Canopy collision? anyone seen this one?

[AlexDias 0]

Hey I just read this on 20minutes.ch (swiss free info site): "A skydiver crashes with another skydiver and end up paraplegic" with a video linked...
http://www.20min.ch/ro/videotv/?vid=228357&cid=120

So my question is: has any of you ever seen this? Comments?
I don't know if i am correct but i think he chops and release reserve while completely entangled with the other guy's main.. could that have been avoided ?

Would just like some insight to make sure this doesn't happen again...

Poor guy..

blue skies

[FanOfFalling 0]

Protect your handles when getting wrapped, and/or do not chop a parachute and go back into freefall while wearing another jumpers chute.

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Razz is a very experienced CRW pilot. He visits here from time to time but can be found more easily on the CRW forum.

Hey Jim... what's the story here?

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[pchapman 278]

The first issue is the collision.

Looks like he got in close behind and above his buddy while flying their canopies, while getting video. His buddy hits full brakes and thus very rapidly comes back and up (in relative terms) at the jumper with video.

[Edit - added paragraph:] For those who haven't seen the video, the jumper with the video then ends up with a reserve not inflating much due to being choked off by the main canopy jettisoned by the front jumper. Someone would have to examine the video more closely to determine the detailed sequence of events.

I can imagine the conversation later: "Why did you hit brakes so suddenly - you came right at me!"
"But I thought you said you'd stay clear of me! I didn't see you back there! You should have avoided me."

Proximity canopy flight and CRW concepts have to be learned like anything else to avoid danger. The guy in front did a sudden maneuver (likely not realizing where his buddy was), and the guy behind didn't have the experience to anticipate and avoid in time.

The second issue is what to do after the collision.

I don't know if the jumpers had RSLs, but if they did, they may not have considered disconnection, if they hadn't thought specifically about canopy collision danger.

Cutting away when one's body isn't clear of lines is very bad, unless the options are worse.

I was going to quote something useful from the SIM -- but what's in there is actually rather unhelpful at first glance.

(P.107 of SIM 2012 seems to have the main instructions on what to do after a canopy collision. P. 132 & 133 cover CRW and provide a little more info. RSL's in section 5.3F, p112.)

Usually the SIM is pretty detailed and concise in instructions, but I can't find anything that says that it can be dangerous to cutaway if still entangled in a canopy. Yikes. (Anyone else find better instructions in there?)

The SIM seems a little muddled in its instructions about what to do in case of a collision. It's a messy topic, but still.

[pchapman 278]

Another site, with links to the original youtube video.

http://storyful.com/stories/1000015201

Supposedly happened 4 1/2 yrs ago but video not posted until a day ago.

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Another site, with links to the original youtube video.

http://storyful.com/stories/1000015201

Supposedly happened 4 1/2 yrs ago but video not posted until a day ago.

the Quad camera flyer mentions that it took him four years to be able to look at the footage.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[normiss 733]

I would hope we would all fight more than just hold on and ride.
I would hope we would try to climb up those risers chasing the problem.

Easy to offer armchair advice I realize...but still.
Never stop fighting.
Never give up.

[peregrinerose 0]

How many jumps did the vid guy have? Possible that he was so fixated on getting the video that he didn't respond appropriately when the front guy hit the brakes?

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[dks13827 3]

The video looks real...........but why can't we find info re: this incident ?

[Ron 10]

Quote

The video looks real...........but why can't we find info re: this incident ?

Not every accident gets reported to anyone. Add in that this might have been a few years ago and it was much worse.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[lekstrom10k 0]

I saw this yesterday.WOW . If you listen at the end for the 911 directions its around Columbus Ohio . Or another Columbus.

[johnmatrix 21]

Quote

I would hope we would all fight more than just hold on and ride.
I would hope we would try to climb up those risers chasing the problem.
.

Would someone really be able to climb the suspension lines to try and untangle that?
Honest question - what could one really do at that stage?
I mean sure, never give up, try and climb the lines by all means, but I don't reckon it could be done. Perhaps with a thicker line type it could be...?

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

I saw this yesterday.WOW . If you listen at the end for the 911 directions its around Columbus Ohio . Or another Columbus.

Wisconsin, I believe.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[normiss 733]

It's difficult to guess for me, but there really isn't much material out, IMO anyway.
I'd certainly be tugging with both hands on a riser or two trying to change the attitude of the ball of shit. HARD.

Note to self: check hook knives on rig and consider upgrading them. (no - probably would have been of no use on this jump - but still)

[VideoFly 0]

Where was the S&TA, the DZO, or other experienced skydivers who should have said NO, you are not getting on the plane with a plan for a stunt like that in mind? The jumper is lucky to have survived, and with others on the jump, it could have been much worse. What has happened to JUST SAY NO?

[sacex250 0]

Quote

Where was the S&TA, the DZO, or other experienced skydivers who should have said NO, you are not getting on the plane with a plan for a stunt like that in mind? The jumper is lucky to have survived, and with others on the jump, it could have been much worse. What has happened to JUST SAY NO?

What was the stunt? It seems like two jumpers were just flying together and the second jumper was too close entrail when the first jumper hit the brakes. Second jumper just "rear-ended" the first jumper. It looks like an accident; a preventable accident but a number of different factors coming together at once to create the outcome.

It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

[pchapman 278]

Quote

What was the stunt? It seems like two jumpers were just flying together

I'll have to agree.

We don't have any rules that say, "Any jumpers wishing to fly their canopies within 100' of each other must be signed off for CRW Flight Procedures, Signals, and Emergencies endorsements".

It sounds like the guy in front was quite CRW experienced (and can be seen to have a CRW canopy) and presumably could have given a more detailed briefing. He must feel pretty shitty about having his friend end up paralyzed, but I can see that it would be quite normal not to have a detailed briefing. "I'm going to do the thing with the kite. Hang out and video me if you can but don't get too close." Ideally though, since he had the knowledge to help make the dive safer, it would have been good had he taught the others more. Avoiding sudden changes in his flight path, when flying with less experienced jumpers, would also be good.

(Of course we are making assumptions about briefings; we don't actually know what was said.)

Some sort of CRW briefing would be good for any proximity canopy flight.


I'm surprised there isn't more comment about the SIM -- as far as I saw, there was nothing about emergency procedures if entangled in lines, even though canopy collisions is a topic.

Edit: I now found something about 'following lines out' if entangled, before starting emergency procedures. That's in section 6-6 F 8 about CRW. At least that's something, but I still think it could be a lot clearer, and in the general canopy collisions section.

[VideoFly 0]

Did I miss something about the kite flying?

[mr2mk1g 10]

There was a small red kite towed by the canopy in front - about the size of a keyboard and shaped like a wwi bi-plane.

It wasn't the cause of the accident though (save as for maybe the trailing guy wanting to get close to film it).

[mircan 0]

Quote

Would someone really be able to climb the suspension lines to try and untangle that? ...

...I mean sure, never give up, try and climb the lines by all means, but I don't reckon it could be done. Perhaps with a thicker line type it could be...?

A buddy of mine who works as as military test jumper climbed the lines on his reserve when slider got stuck all the way up the lines
He solved it of course (he is still with us and jumping) So it can be done. But you have to be tough (spec.ops tough)

dudeist skydiver #42

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

(P.107 of SIM 2012 seems to have the main instructions on what to do after a canopy collision. P. 132 & 133 cover CRW and provide a little more info. RSL's in section 5.3F, p112.)

Usually the SIM is pretty detailed and concise in instructions, but I can't find anything that says that it can be dangerous to cutaway if still entangled in a canopy. Yikes. (Anyone else find better instructions in there?)

The SIM seems a little muddled in its instructions about what to do in case of a collision. It's a messy topic, but still.

Cat B C-8-c
c. If in a canopy entanglement with another jumper
below 1,000 feet and it appears the canopies
cannot be separated in time for a safe landing,
deploy the reserve (will result in a cutaway with
the SOS system, so may not be an option).

5-3 F-c
c. RSLs can complicate certain emergency procedures:
(1) cutaway following a dual deployment
(2) cutting away from an entanglement after
a collision
(3) unstable cutaway, although statistics show

6-6 F
1. Entanglements are the greatest hazards when building
canopy formations.
2. Jumpers should know their altitude at all times,
because altitude will often dictate the course of action.
3. If a collision is imminent:
a. The jumpers should spread one arm and both legs
as wide as possible to reduce the possibility of
penetrating the suspension lines.
b. The other hand is used to protect the
reserve ripcord.
4. Jumpers should be specific in discussing
their intentions.
5. If altitude allows, emergency procedures should proceed
only after acknowledgment by other jumper(s).
6. In the event of multiple cutaways and if altitude
allows, jumpers should stagger reserve openings to
avoid possible canopy collisions.
7. Respond to the given situation.
a. When entanglements occur, jumpers must be
prepared to react quickly and creatively.
b. In many cases, the emergency is one that can’t be
prepared for in advance; it may even be a problem
no one imagined could happen.
8. If the entanglement occurs with sufficient altitude,
the jumpers should attempt to clear the entanglement
by following lines out before initiating emergency
procedures.
9. Jumpers should try to land together following a canopy
relative work emergency.

5-1 H-3-c
3. If a collision is inevitable:
a. Protect your face and operation handles.
b. Tuck in your arms, legs and head

Note the bolded discrepancy above

5-1 H-3-e
e. Communicate before taking action:
(1) The jumper above can strike the jumper
below during a cutaway unless one or both
are clear or ready to fend off.
(2) The jumper below can worsen the situation
for the jumper above by cutting away before
he or she is ready.
(3) If both jumpers are cutting away and altitude
permits, the second jumper should wait until
the first jumper clears the area below.
(4) The first jumper should fly from underneath
in a straight line after opening.
(5) At some point below a safe cutaway altitude
(1,000 feet), it may become necessary to
deploy one or both reserves (may not be a
safe option with an SOS system).
(6) If both jumpers are suspended under one flying
canopy at a low altitude, it may become
necessary to land with only that canopy.
(7) Communications may be difficult if one or
both jumpers are wearing full-face helmets.



I'm still wondering how/why the guys blue reserve is out unless that blue canopy is his main. If it was the main, I'm wondering why he did not cutaway.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Ron 10]

Quote

I'm still wondering how/why the guys blue reserve is out unless that blue canopy is his main. If it was the main, I'm wondering why he did not cutaway.

See my post here: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4235091;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[popsjumper 2]

For simplicity:

Wraps and entanglements

Wrap is when the bottom jumpers canopy is wrapped around the upper jumpers body.

Entanglement is when the bottom jumpers canopy is entangled in the upper jumpers lines.

Wrap
-Communicate intentions
-Lower jumper cuts away first and deploys reserve and then flies out from under immediately.
-Upper jumper removes canopy if possible and lands his good-flying main.

Entanglement
-Communicate intentions
-Upper jumper disconnects RSL and cuts away first and deploys reserve after clearing lower jumper and then flies out from under immediately.
-Lower jumper cuts and deploys reserve after upper guys is out of the way.



Yes, everything is altitude dependent.

What would have them do if it happens at a low altitude? Yes, "low" is subjective.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[pchapman 278]

Hey Pops,
I notice the latest SIM, 2012, has added more to the CRW section 6-6, so now it mentions getting big if the lines are Dacron, but small if the lines are made of other thinner material. The section on entanglements (not in CRW) sticks with getting small.

So there have been some recent changes in wording.

As for Wrap vs. Entanglement, I know how those are distinguished in CRW but I wonder whether the terms are applied that precisely all the time. The SIM in contrast just talks about entanglements in a more general sense, referring to all canopy collisions, and doesn't use the term wrap.

It's not easy to figure out just what the SIM should say.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Hey Pops,
I notice the latest SIM, 2012, has added more to the CRW section 6-6, so now it mentions getting big if the lines are Dacron, but small if the lines are made of other thinner material. The section on entanglements (not in CRW) sticks with getting small.

So there have been some recent changes in wording.

Yes. My SIM references was from the 2011 SIM.

As far as "get big" vs "get small"....somebody needs to make up their mind. If I'm heading for a collision, I really don't think I'm going to be peeling eyeballs trying to distinguish dacron from spectra.

Quote

As for Wrap vs. Entanglement, I know how those are distinguished in CRW but I wonder whether the terms are applied that precisely all the time.

IMO, they should be...across the board.

Quote

It's not easy to figure out just what the SIM should say.

Hence the problem of so many people teaching so many different things.



Just FYI...my post on "simplicity" was not directed at you. I posted it mainly for the youngsters. Some of the old-timers are going to have different opinions for what they would do and that's fine....as long as they don't confuse the youngsters with 15 different plans.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239