Fatalities by DZ

[BillyVance 34]

A little side discussion has been going on in the recent ASC fatality thread, so I got curious to see where the fatalities occurred. The database on dropzone.com listed them back to 2004. Note that I listed number of deaths, not incidents as some of them had multiple deaths. For brevity, I'm only listing the DZs in the U.S. that have had multiple fatalities.

Skydive Arizona - 4
Skydive Perris - 4
(no surprise here, as these are the two busiest DZs)

Skydive Cross Keys - 3 (2 separate incidents)
(ditto, it's the busiest in the northeast)
Skydive Hawaii - 3 (2 separate incidents)

Atlanta Skydiving Center - 3
(not a big DZ)

Skydive The Rockies - 2
Denver Skydivers - 2
(one of the above had one incident)

Skydive Deland - 2
Skydive Dallas - 2
World Free Fall Convention - 2
(no surprise for these three)

Skydive Chicago had several fatalities in prior years but only one since 2004.

I remember there being a fatality database that was posted on rec.skydiving, but I have since lost the info. Does anybody have it?

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[Dougiefresh 0]

Didn't East Troy have three last year? And they're not big at all. Flying a PAC, and that was new last year -- I think they were cessna before that.

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Didn't East Troy have three last year? And they're not big at all. Flying a PAC, and that was new last year -- I think they were cessna before that.

Could be, I've gotten the above info directly from the database on here, so it seems that it's not entirely complete. Well, what's the DZ name?

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[Dougiefresh 0]

Skydive Milwaukee, or East Troy Parachute Club, or Sky Knights.

Here.

Here's one of them: http://www.dropzone.com/fatalities/Detailed/115.shtml

Can't find the others though. Perhaps I'm mistaken, or maybe they're just not listed.

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

I remember there being a fatality database that was posted on rec.skydiving, but I have since lost the info. Does anybody have it?

__________________________________________________

Yeah, I'm fookin' deaf... so sue me...

Not only that, but you can't google either!

http://www.poxon.org/Craig/Skydive/Fatalities/

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[AndyMan 7]

This is one example where Google fails.

More uptodate stats can be found at www.skydivingfatalities.info

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[rasmack 0]

Does anyone have the numbers to renormalize these numbers by total jumb numbers at each DZ? It would also be of interest to compare with the national/international totals. Actually the first exercise should be to figure out which countries are more dangerous than others.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[matthewcline 0]

To put these numbers into prospective we need to see the %.

Total Fatalities to total jumps at a DZ annually.
"Size" of the DZ in this case dosn't matter but the quantity of jumps.

Is it a weekend only facility or a 7 day a week operation.

Then we can get really deep and break it into other criteria, student, swooper, malfunctions etc. etc.

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[rasmack 0]

Quote

To put these numbers into prospective we need to see the %.

Unfortunately I think that the data will be completely dominated by statistical fluctuations, especially when considering the smaller or less active DZs.

Edit: This is good as it means there are few fatalities.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[phoenixlpr 0]

It does not mean anything. You can have all lottery numbers from the past, you don't have more chance to win tomorrow jackpot.

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

http://www.skydivingfatalities.info

That link was on/inside the link I provided and I got there by typing "Barry Brummit" in the google bar in the left upper corner of my screen.
I took for granted that Billy can click with a mouse...

Q: What's worse on the internet than people who "don't read the f@#$%ng manuals"?
A: People who tell you to RTFM...

Off topic: Only day's ago I wanted to 'estimate' a price for a couple of cypresses that were offered in the classifieds here and vaguely remembered that on Craig Poxon's site there was a calculator I had seen. Just couldn't remember Craig Poxon's name and spent an hour before I finally found the calculator at the SSK website.

So sometimes just asking here does the trick, I guess...

Off topic 2: If Billy CAN click and does it twice more from the above link through "Skydivingfatalities.com" He's at "1-800 skyride".

Now THAT ought to get him going!

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[mark 107]

Quote

It does not mean anything. You can have all lottery numbers from the past, you don't have more chance to win tomorrow jackpot.

That's because lottery draws are random and independent events. That doesn't apply to skydiving incidents.

Most skydiving incidents result from identifiable causes, so they are not random events.

Further, what Billy is asking here is if particular clusters of incidents might be related. It's possible they are (for example, if there is an absence of a "Culture of Safety," whatever that is), or it may be coincidence/chance masquerading as related events (how often would you expect a 1-in-a-million chance to affect a New Yorker?). We wouldn't know unless we checked.

Mark

[ladyskydiver 0]

No, you are incorrect. Sky Knights had 2 fatalities last year.

Sky Knights had an otter prior to the Pac. A King Air prior to the otter. The Cessna is there year around and is flown during the winter.

Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly! Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably. And never regret anything that made you smile.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Quote

http://www.skydivingfatalities.info

That link was on/inside the link I provided and I got there by typing "Barry Brummit" in the google bar in the left upper corner of my screen.
I took for granted that Billy can click with a mouse...

Well now I remember that name Barry Brummit... thanks for the link! It had been too long since I kept up with that.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

That's because lottery draws are random and independent events. That doesn't apply to skydiving incidents.

Most skydiving incidents result from identifiable causes, so they are not random events.

The analogy is that these events are rare.

Perris has 4 deaths and some smaller one turbine DZ has 2 or 3 incidents in this 2 year timeframe. What conclusion can you draw about their relative safety?

No valid ones, statistically. Numbers are too tiny.

It would silly not to read the details, of course, but the numbers say almost nothing.

[wmw999 2,452]

Quote

No valid ones, statistically. Numbers are too tiny.
It would silly not to read the details, of course, but the numbers say almost nothing.

Over time (lots of time), you can develop some interesting statistical data even with small numbers. It might not be relevant to dropzone, but by doing a pretty thorough causal analysis of each fatality, you can probably see some common threads among them.

Right now people are seeing them in an informal manner (e.g. "any idiot can see that canopy was too fast"). A thorough causal analysis would look at the factors that didn't look likely as well, and begin to see which ones might either be common, or that might be markers of a variety of problems.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Dougiefresh 0]

Quote

No, you are incorrect. Sky Knights had 2 fatalities last year.

Sky Knights had an otter prior to the Pac. A King Air prior to the otter. The Cessna is there year around and is flown during the winter.

Thanks.

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams

[Elisha 1]

Quote

Quote

No valid ones, statistically. Numbers are too tiny.
It would silly not to read the details, of course, but the numbers say almost nothing.

Over time (lots of time), you can develop some interesting statistical data even with small numbers. It might not be relevant to dropzone, but by doing a pretty thorough causal analysis of each fatality, you can probably see some common threads among them.

Right now people are seeing them in an informal manner (e.g. "any idiot can see that canopy was too fast"). A thorough causal analysis would look at the factors that didn't look likely as well, and begin to see which ones might either be common, or that might be markers of a variety of problems.

Wendy W.

As someone with a degree in Statistics, yes and yes to kelpdiver and Wendy respectively. As to "Culture of Safety", yes, this is difficult - especially due to the small number of incidents to a particular location. A place with a strong sense of "CoS" may have had a couple of incidents due to stupid mistakes or blatant disregard while a DZ with an apparent complete lack of a "CoS" may have had none. Again, looking at the details of the particular incidents and the "lessons learned" are what is important.