Pull altitudes (was: fatality in germany)

[Mad47 0]

Quote

I guess I'm one of those "oldies", never had a problem dumping at 2 K.....in fact if you dumped above 2.5 K you would be axed from the load if it was RW....

I, by all means, belong to new and not yet experienced generation, but I totally understand and support this concept. Pulling high in crowded airspace is more dangerous than pulling close to minimum deployment altitude.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Pulling high in crowded airspace is more dangerous than pulling close to minimum deployment altitude.

Only if you haven't been observing good horizontal seperation.

I'd like to see you dump a x-braced loaded about 2.1 @ 2000 feet, have premature break fire turn violent and see if you still think it's safer (note: It's do-able for sure, but we're talking about what is safe(r)) than giving yourself an extra 1000 feet.

Ever had a bag lock? There's 1000 feet right there. You REALLY want to be pulling your reserve @ 1000 feet?

Times change, equipment changes and what's considered safe changes. I see no reason to continuously pull at the MINIMUM recommended altitude. Skydives used to be from 9000 feet (sometimes lower), nowdays with *most* dz's in the US at least going to 13500 it just doesn't make any sense to me.

EDIT: Lets take this to PM's or another thread so we can keep this thread on track
Blue skies
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[Mad47 0]

PM sent

[obelixtim 100]

I would have NO problem pulling my reserve at 1000 ft, and neither should anyone else if they like living.......in fact I've had a reserve out quite a bit lower than that.....are you suggesting that its somehow dangerous to open a reserve at a grand???....(better than NOT pulling, I'd say)

If I wasn't capable of/couldn't handle a baglock/ spiralling mal/ total mal, at 2K, I'd quit the sport.....but handling those kinds of scenarios is why I did a lot of training and maintain things like altitude awareness.....and consciously rehearse my EP's on jumprun every time....and no, I don't rely on an AAD to save my butt either...and I'm quite comfortable with that....

Train for/expect the worst, and you should be able to handle almost anything.....it sounds to me that you are afraid of/don't trust yourself in a sticky situation......so what happens when one day you find yourself in an unexpected situation?.....(lets say in FF at 1200 ft...)

And separation after breakoff is not an option...its a necessity.....horizontal is best, but I'll take a bit of vertical if it gets me out of the way of any idiots on the load.....but if there are idiots around, I prefer to stay away from them in the first place.....I try to distance myself on breakoff....but I've had idiots tracking after me and directly above....

And yes, this isn't exactly on topic....but raises some valid points I think......

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[ianmdrennan 2]

First let me clear up some assumptions. My entire post was about PLACING YOURSELF INTENTIONALLY in situations that require actions at those altitudes. I am perfectly capable of handling them, however I chose to try and avoid them. Just like I'm perfectly capable of dumping my main regularly at 1000 even though I know it's not a good idea.

Quote

I would have NO problem pulling my reserve at 1000 ft, and neither should anyone else if they like living.......in fact I've had a reserve out quite a bit lower than that.....are you suggesting that its somehow dangerous to open a reserve at a grand???....(better than NOT pulling, I'd say)

No, I'm saying putting yourself in a position where you're at 1000 feet without a reserve above your head isn't a smart thing to do. If you find yourself there, maybe you should reconsider either your pull altitude, altitude awareness or your ability to handle the situation quickly. It's pretty ludicrous to suggest that doing nothing is better than getting it above your head. Let's try stay within the bounds of realism here.

Quote

If I wasn't capable of/couldn't handle a baglock/ spiralling mal/ total mal, at 2K, I'd quit the sport.....but handling those kinds of scenarios is why I did a lot of training and maintain things like altitude awareness.....and consciously rehearse my EP's on jumprun every time....and no, I don't rely on an AAD to save my butt either...and I'm quite comfortable with that....

Hmm been there, done that (and you'll see me do a practice drill every load too). I prefer having more altitude to deal with issues. I've only had 2 mals - 1 spinning, 1 bag lock. Both cases I was open above 1500.

Quote

Train for/expect the worst, and you should be able to handle almost anything.....it sounds to me that you are afraid of/don't trust yourself in a sticky situation......so what happens when one day you find yourself in an unexpected situation?.....(lets say in FF at 1200 ft...)

Funny, you may read it that way. How do you know I haven't been there? I have, I'm still here, please don't make assumptions about what situations I have been in, in return I'll offer you the same respect. Once again, if you read the thread you'll notice we're talking about intentionally doing something at a particular altitude.

Quote

And separation after breakoff is not an option...its a necessity.....horizontal is best, but I'll take a bit of vertical if it gets me out of the way of any idiots on the load.....but if there are idiots around, I prefer to stay away from them in the first place.....I try to distance myself on breakoff....but I've had idiots tracking after me and directly above....

I don't remember saying that vertical seperation was bad - just pulling low repeatedly. That was the whole point of the discussion.

You're entitled to do whatever makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. If you want to dump @ 1000 feet every time - go right ahead. Just don't expect me to.

Now, once again. Feel free to PM and continue this further, but can we please keep the thread about the fatality (Yes I know I'm as guilty about this as everyone else).

EDIT: Cleaned up the post. Also I want to mention that I realize certain dives like really big ways, and some others I haven't thought of I'm sure may require lower than "normal" pulling altitudes, I'm just saying I prefer them as the exception, not the norm.

Performance Designs Factory Team

[johnny1488 1]

Pulling at 2k was all the rage 15 years ago, and thats great. I want to fly my canopy on every jump, not just pull and land. I dont think canopies took 1k feet to open 15 years ago either.

I have no problem with people doing that now, but I dont.

Johnny
--"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!"
Mike Rome

[speedy 0]

You can train your EP's all you want, but if you dump a velocity at 2000 ft and it quickly goes into a spinning mal and suddenly the ground, due to a hill, has stolen 500ft from your altitude, you are in deep shit.

What disturbed me in the original thread was when someone said that they tend to pull higher (3000ft), it was mentioned that at some boogies, this was an unsafe practice.

The unsafe practice is not giving the jumpers adequate seperation. Pulling at 3000ft should always be allowable and safe.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[obelixtim 100]

Yeah, well maybe if you are getting out over the top of high ground you need to be aware of that before you exit the plane...and allow for it....

And if you are going to be pulling above 3K... thats fine....but just let everyone else on the load know about it first.....eating pilot chutes unexpectedly is NOT a pleasant experience....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[obelixtim 100]

So why don't you just go to the top and hop'n'pop every time from 15 grand.....just let everyone else know you are doing it....or if you really want some excitement under canopy...take up CRW...that'll get ya goin'.....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[billvon 2,392]

>Pulling at 3000ft should always be allowable and safe.

At most places it is. At busy boogies (like WFFC) 3500 feet is the upper limit.

[Ron 7]

Quote

I'd like to see you dump a x-braced loaded about 2.1 @ 2000 feet, have premature break fire turn violent and see if you still think it's safer (note: It's do-able for sure, but we're talking about what is safe(r)) than giving yourself an extra 1000 feet.

Done it several times.

6 reserve rides, one cutaway from about 700 feet.

Quote

You REALLY want to be pulling your reserve @ 1000 feet?

Why not? You trust your CYPRES to fire it at 750.

Quote

Times change, equipment changes and what's considered safe changes

Yeah low pulls are bad, but a guy with 300 jumps on a Xbraced is OK?

Quote

nowdays with *most* dz's in the US at least going to 13500 it just doesn't make any sense to me

I would bet that *most* DZ's don't go to 13.5. There are a large number of small DZ's.

Now more jumps may be made from 13.5, but most DZ's???? I don't think so.

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

[billbooth 10]

Unless you have a lot of experience with internal, spring loaded pilot chutes (and therefore know how to "break the burble" at pull time to get them to deploy without hesitation), don't assume that pulling a reserve ripcord while falling "stable" at 1,000 feet at terminal velocity, is high enough. A pilot chute hesitation can easily eat up 500 feet or more. (We are all so spoiled by hand deployed pilot chutes.) And remember, from the time you DECIDE to pull your reserve ripcord, to the time you ACTUALLY DO IT is at least 2 seconds (400 feet) if you have a metal handle, and at least 3 seconds (600 feet) if you have a "soft" reserve handle. 500 plus 600 adds up to 1,100 which ISN'T GOOD when you start at 1,000 feet.

[Ron 7]

Quote

We are all so spoiled by hand deployed pilot chutes

It's your fault...You invented them

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

[obelixtim 100]

And a damn good invention it was too....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Done it several times.

6 reserve rides, one cutaway from about 700 feet.

Me 2, just with no necessary cutaways at that alt

My point was safer (not impossible), you cannot possibly argue that being under a reserve at 700ft was safer than if you'd given yourself more altitude to deal with the situation and be in the saddle under the reserve higher.

Quote

Why not? You trust your CYPRES to fire it at 750.

I don't trust my cypres to do crap - should I ever need it I HOPE it will function as designed, but trust it to work...no.

Quote

Yeah low pulls are bad, but a guy with 300 jumps on a Xbraced is OK?

You know I agree with you on this one

Quote

would bet that *most* DZ's don't go to 13.5. There are a large number of small DZ's.

Now more jumps may be made from 13.5, but most DZ's???? I don't think so.

Fair enough. I haven't jumped at every dz in the country so it was an assumption.

Blue skies
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Unless you have a lot of experience with internal, spring loaded pilot chutes (and therefore know how to "break the burble" at pull time to get them to deploy without hesitation), don't assume that pulling a reserve ripcord while falling "stable" at 1,000 feet at terminal velocity, is high enough. A pilot chute hesitation can easily eat up 500 feet or more. (We are all so spoiled by hand deployed pilot chutes.) And remember, from the time you DECIDE to pull your reserve ripcord, to the time you ACTUALLY DO IT is at least 2 seconds (400 feet) if you have a metal handle, and at least 3 seconds (600 feet) if you have a "soft" reserve handle. 500 plus 600 adds up to 1,100 which ISN'T GOOD when you start at 1,000 feet.

Hi Bill,

Thanks, that was exactly my point. Why would anyone choose to deploy low enough to still find themselves in freefall at 1000 ft? Sure it CAN be done, but why the hell would they WANT to...there are just too many things that could go wrong?

If I remember correctly wasn't one of your "laws of skydiving" that the day you pulled low, was the day things were going to go wrong (paraphrased)?

Blue skies
Ian
ps: Thanks for the throw out pilot chute, 3 rings, etc, etc

Performance Designs Factory Team

[obelixtim 100]

I don't think anyone who "chooses" to open at 1K is gonna be around for long...but it can and does happen......and doesn't mean you are gonna die.....hesitations don't automatically happen because you are low either.....a Cypres fire can see a hesitation as well, but Cypresses are set at 750'......shouldn't that be increased if your argument is followed logically?...

Every jumper should be able to handle a sticky situation though.....at any altitude.....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[diver123 0]

Agreed 100%! I don't understand all the lecturing about ensuring horizontal seperation, clearing your airspace, and all other pre-deployment procedures, and then placing an altitude limit on jumpers? Seems to me that no one should *have* to pull at any altitude they don't feel comfortable pulling at. So long as you communicate your intentions and people act responsibly, what's the problem? I know boogies are busy, but that's no reason for people to start acting all crazy. The entire idea is irresponsible. Why should a jumper wishing to open a bit higher to allow more time for a bad situation be the one out of line?

"pull high! It's lower than you think..."

[Ron 7]

Quote

My point was safer (not impossible), you cannot possibly argue that being under a reserve at 700ft was safer than if you'd given yourself more altitude to deal with the situation and be in the saddle under the reserve higher.

Well, we would all be "safer" if we had to deploy at 6 grand.

We would be "safer" if we had to have both parachutes packed by a rigger.

We would be "safer" if we all had to jump low aspect ratio 7 cells.

We would be "safer" if we didn't let people do head down, or even any RW.

The point is that the skydivers that have been around a while know that while it does reduce the "saftey"...There are times that a lower pull is "safer" than pulling high.

Also some of the newer jumpers would never think of pulling at 2 grand...And I know jumpers with 200-300 jumps that have only pulled below 3G once or twice...And they landed crying about how "low" they were.

Low is very relative. I don't see 2 grand as low.
1200 feet is low.

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

[billvon 2,392]

>Seems to me that no one should *have* to pull at any altitude they
>don't feel comfortable pulling at.

There are some places where you have to pull below a certain altitude due to traffic issues. This is not to say that people must pull low; but if they wish to pull above that altitude they should not jump at those places.

>Why should a jumper wishing to open a bit higher to allow more time
> for a bad situation be the one out of line?

Because that could lead to a canopy/freefall collision that could kill both people. Not acceptable, even if it makes him feel safer.

[crazy 0]

Quote

I don't understand all the lecturing about ensuring horizontal seperation, clearing your airspace, and all other pre-deployment procedures, and then placing an altitude limit on jumpers?

Easy: they are related to two different problems.

The lecturing about ensuring horizontal seperation, clearing your airspace, and all other pre-deployment procedures, is to avoit collisions with jumpers on the same pass. There, the opening altitude doesn't (shouldn't) matter much.

Placing an altitude limit on jumpers can be a convenient procedure to avoid collisions with jumpers on other passes or other loads. Imagine 4 twin otters, 2 passes for each load, this is ~1 jumprun every 2 minutes. Somebody opening at 6000 feet with a large canopy and sightseeing with the brakes still set would be a serious hazard.

--
Come
Skydive Asia

[diver123 0]

I understand the points stated in support of the lowered deployment altitude, but come on guys... Call it naive, or ideological thinking, but if that's the case at these boogies then maybe there should be a re-design of the way things work. Is it really that important to dump that many people in such close proximity? Would it really impact the overall fun of a boogie to space things out a bit more? Maybe I'm a minority here, but I just don't see it. We condemn jumpers all day long for pulling low, or getting under canopies that are too aggressive for a certain skill level, or anything else people have done to add an unnecessary set of new risks, yet we're willing to quickly turn a cheek so as to accomodate a boogie atmosphere where the main purpose is to turn as many loads as possible? In my book that's a double standard. Just my opinion. I know my options and I'll chose when and where I feel comfortable to jump. Not trying to start anything here, just my opinion. We concede that the problem is too many jumpers in the sky in close proximity resulting in an increased risk of freefall/canopy collisions right? Well, it just serves to reason that the smart thing to do would be to cut down the numbers and increase the intervals - as an alternative - to essentially forcing someone lower than may be normal for them to decrease the probability of an accident... OR I can chose not to ever have the pleasure of attending a huge boogie like the WFFC right?

"pull high! It's lower than you think..."

[johnny1488 1]

Quote

So why don't you just go to the top and hop'n'pop every time from 15 grand

I like freefall, too, but I try to do one of those a weekend. I'll keep myself as safe as I can. I'll let everyone else worry about everyone else.

Johnny
--"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!"
Mike Rome

[billvon 2,392]

>Is it really that important to dump that many people in such close >proximity? Would it really impact the overall fun of a boogie to >space things out a bit more?

Well, to put it bluntly, yes. Many people go to the WFFC, for example, to make a lot of jumps. Adding hour-long delays for aircraft (which is often what happens at smaller DZ's) wouldn't be that popular.

But that shouldn't be a big deal. A few boogies (the Eloy boogies, the WFFC to name a few) have that sort of traffic. Most boogies don't. So if you don't like that sort of traffic there are many alternatives. You don't have to jump at the WFFC any more than you have to do BASE.

>I know my options and I'll chose when and where I feel comfortable
> to jump.

That's a good attitude to have. You're right, there are places that are less safe to jump at - whether because the culture is not a safety-oriented one, or because lots of people drink (or smoke pot) and jump, or because the elevation of the landing area is high. Or even because they're putting out loads every 2 minutes.

>OR I can chose not to ever have the pleasure of attending a huge
> boogie like the WFFC right?

Pretty much. "Huge" generally equates to lots of traffic. But bigger isn't always better - there are a lot of boogies around that are just as good (if not better) than the really big ones. That's not to say the WFFC is hideously unsafe. There are a lot of people who put a lot of effort into making it as safe as possible while still turning lots of loads, which is what both the jumpers and the aircraft owners want. But it's also not as safe as a two-otter boogie. Like you said, jump where you are comfortable.

[diver123 0]

Billvon, I here what you're saying. I hope I'm not coming off as some extreme conservative, I just have an opinion on the opening altitude issue. In my personal jumping life that is something I'm not willing to compromise on. Others will not jump in certain wind conditions, with certain people, etc... etc... For me, I like to open with an extra "buffer" if you will. If that means passing on an event or two, then so be it. I hope to still experience as much as possible before I hang up my rig for good, but it will always be a conditional involvement.

As far as the reality of these large scale events; I have no beef with making some cash and filling seats. I just don't like the idea that those things superceed other things. In the end it's all relative to the person I guess... Thanks for the input. Blue skies.

"pull high! It's lower than you think..."