why disconnect RSL?

[annna 0]

This article is in the gear section of this website - so i guess you already read it - but i think its a decent summary of a lot of the stuff in this thread ...

anna

Facts about the "Reserve Staticline Lanyard"
Posted Thursday, October 15, 1998
By Relative Workshop

Facts about the "Reserve Staticline Lanyard"Lately there has been a big push towards the use of the reserve staticline lanyard (RSL) for experienced jumpers.

Most proponents of the RSL have only been dwelling on the positive aspects of the RSL without considering the negative consequences.

The Relative Workshop wants to educate each jumper regarding the pros and cons of the RSL system so you will be able to make an informed decision about this popular, yet controversial modification.

For those of you unfamiliar with the RSL system, a short description is in order. The RSL is a simple lanyard connecting one or both of the main canopy risers to the reserve ripcord. In the event of a main canopy malfunction, and following a successful breakaway, the reserve ripcord is pulled as the main risers depart with the released main canopy.

In essence, the RSL indirectly connects the breakaway handle to the reserve ripcord handle. Unfortunately, this simple lanyard can easily complicate a routine emergency for those who are more than capable of handling the problem manually.

The RSL has gained much of its notoriety through its use on student equipment. The RSL is ideal for students because the probability is high that a student might breakaway from a malfunction lower than the recommended altitude, and delay longer than necessary before deploying the reserve. Having the reserve deploy in a unstable body position, while far from ideal, is preferential to not having the reserve deploy at all. Waiting for the AAD to fire if the breakaway is extremely low is a chancy situation at best. For these reasons, the RSL is quite compatible for student gear and most instructors would probably agree!

RSL's work great on tandem systems as well. The tandem instructor really has his hands filled during a malfunction so the speedy deployment of the reserve is a big advantage. Stability after a breakaway is generally not a problem as the tandem pair have inherent stability qualities due to the positioning of the passenger and tandem master. If the tandem master has properly prepared the passenger's body position, a tandem breakaway has a greater potential for instant stability than a solo breakaway.

Both student and tandem jumps are carried out at higher altitudes and rarely involve other jumpers in the same airspace, minimizing the chance of canopy entanglements which can complicate matters severely.

RSL's and the experienced jumper - Pros vs. Cons
Remember, the RSL does one thing and one thing only: It will activate (providing it does not physically fail) the reserve container following a main canopy breakaway. That's it! Now lets talk about the disadvantages of the RSL.

1) Most jumpers don't realize that utilizing a RSL correctly requires changing their emergency procedures. Why? The reason is simple: Most RSL systems offer the ability to disconnect it from the riser. If it's disconnectable, then there will be situations that may require a disconnection before proceeding with the breakaway. An obvious one that comes to mind is a canopy entanglement with another jumper. If one or both jumpers have an RSL and they mindlessly breakaway without considering the consequences, they might very well find themselves entangled again, possibly for the last time! Canopy entanglements are happening more frequently now than ever before due to several reasons:

A) More inexperienced jumpers engaging in larger RW formations. B) The recent popularity of ultra-fast zero porosity canopies. The result is: Skies crowded with more inexperienced jumpers flying faster canopies.

Emergency procedures for systems fitted with RSLs would change in the following manner: Before the breakaway, you must ask yourself (considering your present malfunction) if an immediate reserve deployment will be in your own best interest. If not, the RSL must be released before proceeding with the breakaway.

NOTE: Anytime the RSL remains active during a breakaway, the jumper should automatically plan on pulling the reserve handle anyway just in case the RSL connection fails to activate the reserve container for whatever reason. This lack of awareness regarding the need to back up the reserve pull manually is an increasing and disturbing trend among some of today's jumpers.

2) The average jumper will take more than several seconds to analyze and determine if the RSL disconnection is necessary. This can obviously consume valuable time. No doubt the average jumper would be better off handling the emergency manually by pulling both handles, which is not a difficult task.

3) Lets examine the cause of malfunctions in the first place. The biggest culprits are improper packing and rigging, or bad body position during deployment. (Bad body position can be defined as shoulders not perpendicular to the relative wind.)

It's almost impossible to be stable within the first second and a half following a breakaway from a malfunctioning high performance main canopy. Therefore, the typical RSL user is most likely unstable during the reserve deployment.

Instability causes malfunctions and allowing the RSL to open the reserve container for you will increase the chance that the reserve canopy will malfunction as well. One might argue that this would be a rare occurrence, but why would an experienced jumper take the chance? Some would consider this an unacceptable risk!

4) CRW enthusiasts, for the obvious reasons mentioned in point 1, do not want or need a RSL. For those that have one, it should be disconnected prior to boarding the aircraft on a planned CRW jump.

5) Freefall videographers should never jump with an active RSL system. The last thing a camera-person needs is the reserve deploying while they're unstable. Just recently in France a fatality occurred when a RSL-activated reserve canopy entangled with the jumpers helmet-mounted camera equipment.

6) The RSL will not work during a total malfunction of the main container, and do not assume that it can take the place of a functioning, properly calibrated automatic activation device. An RSL is not an AAD.

Summation
The RSL system was developed over 25 years ago and found its proper place on student equipment. Due to the fact the skydiving community encounters several deaths each year attributed to the "no-reserve-pull-following-a-breakaway scenario," we have many individuals who feel the RSL is the answer for the experienced jumper. Our belief is quite simple: If every jumper had a RSL, then the amount of RSL related deaths each year would be many more than we now encounter with no-pull situations.

Naturally we have tremendous concern whenever someone wants to take a simple, 3-handle system and turn it into some complicated apparatus in an attempt to make up for the inadequacies of the poorly trained or ill-prepared jumper. We believe if you stick to the basics, constantly rehearse your emergency procedures, and assume you'll have a malfunction on every jump - you'll be much better off.

Remember: The RSL is not a safety device for experienced jumpers because it takes more time to operate it correctly than to pull the breakaway and reserve handles manually. Now that you have been presented with the all the facts, we hope you'll make the right decision for yourself regarding the RSL.

If you would like to have a consultation on your personal skydiving equipment needs, please call Relative Workshop at anytime during the hours of 8am - 6pm EST. We have a highly experienced staff of riggers and instructors who are anxiously awaiting to assist you. If we don't have the answers to your questions, we probably know who does! Remember, we're here to help you make the right decisions concerning your skydiving equipment and its proper use.

Send comments or questions to aimee@relativeworkshop.com
Copyright © 1998 The Uninsured Relative Workshop Inc.
Reprinted with Permission

[Ron 10]

Quote

The Relative Workshop wants to educate each jumper regarding the pros and cons of the RSL system so you will be able to make an informed decision about this popular, yet controversial modification.

Ya gotta love RWS....And I agree 100% with this.

Quote

It's almost impossible to be stable within the first second and a half following a breakaway from a malfunctioning high performance main canopy. Therefore, the typical RSL user is most likely unstable during the reserve deployment.

Instability causes malfunctions and allowing the RSL to open the reserve container for you will increase the chance that the reserve canopy will malfunction as well. One might argue that this would be a rare occurrence, but why would an experienced jumper take the chance? Some would consider this an unacceptable risk!

And there HAVE been fatalities due to RSL's

Quote

Summation
The RSL system was developed over 25 years ago and found its proper place on student equipment. Due to the fact the skydiving community encounters several deaths each year attributed to the "no-reserve-pull-following-a-breakaway scenario," we have many individuals who feel the RSL is the answer for the experienced jumper. Our belief is quite simple: If every jumper had a RSL, then the amount of RSL related deaths each year would be many more than we now encounter with no-pull situations.

Naturally we have tremendous concern whenever someone wants to take a simple, 3-handle system and turn it into some complicated apparatus in an attempt to make up for the inadequacies of the poorly trained or ill-prepared jumper. We believe if you stick to the basics, constantly rehearse your emergency procedures, and assume you'll have a malfunction on every jump - you'll be much better off.

Remember: The RSL is not a safety device for experienced jumpers because it takes more time to operate it correctly than to pull the breakaway and reserve handles manually. Now that you have been presented with the all the facts, we hope you'll make the right decision for yourself regarding the RSL.

cool toys should NEVER take the place of training.

Man I love RWS!!!

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

[rigging65 0]

Just thought this article, published in 1999 would make a nice contrast. Both this article and the one by RWS have great points. The fact is, you should be informed and educated before you make any decision. It's all good food for thought...

_____________
The RSL Makes a Positive Difference
By Ray Ferrell

As the owner of Action Air Parachutes, a sales and service company, a DZ operator, Master Parachute Rigger, AFF Instructor, and former safety and training advisor, I fully endorse the use of RSLs. I also championed a successful campaign to have the RSL endorsed by the Parachute Industry Association. Following is some information and statistics to consider when you consider the use of the RSL.

Reserve static line lanyard (RSL) - a simple, passive device to help ensure reserve activation after breakaway of a main canopy.

The use of an RSL should not change normal emergency procedures of cutting away and pulling the reserve ripcord. No reputable school would teach a student to breakaway and wait for the RSL to pull the reserve.

There are circumstances which may require a change of procedures, with an RSL installed. The modern RSL has a quick-release, giving the jumper all of the options. During an intentional CRW jump, for example, you might want to disconnect the RSL. Another case for disconnecting the RSL might be when doing freefall camera work. These are special circumstances in which each individual must weigh the options and make their own decision.

Another situation that is often debated is unintentional canopy entanglements after opening. This is most likely to occur after a relative work load and at low altitudes. If this happens, you must examine the situation. First try to communicate with the other jumper. If you cut away with the RSL attached there are two possible scenarios: First, you fall free of the entanglement and the reserve deploys. Second, you do not fall away due to the severity of the entanglement, therefore your reserve will most likely not be deployed by the RSL. If you cannot fall free due to the severity of the entanglement, your only option is to pull your reserve and hope for the best (this is where the freebag theory might come into play). If you find yourself in this worst-case scenario, the more stuff out the better. Do not be fooled into thinking that you are better off cutting away, clawing your way free, getting stable, then pulling your reserve ripcord. You will probably run out of altitude and time.

Everyone will agree that it is better to be stable when you deploy a canopy. Proper training and constant review of emergency procedures are very important. However, the reality is, for most jumpers, good body position is not the main consideration in a high stress malfunction situation. By comparison, if everyone drove their cars safely, seat belts wouldn't be needed to save lives. So which is better, a relatively low-speed reserve deployment initiated by the RSL (this virtually ensures a clear pilot chute launch away from the body), or a high-speed unstable deployment?

The sport has no shortage of opinions, and you have just endured some of mine. Now let's take a look at some statistics over the past few years. This information is from Paul Sitter's 1991 fatality summaries for the USPA and the FAI/IPC Safety Survey, and only concerns fatalities that may have been prevented using a RSL:

-1989 - 1 student, 2 novices (less than 200 jumps), and 6 experienced skydivers (with 200, 300. 315, 1450, 1800, and 3500 jumps each). -1990 - 1 student, 2 novices, and 1 experienced skydiver (306) -1991 - 1 student, 2 novices, and 2 experienced skydivers (1000+ and 2044 jumps).

Based on the trend in the US from 1989 to 1991, one might conclude that the number of experienced jumpers in the above category has gone down with the concurrent rise in popularity of the RSL.

Also, based on the 1989 FAI/IPC Safety Survey, there were 107 fatalities. Of those, 22 were "cutaway, no reserve pull," and 26 were "cutwaway, low reserve pull." That's 46 people (45% of all fatalities) that may be saved by a simple RSL.

It is obvious that the RSL makes a positive difference in our sport. It affects individuals, DZ operators (who have to deal with fatalities personally, in business and politics), the USPA, and PIA.

The Parachute Industry Association listened to the RSL argument in 1989 and, without dissension, endorsed the proposal that the RSL should be encouraged and at a minimum be offered as an option on all harness and container order forms. Today, for most major manufacturers, the RSL is standard equipment.

If your rig does not have an RSL, it can easily be retrofitted by the manufacturer or a rigger with FAA authorization. Remember, the next time you skydive, there is a planet out there and it's pointed right at you.

"...and once you had tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward.
For there you have been, and there you long to return..."

[brettpobastad 0]

I realize this is an old topic that has been beat to death. I am researching this subject because there is a trend lately to disconnect or remove an RSL. There are, of course, situations where having an RSL may not be the best choice. Other then for students, it should be an informed, personal decision. After reading some of the comments (many of which make sense) I feel the need to ad to the debate.

Anyone who believes that the perceived or potential drawbacks of having an RSL outweigh the very real benefits of having one SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT! I could present many instances in the past where having an RSL realistically would have opened a person’s reserve and probably saved their life. I challenge anyone to find a single, documented example of where a properly installed RSL did its job and caused an injury or fatality. Simple numbers suggest that a jumper (especially newer jumpers) are far more likely to cutaway and fail to deploy their reserve or initiate emergency procedures at an unsafe altitude versus experiencing an unstable reserve deployment due to the RSL doing its job. In short, if you believe that a reserve static line would cause more problems then they prevent, you must also believe that Nigel’s amplifier really is louder because it goes to ‘11’.

[John4455 0]

"The 2-out scenerios. I've never heard of a complication either. It's hard to believe that the RSL strap could mess anything up"


When you cut away with an RSL, the RSL lanyard goes with the risers. With a two canopy out situation, it is highly likely that the lanyard could entangle with the reserve canopy.
I had always wondered why it was recommended to disconnect it when you have two canopies out. When I found my main after a cutaway it became clear instantly when I saw the rsl on the risers.

How do ya like it Johnny?

[Ron 10]

Quote

Anyone who believes that the perceived or potential drawbacks of having an RSL outweigh the very real benefits of having one SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT!

I guess I don't know what I am talking about.

Quote

I challenge anyone to find a single, documented example of where a properly installed RSL did its job and caused an injury or fatality

Check Racers website.


Heres another:
Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL?
1/30/1997 Taupo, New Zealand MAL,DMAL? 35 2500 ?/Y
Description: After cutting away from a malfunction, it appears one riser hung up, while the side with the RSL released, casuing the reserve to deploy between the remaining riser. This riser then seperated, and the main ending up choking off the reserve. The pair decended on the partially inflated main which was caught on the wholly uninflated reserve.
Lessons:Some of the above is speculation, but it's a good reminder to perform your three ring maintenance regularly. If you don't know what I'm referring to, you should talk to your local rigger. In a nutshell, disconnect your main, flex the webbing of the three ring, clean the yellow cable with a dry cloth, (for metal housings) lightly oil the cable, reconnect the main, perform a line check, and pack it.


How about this one?
6/22/1997 Umatilla, FL MAL? 42 7500 Y?/Y
Description: At the end of a normal tandem skydiver, the student pulled the ripcord at about 5500 feet. The left main riser broke, which in turn activated the reserve static line lanyard (RSL). The RSL immediately pulled the reserve ripcord cables while the right-hand main riser was still attached. The reserve pilot chute and free-bag cleared, but the reserve canopy entangled with the spinning main. The main was then cut away, but failed to clear the reserve. The student survived the landing, the JM did not. The Master 425 main was equipped Dacron with suspension lines. The type VII risers were manufactured in May 1996 and had the new heavy duty 3-rings. The rings were properly positioned during drogue fall, and appeared normal. The type VII webbing broke about 1" above the lower end; the type IV holding the small ring broke just below the grommet. Neither of the two rings from the left riser were recovered, nor was the cutaway handle or the reserve ripcord. All equipment was less than three years old and in good condition. Instructor and student total weight was about 380 pounds.
Lessons:Perhaps a defective riser?

Heres another
Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL?
7/12/2000 Elsinore, CA DMAL 27 Y/Y
Description: The Navy was at Elsinore training Seals; they had their own instructors and their own equipment. At the time of this report, no detailed analysis of the rig has yet been made. This report is based on preliminary examinations and eyewitness accounts. The student ( training under the Navy's equivalent of AFF) deployed his main normally at around 4500 feet. During the main deployment the RSL somehow deployed his reserve which then entangled in the main. Someone supposedly had seen that his main was square and apparently flyable while the reserve was completely fouled and entangled in his main lines. No one directly witnessed the incident while the student was between 4000 and 2500 feet. Somewhere during that interval the student apparently cutaway his main which then collapsed and remained entangled with his fouled reserve. It was believed that if he had not cutaway, he may have been able to land relatively safely on his main. The reserve was apparently NOT deployed by his CYPRES: the preliminary examination revealed a kink in the reserve ripcord where the RSL must have pulled against it while it was still under tension from the closing loop. As soon as the rig is released by the coroner more detailed examinations are going to happen by the DZO, the USPA, the rig manufacturer and the Navy. It is unknown at this time what pulled the RSL, it may have been improperly routed and was pulled on line stretch, or it may have been caught by a toggle. It is also unknown if this type of malfunction is particular to this type of rig or is an industry-wide concern. The Navy has stood down their training and grounded all of their equipment until more is known about the true cause of the incident.
Lessons:Dual canopy out malfunctions are nasty. Discuss appropriate procedures with a local instructor. Cutting away from an inflated main when the reserve fouled is not a recommended course of action.

One that can show the drawbacks of an RSL.
Date Location Category Age # Jumps AAD?/RSL?
9/22/2001 Picton, Australia DMAL 34 360 ?/Y
Description: After a camera jump, this jumper experienced spinning line twists on his Stilleto 135. He was unable to clear them and cutaway at perhaps 1800'. His reserve (an Airforce 120) opened (via RSL, though reserve handle was also pulled roughly simultaneously) slider-up with line twists, and he impacted in a spin still trying to kick out of the twists. The reserve was very highly loaded, at 1.7 lb/ft^2. Video review of the incident shows that the deceased may have been kicking the wrong direction to get the reserve to untwist, and was not observed to be pulling the risers apart to aid the untwisting.
Lessons:There is some reason to believe that pausing briefly after cutting away from a seriously spinning malfunction can aid in reserve deployment. However, pausing also eats up valuable altitude, which is also an increased risk. An RSL removes your choice in this matter, but does insure a rapid deployment after a low cutaway. Note that this forum doesn't post the incidents where someone cutaway low, and their RSL saves them.

Another one.
9/30/2001 Opelika, AL DMAL 48 308 Y/Y
Description: Due to a hard opening, this jumper broke one of the D lines on his canopy, a 230 Rascal. it went into a spin, so he cut it away. The rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag. He was found dead at the scene. A second report from someone involved with the investigation reports that the RSL had nothing to do with it; I await further details.
Lessons:RSL's are a mixed blessing. For novice jumpers, they provide insurance against failure to pull the reserve after a cutaway, a relatively frequent occurrence in the pre-CYPRES past. This incident may illustrate the downside of an RSL.

There are more, but I don't have time to find them.



RSL have saved, and they have also killed people.

And proper training can negate the benefits of an RSL....But they CAN kill you.

So why not train more, and leave off things that can kill you that you don't NEED?

Training, not toys makes you safer...

If you can't understand that..THEN YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

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

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I challenge anyone to find a single, documented example of where a properly installed RSL did its job and caused an injury or fatality.

"9/30/01 Opelika, AL DMAL 48 3000+ Yes / Yes
Description: Due to a hard opening, this jumper broke one of the D lines on his canopy, a 230 Rascal. it went into a spin, so he cut it away. The rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag. He was found dead at the scene. A second report from someone involved with the investigation reports that the RSL had nothing to do with it; I await further details.
Lessons: RSL's are a mixed blessing. For novice jumpers, they provide insurance against failure to pull the reserve after a cutaway, a relatively frequent occurrence in the pre-CYPRES past. This incident may illustrate the downside of an RSL."

"7/12/00 Elsinore, CA DMAL 27 few... Yes/Yes
Description: The Navy was at Elsinore training Seals; they had their own instructors and their own equipment. At the time of this report, no detailed analysis of the rig has yet been made. This report is based on preliminary examinations and eyewitness accounts. The student ( training under the Navy's equivalent of AFF) deployed his main normally at around 4500 feet. During the main deployment the RSL somehow deployed his reserve which then entangled in the main. Someone supposedly had seen that his main was square and apparently flyable while the reserve was completely fouled and entangled in his main lines. No one directly witnessed the incident while the student was between 4000 and 2500 feet. Somewhere during that interval the student apparently cutaway his main which then collapsed and remained entangled with his fouled reserve. It was believed that if he had not cutaway, he may have been able to land relatively safely on his main. The reserve was apparently NOT deployed by his CYPRES: the preliminary examination revealed a kink in the reserve ripcord where the RSL must have pulled against it while it was still under tension from the closing loop. As soon as the rig is released by the coroner more detailed examinations are going to happen by the DZO, the USPA, the rig manufacturer and the Navy. It is unknown at this time what pulled the RSL, it may have been improperly routed and was pulled on line stretch, or it may have been caught by a toggle. It is also unknown if this type of malfunction is particular to this type of rig or is an industry-wide concern. The Navy has stood down their training and grounded all of their equipment until more is known about the true cause of the incident.
Lessons: Dual canopy out malfunctions are nasty. Discuss appropriate procedures with a local instructor. Cutting away from an inflated main when the reserve fouled is not a recommended course of action."

"6/22/97 Umatilla, Florida MAL? 42 7500+ (3000+ tandems) Yes?/Yes
Description: At the end of a normal tandem skydiver, the student pulled the ripcord at about 5500 feet. The left main riser broke, which in turn activated the reserve static line lanyard (RSL). The RSL immediately pulled the reserve ripcord cables while the right-hand main riser was still attached. The reserve pilot chute and free-bag cleared, but the reserve canopy entangled with the spinning main. The main was then cut away, but failed to clear the reserve. The student survived the landing, the JM did not.
The Master 425 main was equipped Dacron with suspension lines. The type VII risers were manufactured in May 1996 and had the new heavy duty 3-rings. The rings were properly positioned during drogue fall, and appeared normal. The type VII webbing broke about 1" above the lower end; the type IV holding the small ring broke just below the grommet. Neither of the two rings from the left riser were recovered, nor was the cutaway handle or the reserve ripcord. All equipment was less than three years old and in good condition. Instructor and student total weight was about 380 pounds.

Lessons: Perhaps a defective riser?"

RSL's are not perfect.

Derek

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

"The 2-out scenerios. I've never heard of a complication either. It's hard to believe that the RSL strap could mess anything up"


When you cut away with an RSL, the RSL lanyard goes with the risers. With a two canopy out situation, it is highly likely that the lanyard could entangle with the reserve canopy.
I had always wondered why it was recommended to disconnect it when you have two canopies out. When I found my main after a cutaway it became clear instantly when I saw the rsl on the risers.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That is only risky when you have a cross-connector style RSL - as installed on Racers.
There is a slim chance that a cross-connector style RSL might choke off a reserve after you cutaway the main - in a two-out scenario.
For that reason, most Racer owners disconnect their RSLs.
Most other people are wiser leaving their RSLs connected.

[brettpobastad 0]

Ron

First of all, thank you for getting involved in the debate. It helps all of us if we continue to discuss these issues.

However, either you didn’t read what I wrote or you didn’t understand what I meant. I apologize for not being clear.

Two of my statements you responded to:

“Anyone who believes that the perceived or potential drawbacks of having an RSL outweigh the very real benefits of having one SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT!”

Now read it again closely, Ron. Do you really believe that with all the statistics and information, including which you have provided, That there is more of a potential for an RSL to cause a problem as opposed to potentially saving a life? If you truly believe that, and worse, if you are passing along that theory to other jumpers, then you are doing a disservice to the sport. You presented five examples. Only one of which makes a somewhat direct connection to the RSL. But lets assume for a minute that all of your examples, and twice that many, could be directly attributed to an RSL. There are five times as many examples of where an RSL would have made a difference. And yes, lets just say it: saved a life. I guess I just assumed everyone was aware of that. I contacted Jim Crouch from USPA and, of course, statistics seem back me up.

The second statement that you responded to:

“I challenge anyone to find a single, documented example of where a properly installed RSL did its job and caused an injury or fatality”

Again, either you didn’t read the question, or you didn’t understand it’s meaning. You did, however, provide me with some examples. Thank you. But your examples didn’t help your position. Yes, it is clear that there was an RSL present in all of your examples. In all but one, the RSL only came into play after another component failed. Using that as a reason for not using an RSL is like saying you won’t wear seat belts because you might get drunk and drive into a lake and not be able to get them off. You go on ahead if you want, but don’t drag an unsuspecting young jumper with you.

Thanks for your time, Ron.

Brett Martin

This from Jim Crouch:

Hi Brett,
You are correct that the jumpers advising against use of an RSL are giving advice without knowing the statistics, or having any true knowledge of the subject. The fact is that reserves open faster if you are not stable. Spring loaded pilot chutes are more effective if they are launched into clean air, not into the burble of a stable jumper. As for entanglements the statistics do not support that theory either. Since 1990 there have been 25 fatalities where an RSL may have changed the outcome. In the same timeframe there have been 4 fatalities where a jumper was entangled in some way after a cutaway and an RSL was part of the equipment. One of these actually did not involve a cutaway. It was due to a riser failing which deployed the reserve while the main canopy was still attached at the other riser. In the other cases where there was an entanglement, it is not necessarily clear what happened, but if the reserve system launches as it is designed there should not be enough time for an entanglement to occur before the reserve gets line stretch and begins inflation. I hear a lot of jumpers stating that they won’t use an RSL because they are jumping a fast canopy and don’t want the reserve opening while they are back-to-earth, right after they cut away from spinning line twist. This is also a decision based on no true knowledge of the situation. I have had 5 cutaways in this same type of situation under a main canopy loaded at 2.0:1, and each time the reserve was deployed by an RSL while I was spinning on my back during the release of the main canopy. In each case the reserve was fully inflated, with no line twist, less than 100 feet from my main canopy. One of them even included a large Sony 700 digital camera on top of my helmet. In fact the video images can be found at http://www.skydivethepoint.com/reserveride.htm
The instability argument is simply misunderstood and not supported by the statistics. Feel free to pass on the statistics to those who may benefit from the information.
I’ll be happy to help in any way I can. By the way, four of those reserve rides were on a canopy which was way out of trim. I quit jumping it after the fourth chop!

Regards,

Jim Crouch
Director of Safety and Training
United States Parachute Association

[NeedToJump 0]

Whether or not you choose to use an RSL should be just that - your own personal choice, but you should do so knowing that there are both positives and negatives with having one. They are not a miracle save-all device.

I have had two cutaways without an RSL on either of them. The first was due to a CRW entanglement - I'm pretty sure that if I had an RSL that the two of us would have been killed. I don't think there is anyone who advocates RSL use for CRW jumps though.

My second cutaway was due to severe line twists on my Stiletto 120 loaded at about 1.45. I cutaway some where between my back and my head, turned over to my belly and pulled the reserve - it opened in about half a line twist. I have no way of knowing if it would have opened better or worse with an RSL and I really don't care to speculate about it.

I CHOOSE not to use RSL and the only downside I can see to not having one is that if I cutaway I need to pull and pull high enough and I am comfortable knowing that.

Wind Tunnel and Skydiving Coach http://www.ariperelman.com

[Hooknswoop 19]

RSL’s are not perfect.

Your statement, “I challenge anyone to find a single, documented example of where a properly installed RSL did its job and caused an injury or fatality”, attempts to give the impression that they are infallible. They are not and have caused fatalities.

Having said that, it is absolutely true that RSL’s have saved more lives than they have taken, (25 to 4, USPA’s statistics).

Stating that reserves do not deploy better when the jumper is stable is mis-leading. Reserves do not deploy better when the jumper is on their back, spinning like a helicopter’s main rotor.

Case in point: “The rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag.”

Slightly head high or dropping a shoulder so as to launch the reserve PC into clean air and avoid the risk of the PC being caught in the jumper’s burble is not unstable.

RSL’s have negative traits. If a jumper has a pre-mature deployment at altitude and a malfunction, they are unable to take any sort of delay prior to reserve activation. Finding the little red/yellow tab during a malfunction would be difficult at best and adding that step complicates emergency procedures. If a jumper is involved in a canopy collision and entanglement with sufficient altitude to cutaway, fall clear of the entanglement prior to reserve activation, that possibility is removed by an RSL. Again, finding a little red/yellow tab after a canopy collision would be difficult at best, complicates emergency procedures, and uses valuable time/altitude. After a malfunction, there is a risk of entanglement with the reserve system activated by a RSL. If, on containers with 2 RSL/ripcord guide rings, the pin is in the guide rings when the RSL pulls, it is possible to tow the main canopy as the reserve is deployed into, risking a main-reserve entanglement. This has happened, but fortunately the rings were ripped off the reserve flap and the entanglement was avoided.

RSL’s have positive traits. If the jumper is unable to deploy the reserve after a cutaway, the RSL will deploy the reserve (good reason for an AAD). If the jumper loses altitude awareness and cuts away very low and then fails to pull the reserve immediately, the RSL will activate the reserve quickly. (By the way, it is possible to beat the RSL by either pulling the reserve slightly before or at the same time as the cutaway handle.) If the jumper is unable to locate the reserve handle after a cutaway, the RSL will activate the reserve.

RSL’s are not perfect. The Skyhook from RWS has addressed most of the negative aspects of RSL’s, making the chances of an Skyhook caused fatality almost impossible.

I think that more focus needs to be placed on reducing the causes of incidents where RSL’s saved the jumper, i.e. emergency procedures, not exceeding personal limits, etc.

Derek

[brettpobastad 0]

I read these replys to my posts, and I think: Did I say that? Could I have possibly given these people the wrong impression? So I go back for the tenth time and re-read my initial message. And of course, no, I didin't say that and if I gave the wrong impresion, well, I apologize (again).

One more time, for the record...again!

The benefits of having an RSL far outweigh the drawbacks. It's that simple. It's that black and white. Years of statistics support this.

(Common sense supports this as well but there seems to be a shortage of that around our sport these days.)

The RSL is not foolproof. The RSL presents its own set of potential problems.

I do not recommend using an RSL when doing CRW or when flying camera.

With the exception of students, the choice of whether or not to use an RSL should always be left up to the individual.

(Ironically enough, I don't use one)

When making this decision. Get all the facts. Be informed.

(that doesn't mean just because the rigger with a thousand jumps and the matching rig and jumpsuit combination says so)

And this last point. This last very important point: If you are in a position of influence (and we all are to some degree) You are morally obligated to present all the facts. What chills me is that after all of this discussion, 'Rigger Ron' and 'Hook and Loop' and that guy with the cute little Calvin and Hobbes cartoon are going to be sittin' around the 'ol bonfire drinking beer an some young jumper looking for his first rig will ask the question: Whatdou fellas think about RSLs? And old Rex will puff out his chest and say: "Ahh never use the things...cause too many entanglements" and leave it at that.

That's the real point of this debate.

Brett

[Ron 10]

Quote

“Anyone who believes that the perceived or potential drawbacks of having an RSL outweigh the very real benefits of having one SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT!”

It can be also said that anyone that thinks RSL's are fool proof also don't know what they are talking about.

Do RSL's save more folks than they kill? YES. However, in all of the RSL "saves" a person could have saved themself if they had used the correct emergency procedures. In all of the RSL deaths....The guy did everything right and a cute little device that was supposed to save them killed them.

In my OPINION a saftey device that you don't need, that can kill you is NOT a saftey device.

Quote

When making this decision. Get all the facts. Be informed

And thats what I want folks to know...You may think Im bashing RSL's...But what I am doing is giving the other side of the coin. You have folks out there that say "RSL's are good". And when you point out that they can cause problems they look at you like you are an idiot.

Quote

And this last point. This last very important point: If you are in a position of influence (and we all are to some degree) You are morally obligated to present all the facts. What chills me is that after all of this discussion, 'Rigger Ron' and 'Hook and Loop' and that guy with the cute little Calvin and Hobbes cartoon are going to be sittin' around the 'ol bonfire drinking beer an some young jumper looking for his first rig will ask the question: Whatdou fellas think about RSLs? And old Rex will puff out his chest and say: "Ahh never use the things...cause too many entanglements" and leave it at that.

And in this case you don't know me at all....I have said several times in person and on here. "You should have an RSL till you have your first cutaway. Then make an informed choice." I do however think that WAY to many people are buying cool saftey toys RSL's and AAD's and depending on them for saftey, and not training and drilling the correct procedures....

I can point out many cases where a guy didn't bother to pull his reserve after a mal since he knew he had an RSL.

Thats wrong as hell.

Cool toys should not make up for a lack of training.

You should know ALL the facts....RSL's can kill. If you know that and choose to jump on thats fine...But you should know that they can kill.

And way to many times young jumpers sit at the fire, and "Brett D Bastard" says that RSL's are safe, and don't mention thet they can cause problems.

And thats wrong as hell also.

Not trying to slam you, but BOTH sides should be seen. RSL's are a neat toy that makes up for a lack of proper training. They can save you if you screw up, ad we all are human and can screw up. However they can kill you.

Make your choices knowing that.

I prefer to train harder and more, than just buy "Saftey Toys".

BTW I have and use a CYPRES, but I have yet to find a fatality CAUSED by a CYPRES...Other AAD's yes, but not a CYPRES. If you find me some, I will have to rethink my use of it.

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

[velo90 0]

Quote

BTW I have and use a CYPRES, but I have yet to find a fatality CAUSED by a CYPRES...Other AAD's yes, but not a CYPRES. If you find me some, I will have to rethink my use of it.

I have no examples of CYPRES caused deaths either. That is not to say that I cannot think of a number of scenarios where CYPRES could cause a death.
a) you pull low, as your main opens, CYPRES fires and your reserve joins the main to create a mess.
b) I have also seen a number of people with two out due to a CYPRES fire. If the "two out" is not handled properly it can also cause a death.

OK, in both cases above you can argue that the cause was something else other than the CYPRES. However, you can still claim that without a CYPRES the problem would not have escalated to cause a death.

I believe the point you make about RSL's (consider the pro's and con's) apply equally well to AAD's (including CYPRES).

[Ron 10]

Quote

a) you pull low, as your main opens, CYPRES fires and your reserve joins the main to create a mess.

Yes, however the CYPRES worked as intended. It is not a misfire if you pull low. It did not cause the issue the low pull did.

Quote

I believe the point you make about RSL's (consider the pro's and con's) apply equally well to AAD's (including CYPRES).

Yes, and I do consider them. But I have yet to see a CYPRES fire outside of its operational parameters. If it did, I would not jump one.

I try to remove all possible ways that my gear can kill me. I substitute training for the cool toys.

Now it wil be very funny if I bounce and an RSL could have saved me...But I would rather die due to my failure to perform, than die due to a "saftey device" killing me.

I can train myself to replace the RSL.

Personal choice, and I only make it for myself.

But I want people to know both the good and bad of ALL issues...Both sides.

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

[brettpobastad 0]

Come on, Ron. Brett D. Bastard? I know a smart fella such as yourself can do better then that.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Come on, Ron. Brett D. Bastard? I know a smart fella such as yourself can do better then that.

I would not bet on that

Besides I was just the cute Calvin guy....Thats just wrong.

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

[jerm 0]

Quote

I cant see any reason to disconnect RSL in high winds or landing on a building. IMHO a canopy is not loaded it wont fly, it wont drag.

even the ball of shut that ensued from cuting away the main can have a lot of drag in high winds on the ground... try it sometime. unless it's time for a repack, however, i don't suggest having the RSL connected.

Quote

I bet a cuted away conpy wont open reserve on the ground with the RSL,.

open the canopy? no. open the container? sure.

Landing without injury is not necessarily evidence that you didn't fuck up... it just means you got away with it this time

[billvon 3,068]

>In my OPINION a saftey device that you don't need, that can kill you
> is NOT a saftey device.

Reserves, AAD's and helmets can all injure or kill you, and you don't need them 99% of the time; people can jump safely without any of the above. Since they more often help you than hurt you, most people use them.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Reserves, AAD's and helmets can all injure or kill you, and you don't need them 99% of the time; people can jump safely without any of the above. Since they more often help you than hurt you, most people use them.

#1. Thats why I said MY OPINION.

#2. Show me where a RESERVE worked AS INTENDED and hurt or killed someone.

Show me where a MODERN AAD (CYPRES) worked within its operating envelope and hurt/killed someone.

There are cases of an RSL killing someone WHEN IT WORKED AS INTENDED. Taking an AAD on a low pull is taking it out of its normal planned operations.

Like I said an RSL can kill you even if it works right, and is used within it's normal operational envelope. The same CANNOT be said for modern AAD's, and reserves.

So you can have a normal skydive with a mal, and get killed due to a saftey device...In (Again) my opinion...Thats not a safety device.

Plus all you have to do is pull the silver handle after you pull the cutaway handle. Your noramal E procedures....Simple really. So its not needed. It's a device that lets people relax and they rely on it....And it can kill you.

So it's not needed, and it can kill you...That makes it a bad thing to me.

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

[billvon 3,068]

>Show me where a RESERVE worked AS INTENDED and hurt or killed someone.

372 way. A reserve was deployed on the tailgate by pulling the handle, and the jumper was injured seriously enough to ground him.

Brown. A reserve deployed in the door. It nearly sheared the tail off, which would have killed 12 people. Fortunately only injuries were broken femur and ribs.

>Show me where a MODERN AAD (CYPRES) worked within its operating
>envelope and hurt/killed someone.

There have been several AAD caused two-out situations where the jumper either experienced an entanglement or a downplane. I observed one such injury at Quincy 95.

>Like I said an RSL can kill you even if it works right, and is used
>within it's normal operational envelope. The same CANNOT be said
>for modern AAD's, and reserves.

An AAD can injure or kill you by causing a main/reserve entanglement if it fires during a low deployment of your main. A reserve can injure or kill you by being inadvertently deployed at the wrong time. That's even if it is operated normally - you can pull your reserve handle in a head-down, experience canopy/harness damage, and die as a result. As with any other piece of skydiving equipment, an RSL/AAD/reserve can both harm you or help you. Outside of BASE we have no choice other than to use a reserve, but we can decide whether or not to use the other two. In most cases they do far more good than harm.

[Ron 10]

Bill read again...worked as INTENDED...

Quote

372 way. A reserve was deployed on the tailgate by pulling the handle, and the jumper was injured seriously enough to ground him.

Was the reserve designed to be pulled in the plane? Is this part of the TSO process?

Nope....This is not used AS DESIGNED...It was an accident.

Quote

Brown. A reserve deployed in the door. It nearly sheared the tail off, which would have killed 12 people. Fortunately only injuries were broken femur and ribs.

This was also not AS DESIGNED....It was an accident.

Quote

An AAD can injure or kill you by causing a main/reserve entanglement if it fires during a low deployment of your main

again taken out of the operating parameters...It did not misfire...It was not designed to be taken low..Again an ACCIDENT.

Quote

A reserve can injure or kill you by being inadvertently deployed at the wrong time

At the wrong time being key...Not being operated as designed was it?

Quote

That's even if it is operated normally - you can pull your reserve handle in a head-down, experience canopy/harness damage, and die as a result

Well, if you are above the speed that it is designed for its not as designed now is it?

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

[billvon 3,068]

>Was the reserve designed to be pulled in the plane?

He was not in the plane. His feet had just left the floor; it was pulled by the person behind him, who had her hand on his handle (and was still in the plane.)

In any case, reserves are designed to open even if pulled a split second out the door. During a bailout you can pull your reserve the instant your feet leave the tailgate, and no rig manufacturer says anything different.

> Is this part of the TSO process?

Yes. We've deployed reserves right out the door at 200 knots during rig testing.

>This was also not AS DESIGNED....It was an accident.

The reserve deployed as designed. If you are going to eliminate all the problems caused by accidents. I'm going to eliminate all the accidental problems caused by RSL's. Then all gear is perfect. A sort of unrealistic way to look at the issue, though.

>again taken out of the operating parameters...It did not misfire...It
>was not designed to be taken low..Again an ACCIDENT.

I didn't say it misfired. I am saying it operated exactly as designed by firing when it saw a descent rate greater than 78mph at 750 feet.

>At the wrong time being key...Not being operated as designed was it?

What are you talking about? A reserve is designed to open when you pull the handle. If you pull the handle and it opens, it's operating as designed.

[Ron 10]

Quote

He was not in the plane. His feet had just left the floor; it was pulled by the person behind him, who had her hand on his handle (and was still in the plane.)

So reserves are designed to be deployed by people who are behind you on accident?

Quote

Yes. We've deployed reserves right out the door at 200 knots during rig testing.

Not by someone else who is doing it from behind the rig following it out. Thats not safe.

Quote

The reserve deployed as designed. If you are going to eliminate all the problems caused by accidents. I'm going to eliminate all the accidental problems caused by RSL's

Sure as long as you eliminate the RSL accidents that were not used as designed....Find some, I'll wait.

Quote

>again taken out of the operating parameters...It did not misfire...It
>was not designed to be taken low..Again an ACCIDENT.

I didn't say it misfired. I am saying it operated exactly as designed by firing when it saw a descent rate greater than 78mph at 750 feet.

But it was taken out of the operation parameters.....You are not supposed to take it to 1000 feet. So you can't count fires due to low pulls.

The RSL accidents they were used just as intended...See the difference.

I have a cut away, and the riser breaks and the RSL fires the reserve into the main killing me....I did nothing wrong.

I like a jackass pull at 1,000 feet and my CYPRES fires...Well it was not intended to be used like that now was it?

Quote

>At the wrong time being key...Not being operated as designed was it?

What are you talking about? A reserve is designed to open when you pull the handle. If you pull the handle and it opens, it's operating as designed.

A reserve being fired while I am head down going faster than it is designed to be operated in and it blows up...Its not the reserves fault.

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

[billvon 3,068]

>So reserves are designed to be deployed by people who are behind
>you on accident?

They are designed to be deployed by anyone who pulls on them, whether by accident or on purpose. I saved an experienced jumper at Rantoul this year by pulling her reserve handle while she was spinning on her back.

>But it was taken out of the operation parameters.....

No, it's not. It fires at 750 feet at a speed of 78mph or greater. That's how it works; those are the parameters it uses. It doesn't care what else you're doing (i.e. deploying or not.) That can injure or kill you. Decide on your own if you want to take the risk. I (usually) accept that risk because I like the additional protection an AAD affords.

Two weeks ago in Thailand a cypres fired when Willy landed close to an air traffic control radar, as another example.

>Sure as long as you eliminate the RSL accidents that were not used
>as designed....Find some, I'll wait.

Racer fatality - jumper did not disconnect RSL before cutting away from a two-canopy-out scenario.