list more than once.

Who's the drama queen now?

I just read the list, and nearly 99% of those are not people relying on an AAD. Just because they didn't do anything to clear the malfunction(and that is what all of those say) doesn't mean they didn't do it because they "knew" an AAD would fire. You can interpret that list however you like to bolster your argument, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, those people are still alive, regardless if they did, or didn't rely on the AAD. I would also argue that even if those people relied on their AAD, how many do you think would have ended up saving themselves without a cypress? Enough to write off AAD's altogether?

Lets not kid ourselves here, like Wendy said, AAD's are not perfect, they can be bad for a situation, no doubt, but when they are truly needed , wouldn't you rather have a 50-50 chance of living, than none at all? I mean, if I told you your reserve will only work 50% of the time, would you stop using one?

Like I told Wendy, I don't really "care" if people use them or not, that is your decision, but don't ague against a piece of safety equipment, that has been proven to save lives. Regardless if it could possibly kill you, the chances of it saving you are greater, even if by 1%, and that is enough for people to use them, and enough to keep people alive, no matter the reason for their use. If you want to see people stop relying on an AAD like you say, then in-doctrine that training into an AAF course, make it clearly known the risks and benefits and that they are only back-ups and teach them that they don't work 100% of the time, but don't argue against their use, as if its a black and white situation. Help bolster the educated use of them, not breed blind absence of them.

All of this meant in the kindest of ways, like I said I don't "care" if people use them or not, I jump with people regularly who don't, just don't agree with people arguing against their use.(it creates the image that they shouldn't be used at all by anyone)

-Evo

Zoo Crew

[skypuppy 1]

Like I told Wendy, I don't really "care" if people use them or not, that is your decision, but don't ague against a piece of safety equipment, that has been proven to save lives. Regardless if it could possibly kill you, the chances of it saving you are greater, even if by 1%, and that is enough for people to use them, and enough to keep people alive, no matter the reason for their use. If you want to see people stop relying on an AAD like you say, then in-doctrine that training into an AAF course, make it clearly known the risks and benefits and that they are only back-ups and teach them that they don't work 100% of the time, but don't argue against their use, as if its a black and white situation. Help bolster the educated use of them, not breed blind absence of them.
________________________________________________

If you don't care -- then stop telling ME what to do. And if you can argue for them, then I can damn well argue that people should be able to decide themselves, instead of having them forced down their throats.

Surprising how many people say they don't care, but then try to insist everyone have one, instead of putting one on their own rig and just shutting up.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skyjumpenfool 2]

I don't have one. It's not a personal preference, I think they're a good idea. I just decided not to pay that much for one. I'll probly buy one as soon as I can afford one??

I'd be currious to know what percentage of people who don't jump one do so because of the cost?

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[3331 108]

If your unconscious or pissing around with a total malfunction too low and your AAD fires at 750 feet and your reserve doesn't open in 300 feet as required by the FAA TSO because you bought "Gucci Gear" designed for fashion not function.

Think of the money you would have saved.

I Jumped with the guys who invented Skydiving.

[Will_Evo 0]

Quote

If you don't care -- then stop telling ME what to do. And if you can argue for them, then I can damn well argue that people should be able to decide themselves, instead of having them forced down their throats.

Surprising how many people say they don't care, but then try to insist everyone have one, instead of putting one on their own rig and just shutting up.

When did I say AAD's should be mandatory? When did I insist everyone have one? I do not agree with either of those statements.

Why are you getting angry, I never said you couldn't argue, I said

"don't argue against their use, as if its a black and white situation"

Which boils down to recognizing the negatives AND positives and presenting that information on these forums and to new jumpers who are on the fence about getting an AAD. This way it IS a choice, not the result of an instructors personal opinion.

-Evo

Zoo Crew

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Quote

If your unconscious or pissing around with a total malfunction too low and your AAD fires at 750 feet and your reserve doesn't open in 300 feet as required by the FAA TSO because you bought "Gucci Gear" designed for fashion not function.

Think of the money you would have saved.

Hey, I said cost was MY reason for not using an AAD. I did NOT say it was a good reason!

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[skypuppy 1]

Actually, you said this....

"but don't ague against a piece of safety equipment, that has been proven to save lives."

End of quote/.

Earlier you said 'no one' waits for their cypres to fire, then after you read the list, you said almost 99%. Actually I'd say 99% is being generous, that would mean only 3-4 people, and there were more than that, but I don't see the point of arguing.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[mircan 0]

Quote

I don't have one. It's not a personal preference, I think they're a good idea. I just decided not to pay that much for one. I'll probly buy one as soon as I can afford one??

I'd be currious to know what percentage of people who don't jump one do so because of the cost?

I jump for over a decade now and I did not use one for the most of the time because it was too expensive. Still, when I got "offer that I could not turn down" I got myself one.
The only difference now is that I have this extra degree of "calmness" in my head.

dudeist skydiver #42

[wrightskyguy 1]

No-one can actually see an AAD. I'd rather spend my money on a swoopy pair of manpri pants that make my ass look hot and my eyes dance.

John Wright

World's most beloved skydiver

[tkhayes 125]

Quote

And then there's the fact of aads firing during swoops or on other types of jumps where they're not desired.

And AADs fire on swoopers all the time right? You are naming a very specific group (small group) of skydivers, who are generally highly experienced and are capable of handling their own AAD decision/situation for a particular jump, not on all jumps. Not necessarily 'relying on an AAD', but able to turn it off, or even purchase the right product for their type of activity.

The Swoop does not negate the possible need for an AAD, it just demonstrates a situation where having one requires perhaps more planning for your particular jump.

And what are the 'other types of jumps' you suggest where you might not want one?

[tkhayes 125]

Quote

My first chop was at Swoop in 1980 -- hi-speed bag-lock at @2000, cutaway the r-3's and did an unintentional backloop, levelled out, figured 'only one chance left, if it's not going to work I figure I'd rather not have too long to worry about it" and did another couple of backloops before dumping the 24 foot rip at about a grand.

The reserve doesn't turn into a pumpkin below 1000 feet.

And that kind of recklessness is what gives the sport a bad name. Most rational people would think - wow, already have an 'emergency', so lets get the reserve out and then have more time to actually figure out where I am going to land, have enough time for deployment, what else might go wrong. like a long snivel.

Humming it down on your reserve adds another link to the chain of events that lead to accidents.

Just 'cause you're 'cool', (which by the way you are), does not mean that you make rational decisions when confronted with an emergency. Glad you are so level headed that opening a reserve at a grand is something you feel that you can rely on.

Plenty of dead people out there that tried the same thing......snivel, smack. If they only had 200' more or those extra few seconds.

Pete Luter just went in at Z-Hills, an RSL or Skyhook may have saved his life. He is 'cooler' than you are and highly experienced, but he got 'bit' by something. Safety equipment is there for a reason. You and anyone else are not immune to the chain of events that lead to accidents REGARDLESS of your skill or 'cool' level.

Besides the thread was about "Reasons not to buy an AAD', not forcing you to wear one. There are no reasons not to buy and use an AAD, and no one is forcing you to wear one.

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

If your unconscious or pissing around with a total malfunction too low and your AAD fires at 750 feet and your reserve doesn't open in 300 feet as required by the FAA TSO because you bought "Gucci Gear" designed for fashion not function.

Think of the money you would have saved.

Which manufacturer makes gear that is designed for fashion, not function?

[skypuppy 1]

Quote

Quote

And then there's the fact of aads firing during swoops or on other types of jumps where they're not desired.

And AADs fire on swoopers all the time right? You are naming a very specific group (small group) of skydivers, who are generally highly experienced and are capable of handling their own AAD decision/situation for a particular jump, not on all jumps. Not necessarily 'relying on an AAD', but able to turn it off, or even purchase the right product for their type of activity.

The Swoop does not negate the possible need for an AAD, it just demonstrates a situation where having one requires perhaps more planning for your particular jump.

And what are the 'other types of jumps' you suggest where you might not want one?

__________________________________________________

Do you really believe that swoopers are a small group? I'm asking you here as a dzo of a busy dropzone. And yes, I hear regularly about them firing, we've even had a few here.

I also don't believe that the so-called swoop-ready aads actually work much better than the general class, I've heard of situations where they have fired as well.

As far as 'other types of jumps', I'm mainly talking about crw. Most experienced crw jumpers I've talked to do not want to wear aads (I know there are a few that do).

Are aads mandatory at your dz?

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

have more time to actually figure out where I am going to land,

Well, it was right over the middle of Love's field, and a round reserve (24' army surpus, tri-mesh, no diaper), so I didn't have a lot of choice in the matter.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[billvon 2,396]

>Which manufacturer makes gear that is designed for fashion, not function?

Any manufacturer, potentially. When a 220lb jumper buys a PD99 because he wants to have the cool small rig, then he is putting fashion over function - and potentially designing a system that will not save him if his AAD ever fires. (That doesn't mean a PD99 is a bad reserve, just that it was misused by a foolish jumper.)

[robinheid 0]

Quote

>Which manufacturer makes gear that is designed for fashion, not function?

Any manufacturer, potentially. When a 220lb jumper buys a PD99 because he wants to have the cool small rig, then he is putting fashion over function - and potentially designing a system that will not save him if his AAD ever fires. (That doesn't mean a PD99 is a bad reserve, just that it was misused by a foolish jumper.)

Right on, Bill.

As the late great Al Frisby once said to a 200-pound-plus guy who wanted him to install an AAD on a rig with a 100sf-range reserve:

"Why the f*** are you wasting your money on a f****** AAD? If you're unconscious or incapacitated, the f****** landing's gonna f****** kill you anyway."

SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.)

"The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

>Which manufacturer makes gear that is designed for fashion, not function?

Any manufacturer, potentially. When a 220lb jumper buys a PD99 because he wants to have the cool small rig, then he is putting fashion over function - and potentially designing a system that will not save him if his AAD ever fires. (That doesn't mean a PD99 is a bad reserve, just that it was misused by a foolish jumper.)

Yes. The jumper, not the manufacturer.

[sundevil777 93]

I think that what is really important is that we do our best to ensure that newly licensed jumpers don't make their decision to exclude an AAD or RSL too quickly.

I choose to have an AAD, but not an RSL. I realize that statistically I am more likely to be saved by the RSL (and it is a lot cheaper), but it is a decision I make as a very informed, experienced jumper, with a high level of gear knowledge. Newbies should be strongly encouraged not to make an early decision to exclude an AAD or RSL. I hope we can all agree on that.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[skypuppy 1]

Pete Luter just went in at Z-Hills, an RSL or Skyhook may have saved his life. He is 'cooler' than you are and highly experienced, but he got 'bit' by something. Safety equipment is there for a reason. You and anyone else are not immune to the chain of events that lead to accidents REGARDLESS of your skill or 'cool' level.
__________________________________________________

Now I've taken the time to think. Unless I've had 4 or 5 beers, I don't think I ever claimed to be cool... While I do hope to be average, I know I'll never be a walk-on for a casual big-way in lotus land. My comment about the reserve ride was simply an example in reply to Peter's post above - 'chops at 2000' and tumbles away, some might pull right away, others might get stable before the reserve pull. That could be a thread of its own.'


I didn't realize we were talking about RSL's, I have no problem with them, and in fact have one on one of my main rigs. The other is a crw rig and doesn't have one.

The earlier seat-belt analogy you used works perfectly with RSL's -- they're added to virtually all rigs at the factory for very little cost and add immensely to safety. The same is not true of a $1300 aad, which can add 50% or more to cost of a decent used rig. They work well in certain situations, but it should be a personal choice whether to have one or not.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[MotherGoose 0]

I'd just like to clarify, that myself and I believe the others are not "anti-aad" in any way. Anti-mandatory-aad is the right term for us. And, I do own a fully functional Cypres that is installed in my one and only rig. I feel comfortable not jumping with one, I've done at least 750 without an aad. If my batteries die or my cypres expires I don't want to be on the ground or renting unfamiliar gear because of some blanket rule. Mandatory aad rules introduce as many problems as they alleviate. As for the seatbelt rule, they are also not infallible and there are still incidents to this day that involve death caused by seatbelts. Also, there is a reason why we (society) decided that seatbelts should be mandatory except on schoolbuses full of children (or transit buses in general). Because there are always "exceptions" to the rules. I like the fact that when I entered this sport I had to wear an aad, no choice. But I also liked that at some point, when I bought my own gear, I could choose whether or not I wanted to own one. There will always be exceptions and I don't want to be limited by a rule/law.

You think you understand the situation, but what you don't understand, is that the situation just changed.