billvon 2,384 #26 September 12, 2003 >This sport is about risk management, not bravado. Actually learning how to recover from a spin in an aircraft (by doing it) is bravado? It's certainly dangerous, Actually doing a cutaway (on a rig with a tersh) is bravado? That's dangerous as well. Actually jumping at night is just bravado? That's dangerous too. Actually jumping without an RSL, full face helmet or state of the art protrack is just bravado? Also can be dangerous. Learning to do something by actually doing it has value, no matter how much you want to claim it's just someone's ego talking. A whuffo could claim the same for you - "skydiving is a sport, doing 10-way is just bravado." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alambic 0 #27 September 12, 2003 Yes let's say I am dependant on my Cypres. For me it is OK for me... but that s just a matter of risk management... It is a security device, transparent (it doesn t interfere with my normal skydiving as long as I don t open low)... And yes, if I had to jump with a Cypres I would take extra care... and not do the same kind of jumps... Same way as if I jumped without helmet, I would be more careful not to bump on sb because I am less protected... (I don t drive faster because I have a seatbelt, but if I hadn t I would drive slower... see the difference)... Last thing: Jumping once without an AAD to know it is... For me it is useless, because there is no experience on it: doing an exercise of recovering of a spin learns you to ... recover from a spin in case it happens jumping without an alti gives you experience in case your alti fails jumping without an AAD doesn t teach you anything useful when shit happens, and the only thing you will prove is "it is OK to jump without Cypres, Murphy s law doesn t work", and lead people to forget more often to put it off If what you want to prove is "Cypres isn t a reason to take more risks because it does no miracles" bring up cases where Cypres didn t do anything... have people jump without it will teach them the wrong lesson....Alambic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #28 September 12, 2003 QuoteYes let's say I am dependant on my Cypres. For me it is OK for me... Well at least you will admit you are dependent on it. But here is my main issue: QuoteAnd yes, if I had to jump without a Cypres I would take extra care... and not do the same kind of jumps... Then why do those jumps at all? This is the danger of CYPRES dependence. Who is safer, the guy that jumps on any load, but has a CYPRES? Or the guy that jumps only on loads that he would go on without one? Now you see the dependence? You will do things with it that you would not normally do. This includes putting yourself at a greater risk and using the damn thing like security blanket. True saftey is limiting your exposure to injury by using you brain to prevent putting yourself into dangerous situations that might require a CYPRES. It is not buying a CYPRES and doing anything knowing that you are "safe". Me, I jump on loads where I would not need one, but I have one. This is a backup. Ron"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #29 September 12, 2003 Quotehis sport is about risk management, not bravado. And the best risk managment is to not go on jumps that you would not do if you didn't have a CYPRES. Not to do them anyway and trust the CYPRES to save your ass. THATS risk managment. Relying on a small balck box to save you from your error in judement is stupidity. Ron"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #30 September 12, 2003 Quotewhen we went through AFF or static line, we were aware that the minute we were off student status, we had to pull or we would die. There were probably many people who decided that this was an unacceptable risk and decided not to continue jumping. Today’s students aren’t faced with this added risk after getting off student status and some who probably wouldn’t have continued in the sport have continued jumping. I guess my point is that different people have different thresholds of acceptable risk. Does this make them reliant on the Cypress? Maybe. The number of Cypress saves today certainly appears to higher than the number of low-pull/no-pull fatalities in the past. Maybe the answer is better education about the consequences of a low-pull/no-pull situation and the possibility that the Cypress may not save you! I’ve always believed that if you have a Cypress fire, you’re theoretically dead anyway, so you can’t jump anymore. Amen! Why are there so many more saves? The answer is people are LESS altitude aware. Going low does not equate to death anymore, just a repack and a cutter. Is this a safer view of skydiving? All I have ever said is that the CYPRES is a good backup, but the mentality of those who have them, and rely on them is not good."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alambic 0 #31 September 12, 2003 Ron: wound you do RW without helmet? I don t think I would because if I could get kicked and it would be dangerous... For me the basic gear to skydive is: -main -reserve -harness -altimeter -ditter -AAD I jump with this, because I think it is security optimum... and it is the reference for me... If I ever do a jump without one of these elements, I will take EXTRA care... that s all... It doesn t mean if I have them I take EXTRA risks... do you see what I mean?Alambic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alambic 0 #32 September 12, 2003 Once again I think you mix this two things: -people who do stupid things and have the cypres an excuse for it -people who take the cypres as their security standard, and don t see why drop their standards...Alambic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #33 September 12, 2003 QuoteJust because you will or won't do certain...especially extreme...jumps with or without certain equipment doesn't mean that you're dependant upon that equipment. Then what the hell is YOUR definition of dependent? That is exactly my definition of dependent. And by the way that is also the dictonary's definition. Ron"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #34 September 12, 2003 QuoteRon: wound you do RW without helmet? Yes, and I have several hundred jumps without one. In fact the only reason I started wearing one is I lost contacts with goggles. QuoteFor me the basic gear to skydive is: -main -reserve -harness -altimeter -ditter -AAD For me its main, reserve, container. Thats all folks! If you need more, then you are dependent on them. I am dependent on the main, reserve and conatainer.. You are dependent on more than me. Quote I jump with this, because I think it is security optimum... and it is the reference for me... If I ever do a jump without one of these elements, I will take EXTRA care... that s all... It doesn t mean if I have them I take EXTRA risks... do you see what I mean? Yep you are more dependent on more things than me. Do you see that you are dependent on them?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #35 September 12, 2003 QuoteOnce again I think you mix this two things: -people who do stupid things and have the cypres an excuse for it -people who take the cypres as their security standard, and don t see why drop their standards... No you do. 1. People who depend on an AAD or they will not jump, or will limit what they do without it. 2. People who are not dependent on a CYPRES. These people act like they don't have one. I have one, but don't go on skydives where I would need it, or want it. So I don't change a damn thing if I don't have one."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alambic 0 #36 September 12, 2003 I am totally OK with being dependant: I won t do anything stupid thinking "I have a Cypres that s OK"... I will do something stupid (because let s face it real skydivers do stupid things... and after (maybe long after) the jump they say: why did I do this jump, it was stupid), but I won t do them thinking my Cypress was here... I just jump with a Cypres because it allow to do stupid things, but because in a certain extent it gives me an added survival chance in case shits hits the fan...Alambic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #37 September 12, 2003 QuoteI am totally OK with being dependant: I won t do anything stupid thinking "I have a Cypres that s OK"... I will do something stupid (because let s face it real skydivers do stupid things... and after (maybe long after) the jump they say: why did I do this jump, it was stupid), but I won t do them thinking my Cypress was here... And if you REALLY want to be safe... Think ahead of the skydive and realize which ones are higher risk...And then don't do them."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #38 September 12, 2003 QuoteQuotehis sport is about risk management, not bravado. And the best risk managment is to not go on jumps that you would not do if you didn't have a CYPRES. Not to do them anyway and trust the CYPRES to save your ass. THATS risk managment. Relying on a small balck box to save you from your error in judement is stupidity. Ron The bottom line is that despite all your barbs about dependency and the CYPRES generation, fewer people are dying from low pulls than before the CYPRES came along. Maybe the CYPRES generation has it right.... 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
kallend 1,621 #39 September 12, 2003 QuoteQuoteI am totally OK with being dependant: I won t do anything stupid thinking "I have a Cypres that s OK"... I will do something stupid (because let s face it real skydivers do stupid things... and after (maybe long after) the jump they say: why did I do this jump, it was stupid), but I won t do them thinking my Cypress was here... And if you REALLY want to be safe... Think ahead of the skydive and realize which ones are higher risk...And then don't do them. The drop in no-pull fatalities over the last few years suggest that if you want to be safe, use a CYPRES.... 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
kallend 1,621 #40 September 12, 2003 Quote>This sport is about risk management, not bravado. Actually learning how to recover from a spin in an aircraft (by doing it) is bravado? It's certainly dangerous, so much so that the FAA stopped requiring it. Spin training killed more people than the spins themselves. Quote Actually doing a cutaway (on a rig with a tersh) is bravado? That's dangerous as well. Yes, and no one is expected to do it. Quote Actually jumping at night is just bravado? That's dangerous too. Quote yes, and IMO it has minimal training value and should be dropped as a requirement. Actually jumping without an RSL, full face helmet or state of the art protrack is just bravado? Also can be dangerous. Learning to do something by actually doing it has value, no matter how much you want to claim it's just someone's ego talking. A whuffo could claim the same for you - "skydiving is a sport, doing 10-way is just bravado." Doing 10-way has value to me so the risk is worth it IMO. Jumping without a CYPRES has NO training or entertainment value to me so the benefit/risk ratio is zero .... 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
Ron 7 #41 September 12, 2003 QuoteThe bottom line is that despite all your barbs about dependency and the CYPRES generation, fewer people are dying from low pulls than before the CYPRES came along. Maybe the CYPRES generation has it right. But the number of CYPRES fires is larger than the number of low pull fatalities were..... That shows me that more people are less altitude aware than before. While I think the CYPRES is a great toy...The fact that people are depending on them and doing more dangerous things with them than they would do without them is stupid and dangerous. Its a bad thing when people trust a device more than their brains."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alambic 0 #42 September 12, 2003 I let this discussion to go on supporting France team in Gap... But still Ron, If I understand and agree on part of you point of view, (people should make dangerous things because they think they are safe), there is no problem for me in adapting your jumps to the level of security of your equipment (the same as not jumping non FF compliant rigs on FF)Alambic Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #43 September 12, 2003 QuoteGoing low does not equate to death anymore, just a repack and a cutter. Now I've only been skydiving since 2000, but some folks who've been around a lot longer than I have often tell stories of how in the good ol' days it was common to pull at 1000, or lower. Pulling at those altitudes, in the day of the CYPRES equiped rig, usually results in a CYPRES fire, and the "CYPRES SAVE" stories. How many of todays 'saves' would not have resulted in a fatality if the rig were not CYPRES equiped? How many 'CYPRES saves' are actual saves, and not just fires? If you're going to go down this road then maybe it would be prudent to separate CYPRES fires, with CYPRES 'saves'. Going low didn't equate to death in the early days either, not automatically anyway. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #44 September 12, 2003 QuoteQuoteThe bottom line is that despite all your barbs about dependency and the CYPRES generation, fewer people are dying from low pulls than before the CYPRES came along. Maybe the CYPRES generation has it right. But the number of CYPRES fires is larger than the number of low pull fatalities were..... That shows me that more people are less altitude aware than before. While I think the CYPRES is a great toy...The fact that people are depending on them and doing more dangerous things with them than they would do without them is stupid and dangerous. Its a bad thing when people trust a device more than their brains. No -it's technological advance. Like automatic transmissions (yes, I CAN and DO drive a stick shift antique car). Can you weave your own parachute fabric? Can you make a car tire? Can you design a fiber optic switcher? Can you make a ring sight from scratch? Can you generate your own electricity and produce your own clean drinking water? Can you produce all your own food? Can you fly yourself to altitude in an airplane you designed and built from scratch? Or is your entire lifestyle, maybe, DEPENDENT on others. No-pull and low-pull fatalities are way down since the CYPRES was introduced, regardless of how people use one or think about it. THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE.... 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
kallend 1,621 #45 September 12, 2003 QuoteQuoteOnce again I think you mix this two things: -people who do stupid things and have the cypres an excuse for it -people who take the cypres as their security standard, and don t see why drop their standards... No you do. 1. People who depend on an AAD or they will not jump, or will limit what they do without it. 2. People who are not dependent on a CYPRES. These people act like they don't have one. I have one, but don't go on skydives where I would need it, or want it. So I don't change a damn thing if I don't have one. When you are willing to go on skydive without a main, reserve, or harness, I will concede that you are not dependent on any device to save your ass. Give me a call after you've done it, and please send me the video. Until you do this, you just come over like the pot calling the kettle "black".... 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
Ron 7 #46 September 12, 2003 QuoteWhen you are willing to go on skydive without a main, reserve, or harness, I will concede that you are not dependent on any device to save your ass. Big difference read my posts before you jump in..I have ADMITTED I am dependent on a main reserve and rig... Even though I have made jumps without a reserve. Now why don't you admit you are dependent on the CYPRES?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #47 September 12, 2003 QuoteNo-pull and low-pull fatalities are way down since the CYPRES was introduced, regardless of how people use one or think about it. THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE. Yes, but so are the number of people going low.. So the trend seems to be people making more mistakes not less...Its just they have a cool toy save them now."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ianmdrennan 2 #48 September 12, 2003 Does anyone have any data showing the total number # of cypress saves for each year along with the total number of skydives done throughout the world for that year for the last 10 years? I don't know, but I expect more people are skydiving than ever before. I'd be interested in seeing if the percentage of cypress fires is going up, down or staying the same. 10 people skydive, 1 has a fire then 10% had saves...100 people skydive , 1 fire then 1% had saves, etc..... IanPerformance Designs Factory Team Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrumpot 1 #49 September 12, 2003 QuoteMaking a jump without one just to show that you can is equally stupid. This sport is about risk management, not bravado. Maybe ...if again on that opposite side of the spectrum that is the only reason you are jumping (linda like the ol' fashioned "look ma, no hands trick" I'm sure we all know from when we were kids). However, let's say you arive at the DZ, go to power up your Cypres, it errors-out repeatedly & shuts down. Are you grounding yourself? Or on jumprun someone realizes you didn't turn your Cypres on. You staying in the plane? Choosing to go ahead & make your jumps under those scenarios (or not for that matter) is not necessarily "bravado" at all ...just simple personal choice, that's all. Either decision is not "stupid" so long as properly reasoned, and measured against the individual's own PERSONAL tolerance or acceptability of risk & perception and further personal practice of risk management. If you do not feel like you even have that CHOICE (ie: no Cypres, no skydive) YOU ARE DEPENDENT. It is just that plain & simple. Period. My opinion: Cypres' should be a choice. I am free to make mine, you are free to make yours. ---At least until further notice coitus non circum - Moab Stone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,621 #50 September 12, 2003 QuoteQuoteWhen you are willing to go on skydive without a main, reserve, or harness, I will concede that you are not dependent on any device to save your ass. Big difference read my posts before you jump in..I have ADMITTED I am dependent on a main reserve and rig... Even though I have made jumps without a reserve. Now why don't you admit you are dependent on the CYPRES? If you read my posts, you would have seen that I have made a number of 10-way speed jumps without a CYPRES when I had to borrow someone else's rig - so how come I'm any more dependent than you?... 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
