Picture Mal vs. Video Mal

[Cayce 0]

Okay, having recently gone through AFF, and actually having experienced parts of it at two different DZ’s I have a thought. Not wanting to highjack another thread I wanted to voice this opinion as a stand alone thread. I really didn’t get much from the series of malfunction photos that were shown at each DZ (same photos, 2 DZs, BTW) during the AFF program. I had a lineover on AFF-2 which resulted in a cutaway, and I didn’t really recognize it as it was a very dynamic situation which didn’t exactly resemble the picture.

So since then I ordered the set of videos from Deland. One of which showed many malfunctions in video format from many angles. I VERY much responded to this and said “Hey, that’s what I had”. I know this can be struck up to how different people process information. Typically people process in an; audio (spoken word), visual (picture) or kinesthetic (feel it, experience it) point of view. Regardless of my predisposition (which BTW is visual with a heavy minor in kinesthetic), the video really helped me understand the Mal much more than the lame ass picture that was shown to me twice in AFF.

So, the question/proposition to the community is this: do you think that video malfunctions may be more explanatory than those pictures they show? Do you think that may scare an AFF student? It kind of scared me after the fact but in the long run, and having experienced it, I believe it was beneficial to see a moving picture of a Mal rather than a static shot… Any feedback?

[kelpdiver 2]

Cayce, for my ground training we had both the stills and a well used VHS tape that had the various mals from the jumper perspective. The video definitely shows some better, esp since a normal opening goes from looking like a bag lock, then ball of nylon, then a stalled slider, then a normal chute. But you can look at the stills in your office when no one is around.

When I first went to Perris, I left a place where PD300s opened instantly to a Nav280 that sniveled some (at least in comparison). I kept thinking I was having a stalled slider - the image looked just the same. I had never seen the PDs in that state of opening.

[billvon 2,416]

>do you think that video malfunctions may be more explanatory than those pictures they show?

While I was teaching at Brown I used both pictures and video. I'd hold the pictures over people's heads to get their reactions during emergency drills, then everyone would watch the malfunctions tape. For each mal I would start the tape then freeze it in the middle of the mal and ask them "what would you do?" Some pictures had more than one right answer (like a slider stuck halfway down) but it gave them a slightly more real-world view of what mals and normal openings looked like. It ended with two normal openings. On several occasions I'd have a student struggle over the last two, finally telling me "sorry, I can't see what's wrong with them."

[Lozza 0]

I like Bill's teaching method. When I did my training we used stills, and video. The videos give you a 3D view; (on a 2D TV) so it’s easier too visualize the situation. Since then I have seen many videos of Mals and actual Cypress saves, all of which I fell make one a safer more conscientious skydiver, from packing to landing.

Lozza.

[bch7773 0]

our DZ shows em a video with mals on it, and then when they are in the hanging harness, we use the pictures... since its kinda hard to hold a tv above their head.

MB 3528, RB 1182

[Cayce 0]

Hey Bill and others, it's great to see that people (DZ AFF programs) are utilizing the video depiction of Mals for AFF and training purposes. I kind of wish my AFF had done that but hey, there's no use worrying about it. I just wanted to point out that it is such a great tool to help people recognize the situation they may find themselves in and describes some of the variables so much better than a 1982 picture of a folded end cell.

When you see the videos you really get a sense of the time frame, the visual POV and how definitively people have handled these situations. Honestly, for my line-over, I'm so glad we pulled at 4.5 because it gave me plenty of time (15 sec) to evaluate before my hard deck. Yet as jumpers get out of AFF and find them selves in the lineup on a jump run they will have to pull in the order of people around them or move to the back of the bus and pull with the students. Maybe that's a topic for another thread? Anyway, the point being that the videos helped me in future evaluation of canopy shape/function/malfunction evaluation and I feel better for the viewing them.

And, since then, when I find myself in the line-up of people who are pulling at 3k, and I know I have a 500 foot snivel, I realize that I will have to take action fast if there is a problem. That’s fine, I’m ready for that eventuality if it happens, yet I’m glad I saw the videos to help me recognize the myriad of malfunctions that I may experience.

[firstime 0]

sounds like a great video but a mal is only one dimension when you look up

[Cayce 0]

Oh come on! No fair leaving it at a junior high inuendo of "I know something you don't know..."

Elaborate, what else are you concerned with and what is the sequence of evaluation that you use!

[Superman32 0]

I really liked the video at the ground school.
I'm sure it translates better in aiding learning

Inveniam Viam aut Faciam
I'm back biatches!