chasing aff students below our hard deck

[NoShitThereIWas 0]

Quote

I guess my attitude is this:
If I were the student, I wouldn't want the instructor to endanger himself on my account by going way low.
If one of my kids were the student, and got into trouble, I’d hope the instructor would take it down to Cypres fire if need be.
Flame away if you feel the need.

I understand where you are coming from in feeling that way. That is because you are a parent. If it were my daughter and she was below 2,000 feet, I would chase her down until my Cypres fired or want another person to save her life too. But that is because she is my child. I think most parents would risk their life to save their child. But beyond that, if it was not your child, or say your mother, father, very close significant other ... There comes a point when it is time to save your own life. That is called self preservation. Depending on what the problem is, you may not be able to fix it and in most emergencies that I have seen or been in, when others try and get involved, the situation gets more complex and confusing.

I feel I already put myself under enough risk every time I am involved in skydiving activities because shit can happen. I think Instructors take on a certain amount of risk so that they may teach others what they know. There are stories out there where students have killed or nearly killed their instructors.

We teach our students to open by a specific altitude. We reiterate altitude awareness on every jump and it's importance. We do what we can to make sure we are well trained, the gear is equipped with back up safety devices and that students receive proper training in the event of an emergency.

Even with all of that things can go wrong. In the end, it stil boils down to the simple fact that you need to save your own life on every skydive. At our DZ, students are required to wear Cypres or Vigil. If something went terribly wrong on my skydive, that is why I spent $1200 on a Cypres. It is no different for students.

There may be a few people out there who I would chase to 1,000 feet, but they'd have to be pretty damn special; I still wouldn't be happy about having to do it and I don't think I would ever skydive with them again.

Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."

Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."

[SkyTango 0]

My opinion as a low-timer (only 30 jumps off AFF)

Lets face it as a student there was a few things I expected out of my AFF course.

1 My instructor should train me to successfully complete my own jump by student deployment altitude (my training should be adequate so that the instructor doesn’t have to complete my jump for me i.e. pull my ripcord)

2..My instructor is a backup and should complete my jump if I really screw-up. (Up to the instructor’s hard deck)

3..My instructor should now piss off and give me my best change of survival. (Let’s face it if I got away from the AFFI for the last 3000ft (15sec) what gives him the idea that he can catch me in the next 1000ft (5sec) till Cypess fire.)

And yes, if it was my son I would also want the AFFI out of there by 2000ft. It just increases my son’s chances of survival.

So my opinion is simple. Keep playing the percentages that will give you the highest probable success rate. i.e.(I’ll divide the deployment responsibility as follows:)

Plane to student deployment altitude --> Student
Student’s deployment altitude to instructor's hard deck --> Student and AFFI
Instructor’s hard deck to ground --> Student and AAD

JC

If you woke up breathing, congratulations!
You get another chance.

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

Fine, that settles it; she’s going static line, like her old man did.

OK, no she’s not.
Probably not.
A few more months till she’s 18.
As her father, I’ll just be glad once she’s off student status.
I think.
I definitely need to think with my head and not my gut on this.
Maybe I’ll get her some tunnel time before her FJC.

I think it was the late Roger Nelson who once said (in an interview with 'Skydiving Magazine' ) that jumping with your family as students really brings home the fact that all your students are family to someone and that therefore your 'operational procedures' should reflect that. (i.e. "don't want my kid to jump with this old rig / lousy instructor / incapable pilot / tricky weather conditions? Why then someone elses kid should be OK with that?")

That said - I'm glad my kid is off student status, glad he chopped something (a bag-lock) & pulled his reserve, glad he landed out already twice, glad he went into a cloud and came out 'completely somewhere else' at 1500ft and most of all glad he seems very aware about risks and the dull discipline you have to follow in order to eliminate them. In fact he seems more 'religious' than me when inspecting all of his gear, checking upper winds etcetera and he is not afraid to say NO to a skydive when his safety-conditions are not met.

Your emotion ("that AFF-instructor ought to chase my kid and pull as long as they are both in freefall") is understandable. This summer I was in a lot of loads where my kid was also on board and I found that under my tandem-canopy, yapping away with the passenger, I DO tend to look out for that one particular bright red canopy and I DO get worried when it takes me a minute or more to find it.

However: with training and material (AAD) as it is and procedures as they are ("My instructor is still near me in freefall - I have TIME to get stable!") a larger than life 'superhero' chasing your kid in stead of showing some fabric might be counterproductive.
Although it is almost impossible to predict the students behavior 'in a crisis', that is exactly what instructors are doing most of the time...
I have seen people during static-line jumps that screwed a canopy into the ground or had a five seconds reserve ride. Apparently I thought they were going to do OK, but they didn't.

This all made me cautious. But if standard operating procedures should be changed it is not OK to change them for our kids and leave them in place for the paying customers.

And - if I may be so bold: It is perfectly OK to entrust your kid to the best instructor you can find.
Once you do that you yourself should stear away from your kids training as fast as you can. Don't give the first jump course, don't give the tunnel instruction - just pull out your check book and observe from a distance...

Just my $0,02...
edited to say: I jsut noticed from your profile that you are not an instructor so you probably will not give the first jump course anyway. But for those who are and that have kids who are starting: Don't get involved with your kids (pre A-licence) training! You don't want a student you changed diapers on!

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[mark 107]

Quote

If it were my daughter and she was below 2,000 feet, I would chase her down until my Cypres fired or want another person to save her life too.

Okay, let's try this again.

The chances of good things happening because you chase a student below 2000 feet are slim. The chances of bad things happening are large.

If you chase a tumbling student, you are likely to be above them. If you chase them at Cypres-firing altitude, your freefall-canopy collision will result in serious injury or death. If you misjudge your approach and are under your student when your Cypres fires, same result.

If you are next to a Cypres-equipped student when your Cypres fires, your reserve canopies will deploy next to each other.

If you are successful in deploying someone's main parachute at Cypres-firing altitude, you make his or her situation worse instead of better. Now that someone will have two parachutes out. Those two parachutes may or may not entangle with your Cypres-deployed reserve.

If you didn't have the skill you needed above 3500 feet, how will you suddenly develop the skill below 2000?

Why would you want to endanger your daughter's life by chasing her down to Cypres-firing altitude?

Mark

[wmw999 2,480]

Quote

Why would you want to endanger your daughter's life by chasing her down to Cypres-firing altitude?

I'm a former AFFI, and a mother of a 21-year-old.

Why would you do it? For the same reason that most mothers (or fathers) would willingly throw themselves in front of a car and try to push their kids out of the way even if their child was already running. Some sort of instinct takes over.

That said, if my son ever decides to skydiving (it's not worth the money to him yet, and he has to want to do it badly enough to keep paying for it), I won't be involved in his direct instruction. And I wouldn't if I were still current.

I'd drill him. I'd talk to him, and quiz him, and everything else. I'd probably make his life miserable. I'd certainly want to go out on his first tandem if he wanted it.

But an unrelated instructor will let him make normal student mistakes, and that's a critical part of learning. And an unrelated instructor will value his own life enough to let the Cypres work if it gets to that. Just thinking about it makes my knees go weak, however.

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)

[mark 107]

Quote

Why would you do it? For the same reason that most mothers (or fathers) would willingly throw themselves in front of a car and try to push their kids out of the way even if their child was already running.

Sorry, not a good analogy. Pushing a kid out of the way even if he or she is already running is making his or her situation better. Chasing your kid at Cypres-firing altitude is making his or her situation worse. Wanting me to be the instructor endangering your daughter's life instead of endangering it yourself strikes me as no improvement.

Mark

[calledisrael 0]

My instructor should now piss off and give me my best change of survival. (Let’s face it if I got away from the AFFI for the last 3000ft (15sec) what gives him the idea that he can catch me in the next 1000ft (5sec) till Cypess fire.)


exactly. i am (obviously) not an instructor, but i was chased by my AFFI until cypres fire. i am thankful for his heart in that. but *i am the one who screwed up.* and while i wish he could have pulled me at the appropriate time, it was my job to save my own life.

the likelihood of him being able to do it that low when he couldn't do it before (for whatever reason) is pretty small. i appreciated his responsibility to me as his student, and (now) i appreciate the thorough thrashing he (and other AFFIs) later gave to me. i am now a much better and safer skydiver because of it.

all you AFFIs out there - you are amazing, and you do a really difficult job. thanks for putting yourselves out there to make skydivers out of us. please don't be in a position where *we* could kill you.

life is either a daring adventure or nothing at all.
(helen keller)

[NoShitThereIWas 0]

Again Mark:

Everything depends on the situation. We train our students that if you see your instructor deploy or you are alone in freefall (1st few jumps) you must deploy. I would train my daughter no differently. However, if I saw my daughter under my hard deck trying or waiting too long to "do the right thing" like pull the reserve ripcord after wasting too much time on a hard pull, I would stay with her until I got her to pull A handle or pulled it myself.

All of you Non-Parents can judge but after you have a kid, you too would do WHATEVER it took to save your child's life. That is just human nature. I am glad someone on this post did mention the whole if you were to chase someone to Cypres firing altitude, it would be a bad situation when both Cypreses fired at the same time. In that situation you would be in danger of a low wrap. That is a good point. I don't think it would stop me though from chasing MY daughter below the hard deck.

Technically, though, if I was doing AFF with my daughter (which I hope to someday do, she is only 5) and both of our Cypreses are working properly, her student Cypres should fire approx. 300 feet higher than my expert Cypres and hopefully that vertical separation would be enough to avoid a canopy collision. Who knows, one can only speculate and hopefully we can all deal with the things that need to be dealt with up high.

Altitude is a GOOD thing

Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."

Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."

[apoil 0]

Quote

If you didn't have the skill you needed above 3500 feet, how will you suddenly develop the skill below 2000?

This is an important point that I may not have clarified about my position.
If I ever need to deploy out of a situation like that at 2000 feet, it is only so that I can land and resign my position as an instructor. So if I'm instructing your loved ones you know that such a situation has never happened.

[livendive 8]

Quote

All of you Non-Parents can judge but after you have a kid, you too would do WHATEVER it took to save your child's life. That is just human nature. I am glad someone on this post did mention the whole if you were to chase someone to Cypres firing altitude, it would be a bad situation when both Cypreses fired at the same time. In that situation you would be in danger of a low wrap. That is a good point. I don't think it would stop me though from chasing MY daughter below the hard deck.

Agreed. While I understand that chasing my daughter below the hard deck would be ill-advised, I'm quite certain I'd do it anyhow. I just don't think it'd be possible for me to abandon her in that scenario, regardless of what the logical choice is.

Quote

Technically, though, if I was doing AFF with my daughter (which I hope to someday do, she is only 5) and both of our Cypreses are working properly, her student Cypres should fire approx. 300 feet higher than my expert Cypres and hopefully that vertical separation would be enough to avoid a canopy collision.

You misunderstand the operation of a student CYPRES. At freefall speeds, it will fire at the same altitude as an expert CYPRES.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[artistcalledian 0]

I'm not an instructor, so forgive me for posting in your section, but.....

I got into a spin at 7000ft on my level 7 jump, my instructor came in to stop me and dislocated his shoulder, the fact i was responsible for that almost made me give up, but i didn't..... if i was to go so low that i put my instructor's life in danger, i'd never ever be able to live with myself if they got killed because of me. We all know the risks, its not their responsibility to put their lives on the line like that for us

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[livendive 8]

Quote

if i was to go so low that i put my instructor's life in danger, i'd never ever be able to live with myself if they got killed because of me.

I know a jumper whose instructor went in after chasing her into AAD land (her's fired and he didn't have one). She went on to become an instructor herself and still jumps today. I wouldn't say he got killed because of her, as students and novices have their hands full enough just taking care of themselves. They can't be expected to take responsibility for another life as well. Anyhow, like most incidents in skydiving, his death was a direct result of the choices he made.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

...i'd never ever be able to live with myself if they got killed because of me.

I agree, I wouldn't want them to do that for me either. If someone went in trying to save my sorry ass, it might drive me out of the sport, too. On the other hand, it might drive me to become an instructor (I'm not one) and pay back to the sport by mentoring students myself.....hard to say....

Quote

...its not their responsibility to put their lives on the line like that for us

However, I'm not so sure I agree with that.

[artistcalledian 0]

Quote

However, I'm not so sure I agree with that.

i respect your point of view on this... its just that i think there is a duty of care on both sides. I want them next to me when they should be, but not when they are going to be in danger of not going home to their family at the end of the day. Just my opinion, i'm not saying you're wrong

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[Beverly 1]

Quote

...its not their responsibility to put their lives on the line like that for us

However, I'm not so sure I agree with that.

[koppel 4]

Quote

it would be a bad situation when both Cypreses fired at the same time

Yes it would.

Quote

Technically, though, if I was doing AFF with my daughter (which I hope to someday do, she is only 5) and both of our Cypreses are working properly, her student Cypres should fire approx. 300 feet higher than my expert Cypres and hopefully that vertical separation would be enough to avoid a canopy collision

http://www.cypres.cc/Sites/englisch/Download_Users_Guides.htm
Please read Section 12 : Technical Data

Specifically regarding activation heights of Expert and Student models.

I am a Non-Parent. However when I have children they will if they choose jump. I hope that I can educate them to RTFM and not rely on myth and hearsay for information in this sport.

Koppel

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[koppel 4]

Quote

I know a jumper whose instructor went in after chasing her into AAD land (her's fired and he didn't have one)

I read a story in Readers Digest very similar to that you mention last year. I was very angry to hear that he was posthumously awarded something for bravery. The signal he sent was that he did not trust his students equipment to work.

We must trust our equipment, but only after we have checked it

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[Andy9o8 2]

Pretty harsh response to my pointing out that there is more than a single legit point of view on this issue. I had hoped we could have a mature discussion of this topic without name-calling or anger. There really is room for more than one opinion, you know.

No, of course you’re not supposed to die trying to save a student; nor do I expect someone to die for my daughter – but then I never said that, either, so let’s not re-phrase each other’s posts to make them sound worse than they are, ok? That doesn’t advance the discussion either. If you look at my original post, I made it clear I respected the opinion of those who felt they should stick strictly to their hard deck.

What I’m saying is this: We all understand that skydiving presents an enhanced risk, and by engaging in the sport, we make the conscious decision to accept that enhanced risk. Well, by the same token, making an instruction jump as an AFFI is not just another skydive; there are certain enhanced risks that are inherent to that particular type of jump (that is, as compared to some other types of jumps). And when you become an AFFI, you choose to accept the enhanced risk inherent to making AFFI jumps. Part of that enhanced risk comes from the fact that, if your student gets into the shit, you have some responsibility to place yourself more in harm’s way to try to help him than you might with another jumper on a “routine” skydive. That’s one reason I have such incredible respect for all the instructors in our sport. Is that enhanced risk properly defined as “putting your life on the line” (which was not my choice of words, it was another poster's)? I guess it’s up to each individual person to decide what that enhanced risk means to him/her.

How far into harm’s way should an instructor go? I really don’t know; despite the hard-deck rule, I think there probably isn’t one single correct answer that covers every situation. But the issue isn’t always a simple one to resolve, and if you scroll back up, you’ll see posts from several other parents, skydiving instructors all, that acknowledge this.

-------

By the way, Beverly, I read your posts on "showing students horror pictures" and I agree with your feelings on that issue completely.

[riddler 0]

Not an AFFI (yet), but what I see in this thread is kind of a testament to everyone's faith in AADs. I guess it's more about statistical probabilities than anything. But the assumption is that if you drop a student, the AAD will save them. Probably it will. But there's also a chance it won't.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

I know a jumper whose instructor went in after chasing her into AAD land (her's fired and he didn't have one)

I read a story in Readers Digest very similar to that you mention last year. I was very angry to hear that he was posthumously awarded something for bravery. The signal he sent was that he did not trust his students equipment to work.

We must trust our equipment, but only after we have checked it

I'm trying to decide whether there's a certain inconsistency here. Over and over I hear and read jumpers with way more jumps than I have say that AAD's, while good and quite reliable (these days), are are not foolproof, and therefore you should never abandon your EP's and simply trust your AAD to pull for you. If an experienced jumper uses that standard for himself, why is it ok for him to trust an AAD to save a student?
(Note: this truly is a question, not an argument.)

[mark 107]

How many Cypres-equipped students have died because their AADs failed to work as advertised? None.

How many Instructors have died because they chased their students to Cypres-firing altitudes? At least one.

Did the dead Instructor improve his student's chances? No. He made them worse. Instead of his student having just one canopy out, the student had two out. The Instructor's heart was in the right place, but he wasn't thinking clearly, and by his actions he endangered his student more.

In three cases I know of, Instructors caused a more dangerous situation by accompanying their students to Cypres-firing altitude. I don't know of any cases where things got better because an Instructor was down there.

There is a small chance a Cypres might fail to fire. There is a large chance the pursuing Instructor will make things worse instead of better. Which chance would you prefer?

Mark

[koppel 4]

Quote

I'm trying to decide whether there's a certain inconsistency here. Over and over I hear and read jumpers with way more jumps than I have say that AAD's, while good and quite reliable (these days), are are not foolproof, and therefore you should never abandon your EP's and simply trust your AAD to pull for you. If an experienced jumper uses that standard for himself, why is it ok for him to trust an AAD to save a student?

A student is also taught never to abandon EP's, nor to rely on an AAD. The standard is the same. In the event of a failure of the skydiver to turn themselves into a parachutist the AAD will hopefully acheive this for them. We do not rely on them for ourselves or our students. However chasing your student and not opening your parachute may turn the instructor into a Rorsch Blob leaving the lesson stated but not explained.

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

How many Cypres-equipped students have died because their AADs failed to work as advertised? None.

How many Instructors have died because they chased their students to Cypres-firing altitudes? At least one.

How many AFF students have gone in after their Instructor(s) failed to catch them?

Derek

[Guest 1010]

Quote

How many AFF students have gone in after their Instructor(s) failed to catch them?

(my newbie .02)

none. It is the students responsibility to pull. If they go in under these circumstances they will have gone in after failing to deploy their main parachute, not because their AFFI didn't catch them.

You can have it good, fast, or cheap: pick two.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

none

Then why have an AFFICC (or whatever they are calling the current cracker-jack box ratings). Why not just have all coaches jumping with students? What is the difference between a Coach and an AFFI?

Derek

Derek