Skylark

"I grabbed my rear risers to prepare to kick out the line twist" Can anyone tell me why it's necessary to grab onto one's rear risers before kicking out of a twist? Also, I keep seeing posts where jumpers go into a spin after deployment, due to one break being unstowed. Why should this be? Surely when breaks are unstowed, they just hang loose, not tight, thus there shouldn't be any flare on that particular side of the canopy? Or am I missing something? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

I obviously am aware that the odds are not 50:50. I was merely seeing if you were aware. But I digress. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Ok, a test for the 'mathematicians' to see how much they understand probability You turn your back and ask someone to place 3 emtpy cups upside down and to place a ball under one of the cups. You turn to face the cups. Now, two of those cups MUST be empty and one of them must hide the ball, correct? You place your hand on one of the cups at random. Now, whichever cup you choose, of the remaining two cups, at least one must be empty. With me so far? Good. You ask the person to remove the empty cup (whichever it is) and you remove your hand from the cup you chose, leaving you with two cups on the table. So, you are left with two cups on the table, one hides the ball and one is empty. You still obviously have no idea which cup is hiding the ball and which is empty. Two cups, one with the ball, one empty. Heads or Tails, 50:50, 1/2 etc. You are now asked to guess which cup hides the ball. You decide to choose the cup you originally placed your hand on right at the start of the game when there were 3 cups on the table. What are the odds that this cup is hiding the ball? Remember there are only 2 cups on the table, one hides the ball, one is empty. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Yes, I agree. But if someone has 25,000 jumps and still hasn't broken their ankle, they will have a higher probability of braking it on their next jump than someone who only has, say, 10 jumps. This is because the odds say that, on average, the person with only 10 jumps shouldn't break his ankle until he reaches 500 jumps, but the person with 25,000 jumps is long overdue for breaking his ankle, otherwise he is 'defeating' the odds. havehe 'should' have broken his ankle many times before. I "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

I can see you're unable to grasp the mathematics being used here because you're talking about gear quality. If there is a probability that something will happen, that probability is calculated taking into account all other factors. Let me explain by getting you to answer the question. If you were forced to play Russian Roulette once, with a 25,000 barrel handgun, but were also given the choice of playing it 25,000 times (assuming the barrel was re-spun), which would you choose? If what you are saying is correct, that the probability of being 'unlucky' is 25,000 to 1 on the first attempt and also 25,000 to 1 on the 25,000 attempt, then presumably you wouldn't have a problem with playing it 25,000 times because, according to you the odds are exactly the same. But nobody would risk playing it again if they didn't have to, if they survived the first trigger pull. The reason being that, despite the barrel being re-spun, they are increasing their chances of striking unlucky by continuing to play. I can use the law of averages since the 'group' in question is the aggregate of skydives recorded used to calculate the odds of experiencing a double malfunction. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Then the law of averages would dictate that, if the gun was 'fair', that there 'should' be a bullet in the chamber you fire upon, once every 25,000 times. You would give yourself far more of a chance of striking unlucky if you pulled the trigger 25,000 times than if you pulled it just the once, otherwise the gun wouldn't be 'fair'. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

So are you really saying that, given the choice, most people would carry on pulling the trigger thousands of times if they managed to survive the first attempt, because the chances of them killing themselves wouldn't be any greater? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

So would you: A.) Pull the trigger just once B.) Pull the trigger 1,000 times C.) Pull the tigger 25,000 times Which choice would be more likely to result in you killing yourself? If you had just once chance or if you had 25,000 chances? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

So you agree with me then? You admit that you're more likely to experience a double mal if you skydive 25,000 times, just like you're more likely to fire onto the chamber containing the bullet if you played Russian Roulette 25,000 times, but you skydive because the risks are worth it? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Be honest. What sort of protection will this weak piece of bendy plastic give my skull in a 30mph freefall collision? The design doesn't cover one's forehead either. Admit it. You wear it because it looks good. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Ah, but whether you enjoy skydiving or not won't make a difference. If someone loved playing Russian Roulette, would that make them safer when they played it? No. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Gosh. I've only just had a look at this again after my last post

Never mind all that design stuff...how far can you fly in it? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Ok, but what if it came up 'heads' 600 times in a row? Wouldn't you think there was something wrong with the coin? The law of averages means that eventually it will have to come up 'tails', otherwise the coin wouldn't be 'fair'. The more flips you make, the more likely it will eventually come up tails. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Incorrect. Say for example the odds of a double-mal are 1/25,000. If someone jumped once, their chances of a double-mal would be 1/25,000. If they jumped 10,000 times, they would have another 10,000 'chances' and would be more likely to be 'unlucky'. If a roulette wheel has come up 'red' 45 times in a row, yes, statistically, the chances of another red on the 46th spin are the same as before. But in theory, it will be more likely to come up 'black', because otherwise the wheel wouldn't be adhering to the law of averages of being 'fair'. I'm no mathematician either, but this one's been bugging me quite a while... "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

It is purely because of statistics that the above statement is correct. This isn't a skydiving question, but one of mathematics. The law of averages state there WILL be a double mal ever x number of jumps. The more jumps you make, the closer you will reach the average and the more change there is of it happening to you. It's a mathematical law because it's fundamentally correct. A reserve IS more likely to malfunction the higher the number of jumps that person has. Not because the rig is 'faulty', but because the law of averages holds true. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

I read recently some military instructors have in the region of 10,000+ jumps and I even seem to remember reading about some guy having 25,000+ If this is correct, these guys are presumably reaching the point where, statistically, they 'should' experience a double-mal. It doesn't matter how experienced you are or how well you pack, or how good your rig is. If there's a statistical law of averages, for anything, that law will always hold true eventually. Sure, anyone could experience a double-mal at any time, even on their first jump. But mathematical law dictates that the more jumps you make, the closer you will reach the 'average' number of jumps needed for a double-mal, and the more likely it is to happen. Thus a jumpmaster with 5,000+ jumps is at far greater risk of a double-mal every time he or she jumps, than an intermediate jumper on 300+ This is a purely mathematical question, and will be best answered in a statistical way. It can't be answered by simply stating that someone with 25,000+ jumps will be more experienced at handling mals, even if they are. This is about 'acts of god', that will always happen every x number of jumps, no matter how experienced you are. Discuss... Right, I'm leaving for Empuria now for the Xmas boogie. Hopefully see you there...

Maybe I phrased the question incorrectly. I'm not talking about flying a camera to specifically film others, but simply wearing a camera during freefall, without concentrating at all on filming, just letting the camera record on it's onw. I own the smallest camcorder in the world, only slightly bigger than a deck of cards and not much bigger than a pro-track http://news.sel.sony.com/digitalimages/photo?photo_id=148464. Surely I don't need 200 jumps for this? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

I work in the media. I've worked as everything from a producer to a cameraman to a reporter. I've even made programmes about how biased, unfair, innacurate and wrong the media can be. You're wrong in thinking that skydivers are singled out for biased treatment by the media; all 'groups' in society are. A lot of the time, news of fatalities are badly reported simply because, thankfully, such incidents are rare, thus media organisations have no need for a full-time 'skydive correspondent', like they might have a correspondent for business, or showbiz. Thus when a skydiving story breaks and needs to be covered, most reporters have to take a 30 minute crash course in skydiving in order to write their stories and mistakes are thus made. It makes things much harder for reporters who surf into skydiving sites when all they get are CTLA's (Confusing Three Letter Acronyms ) The story you're talking about was deliberately edited to make the viewer think the jump was far more dramatic and dangerous that it really was. I know the clip you're talking about; for some reason it's in our news archive and yes, the whole skydive was fine apart from the jumper cutting away a good canopy at 300 ft and going in (he survived though). To put things in perspective, I recently tried to research a news story on Lorry Drivers and not a single lorry driver would talk to me, because they said they always get terrible media coverage. The only way reporting is going to become fairer, is when people stop watching the programmes that are unfair, the advertisers will take their ads elsewhere and the programmes will run out of money. The same is true of newspapers. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

yeah, but looks like I can't see it unless it comes to London. Grrr! "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Still dont understand...if it's in the palm of your hand, how do you pull? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Is there a pre-requisite number of jumps one needs to wear Pantz? What are they actually like? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Surley a wingsuit is not a 'gadget'. Skyray is a 'gadget', a rigid wing that one 'wears', not disimilar to a hang-glider. A wingsuit surely must feel more like an extension of one's own arms, much like the wings of a bird? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

Has anyone seen this yet? Any good? Will it ever come to London? "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience

If one wants to fly Skyray, one might as well fly an aeroplane. Wingsuits are about flying your own body. "Into the dangerous world I leapt..." William Blake, Songs of Experience