Awesome letter in Parachutist about mandatory AAD at some Dz

[waltappel 1]

Quote

Well then if there are more ways than in yesteryear to induce loss of altitude awareness, logically there’d be more lo-pull and no-pull situations. And maybe there are. Yet something has to be counteracting that to induce fewer no-pull fatalities.

Obviously the audible altimeters and AADs are both a factor, but beyond that I think the hazard is so obvious to freeflyers that most are *very* conscious of it.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who would like to think that AADs are primarily responsible for keeping no/low pull fatalities relatively low and there are certainly some numbers available on AAD saves, but there are no such stats on audibles.

I would bet that nearly everyone who jumps with an audible altimeter will agree that they have been signaled by an audible when they were focused on something other than the ground and it's likely they would have gone lower than they had intended had they not been wearing that audible.

By contrast, very few AAD users can claim they were saved by their AAD.

Walt

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

the point is that no-pull or low-pull fatalities have dropped significantly. This tends to show rather conclusively that loss of altitude awareness/lack of technique is not a new problem, but an old one.

...and so far, 94 posts and counting, I haven't seen anyone refute this, nor have I seen anyone persuasively attribute it to any significant factors other than AADs.

I'm guessing that the higher normal opening altitudes of today figure into the equation. The prevalence of AFF training (pulling at tandem altitudes) and slow-opening higher performance parachutes have both had an effect on opening altitudes, such that loss of altitude awareness by many people today will just result in something approximating a "normal" pull altitude in years past, rather than a dangrerously low pull.

Of course, the prevalence of AADs has obviously figured into this as well, not because the AADs are actively saving everyone, but because people are more careful with their pull altitudes in order to prevent an inadvertent AAD-fire.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[SethInMI 174]

After reading this whole thread I can make one point that hasn't been made, and agree with several others.

My contribution: I don't think AADs are really that expensive. Sure they cost $1200-1100 new, but you have 12 or maybe more (Vigil) years of life (with servicing costs extra). This is about ~100.00 a year, and I don't think of that as being a burdensome cost. Now maybe the same people who bitch about paying the USPA dues will complain about that cost, but until jump tickets go down to $2 apiece, $100 annual cost will be a small percentage of the cost of being a skydiver.

Seth

It's flare not flair, brakes not breaks, bridle not bridal, "could NOT care less" not "could care less".

[waltappel 1]

Quote

After reading this whole thread I can make one point that hasn't been made, and agree with several others.

My contribution: I don't think AADs are really that expensive. Sure they cost $1200-1100 new, but you have 12 or maybe more (Vigil) years of life (with servicing costs extra). This is about ~100.00 a year, and I don't think of that as being a burdensome cost. Now maybe the same people who bitch about paying the USPA dues will complain about that cost, but until jump tickets go down to $2 apiece, $100 annual cost will be a small percentage of the cost of being a skydiver.

Seth

That's fine if we could pay by the year, but we don't. For someone who is already having their budgets slammed by the high buy-in costs (training and gear), many low-timers simply cannot afford that high up-front cost for an AAD. Also, as you pointed out, servicing and batteries are extra.

Walt

[Elisha 1]

Quote

Quote

If you don't want to wear and AAD, fine, pack your gear bag up and take your $20 and bad attitude somewhere else. I don't want to clean up your mess. Understand this, it is the Business Owners right to decide what he expects of his customers. If you don't want to do business there, fine, go away, but quit your whining. The DZO is being a smart business man, not a nazi.

I ran one of the largest DZs in the world for a few years. We didn't require AADs, but we did require proper training. We had several fatalities, and none of them would have been prevented by an AAD. IMHO, requiring AADs is a waste of time and makes no business sense whatsoever, unless you're in the business of selling them.

It's a pointless argument though. DZO's are free to make whatever decisions they like, even when it drives perfectly good safe and current jumpers elsewhere.

One thing I like about you Brits - you get to the point and are concise about it.

[ryno1972 0]

I hate it when jumpers(I guess it happens in all aspects of life, people are people)get these attitudes. I put 65-70 jumps on my rig before I could afford an AAD. I jump with as much SA as when I did not have it. A good friend of mine in NC, he has been jumping since 1970 overheard me voicing my concerns about not having one (I too had someone tell me I was stupid for not having an AAD. Told me to stay away from him etc). My buddy, Greg, pulled me aside and said, "Look Ryan, I have been jumping over 30 years without an AAD, just be careful, do not jump with someone you do not trust and be aware of what is around you, you will be fine."

I think there is a lot more reasons out there that are killing skydivers. Monitering your altitude, looking at the ground, when the ground gets really big, it is time to pull. Maybe look out the window when you reach the cloud ceiling and then checking you altimeter and using that as a reference.

Anyway, that is my 2 cents. If a DZO wants to make AAD's manditory, then all the power to him. I support his decision. The DZO has invested money and time to make it happen, he can make those decisions. If not, then so be it.

Anyway, you'all have a great time at the Farm this weekend! I have Army Reserve drill, cannot make it.

glad to be here!!

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

...and so far, 94 posts and counting, I haven't seen anyone refute this, nor have I seen anyone persuasively attribute it to any significant factors other than AADs.

OK, I'll have a go then.

It is exceedingly rare for a person to fail to deploy either parachute. However, it used to be not so rare that they would cutaway and then fail to deploy their reserves in a timely manner. In fact, the two fatalities at the last convention were attributed to this. Both jumpers had AADs if I remember correctly.

More jumpers today use RSLs than ever before. They were virtually unknown for D license holders when I started. A large percentage of fatalitities are prevented by RSLs, not AADs which do not re-arm in the case of low cutaways.

IMHO, you're way safer with good well practiced emergency procedures and an RSL. I am actually removing my AADs from my rigs because they are expired, and I'm not about to spend $3000 replacing things that work just fine.

I'm keeping my RSLs though.

OK, that's enough from me on this.

[Ron 10]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


the point is that no-pull or low-pull fatalities have dropped significantly. This tends to show rather conclusively that loss of altitude awareness/lack of technique is not a new problem, but an old one.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


...and so far, 94 posts and counting, I haven't seen anyone refute this, nor have I seen anyone persuasively attribute it to any significant factors other than AADs.

Not going to refute it. AAD's do save lives.

Other reasons that low/no pulls have dropped.

1. Canopies. The popularity of the Stiletto and its really slow openings made it so many people started pulling higher. Todays canopies take longer to open, and malfunction really bad. This can lead to people opening higher.

2. RSL's. They have become more popular. Since a good number of "Nopulls" were from a cutaway the popularity of RSL's could play a part in that reduction.

3. AFF. Someone already pointed out that since AFF trained jumpers pull much higher than the old SL trained jumpers of old...that they have gotten used to pulling high. That gives you more time when it hits the fan.

4. Freefly's higher speeds. FF jumps break off higher than RW. More people FF today and break off higher. This gives people more time.

5. Audibles. They are more popular than ever.

6. Pulling low is not "cool" anymore.

7. AAD's Besides the obvious benefit of them firing...The fact that they can be scared into firing means that people pull higher to avoid a double out.

These are just some of the reasons.

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

[Broke 0]

Also you don't want an inadvertant AAD fire so you don't have to pay for a reserve repack.

Pardon my ignorance, but do AADs have to go in for service once they have been fired?

Divot your source for all things Hillbilly.
Anvil Brother 84
SCR 14192

[Ron 10]

Quote

Pardon my ignorance, but do AADs have to go in for service once they have been fired?

I can only speak obout one type of AAD (CYPRES). But no, the cutter can be replaced by a rigger. I think it is the same for most other brands of modern AAD's.

However the cost of a cutter, is not my major concern. It is the two out I would have to deal with.

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

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

You are absolutely right. It is a great letter and you should be able to smoke yourself into the ground doing 220 in a head down position and do it all in front of people who live in the neighborhood right beside the DZ. You should also leave it all to be explained by the DZO, to the press, to your loved ones, to the people of the local "quiet community of..." just to keep his business alive.

Guess what, it happens, and it has always been a huge piece of heartburn to me for someone to call a Business Owner a "Safety Nazi" because he said AAD's are mandatory. Well as a DZO I did it, but I did it after I had to do all of the things I listed above and more. If you don't want to wear and AAD, fine, pack your gear bag up and take your $20 and bad attitude somewhere else. I don't want to clean up your mess. Understand this, it is the Business Owners right to decide what he expects of his customers. If you don't want to do business there, fine, go away, but quit your whining. The DZO is being a smart business man, not a nazi.

I hate that this post is in the Bonefire, please feel free to move it to SC so I don't have to see it again.

I will gladly take my $20 and my attitude of skydiving is beautiful away from your business enterprise as long as there are DZ's that value what skydiving is about.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

It's easy to pick a side and blast away. But most skydivers realize that the real-world solution lies in the middle. Common sense is generally a better choice than an extreme position on either side.

This is SO true. What is amazing to me though is that the DZO is being demonized in the process. It's the DZO's right to set the requirements for their DZ.

Instead of whining about the DZO's decisions, people who are truly concerned with the future of the sport should instead OPEN THEIR OWN DZ's!! That way we'd all have more places to jump, and we'd all have a lot more choices.

• Quote

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Quote

Don't own one. Don't feel I need one. Skydive anyway. Color me crazy if you want. But I figure if I can't cover my shit maybe I should be shitting. Tommy Piras died because his wasn't on and as a result sales of Cypres went through the roof. His accident put Cypres on the map AND IT WASN'T EVEN ON! Somehow, to me, that sort of reveals the pussy aspect of the sport. Here's an article I wrote a few years ago when I was S&TA at the Ranch. I am convinced Darwin's been cheated. http://theblueskyranch.com/sta/ke11.htm

I don't think that post can be surpassed in this thread, and I'm absolutely positive the link can't (yes, I fixed it for the clicky-dependent ). That was flat-out fucking awesome!
Blues,
Dave

That article IS awesome. Superbly written. I see no inconsistancy between Emerson's points and the right of a DZO to decide that AAD's will be a requirement at any particular DZ.

[kallend 2,103]

Quote

exactly
7% of fatalities have been no pulls vs 34% on landing it dosent specify low turns, but I would believe that most of them would be low turns.

Which year would that be? Take a look at 1989, for example, 25 fatalities in the USA attributed to no/low pulls. 1991 had 14 no/low pull fatalities.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Nightingale 0]

It seems to me that with a high performance landing injury/fatality, it may be easier to explain that the jumper made an error in judgment and was injured/died under a perfectly good parachute than explain why someone didn't pull. With a high performance landing problem, we usually have a pretty good idea what happened, but with a no-pull there seems to be a lot more questions about what happened (could they reach their handles? was it a hard pull? did they just lose altitude awareness? did they do it on purpose? were they unconscious? etc...), and there seems to be a lot more speculation about whether it was a gear problem, a jumper problem, or both.

[kallend 2,103]

Quote

Don't own one. Don't feel I need one. Skydive anyway. Color me crazy if you want. But I figure if I can't cover my shit maybe I should be shitting. Tommy Piras died because his wasn't on and as a result sales of Cypres went through the roof. His accident put Cypres on the map AND IT WASN'T EVEN ON! Somehow, to me, that sort of reveals the pussy aspect of the sport. Here's an article I wrote a few years ago when I was S&TA at the Ranch. I am convinced Darwin's been cheated. http://theblueskyranch.com/sta/ke11.htm

Let's not forget that in the good old days when everyone was so self-reliant and no-one used audible altimeters, etc., the fatality rate was three times what it is now.

Graph

The graph only goes to the mid 80s. The fatality rate was even higher before that, in the golden age.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.