Device dependence (was: Cypres report)

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

I won't drive on the highway without my seatbelt. Does that mean I shouldn't drive on the highway?

To me, that's not a fair analogy to an altimiter (the subject you are replying/referring to). You are not relying on your seatbelt to give you any feedback or "information" upon which to rely for any decision-making purposes.

To continue upon that (flawed) logic path: Many cars are coming out now adays with distance (separation) sensors even in the FRONT bumpers, so that if you have the cruise control on & are approaching a slower vehicle in front of you, and you take NO ACTION on your own, it will apply the brakes &/or slow your vehicle (and "space it") FOR YOU. Does this mean then, that if you had one of these cars you should absolutely rely on that? If/when that system failed you should immediately pull over and stop driving?? Maybe everyone SHOULD have one of these cars, because it's a "safety device" that's available ...and "everybody should use every possible safety device ALWAYS available to them", -right?? Would you then drive your car with your eyes closed? I suppose you actually COULD for a period of time (longer than you could WITHOUT this) ...but would you want to RELY on that??

Personally, I would certainly want to be fully CAPABLE to not have to rely upon any such back-up device. So again, another long-winded answer to basically that particular question which you were referring with your analogy: Should you be capable of making a jump without any altimeter, either visual OR audible?

I still think that answer is YES!

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[Scrumpot 1]

Boy, did this post certainly get "LOST" once Bill Von moved it out of the incident thread that it was originally posted in!

Did the original poster, to whom I was only merely REPLYING TO even ever see this?
I wonder.

Hmmmm....

I HATE RAINY SATURDAYS STUCK AT HOME!

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[DontPanic 0]

I've been rolling this topic over in my head while following the discussion with the Perris accident. Part of my attention has been drawn to the people that argue you should jump no "different" with a Cypres than without a Cypres.

I understand their argument that there are more Cypress/AAD fires now than there were low/no pulls before AADs became common. Also, as this accident pointed out, AADs can fail from something as simple as turning the device on at home (or from forgetting to turn the device on at all). Besides all that, what can be more fundamental to skydiving than pulling at the right altitude?

On the other hand, humans are inherently fallable, and I think most everyone agrees that the widespread use of AADs has saved a lot of lives.

I understand your point that skydivers should be able to jump safely without an AAD, or an altimeter, or an audible. But I'm sure I'd jump "differently" without an altimeter, and I think I am many jumps away from being at the point where I can say I'd jump no "differently" without an AAD.

I hope this doesn't make me a bad person.

[darkwing 5]

Quote

...I understand their argument that there are more Cypress/AAD fires now than there were low/no pulls before AADs became common...

I disagree. Without a doubt there are fewer low pulls now then in the old days. While I admid that my old days are different than some (mine old days start in 1973), I saw a lot of low pulls then.

-- Jeff
My Skydiving History

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

...you should jump no "different" with a Cypres than without a Cypres.

Well, although on one level (like explaining to students) I can understand the reasoning behind this being stated; still, once you progress, having a bit more "broader" of an understanding, and consideration of this little piece of equipment, in my mind, is still rather important. For instance, I most certainly WILL jump (or at least potentially react to a situation) "different" WITH my Cypres versus without. At 1,500ft in freefall (granted, not an "ideal" and "every day" situation to be in, but that's most specifically also when you DON'T just want to be trying to figure out as well for the 1st time what your Cypres parameters may be) WITHOUT a Cypres I will have absolutely no reservation in going to my main. However, WITH a Cypres, that reaction risks a 2-out situation. SO in fact, it could be quite reasonable to "jump differently" with vs. without your Cypres.

My point however, is that you should be at least CAPABLE of doing BOTH. If you feel the risk of the jump you are about to get on would be too high without your Cypres, and/or the Cypres is the decision factor for you making a particular jump you may not otherwise, ...perhaps you should rethink participating in that jump (or jumping in general if you are THAT dependent upon your Cypres) At all.

Quote

I think I am many jumps away from being at the point where I can say I'd jump no "differently" without an AAD.

I hope this doesn't make me a bad person.

Not at all. You CHOOSE to jump with a Cypres. You do seem to be THINKING about it, and its purpose and its operation though. And that is good, and that is all I ask.

Again, although I most certainly understand the "turn it on and forget about it" statement REASONING (and its "targetted audience"); The Perris incident in particular, in my mind also highlights the potential danger in this mentality as well.

Once a skydiver is turned over to his/her own devices, it is incumbent upon them to KNOW their own equipment, equipment choices, or seek out that knowledge and THINK about it/consider what it means and how it may apply to their INDIVIDUAL jumping situation.

I am just amazed today at how many jumpers I encounter who have literally NO CLUE of how many components of their gear actually function (the Cypres included), how to either maintain or adjust them, and what that could mean in certain situations based on their CHOICES.
And that just astounds me!

That may be fine for video games or tiddly-winks, but that is not what we are all participating in here!!

This where the extent of the turn it on, "set it and forget it" mentality I think can (and was shown in this very incident) to be a mistake. Although I am solidly in the camp that the Cypres itself played "NO ROLE" in this incident, and that the PRIMARY CAUSE was jumper failure to deploy her own landable parachute before impact; it is still inescapable to consider its ABSENCE as CAUSED by this jumpers failure to understand her own gear, as also a "contributory" mistake. It would be a shame if nobody as a result indeed took some pause in that (myself included), and redoubled their commitment to LEARN THEIR OWN GEAR, and yes, learn from THIS mistake.

Sorry if all the above is a bit long-winded and rambling. But hopefully at least makes SOME sense.

Blue Skies,
-Grant

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[metalslug 36]

Quote

Should you be capable of making a jump without any altimeter, either visual OR audible?
I still think that answer is YES!

Agreed, and many static-line progression students worldwide are doing their 3s, 5s and 10s delay freefalls without any altimeter at all.
The primary goal of any skydive is to survive without injury. Surely a device such an altimeter does more than merely assist you in doing that?

If people should be prepared to jump without an altimeter, then how precise should their altitude awareness need to be when relying on only their senses? Accurate to within 500ft? 1000ft?
It is true in most circumstances that deploying a canopy too low would result in less altitude to deal with a malfunction, and deploying too high could endanger other jumpers still in freefall.
Are these two possibilities of a much lesser concern than being able to demonstrate that a person survived a skydive without devices?

[billvon 3,072]

>If people should be prepared to jump without an altimeter, then how
> precise should their altitude awareness need to be when relying on
> only their senses? Accurate to within 500ft? 1000ft?

Good question. When I jump without an altimeter, I typically break off and deploy about 500 feet higher than normal, since I tend to err on the side of caution. For the jumping I do, that's fine. It's OK for me to pull at 3000 feet instead of 2500.

Someone else may always pull 1000 feet higher. Maybe that's OK - as long as they don't end up pulling dangerously high. For example, opening at 5000 feet at Rantoul can be dangerous. Or they may have poor height awareness and sometimes pull 1000 feet low. That's probably not OK. 200 feet too low probably is.

So to me, sufficient awareness is enough awareness to be able to pull at or above your minimum deployment altitude without an altimeter.

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

Are these two possibilities of a much lesser concern than being able to demonstrate that a person survived a skydive without devices?

No, I don't necessarily think that these possibilities are of a significantly much lesser concern, nor are they mutually exclusive to each other either.

I am not advocating that you need to jump regularly without any form of altimiter at all. Only that you SHOULD be able to "train your eyes" so that you are able to make them one of your (if not maybe even primary/most trusted) altitude awareness resources. That way, you are not 100% relying upon, and DEPENDENT upon a mechanical (or electical) device which is prone to failure.

You can make several jumps to do this quite safely WITH your wrist-mount altimiter. Start by training yourself to judge the alt at certain important points in your freefall FIRST, then VERIFY it against your altimeter until you feel you have gotten that "dialed-in" & ingrained. You can cross-verify this all the time then too, on nearly every jump until you feel comfortable and confident that you are learning your "sight picture". Then, that one time when you find yourself climbing to alt, and have either forgotten your altimeter, or check it only to find it is hopelessly broken, and no-one else on the load has an extra they can lend you, ...you can actually go forward with the jump without either freaking out, or at least too much undue difficulty!

If you do plan on making a jump totally without any either visual or audible artificial altimeter to "test" yourself, it probably also is a good idea that you do that in a truly "planned" sense. Meaining that you also certainly do not in combination with say your 1st head-down jump, or at your DZ's annual Casa-Boogie with multiple turbines flying multiple turn-around loads on you too. Being a last-out solo, or 2-way "coached" dive to actually do this, surely could not be all that tough at any given time to arrange.

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[wmw999 2,537]

I think the "low pulls/no pulls" in this case is fatalities from low pulls and no pulls. There do seem to be a lot more Cypres fires than there used to be bounces, even given the increase in skydives since then.

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)

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

I've been rolling this topic over in my head while following the discussion with the Perris accident. Part of my attention has been drawn to the people that argue you should jump no "different" with a Cypres than without a Cypres.

An AAD does change the way you jump. Those that 'turn it on and forget about it' are usually not aware of the operating parameters.

Quote

I understand their argument that there are more Cypress/AAD fires now than there were low/no pulls before AADs became common.

The number (or percentage) of instances of 'lost altitude awareness' has probably NOT changed over the years. What has changed is that people get 'woken up' and directed to life saving procedures by audibles. In the 80's, audibles only had one beep. It was usually set for breakoff altitude. Today they have three, if you choose to use all three. And there are AADs that try to open your reserve if you REALLY forget what to do.

Quote

Also, as this accident pointed out, AADs can fail from something as simple as turning the device on at home (or from forgetting to turn the device on at all).

The AAD did NOT fail. It was operator error. I think this is a concept that a lot of people have trouble accepting. "If some other jumper makes a mistake, then perhaps I might make that mistake." It brings home the concept that I might do something that does me in. This might be hard to accept, but once you do, you will have a tremendous respect for the ground. This crosses all experience levels. It is much easier to think that the other jumper was 'just stupid' or 'un-educated'. When you start to realize that the folks that go in or take their gear for granted are smart and educated, then you realize that you too are susceptible to these same mistakes. It may give you a restless night or two.

Quote

Besides all that, what can be more fundamental to skydiving than pulling at the right altitude?

Landing safely?

Quote

On the other hand, humans are inherently fallable, and I think most everyone agrees that the widespread use of AADs has saved a lot of lives.

I understand your point that skydivers should be able to jump safely without an AAD, or an altimeter, or an audible. But I'm sure I'd jump "differently" without an altimeter, and I think I am many jumps away from being at the point where I can say I'd jump no "differently" without an AAD.

Jumpers should be able to deal with an altimeter, audible or AAD "failure".
"failure" meaning it is not telling you or doing the 'expected' thing.

Each jumper has multiple INDEPENDANT ways to determine altitude. You need to cross check each of these ways and determine which ones are 'telling the truth' and 'which ones are broken'.

For example, if I see 7 of my companions tracking off and pulling and the same time I see my altimeter read 8K or no beeper signal (if I was wearing a beeper set for breakoff altitude), I will track and pull. Of course, looking at the ground would be a big suggestion too!

For additional thoughts see
Is Device Dependency Anonymous for You?
Fast forward to the year 2050. (air-bag, GPS and CYPRES stuff)

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Besides all that, what can be more fundamental to skydiving than pulling at the right altitude?

As I have stated before, there are 2 things that must be done to survive a skydive. (fundamental if you will)
One is to deploy a landable canopy be for impact.
Two is to land that canopy safely.
Anything else you do not a skydive is just fluff.

You should never rely or expect anything or anyone to do these two simple tasks for you.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Besides all that, what can be more fundamental to skydiving than pulling at the right altitude?

As I have stated before, there are 2 things that must be done to survive a skydive. (fundamental if you will)
One is to deploy a landable canopy be for impact.
Two is to land that canopy safely.
Anything else you do not a skydive is just fluff.

You should never rely or expect anything or anyone to do these two simple tasks for you.

Sparky

It's an indisputable fact that an AAD increases your odds of accomplishing item one.

[sukaidaiba 0]

Agreed

the ideal falling motion of something subject only to a gravitational field

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

It's an indisputable fact that an AAD increases your odds of accomplishing item one.

Not agreed. Not agreed AT ALL! In fact that statement indicates to me, quite the OPPOSITE! ...and that is, that an AAD fire instead indicates, quite "indisputably" that the jumper has indeed himself/herself rather: FAILED TO ACCOMPLISH ITEM ONE!

How can you possibly continue to argue otherwise?
You have contradicted yourself here now with your historical arguments here Dorb. Perhaps I misinterperet your meaning or intent?

The way I read the post that you were replying to is:

Sparky's "item one" was: IT IS THE JUMPERS (not a "device") RESPONSIBILITY to deploy his or her own parachute, then land it safely. A Cypres activation instead indicates, quite primarilly a Jumpers own FAILURE to accomplish this.

You want to abdicate that responsibility, or delegate that to a device, and consider that "acceptable" that's your call. But it's certainly not mine. I'd damn sure better be INCAPACITATED in some fashion if my Cypres ever fired, or I'm personally giving great pause to my further continuation, and personal accurate risk assessment capabilities beyond that point.

I TAKE FULL ACCOUNTABILITY AT ALL TIMES, FOR MYSELF.

-Grant

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[dorbie 0]

OK, you disagree, well said.

There's no argument over how an AAD deploys reserve.

The statistics over no pull fatalities means I can continue to argue the value of AADs.

The rest is semantics or appeals to relegate an AAD to a second class piece of safety equipment. If I ensure I have an installed and functionaing AAD & activate it correctly & it deploys my reserve then I have helped ensure that I had a deployed parachute albeit indirectly.

Conversely, if you're jumping, lose altitude awareness and you don't pull and go in, you screwed up, but you didn't just screw up by not pulling, you screwed up by not having the most obvious piece of safety equipment that would have saved your ass, an AAD. Someone who goes in these days for want of an AAD has erred gravely by not having an AAD. Note this is not someone who has an AAD in their rig and fails to operate it correctly or forgets to switch it on, any of us has a slim chance of still doing that on a bad day, I'm talking about intentionally jumping without an AAD. But it's your choice and I'm all for choice.

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

Someone who goes in these days for want of an AAD has erred gravely by not having an AAD. Note this is not someone who has an AAD in their rig and fails to operate it correctly or forgets to switch it on...

(emphasis added by me)

Why not? I contend that they ARE one & the same! In actuality the Perris incident highlights (to me) that this jumper in fact did not "have" a Cypres in reality at all (due to her activation error with it), although it is clear that she certainly did not think/know/realize that. In fact, I would go so far as to personally have in this incident categorized her as a "non-Cypres jumper", and in total if it turns out to ever be known that her activation "routine" was just that ...and a ROUTINE practice. Because, know it or not ...she just was not EVER (effectively) jumping "with" a Cypres (really) at all!

This is precisely my point. Make your own choices about your gear. But make those choices INFORMED and EDUCATED. YOU have no excuse for jumping your gear blindly, or on "blind faith" without that, and it just ASTOUNDS ME as to how many of today's jumpers apparently though, none-the-less, do!

Quote

But it's your choice and I'm all for choice.

On this we agree. But again, it is still an individual jumpers OWN RESPONSIBILITY to make those choices "informed" and based upon good education. One should still NEVER be a substitute for the other.

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[dorbie 0]

Like it or not we're fallible. I can make a conscious choice ahead of time to buy and install an AAD. I can't guarantee I'll never forget to switch it on. That has never happened since I got off student status, but I accept the slim possibility that it might (I accept the greater possibility that I'll descend over terrain higher than my AAD firing altitude on many weekends).

The unfortunate jumper who had her cypres set low made a mistake. She probably thought she was being dilligent and cautious turning her cypres on ahead of time, tragically the opposite was true. As you say effectively she was jumping wthout an AAD, but it wasn't a deliberate choice to do so, it was a human error. I sometimes make those, we all do, so far all of my mistakes in life have been survivable.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

The unfortunate jumper who had her cypres set low made a mistake. She probably thought she was being dilligent and cautious turning her cypres on ahead of time, tragically the opposite was true. As you say effectively she was jumping wthout an AAD, but it wasn't a deliberate choice to do so, it was a human error. I sometimes make those, we all do, so far all of my mistakes in life have been survivable.

So the question remains, would she have done something different on that skydive had she known she effectively did not have an AAD? Would she be alive today if she knew the AAD would not fire?

Derek

[billvon 3,072]

>So the question remains, would she have done something different
>on that skydive had she known she effectively did not have an AAD?

That's one part of the question. The second part is - did having a cypres give her enough additional confidence to jump at all? I met this jumper all of once, and in the very short time I knew her I did not get the impression that that was the case. But I know people out there who do jump using that rationale.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

So the question remains, would she have done something different on that skydive had she known she effectively did not have an AAD? Would she be alive today if she knew the AAD would not fire?

Some questions we can never hope to get the answer to no matter how often we repeat them. At least one post she made suggests she wouldn't have waited on her AAD.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

>So the question remains, would she have done something different
>on that skydive had she known she effectively did not have an AAD?

That's one part of the question. The second part is - did having a cypres give her enough additional confidence to jump at all? I met this jumper all of once, and in the very short time I knew her I did not get the impression that that was the case. But I know people out there who do jump using that rationale.

Does the 3 ring system & reserve give you the additional confidence you need to jump?

Does the mandatory use of AADs give the USPA the confidence to let students learn using the AFF harness hold technique?

[billvon 3,072]

>Does the 3 ring system & reserve give you the additional confidence
>you need to jump?

No. I have jumped without them, and I would have no problem using a Chrysalis system (although I don't like that system.)

>Does the mandatory use of AADs give the USPA the confidence to
>let students learn using the AFF harness hold technique?

I can't answer for them. I wouldn't take a student up if he didn't have an AAD.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

At least one post she made suggests she wouldn't have waited on her AAD.

And I bet feuergnom would have bet he would not have panicked when he had to flood/remove his mask underwater. I know dozens of people that have sworn that wouldn't downize again, only to se them downsize several times.

Derek

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

At least one post she made suggests she wouldn't have waited on her AAD.

And I bet feuergnom would have bet he would not have panicked when he had to flood/remove his mask underwater. I know dozens of people that have sworn that wouldn't downize again, only to se them downsize several times.

This is true, but unless you now saying that having no AAD could reduce someone's panic I don't see how that supports your earlier contention.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

This is true, but unless you now saying that having no AAD could reduce someone's panic I don't see how that supports your earlier contention.

I am saying that regardless of what someone says they will or wont' do, when they do when they are actually in the situation may be different from what they said they would do.

I've done a lot of things I said I would never do.

Derek