Back up devices (from incidents)

[freakydiver 0]

Can't we all just agree that it is best to pay attention to the sport to avoid getting bit in the ass? There have certainly been advancements in technology that make the sport safer, but the best safety option is to practice safe skydiving, no??

-- (N.DG) "If all else fails – at least try and look under control." --

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Can't we all just agree that it is best to pay attention to the sport to avoid getting bit in the ass? There have certainly been advancements in technology that make the sport safer, but the best safety option is to practice safe skydiving, no??

Yup, I've said from the outset you should jump with an AAD as if you have no AAD. Everyone seems to agree on that, when people start saying you have no business making a jump if you wouldn't make it without specific pieces of life saving safety equipment well it gets ... contentious.

The first skydiver I encountered (I was a whuffo) was a work colleague and the sole survivor of a 4-way because he was the sole owner of an AAD. My last coach was knocked unconcious while freeflying with no AAD, scared the shit out of him, luckily his dytter woke him up in freefall (he thinks), he doesn't know for sure how or why he survived that one. These kinds of stories are not uncommon. It could happen to you on your next jump (the one you're told you shouldn't make if you aren't prepared to discard your AAD).

[wmw999 2,167]

Quote

These kinds of stories are not uncommon.

I think they are uncommon. I've been involved in skydiving for almost 30 years (even when I wasn't jumping I was reading rec.skydiving and taking Parachutist). I don't personally know anyone who was saved from something beyond their control from a Cypres.

I have one friend who was knocked out in freefall, but that was before AADs being common, so her husband pulled her.

It's uncommon. Jump as though your life depends on it, and not as though it depends on your AAD.

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)

[pilotdave 0]

Ya know there are still a lot of skydivers out there that truly believe skydivers are better off without an AAD. I had a long talk with one of them about a year ago. It's an interesting point of view... not just that AADs lead to complacency, but that AADs actually add risk. I think I might pay to see you locked in a room with one of those people to argue about it. They don't post here much...wonder why.
Dave

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

when people start saying you have no business making a jump if you wouldn't make it without specific pieces of life saving safety equipment well it gets ... contentious.

If you wouldn't make the jump w/o an AAD, how does having an AAD change your ability to handle the skydive?

Let's say you turn on your AAD and as your are putting your rig on, the cutter becomes disconnected. Now you think you have an AAD, but you don't. Next you go make a jump you wouldn't make w/o your Cypres, but, unbeknownst to you, you don't have a (functioning) Cypres. Why go make jumps you wouldn’t make w/o an AAD when you don’t know if it will even work. I think the reliability of modern AAD’s are working against jumpers’ attitudes towards safety. They are putting themselves in higher risk situations because they have one.

I am not, and have never said, don’t jump an AAD. I said don’t rely on a back up, optional safety device. If you make a jump because you have an AA you wouldn’t make w/o one, you are relying on it to increase your level of safety, when it might not be. By not increasing your risk level because of an AAD, you keep your risk level lower than making a riskier skydive and expecting the AAD to offset the risk because then it is no longer a back up when you are relying on it. Do not expect an AAD to offset risk. Because if it fails when you need it, there are no more back ups. It is an attitude difference, not a gear difference.

I’ve never made a jump that I wouldn’t have made w/o an AAD.

Derek

Derek

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

Quote

when people start saying you have no business making a jump if you wouldn't make it without specific pieces of life saving safety equipment well it gets ... contentious.

If you wouldn't make the jump w/o an AAD, how does having an AAD change your ability to handle the skydive?

Let's say you turn on your AAD and as your are putting your rig on, the cutter becomes disconnected. Now you think you have an AAD, but you don't. Next you go make a jump you wouldn't make w/o your Cypres, but, unbeknownst to you, you don't have a (functioning) Cypres. Why go make jumps you wouldn’t make w/o an AAD when you don’t know if it will even work. I think the reliability of modern AAD’s are working against jumpers’ attitudes towards safety. They are putting themselves in higher risk situations because they have one.

I am not, and have never said, don’t jump an AAD. I said don’t rely on a back up, optional safety device. If you make a jump because you have an AA you wouldn’t make w/o one, you are relying on it to increase your level of safety, when it might not be. By not increasing your risk level because of an AAD, you keep your risk level lower than making a riskier skydive and expecting the AAD to offset the risk because then it is no longer a back up when you are relying on it. Do not expect an AAD to offset risk. Because if it fails when you need it, there are no more back ups. It is an attitude difference, not a gear difference.

I’ve never made a jump that I wouldn’t have made w/o an AAD.

Derek

Derek

If there are many links in a chain of events leading to a fatality, and breaking any one of those links prevents the fatality, why do you consider any one link (the AAD) more "iffy" than the others?

Look at the no/low-pull fatalities from 1981 - 1991. Anyone that thinks the human link is reliable is living in cloud-cuckoo land. These dead people weren't relying on an AAD to save them, so they must have had the right attitude to your way of thinking, correct?

Bottom line: regardless of attitude (bad or otherwise) fewer skydivers burn in with no canopy out than did 15 years ago because there is now one more point at which the fatal chain can be broken.

...

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

[pilotdave 0]

I don't think dorbie is disagreeing with you at all. It's not about the jumpers that will do certain jumps only because they have an AAD... it's about those people that wouldn't jump at all without an AAD. Of course those people realize that they need to rely on themselves because the AAD can fail (aside from a few crazy/stupid people who I truly think are the exceptions). But the chances are pretty good that the AAD will work if it's needed. And if it's needed, IT'S NEEDED!

I think your point is that people shouldn't change their driving style because they have airbags in their car. She isn't arguing that. She's saying that just because someone won't drive a car that doesn't have airbags doesn't make that person reliant on airbags. I mean, you can call it that if you want... technically that person's driving does rely on airbags. But it's a totally different situation from what you're talking about.

And I really think you're "preaching to the choir" here. People that truly think they are safe to rely on backup devices, the way you mean it, are not here reading the S&T forum.

Dave

[Hooknswoop 19]

I think you are right.

John- I'm sorry, I cannot explain in a way you can understand. I tried, but I can't do it. Maybe someone else can explain in a way you will understand what I am trying to say.

Derek

[pilotdave 0]

You guys are arguing with yourselves, not each other.

Hook: AADs are good. don't rely on them.

kallend: AADs save lives, depending on what the meaning of "is" is...

There's no argument here, just a bunch of people repeating themselves over and over again.

Dave

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

when people start saying you have no business making a jump if you wouldn't make it without specific pieces of life saving safety equipment well it gets ... contentious.

If you wouldn't make the jump w/o an AAD, how does having an AAD change your ability to handle the skydive?

It doesn't affect my ability I'm as capable and as fallible with or without one, it does seriously affect the probability of surviving a skydive, that's a stone cold fact. Should I become unconsciouss due to a collision, have a medical problem, lose altitude awareness or some other unforseen screw up, there's a chance I'll survive.

Historical statistics suggest I'm half as likely to die in a skydive with an AAD and that's a safety factor only a fool would ignore.

You keep saying this is about overly relying on an AAD, it's not, it's just a recognition of the fact that there are AAD saves and the statistics are massively in favor of jumping with one.

I totally agree and understand that you shouldn't be relying on your AAD to pull for you or using it as a safety net for your confidence or lack of ability. That is a separate issue from assuming I'm joe average and looking at the chances of dying on a skydive, seeing that an AAD makes that significantly less likely and insisting on jumping with one.

The danger in relying on an AAD does not translate into not jumping with one if you wouldn't jump without one, because jumping without one actually increases my risk, and for me a tangible 2X increased risk that is clearly statistically demonstrable is a very good and sane reason not to jump.

I think we agree on this but we just don't agree on your litmus test for whether you should jump. If someone backs out at double the risk that's their business. It's up to them whether they should jump or not.

[wmw999 2,167]

That's increasing the risk in a situation wtih a very small likelihood in the first place. You have to look at it that way, and not compared against skydiving as a whole.

Because if your risk across skydiving as a whole without the AAD is significantly more than your risk with the AAD you're probably doing something wrong.

(not against them -- I have one)

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)

[dorbie 0]

Quote

That's increasing the risk in a situation wtih a very small likelihood in the first place. You have to look at it that way, and not compared against skydiving as a whole.

Because if your risk across skydiving as a whole without the AAD is significantly more than your risk with the AAD you're probably doing something wrong.

That is never how I'll view risk, but you're entitled to make your own judgement calls & I mine.

The risk with and without AADs is pretty much nailed down, it's not something a post or personal opinion alters, it's just the evidence before you. See kallend's graph, it's brutally honest. There are two ways of reacting to that data, you can either assume that you're better and different than the guys who went in or you can assume that you're probably at as much risk as they were on the average and it could happen to you.

I assume the latter and so absolutely an AAD increases my chance of survival significantly IMHO, and it's not something I have a problem with, it's not that I worry about my ability to pull or think I'll lose awareness, it's just a conclusion derived from the undeniable evidence. If you think differently you should review your own risk appraisal in my opinion.

[wmw999 2,167]

The undeniable evidence is that AADs increase your chances of surviving a lack-of-awareness or inability situation hugely.

However, if you look at the number of bounces and AAD saves vs. the overall number of skydives, the view changes.

I make roughly 100 jumps per year. They are not half as dangerous because I have an AAD. Once I get into a lack-of-awareness situation (which is hopefully a very small likelihood) my AAD hopefully will improve my chances.

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)

[dorbie 0]

Quote

The undeniable evidence is that AADs increase your chances of surviving a lack-of-awareness or inability situation hugely.

I can't choose when that will happen, I spend my time avoiding that outcome, but the real issue is the probability of that happening no matter how hard I work to prevent it. It's agreed the AAD helps you out of some potentially fatal messes, however this is not some special case reserved for isolated dives. It's a series of highly undesirable outcomes from a skydive with a finite probability of one of them happening on each skydive you make. I don't split this off as some special case under which an AAD will help, surely you can do this and you might preffer to think of it this way. I look at it like it could happen on any skydive and eventually it might, the chance that it will is at the heart of those fatalities and the AAD saves that displaced them over the years. Viewed like this an AAD is a small (but very significant) improvement in safety on every jump not a huge probable save on some rare occasion where I'm in the shit, although it's certainly both.

Quote

However, if you look at the number of bounces and AAD saves vs. the overall number of skydives, the view changes.

No it doesn't kallend's data was normalized per 10,000 jumps(edit, members, my bad, it still accounted for half of fatalities (at least)). If you're suggesting experience helps, I'd buy that it does, although I've seen no data to support that it makes sense, but experience can have it's traps and added risks for some too (e.g. reliance on audibles).

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Historical statistics suggest I'm half as likely to die in a skydive with an AAD and that's a safety factor only a fool would ignore.

Not to be too much a pain, but what numbers are you using to come up with a 50% reduction in the possibility of your death?

If you eliminate canopy deaths, that might work out, but I'm not ready to write them all off that way. The AAD's primary function is to correct for a failure or panic by the jumper and it does that very well. But many of the landing deaths fit into the same descriptors. Despite being trained not to, people still do panic 180s at 100ft.

Many people say they carry one in case they get knocked out. I'm perfectly happy to say I'm carrying it for the possibility I'll fuck up. If it happens, I may have to opt to go back into the water on weekends instead.

I have done one jump without an AAD (or do Astra jumps count?!), but it was not planned. The DZO asked if I could make a quick call to free up a slot on the next (sunset load) and my finger slipped setting the offset on a C1. Rather than delay everyone and make that sunset run marginal, I opted to go without properly setting it.

The Cypres2 really improved in this regard - turns on much quicker, much easier to set the +420.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

If you eliminate canopy deaths, that might work out, but I'm not ready to write them all off that way.

Fair enough, I mentioned that caveat earlier the first time I made this claim however you're right canopy incidents make the historical data less useful. It would probably closer to 33% these days rather than 50% if you factor in suicide by canopy but I might suggest that freeflying could skew it back

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

You guys are arguing with yourselves, not each other.

Hook: AADs are good. don't rely on them.

kallend: AADs save lives, depending on what the meaning of "is" is...

There's no argument here, just a bunch of people repeating themselves over and over again.

Dave

Kallend says don't rely on any of your equipment - it can all fail, and so can the user. Picking on AADS as somehow different from the rest of ther rig is an emotional, not a logical response.

...

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

[pilotdave 0]

Well, that's very true that anything can fail, but we have no choice but to rely on some of our equipment. Hook is skipping the stuff we have no backup for, like the harness and reserve.

I am a huge believer, although its a very unpopular idea among the old timers, that the human is the weak link in the chain. At work, in the world of System Safety Engineering, relying on humans to do the right thing is absolutely the least desirable type of hazard mitigation. All those old (and young) guys that say their left hand is their AAD don't seem to understand that.

But just for the sake of disagreeing with you, AADs are different from the rest of our equipment. They're like airbags. They try to save your ass after something has gone wrong. Even if they were proven to work 100% of the time, I'd still agree with hook that we should avoid needing the AAD (in particular) by only jumping within our skill/currency level. Even when the AAD works, you might still already be dead. I think that sets it apart from reliance on an audible or a reserve or a harness or whatever.

Dave

[billvon 2,469]

>Picking on AADS as somehow different from the rest of ther rig . . .

It is different because you don't need it. You do need your harness/container and reserve to work at an absolute minimum; a safe skydiver can complete a jump and land safely with nothing else.

If you ask yourself if you would rather jump without an AAD or without a harness the difference is pretty clear. Even Bill Cole jumped with a harness on every jump.

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

>Picking on AADS as somehow different from the rest of ther rig . . .

It is different because you don't need it. You do need your harness/container and reserve to work at an absolute minimum; a safe skydiver can complete a jump and land safely with nothing else.

If you ask yourself if you would rather jump without an AAD or without a harness the difference is pretty clear. Even Bill Cole jumped with a harness on every jump.

Are reserves "needed" or simply "required" by FAR? There is a difference.

The reason reserves are required is that parachutes have proven themselves unreliable. Main malfunctions occur roughly once every 500 uses on average. That's pretty poor odds for a lifesaving device. If my car stereo, TV or dishwasher were that unreliable I'd be pissed.

Personally, I've not needed my reserve, except to satisfy the FAA requriement. And I've not needed my AAD either. Or my hook knife.

...

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

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Are reserves "needed" or simply "required" by FAR? There is a difference.

Conversely if the FAA mandated AADs tomorrow would that change the attitude of being prepared to accept the risk of jumping without one?

Some ink on paper in D.C. doesn't change your odds of survival in the air with the same equipment. An appeal to the authority of FARs that suggests your approach to risk is somehow altered w.r.t. one piece of life saving equipment and not another is not a compelling case.

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

Quote

Are reserves "needed" or simply "required" by FAR? There is a difference.

Conversely if the FAA mandated AADs tomorrow would that change the attitude of being prepared to accept the risk of jumping without one?

Some ink on paper in D.C. doesn't change your odds of survival in the air with the same equipment. An appeal to the authority of FARs that suggests your approach to risk is somehow altered w.r.t. one piece of life saving equipment and not another is not a compelling case.

In Australia, AADs are "needed" for all skydivers below "D" license level.

...

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

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Are reserves "needed" or simply "required" by FAR? There is a difference.

Conversely if the FAA mandated AADs tomorrow would that change the attitude of being prepared to accept the risk of jumping without one?

Some ink on paper in D.C. doesn't change your odds of survival in the air with the same equipment. An appeal to the authority of FARs that suggests your approach to risk is somehow altered w.r.t. one piece of life saving equipment and not another is not a compelling case.

In Australia, AADs are "needed" for all skydivers below "D" license level.

Obviously jumping there Bill would instantly change his attitude to that piece of hardware then.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Obviously jumping there Bill would instantly change his attitude to that piece of hardware then.

I am curious what you think my attitude is towards AAD's?

I hope your answer to this question will help me explain better my point.

Derek

[bob.dino 0]

To clarify slightly, according to the APF Op Regs:

Quote

5.1.15. All freefall descents made by parachutists who do not hold a Certificate "E" must be made with equipment fitted with a functional reserve static line or an operational automatic activation device. The DZSO, in writing, may permit exemptions to this rule for specific descents.

5.1.16. Notwithstanding the provisions of 5.1.15, all freefall descents made by parachutists who do not hold a Certificate "D" must be made with equipment fitted with an operational automatic activation device.

A D licence requires, among other things, 200 jumps. An E licence requires, again amongst other things, 500 jumps.