mikeat10500 12 #76 March 20, 2003 QuoteQuoteI could be wrong (and I may be) but it seems to me more jumpers have died with an AAD in their rig, than without. Perhaps that because more jumpers have AADs. If 90% of the jumpers wear AAD's, aprox 90% of the fatal jumps would be w/AAD.----------------------------------- Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1 Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #77 March 20, 2003 >If 90% of the jumpers wear AAD's, aprox 90% of >the fatal jumps would be w/AAD. Only if using an AAD has nothing to do with surviving a jump, which clearly isn't true. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dzjmg 0 #78 March 20, 2003 QuoteQuoteQuoteI could be wrong (and I may be) but it seems to me more jumpers have died with an AAD in their rig, than without. Perhaps that because more jumpers have AADs. If 90% of the jumpers wear AAD's, aprox 90% of the fatal jumps would be w/AAD. all good points, I was just inferring that REGULATING that ALL jumpers have an AAD would not significantly alter fatality rates in this sport. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #79 March 21, 2003 Quote>>...I think outlawing hook turns would save FAR more skydivers than an AAD ever will....or how about a canopy regulation of some type..... Some of us are in the sport to get away from rules and regulations. Jumpers always say "Why do the call it FREEfall...it's not free!!! It's called free fall because you are free of the A/C,free from the life you lead on the planet below, free to fly your body through the sky, free to do what you damn well please. you obviously had no clue that I was saying that tongue in cheek....I would never dream of outlawing hookturns...or making canopy regulations....more regulation is NOT what we want. that is the whole point to my post....but I think before we mandate AAD's we should think about other ways of "saving" us from ourselves....which I think is a joke unto itself... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #80 March 21, 2003 QuoteI can think of at least one ENTIRE 4-way team that lost altiude awareness and went in as a result. That's ALL 4 MEMBERS. Maybe a Cypres wouldn't have saved all of them, but chances sure would have been a hell of a lot better. I can think of another 4-way team that almost did the exact same thing, but were saved because they had them installed. Geeze man . . . I dunno if the 4-way thing is a valid argument there. Quade, ....I agree...FAR more 4 way teams, RW teams in general could be saved with jumping them.. BUT my point is cypres are machines and they could fail at the wrong time....as I stated before...will they? probably not...A cypres should not be needed to replace common sense...unfortunately...they are needed.... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikeat10500 12 #81 March 21, 2003 Quote>If 90% of the jumpers wear AAD's, aprox 90% of >the fatal jumps would be w/AAD. Only if using an AAD has nothing to do with surviving a jump, which clearly isn't true. Ok lets take 1 step further...100% of the skydivers in the world wear AAD's. Out of the 49 fatalities that happen in the year 3002, how many are AAD equipped?----------------------------------- Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1 Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikeat10500 12 #82 March 21, 2003 you obviously had no clue that I was saying that tongue in cheek.... Sorry Skymedic...I knew what you were saying and my post was not directed at you" or not my intention anyway". I just needed to steel from a post to help make my point. Education over regulation. The first one can be effective.----------------------------------- Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1 Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #83 March 21, 2003 Quote Education over regulation. The first one can be effective. Amen to that brother..... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
betzilla 56 #84 March 21, 2003 Yeah, What skymedic said... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kansasskydiver 0 #85 March 21, 2003 here's my opinion. just because you have an airbag doesn't mean you're going to go see if it works right? skydiving is all about common sense, AAD's are back up devices only, you shouldn't even rely on them. But to say that it should be made illegal to jump without one, would be like me saying it's illegal for you not to wear white on Fridays. It's a personal choice and it should be kept that way. I have a cypress but when i jump i forget about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clownburner 0 #86 March 21, 2003 QuoteI am against the Gov requiring seat belts and helmets Its my business if dont use these things and no one elses. By not wearing them I ony harm myself, therefore its my business and no one elses. I dont need the Gov to wipe my ass for me. same for AAD's OK, I agree with the principal here; I'm staunchly libertarian and I don't believe in government regulation... However, here's a real situation to make you think: A motorcylist not wearing a helmet is weaving in and out of traffic on a busy street. A car, not seeing him coming behind from a different lane, changes lanes in front of him. The motorcyclist strikes the car, and is thrown over it onto the road. He lands head first and is killed almost instantly by massive head trauma. So far, it's just a personal tragedy. The motorcylists' family sues the driver of the car for wrongful death. The jury sides with them, and the driver of the car is financially ruined by a million-dollar judgement against him, despite the fact that if the motorcylist had been wearing a helmet, he may well have survived the accident. Do you think the driver of that car, now bankrupt, is in favor of helmet laws? If the motorcyclist had survived, but required massive medical support and had no insurance, the taxpayers would have to pay his 10's or 100's of thousands in medical expenses. Did the motorcyclist 'not affect anyone but himself' by choosing to not wear a helmet that day? Now, how many dropzones have been forced to close because of lawsuits filed by the families of Skydivers killed in accidents? Admittedly, this seems to be getting better with the latest generation of waivers, but it does give one pause. My take is that they should not be required, but your family and estate also shouldn't be able to file a lawsuit because the dropzone didn't 'make' you wear one. Eliminating regulation requires some tort reform in our current system to be truly effective. Otherwise, I predict the number of DZ's requiring AADs (and helmets, and RSLs, etc) will increase...7CP#1 | BTR#2 | Payaso en fuego Rodriguez "I want hot chicks in my boobies!"- McBeth Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #87 March 21, 2003 Quote. It's a personal choice and it should be kept that way. I have a cypress but when i jump i forget about it. a person with common sense..... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #88 March 21, 2003 QuoteQuoteI am against the Gov requiring seat belts and helmets Its my business if dont use these things and no one elses. By not wearing them I ony harm myself, therefore its my business and no one elses. I dont need the Gov to wipe my ass for me. same for AAD's OK, I agree with the principal here; I'm staunchly libertarian and I don't believe in government regulation... However, here's a real situation to make you think: A motorcylist not wearing a helmet is weaving in and out of traffic on a busy street. A car, not seeing him coming behind from a different lane, changes lanes in front of him. The motorcyclist strikes the car, and is thrown over it onto the road. He lands head first and is killed almost instantly by massive head trauma. So far, it's just a personal tragedy. The motorcylists' family sues the driver of the car for wrongful death. The jury sides with them, and the driver of the car is financially ruined by a million-dollar judgement against him, despite the fact that if the motorcylist had been wearing a helmet, he may well have survived the accident. Do you think the driver of that car, now bankrupt, is in favor of helmet laws? If the motorcyclist had survived, but required massive medical support and had no insurance, the taxpayers would have to pay his 10's or 100's of thousands in medical expenses. Did the motorcyclist 'not affect anyone but himself' by choosing to not wear a helmet that day? Now, how many dropzones have been forced to close because of lawsuits filed by the families of Skydivers killed in accidents? Admittedly, this seems to be getting better with the latest generation of waivers, but it does give one pause. My take is that they should not be required, but your family and estate also shouldn't be able to file a lawsuit because the dropzone didn't 'make' you wear one. Eliminating regulation requires some tort reform in our current system to be truly effective. Otherwise, I predict the number of DZ's requiring AADs (and helmets, and RSLs, etc) will increase... If it were up to me, and it definitly is not, I would throw the lawsuit out of court. But, lawyers being lawyers I could see this happening. I just hope it doesnt and the waivers keep holding up. The guy not wearing the helmet should make any wrongful death suit null since he was not in keeping with Basic Safety Requirements ie not Safety Mandates Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #89 March 21, 2003 Quotea person with common sense.... Just out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about seatbelts? _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #90 March 21, 2003 If you are over the age of 18...yes...same with helmet laws.... people should be smart enough to wear them.....too bad some arn't... I still pick up people that dont wear them...and they tend to be ejected or worse...but it is there decision...foolish as it may be... Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casch 0 #91 March 22, 2003 Ok I strongly believe we should put this matter to rest. It's like arguing the cases of Creationism and Evolutionism...NO ONE WINS!!!!!! People have their opinions set and it won't change. There's absolutly nothing wrong with that either. There will never be a unanimous vote on the subject. Give it a rest!!!! (Casch slips into his biological weapon/flame proof suit and locks himself in a lead vault) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iflyme 0 #92 March 22, 2003 QuoteSkydiving is dangerous, we all know that and accept the risk. If you want to go down the road of more Govt regulations, you have NO IDEA what kind of a can of worms you are opening. Wow ... you are REALLY putting words in my mouth ... yes, we know skydiving is dangerous, so to reduce the risk of death and/or injury, we wear a reserve. I am GLAD my government has legislated seat belt use, bike helmet use, and does not permit people to smoke in ANY work place. None of my personal freedoms are infringed upon. How can anyone claim that their lives are too restricted if they are required to use a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet? You know, there comes a point where your demands for "freedom to choose" border on ridiculous. I do NOT favor legislating the use of an AAD beacuse VERY FEW lives are saved by these devices. Sealbelts, motorcycle helmets, and bike helmets save an ENORMUS number of lives. I support NON-SMOKING legfislation because cancers caused by second hand smoke kill LOTS of people. [QUOTE]We should also require a Gov't approve electrical outlet covers because someone might accidently electrocute themselves because they are too stupid to realize sticking a knife in the socket is dangerous. [/QUOTE] I will also assume you want the FAA standing there while you board the plane to check and make sure your helmet complies with Gov't Skydiving Helmet Safety Requirements and to check and make sure your AAD is turned on.Now you are just being stoopid. And I don't live in a country under the control of your FAA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManBird 0 #93 March 23, 2003 QuoteCould somebody please, please tell me why it's not yet illegal in either the US or the UK (or any other DZ for that matter) to jump a rig without an AAD?I haven't fallen faster than 75 MPH in a year, and I always open above 3,000'. You have to be going 78 MPH down at 750' to fire the thing. Flying a wingsuit, I'm pretty much guaranteed that I'll be flying with experienced people. What good will an AAD do me? My chances of needing one are so drastically reduced, that I don't feel I would ever need one. Making it illegal for me to skydive because I didn't shell out $1,200 for a tiny metal box and some wire running off of about 50 lines of code, when I don't even need the thing, is just ridiculous. If this sport kills me, it most likely won't be do to a situation wherein I needed an AAD. And if I do impact, you can say "I told you so". If you're making a car analogy, AADs aren't seatbelts, they're oh-shit handles."¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamsville 0 #94 March 23, 2003 My freefall does not include a wingsuit, so this is just another example of why the situation (wing suit, CRW) needs to be taken into account. I never jump without a Cypres, but it should not be mandatory. People have been schooled as to why/when it's needed and useful. Nuf said. |I don't drink during the day, so I don't know what it is about this airline. I keep falling out the door of the plane. Harry, FB #4143 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #95 March 23, 2003 >. I am GLAD my government has legislated seat belt use, bike >helmet use, and does not permit people to smoke in ANY work >place. None of my personal freedoms are infringed upon. Untrue by definition. You may claim that your personal freedoms are not _unduly_ infringed upon, and you enjoy the reduction of your own workload (i.e. you don't have to ask people to stop smoking or wonder if you should wear your seat belt.) However, that's not the same as saying that "none of my personal freedoms are infringed." >How can anyone claim that their lives are too restricted if they are > required to use a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet? Let me give you an example. I once had to see why a ballast wasn't working in a machine shop (it was important for me to do it for a few reasons.) I would have done it using a harness, a rope and my climbing shoes; the ballast was easily accessible from a nearby girder. It would have taken ten minutes and been as safe as any toprope climb. Instead I had to use steel toed boots and a hard hat that prevented me from looking up. A simple job became a dangerous and difficult job because someone else thought I would be 'safer' using steel toed boots and a hard hat. That's the danger; when laws are passed our government tries to decide that they, rather than we, know better how to protect ourselves. That's often not the case, and will _definitely_ not be the case in skydiving, which is why I think any attempt to get safety 'laws' passed is counterproductive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #96 March 23, 2003 QuoteQuoteSkydiving is dangerous, we all know that and accept the risk. If you want to go down the road of more Govt regulations, you have NO IDEA what kind of a can of worms you are opening. Wow ... you are REALLY putting words in my mouth ... yes, we know skydiving is dangerous, so to reduce the risk of death and/or injury, we wear a reserve. I am GLAD my government has legislated seat belt use, bike helmet use, Quote Is this because you believe people to be too stupid to use them and feel you need the govt to protect people from themselves? Where do you draw the line on infringement into your own personal choice? Who am I hurting if I don't wear a seatbelt or a hemet? and does not permit people to smoke in ANY work place.Quote Yes and we see where this is leading us. Did you know San Francisco is considering banning smoking even in parks? Whats next, banning it even in your own home? See what happens when you go down that road? None of my personal freedoms are infringed upon. How can anyone claim that their lives are too restricted if they are required to use a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet? Quote Whats being resticted is my right to make my own choice without the govt dictating what I can and can't do. You know, there comes a point where your demands for "freedom to choose" border on ridiculous. Quote In "YOUR" opinion. Who are you to dictate what I consider rediculous? I do NOT favor legislating the use of an AAD beacuse VERY FEW lives are saved by these devices. Quote So it's a matter of degree? Would you favor it if more people were killed? Sealbelts, motorcycle helmets, and bike helmets save an ENORMUS number of lives. I support NON-SMOKING legfislation because cancers caused by second hand smoke kill LOTS of people.Quote Who do you think you are? It's my life and my choices. Do you favor or oppose abortion? [QUOTE]We should also require a Gov't approve electrical outlet covers because someone might accidently electrocute themselves because they are too stupid to realize sticking a knife in the socket is dangerous. [/QUOTE] I will also assume you want the FAA standing there while you board the plane to check and make sure your helmet complies with Gov't Skydiving Helmet Safety Requirements and to check and make sure your AAD is turned on.Now you are just being stoopid. And I don't live in a country under the control of your FAA So you are in favor of passing laws with no way to enforce them? I'm glad I live in a country that has an FAA that still believes in individual choice instead of a Socialist Society. One of the reasons we don't have the type of govt intervention like Canada does is because we have shown the ability to self-regulate. I'd rather live in that kind of a country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #97 March 23, 2003 exactly. heathly eating and regular exercise would save MILLIONS of lives. do you want goverment enforced nutritional standards and country wide PT formations? no thanks. i'll take freedom instead ____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #98 March 23, 2003 Skylark- On you bio page you don't have a # of jumps listed... if I had a better idea of your experience level I would craft my response accordingly. Generally speaking, I think using an AAD is a good idea. If you feel that strongly that you need one to make a successful skydive then by all means you should use one. I don't, and for that matter I remove the RSL's from all my rigs...It's a personal choice and a calculated risk. I don't believe anyone should impose regulations on anyone in this sport ... small canopies, no helmets, barefoot, BASE... The freedom this sport has, attracts a most diverse and talented group...The most fascinating people I've ever met, and I wouldn't have it any other way. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpy 0 #99 March 23, 2003 QuoteCould somebody please, please tell me why it's not yet illegal in either the US or the UK (or any other DZ for that matter) to jump a rig without an AAD? Well its mandatory for those not holding an E and F license not to have one.. although it may have been moved up.. here in Australia. One thing you might want to think about is that making something mandatory and making sure everyone has one isn't making people turn it on.... stupid though it may be it has been done Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
loughery 0 #100 March 23, 2003 "hey lets also add no jumping w/out gloves..goggles , altimeters...audibles" In canada one of out Basic Safety Rules is that we have to wear an altimiter. Troy A-6969TOT www.SkydiveMoncton.com To my wife: 'If you ask me to stop skydiving, you are asking me to move out!' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
