Skydiving statistics: do they accurately represent the danger of skydiving?

[no_opinion 0]

Hi all,

After reading a quote from an Australian Parachute federation official that out of 300,000 jumps per annum there is an average of 2.7 deaths per year in Australia due to skydiving accidents, I would like people's opinion on skydiving statistics and do you think they truly represent a jumpers chance of dying from this sport?

In Australia, there has been only one Tandem fatality since the 80s so 2.7 deaths/annum is not representative of deaths doing tandem skydives.

Does that mean that the statistics for licensed skydivers are a lot worse? Should we be measuring the percentage of fatalities against the number of participants in the sport rather than relative to the total number of skydives done per year accross all disciplines?

Obviously the different disciplines have different risks and it would be interesting to see how these different risks are represented by the statistics rather than a very general 2.7 deaths/annum which incorrectly implies equal risk accross all skydiving disciplines.

What do others think?

[RichardR 0]

Your thinking is sound. We do need the fatalities analyzed by activity.

To answer one of your questions, the fatality rate is generally lower for experienced skydivers than for students (which means AFF students). Also, there is evidence to suggest that skydivers that jump infrequently or are coming back from a layoff from the sport are at higher risk. I don't know the statistics for tandem jumps or how they compare. However, keep in mind that the number of tandem jumps is probably much smaller than the number of non-tandem sport jumps. So, don't assume anything by the low number of fatalities. Part of that lower number is due to the smaller number of jumps. Another factor is the fact that tandem instructors, on average, are VERY experienced skydivers, that are cool under fire, and can handle emergencies in stride.

I have read every skydiving fatality report documented for the last 13 years. More interesting than statistics by discipline is a root cause analysis. For the last five years or so, there are a significant number of fatalities due to low turns. Fatalities due to equipment problems seem to have become rare. "Operator Error" or "Operator Induced", appears to be a significant cause of death.

Richard Rothery

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

To answer one of your questions, the fatality rate is generally lower for experienced skydivers than for students (which means AFF students). Also, there is evidence to suggest that skydivers that jump infrequently or are coming back from a layoff from the sport are at higher risk. I don't know the statistics for tandem jumps or how they compare.

Are you sure AFF students are at greater risk? I don't think that's shown in the incidents. A lot of people (esp before the tandem progression came along) did AFF-1 and quit. AFF students have backup in their instructor, a simpleR dive flow, a high pull height, and a big parachute. Perhaps a higher rate of leg injuries from bad flares, but don't think so for fatalities.

As for tandems, there's no doubt that it is safer than the average jumper. As you would expect and hope with an experienced TM in charge, and the higher pull height to give more time to handle malfunctions.

[AlexCrowley 0]

According to April's Parachutist, US fatalities broke down as follows:

14% students
5% A License
10% B License
14% C License
57% D License

2004 total fatalities: 21
10 year average annual total: 33

The article also notes that in 2004 there were no deaths related to tandem, static line, IAD or AFF jumps - either student or tandem.

I have always heard that the average is around 1 fatality per 100,000 jumps. (33 fatality average over 3,000,000 estimated jumps in the US per year)

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[NickDG 23]

>>the fatality rate is generally lower for experienced skydivers than for students (which means AFF students).<<

Richard,

Sorry, but I can't leave that one hanging out there like a big matzo ball as that's about as wrong as anything I've heard lately. In the U.S. it used to be someone off student status but not yet "A" licensed was considered a novice skydiver. Nowadays everyone is considered a student until "A" licensed. This has somewhat inflated the "student" fatality count.

The number of actual AFF student fatalities, meaning a student who dies on one of the AFF levels, is very low. We go sometimes years and years without an AFF fatality and while I don’t have the actual figure in hand I'm pretty sure I've heard of every one since 1984. If I had to describe the number it would be a very small handful. Overall, being any type of student, S/L, AFF, or tandem will be the safest part of your skydiving career.

In fact, and I'm being a bit cheeky here, if you want to almost guarantee a death free career of skydiving just hire an AFF instructor to shadow all your jumps . . . Its when you get away from being told, "No, don't do that," that you have the best chance of doing yourself in . . .

NickD BASE 194

[riggerrob 563]

The flaw with trying to analyze any skydiving statistic is that we start with a hopelessly inaccurate number of jumps.
Most countries do not require drop zone owners to report how many jumps were made.
... so we know accurately how many people died
... have a vague idea how many suffered broken bones,
... but have only an educated guess about how many total jumps were made in any given year.

That said, NickDg gave some good advice about surviving.

[Gravitymaster 0]

It would be interesting to see the stats of deaths per 100k with swooping taken out of them.

[Remster 26]

Quote

100k with swooping taken out of them.

Intentional swooping? Or low turns?

Remster

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

100k with swooping taken out of them.

Intentional swooping? Or low turns?

Actually both. Then we could see what the odds are of dying or being seriously injured if you engage in either. This might give a clearer picture to the newbie contemplating becoming a skydiver and would also help an experienced jumper evaluate the odds of injury or death before deciding to partake in either.

[happythoughts 0]

If you are discussing death, not that many people die. However, there are worse things than dying.

Skydivers will tell you that not many people die, but they won't tell you how many people almost die.

Among my friends with over 5 years in sport, almost half have metal or have at least fractured a bone.

Lots of people get busted up. That is a bigger danger.

(edited for grammar)

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Obviously the different disciplines have different risks and it would be interesting to see how these different risks are represented by the statistics rather than a very general 2.7 deaths/annum which incorrectly implies equal risk accross all skydiving disciplines.

What do others think?

The statistics don't misrepresent anything, they are what they are.

If you choose to interpret the statistics as if they imply something that they do not imply, that's your problem.

...

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

[MarkM 0]

Quote

Among my friends with over 5 years in sport, almost half have metal or have at least fractured a bone.

I'm betting that's more about the behavior of your friends, not just time in sport. I've known a lot of good instructors over the last 5 years and none of them have gotten any metal in them.

Except for one that died, and I wasn't suprised to hear he went in. He had a talent for putting himself into bad situations.

[Guest]

people get killed and hurt skydiving, as they do in most other persuits. In my metro area there are a couple dozen drownings EVERY year, typically in cold rivers not respected by their swimmers. Others rock climbing, hiking, heck, there's been 20 people killed in general aviation accidents so far this year, in everything from ultra lights to cessnas to a twin turbine aircraft piloted by a very experienced prof pilot.

Statistics mean little to nothing unless you are the one involved. IMHO it means more to find out what causes most accidents, and don't do that stuff. (low pulls, unstable pulls, hook turns, gettig run over by other canopy pilots, getting knocked out in ff, etc) But you can do everything right, and still get killed or hurt. You have to decide for yourself if the risks, as you believe them to be, are worth it.

You can have it good, fast, or cheap: pick two.

[happythoughts 0]

All today :

I was did a 4-way with a person who fractured her ankle about 2 years ago. The cameraman walked up, he broke his ankle about 2 years ago. I was talking to a tandem master who fractured his wrist a year ago. My organizer on the last jump of the day had a bad opening 5 years ago and crushed his heel, and broke some other stuff.
An organizer sitting next to me limps because he hooked in 7 years ago.

I won't begin to list the raft of people who have left the sport because of injuries. It isn't just my friends.
If you don't personally know 5 people who have fractured something, I am amazed.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Obviously the different disciplines have different risks and it would be interesting to see how these different risks are represented by the statistics rather than a very general 2.7 deaths/annum which incorrectly implies equal risk accross all skydiving disciplines.

What do others think?

The statistics don't misrepresent anything, they are what they are.

If you choose to interpret the statistics as if they imply something that they do not imply, that's your problem.

Why is asking how the fatalities are broken down by discipline and trying to understand the different risks posed by each, considered interpeting something the statistics don't imply. He's trying to understand something raw statistics don't make clear.

[Witelli 0]

Quote

Quote

Obviously the different disciplines have different risks and it would be interesting to see how these different risks are represented by the statistics rather than a very general 2.7 deaths/annum which incorrectly implies equal risk accross all skydiving disciplines.

What do others think?

The statistics don't misrepresent anything, they are what they are.

If you choose to interpret the statistics as if they imply something that they do not imply, that's your problem.

Statistics mean a lot and can be very misrepresenting. If you have 10 million people in a state where there is only one skydiver, the fatality rate in that state would be either 0% or 100% of skydivers in that state died while skydiving, depending on that one skydiver. Either way, even if he died skydiving the percentage of people in that state who died skydiving would be 1/10,000,000. I would like to see a statistic where they compared the total number of jumps in a year for everyone to the number of fatalities that occurred when skydivers were just trying to land safely. In other words, how safe can the sport be? I guess this statistic I'm looking for would only include malfunctions that couldn't be corrected with basic training (AFF). If the wuffo's saw that statistic only, which would be pretty low I'm assuming, maybe skydiving would become more popular. But would it be a good thing if EVERYONE skydived? Hmmmm.

[MarkM 0]

Quote

If you don't personally know 5 people who have fractured something, I am amazed.

Fractured, breaks, sprains, sure. You get that in most sports though. But getting metal takes a little more effort.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Quote

If you don't personally know 5 people who have fractured something, I am amazed.

Fractured, breaks, sprains, sure. You get that in most sports though. But getting metal takes a little more effort.

Go back and re-read my original post. You even quoted that part in your previous response above.

Quote

Among my friends with over 5 years in sport, almost half have metal or have at least fractured a bone.

I didn't say that all had metal. Just that probably half had metal or a bone injury. It seems pretty valid.

Some of those injuries, while not life threatening, are life-changing.

[HydroGuy 0]

I think more people blow out there knees playing tennis than any other sport.

The statistics are way to vague. We would need accurate jump numbers, and accurate jump numbers by license catagory.

It would be interesting to see the differences in the jump number/injury or jump number/fatality ratio between A license jumpers compared to D license jumpers.

Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary

[kelpdiver 2]

I think the participant count is accurate enough (or the US figure of ~3M jumps). But the injury side for jumping or tennis is terribly fuzzy.