AAD's & Personal Acceptable Risk Thresholds

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Again, out of those million things that you wouldn't try, are they any that you would change your mind about and try because youhave an AAD?

Don't think so. I'm not a person that would never jump without an AAD. When my cypres goes in for its 4-year in a few months, I don't plan to stop jumping and I really doubt I'll think about what jumps I'll go on based on my lack of cypres. But that's just me. I'm also hopefully going to get my coach rating very soon (just need to pass the evals). Assuming I get the rating, I still won't be doing any coach jumps while my AAD is out. Why? Not allowed at my DZ. My DZ made the decision to use AADs on intructional/coach jumps very easy by taking it out of the instructors'/coaches' hands. But would I be wrong choosing on my own to sit out coach jumps while my AAD was out? I don't think so...

Quote

What would it take for someone to be AAD- dependant in your opinion?

Someone that PLANS to cut away and wait for the cypres to fire during a mal. Someone that truly plans to use their AAD. Someone that PLANS to keep tugging on their main deployment handle until the cypres fires the reserve.

I wonder who is having all these dozens of cypres fires people ellude to. Were they all "AAD dependent" beforehand? How about the low/no pulls that would have been cypres fires? Aside from students, were they doing especially dangerous jumps that they would have considered beyond their risk limits?

Dave

[Ron 7]

Quote

I guess we should all quit jumping off things then...

I only have two BASE jumps...But the detail that went into them made them safer than most skydives

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[nicknitro71 0]

Quote

I only have two BASE jumps...But the detail that went into them made them safer than most skydives

Too true. It's funny to see semi-careless skydivers become anal about skydiving gear safety when they pick up BASE...

Memento Audere Semper

903

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Don't think so.

But what about the person that does? Isn't saying that coach freefly jumps aren't worth the risk saying it is one of the million things you wouldn't do? Isn't that saying coach freefly jumps are beyond their risk/benefit ratio limit?

Quote

What would it take for someone to be AAD- dependant in your opinion?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Someone that PLANS to cut away and wait for the cypres to fire during a mal. Someone that truly plans to use their AAD. Someone that PLANS to keep tugging on their main deployment handle until the cypres fires the reserve.

Then this is where we disagree.

I believe someone is also AAD dependant when they depend on it to mitigate risk so that it is below their risk/benifit limit. That is depending on something. Because if they didn't depend on it, then the jump is above their risk/benefit ratio. and they wouldn't do the jump. That is depending on the AAD to reduce risk. I don't think anyone should depend on an AAD to either fire or reduce risk. If you are counting on something to reduce risk because it is otherwise above your risk/benefit limit, then it isn't a back up device anymore.

You are saying it is OK to drive a car above your risk/benefit ratio if you have airbags. I don't think you should drive a car above your risk/benefit ratio because you have airbags. Depending on your airbags to work because you ram a building is definately dpending on your airbags. Depending on your airbags to lower the risk to below your risk/benefit raio is ALSO depending on them. Either way, youa re depending on them. A back up device should not allow you to exceed your risk/benefit ratio, nothing should. Isn't that the point of a limit?

If your hard deck for cutting away, i.e the lowest altitude you try to fix a main before cutting away, is 1,800 feet. Does the fact that you have a Skyhook that may get your reserve out faster change that hard deack? If you allow it to, then your are not any safer because you have a Skyhook. If you don't change your hard deck, then you are safer with a Skyhook. I think you shoud use safety devices to be safer, not to exceed your risk/benefit ratio.

I guess we'll have to disagree. But I think my concept results in a jumper that is less likely to ever need an AAD.

Derek

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I guess we'll have to disagree. But I think my concept results in a jumper that is less likely to ever need an AAD.

Your "concept" is that some people should not participate on some skydives. That is absolutely 100% a means to lower the number of deaths or cypres fires. My point is that if you have two skydivers of exactly equal experience and skill, but one is willing to coach new freeflyers without a cypres and the other will only coach new freeflyers with a cypres, they are taking equal risks and have an equal likelyhood of having a cypes fire, if both are cypres equipped. The one willing to coach without a cypres is simply willing to take a higher risk (higher risk/benefit ratio if you want to call it that). I don't believe that makes him/her better suited to coaching new freeflyers. That skydiver is simply willing to accept a higher probability of dying on one of those jumps.

Dave

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

My point is that if you have two skydivers of exactly equal experience and skill, but one is willing to coach new freeflyers without a cypres and the other will only coach new freeflyers with a cypres, they are taking equal risks and have an equal likelyhood of having a cypes fire, if both are cypres equipped. The one willing to coach without a cypres is simply willing to take a higher risk (higher risk/benefit ratio if you want to call it that). I don't believe that makes him/her better suited to coaching new freeflyers. That skydiver is simply willing to accept a higher probability of dying on one of those jumps.

I agree and am not disputing that.

I am saying don't exceed your risk/benefit limit because you have an AAD, you are saying to go ahead and exceed it because you have an AAD.

I don't see a difference with what you are saying and saying it is OK to drive faster than you think you should because you have airbags.

Derek

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I am saying don't exceed your risk/benefit limit because you have an AAD, you are saying to go ahead and exceed it because you have an AAD.

I'm not saying that. I don't know what a risk/benefit limit is! I don't know how to determine the risk or benefit of any skydive. I don't think anyone should take extra risks just because they have an AAD. In fact, you're freaking agreeing with me now! I had previously thought your attitude was that if a jumper won't do a particular type of jump without an AAD but will do it with an AAD, that automatically meant that person should not be doing that type of jump. THAT is what I've been disputing, but you have corrected me.

Dave

[billvon 2,400]

>I don't think anyone should take extra risks just because they have an AAD.

Do you think that it's OK to only go on certain (riskier) dives if they have the added backup of an AAD? Because that's what you seem to be saying.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I don't know what a risk/benefit limit is!

Simple, "I won't do xyz, because it isn't worth the risk to me."

If someone says that, then I think they shouldn't do 'xyz'. If they then say, "I'll do xyz because I have an AAD." then I think they are AAD-dependant and are not treating the AAD as a back up.

That is all I have been saying all along.

Derek

[pilotdave 0]

I think it's ok to choose to only go on certain dives if you have an AAD. Not exactly the same thing, at least in my opinion.

The situation I'm talking about is where skill is not in question. An AFF instructor with 2000 AFF jumps who chooses to do AFF jumps only if he has a cypres. The risk of going on an AFF jump with no cypres is unnaceptable to him. The risk with a cypres is acceptable. Should he not be doing AFF because he decided an AAD is "necessary?"

Dave

[billvon 2,400]

>I think it's ok to choose to only go on certain dives if you have an AAD.

That's fine, but that's pretty much saying that you think it's OK to take additional risks by going on certain dives if you have an AAD.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I wonder who is having all these dozens of cypres fires people ellude to. Were they all "AAD dependent" beforehand? How about the low/no pulls that would have been cypres fires? Aside from students, were they doing especially dangerous jumps that they would have considered beyond their risk limits?

Based on Airtec's records, they were not jumping over their heads. These dependent folks might be smacking into each other, but they're not doing AAD fires.

[pilotdave 0]

Start with a given jumper on a given jump. Any example you want. In most cases, that jumper is safer using an AAD than not using one. Do you disagree?

On some jumps, the jumper is more likely to lose altitude awareness or be involved in a freefall collision due to the nature of the jump, not the jumper's skill. Do you disagree?

Why is it wrong to accept the higher risk of certain jumps and add a backup just in case? What is wrong with only accepting that risk (of lost altitude awareness or a collision) when a backup is available?

Hook's analogy: would you run a red light just because you have airbags in your car?

My analogy: if I was going to run a red light, I sure as hell would want airbags in my car! Having airbags doesn't have to be the reason I run a red light. If it is, well then I'm a moron. That'd be like landing in water because I have flotation equipment or cutting away a good main because I have a reserve.

Dave

[divnswoop 0]

Quote

>I think it's ok to choose to only go on certain dives if you have an AAD.

Quote

That's fine, but that's pretty much saying that you think it's OK to take additional risks by going on certain dives if you have an AAD.

NO IT'S NOT!!!! It's a personal choice. This is not black and white.... I choose to do AFF and tandems with a cypres and won't without one. One is because it's the law, the other is because i just think it's an INTELLIGENT thing to do. I am not accepting risks that are over my head or ability JUST because I won't do aff without it. I don't rely on my cypres to "save" me. Can't you guys see the difference?????? How many threads are we going to go through?

Edit to add: I have met people who would do something that is beyond their ability/risk level just because they had a cypres on....I think this is a DUMB idea... But, not ALL people who choose to do certain jumps only if they have an AAD are getting themselves over their acceptable risk level. You can't blanket the entire skydiving world as "device dependent" because they choose to only do AFF, tandems, freefly, 400 ways, or anything else only if they have a cypres. These threads come off like," If you jump with an AAD your doing stuff outside your abilities." Do we really want that impression on our younger jumpers? ** If you only choose to go on a jump because you have a cypres and think it'll save you in a bad situation, THEN you need to look at your priorities...

[billvon 2,400]

> Start with a given jumper on a given jump. Any example you want. In
> most cases, that jumper is safer using an AAD than not using one.

Agreed there.

>On some jumps, the jumper is more likely to lose altitude awareness or
> be involved in a freefall collision due to the nature of the jump, not the
> jumper's skill. Do you disagree?

Disagree. Losing altitude awareness is not something you can blame on anything else, like the nature of the jump or the 'pressure' or whatever. There is surely more pressure on some jumps, like competitive 4-way. But if you were to lose altitude awareness on such a jump, it would be because you were not sufficiently altitude aware, not because the jump was inherently making you forget. The best solution there is better training so you can be more aware in freefall.

>Why is it wrong to accept the higher risk of certain jumps and add a
>backup just in case? What is wrong with only accepting that risk (of lost
>altitude awareness or a collision) when a backup is available?

I'm not telling you are wrong to do it. Like other people have said, it's not black and white. What I am saying is if you accept additional risk because you have backup, you may be relying on that backup to do more than it can do. If you do not accept additional risk because of your backup, and you use it anyway, then you will be a safer jumper overall. Note that that doesn't have to be your goal.

>My analogy: if I was going to run a red light, I sure as hell would want
> airbags in my car!

Again, that's fine. Some of us (and this may be just a semantic difference) think it would better to make the decision not to run the red light to begin with. Very few things we do in this sport are mandatory. Better to choose to avoid "running that red light" by staying on the ground for that jump.

[wmw999 2,123]

Maybe we need to combine the "understood risks" thread with the AAD threads.

Because, well, if you (this would be the rhetorical "you") use an AAD to manage risks that you fully understand, and choose not to jump without one, fine.

But it's easy to get lulled into a sense of complacency. Just like the experienced jumper who's "good in turbulence" or the instructor who's "good with students" and forgets that sometimes students aren't good with instructors.

Fundamentals count. Strength, quickness, intelligence -- they can get you the short way around a lot of problems. But one shouldn't use objects to do that, and one needs to really really understand what's being made easier by the superior skills/intelligence/agility/whatever.

Because otherwise the time that the "advantage" doesn't work, the lack of fundamental knowledge can bite you big-time.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

I am rapidly nearing the point of simply repeating myself over and over again.

Nearing Derek?

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Again, that's fine. Some of us (and this may be just a semantic difference) think it would better to make the decision not to run the red light to begin with.

Ok, bad example because the skydiving equivalent of running a red is something more like tracking through another RW group. I'm thinking of a jump with a higher risk level than say a solo. A type of jump where the risk of a collision is higher or where others with equal or more experience than you have been known to lose altitude awareness. Of course a jump doesn't CAUSE a loss of altitude awareness... but it's known to happen to experienced jumpers on certain types of jumps more than others.

Do you think an AFF instructor that won't ordinarily do AFF without an AAD should try it once to prove he can do it and be sure he isn't device dependent?

Dave

[divnswoop 0]

Quote

Do you think an AFF instructor that won't ordinarily do AFF without an AAD should try it once to prove he can do it and be sure he isn't device dependent?

I have done aff without a cypres when I first got my rating. After maturing as a aff jm and being in dives where things got very hairy, I saw no reason not to have the cypres as a backup. What has happened to the aff I's who have died doing aff???? You never really know what your going to get from that student. I've had some that barely got by showing everything they needed to show on the ground to go on the dive....then they went up and did great. I've also had one that could repeat everything I taught them word for word and showed me the proper technique exactly as I showed them....then went up and did horrible. After 9 years of doing aff and seeing all the stuff I've seen, I see no reason not to have one. Nor do I see a reason to do an aff without a cypres just to prove I'm not "device dependent". I look at it as a intelligent backup to have a cypres.

So are all TI's device dependent too? Or do you just not turn yours on when you do tandems because you don't want to be device dependent? Do you jump with a cypres on just because it's a FAR?? Or do you not care about the liability the DZ will have when you go in with a cypres turned off? (all hypothetical questions..but would like to know opinions of the I's who think I'm device dependent on AFF. Ron, bilvon, derek?)

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

So are all TI's device dependent too? Or do you just not turn yours on when you do tandems because you don't want to be device dependent? Do you jump with a cypres on just because it's a FAR?? Or do you not care about the liability the DZ will have when you go in with a cypres turned off?

Is a student device dependent too???

If its a have to have you can not depend on that....
just in that sense that you are not allowed to go without it.

[divnswoop 0]

Quote

Is a student device dependent too???

Apparently!! Good observation!! Since the students can't jump with out one, (according to bsr's) then they are device dependent too. I get it now... THAT'S the whole problem with modern/progressive instructing. We teach our students from day one to be device dependent. So we have people who will jump on dives outside of their acceptable risk level/ ablilities because they have a cypres (which I think is a poor ideal) and people who are device dependent from the beginning because I make them wear a cypres during their student progression. Maybe I need to change the way I teach about the cypres. Maybe I shouldn't tell them that it's a strictly backup device that adds a layer of safety incase they fail. I think the students shouldn't jump at all because....

Quote

They shouldn't go on any jump if they won't do it without an aad on

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

> Start with a given jumper on a given jump. Any example you want. In
> most cases, that jumper is safer using an AAD than not using one.

Agreed there.

>On some jumps, the jumper is more likely to lose altitude awareness or
> be involved in a freefall collision due to the nature of the jump, not the
> jumper's skill. Do you disagree?

Disagree. Losing altitude awareness is not something you can blame on anything else, like the nature of the jump or the 'pressure' or whatever. There is surely more pressure on some jumps, like competitive 4-way. But if you were to lose altitude awareness on such a jump, it would be because you were not sufficiently altitude aware, not because the jump was inherently making you forget. The best solution there is better training so you can be more aware in freefall.

>Why is it wrong to accept the higher risk of certain jumps and add a
>backup just in case? What is wrong with only accepting that risk (of lost
>altitude awareness or a collision) when a backup is available?

I'm not telling you are wrong to do it. Like other people have said, it's not black and white. What I am saying is if you accept additional risk because you have backup, you may be relying on that backup to do more than it can do. If you do not accept additional risk because of your backup, and you use it anyway, then you will be a safer jumper overall. Note that that doesn't have to be your goal.

>My analogy: if I was going to run a red light, I sure as hell would want
> airbags in my car!

Again, that's fine. Some of us (and this may be just a semantic difference) think it would better to make the decision not to run the red light to begin with. Very few things we do in this sport are mandatory. Better to choose to avoid "running that red light" by staying on the ground for that jump.

There is absolutely no doubt that the risk of a collision is greater on some kinds of jump than on others, and that has no relationship whatever with the skill of the jumper. I cannot see why someone with necessary skill for the jump should be criticized for making the choice always to use an AAD on that type of jump. That is simply smart risk management.

If they are making a jump beyond their ability level, that's a whole different discussion.

I have done competitive 10-way speed - evidence that I am willing to risk collisions with the door or other team members. I am less willing to risk certain death as a consequence of a collision.

...

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

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

So we have people who will jump on dives outside of their acceptable risk level/ ablilities because they have a cypres (which I think is a poor ideal) and people who are device dependent from the beginning because I make them wear a cypres during their student progression.

AAD != Cypress

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

Quote

So we have people who will jump on dives outside of their acceptable risk level/ ablilities because they have a cypres (which I think is a poor ideal) and people who are device dependent from the beginning because I make them wear a cypres during their student progression.

AAD != Cypress

Cypress = tree

...

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

[divnswoop 0]

Quote

AAD != Cypress

NO!!

Cypres- A backup safety device used is skydiving that is worn only to fire a reserve in the event that the jumper has became unconscious/unable to do so in freefall. This device should NOT influence your decision on what type of jumps you go on, give you comfort on going on jumps above your ablility/risk level, nor should you rely on it in an emergency situation. It is stictly a backup device in case you become unconscious due to a collision/heart attack/ double dis-location of your shoulders/black out from too much red bull.

cypress---some type of tree