0
davelepka

Perspective

By davelepka, in Safety and Training

Recommended Posts

penniless    0

penniless
Quote

Quote


FAA took no action when dozens burned in each year due to low or no pulls. Although landing fatalities are now the largest category, there aren't as many as there were low/no pull fatalities 15 years ago. The overall rate of skydiving fatalities is way lower than it was 15 - 25 years ago.

FAA is primarily interested in protecting passengers, other users of the airspace, and people on the ground. I seriously doubt they care very much if a few skydivers kill themselves each year when landing.




You have not been around long enough to remember, but the state of California was in the business of regulating some aspects of jumping at that time. By reducing the number of glaring fatalities from low pulls or no pulls we were able to get that changed. If we continue to have people die under good canopies, without making an effort as a group to control it, some mid level bureaucrat will see a way that he can make his bones by "putting a stop to this silliness".

You just keep your head in the sand pretending there is not a problem and you won't even see it coming.

Do you really feel there is not a problem? Do you feel 10 to 15 deaths a year under good canopies is an acceptable lose? Do you feel changing this does not rate an effort?
If your answer to any of these questions is yes, I feel sorry for you.



Very good diversion. Now, about MY response concerning FAA's inaction over dozens of no-pull fatalities. You haven't disputed that.

The title of this thread is P-e-r-s-p-e-c-t-i-v-e. I'm trying to give some.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

mjosparky    4

mjosparky
Quote

The title of this thread is P-e-r-s-p-e-c-t-i-v-e. I'm trying to give some.



No, you are throwing rocks at any perspective that does not perceive what your perspective does.

No, the FAA did not take any formal action. But as many who post here remember, the Feds were looking a lot harder at the sport because of the type of fatalities during that period. It is my feeling that if the trend had continued they would have stepped in with some form of regulation.

Where did you get your numbers, "dozens of no-pull fatalities"? Is that the type of hard data you said was needed to defend a W/L BSR?
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

stratostar    5

stratostar
The FAR's say you must jump with a dual system.
And that is about all it says as to the parachute worn, nowhere in there dose it say you must open one of them before hitting the ground!:ph34r:

You are correct that the FAA don't really care if you bounce as long as you were wearing the right kind of rig and it is in date and you don't land on anyone or property as to be a hazzard to those on the ground, you could have load after load going in out in the desert and the fed's wouldn't care, but you do the same load after load in downtown usa and it will get reg's slapped on the sport real fast, because now your endangering people and property on the ground.
BTW dozens burn in a year, NOT! yes there were a few every year but not dozens, every cypres fire we have today is a burn in 15 years ago, so maybe we should take them away from everyone and weed out the stupids fucks in the sport.
those are only trying to save people from killing them selfs.
Same thing people are trying to do with a WL BSR, your right we don't need it, what we need to do is sell everyone a vx 89
and if you can handle that you don't need to be in the sport.
What a great way to weed out the fuck up's no more AAD's and sub 100 canopies for everyone.
When you getting yours?

~
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Praetorian    1

Praetorian
Quote

What a great way to weed out the fuck up's no more AAD's and sub 100 canopies for everyone.
When you getting yours?



while I realise your comment was a shot at his position, I'll keep my AAD and my 170 for the time being thanks. Oh and I won't feel that I'm doing so is cuz I'm a fuckup . . . in fact I think this choice is a good arguement that I'm not a fuckup.

Good Judgment comes from experience...a lot of experience comes from bad
judgment.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

kelpdiver    2

kelpdiver
Quote

Same thing people are trying to do with a WL BSR, your right we don't need it, what we need to do is sell everyone a vx 89
and if you can handle that you don't need to be in the sport.



I'm guessing you meant "can't" there.

Strat, there are more options than the false choice you suggest here.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

wmw999    2,446

wmw999
Quote

My source is I was there



Me too, Mike. Well, at least I was getting the magazine in the late 80's & 90's; my jumping was sparse. But, my memory is also that Parachutist called anything where a parachute wasn't deployed in time to save the person's life a low/no pull fatality. Not necessarily where people did nothing to save themselves. So, well, it might be that the report she's reading says exactly that.

So it's possible that there is a classification that says a shitload of people died without a good canopy above their head in time. With multiple causes, just as there are multiple causes for the people who are slamming themselves into the ground.

Something else to consider, though, is that 15-20 years ago most folks weren't as sue-happy, so there wasn't as strong a drive to regulate things.

Do I think there should be guidelines? Absolutely; the technology has advanced beyond the commonly-received education, and that has to be rectified.

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)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
0
Go To Topic Listing