treeman 0 #26 November 8, 2004 sorry for being stupid but do you have to cut away from somthin as small as 21sqft or do you land it? i ask this question for knowledge as i do not know better. my last jump was with chris and to me he was quite familiar he was my jm and im having trouble with this. does it make me look stupid to be using these large canopies any info would be much appreciated as i am very new to the sport with only 4 jumps Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #27 November 8, 2004 QuoteI'm not talking about the past, I'm talking about the present & I'm talking about the too small canopies Sir, The problem is this...Unles SOMEONE pushes the edge....We never go forward. If people listened to all those that thought squares were unsafe...We would still have rounds. Take it back further and we would not be jumping at all. Advancements are often made in ANY activity by the guy that wants to push the edge for no reason than they want to. Think the 4 min mile. There is no reason to run that fast. From these advancements new devices and tecniques trickle down to ALL skydivers. I remember when AAD's were deathtraps. So while agree that not just anyone should push the edge...I have no problem with skilled people who know the risks pushing it one small step at a time. I knew Chris, and thats what he did. He pushed it, and found the edge, but didn't make it back. But do to people like him we have what we have today. Without them we would just sit on the ground and look at birds. QuoteToo many skydivers lost their life under OPEN canopies, like the 30 jumps or so skydiver who jumped a Stiletto 190 or other low level skydivers jumping too small & HP canopies for their level & no body care. Something should be done about that...Since they don't have the skill , or know the risks...Chris was skilled, and knew the risks. QuoteRam Air reserve has been always better then rounds. Not true. They were once considered death traps. QuoteRegarding AAD - why it is not mandatory ? Free choice. QuoteWhy we still have AFF instructors jumping AFF jumps without an AAD. A good number of instructors I know can't afford them."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
Remster 30 #28 November 8, 2004 QuoteI have a lot of respect to the mfg., skydivers & all good people that developed the more & more safer & better parachutes & I do think that it will continue. If your goal is to develop the safest system, its a chain and padlock to lock yourself to the ground. For you to say that RAM airs were always safer, I'm a bit surprised. When I started in the sport, not as long as you, there was still a debate as far as round vs. square reserve: round is sound, square will get you there. Before that, no one would jump a square main as they were seen as radical, and only for highly experienced pilots. Like someone else said here about the incident that sparked this debate, this was no ordinary jump. Not anyone can get a 21 sq ft canopy. Chris was pushing the envelope. Good on him! This is how progress is made and how new technology can be tested and imagined. He paid a very high price for it, but I'm willing to bet he understood some of the risks he was taking.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RogerRamjet 0 #29 November 8, 2004 QuoteHi Roger You should credit Bill Booth for the "Skyhook" RSL system too. This is one more life saving device came out from the RWS. Safe Skydiving !!! Hi Shlomo, Thanks for adding that for Bill. I know of the device, but have never researched to see who invented it. I was able to quote the hand deploy and 3-ring release because I was working for Bill when those items were invented. ----------------------- Roger "Ramjet" Clark FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AdD 1 #30 November 8, 2004 His intention was to cut it away. Nobody who uses a larger and safer canopy is stupid for making the choice to give themselves the extra safety margin provided by larger canopies.Life is ez On the dz Every jumper's dream 3 rigs and an airstream Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #31 November 8, 2004 Quote There must be a limit for how far mfg. should go with small mains & small reserves & one of the ways is that the skydivers & DZO will understand that there is a LIMIT & refuse to play with the too small toys. Right. Here's a good one-size fits all policy: No one can jump anything smaller than a Manta 288 and Raven IV reserve (282 square feet). Anything smaller is more dangerous and therefore unacceptable.... Or you can take the view that different people have different experience levels, environments, and risk thresholds. As long as they're not taking more than customary risks with other people's lives what they jump is their business. To them, a 21 (with cutaway) or 39 (intentional cutaway or landing) is an acceptable risk. I have about 1500 parachute jumps, weigh 150-155 pounds, live at 5000 feet, usually make 200 jumps a year, and want a reserve that won't suck too much landing while incapacitated. I like a 105 main (same wing loading I've had for the last 800 jumps) and 143 reserve. I'll bump endcells with that main and don't mind people walking across the topskin. I've skysurfed and flow wing suits. I'll freefall 300 feet and static line 200. I wouldn't jump a 3-canopy system using risers with an extra base-ring, or two sets of small rings on one big base ring. I would use a 3-canopy rig or second harness/direct bag with a cutaway handle in the right place. I'd definately try a 60 with an intentional cutaway and think about something much smaller. If I were more current, lived in a desert like eloy, and didn't think some things were worth considering (freefall dislocations/broken bones and unconscious landings after a cypres fire) I'd opt for 90/106 square feet. With more jumps and currency I might opt for a cross-braced 75 main. Other people have different risk thresholds. Dwain Weston liked to swoop fixed objects in a wing suit. That was his choice to make. Flying close enough that he bounced less than 10' from me should not have been a choice he made. Many skydivers won't BASE jump. Some wouldn't tray skysurfing. Many other people won't even skydive. The only problem we might want to address is people taking risks without knowing. People with a year in the sport and 200 jumps under elliptical canopies loaded to 1.5 pounds/square foot fall into this category. Guys with thousands of jumps doing intentional cutaways don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #32 November 8, 2004 Quote QuoteRegarding AAD - why it is not mandatory ? Free choice. QuoteWhy we still have AFF instructors jumping AFF jumps without an AAD. A good number of instructors I know can't afford them. A CYPRES costs about $175 a year - half what cable TV does. Divided into 500 jumps it's fraction of gear depreciation ($.35 cents vs. > $1.00) assuming the instructor isn't getting paid. Instructors who don't buy a Cypres (used if cash is an issue - the per jump cost is the same) can claim they can't afford it although that's an excuse. "I choose not to pay for one" or "I think they're silly" are accurate answers. While those answers don't sound as good as "I can't afford it," those instructors still have the right to make their own decision regarding acceptable risks. The capitalist DZ that employs them is also free to decide they'd rather force instructors (or even all jumpers) to use a cypres than to deal with the aftermath of a fatality even if it means some people will work+jump elsewhere. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #33 November 8, 2004 QuoteInstructors who don't buy a Cypres (used if cash is an issue - the per jump cost is the same) can claim they can't afford it although that's an excuse. There are people that can only afford 5 jumps a mth. Don't assume everyone jumps at the currency you do, or has the disposable income that you do. I also know Instructors that have a real job, and jump to meet the ends meet. They don't have 1200 lying around to by a CYPRES. (As nice as your per jump price looks, Square 1 wants 1200 bucks, not .35 cents a jump.) Not all Instructors I know make 500 jumps a year. Like I said don't assume everyone meets your parameters of lifestyle. Also thinking a CYPRES s the answer to ending fatalities is wrong. The first step is not doing stupid things. More people die under small canopies than bouncing, so they would be safer to jump a bigger canopy and not hook turning than buying a CYPRES. A CYPRES would not have helped in this instance anyway. To many people want to buy toys instead of doing smart things."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
bob.dino 1 #34 November 9, 2004 The smallest canopy ever landed was 39sq ft. There's only a handful of people in the world that could safely land it. You and I are definitely not in that group. Quotedoes it make me look stupid to be using these large canopies Nope. It'd make you look damn stupid (and a good deal flatter) if you tried to jump smaller canopies. You wouldn't give someone learning to drive the keys to a Formula 1 car, would you? Take your time and learn at a sensible pace. Hospitals aren't a hell of a lot of fun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #35 November 9, 2004 Quotesorry for being stupid but do you have to cut away from somthin as small as 21sqft or do you land it? i ask this question for knowledge as i do not know better. my last jump was with chris and to me he was quite familiar he was my jm and im having trouble with this. does it make me look stupid to be using these large canopies any info would be much appreciated as i am very new to the sport with only 4 jumps No one is going to give you a hard time for the bigger canopy. Occasionally the exit order might be set by the wingloadings, like on a hop n pop load. Style points are nice - you get them for a clean landing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #36 November 9, 2004 Quote I also know Instructors that have a real job, and jump to meet the ends meet. They don't have 1200 lying around to by a CYPRES. (As nice as your per jump price looks, Square 1 wants 1200 bucks, not .35 cents a jump.) They can have a used Cypres just like they have a used car (if they bought a new car, they have chosen it over the Cypres). Used Cypreses are priced on time remaining. An 11 year old Cypres with good batteries isn't worth much over $150: 1/12th what the original owner should have paid (there are people that cell the Cypres at cost because they think it' a good idea) + 1/4 the 4-year + 1/2 the battery. Few American skydivers* CAN'T afford a CYPRES. Especially AFF instructors. They just choose not to buy one. Saying they CAN'T afford it is being dishonest. Someplace there's a club that owns a 182, charges jumpers for Hobbs time only, and hop-and-pops are $5 on club gear. The club doesn't require USPA membership. Broke jumpers who don't pay for reserve repacks can make 30 jumps a year there for what a Cypres costs. Poor jumpers who own their own rigs and can't retrofit a Cypres (for example, there's no TSO'd way to put one in an EOS) can also legitimately claim they can't afford it. Other impoverished jumpers with Cypres ready rigs doing 5 jumps a month at $15/a jump and spending $900 a year + repacks + USPA membership can afford a Cypres by limiting themselves to 4 jumps a month. A Cypres is a cheap insurance policy against certain accidents that does nothing for others. You can choose not to use one although usually "I can't afford it" is really "I'd rather spend my money on something else." Adults are free to make that choice, although claiming poverty is usually a lie. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RIGGER 0 #37 November 9, 2004 *** If your goal is to develop the safest system, its a chain and padlock to lock yourself to the ground. Quote I think that this is the goal of all of us - having better & SAFER systems which will better deal with today skydiving speeds. *** For you to say that RAM airs were always safer, I'm a bit surprised I said Ram Air Reserves. By the way we do not have to agree on all points, each skydiver have the freedom to see the sport in his way, I have my point of view. Safe Skydiving !!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #38 November 9, 2004 QuoteThey can have a used Cypres just like they have a used car (if they bought a new car, they have chosen it over the Cypres). And if they don't have a car and live on the DZ...Then what? Like I said before don't assume everyone can afford the cost of a CYPRES. Some prefer that their kids eat. QuoteBroke jumpers who don't pay for reserve repacks can make 30 jumps a year there for what a Cypres costs. And in the process violate the FAR's...Great idea. QuoteOther impoverished jumpers with Cypres ready rigs doing 5 jumps a month at $15/a jump and spending $900 a year + repacks + USPA membership can afford a Cypres by limiting themselves to 4 jumps a month. And they would be safer to not do hook turns than buying a CYPRES. QuoteA Cypres is a cheap insurance policy against certain accidents that does nothing for others. You can choose not to use one although usually "I can't afford it" is really "I'd rather spend my money on something else." Adults are free to make that choice, although claiming poverty is usually a lie. Some people would rather spend money on College, food ect. Like I said don't assume everyone is like you. Or that everyone needs a CYPRES. People would be safer to not have a CYPRES and jump a bigger canopy and not do hook turns. Don't try to push a CYPRES on people who don't need one, or can't afford one by calling them liars....I know several people that can't afford one, or they would have one."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
WFFC 1 #39 November 9, 2004 QuoteDon't try to push a CYPRES on people who don't need one, or can't afford one by calling them liars....I know several people that can't afford one, or they would have one. I'm going to lightly tread on this on statement as I believe that it is worded incorrectly - Someone doesn't need a Cypres, they choose to have one or not to have one. The ability to afford one or not is also a matter of choice. Modifying one's spending habits, as Drew said, is one way to do it. You mentioned feeding the kids - so, if subject A is currently doing 5 jumps a weekend, and the kids are being fed, it is assumed that by only doing 4 jumps a weekend, the cost of one jump ticket can go into a savings account (or even on account at the DZ) towards the purchase of a Cypres. When I first accumulated all my gear, I did not have a Cypres. The DZO gave me a Cypres (new) and allowed me to pay it off as I went. The only stipulation was that my rig had to be left in the rigging loft until the Cypres was paid for. There are creative ways to acquire a Cypres and if a jumper approached their DZO, the DZO might offer a creative solution. I've also run into several DZOs who sell their Cypres supply at cost. Just like Mercedes did with their patent on crumple zones on cars, sometimes it's better to think about the safetly factor than the money factor.----- ~~~Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #40 November 9, 2004 QuoteSomeone doesn't need a Cypres, they choose to have one or not to have one. And I feel that someone does not need to be forced into making that choice. Since this thread is about reasonable risks this topic does fit. It is very reasonable to consider a CYPRES an un-needed piece of equipment. People would be safer to jump bigger canopies and not hook turn than buying a CYPRES. Yes, for people it is a matter of choice. A person can quit smoking a pack a day and have 912.50 more a year. Or quit drinking and have another 936.00 a year based on buying 3 beers at 2 bucks a piece Fri, Sat, Sun nights. A person can cut out eating out, or going to movies, they can ditch cable, drive a used car, live in a trailer, or rent a small apartment, they can eat Ramen noodles,mac and cheese and PB&J sandwhiches every night and save tons. However, having a life outside of skydiving is something most people want. Many people don't have 1200.00 bucks to drop on something that is not needed. And they don't want to be in debt for something that they don't NEED. So they make a choice to jump without it, and they should not be treated as idiots for making that choice is all I am saying. An AAD is not needed. More lives would be saved if we made everyone jump big canopies and outlawed hook turns... But then again the size of a persons canopy and what approach to landing they want to take is ALSO their right. I'm not going to call someone who chooses to jump a smaller canopy than I like (as long as they have the skills needed to do it), or someone that chooses to jump without a CYPRES stupid, or tell them they have bad priorities....Hell, if we just quit jumping we could save tons of money and never be risking our lives. For you, and maybe Drew a CYPRES is a needed piece of equipment. For many, to include me, it is not. It is nice to have, but I would jump and have jumped (I just did the Nationals without a CYPRES while it was sent in for it's 8 year) without one. No one needs a CYPRES, no one needs to hook turn, we don't even NEED to skydive. I'm not about to hold someone to MY personal risk level, or call them names since they don't follow my level of risk. BTW I do have a CYPRES and I like it...I consider it cheap insurance for me doing something stupid....But I can afford it....some can't."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
WFFC 1 #41 November 9, 2004 QuoteFor you, and maybe Drew a CYPRES is a needed piece of equipment. For many, to include me, it is not. It is nice to have, but I would jump and have jumped (I just did the Nationals without a CYPRES while it was sent in for it's 8 year) without one. BTW I do have a CYPRES and I like it...I consider it cheap insurance for me doing something stupid....But I can afford it....some can't. Like you, I don't need a Cypres. None of us do. I also jumped while mine was away for for the 4 year. I chose to have one, I chose to jump without it during the 4 year. It's a simple choice. If you want one bad enough, you will make financial arrangements to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
treeman 0 #42 November 10, 2004 thanks for the info Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
