kallend 2,027 #301 May 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteYou encourage people to prove they can do risky jumps without a proven safety device. NO HE DOESN'T! This is where I get confused. He (and Ron) says if you won't do a skydive without an AAD, don't do it at all. If you won't do any skydive without an AAD, don't do any skydive. But don't jump without an AAD. And you don't have to be willing to jump without an AAD. It's just that if you won't, you shouldn't jump. See they're different. I guess... Dave That's not the way I interpret it. I interpret it as a challenge, to prove something to their satisfaction... If you don't actually DO it, anything you say has a hollow ring to it. Oh yes, I can climb Everest. Oh yes, I can fly the Space Shuttle Oh yes, I would go into a tiger's cage. But I'm not going to.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #302 May 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteNot using a readily available safety device of proven value does not indicate good judgment. And using a safety device to exceed a person's risk/benefit limit or to compensate for lack of ability or other's lack of ability is also poor judgement. Derek I don't encourage that. You encourage people to prove they can do risky jumps without a proven safety device. Some people say all skydiving is an indication of poor judgment. I get the feeling everyone is saying the same thing but in different ways here. Kallend - I'm in no way saying you shouldn't do 10 way, I'm in no way saying you don't have the abilitty, training experience to do it. The danger is when a jumper that DOES NOT have the experience/training/ability gets in on that jump only because they have an aad.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #303 May 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNot using a readily available safety device of proven value does not indicate good judgment. And using a safety device to exceed a person's risk/benefit limit or to compensate for lack of ability or other's lack of ability is also poor judgement. Derek I don't encourage that. You encourage people to prove they can do risky jumps without a proven safety device. Some people say all skydiving is an indication of poor judgment. I get the feeling everyone is saying the same thing but in different ways here. Kallend - I'm in no way saying you shouldn't do 10 way, I'm in no way saying you don't have the abilitty, training experience to do it. The danger is when a jumper that DOES NOT have the experience/training/ability gets in on that jump only because they have an aad. Having an AAD was not a criterion we used in selecting team members. I don't think any competition team ever used that as a criterion. I don't think having an AAD was ever a criterion used to earn a coach rating, or an AFF rating, or get an invitation to a 200+ big way. Generally speaking the necessary skill has already been demonstrated for these. These are the kinds of things under discussion - whether individuals who's skill level is not in doubt can decide that they will not do certain high risk jumps without an AAD without Ron and Derek second guessing their decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #304 May 3, 2005 QuoteKallend - I'm in no way saying you shouldn't do 10 way, I'm in no way saying you don't have the abilitty, training experience to do it. So you disagree with Ron who says kallend shouldn't do 10-way because he will not do it without an AAD? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #305 May 3, 2005 QuoteI don't encourage that. Of course not. But it doea happen and that is what I am talking about. It shouldn't happen, but it does. If you agree with that, then we agree and can end this. QuoteYou encourage people to prove they can do risky jumps without a proven safety device. No, I don't. How many times have I said everyone should jump w/ an AAD in this thread alone? Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #306 May 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteKallend - I'm in no way saying you shouldn't do 10 way, I'm in no way saying you don't have the abilitty, training experience to do it. So you disagree with Ron who says kallend shouldn't do 10-way because he will not do it without an AAD? Dave In this instance I would disagree with Ron because Kallend has the skill/experience to do this jump. It's the people that use the aad to move their safetly level into a comfort zone they otherwise wouldn't have that is disturbing.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #307 May 3, 2005 QuoteThat's not the way I interpret it. How can you interpret "Everyone should jump w/ an AAD. AAD's are a good thing." as encouraging people to jump w/o an AAD? Unless you tell someone, no one can tell if you are depending on your AD or not, IMO. I thin I said in my first post in this thread. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #308 May 3, 2005 QuoteIn this instance I would disagree with Ron because Kallend has the skill/experience to do this jump. It's the people that use the aad to move their safetly level into a comfort zone they otherwise wouldn't have that is disturbing. If a 100-way is out of my comfort zone, but within my abilities, but I do the 100-way because of the Cypres, isn't that using an AAD to move outside my comfort zone also? Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #309 May 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteIn this instance I would disagree with Ron because Kallend has the skill/experience to do this jump. It's the people that use the aad to move their safetly level into a comfort zone they otherwise wouldn't have that is disturbing. If a 100-way is out of my comfort zone, but within my abilities, but I do the 100-way because of the Cypres, isn't that using an AAD to move outside my comfort zone also? Derek How many of us were in our comfort zone the first time we exited the plane? I think it's more about ability/experience than comfort. If we always stay in our comfort zone we never grow. Just like running - if you don't push past what you can do easily, you can never really go further.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #310 May 3, 2005 QuoteThat's not the way I interpret it. I interpret it as a challenge, to prove something to their satisfaction... Then you would be wrong....still."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #311 May 3, 2005 QuoteThe increased risk of collision in competition 10-way, 100+ ways, AFF instructing, freefly coaching etc. is there whether or not anyone uses an AAD The if those jump are above your risk level without it...you should not do it even with the AAD. The RISK of accident is the SAME. Only the outcome *might* be different. QuoteNot using a readily available safety device of proven value does not indicate good judgment. Neither does using a saftey device to do more dangerous things. QuoteEncouraging, even indirectly, someone to prove they can do it without an AAD, is irresponsible. Encourouging someone, even indirectly, to use an AAD as a substitute for good judgement is irresponsible."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #312 May 3, 2005 QuoteQuoteThat's not the way I interpret it. I interpret it as a challenge, to prove something to their satisfaction... Then you would be wrong....still. If you don't actually DO it, anything you say has a hollow ring to it. Oh yes, I can climb Everest. Oh yes, I can fly the Space Shuttle Oh yes, I would go into a tiger's cage. But I'm not going to. Talk is cheap. Reminds me of an old story: A guy in the garment district of NYC sees two stores on opposite sides of the street. One advertizes "Silk Shirts $10, no rain checks", and the other "Silk Shirts $20, no rain checks". So he goes into the $10 store and asks for a shirt. The owner tells him he is out of stock, no rain check, sorry. He goes into the other store, which has plenty of silk shirts hanging on a rail, and asks why this guy's shirts are $20 when the store opposite has them for only $10. "Well", says the owner, "Ours are $10 too, when we are out of stock". Talk is cheap.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #313 May 3, 2005 QuoteIf you don't actually DO it, anything you say has a hollow ring to it. Oh yes, I can climb Everest. Oh yes, I can fly the Space Shuttle Oh yes, I would go into a tiger's cage. But I'm not going to. Talk is cheap. Reminds me of an old story: A guy in the garment district of NYC sees two stores on opposite sides of the street. One advertizes "Silk Shirts $10, no rain checks", and the other "Silk Shirts $20, no rain checks". So he goes into the $10 store and asks for a shirt. The owner tells him he is out of stock, no rain check, sorry. He goes into the other store, which has plenty of silk shirts hanging on a rail, and asks why this guy's shirts are $20 when the store opposite has them for only $10. "Well", says the owner, "Ours are $10 too, when we are out of stock". Talk is cheap. ... Then YOU want them to do it...I have never said that."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #314 May 3, 2005 QuoteThe RISK of accident is the SAME. I absolutely disagree. Risk assessment happens to be my job. Potential outcome has EVERYTHING to do with risk. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #315 May 3, 2005 QuoteI absolutely disagree. Risk assessment happens to be my job. Potential outcome has EVERYTHING to do with risk. Then you need to re-read that "The risk of ACCIDENT is the same"...and it is. Unless you can show me how an AAD can PREVENT an accident."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #316 May 3, 2005 Ron, I agree that you have never said to jump without an AAD. You HAVE said that if someone WON'T jump without an AAD, they shouldn't jump at all. I then make the leap (no pun intended) that, in order to jump out of a plane, I must be willing to do it without an AAD. Do you disagree with that statement? If you don't disagree, then I have a followup question which you have failed to answer before. Why SHOULD I be willing to jump without an AAD? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #317 May 3, 2005 QuoteThen you need to re-read that "The risk of ACCIDENT is the same"...and it is. Unless you can show me how an AAD can PREVENT an accident. AHH! Here's a big problem I've had. You're misusing the word "risk." Risk the product of the severity and probability of an event. You are using risk to mean probability alone. True, the AAD does not change the probability of an accident. It is not true that the AAD does not change the risk of an accident. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #318 May 3, 2005 QuoteAHH! Here's a big problem I've had. You're misusing the word "risk." Risk the product of the severity and probability of an event. You are using risk to mean probability alone. Quote Risk (rsk) n.: 1. The possibility of suffering harm or loss; danger. 2. A factor, thing, element, or course involving uncertain danger; a hazard: “the usual risks of the desert: rattlesnakes, the heat, and lack of water” (Frank Clancy). Being knocked out is harm. It is also dangerous. QuoteTrue, the AAD does not change the probability of an accident. It is not true that the AAD does not change the risk of an accident. Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. But even under your definition..an AAD will do NOTHING to PREVENT an accident. Avoid the dangerous situation WILL. Edit to add for you: Quote ac·ci·dent n. 1. An unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm: car accidents on icy roads. 2. An unforeseen incident: A series of happy accidents led to his promotion. 3. An instance of involuntary urination or defecation in one's clothing. 4. Lack of intention; chance: ran into an old friend by accident. 5. Logic. A circumstance or attribute that is not essential to the nature of something. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #319 May 3, 2005 QuoteI then make the leap (no pun intended) that, in order to jump out of a plane, I must be willing to do it without an AAD. Do you disagree with that statement? Yes. What I have said...Is not to allow yourself to do something just because you have an AAD. If that means not jumping...then so be it. You don't have to skydive. That would be like saying its OK to drive drunk since you have airbags. In both cases you will most likely be safer because the AAD and the Airbags...But that doe not make the act safe. Nor does either device reduce the chance of an accident. Never did I say to jump without an AAD."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #320 May 3, 2005 Alright I'm not gonna argue who has the better dictionary. I use the definitions accepted by the military and aerospace industry (MIL-STD-882 and SAE ARP4761), as well as the insurance industry. If you use risk as a synonym for hazard, then sure, there's still a hazard when you add an AAD. The severity of that hazard is not the same. The hazard is being knocked unconscious by a freefall collision. The AAD reduces the severity from fatal to nonfatal, at least in some cases. The AAD doesn't prevent broken arms, backs, etc. Nobody uses it to prevent those hazards. Kallend said people do wear pads for 10-way to help prevent other injuries. If the jump is too dangerous to do without pads, is it too dangerous to do with pads? If it's too dangerous to do with no helmet, is it too dangerous to do with a helmet? This is just my opinion here, but I think you're unfairly attacking AADs. Yes, people use AADs to go on jumps they are qualified to do but wouldn't otherwise go on. Just like helmets and even reserves. Relying on an AAD to save your life, like someone that doesn't pull their reserve but instead waits for the reserve to fire, is obviously wrong for many reasons. Going on a 100 way when you don't believe you have enough skill to participate on that jump but will anyway due to an AAD is wrong for many reasons. Going on a jump that you are qualified for, AAD or not, is your decision. It is not right or wrong. It just is. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #321 May 3, 2005 whoa, whoa, whoa...now people are pulling out dictionaries, mil-specs, etc. I think it's time for us all to relax, jump (aad's optional ) and have some because at least we ain't whuffos.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #322 May 3, 2005 QuoteAlright I'm not gonna argue who has the better dictionary. I use the definitions accepted by the military and aerospace industry (MIL-STD-882 and SAE ARP4761), as well as the insurance industry. NASA good enough? NASA:Quote There are a number of definitions and uses for the term risk, but there is no universally accepted definition. What all definitions have in common is agreement that risk has two characteristics: uncertainty: An event may or may not happen. loss: An event has unwanted consequences or losses. Therefore, risk involves the likelihood that an undesirable event will occur, and the severity of the consequences of the event, should it occur. I am focusing on the first part...likelihood that an undesirable event will occur. you are thinking only in the second. QuoteIf you use risk as a synonym for hazard, then sure, there's still a hazard when you add an AAD Why not focus on removing the risk/hazzard first...Then add saftey equipment? If there is no incident/acident/occurance, then no AAD would be needed. QuoteThe severity of that hazard is not the same. The hazard is being knocked unconscious by a freefall collision. Not true...People have been killed from a collision, not just knocked out. QuoteIf the jump is too dangerous to do without pads, is it too dangerous to do with pads? If it's too dangerous to do with no helmet, is it too dangerous to do with a helmet? Yes. QuoteRelying on an AAD to save your life, like someone that doesn't pull their reserve but instead waits for the reserve to fire, is obviously wrong for many reasons. Going on a 100 way when you don't believe you have enough skill to participate on that jump but will anyway due to an AAD is wrong for many reasons So why do you have such a beef? All I have ever said is that if you think the risk/hazzard of a jump is too high without an AAD, then you should not do it just because you have one. That is risk management. You are thinking of only half of risk management. I am thinking of removing the possibility of an accident so that there is less danger. THEN adding an AAD so that in the event that your best thought out plans do get fucked up...you can still survive."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #323 May 3, 2005 QuoteTherefore, risk involves the likelihood that an undesirable event will occur, and the severity of the consequences of the event, should it occur. That is exactly what I said. Probability AND severity. You're choosing to ignore severity, I am not. You are saying risk stays equal. That is true, if you choose to just ignore half of what makes up risk. I am not ignoring probability. Probability doesn't change, just like you said. Severity does change. AADs protect against a small number of hazards. They don't protect against broken bones or being killed by a collision. They protect against hitting the ground at terminal velocity if you are knocked unconscious or forget to pull. The hazards they protect against are the reasons people use them. You say over and over that they don't prevent accidents. That's very true! Nobody is arguing that point. Nobody is also arguing that any skydiver is better off jumping than staying on the ground. You jump well within your risk threshold. That makes you a safe jumper. You'd be an even safer jumper if you stayed on the ground. When someone chooses to use an AAD for a particular jump, it may appear that the person is only jumping because of the AAD. That's how you view kallend doing 10-way. I don't see that. I see that kallend is going to do 10-way, and THEN he chooses to add a cypres because of the risk of a collision. The AAD isn't allowing him to do something dangerous. The AAD isn't an excuse to take greater risks. The AAD is nothing but a decision on his part to have some extra protection in case he cannot pull for himself. The fact that he won't do 10-way without a cypres doesn't change that. It doesn't magically make 10-way "too" dangerous for him. Adding a cypres isn't what makes it safe enough. It is safe enough because he has the skill to do it safely. His choice not to do it without an AAD is an entirely different issue and has no bearing on his safety when he's doing 10-way. Therefore I see it as totally irrelevant to anything. Perhaps if his team found out, they'd kick him off because of the chance he'll screw them by riding the plane down during a competition. But that's not a safety issue. If you want to promote safety, focus your argument where it makes a difference as far as safety is concerned. In kallend's case, or the case of a freefly coach, or the case of an AFF instructor, there's no safety difference between someone that is willing to jump without an AAD but is wearing one and someone that is not willing to jump without one. Kallend IS less safe by going on 10-way jump instead of watching from the ground. That is true for every single human being in the history of the world. His choice to use a cypres when he does 10-way does not make him less safe while doing 10-way. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #324 May 3, 2005 QuoteWhen someone chooses to use an AAD for a particular jump, it may appear that the person is only jumping because of the AAD. That's how you view kallend doing 10-way. I don't see that. I see that kallend is going to do 10-way, and THEN he chooses to add a cypres because of the risk of a collision. The AAD isn't allowing him to do something dangerous. The AAD isn't an excuse to take greater risks Does Kallend see 10way as too dangerous without an AAD? Yes, or No? If Yes, then he is in fact using the AAD as an excuse to take bigger risks than he would be willing to take without them. If you said no, then you need to re-read his posts. QuoteThe fact that he won't do 10-way without a cypres doesn't change that. It doesn't magically make 10-way "too" dangerous for him. Adding a cypres isn't what makes it safe enough. If the only difference between "Go" and No-Go" is the AAD...How can you say he is no using it as THE reason he does the jump? EDIT: I'm done with this....It is quite clear that if the only factor that makes it OK for you to jump is the AAD, you are in fact dependant. I see no need to continue this...If you feel like asking me a question...Think about the question, then read all these posts again...I can bet it has been answered atleast once before."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #325 May 3, 2005 I'm not going to answer for kallend and I'm not going to bother looking up the wording of his original post. But here's what I assume is going on in his mind. 10-way is dangerous. There's a high risk of collision. The AAD might save his life following a collision. There is no benefit on 10-way to not using an AAD. There is possible benefit to using one. He has one. There's no reason not to use one. There's no reason to consider not using one. There's no reason to be willing to not use one. None of those would have any benefit to him. Using one may have benefit. Therefore he chooses to use one. Every time. It's dangerous, not TOO dangerous. But anyway, regardless of it all... Lets say 10-way IS too dangerous for kallend (him, specifically). What does that mean? What if it was too dangerous for him WITH an AAD and he still does it anyway. What if it was too dangerous for him without an AAD and he did it without an AAD? What are you trying to accomplish here? To make kallend safer by quitting 10-way? What if we were talking about someone else. ~200 jumps, no fear, jumps a small canopy but he's comfortable with it. It's not "too dangerous" for him. He does 10-way. Dives really hard, stops fast, wears a cypres if possible. It's not too dangerous for him. He says so. Who is more likely to be hurt (or hurt someone else) on a 10-way jump... Him or kallend? AADs aren't the problem sometimes. Overconfidence is a big killer in this sport. We see it in the incidents forum all the time. You're focusing your energy to keep kallend safer by not going on 10-way. That's all well and good but I think there are bigger fish to fry. Kallend isn't a danger to himself or his teammates. Many others in this sport are. Qualified AFF instructors aren't a danger. Qualified freefly coaches aren't a danger. People that think "I don't need a cypres or a helmet, I have skillZ" are a danger. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
