fcajump

I put the holder under the laces, no edges to catch. (sorry... mental image... had to share...) Which explains why there was a shoe falling past you during the wrap as he slices the laces clean while reaching for the knife. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

In thinking how bad PIT's can be, I'd like to start a discussion on how to avoid them... So, if you've had one and know the cause, please list it here... preferably with the solution you, packer, rigger, mfg or other's came up with to avoid that in the future. ------------------------------------------------------- Gear - Vector II-V9 (good condition), - Spectre-230 (newish - right-sized for the container), - Cazer ZP collapsable pilot chute (3rd jump) Jump - lowish alt demo (3,500') - planned 5 sec delay Determined cause - Bottom Line: Incompatible parts - PC was too small for my canopy. At the time Cazer didn't tag the PC's as to sizing. I was new to ZP PC's and didn't know there was a difference, nor that my local supplier only had the smaller ones on the shelf. Resolution - Cazer replaced (no charge) the PC for a larger model by the next weekend and from then on all of the Cazer PC's I saw for sale had sizing tags/instructions in the bag. The rest of the story I decided on cut-away/reserve (as I had been taught). As soon as I got both handles grasped the pin popped and the main slammed me. Good news, instant main... bad news, the opening was hard enough that my left hand dislodged the reserve handle and I had 2 out. Bottom line, after careful consideration, I chose to chop the main. Landed within sight of the audience (with USA flag deployed... but with everything else, they forgot to play the anthem :-). ------------------ Ok... whose next to teach us how not to f-up?? JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Something out vs nothing... Two related topics are intermingling here and I want to make sure that (especially our younger jumpers) understand the difference. ------------NoPull--------------- THIS original discussion was on a jumper that could not find the handle. This is a NOTHING OUT high speed mal. In this case, the cutaway handle will do NOTHING except take time. (a slim case could be made that it takes less time than deciding what to do, but that gets eaten up by the further hesitation of waiting for the risers to clear, which they never will...) It also takes away a later (last ditch) option should there be a malfunction of your reserve (think non-deployment, you could try the main again, or adding more fabric if the reserve is a non-landable mess). These options are gone if you have already cutaway. -----------------/NoPull------------- ----------------PIT------------------ A PIT (pilot chute in tow) is a different animal... it is neither a malfunctioned main overhead, nor is it a sealed/static/immobile main container safely out of the way. It is a main canopy poised waiting to cause trouble at any moment. It may deploy when you: - reach for handles (been there... done that), - pull the reserve, releasing tray pressure, - after the reserve is out, at some random time prior to landing. And each of these have the possibility of the main being front, reserve being front, both deploying/wrapping at the same time. Does it clear better with the main risers still attached or released... both have happened, and both have not cleared. This is why training methods vary and why even USPA leaves it as an unresolved, two solution item in their training. Both can be the right answer, both can kill you. Unfortunately, this leaves us in the position of saying 'he lived, so he made the right choice, but that guy didn't live, so he made the wrong choice'... even when they might have both done the same thing. It does mean we REALLY need to avoid PIT. --------------/PIT-------------------- We also really need to avoid no pulls... which returns us to THIS jump's analysis. (and other thread drift discussions ;-) JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Reminds me of the poor guy that got so focused/freaked-out when he realized his chest-strap was not fastened in freefall* that he was still working to fasten it up after landing... stress of the situation can make you act less rationally than you would hope. Pre-thought and repetitive training/practice will better enable one to handle the emergencies that arise. *mind you - I'd be pretty damn focused on the chest strap in that case too... and after landing I'd be focused on changing my shorts... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I agree that a cutaway in this situation is not a useful step and wastes time. The USPA SIM agrees with you as well (5-1-E. Total Malfunctions 2.a specifies to go straight to reserve). It is only in 2.b (PC in tow) that the SIM gives options to either cut-away or not, as both have their risks. However, in an emergency conscious decisions are slower than practiced responses (e.g. low bailouts where jumpers deploy their main vs reserve). That alone would not have been a significant (if inappropriate) problem here EXCEPT that the practiced behavior appears to have been cutaway and wait, rather than cutaway and deploy reserve. To go down that rabbit-hole a little further, we have been trying to get people to ensure the cutaway was successful before pulling silver (i.e. ensure one side didn't get hung-up)... in this case (or in the case of actual PC-in-tow) you would wait a long time to see the risers clear... All of which leads me back to your notion... Correct situational awareness (total, due to inability to initiate main deployment) should have lead to correct response (reserve NOW). And this is one of the reasons I posted this... to get folks (including myself) to think through their decision tree on the ground and then practice for each branch of that tree. His outcome was successful (thanks at least to the AAD), though I can agree with those that suggest that this IS actually a no-injury "Incident". JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Made one (before hearing these other stories) and promptly cut the tether during a test deployment. Got better/similar advice before making another one... JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I recently reviewed the Cypres-Save report at: https://www.cypres.aero/the-day-cypres-saved-my-life/ (video is there too) and had some thoughts/questions on it... Note: Please understand, I am NOT interested in calling out the individual... our (re)actions when things go south are not always what we would prefer, but also different training and philosophy leads us into different actions. My first reserve ride could have also gone better. My point with this is to analyse, discuss and learn... just as with an incident, I think there is much for everyone (especially our newer jumpers) to learn with this dive. Fortunately, the individual is still around to learn as well. Selected Details: Note: ~3,280ft for us 'mericns... Lesson 1 - make sure your clothing selection can not impede your access to your handles or block your vision. To the good Dr: yep... sounds like a very familiar internal dialog at that point... Note: 2,460ft Lesson 2: Work to maintain body position, but deployment before hard deck is primary goal. Increased speed would not be unusual, nor the time used pursing the desired goal (main deployment), but don't loose track of ALTITUDE. (I don't say "time" here, as really its the altitude that matters and with both varying speed and mental time dilation during a crisis, its hard to keep that meaningful.) Pause here... Note: ~1640ft, not an unusual hard-deck. Note: "cutaway" was the thought despite nothing out on the main. This is not a PC-in-tow or beyond, this is a no-pull, high speed situation. It IS consistent with the "always use one procedure" method, though it takes a little more time, the training is to then ALWAYS pull the reserve handle as well... Roll tape... Lesson 3: yep, your post/self-analysis is good. Because there is no main, the cutaway is not going to activate the skyhook based deployment and time has now been spent both pulling the cutaway handle AND in the split second to realize that still nothing is happening and why. Question #1: Does anyone teach going into a sit when deploying the reserve? If so, why? On the one hand I could see that it clears the burble so as to (maybe) have a cleaner launch of the PC, but it also speeds you up, may put you on your back (shouldn't.. but...) and in this case may actually cause the jacket to cover these handles as well due to the relative wind shift. Finally, as John Sherman has pointed out, some rigs have increased deployment forces getting the freebag out of the container from that angle. Lesson #4 (from the video) some precious time appears to be wasted at this point trying to decide which hand should hold the (already deployed) cut-away handle and which should reach for the reserve. If you're going to pull it, clear it and THROW IT. Not worth holding on to for the time spent and the distraction. Note: just under 1000ft Yep... that's what should happen, because at this point you are below your hard deck... the time spent awaiting the skyhook went just like that... As to it not being 750', I would suggest that in a sitfly position, the Cypres would likely read a little lower and may fire a little higher... But at that speed/altitude, the difference is slight if any... Note: actually 12 seconds, but definitely a very short time to analyse your canopy, location, direction, landing options and fly a canopy you may have never flown before to a safe landing. Which he did VERY well. The final turn didn't go as far as he might have on his main, but he did correct that too. Note: And here he shows that he did learn better and the why of it. One set of good decisions (getting a good reserve and AAD, and turning the AAD on before the jump) means that he gets to learn and try again. Some will point out that he was finally on his way to pulling silver... Would he have been quick enough and survived? Dunno... but at that point, the AAD did what it was designed to do. Finally - I commend this jumper for his gear choice, his review of the jump, actions, outcome and video. Had my first reserve ride been on video, I don't think it would review any better. Glad to be discussing this here, rather than on the incidents page. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I'm all for more tools. Will have to dust that one off with a mind set of when I would use it. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I offered a discount if the would... no one took me up on it... For many years I packed pilot rigs in an unheated/no-cooling/leaky airport room. A propane heater running full would eventually warm the top half of the room, but your feet... never. I offered that if they would commit to a full year of repacks on my schedule (3/year at the time), I'd charge a dollar per degree f. Winter repacks would have been cheep ($20-$35), and I would have enjoyed the company. ------------------- Seriously, as long as they can be patient (I'm slow) and quiet when I need to focus, I prefer to a customer to learn all they wish. And when I was the customer, it taught me a lot about my gear and the guy working on it. Finally - (more about pilots than jumpers) for new customers I requested that they plan to take 30m-2hrs the first time they dropped off their gear. I went over pre-flight, donning, bail-out situations and procedures, deployment (practiced and live) and then pulled their canopy out so they could actually see the stuff we talked about. >95% had NEVER pulled or seen their canopy (steering toggles, etc) and most said they had never been talked through this stuff we jumpers take for granted... Didn't charge a dime for that time, but 90+% of my pilot customers kept coming back. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

All the time you are rolling to look up, you are not looking down to make sure you are not drifting overtop of someone else. Great to look in your rear-view mirror to know if you're going to be hit, but you must make sure you're not about to run into someone in the meanwhile. That, combined with the other notions mentioned such as performing a maneuver many don't practice, that puts you (temporarily) in a non-deployable situation, and may take you off course at a time when others are depending on you to keep your line... all at a time when your getting close to pull alt... just doesn't seem like a good overall plan. Yes, there are a minority of situations where this would be a good thing... such as the minority of situations when an AAD is bad and an RSL can cause problems. But overall I think making this a new norm will cause more issues than it would solve. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I have seen the white of someone's chestmount altimeter (from the ground). Within seconds he had two canopies. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

yea... me too... good plan. Keep in mind IIRC that the BSR minimum's in the USA are 2,500' for any experience level. Actually, I'm also starting to think that many (eventually 'all') of those who grew up pulling at 2,000' (unless they hummed it down to get a little more clearance) need to bump up their plans to a higher altitude simply because the 80+ y.o. man you mention still does not have the reflexes or strength that they had at 50/40/30... JW PS - Thanks for the reply... as I said, I'm curious what people think... I don't think there is one good final answer to this question. PPS - BTW - I dumped at 1600' once... fortunately it was before I got my Spectre... don't want to do that again until the plane's on fire... and then it'll be my reserve. Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Two conversations stand out in my mind over the years... First - I was questioned as to my state of mind when, with a 'C' license I liked to put myself in the stack just prior to the tandems such that I could open at 4-5k' and play under canopy (with full awareness/coordination with everyone else's plans). They were concerned as I was supposed to be opening at 2k since I had a 'C' license... so what's wrong with me that I'm planning to open high?? Second was an Otter load 20+ years later, filled with about the same level experience as was the case above... wanted to open 3-4 and found myself at the low-end of the group... plans were from 2,500 to 8k' with no tandems nor CReW. My how times have changed. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Yes... I know, it can depend on many things... but when you hear that someone is going to pull at X,000', what makes you uncomfortable?? Lets say, you hear the plans of an: experienced/current jumper solo to 4way (not big-way/crowded area) planning to be slowed on his belly at pull time unknown main canopy *yes, I know the metric conversion is not exact, but close enough for pull time. Background for the question: Over the last (almost) 30 years, I've watched the deployment altitudes (and attitudes) go up from everyone deploying around 2,000' to a wide variety now. This has happened as AAD's became more common, some canopies were designed for soft openings (my Spectre) and others are known to burn a lot of altitude if they open in a turn. Recent reserve issues have also prompted the move of BSR minimums up to 2,500' in the USA. (So, some good reasons for the shift.) But I also know some folks that still jump traditional design canopies (Parafoil, Raven, etc...) that have always pulled at 2,000' and don't feel the need to change. (one still uses a pair of very well maintained Sweethogs... AAD only added to appease the local DZO) Recently it was asserted that a jumper "routinely pulled low", and it took me back to when I started... that meant the person in question was often pulling below 1,800'... As I doubt that's what is meant now it got me thinking what was meant by that person making that comment today. So, I am curious what the consensus is on what the phrase "routinely pulling low" means now... JW PS - This is not an argument for returning to 2000' deployments. You should always plan a safe deployment altitude, based on your skill, currency, main deployment behavior, reserve, AAD settings, exit location, landscape, type of jump, number of other jumpers in the formation, number of jumpers in the air, DZ policies and landing patterns and acceptable safety margin. (and I'm sure I missed a few there too) Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Anyone done any business with these folks? Nice website at first glimps, but most prices show $0 and no information on selecting sizes on items like jumpsuits. Just curious if they are legit or scam. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I did get one. Though I haven't put much hard time on it, did does look fairly decent and as advertised. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

While do not deny that they are in business to sell their product, but if the old technology was so good why are you not still using it? Because to get the improvements we wanted electronics were needed, and to obtain the level of reliability you/we want with electronics, you need to retire them "early"... Remember that MTBF is the mean time... do you want to be part of the group that fails before the average? As to the wing spars... IIRC don't think that was as manufactured a problem as you imply... several planes folded up in flight due to those spars killing those on board. And with the used market not doing a precise enough job with prior use traceability. In both cases, I'm of the opinion that flight is expensive... Safe(r) flight even more so. I can't fly/jump near as much as I want to... partially because I believe in putting additional money toward keeping it as safe from known problems as I can. AAD's proved their worth. Mfg's know more about their shit than I... so I follow them. Give me a reason to wonder if the plane is going to fold up and I'll ground it until we prove otherwise. But... that's just the ravings of a flyer who wants to die quietly in his bed at 120, wife on one side, mistress on the other, claiming he mistook one for the other. ;-) JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Yep, you don't have to turn it on, but if you do, you are breaking the rules. Nope. You are breaking the rules by having it "installed" whether it's turned on or not. Read the regulation. Not all DZs (or countries) mandate AADs, so if you are at a DZ that does not mandate AADs you don't need to have one. Having one that is turned off, effectively is the same as not having one at all. Is it not? And there is no "rule" that says an AAD must be fitted to a reserve. AADs fitted to main parachutes instead of reserves is not unknown.(But that is a separate issue) And AAD requirements are not always hard "rules", mostly they are recommendations. You are correct, not all countries require them, and the regulation is USA-FAA regulation and so limited to just us... That said, many (most?) DZ's in the US require an AAD be installed and turned on for you to jump there... at which point, as there is one installed in the rig, it must also by Govt regulation be properly maintained. Moreover, take that same rig to a DZ that doesn't require its use and turn it off... you are STILL required to maintain it as it is "installed". Other countries, different regs/recommendations/suggestions/behaviors. (but same physics in play, and same hard earth below... funny how that doesn't change with international boarders, language, race, religion, etc...) JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

You can lead a horse to water... But sometimes you just want to push its head under and hold until it stops wiggling... JW PS - no actual horses were harmed in this post... but one unicorn might have been.... (ain't tellin') Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Step 1 - ask this of the local instructors. ESPECIALLY if any of them saw the traffic issues and how you responded. Often things look very different to an outside observer. Landing on rears - I've done it and it can be done safely.but done wrong you can collapse you canopy prematurely and drop hard. Get some coaching on how to learn this skill. In this case, assuming the proximity you describe is correct, then sounds like you pulled did what was needed to avoid a collision. At that point dropping rears and flaring could either be late/ineffective* and has the potential to drop both rears AND (inadvertently) one of your toggles as well. This ALSO would be a setup for disaster. *floating on rears will slow your canopy speed and make the flare less effective. To address all these concerns, get some coaching on how to hold/use/release risers. Rears are another tool, but they can be dangerous too. You're asking good questions... keep doing that. Get some local instruction/coaching. Practice up high to see how things respond. Be ready to PLF with either solution as at that moment, either option can be a harder landing than expected. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

Remember that often nicknames (for objects and people) have been given for a reason. Additionally, after a quick glance at your stats: Until you are in the top 1% (experience/time/skill) it is not generally smart to try emulating the advanced techniques/tools/toys shown off by the top 1%. You would like to be given advice on how to mitigate the safety risks and avoid entanglements... My recommendation for step #1 is more time and experience under your belt. You are already indicating that you are wing suiting and running camera with only 1 year in. (and many will argue over whether 300 is a lot of jumps or not or immaterial... I'll leave it to them on that) Patience and practice what you are already doing would be my recommendation. Just my $.02 JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

(can't access the pic from work... no issue, I'll see it later) Just make sure you do see it when packing... You'd be surprised how much people don't see wrong on the rig they're packing. Doesn't take much, just conscious observation. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I am personally partial to french links. Not aware of any problems with having that metal contact that concerns you. The only wear issue I know of is with the connection loop, which will wear regardless of which link you use. (though Rob disagrees with this and I have no problem bowing to his experienced opinion) That having been said... As to the notion of connecting the Yepzon there, I would not be comfortable with that. If we assume that there will be no problem with damaging the unit during repeated pack cycles (possibly creating sharp edges of cracked plastic in our rig), and we assume that there can be no contamination of the canopy by a leaky/corroded battery down the road, then it raises the next issue... snag point. If I'm right about how you want to connect it, simply looping the link through its strap hole... (is the link long enough to go through that and the bridle and the bridle attachment loop?) then you've got a snag point for lines or reinforcement tape to get wrapped around. I admit its a small likelihood, but its there... And as a pocket on the D-bag would be a clean way to enclose it and remove that possibility, I think I would go that way. Either way, I would add it to my periodic inspection. Is it there, working, in good physical and operational condition, properly fastened? Just my $.02 JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

I wish the resources were there. Unfortunately some would only see how bad the industry and sport would be after we loose USPA and PIA. Should there be better? OK... but nothing worth having comes free. If you (the reader) think we should have better independent testing of (for example) real world PC pull force (peak, average, etc) for each PC on the market... GREAT!! Figure out the funding, anonymously purchase several of each, design the testing parameters, hire the videographers and go pay for your test jumps. Then you can publish your results (for free of course) for the rest of us.* Until then, I for one will be grateful for what information and data has been collected. As Terry said, if leading up to this test you have removed the anonymity from the results, I doubt you would have seen much gear is provided by the mfgs for testing... In my mind, the test results were for each mfg to see how they did, and how they compared. This will lead (hopefully) to changes by those who didn't test well, so that their rigs are better for us in the future. Thanks to Terry and all the others that have put their money, time, efforts and lives on the line to test the gear we often take for granted. Must my $.02, JW *PS - while this sounds hard... and it is... it is also a serious challenge to think "outside the container"... Aeronautical Engineering students (or those that should be and haven't woken up to it yet)... this is the type of research you could be discussing with your instructors. Any of you have access to a wind tunnel for tests? Too big for one student to do a comprehensive test?... what about a collaborative study between multiple students at multiple Universities... if you can design the test so that it could be safely replicated and conducted by others maybe you could crowd-source the actual testing... dunno... think about it. Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

What really annoyed me with my supplier was that I told them up front that I specifically wanted an EASY reserve pack since I was not familiar with packing their rig. And this order was not going through a middle-man, so the desires were communicated up front. I'm broad shouldered (so bigger is no problem as they could see from the measurements) and I'm not downsizing. They did eventually offer to re-cut/size the rig, for a price. JW Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...