UDSkyJunkie 0 #1 October 19, 2006 A lot of people throw driving your car around as being as dangerous or more dangerous than skydiving, without ever having done the math. So for those who want to know, here's some real numbers. In 2005, and estimated 1.47 deaths resulted from each 100 million vehicle miles travelled. Source: http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/ A commonly used and reasonably accurate number for skydiving is that 1 jump in 100,000 results in a fatality. So, to use myself as an example, in the last 12 months I have driven approximately 35,000 miles and done 202 skydives. If you go by statistics only, my driving has exposed me to a 1 in 1943, or about 0.05% chance of being killed in the past year, while my jumping has exposed me to a 1 in 495, or about 0.2% chance. I think this shows that clearly driving has exposed me to less risk, although it's worth noting that they two are on the same order of magnitude. Some other things to consider: - approximately 40% of driving fatalities involved alcohol levels of 0.08 BAL or more. I think it's fair to say that a higher percentage of drivers are drunk than skydivers, giving driving an even greater edge over skydiving, assuming you're sober. - Everything changes if you're riding a motorcycle. At a fatality rate of 38 per 100 million miles travelled, it would only take me 5,000 miles on a motorcycle in a year to reach the risk level of my 202 jumps. Based on this, it seems that skydiving and motorcycle riding carry similar amounts of risk. And of course there are a million side-issues that could be investigated too... canopy choice, general decision making, inherent skill level, currency, coaching, they all make a difference. Then again, similar arguments could be made for driving. Plus, the numbers presented above apply to my own habits... if you make 15 jumps and are a taxi driver who did 100,000 miles this year, than driving may well expose you to greater risk. If you drive after "a couple beers" most weekends, the same may be true. If you race your motorcycle without a helmet after half a bottle of Jack, then it's definately more dangerous than skydiving. But... going by the averages, it takes about 680 miles on the road to expose you to the same amount of risk as 1 jump. VERY few "active" jumpers drive that much or jump that little. And the commonly used claim that "you're more likley to be killed driving to the DZ" is clearly not correct. Unless you're driving from LA to NYC to do a tandem."Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigway 4 #2 October 19, 2006 Congratulations, first post of it's kind .Karnage Krew Gear Store . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #3 October 19, 2006 See, this is whats wrong about DZ.com now days.. someone tries to make a logical comment and very first reply is garbage. What I find interesting about the driving/skydiving arguement is a complete breakdown of exposure hours. If you break it down to just the freefall and canopy skydiving is so far into the danger zone vs driving people would think we are nuts to do it. Add in the flight time and things look slightly better. Here is something to think about, actuaries sit around all day and come up with risk factor numbers and things to apply to insurance formulas. If skydiving was really that safe why is it that premiums are sky high for jumpers?Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MagicGuy 0 #4 October 19, 2006 I like this post very much so. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think that so many people in this sport are so tied up in the fact that they are having so much fun doing it, that they really don't realize that what we do is certainly dangerous. I've actually had skydivers argue with me and insist that skydiving is SAFE. While certain precautions can be taken to make it as safe as possible, there is certainly a chance that we could get killed on that next jump. And THAT, is what I think some people need to realize and understand. In no means do I want my post to be morbid - I know that what I do isn't 'safer than driving' but I have come to the realization that everyone dies. If I'm going to die skydiving than shit, I'm dying doing something that is my passion and my dream. But you better be damn sure that I am going to take every precaution that I can so that I can live as long as possible! Nice post, thanks for taking the time to run the numbers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,622 #5 October 19, 2006 QuoteCongratulations, first post of it's kind Ummm - no www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=928171#928171... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VincentVL. 0 #6 October 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteCongratulations, first post of it's kind Ummm - no www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=928171#928171 OOOOOOOOH HE LIED Hell awaits Seriously...it doesn't really matter what's more dangerous. It's all about perception. For instance...I have shark phobia. Everytime someone hears that the go like "You're more likely to get struck by lightning etc." Seriously...I don't give a toss. Lightning or no lightning...I'm not gonna swim in shark "infested" waters. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigway 4 #7 October 19, 2006 Sorry if that was garbage, personally this has been drilled into me so many times with figures and beliefs. Fair play to the guy for doing the math. .Karnage Krew Gear Store . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigway 4 #8 October 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteCongratulations, first post of it's kind Ummm - no www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=928171#928171 That would be sarcasim Kallend. .Karnage Krew Gear Store . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,622 #9 October 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteCongratulations, first post of it's kind Ummm - no www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=928171#928171 That would be sarcasim Kallend. There's no sarcasm tag, though.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 0 #10 October 19, 2006 QuoteHere is something to think about, actuaries sit around all day and come up with risk factor numbers and things to apply to insurance formulas. If skydiving was really that safe why is it that premiums are sky high for jumpers? There is a difference between safety and success rate. According to insurance companies, I became a much "safer" driver overnight when I turned 25. If the fatality rate triples next year, that will not mean skydiving is 3 times more dangerous than it was before. Statistics only measure success and failure. Risk (danger) is not measurable.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #11 October 19, 2006 QuoteI've actually had skydivers argue with me and insist that skydiving is SAFE. Saying that anything is "safe" or "dangerous" in any absolute sense is completely meaningless. If you've come to terms with the risks and enjoy doing it then it's "safe enough." While I cringe just as much as the next guy when I hear someone say, "you're more likely to be killed while driving to the dropzone." I'm also sick of people who seem to be preoccupied with the idea that death awaits them at all times and around every corner of the dropzone. Being complacent can definitely get you killed, but everytime someone says, "You know, all said and done skydiving is actually pretty safe." you don't need to fly out of the woodwork, piss on their birthday candles, and scream, "But you can do everything right and still die!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MagicGuy 0 #12 October 19, 2006 I absolutely agree. I think my point was missed in my previous post and I apologize if so. I just think that skydivers need to realize that what they do does have inherant risks, that's all. The person I'm referring to seemed like they didn't understand this. Thanks for the post! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daremrc 0 #13 October 19, 2006 I've had my motorcycle(s) to 39 states and 65,000 miles over the last 5 years. so I guess this is my new, safe hobby there is an immesurable fatcor here: The judgement of the participant. I dont ride drunk, I dont do wheelies, stunts, etc... and I adhere to what us cyclists call an ATGATT policy: all the gear, all the time. That means I wear a suit of cordura and armor plating, even in the summer, and even when I visited Arizona. I try to ride my bike up to 7/10th of it's performance ability when on the street, and no higher, to account for the unkown or unpercieved dangers out there. in my so-far short skydiving experience, I am finding myself interested in just getting a chute over my head, having nice and soft openings, and landing anywhere thats safe. the HP landing stuff just does not seem to appeal to me, at least at this point in my student jumping career. I tell my family and friends that on the bike, it is thrilling enough for me to just ride it down the twisty roads, and live to ride another day. I dont need wheelies, burnouts, or 100+ MPH runs on every ride to get my 'fix'. I think the same applies to my personailty as far as jumping goes, at least so far as I can tell this early in the game. My point? An unproportionate ammount of the risk in either activity is bore by a small amount of its participants. You can average it out all you like, but you end up with just that: an average. I'd like to think that my risk/reward calculations & tolerance for personal danger are tuned OK, thus far, but I'm always looking to up my game and do whatever little or seemingly silly things I can do to tilt the odds that much more in my favor. I don't thinks it's fair to categorize me in the same risk category as a sportbike stunt rider, heavy drinker, or high-speed swooper. your mileage may varyGood judgement comes from experience, and most of that comes from bad judgement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
recovercrachead 0 #14 October 19, 2006 when was skydiving dangerous? It is?Track high, Pull LOW!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #15 October 19, 2006 My landings suck, but you haven't seen me drive either. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UDSkyJunkie 0 #16 October 19, 2006 QuoteI don't thinks it's fair to categorize me in the same risk category as a sportbike stunt rider, heavy drinker, or high-speed swooper. your mileage may vary You're right, it's not. The numbers I used were averages because those are the only reliable numbers available. Your points about wearing the correct gear, riding within your and the bike's ability, ect, will make your odds much better than the stated "average" 38 per 100 million miles. Every good statistician knows that everything has a bell curve, and by definition 95% or so aren't too far from the average (2 standard deviations, if I remember my math). The sportbike stunt guys, the drunks, the crazy swoopers, ect... they're going to fall on the bad side of the curve, and the guys who do what you described are going to fall on the good side. All this shows is: overall, skydiving presents a greater level of risk than driving, assuming you are roughly equally skilled, current, sober, take a similar approach to risk, and keep your equipment in a similar state of repair. If you switch from driving a car to a motorcycle, and keep everything else the same, your odds are perhaps roughly equal to skydiving. The other point of this post was to see that number for a year of jumping. 1 fatality per 100,000 jumps doesn't seem like too bad of odds, but 1 in 495 in a year is a whole different skillet of shit. When I originally ran the math in my head (many years ago, before I even started jumping), it was a reality check. I'm hoping seeing a number like that will encourage a few people to work on putting themselves on the good side of the bell curve. If that isn't enough, consider: take 10 years at 200 jumps per year, and suddenly it's 1 in 50. P.S., I've always wanted a motorcycle, and if I ever get one will follow the ATGATT policy, drive sober, stay out of rush hour traffic, ect... I cannot tell you the number of people who have said I'm a pussy for saying that. Oddly, the same people often tell me that only an idiot would jump out of a perfectly good airplane."Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 0 #17 October 19, 2006 QuoteEvery good statistician knows that everything has a bell curve, and by definition 95% or so aren't too far from the average (2 standard deviations, if I remember my math). The problem with applying that to our situation, is that there's no such thing as 95% dead. Life is binary.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daremrc 0 #18 October 19, 2006 totally. I was just trying to point out that there are a lot of things in life that you are in control of, and a whole lot more that you aren't. If you can put all of the 'controlables' in your favor, even if it means taking heat from others by "being a pussy", than you stand a better chance and are better prepared when life inevitably throws an 'uncontrolable' circumstance at you. and I have taken my share of funny stares and literal 'heat' from others by wearing a black, armoured riding suit in the dead of summer. "aren't you hot?" "not as hot as a skin graft, buddy" as I learn more about this sport, I hope to be able to keep my ego & head in check, not let the excitement of advancing get control of my decision-making process, and keep tilting those odds. When you average out my philosophy with those that rush to downsize their canopies, try things they aren't prepared for yet, and refuse to heed the advice of others that have more experience... well you end up with that average number. It's up to the individual weather he or she wants to aim for higher or lower than that median... that said, any one of us can die tomorrow, and the wheelie doing, drunk swooper with 100 jumps may live to be 100. such is life. cheers and blues... -PaulGood judgement comes from experience, and most of that comes from bad judgement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
itllclear 1 #19 October 19, 2006 You can also go anecdotal -- on at least one day the drive to the drop zone WAS more dangerous than the jumps we made. Of course we only made 3 jumps that day. We had to call somone to pick us up to finish the trip to the DZ. BSBD Harry"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there." "Your statement answered your question." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Elisha 1 #20 October 19, 2006 Quote Every good statistician knows that everything has a bell curve, and by definition 95% or so aren't too far from the average (2 standard deviations, if I remember my math). Not quite...that assumes data that is normally distributed which is not always the case. For example a success/failure rate would be a binomial. In skydiving, probably a geometric, as a "failure" would end it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarkM 0 #21 October 19, 2006 Quote The problem with applying that to our situation, is that there's no such thing as 95% dead. Life is binary. Well.... sometimes I see certain people at the DZs and I wonder about that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
btucker 0 #22 October 19, 2006 Worth remembering that each jump is a separate throw of the statistical die. The grim reaper doesn't know how many jumps you have done: If you have 99,999 jumps you won't die for sure on the next one. Your odds remain at 1/100,000 of dying on your 100,000th the same as dying on your first jump. Blue Dreams Benno Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RMURRAY 1 #23 October 19, 2006 why use a mile? why not use a block or 100 miles, or km.... rm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dontiego 0 #24 October 19, 2006 Quotewhy use a mile? why not use a block or 100 miles, or km.... Yeah, I wondered about that to. The analogy with car driving has another flaw: you drive your car in order to go from A to B. Sometimes you must drive. You never HAVE to skydive (think the whuffos), it only takes you from A to A."We call on the common man to rise up in revolt against this evil of typographical ignorance." http://bancomicsans.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthias 0 #25 October 19, 2006 Quotewhy use a mile? why not use a block or 100 miles, or km.... rm Guess it depends on what city you live in. (driving in major cities vs small towns, etc)_________________________________________ trance/house mixes for download: www.djmattm.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
