Opinions wanted about a 2-step RSL procedure

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I mean, I can't see myself getting severe line twists with a wing loading of .96

You would be wrong.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[goose491 0]

I'm afraid I don't understand your comment.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[Ron 10]

Quote

Not according to the DESIGNER of the 3-ring system:

To which your post just told ALL people who skydive to cut one shorter than the other.

Are you a rigger? Do you think its wise to make such statements as "Fact" when at least on maker of containers said the opposite of what you recomended?

Also you missed this part of Bills post :"In truth, the 2" differential really doesn't matter. If we assume you are pulling your cutaway handle at just 5 feet (60 inches) per second (most people pull a lot faster), then the 2" differential represents only 1/30 th of a second between riser releases."

So in fact your own "proof" states it does not matter.
But you stated something as fact when in fact it was not (as evidenced by Sunpaths manual), and your proof stated it does not matter. That is a weak position to claim you are correct.

If you had said' "Relative Workshop recomends", that would be one thing, but you said they ALL should be and that is wrong.

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

Err...did you read my posts?

Yep.

Quote

I worry too much about entanglements up high and the low collisions. Because the RSL wouldn't help me (the way I want it to) in those situations

A low collision is EXACTLY when an RSL is good. It is exactly when I would want one.

Your claim of entaglements up high is almost a non issue. If you maintain your gear you will have very little chance of a problem.

Its good to use your head to look at different things. It is not wise to not listen to the answers you get because you don't like them.

Quote

I would want a choice for cutting away without the reserve being deployed immediately.

Why? I can only think of one reason and thats an entanglement. But think of this...If you are in an entaglement that means you have deployed your main. Which means you no longer wish to be in freefall. So why would you want to freefall below the hight you wanted a main out? The only answer to that is to fall free of the mess...OK that would be a fair answer. But how long are you gonna delay?

Choose to have an RSL then keep it, or don't. But to switch back in forth in the air is the worst thing you can do for the very reasons we have all stated.

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

[PhreeZone 20]

Quick question... name me one malfunction that requires a disconnect?

High winds? Unless you are jumping in a hurricane or have a Skyhook all that having an RSL will do on a ground chop is cause you to have a rigger reclose your reserve.

Canopy Collision? If you are low person an RSL should'nt cause that big of an issue since your canopy will remain on the high person in the case of the chop. High person? Unless you've really screwed the pooch you'll probally still have an intact canopy over your head (might not be flying level, but its there still). I don't see a chop needing to be done there. Entanglement in CRW, yeah, a delay is needed.

Name the mal that requires a disconnect?

And as for a stable body position needed... you should see some of the body positions I throw in on exit (Halfway through a gainer) or freeflying( halfway through a roll)... Hell go watch jumpers off the Bridge this year throwing Aerials and throwing at all sorts of weird ass angles and they all opened fairly cleanly.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[dragon2 2]

Quote

Quote

I present that because a great many more experienced jumpers do not use RSLs then do, and because "incidents" and "hairy situations" tend to find experienced jumpers more often the students and tandems, that the comparison is not valid.

I would have to agree with you on that. I mean, I can't see myself getting severe line twists with a wing loading of .96

Pity I wasn't wearing my camera when I had to chop my Spectre (yes a Spectre) at WL 1.1 because it was spinning so hard it was straight in front of me. No visible malfunction other than "just linetwists".

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[Ron 10]

Quote

Contrary, there are an alarming number of people going in who would've been saved by one.

And they would also have been alive if they had used a one hand each handle emergency procedure.

The above statement has as much truth to it as yours about RSL being able to save them.

Both might be correct or not.

So the BEST thing to do here is have a good procedure over a device that could actually make the situation worse. How could good procedures actually made those situations worse?

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

But the vast majority of experienced jumpers do not use the RSL whereas all the students do.

Is that based on fact, or your belief? This was talked about in the August thread I referenced. I tried to poll here to get some sense of usage - of 262 respondents claiming > 100 jumps experience, 45% used an RSL. 3% had an RSL, but generally left it disconnected.

There is certainly the possibility for that sample to be skewed, but it suggests that RSL usage is not as rare as you make it out to be. Asking Javelin/Wings/etc would give another data point, though you wouldn't know how many stopped using it.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1791988;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

[dragon2 2]

Quote

Quick question... name me one malfunction that requires a disconnect?

Not required per se, but in a 2 out situation that you have to chop because it's downplaning, disconnecting the rsl first prevents the rsl from snagging anything.

I didn't disconnect mine when I found myself in that situation, because I didn't know to. But next time I would, if I had the time. Then again, not many people have 2 outs at +2k that also downplane later on

I'd use an rsl for sure, if I didn't jump camera and wingsuit so much. And I know how to find my handles too

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[goose491 0]

Personal Observation.

But I know better then to get into it with you about samples. lol

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

And they would also have been alive if they had used a one hand each handle emergency procedure.

...
So the BEST thing to do here is have a good procedure over a device that could actually make the situation worse. How could good procedures actually made those situations worse?

Doesn't the one hand on each handle have its own set of issues, Ron? Deaths from out of sequence releases?

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I'm afraid I don't understand your comment.

Billvon said: "I was at Rantoul this summer where two jumpers would have been saved by their RSL's. One tore his shirt apart trying to get to his reserve handle."

Your reply included: "-This jumper could also have had his RSL fire a malfunctioned reserve due to poor body position after the chop."

I'm not really sure what body position after a cutaway could cause a reserve malfunction, but I don't see how it matters anyway. Dead is dead.

Dave

[Ron 10]

Quote

Odd. Interesting that the safest aspects of our sport are students and tandems, both which require RSLs.

And they also have:
1. Higher pull altitudes.
2. More docile equipment.
3. In the case of Tandems an experienced jumper, and in the case of students they have JUST praticed their procedures and they are fresh in their minds...They also are not yet complacent.

You can claim it is just the RSL, but I think its more about the fact students are scared, just practiced their procedures, and jump docile equipment.

Quote

The suposition that somebody needs to "get stable" from after cuttaway from a moderately loaded Saber2-style canopy is demonstrably false.

Not true. There are fatalities where people trapped the reserve in them as they flipped and rolled.

Quote

Canopy colisions and entanglements are very rare outside of CRW circles

Roger Nelson.

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

Doesn't the one hand on each handle have its own set of issues, Ron? Deaths from out of sequence releases?

That would not be proper procedure now would it?

Every method has problems. You have to look at each method and then decide which is good for you.

The two hands per handle method takes time, harnesses shift, Makes it harder to be stable.

One hand each handle can have a hard pull, out of sequence deployment.

I find that one hand each handle is easier to fix the potential problems....I wait till I am released before I pull the reserve. But I think it has more benefits...For one I already have my hand on the handle and can pull it at anytime. I don't have to look for it.

But, I think that a proper single hand on each handle method is better than any device.

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

[borg2050 0]

Quote

>I'm not so sure that all of those skydivers who cut away too low would have been saved by an RSL.

I was at Rantoul this summer where two jumpers would have been saved by their RSL's. One tore his shirt apart trying to get to his reserve handle.

Interesting...

[billvon 3,030]

>-This jumper could also have had his RSL fire a malfunctioned
> reserve due to poor body position after the chop.

That's true. And if that happened, he might be deader.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Doesn't the one hand on each handle have its own set of issues, Ron? Deaths from out of sequence releases?

That would not be proper procedure now would it?

no, but one measure of properness is how likely a user is to screw it up, and what the consequences are. Just the same as how you evaluate the RSL device.

As I mentioned in another place, this is why buddy breathing is no longer used in scuba, and is a good thing.

[goose491 0]

That's right. Dead is dead.

And it's easy to say after the fact that xyz WOULD have saved him/her. Rather then COULD have...

I'm just saying that the RSL could have given him a malfunctioned reserve anyway, due to body postition. It's not an argument against using one.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

And they would also have been alive if they had used a one hand each handle emergency procedure.

True. However, unlike an RSL, a one hand each handle does have a historical pattern of issues - notably hard pulls on either the cuttaway or the reserve.

Quote

So the BEST thing to do here is have a good procedure over a device that could actually make the situation worse. How could good procedures actually made those situations worse?

In my view, the BEST thing is to have both good procedures and a good backup.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[goose491 0]

I'm not just being difficult for the sake of being difficult. You state with such certainty that an RSL would have saved him.

I notice you (or PilotDave) didn't bother to comment on what a one hand on each handle technique would have done for the jumper.

Is it not equally feasible for me to say that using one hand on each handle would have saved him? And to say it with the same amount of certainty?

(The RSL throwing him into a spun-up reserve is used in conjunction with this... perhaps a pre-response to Kelpdiver's chiming in with: "Doesn't the one hand on each create an out of sequence issue?")

Anyway, there is obviously more then one way that this jumper could have been saved.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[Ron 10]

Quote

no, but one measure of properness is how likely a user is to screw it up, and what the consequences are. Just the same as how you evaluate the RSL device.

Correct. I think that two hands per handle has only one benefit...Hard pulls are easier. You can claim that it also will prevent an out of sequience pull. But so will having a good procedure on one hand per handle. To that you also can claim that the two hands on one handle can make it hard to find the reserve. As Bill stated one guy ripped his shirt looking for the reserve handle.

So:

1. One hand per handle might give you an out od sequence deployment...
2. Two hands per handle might have you back in freefall looking for the reserve till you impact.

I'll take two out over nothing out any day.

Quote

As I mentioned in another place, this is why buddy breathing is no longer used in scuba, and is a good thing.

While buddy breathing has problems...I can't see how its good not to know it.

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

[Ron 10]

Quote

True. However, unlike an RSL, a one hand each handle does have a historical pattern of issues - notably hard pulls on either the cuttaway or the reserve.

You say that like it has killed more than an RSL. Have any proof of that statement?

Quote

In my view, the BEST thing is to have both good procedures and a good backup.

And it goes back to what you consider "Good". I don't consider a safety device that can kill you when used correctly as good.

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

[pilotdave 0]

I'm just curious... do you teach students to use one hand per handle?

BTW, I'm not trying to imply thats wrong... it's how I learned it before my first jump. Switched DZs before my second jump and learned two hands per handle. Later switched back to one hand per handle as I got more experience, and now I'm back to two for a few reasons. Never had a cutaway, so I can't compare either method based on real life experience (you just KNOW i'm doomed to have a cutaway this weekend after saying that!)
Dave

[mattjw916 2]

Quote

I would have to agree with you on that. I mean, I can't see myself getting severe line twists with a wing loading of .96

You wanna bet your life on it? Leave too little slack between the connector links and the d-bag when packing then dump in a track...

One of my friends had a violent spinning malfunction under a Spectre loaded very lightly. The ensuing cutaway (no RSL) left welts on his arms from chopping in a spin with the risers crossed in front of his face. Spectres are supposed to be mellow canopies, right?

Also recently witnessed 2 other violent cutaways, one left gouges on the guy's face from riser slap during cutaway and the other knocked a couple teeth out. Both were light to moderately loaded Sabre2s or Spectres (I don't remember which was which).

Malfunctions are called malfunctions for a reason, it means the canopy failed to work right, i.e. open reasonably soft and on-heading. When they do so, anything can happen. The hardest opening of my life was under a Navigator 260, loaded around 0.8 or something... sometimes stuff happens.

edit: kant spel

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[Ron 10]

Quote

I'm just curious... do you teach students to use one hand per handle?

I teach whatever the DZ I am at teaches. That way they do not get confused with other students or other adivce given to other students.

Quote

Later switched back to one hand per handle as I got more experience, and now I'm back to two for a few reasons

What are they? I would suggest that you pick a method and stick with it...It is a VERY important procedure and having more than one in your brain can casue problems when the shit hits the fan.....Some times you revert back to the most recent, some times you revert back to the first, and sometimes you mix the two and that can be bad.

I would teach one hand per handle. Pull the reserve after you fall away. I think having the reserve ready is more important than the chance of a double out.

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