Static line students using a BOC or RIPCORD for first freefalls?

[listo 0]

Well, the subject of a static line student progressing to free fall with a BOC or RIPCORD has come to light.
For obvious reasons I believe that the ripcord would be much better. First of all a ripcord deployment uses a spring loaded pilot chute.

Lets talk about the differences between a spring loaded pilot chute vs. throw out. First of all a spring loaded pilot chute when activated is about roughly 2 feet long with a spring holding it open. A throw out could collapse around a leg, arm, body or so on. A spring loaded chute will always catch air and deploy. Lets say for whatever reason a pilot chute gets caught in a burble. The spring loaded chute is more likely to clear itself before a throw out because once again the spring is holding it open and therefore it has more surface area to catch the wind. Now, speaking of entanglement issues, I believe that the throw out is a lot more likely for a static line progression student to become entangled in. After all, you are getting the student to hold onto something directly attached to the bridle. A spring loaded chute never involves the student's hand touching anything that is attached to the bridle.

For first free falls, I believe that a ripcord is much safer for use because of the pilot chute incorportated. As for the handle location, there really isn't a difference. From what I have seen the most difference would only be about 2 inches, which is still within a hand width.

I can honestly say that I would never put a static line progression student out on a BOC unless I was able to jump with the student in an AFF type atmosphere and even then, I would fly "close" the whole time, at least until the student had been to full altitude for a total of at least 5 free falls and only if this student had demonstrated excellent body position while in free fall as well as during the reaching and deployment phases.The problem with this is that the student would have to have be executing manuevers by this time in his/her progression so it would be really hard for someone that hasn't been trained for AFF to get in and correct what is wrong.

This leads me to my other topic of personal pet peaves with a static line progression. I think that once a static line progression student is in free fall, he/she needs to be accompanied by an AFF rated instructor. A coach rating or someone that has just got a SL rating with only 200 jumps is more than likely NOT going to be able to "get in" and fix a problem with stability. I have seen this too much and it really scares the poo out of me.

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[masher 1]

Thats easy for us Australians.

Students use ripcords and SOS rigs here.

No BOCs and TAS until you've finished your training table.

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[jerm 0]

Quote

Thats easy for us Australians.

Students use ripcords and SOS rigs here.

No BOCs and TAS until you've finished your training table.

I still fail to see the logic in SOS. Why teach someone them the WRONG way to do it? IF you're scared of someone not chopping in a mal then you drill it into them until they don't have to think about it anymore... more repetition, build the muscle memory, you're only going to have to through it again later and try to UN-program what you just got done teaching them a few jumps ago.

Sorry, one of MY pet peeves.

edit: Oh yeah, you say no BOC... why is this? you can put a ripcord in the BOC location and still not have whatever issues you have with a throwout. Again, teach them the right way the first time. (even if you prefer PUD, BoC is a lot closer then a bell-mounted ripcord.)

Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

[jerm 0]

Quote

Well, the subject of a static line student progressing to free fall with a BOC or RIPCORD has come to light.
For obvious reasons I believe that the ripcord would be much better. First of all a ripcord deployment uses a spring loaded pilot chute.

Well, it's not obvious to me.... let me provide my spin on it

Quote

only if this student had demonstrated excellent body position while in free fall as well as during the reaching and deployment phases.

During the static line portion of the progression the student should be doing PRCPs. Do you let them freefall before they can do them properly and consistently?

Also during the static line portion they should be practicing proper body position and stability during exit and the first few seconds of freefall/deployment. Do you let them freefall before they can hold body position and stay stable through exit?

Once they're up to freefall they should have the basics down of deploying for themselves and staying stable. Why is a throwout bad in this situation?

A spring-loaded PC can get caught in a burble just as a throwout can. I've seen it. Proper deployment procedures (Arch, reach, pull, arch, CHECK) should alleviate this problem for either system.

If the student in unstable, a Spring-load can be just as prone to wrap/horseshoe someone as a throwout. In fact, the always-open nature of the spring load could conceivably work against you in such a litation, a deflated PC could be easier to un-tangle from because it would not be pulling on the student as you mention a spring-load always would be.


I'm not, however, completely against spring-loads so long as the students are NOT taught to hold onto the ripcords.

Work the replacement cost into the jump and teach them the right way form the beginning. You're more likely to have someone hold onto a throwout PC once the transition if they've been taught from the beginning to hold on after pulling -- teach them right the first time (see my earlier post).

Quote

think that once a static line progression student is in free fall, he/she needs to be accompanied by an AFF rated instructor

Agreed. This is why we do IADs and then an IAF type progression (one instructor).
I think onf of the big reasons for continuing complete static-line programs, though, is a large lack of AFF instructors at the DZs that run them. Hence an inherent difficulty in such a plan and a reason why USPA is screaming for more AFF instructors.



Blue skies, soft landings.

Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

[masher 1]

clarification: I don't know about the positioning of the ripcord. I don't know if the regs state where it should be. Mine was chest mounted.

SOS isn't bad. Why do you call it the wrong way? Whats wrong with it? It cuts down on a handle, it gives less things for the student to remember... As a student, you're concentrating on falling, and not hurting yourself.

Once you get to the stage of using TAS, you don't have to worry about falling, and can start to worry about other things.

.

NB This coming from a 40 jump wonder with ~5 BOC/TAS jumps under his belt and the rest RC/SOS

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[masher 1]

>I'm not, however, completely against spring-loads so long as the students are NOT taught to hold onto the ripcords.

.

At $60 a pop, I don't think so. That ripcord isn't going anywhere...

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[jerm 0]

Quote

At $60 a pop, I don't think so. That ripcord isn't going anywhere...

Hmm, ours were $5

Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

[jerm 0]

Quote

clarification: I don't know about the positioning of the ripcord. I don't know if the regs state where it should be. Mine was chest mounted.

i don't think there are regs on this. But why teach you to reach for your chest to deploy, then have you re-learn later on?

Quote

As a student, you're concentrating on falling, and not hurting yourself.

Are you really saying that freefall stability is more important than knowing emergency procedures?
As a student your first priority should be saving your life. Once you deploy you don't have that instructor with you anymore to help out, and it's up to you to do so.

Quote

SOS isn't bad. Why do you call it the wrong way? Whats wrong with it? It cuts down on a handle, it gives less things for the student to remember...

After pulling, the next step in saving your life is dealing with a malfunction. What do you think is more confusing, teaching them the proper way from the beginning (more to remember but they don't know that), or drilling one way into their head for 10 jumps only to then tell them later on:
"sorry, ok forget all that stuff we pounded into you and learn this NEW way. Oh and don't revert back to the first way (natural reaction in a crisis) cause it will kill you"

If someone is going to revert back to their roots, i want their roots to be the right ones.

SOS is wrong because it's not how real-life equipment works

Quote

Once you get to the stage of using TAS, you don't have to worry about falling, and can start to worry about other things.

You always have to worry about falling. You always have to worry about other things. That's why the FJC is so long... repetition, repetition, repetition. Building habit and muscle memory, so that you don't have to think about them all the time, but you'll remember (or your body may if not your brain) when the time comes.

Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

[riggerrob 558]

SOS made sense back when the vast majority of one-jump-wonders went static-line. The logic was they were not bright enough to pull two handles to save their lives.
THank God that most of these one-jump-wonders now go tandem!

Oh, and one of my students proved that you can mess up even an SOS. He pulled his handle far enough to release his main risers, but when he felt resistance (reserve ripcord pins) he quit pulling and waited for Mr. FXC to save his life.

[masher 1]

No RSL?

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[bluefingers 0]

Hi
student here! I've done SL progression in SOuth Africa ... currently trying to pass my first 15sec (had a prob keeping a heading on my last jump).

Re BOC, we only do the BOC conversion once we have completed the Cat 1 prog (ie done all the turns, spin test, full series, delta, track etc etc). THEN we do the BOC conversion. I can't argue for or against, simply because I don't know ....

One thing in your post confused me though ..

Quote

A coach rating or someone that has just got a SL rating with only 200 jumps is more than likely NOT going to be able to "get in" and fix a problem with stability.

If I had gone unstable in one of my 10sec jumps, or heaven forbid, one of my upcoming jumps, how is the instructor going to get in and fix the prob if he's looking at me from the door of the plane? (C182 dropzone). Surely it's up to me to be heads up enough to arch hard and get stable, not forgetting the three rules of freefall, of course.

As for progressing to the next level, I don't know about other dz's, but at ours, if you don't get it right, you don't progress. It's as simple as that. (Ask me, I've done loads of DRCP's, getting my arch right. And it worked, because although I can't keep a heading YET, I'm stable.)

Listo, I've been reading your posts regarding progression and body position with interest. Thanks!

Kerry

[listo 0]

Quote

If I had gone unstable in one of my 10sec jumps, or heaven forbid, one of my upcoming jumps, how is the instructor going to get in and fix the prob if he's looking at me from the door of the plane? (C182 dropzone). Surely it's up to me to be heads up enough to arch hard and get stable, not forgetting the three rules of freefall, of course.

This is my point exactly. There is no way an instructor could help an unstable student on a 5 or 10 second delay jump. I really believe that this is the most dangerous way for a student to learn. Leaving it up to the student in my opinion is just simply not a good way to do things. Not when we have other means of training available.

I would say this to any static line progression student out there who may be reading this. Once you are off of the static line and on the 5 or 10 second delay, do yourself a justice and ask to go on a tandem "instructed" jump or an AFF before continueing on further. It would help you to become more comfortable and probably lessen the chances of going unstable.

Quote

(had a prob keeping a heading on my last jump).

try doing toe taps while in free fall, this will get your feet to be even and probably stop your heading problems. (something you would learn in an AFF course) Good luck with it.

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[riggerrob 558]

That scary incident with SOS occurred back in 1984, befrore RSLs became mandatory for students. Before the incident I questioned the value of RSLS. Nowadays I refuse to dispatch students without RSLs.

[riggerrob 558]

listo certainly is dogmatic!

Too bad his side lost the argument in Gananoque, Ontario in 1979. Most Canadian DZs followed suit in the mid-1980s. Too bad it took most American DZs another decade to catch up.
A little Canadian jingoism there on my part. Ha! Ha!
Back in 1979, Tom MacArthy revived an old American concept when he introduced IAD to Gananoque, Ontario. Along with IAD, Tom introduced hand-deploy pilotchutes for all his freefall students. Tom also did harness-hold jumps with early freefall students. In the long run most Canadian DZs followed Tom's lead with IAD for first-timers and PFF for first freefallers. Main pilotchutes have migrated from belly-bands to BOC.

There are two reasons why most Canadian DZs still run PFF parellel to traditonal progression. First, the old school method is better for cash-strapped students. Secondly, over the winter, many DZs are lucky to get 4,000 feet.

Finally, as a pompous FAA Master Rigger - who packed retired President George Bush's reserve in 1997 - I am not convinced that main ripcords are inherently better. I see ripcords presenting six possible problems, while BOC present a half-dozen other possible problems. In the long run I prefer BOC for its lower maintenance.

[JYorkster 0]

Listo,

First let me say there is logic to your arguments, but I still have to disagree. I am S/L and IAD rated and have used both spring loaded/ripcord and hand deployed pilot chutes. While in theory, a hand deployed pilot chute is easier to hold on to, I have NEVER seen it happen with any of the students I have put out using hand deploy. However, I have seen an unstable student with a ripcord actually grab the spring-loaded pilot chute briefly. Having done both, I actually prefer IAD with hand-deployed BOC pilot chutes. The students learn the correct way to do things from the beginning with no change of equipment or procedures.

As for your argument about whether a S/L instructor can stay close enough to solve a student problem, it is irrelevant. S/L and IAD instructors are not allowed to touch the student or interfere in any way to aid with deployment. If properly trained and not advanced before they are ready, students are perfectly capable of deploying there own canopy on their first freefall. There are thousands of students that have lived through the experience well before AFF was even an option. Proper training is the key.

Rock

[billvon 2,425]

>Lets say for whatever reason a pilot chute gets caught in a burble.
> The spring loaded chute is more likely to clear itself before a throw
> out because once again the spring is holding it open and therefore
> it has more surface area to catch the wind.

I have found the opposite to be true. Springs are heavy and have a lot of inertia; once on a student's back they like to stay there. I got used to the "sit the student up" trick on Level I's to clear PC-in-burble problems. Those problems went away when we switched to throwouts.

>This leads me to my other topic of personal pet peaves with a static
> line progression. I think that once a static line progression student
> is in free fall, he/she needs to be accompanied by an AFF rated
> instructor. A coach rating or someone that has just got a SL rating
> with only 200 jumps is more than likely NOT going to be able to "get
> in" and fix a problem with stability.

Neither is an AFF JM. On an unlinked exit, best case, it would take me 5 seconds to dock on someone, then another 2-3 seconds to get them relatively stable and dump them out. Thinking than an AFF JM could "fix" an unstable student on a 10 second delay isn't reasonable.

It sounds like what you're really saying is that you don't like static line at all. Which is fine, but many DZ's are simply not equipped to be able to do AFF as a training method.

[gale 0]

Just a question here, and I imagine it will just show my newbie-like lack of experience but...

If ripcords are so great why don't experienced skydivers use them?

I've never even seen a ripcord deployed chute so I was wondering why.

Gale

I'm drowning...so come inside
Welcome to my...dirty mind

[billvon 2,425]

>If ripcords are so great why don't experienced skydivers use them?

They do; every rig on the market has a ripcord operated reserve. Most skydivers use throwout/pullouy mains because they're easier to pack, give more reliable operation when operated correctly (i.e. deployed when stable) and are collapsable.

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

Here at Raeford, when we still do the occasional SL student at the school, we use BOC. The Green Beret Sport Parachute Activity, which I taught at for many years, has been using BOC-only in their static line program for at least three years with no problems. The only change at all to the pull sequence is negating the "look" part. Using BOC has negated a lot of the tendency to roll over on your side that came with being able to see the ripcord down at your hip. Since you can't see the BOC hackey even if you try, we have found that many fewer students go torquing their body around on "reach" and thus have much more stable pulls.

As to here at the RPC school, I maintain a couple of older Student Vectors with stow bars on them for SL. What we are planning to do, though, is just start doing IAD in the cases where we have a student that just "wants" to do SL progression due to the percieved lower cost. I have an instructor on staff who is going to run an IAD course for the rest of us so that we are legal. With this move, I can phase out the older rigs altogether and just use my new Student Javs for everything.

Chuck