Liemberg

Become a participant observer. After all, isn't that what anthropologists do? You'll probably encounter the same pitfalls your fore-bearers encountered living among the Trobriands, the Inuit or the Argonauts of the Western Pacific - since taboo isn't always taboo (except when it's taboo, of course)

Been done before in the parachuting industry. Though not with AAD's. And different times I guess... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

How do you all suppose Dorothy ever ended up in the land of Oz? Just sayin'

But as a DZ.com reader you (and everybody else) asume(s) that these were paying customers with no skydiving experience whatsoever. I dunno... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

http://youtu.be/G5m1QpwprzM 'Never attribute to conspiracy what is adequately explained by stupidity...' http://youtu.be/UvzyQt_F23Y "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

I would want the alti more on the side, not on top of the wrist/arm. Basically - what Riggerrob said. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

"Cross my heart and hope to die" - years ago, after the jump a female passenger told me she was pregnant and if I thought that in retrospect what we just did maybe wasn't that beneficial for the baby. Flabbergasted, all I could think off was that since it had happened anyway, it became insignificant. 'Yes I wish you would have told me beforehand but you were smart enough not to, for I would have declined. You owe me a birth announcement'. Which I got

Either all of a sudden i'm starting to comprehend Russian or our poor East-European friends are blamed for something they didn't do.

The 'let's pitch the drogue before everything goes ape-shit' says it all... *Refrains from giving famous Forrest Gump quote* (Then again, if it was rewarded with an out of this world menage a trois, I'd be tempted) "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

From 'hearsay' I know of a TI landing a malfunctioned reserve in a nearby river and almost getting himself and his passenger killed by drowning. So, that's at least one. But 'in the heath of the battle' somehow to me it seems better only to consider the possible inconvenience of a rig down, a search for the gear and a repack, not the possibility of 'plan B' failing also. YMMV "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Ah, the irony! The young whippersnappers jumping slightly undersized canopies 'with good penetration', wearing full face helmets with earplugs, two audibles inside and a GoPro glued onto the top, recording every jump they make for future reference and immediate youtube publication, well protected against all the eventualities of skydiving and fearing to become deaf like the rest of us in twenty years time, while in fact from the get go THEY are the ones with serious hearing problems.

Then you are not in the position to make the judgement call - which makes it so much easier to make it anyway on an internet-forum. Now I would have judged otherwise than this TI did - but I'm fully aware that I'm judging from pictures on the internet, not in the sometimes "gray area" of day to day tandemjumping where these judgements take place. Besides, for MY judgement I had the benifit of 2 points of (outside photo) view said tandemmaster did not have. My monday-morning-internet-judgement is also influenced by a prior experience 'many moons ago', with a wrongly attached steering toggle that separated from its control line. At 3000 ft I decided that there was more than enough wind to land this light weight passenger with the rear risers and that 3 lefts equal 1 right at my 1000 x 500m landing-area, full of high grass at that particular day. At 1000ft however, suddenly the wind was completely gone. I had to land with zero wind. The jump ended with a severely sprained ankle for the passenger. That was on a Master 425. Would have been worse on a modern canopy, I would think... Other than that, I don't worry to much about DZ.com discussions being quoted in court - but I conduct my business outside the USA. (You Americans should get tort reform on its way - but I guess that's a whole different discussion than this one...) What should be completely clear however in discussions like these is that the TI is not actually doing anything 'wrong' and that he should not be 'blamed' for his 'poor judgement'. The purpose of these discussions should be that the overall quality of judgements and decisions improves. Besides, even in Canada, a waiver was signed I would think... In my case, the passenger that sprained her ankle was completely blind. Can't help but thinking that to be funny, in retrospect - just picture the lawyer: "Your honour, my poor client couldn't have read the waiver they claimed she signed! It's an outrage!"

Though 'monday morning coaching' IS easy, I find it hard to see any merit in the TI's judgement when he decided to land this - even if he has gotten away with something similar in the past. The canopy is clearly deformed. There was absolutely no guarantee that it wasn't going to take a 'turn for worse' closer to the ground where turbulence may be lurking... Though I hate chopping canopies as much as the next person, when it's gotta go, it's gotta go. Square, Stable, Steerable. Pretty basic - almost 'square' just isn't good enough with modern canopies... Even if it had been a solo jumper and he had walked away unhurt, someone should discuss with him the grim possibilities of canopies collapsing close to the ground during landing manoeuvres when configured like that. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

No, it doesn't. The bridle + PC get cleared by themselves after about 2 seconds. There is no mount breaking or GoPro tumbling away from the jumpmasters head. (Goes to show that sometimes being clueless and lucky beats being smart and unlucky...) In fact, elsewhere on the internet there's video floating around of a parapente-pilot who ends up with the lines of his canopy behind the GoPro mount on top of his helmet. This is filmed by another GoPro on his belly. ( I think a link to it has also been posted on this forum). There you can clearly see that situations like these can quickly develop into some rather kinky strangulation sex if something is pulling on the GoPro and the GoPro is pulling on your helmet-without-a-quick-release. That GoPro mount is much stronger than most users think it is. But in the case at hand the bridle just cleared through sheer luck. YMMV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTXiYohr6lw (edited to include the link to the parapente video) "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Thanks for that - now I'll never be able to cross a street any more without thinking about the incredible hazard I'm about to expose myself to. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Funny that you mention this as only yesterday a jumper on my DZ told me that the rigger on a large DZ in Belgium where he jumps now and then has no less than seven (7!) skydiving rigs in his loft that were never reclaimed after being dropped for a repack / inspection. Supposedly all of those rigs are there already more than a year, some several years. Though this is rumour / hearsay of course, it still makes you wonder what peoples priorities are when they decide they want to become skydivers... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Could it be that the TI that doesn't fit the passengers harness in the right way only has his job made more complicated with the Y-mod? If the Y-mod is too tight they can't lift their legs for landing. Then again, breaking an ankle on landing beats falling out on opening, no discussion there... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Come to think of it: @ one third of the way the 270 turns into a 180. But you'll arrive there with more speed. If more speed is desirable maybe depends upon the individuals taste in how to spice up his life. However, in traffic with the added speed you may end with 'spicing up' the life of others. They may hold the opinion that they are perfectly able to hurt or kill themselves skydiving without your help... (no offence and not directed to anyone in particular, just responding to the last post in the thread)

Well, at least you'll have more time to consider your options...

Amen. Getting them safely to the ground is the name of the game. If that means leaving them on the ground for the time being, so be it. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Though that may be true when you want to film the tandem wearing the tandemrig yourself, with a handcam on your left hand and a student/passenger on your belly, for the rest it is indeed overkill. Not suggesting that there's never a wannabee cameraflyer who ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time but proficiency in falling straight down while trailing a drogue and controlling your pax does NOTHING for the skills you need as a cameraflyer. Usually that set of skills is not met before +300 jumps / + 50 camerajumps but I'm pretty sure that if only TI's were allowed doing outside camera on tandems we are using an enormous axe for a very small piece of wood... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Where 'could have' is - given the nature of the all to well known 'Murphy's law' - the most interesting. When all possible outcomes total 1 (or 100% if you like) Impossible outcomes are left with 0. What cannot happen does not happen... It never does so that is a moot point... If I'm allowed some semantics too: When we say 'she killed herself' we usually refer to an ACTION by the part of the individual. There are by now thousand plus reports of skydivers being stopped by an AAD that themselves did not do anything and would also have 'killed themselves' through their INACTIVITY where it not for the AAD working as designed. Now had she climbed out of her harness in air or switch off the AAD AND lock the reserve prior to jumping/cutting away I would have agreed with the statement that 'she killed herself'. Since that was not the case it may well be that all she was 'guilty' of was a fatal misinterpretation of what she should have learned in her FJC. I have met a whole lot of student-skydivers that were guilty of exactly the same, misinterpreting parts of their FJC. Though their take on things may not always be completely realistic, they usually count on their instructors to keep them out of harms way. That is what AAD's are for in the first place and most skydiving centres all over the world point out the existence of this fail-safe mechanism during the first contact they have with their customers. Only DURING a (good) FJC they are confronted with the limitations but when selling the product to prospective buyers EVERYBODY mentions the AAD's on the reserves. That is why we want them to work flawlessly where that is at all possible. "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

This is getting ridiculous. What would be the point of an AAD if not to activate the reserve when you failed to deploy a parachute? YES, had she pulled herself she might have been saved. However, had she done so @ the exact moment the AAD fired (it did fire, did it not?) the apparently faulty cutter might have trapped the deployment bag - as it obviously also did when she didn't pull herself. The rest is playing with semantics. For the Argus AAD did not save her either. In fact, even before the Polish incident happened (that even in the most 'Aviacom friendly scenario' definitely leaves open the possibility of a freebag (temporally) locked in place by a faulty cutter) I pointed out exactly THAT possibility in a post I wrote october 5 2006 - replying to none other than YOU in a thread that discussed the quality of the Argus cutters... If I'm allowed to quote myself: Now since that post of mine in october 2006 a lot has happened. But what did not happen is the good people from Aviacom SA convincing us that the above mentioned cannot happen. I'm usually vain enough to enjoy being right with my predictions. In this case however, I had rather been wrong... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

Come on, give the guy a brake... "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...

I thought this was the 'gear and rigging' section. What made it the 'legalities and liability' section? Just like on my computer where the software manufacturers want to do their legal battles on MY screen, now in MY reserve the AAD manufacturers want to do the same? The ought to be spanked! (Since that's not going to happen, let's just ignore them from now on, every time their corporate lawyer comes up with something silly...) "Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci A thousand words...