an ethical question

[Jib 0]

Quote

Quote

the DZO should be made aware, step in and say not
at my dropzone.

Okay, but what if the "someone" who handed you that Diablo and then recommended that Crossfire was the dzo and the person who taught you to skydive?

That sent a chill down my spine. I would have hoped someone like that would have taught him better instead of egged him on.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[SkyMissy 0]

Then you should have paid better attention to Joe's waiver. And Joe's a jerk, but not responsible.

________________________________________________
Mike

[wmw999 2,452]

Quote

Yeah, but maybe you're new to the planet and aren't aware how bad jumping off a bridge could hurt you. Maybe Joe's your best source of information about the sport.

A very valid point. We all tell people who are unsure of their skills to ask their instructor, right? If the instructor is a compromised source, then their basis of information is much smaller than they think it is.

If this is a real situation, I'd consider verifying, and naming names. Really. Of course, that's easy for me to say because I live in Houston. But the ensuing shitstorm would be easier to take than the jumper killing themself.

Edited to say: do we want to spend time analyzing who's responsible, or do we simply want to find the most expedient way to prevent the likely ensuing disaster?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Deuce 1]

Quote

I wouldn't say they were ethically responsible. They were contributory, but not responsible. If Joe tells you to jump off a bridge and you do it, Joe's a jerk but you had the choice. If Joe tells you to jump a canopy loaded at 2:1, same deal.

Oh no. I really disagree. A first time jumper thinks somebody with a brand-new A license is a skygod.

Virtually everybody knows that jumping off the hypothetical bridge will kill you. A new skydiver listening to the wrong people doesn't know that downsizing can kill you. No Parachutist, no DZ.com, that new jumper believes everything the seller of the handkerchief tells him or her.

[darkwing 5]

I consider it my ethical duty to say something like, "You are crazy to jump that. You will likely kill yourself, and ruin my day, and lots of others. On the other hand you may live, and thereby encourage others to do the same, and they will surely die. Show me that you can handle a Zoomie 190, and come back with a few hundred jumps and then I'll say go ahead and jump a 97." I'd also tell the STA and the DZO that I think they are being irresponsible, and encouraging unsafe progression.

-- Jeff
My Skydiving History

[Opie 0]

Quote

Quote

They were contributory, but not responsible. If Joe tells you to jump off a bridge and you do it, Joe's a jerk but you had the choice.

Yeah, but maybe you're new to the planet and aren't aware how bad jumping off a bridge could hurt you. Maybe Joe's your best source of information about the sport. Maybe you trust him, because he taught you how to skydive. Maybe you haven't spent hours reading about wingloadings on dropzone.com, and believe what Joe tells you.

I'm pretty sure that when I was new to this planet (at least old enough to be allowed the chance of jumping off a bridge or not---say 7), I new that jumping off that bridge is dangerous and likely to kill me, if I didn't I wouldn't have lived this long.

[Jessica 0]

Quote

Then you should have paid better attention to Joe's waiver.

I wasn't aware that waivers typically gave comprehensive information on wing loadings and their effects.

We're talking about ethical responsibility. To me, Joe's being a jerk and knowingly recommending stupid gear equates to his being ethically responsible for that jumper's injury.

Skydiving is for cool people only

[Keith 0]

Well let's see . . . The 50 jump wonder, the someone who hands over the Diablo, the someone who hands over the Crossfire and YOU if you don't step up to the plate and say something. How's that for covering all the bases?

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Quote

I wouldn't say they were ethically responsible. They were contributory, but not responsible. If Joe tells you to jump off a bridge and you do it, Joe's a jerk but you had the choice. If Joe tells you to jump a canopy loaded at 2:1, same deal.

Oh no. I really disagree. A first time jumper thinks somebody with a brand-new A license is a skygod.

Virtually everybody knows that jumping off the hypothetical bridge will kill you. A new skydiver listening to the wrong people doesn't know that downsizing can kill you. No Parachutist, no DZ.com, that new jumper believes everything the seller of the handkerchief tells him or her.

Yeah, but we're talking about someone with 50 jumps. If after 50 jumps you don't recognize the difference in speed and performance of a higher wing loading and correlate that to a faster impact with the ground when you fuck up, then you're probably going to do something equally stupid and assinine like stick a fork in a toaster.

And they don't have to read dz.com for wingloading info, they can get it from the manufactuer. If they decide to buy a piece of life saving equipment without doing research, THEY are responsible.

[jmpnkramer 0]

Dear Lisa:

In my opinion anyone who knows about it is ultimately responsible. No we cannot technically stop people from buying things that they should not. We can let the DZO's know and post things on sites like this. I see on your profile that you have the ratings to know all the answers to this question.

I personally have been hit by an idiot test jumping an Icarus who did not have the skills to jump one. It was Quincy 99'. We were the only two people in the sky and just before I flared this retard hooked into me. Luckily I did not get hurt and all my pals from Z-Hills were there.

Just because you have the money to buy something does not mean that you should. I jumped a 200sqft canopy for over 200 jumps. I made some mistakes that if I had a smaller faster canopy would not have been surviveable.

This is not only about the individual's safety but all the people in the sport. If that Yahoo gets into a situation under that canopy he will not only take himself out but most likely an innocent individual.

It makes me sick when all people think about is money and themselves. You would do the sport a great deed by naming the individual before he kills the innocent. Better yet Murders the innocent; because that is what it is.

I have seen many people pound the ground and it not a pretty site. Fortunately I have not been on the DZ when there was a fatality. I have even urt myself under a mal that I thought I could clear. When I realized I could not I was able to avoid the main landing area so as to only hurt myself. My question would be can someone with only 50 jumps be that alert under that kind of stress? I HIGHLY DOUBT IT!!!!!!

Please inform the DZO's of wherever this individual might jump. Maybe we should set up a special form for DZO's & Instructors for this kind of information. Obviously credentials would have to be verified before authorization was given. Just a Thought. It might be a hard task but we have enough Death in the sport without ridiculous factors such as you talk about.

I apologize for the length. I just let things flow as they will. Take care.

Blue Skies and Safe Landing's!!!!

The REAL KRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMER!

"HESITATION CAUSES DEATH!!!"
"Be Slow to Fall into Friendship; but when Thou Art in, Continue Firm & Constant." - SOCRATES

[Deuce 1]

Quote

And they don't have to read dz.com for wingloading info, they can get it from the manufactuer. If they decide to buy a piece of life saving equipment without doing research, THEY are responsible.

Dude, you're right. But that's hard. And one of us is gonna have to do CPR on this idiot, or one of our skydiving mates cause this idiot took them out.

I'm going to check with my DZO to see if he has guidelines about jumps to canopy ratio.

[skybytch 273]

Great replies; thanks all.

So you all know, this is a "semi-hypothetical" situation. A co-worker got a call today from someone who said he had 50 jumps, weighed 200, had been handed a 120 by his dzo/aff instructor but thought it was a bit slow after jumping it and was told that his next canopy should be a Crossfire 109. We didn't get his name, where he jumps, or any other pertinent info. It's entirely possible that the phone call was a troll, but it had enough of a ring of truth to it that I thought it would make an excellent topic of discussion here.

btw, there's no way in hell we'd sell someone with 50 jumps a Crossfire period, much less one that jumper would load at 2.0-ish. We like to sleep at night.

[lowpull 0]

I should hope EVERY person on the DZ would have the balls to speak up and try to point out the idiocy of this situation.

However, sadly, too many times those of us who know better just watch and hope for the best.

I am lucky that the dz's I work at are very good at letting us self police ourselves and watch out for the younger jumpers.

I honestly believe if I saw this exact scenario being played out as you have explained,I would do anything and everything in my power to put a stop to a needless injury and bad press for our sport.

I pray all of us would............Ralph

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

btw, there's no way in hell we'd sell someone with 50 jumps a Crossfire period, much less one that jumper would load at 2.0-ish. We like to sleep at night.

Don't worry I don't have the $$$ to be shelling out to be buying a new rig and a new canopy, but what sort of jump experience do you look for before you'd sell someone a Crossfire loaded at something like 1.5:1?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[mujie96 0]

If this guy seriously thinks the 120 was slow, then he's got some perception problems. I don't find a 120 particularly slow and I have almost 100 more jumps and carry 80 fewer pounds.
Probably a troll. One of the DJs I work with claims he was using a 150 for his only 12 solo jumps and he's got to be pushing 225+ with gear.

Just keep swimming...just keep swimming....

[Zenister 0]

Quote

You are responsible.

The other two may not be good people nor your friends, the local S&TA, or your instructors that didn't try to explain why this is not the right canopy for you at this time. But you are ultimately responsible for your actions and will be the one that pays the price. This is a inherintly dangerous sport and if you are always going to be looking to place blame for your own bad judgements and actions on someone other than yourself. I would suggest you take up bowling instead. Skydiving, it's not for everyone.

exactly.

as much as anyone else may not like it, all you are really responsible for is telling him what an idiot you think he is, and that you refuse to cry at his funeral...

and perhaps filling in the divot he'll make if your the DZ grounds keeper.

ethics are relative, what you may consider ethical another might not..

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

It's entirely possible that the phone call was a troll, but it had enough of a ring of truth to it that I thought it would make an excellent topic of discussion here.

Amazing that we have to put up with that, huh? I get about two a month here....

Quote

btw, there's no way in hell we'd sell someone with 50 jumps a Crossfire period, much less one that jumper would load at 2.0-ish. We like to sleep at night.

I'm glad there are others out there! Mucho Applauso!

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[skybytch 273]

Quote

what sort of jump experience do you look for before you'd sell someone a Crossfire loaded at something like 1.5:1?

The answer to that question depends on a number of things. Jump numbers alone don't tell me much - hell, I have 900 jumps and I do not have the skills to safely land a Crossfire at 1.5 in any situation. But most people would say someone with 900 jumps should be just fine under something like that...

When people are asking me about higher wingloadings and more aggressive canopy types I start asking lots of questions - where do they jump, what have they been jumping, how many jumps on that canopy and size, can they land that canopy standing up in all of the situations billvon mentions in his "are you ready to downsize" list, how do they normally land, have they ever landed off the dz, are they working with a canopy coach, how many jumps per month do they make, how many of those are dedicated to canopy flight, and do they have medical insurance. The answers to those questions can help me figure out whether the person is ready for it or not.

I've sold Stilettos and Crossfires at 1.3 - 1.5 to guys with 200 -250 jumps; that's about the minimum raw jump numbers that I'd be comfortable with. But at that, the person would have to show me through the answers to the above questions that he (yes, it is always a guy) has put a lot of time and effort into learning canopy flight, is working with a coach and knows exactly what he's getting into by flying that canopy.

[VivaHeadDown 0]

You're supposed to answer statements like that with, "Where can I get the good stuff you're obviously on?", and "Does this DZO fly it in from Columbia personally, or was it his chief pilot?" And ethics probably don't hold a high place in any of their decision making skills. Come on, give us something more challenging.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Coming in kinda late...sorry, but its a GMT thang.
Ethically responsible?
All of us are responsible for advising our peers, even if it means offering different advice from that person's instructor, which can put you in a whole new dilemma.
Legally responsibe? Well that depends who the guy's family can sue....

Lisa's approach may seem severe to some but I think its admirable, placing a stranger's safety above profit. I guess like she says, she wants to sleep of an evening.

"She was as easy as the Daily Star crossword."
Not much point trying to get one across on her then....

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[CanuckInUSA 0]

I was worried that I wouldn't get an honest answer to a honest question, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Thank you for the honest answer Lisa.

I know I'm currently in no position to be giving you a call to buy a certain canopy type right now in my short skydiving career. But as long as he doesn't move, I know who my canopy coach may be and sometime in the future (probably one year from now) we just may be having this exact conversation that you outlined above.

Now if only my knee would feel better. I suffered a minor knee injury playing hockey tonight and weather permitting I'm scheduled to take my first (oops beer) canopy control course on Sunday.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Samurai136 0]

Are we talking business ethics or moral ethics?

In a conversation w/ my doctor he said, "After years of medical practice I no longer believe in morality. There is no right or wrong, only health and disease."

The only comments I make to skydivers jumping a canopy I think is beyond their skill: Are you sure you're ready for this canopy? This canopy will turn and dive faster than you may be ready for. What if you get hurt and can't skydive for 6 months or longer?

Generally this stimulates some thought and conversation. If I was a dealer, I would stick to a specific standard. Usually the longer a customer lives them more likely they are to spend money with you...

Ken

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[BMFin 0]

BTW. In Finland <250 jumpers are allowed to load their canopies 1.34 MAX. Also no elliptical canopies before 250+ . (yes we have lists of the canopies that are suitable)


We also have rules like 500+ jumps to skysurf or to jump a wingsuit. (250+ with a coach)

I think these rules are pretty good.

After 250 jumps most people are more mature to judge their skills on their own.

[charliezulu 0]

Quote

This is a case where a good discussion by several really strong guys with the 200-lb wonder would be a good idea. After all, a good beating isn't going to hurt nearly as much as the eventual biffed landing.

No shit! Thump him! Save his life! I wouldn't want to be in the air anywhere near this guy!

CZ

• Quote

[billvon 2,998]

Not directed just at Lisa -

You know, there are some pretty strong replies here. Two suggested beating the guy up, and many people are expressing righteous indignation that such a thing could be allowed. People, it IS happening. I would be suprised if most people here haven't met someone who is jumping an 2 to 1 canopy at 50-100 jumps. And they don't get beat up, they don't get grounded, they don't even get an ultimatium that they have to go to a canopy control course or upsize. They just jump.

How do they do it? Well, first off, they lie. They don't lie about their canopy size, since small canopies are cool. They lie about their jump numbers. I heard one guy at Rantoul one year go to three different canopy manufacturers and give two different numbers of jumps, depending on how small the canopy he wanted to jump was.

Second, if they get caught (or they don't try to inflate their jump numbers) they have a whole box of excuses. And unlike their box of luck, their box of excuses is bottomless:

"You've never seen me fly it."
"I just have a knack for flying canopies. Not everyone does I guess."
"I'm being really careful."
"Who the hell are you to tell me what to jump anyway? You only jump a 1.7 to 1!"
"You can't ground me."
"I'm a pilot, so I have a head start."
"I've landed 40 times in a row with no problem, so what's YOUR problem?"

The problem is going to get worse, not better. In 10 years, a loading of 2:1 at 50 jumps will be accepted, and people will be wringing their hands over the landing fatality rates. The only thing that can stop this is us. And that means all of us, not just the canopy nazis and instructors, it means everyone. It means that _you_ pick a canopy that will land you safely every time rather than something that will give you a better surf. It means _you_ teach people canopy control before they downsize to a canopy they are terrified to experiment on. It means _you_ make a stink about their choices, even if you get branded a dick, or a canopy nazi.

Or do none of those things, and watch fatalities go up, new rules get passed, and canopy choices restricted. It's up to you, but if you decide to do nothing, remember that the person to blame for the fatalities and new rules will be looking you in the mirror.