Hard Deck vs Decision alti?

[Superman32 0]

I'm having a brain fart.
I can't remember if the terms hard deck and decision alti are the same thing.
Here's what I'm thinking: 2500ft is my decision alti/hard deck where i'm no longer trying to fix anything and I'm either chopping or landing it.
At 1000 ft if something is wrong with what's above my head I'm pulling silver, which should never be an issue b/c I'm chopping at 2500'

Inveniam Viam aut Faciam
I'm back biatches!

[Ron 10]

Quote

I'm having a brain fart.
I can't remember if the terms hard deck and decision alti are the same thing.

Decision Alti: You make your choice.

Hard Deck: You do it (or have done it), or deal with what you have below that.

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

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

At 1000 ft if something is wrong with what's above my head I'm pulling silver, which should never be an issue b/c I'm chopping at 2500'

I believe that having a landable canopy at 2,500ft does not guarantee it will remain that way at lower altitude, so it could be an issue. Things can happen all the way down to ground level.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[parachutist 2]

Quote

I'm having a brain fart.
I can't remember if the terms hard deck and decision alti are the same thing.
Here's what I'm thinking: 2500ft is my decision alti/hard deck where i'm no longer trying to fix anything and I'm either chopping or landing it.
At 1000 ft if something is wrong with what's above my head I'm pulling silver, which should never be an issue b/c I'm chopping at 2500'

During AFF the rule is taught:
Decision altitude is 2,500 ft. This means that by 2,500 you decide whether your canopy is good or whether you need to cut away. "Decision altitude" means that you need to decide what you're going to do by this altitude.. you still have time to execute emergency procedures after you have made your decision.

This decision altitude will need to go lower for some jumpers later in their skydiving career because they may be pulling lower. For example if someone deploys at 2,500 ft., as some do, then you've already blown through the decision altitude before your canopy is even out of the bag... so that 2,500 altitude wouldn't work as your decision alttitude anymore.

Another rule taught in AFF:
No cutaways below 1,000 ft. This altitude can't go much lower later in a skydiving career... so that one is good to keep as a general guideline no matter how many jumps you have.

Chris

[Plucky 0]

-------
"...2500ft is my decision alti/hard deck where i'm no longer trying to fix anything and I'm either chopping or landing it.
At 1000 ft if something is wrong with what's above my head I'm pulling silver, which should never be an issue b/c I'm chopping at 2500'..."
----------

I agree with the "Hard deck": 1000ft - if the canopy above me isn't good, go for silver without cutting away.

Decision altitude: This to me is about 2200ft, but means something slightly different to yours.
That is, if my main looks fixable, I will try once, very quickly, to fix it if I'm above 2200.
I will not try to fix it all the way down to 2200, if I dumped at, say, 3500.

If it's a bad spot, or something goes wrong with my reserve, I'd like to have cut away as high as possible.

I'm thinking that the theory "If it's not controllable and landable, chop it" takes priority over "I can fix this main before my decision altitude, then I still have my reserve if I need it".

Open to criticism.
These things happen quickly.

[billvon 3,070]

>At 1000 ft if something is wrong with what's above my head I'm
> pulling silver, which should never be an issue b/c I'm chopping at 2500'

This situation can arise when you have a canopy collision or progressive canopy damage (like a tear) below 2500 feet.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

This situation can arise when you have a canopy collision or progressive canopy damage (like a tear) below 2500 feet.

Have you any experience like that? Canopy has a minor tear you don't see, it passes flare/turn test, but then gets worse?

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

Canopy has a minor tear you don't see, it passes flare/turn test, but then gets worse?

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1595226;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

[grue 1]

I was taught that I'm to decide by 2,500', act by 2,000'.

Three seconds, at stable terminal, to act.

cavete terrae.

[bseriesboosted 0]

One thing to remember is.. never ever ever ever break your hard deck by thinking that the malfunction is almost handled... example; a couple of weeks ago i done a chopper jump from 4000 and deployed my main at 3000 feet.. my canopy has about a 900 to 1000 foot snivill(this is not because of packing it just takes that long) so i knew i would be in the saddle at about 2000ft I opened up whit line twist that made my canopy start to turn and dive... within a second i was on my back spinning i looked at altitude and decided i could handle this so i had to fight the linetwists and finely i was stable at 1200 feet so i broke my hard deck by almost 1000' after i landed I had a couple of very experienced jumpers tell me that i should have cut a way.(they wittnessed the malfunction) it made me look at what I done now i realize what i done was stupid and could have killed me. so my lesson to you is never go below your set altitude..

that is my advice to you. I hope you will take my advice and learn from my mistake...

Pruitt

Skydive The Farm

[Mockingbird 0]

Bill, could you or somebody else answer a question I have on this subject? (I was a good girl and searched first rather than start a new thread. )

In the Category B Quiz of the SIM it says that if you're below 1000' and your canopy (for whatever reason) isn't landable, you should deploy the reserve -- but NOT if you're using a single-operation system. This doesn't make sense. There's no time to cut away first.

I'm sure there's a simple answer to this...

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[billvon 3,070]

>In the Category B Quiz of the SIM it says that if you're below 1000' and
> your canopy (for whatever reason) isn't landable, you should deploy the
>reserve -- but NOT if you're using a single-operation system. This doesn't
> make sense. There's no time to cut away first.

Right. And pulling the handle on an SOS system cuts away the main, so you shouldn't do that under 1000 feet. In such a situation there really is no good answer. Pull the handle and go into freefall at 1000 feet, and risk impacting as the reserve opens? Or don't pull the handle and have to land an unlandable main? Generally if the main is controllable at all, and will land you survivably, you should keep it below 1000 feet on an SOS system.

[Mockingbird 0]

Yikes.

Thanks, tho'.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[goose491 0]

As far as I have been taught, they are seperate terms.

I like to emphasize the word "Hard" in "hard-deck" lol. As in: "That Deck is Hard and I don't want to hit it at increased speeds."

Decision Altitude: Altitude at or before which you have made a decision about the canopy you have overhead (keep it or chop it... but not "continue messing with it")

Hard Deck: Needless to say, you should have a canopy overhead by this alti Have your 'decision' made and enacted by this altitude.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[tbrown 26]

Quote

>In the Category B Quiz of the SIM it says that if you're below 1000' and
> your canopy (for whatever reason) isn't landable, you should deploy the
>reserve -- but NOT if you're using a single-operation system. This doesn't
> make sense. There's no time to cut away first.

Right. And pulling the handle on an SOS system cuts away the main, so you shouldn't do that under 1000 feet. In such a situation there really is no good answer. Pull the handle and go into freefall at 1000 feet, and risk impacting as the reserve opens? Or don't pull the handle and have to land an unlandable main? Generally if the main is controllable at all, and will land you survivably, you should keep it below 1000 feet on an SOS system.

I haven't seen any of the current SOS systems, but some of the original Australian SOS rigs, circa 1980 had a "reserve only" handle that was below the main handle, with the cable routed through the main handle to the "only" one. It seemed like a good idea, so don't they still make them that way ?

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[grue 1]

Some of our student rigs are SOS (just the ripcord rigs, not the BOC rigs after students are further off the static line). If memory serves, pulling the reserve handle also cuts away. I don't think there's actually a handle on the right MLW, but I could be wrong. It's been a while

cavete terrae.

[mdrejhon 8]

The student rigs at my dropzone had a SOS style system on one handle, but the other handle still existed. It's been a while, but I think it was the cutaway handle that would also deploy the reserve.

However, there was also the option to go straight to silver if I have nothing survivable above me at 1000 feet, for example, and for emergency airplane exits at lower altitude.

I suspect two-out would be a bigger concern for these rigs, but properly drilled EP's avoids doing this by accident. That's the advantage, I had no need to change EP's when I went off the student rig...

[grue 1]

Hm, that might be how it was set up. I'll look next time I'm up there.

cavete terrae.

[azureriders 0]

The student rigs on my DZ have two emergency handles. One red pud on the right MLW and one silver D on the left MLW. Looks just like any other sport rig. The red cutaway handle also works like any other rig, and there is a RSL in use. The Silver reserve handle, has an additional purpose. Along with a reserve rip chord, it also has a pair of cutaway cables that go to the 3 ring system. The loop on the three ring, instead of having one end sewed and one end trough the gromet in the riser, has a double ended loop and two gromets in the riser. One for each end of the loop and one cutaway cable from the right handle and one from the left handle through ea end of the loop.

The idea is that if a student freaks and only pulls one handle, either handle, they should be ok. EMP's are taught just like for any sport rig and therefore no transition period needed to pass onto your own rig.

I have never saw a SOS handle with a reserve only handle on the same MLW. I have heard of these, some with a soft pud on the end of the reserve rip chord on the inside of the SOS D and some with a longer reserve rip chord and the pud velcroed below the SOS D. Doe anyone know if these are in use anywhere or of any manufactuer that sells them. I would like to see one, or atleast a pic.

[packerboy 3]

Both handles on our student rigs cutaway and deploy reserve. If you don't have anything landable over your head at 1000ft youd better be still pulling handles damn quick or hope you are going fast enough for the CYPRES fire, so you can survive long enough to obtain your directions to the bowling alley.

--------------------------------------------------
In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[dzjohn 0]

I was taught with the method of using two handles and if you were told that either handle done both jobs wouldnt you be setting yourself up for a big accident if when you brought your first rig and had a mal early on a freaked you could go back to the student days and pull the red pud low and just think everythings going to happen, and then opps to late.

[ScottyInAus 0]

Most students that early on don't realise how the TAO system works and by the time they do, they should have their EP's worked out.
You are still taught to pull Red, Silver.
In the case that only one handle is pulled the main riser (L/H) has an RSL, the reserve handle also has cutaway cables attached to it.
So instead of the cutaway loop (small white shoelace type material, sorry don't know the tech name) being sown (sp?) to the main risers it is free and held in place by 2 (two) yellow cutaway cables.

Cheers,
Jason.

[billbooth 10]

Trouble is, double-ended 3-ring release loops drastically lower the reliability of the 3-ring system...as we have found out on tandem drogue release systems. Plus, if your 3-ring cables jam, you can't pull your reserve ripcord. So by linking the two systems, you lower the reliability of both. This is hardly a system you want to give to a student jumper...is it?

[azureriders 0]

Bill,
I will agree with you that simplicity is reliable. I have heard you use the comparison of your drouge release to this issue several times. My question is, if the drouge release would be in plain sight so that it can be checked by the jumper prior to ea dive (the way I check my double ended three ring release loop) would the rate of drouge rlease failures still have increased by a factor of 10?

As for the duel cutaway system, I have never jumped anything else and have no problem jumping it again. As I have explained in other releated threads, I found the double ended loop on my first gear check in the FJC, but only because I am the type to research, study and prepare myself before any class or activity.

Although I am comfortable with the gear I jump, my questions to the instuctors and DZO's that use the dual cutaway rigs are these: How can the student be taught to do a gear check if he don't understand the gear? If you teach him how the gear works so that he can understand it, now you have let him in on the secret that either handle should save his life, does that not negate the whole, no transition to new gear thing?

Another question that I have asked before with very little answer: what do you do in the more shit is better than some shit sittuation? As Bill mentioned, if the three ring fails to release, you can not dump the reserve giving you more shit for drag. Same thing under 1000', no time for a cutaway, but no way do dump more shit with out cuting away first. Now I know this and I still don't mind jumping this gear, but the difference is I KNOW THIS.

What about the student that does not know that he is jumping a dual cutaway system, who comes home and reads DZ.com and finds a catchy phrase like more shit is better than some shit, or reads the SIM which states clearly that you should not cutaway bellow 1000' but instead dump your reserve. Now the SIM also makes reference to the SOS system in that same statement, but you have not told the student that his reserve handle is in fact a SOS handle so he dismisses that bit of info. He don't know what a SOS is, but surely if he was jumping one his instuctor would have told him during that speech about how important it is to understand your gear.

I am not against the dual cutaway system, however I am against anyone straping a lifesaveing device to my back and not giving me proper and thorough training on exactly how it works. There are several questions above and more that could be asked, and I don't claim to know the answers, just that I don't agree with the way these rigs are curently being used. However, I am not an instuctor and don't believe that those of you who are need my aproval

As for the three ring release failure, or no time to cut away: I have heard that there was a SOS type left MLW handle made that had a pud on the end of the reserve cable itself. If you pull silver it activated both the three ring and the reserve, but if you pull the pud it would pull the cable through the silver handle which is still in its pocket and deploy the reserve only. Do any of you that use the dual cutaway or SOS know if these were in fact made and if so are they still in production and where? Not saying that this would be good for students, probably just complicating things.

I know this is getting long but one more example. I had an instuctor, (who I had just met, used to work there, filling in on a busy day, etc etc), brief me for level 6 AFF. He was going over EP's with me and asked questions to make sure I understood both the decision altitude and hard deck, then asked what I should do if I found myself under 1000' with an unlandable canopy (yes, this was followed by a speech about how this could not happen if I was doing what I was supposed to be doing). The answer he was looking for was to 'just pull silver' yet here I stand wearing a dual cutaway rig. I mentioned this to him and he backed up and probably gave me the best set of answers to the above questions that I have heard so far, but what if I had not known that I had a dual cutaway rig?????????????????

Sorry about the long post, but this is something I have been working on since I have been jumping. I like the dual cutaway or SOS rig. I have even proposed some modifications to it. I have presented these mods to Bill Booth, Slotperfect, Billvon, and others who have all given me feedback, a lot of which was very positive.

In conclusion, I am begining to understand and agree with Bill Booth that this rig is too complicated. Where Bill says the rigging is complicated and therefore less reliable, I am saying that it is complicated because there are so many unanswerable questions surronding it. Two different anologies, both complicated.