IAD out of a Caravan

[livendive 8]

Who's doing it and how are you doing it (i.e. what kind of exit)? When considering the possibility last year I did one jump as a dummy student and thought the prop blast would be a bit much for a scared first jump student. Now I need to look at changing things up and possibly only having a Caravan to do my entire progression with (was IAD to the clear & pull, then one instructor AFF). I'm prefer to keep IAD in the progression, but only if the students have a good chance of learning and progressing at a relatively normal rate.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Gene03 0]

At the risk of pissing off a lot of people here I'm going to tell you my opinion of IAD (Instructor Assisted Deployment).
I believe this is the laziest and most dangerous advancement allowed to creep into our sport.

Why?

What is a jumpmasters worst nightmare?
A student going unstable on exit and wrapping or snagging the bridle and/or deploying canopy, and possibly a resulting fatality.

This type of incident is almost completely avoided by relying on the time tested and proven direct bag static line system.
Yes, I know there are other factors to consider as well, length of static line, grommets on bag beating side of aircraft, etc.
Okay I've said my piece.

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[livendive 8]

I've been an IAD instructor for 10 or 11 years and haven't seen anything that bad *yet*. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but the worst I've seen so far is things like the bag/canopy coming up through the armpit or around the side farther down the torso. Of course all my S/L experience is PCA rather than direct-bag, so my idea of what looks normal may be different than yours. A static-line PCA deployment just isn't all that different from an IAD deployment.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Gene03 0]

Thank you for considering my opinion on the IAD technique.
I'm not making a personal attack on you.
I firmly believe this method has a lot of "mayhem potential" and should be avoided at all cost, irregardless of its' approval by the USPA.
Doesn't the student deserve the best, time proven methods and equipment we can provide to them, no matter how inconvenient it may be the the packers, riggers or jumpmasters?

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[livendive 8]

Quote

Thank you for considering my opinion on the IAD technique.
I'm not making a personal attack on you.
I firmly believe this method has a lot of "mayhem potential" and should be avoided at all cost, irregardless of its' approval by the USPA.
Doesn't the student deserve the best, time proven methods and equipment we can provide to them, no matter how inconvenient it may be the the packers, riggers or jumpmasters?

If all we went with was time-proven methods, there'd be no AFF, tandem, or IAD. I learned via PCA static-line on a Might Mak canopy with 26' LoPo reserve. I think my students benefit from more modern gear and training.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Gene03 0]

I would not want to go back to the good ole days no matter what.
While I'm not exactly a Luddite I do think there are a lot of good things that have been lost over the years in the sport.

Since you've been a jumpmaster for 10-11 years is it safe to assume you know what shortlining an unstable student is?

I've heard some conversations on IAD that went sort of like this, "Real easy dude, just pitch the pilot chute out the door after the student leaves the step."

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[velvetjo 0]

Quote

I've heard some conversations on IAD that went sort of like this, "Real easy dude, just pitch the pilot chute out the door after the student leaves the step."

That sounds a lot more like a critique of a lazy/sloppy instructor than the technique itself. A SL instructor with a similar attitude would be just as dangerous, no?

There are definitely tradeoffs between the two techniques. The biggest disadvantages I've seen for SL include:

- the possibility of rigging errors converting student rigs between SL & freefall configurations

- more prone to line twists (generally not a big deal, but sometimes leads to panic cutaways)

- gear transition issues (depends on rigging techniques / student equipment)

I'm a low time IAD-I, admittedly. Despite that, I've seen a lot of training methods over the years, and I like the way some DZ's include IAD as part of a tandem / IAD / AFF /coach progression. The idea that a student can check their rig the same way for all solo jumps is good consistency and also prepares them well for the rigs they'll be jumping after they're licensed. I'd be more convinced of the danger if IAD students were burning in with bridles wrapped around their appendages, but that doesn't seem to be the case despite a lot of IAD's still being dispatched every year.

I'm with you in saying that we shouldn't lose the good things as we move forward. It's part of our job to take the best of each technique and give it to our students.

Lance

[Andrewwhyte 1]

How long does a system need to be in use to be "time tested?" I think IAD has been around quite long enough that we are well aware of its strengths and weaknesses. Everyone's experiences will not be the same, but my experience with D-bag static line was a higher malfunction rate due to out of sequence deployment issues.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Since you've been a jumpmaster for 10-11 years is it safe to assume you know what shortlining an unstable student is?

I've heard some conversations on IAD that went sort of like this, "Real easy dude, just pitch the pilot chute out the door after the student leaves the step."

Yep, and short-lining an IAD student is just as easy as shortlining a S/L student. The latter sounds like a lazy instructor, which is no more or less likely in an IAD environment than any other.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[BIGUN 1,051]

Quote

Who's doing it and how are you doing it (i.e. what kind of exit)? When considering the possibility last year I did one jump as a dummy student and thought the prop blast would be a bit much for a scared first jump student. Now I need to look at changing things up and possibly only having a Caravan to do my entire progression with (was IAD to the clear & pull, then one instructor AFF). I'm prefer to keep IAD in the progression, but only if the students have a good chance of learning and progressing at a relatively normal rate.

You guys can debate the advantages/disadvantages of IAD -S/L down the hall in another thread... To get back on track with your question, Dave. When doing IAD out of a Caravan, I've found the AFF student position of (facing the front of the A/C in a crouch) gives me the best control over the student and the smoothest exit. I've actually had more creativity from the students hanging off the 182, than with the AFF position out of a Caravan. The other thing I like about the Caravan over 182 IAD path is the greater control we have over the P/C - Right side and inside the A/C at all times.

Aircraft atitude and speed is important.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

The other thing I like about the Caravan over 182 IAD path is the greater control we have over the P/C - Right side and inside the A/C at all times.

I don't see why right side is any better than left side, the pin is in the middle.
The fact that the P/C is out of the air flow is definitely an advantage. This is similar to the U-206 or Beech 18 exit. I can see, however, that the crouching exit would be much easier for the student than the one cheek in one cheek out exit used for the 206 and Beech.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

The other thing I like about the Caravan over 182 IAD path is the greater control we have over the P/C - Right side and inside the A/C at all times.

I don't see why right side is any better than left side, the pin is in the middle.
The fact that the P/C is out of the air flow is definitely an advantage. This is similar to the U-206 or Beech 18 exit. I can see, however, that the crouching exit would be much easier for the student than the one cheek in one cheek out exit used for the 206 and Beech.

I can see a bit of a difference between right side door and left side door, and that's when they get to practice pulls. Out of a 182 or 206, deployment is originating from the student's left side while their right hand is headed for their hip. Out of a Caravan, the deployment is originating from the right while their right hand is headed for their hip. I don't *think* this should cause a problem, but I can kind of imagine it. Could those of you who've done IAD's out of a left side door pipe in?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[riggerrob 558]

Congratulations Gene03!

You just set a new record for hijacking a thread!

It's luddites like you who hold students back.

Maybe if you completed your profile, we would take you more seriously.

If you care to lay d$##@!s ... er logbooks on the table ...
I have been a static-line instructor on-and-off since 1982 and an IAD jump-master on-and-off since 1984. My ratings were issued by both CSPA and USPA.
I was damn glad when I dropped my last static-line student in Beiseker, Alberta in September of 2006, because I was never comfortable with that snake's nest on the airplane floor or the risk of strangling a student.

The bottom line, is I have many years of experience with both systems and far prefer IAD.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

C'mon Rob, stop beating around the bush ant tell us what you really think.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

I can see a bit of a difference between right side door and left side door, and that's when they get to practice pulls. Out of a 182 or 206, deployment is originating from the student's left side while their right hand is headed for their hip. Out of a Caravan, the deployment is originating from the right while their right hand is headed for their hip. I don't *think* this should cause a problem, but I can kind of imagine it. Could those of you who've done IAD's out of a left side door pipe in?

Blues,
Dave

Well, i have done IAD out of a beech 18, but not training pulls. To tell you the truth I have never had the pilot chute interfere with the student's dummy pull on an IAD. I have, however had those problems on a static line jump with the d-bag ripping the student's altimeter of their wrist (more than once).

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

How long does a system need to be in use to be "time tested?" I think IAD has been around quite long enough that we are well aware of its strengths and weaknesses.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

How about twenty-plus years?

History lesson: IAD was invented in Georgia or Alabama circa 1975, shortly after hand-deployed pilot chutes were invented.
Unfortunately, USPA treated it the same way they treated AFF. USPA killed IAD.

Fast forward to 1979 when Tom MacCarthy introduced IAD to Gananoque, Ontario. Tom learned a lot of things the hard way during his first few years of IAD. For example, he learned that hanging on to pilot chutes too long increased the malfunction rate of Para-Commanders.
Over the next few years, the boys in Clareshom, Alberta worked more of the bugs out of IAD. The last major bug was worked out by a bandit DZ in the prairies. By the late 1980s, most Canadian DZs had converted to IAD.

Fast forward to the late 1990s when most American DZs had converted to IAD.

• Quote

[Erwinjr 0]

Thats it...its been around for years....And it has provern it strong and weak points....Would it be my first choice...NO....would i leave a student on the ground if it was the only thing availible..NO...
Just my 2 cents...

[Unstable 8]

Quote

How about twenty-plus years?

History lesson: IAD was invented in Georgia or Alabama circa 1975, shortly after hand-deployed pilot chutes were invented.
Unfortunately, USPA treated it the same way they treated AFF. USPA killed IAD.

Fast forward to 1979 when Tom MacCarthy introduced IAD to Gananoque, Ontario. Tom learned a lot of things the hard way during his first few years of IAD. For example, he learned that hanging on to pilot chutes too long increased the malfunction rate of Para-Commanders.
Over the next few years, the boys in Clareshom, Alberta worked more of the bugs out of IAD. The last major bug was worked out by a bandit DZ in the prairies. By the late 1980s, most Canadian DZs had converted to IAD.

Fast forward to the late 1990s when most American DZs had converted to IAD.

I think RiggerRob has brought a lot of really good points to the table. I may not have 20+ years tossing students, but I've learned enough to be safe in 4+ years of training students on the SL method. They both have their pro's and cons. IMHO, it's pretty easy to mess up both methods with a lazy jump master, but the fact you can train students more economically than AFF has allowed MANY people to progress and join our sport than if we had AFF alone.

Back to the original thread...

I would tend to think IAD would be wise out of a caravan. Riggerrob, traditionally, where would the SL attachment for a Caravan or Otter go, if IAD was not available?

=========Shaun ==========

[riggerrob 558]

Wow!
I have never jumped from a Caravan rigged for static-line.
Try asking the Brits in Neatherhaven or Bad Lipspringer.

And it has been at least a decade since I jumped from a Twin Otter rigged for static-line (California City). I vaguely remember the static-line anchor being hooked to a seat belt???

[Unstable 8]

Quote

I vaguely remember the static-line anchor being hooked to a seat belt???

Huh?!? Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't a SL be connected to a structural support component of the AC? Does a seat-belt provide a safe anchor?

=========Shaun ==========

[stratostar 5]

(in best chong voice) OH naw man we just like hook it right there, man.

Look at most 182's and p206's and you'll see the S/L attachment point is the seat belt attachment, very common and could be said to be part of the "structural support"m depending on how you look at it.

The S/L's I've done out of caravans and totters were just using the cargo attachment points in the rear to hook the S/L. IAD's were a cake walk on both those ac's

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

Quote

I vaguely remember the static-line anchor being hooked to a seat belt???

Huh?!? Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't a SL be connected to a structural support component of the AC? Does a seat-belt provide a safe anchor?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The official DeHavilland static-line anchor probably bolts to a structural cargo tie-down, but it also costs thousands of dollars, so most civilian DZs just clip static/lines to seat belt anchors. Maybe ask their local rigger to sew a D-Ring to an old seatbelt.

[JohnMitchell 14]

Making sure the static line loads are pulling longitudinally on the seat belt attachments, not side loading the seat belt attachment points like so many of those C-182 rigged up jobs did.

[riggerrob 558]

John,

That would require "eyeball engineering," or the ability to visualize a simple structural load path. Unfortunately, "eyeball engineering" is a talent rarely acquired by computer age skydivers.

Master Riggers are expected to magically acquire the skill to "eyeball engineer" the same as they are expected to acquire skills in vacuum cleaner repair and mind-reading.

[JohnMitchell 14]

I've always said a little mechanical ability goes a long way in our sport. Knowing how machines and "stuff" work and break can nip a lot of incidents in the bud.