Ron 7 #26 January 7, 2011 QuoteA previous poster talked about 'square, stable, steerable' but how can you be sure about solid flight characteristics @ or below 50 ft when you are @ 3500ft? The same way we all do on each jump we make, the same way we expect students to make that choice on their very first jump."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
Liemberg 0 #27 January 7, 2011 QuoteThe same way we all do on each jump we make, the same way we expect students to make that choice on their very first jump. Err on the side of caution? My reserve opening will be non terminal if I cut it away. No reason why the reserve shouldn't work as advertised... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 100 #28 January 7, 2011 QuoteThe same way we all do on each jump we make, the same way we expect students to make that choice on their very first jump. " Yeah , but a student is usually jumping under slightly more controlled conditions, regarding wind speeds, turbulence, canopy size and sometimes has independant input via radio..... A TM (or prospect) supposedly, has better decision making skills.My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mailed_Fist 0 #29 January 7, 2011 QuoteThey did notice... VERY hard opening. They thought they had end cell closure because that side of the canopy didnt inflate..(then they noticed the real problem when they could see the sun through the cells I hope the decision to ride it in was just a bad decision and not a bad decision that was based on the perceived need to: -Keep the rig on-line and earning $$, with another main attached, and/or -Keep the rig on-line to continue making training jumps, with another main attached, and/or -Keep the cost down, by not having to pay for a reserve re-pack Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airathanas 0 #30 January 7, 2011 Quote Like in "you live and learn"... You have to LIVE to learn. There are a lot of mistakes that I don't want to learn the hard way in skydiving. This is especially true because I made a huge mistake on my last jump and I'm limping around in a knee brace because of it. Yeah we learn from mistakes but we also learn from success. Yes if I knew that the cells were blown out and we were above decision altitude I would have cut that bitch away. Especially as the passenger. The passenger is the one who is most likely to be injured on the landing because they hit the ground first. If that's me, fuck yeah I would cut away. But I also realize that saying what I would do is one thing, and actually being in the situation is another.http://3ringnecklace.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomNoonan 1 #31 January 7, 2011 QuoteNext thing of course: What to do if the pax elects he wants to get rid of it, while the TI-prospect would rather stay? You bring up a very good point here, especially with the Strong system that has Safety (or "Chicken" as they are often called) handles that allow the jumper in the student position to activate both the cutaway and reserve from the front. In the tandem courses I teach, we actually have a section that addresses the use of the handles. the idea being that any disagreement that could occur on whether or not to chop a canopy, is gone through on the ground before the jump and resolved prior to making the jump. It goes like this: "If we encounter a partial malfunction that is debatable in whether or not we cutaway or not, and altitude permits, we need to agree now that we will work as a team to resolve the issue together prior to deciding on a course of action and following it. If we cannot reach an agreement, here is the flow diagram of action on a disagreement: Examiner in front/Candidate in Back = Defer to Examiners decision Candidate in front/Candidate in back = defer to candidate in back as they are acting as PIC on the jump and literally have a better view of the situation. Experienced jumper in front/ tandem instructor or candidate in back = defer to tandem instructor or candidate in the back. Those are the rules set forth in the course, and I get the candidates to agree on them on the ground prior to the jump. I ask them to reach the same agreement with anyone they may take on a recurrency jump or Phase II jump. If the experienced jumper doesn't want to give up that right, that's cool, just find another person to do the jump with. Why do this? One of the WORST possible scenarios that could occur in a disagreement on whether to chop or not would be the person on the back wanting to keep it and the person on the front chopping it anyways. The person on the back could have their hands up in the lines trying to clear something and then POOF they are gone from the main, except for the TIs hand or hands now stuck in the mess above them. The chances of disagreeing on EPs like that are very very slim, but.....it costs nothing to put a plan in place just in case to prevent it from ever becoming a mutiny at 4000ft. As for whether or not to chop 4 blown cells, here's my thoughts on that: Based on what was described in the malfunction, I would have chopped it. But bear in mind, as Ron said, it's not a black and white decision, its a grey area. A 4 cell failure, even in turbulence, is more than likely survivable. Break an ankle or worse? Yeah, probably in turbulence, but your alive. Imagine the speculation that would occur here if you went in on a reserve that malfunctioned AFTER chopping a blown out main that was still flying. I'm not saying that them keeping the main was the right thing to do. I didn't see the amount of damage that "blown out" referenced, and I haven't talked to the people under it, so I don't know what they could actually see. In the end, bad decision or not, they survived. There are so many variables involved in such a decision, such as elevation of DZ, wind conditions, where they are landing (open farmland versus metro area), the weights of the two people, etc. So many variables beyond just the canopy itself. And if you remember back in the day, some of the first ram air parachutes were DC-5 five cells. So, if a tandem instructor is Old School, he (or she) may think, "Hey, I'm back on my DC-5". Again, I am not advocating whether what they did was correct or not. I know so little about the specifics that I don't feel justified in making a call like that. What I can say though is that in my experience, based on what was said, I would have chopped it, but also recognize that there are a number of factors involved that I may not be aware of that could have possibly justified them keeping the main canopy. Last thing to mention, tandem parachutes are built bigger than sport parachutes for a variety or reasons, one of them being to simply put more fabric than needed over our heads to give us an extra margin of protection in situations such as this.Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #32 January 7, 2011 QuoteErr on the side of caution? Yes, but which is considered the safer side? QuoteNo reason why the reserve shouldn't work as advertised... Except, that they sometimes mal. We all have heard the stories of a reserve mal..... Some have actually had a mal. So like any parachute, they can malfunction. So if you felt the canopy was flying fine, had a good flare..... Why would you chop it?"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 #33 January 7, 2011 QuoteYeah , but a student is usually jumping under slightly more controlled conditions, regarding wind speeds, turbulence, canopy size and sometimes has independant input via radio..... Wind speeds: So what if the winds were a constant 10MPH? Turbulence: What if the landing area was in the middle of nowhere with not a single tree to create turbulence? Canopy size: A 100 pound PAX and myself weigh 260 pounds... Add 60 for gear and we are at 320. So on a Sigma II 370 we would be about .88 WL. About the same as a student... Radio: And about the radio.... The TI is *flying the canopy*. that is much better than telling a student what to do and hoping they do it. QuoteA TM (or prospect) supposedly, has better decision making skills Yes, and don't you think they should use those skills to asses the situation and not just automatically cutaway when they may be safe to land the canopy?"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 January 7, 2011 QuoteA 4 cell failure, even in turbulence, is more than likely survivable. Break an ankle or worse? Yeah, probably in turbulence, but your alive. Imagine the speculation that would occur here if you went in on a reserve that malfunctioned AFTER chopping a blown out main that was still flying..... There are so many variables involved in such a decision, such as elevation of DZ, wind conditions, where they are landing (open farmland versus metro area), the weights of the two people, etc. So many variables beyond just the canopy itself. I would have chopped it, but also recognize that there are a number of factors involved that I may not be aware of that could have possibly justified them keeping the main canopy. Last thing to mention, tandem parachutes are built bigger than sport parachutes for a variety or reasons, one of them being to simply put more fabric than needed over our heads to give us an extra margin of protection in situations such as this. Thank you for saying so well what I was unable to put out there. My whole point was that as TI's (even just skydivers) we have to make judgment calls. And that includes looking at all the options. I don't know what the extent of the damage was, but they did land it safely. And yes, if they had crashed I would most likely been a voice in the chorus asking why they didn't chop it. I do know that I meet every Jr. jumper I see land after having a malfunction with, "Congratulations!!!! You did the right thing! Now, what happened?" I don't tend to think these guys did anything wrong. They were there, they saw the damage, they knew the conditions, and they both (apparently) landed fine. I would be VERY interested in hearing from the jumpers in question..... If they read this, hell, PM me so I can find out more. I'll keep your data secret."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
skyrider 0 #35 January 7, 2011 Quote Quote I think it would have made a better story if they disagreed and argued about it, on video of course. ~ plus 1 OCC of skydiving? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 100 #36 January 8, 2011 QuoteWind speeds: So what if the winds were a constant 10MPH? Fine if that was the case, but wind conditions can change between takeoff and exit....and I'm not sure if many people in a cutaway situation would be consciously thinking or factoring possible wind speeds on the ground when making the decision. QuoteTurbulence: What if the landing area was in the middle of nowhere with not a single tree to create turbulence? Trees are not the only things that can generate turbulence.....in fact you can be many miles from the source of turbulence.... QuoteCanopy size: A 100 pound PAX and myself weigh 260 pounds... Add 60 for gear and we are at 320. So on a Sigma II 370 we would be about .88 WL. About the same as a student... Not sure if we are aware of the wing loading on this particular jump, but the OP suggested "two big guys". Quote Radio: And about the radio.... The TI is *flying the canopy*. that is much better than telling a student what to do and hoping they do it. Of course the experienced jumper is better able to fly the canopy... QuoteQuote A TM (or prospect) supposedly, has better decision making skills Yes, and don't you think they should use those skills to asses the situation and not just automatically cutaway when they may be safe to land the canopy? No where did I suggest that the TM in this case made an incorrect decision....it was his call, he was there. The safe thing to do in this situation is simply to make a decision, either way and stick to it, as these guys did. I was simply making the comparison that tandems often operate in conditions which are a bit more extreme than students, and fair enough too....the TM is an experienced jumper, after all. In this case it worked out fine.....but as some others have pointed out here, it is well worth discussing some of the variables that might have resulted in a different decision or outcome. This thread has no doubt provided good food for thought....My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trae 1 #37 February 2, 2011 in reply to "it's not a black and white decision, its a grey area." .................................... mmmmm .... this incident was during a tandem training course ? and the trainee didn't cut away . Hard to believe. Sounds very unpro. Were they over water or something? Worried about losing the main? Wonder if the trainer(gear owner) took over and recommended not cutting away. ? Their decision to not cut-away sounds very questionable and seems to ignore the potential dangers . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #38 February 2, 2011 Anecdotal - but one thing comes to mind for me. I had a very experienced friend with a torn canopy - small tear. Not a tandem, sport rig - one cell affected as visible from below anyway. The canopy was "there, square, stable, steerable" so he decided to land it instead of going for silver. At about 300 feet, he finally noticed that, though the canopy seemed to fly fine, his decent rate was about 2-3 times faster than normal. He only sat out 3 months healing from the landing. that said - every situation is only real to the pilot and they have to do what they think is best.... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obelixtim 100 #39 February 3, 2011 QuoteAt about 300 feet, he finally noticed that, though the canopy seemed to fly fine, his decent rate was about 2-3 times faster than normal. He only sat out 3 months healing from the landing. He obviously didn't know about the good old "spit" test, we used to talk about back in the good old roundie days. If you are under canopy and wondering about your descent rate, lob a big goobie into space. If it falls below you, you are OK. If it goes up.....cutaway.... Make sure you a are not facing into the wind, or it'll come back in your face...although under a ramair you might want to lob it out to one side....My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #40 February 3, 2011 Quote in the good old roundie days..... fewer and fewer of you left I'm 24 years into the sport and only have 1 round jump total nice trick though ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #41 February 3, 2011 QuoteQuoteAt about 300 feet, he finally noticed that, though the canopy seemed to fly fine, his decent rate was about 2-3 times faster than normal. He only sat out 3 months healing from the landing. He obviously didn't know about the good old "spit" test, we used to talk about back in the good old roundie days. If you are under canopy and wondering about your descent rate, lob a big goobie into space. If it falls below you, you are OK. If it goes up.....cutaway.... Make sure you a are not facing into the wind, or it'll come back in your face...although under a ramair you might want to lob it out to one side.... Too add: if your matched in decent rate, judgment call and prepare to CHPLF MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrianM 1 #42 February 3, 2011 QuoteMake sure you a are not facing into the wind, or it'll come back in your face...although under a ramair you might want to lob it out to one side.... A round moves relative to the air mass just like a square does! In other words, the results will be identical whether you are facing into the wind or away from it - even under a round."It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 6 #43 February 4, 2011 Too add: if your matched in decent rate, judgment call and prepare to CHPLF Quote Well...At my weight, jumping the Papillon...liquid matched the decent rate. It was actually kinda cool, spit and it would float away as if weightless, take a cross-country leak under canopy and it would go straight out in a line...but the best was jumping in rain, the droplets you opened with stayed with ya until landing! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #44 February 4, 2011 QuoteA round moves relative to the air mass just like a square does! In other words, the results will be identical whether you are facing into the wind or away from it - even under a round. With an unmodified round you are correct, the jumper will drift at about the same speed as the wind. However, any modifications that create FWD drive will change that. So if the spit is traveling at the same speed as the wind.... You could easily fly into it under a square and even under a modified round. And most people on here will never jump a round. So if they "spit into the wind", they will be spitting on themselves. I can also recommend not pulling the mask off the Lone Ranger, and I'd stay away from Jim."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
obelixtim 100 #45 February 4, 2011 Quotebut the best was jumping in rain, the droplets you opened with stayed with ya until landing! Jumping in the rain..... painful....like jumping into a prickle bush, was the serious advice we students were given way back then....because the shape of the raindrops and the slow speed they were falling compared to freefall, meant you were landing on the pointy part on top of the raindrops, and after landing they would be all stuck in your face.....My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skygypsie 2 #46 February 6, 2011 Quote Quote Personally, no. If it's blown one (or more) cells, to me there is an increased risk of complete fabric failure - depending on the tear of course. Not worth the risk to me if it's that bad. YMMV. Absolutely...sure it can be done, but why drive home on a flat when there is a good spare in the trunk. Brad experienced a D line snap on a Vector 365 tandem opening this past season...no blown cells, however...all while flying handi-cam ! On opening the jolt of the hard opening sublexated his 'cutaway' shoulder. He did a controllability check, found the canopy to fly well, so he decided to keep the main, but with a 260# passenger & realizing the fatigue & weakness to his shoulder at about 1500'... he wished he would've chopped. The passenger had to assist in the flare, but combined with stronger than desirable cross winds on landing, & wet landing area, causing a not so smooth butt slide, combined with a TI's typical "lay out the body to protect the student"...he suffered 2 herniated discs & compressed nerve in his lower back. The student was fine, never knew the difference & figured the flare assist was part of the $$ he paid, to do the jump...since Brad gives his students the toggles for a bit while under canopy ! The following weekend & his next tandem, he took me up to see how 'do able' his body was. I've done enough jumps, to assist if he were in trouble in turns & flaring.. 10 minutes after landing we left for the ER ! Needless to say, his season was cut short & he was out of jumping all together for a minimum of 12 weeks. He's an experienced TI of 6 years; with 1500 tandem jumps on both Strong & Vector-Sigma's, but he had to make a judgement call: having a heavy student on a much larger canopy ( reserve @ 500) assist in flaring with a blown shoulder; though the reserve would've landed slower,... or continue with a flyable main & land a lighter canopy ! Decisons throughout all jumps, need to be made in a nano second ! The outcome could've been much worst. That's the part that causes us grief as a Staff couple. I hear the shouts of someone's issues, while packing...I know my husband's on the load & I witness the incidences. This by far was my least favorite... I wasn't sure he was getting up this time The video was pretty interesting...he definitely earned his $65 for that jump, though the medical bills are 100x Though each season I get abit more anxious to the reality of his career choice, We're both looking forward to our 2011 season to get under way, in a few weeks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BrianM 1 #47 February 11, 2011 QuoteQuoteA round moves relative to the air mass just like a square does! In other words, the results will be identical whether you are facing into the wind or away from it - even under a round. With an unmodified round you are correct With a modified round, I am also correct! What the spit does relative to you will be the same regardless of whether you are flying into the wind or with it - airspeed is the same in both cases. ***I can also recommend not pulling the mask off the Lone Ranger, and I'd stay away from Jim. I wouldn't tug on superman's cape either. ... but if your name is Willie McCoy, then Jim better watch out!"It's amazing what you can learn while you're not talking." - Skydivesg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
playgroundguy 0 #48 March 2, 2011 I will say that I did just finish the TICC, haven't even done my phase two jumps yet. But whoever thinks that this mal is not black and white is crazy! Chop that thing! I wonder if the original poster is even accurate about 4 blown cells and they landed it uneventfully. That thing could further disintegrate at any moment! CHOP IT!Good, Better, Best, never let it rest 'till your good better and your better best Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #49 March 4, 2011 Quote I will say that I did just finish the TICC, haven't even done my phase two jumps yet. But whoever thinks that this mal is not black and white is crazy! So with 5(?) tandem jumps you think you already know what is good and what is bad even though you were not there.... Never mind that the people that are the subject of this thread walked away fine??? "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
obelixtim 100 #50 March 4, 2011 Quote That thing could further disintegrate at any moment! CHOP IT! Just on that point..... Its my opinion that once the damage has occured, little further damage to the canopy is likely to happen. Parachutes don't just "disintegrate" like a wet biscuit. Thats why they are constructed the way they are, with panels, and seams, which provide pretty effective reinforcement for just such a scenario.... Once the initial "explosion" has occurred the damage is generally done. I can recall doing a test jump one time on just such a blown canopy, just to see what would occur, and after a terminal opening, the canopy suffered no further damage. (I weigh around 100 kilos btw, and I chopped the canopy after riding it around and seeing how it reacted to various toggle inputs. It behaved remarkably well.). Not saying that further damage can never occur, but it showed that generally, "disintegration" is unlikely. Its another story landing a damaged canopy, again, its the effects of turbulence close to the ground that can give you quite an adrenalin rush (tried that one time too, through simple stupidity....not recommended). My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
