SKYDIVE@f15.n233.z1.FIDONET.ORG (SKYDIVE) (11/19/90)
Reply-to: Dave.Appel@p0.f30.n231.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Appel) Fido-To: uiucuxc!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ifnxdml ui >Forwarded message: ui > From: a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) ui > Subject: Re: malfunctions ui > Date: 13 Nov 90 23:25:10 GMT ui > Is "mindlink" a Citadel BBS? We got one or two here in Indy, but they ain't networked anymore. Speaking of false rumors started by whuffos who see malfunctions... I was at Richmond Boogie in 1989, and there were a couple of functions. One story was that a jumper got scared in the plane and threw her parachute out the door. Even the paramedics were believing this. (The City provided a rescue truck on site during the boogie.) --- QuickBBS 2.64 (Eval) --- eecp 1.43 Beta LM2 * Origin: SouthSide BBS HST powered from C to shining C (1:231/30) -- SKYDIVE - via FidoNet node 1:233/13 (ehsnet.fidonet.org)
jackson@adobe.COM (Curtis Jackson) (11/21/90)
In article <209@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) writes: }I have to agree with Bob. I believe that it is safest (on average) to }*always* cut away on a mal. NEVER say ALWAYS in skydiving, particularly wrt malfunctions. My only close call on a mal was when my pilot chute bridle wrapped around my wrist. I grabbed the bridle instantly and was absolutely sure that the pin was still in place, so my options were to try to untangle the bridle, or to keep my hold on it and pull my reserve (not my Stephen's cutaway!). Since I had a little altitude, I decided on the former and got the pilot loose within about a second, but had I been close I would definitely have hit the reserve *without* cutting away. The last thing I would have needed at that point was a cutaway main trying to drag me, my wrist, and I around the sky. -- Curtis Jackson @ Adobe Systems in Mountain View, CA (415-962-4905) Internet: jackson@adobe.com uucp: ...!{apple|decwrl|sun}!adobe!jackson "Truth is stranger than fiction; and if it isn't, well, it oughta be." -- Mike Cross, from _The_National_Enquirer_Song_
a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) (11/21/90)
In article <2299.2749B8C4@ehsnet.fidonet.org> SKYDIVE@f15.n233.z1.FIDONET.ORG writes: >ui >Forwarded message: >ui > From: a218@mindlink.UUCP (Charlie Gibbs) >ui > Subject: Re: malfunctions >ui > Date: 13 Nov 90 23:25:10 GMT >ui > > >Is "mindlink" a Citadel BBS? >We got one or two here in Indy, but they ain't networked anymore. Nope. I think it's a 386 system running Xenix. It started out as a local multi-line BBS, which was later hooked up to Usenet. Charlie_Gibbs@mindlink.UUCP Anyone who thinks the government doesn't tax the very air we breathe has never had a SCUBA tank refilled.
bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) (11/26/90)
In article <8412@adobe.UUCP>, jackson@adobe.COM (Curtis Jackson) writes: > In article <209@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) writes: > }I have to agree with Bob. I believe that it is safest (on average) to > }*always* cut away on a mal. > > NEVER say ALWAYS in skydiving, particularly wrt malfunctions. That's true, each situation must be evaluated individually. The BSR's aren't going to mean a rats rear-end when you impact the earth. Guidelines are important but I think that too many people have gotten into the habit of accepting them without question. For instance, the oft repeated bit about always looking at your cutaway handle, reserve handle, etc. This is an excellent way to die. I have had three instances in which I found myself below 1200 feet in freefall. In each case I was unable to take my eyes off of the ground. The ground rush is hypnotic. Fortunately I am aware of the location of my equipment and let my fingers do the walking. Of course there's always going to be the stories of someone going in while tugging on a ring but this points out a major problem. If you can't tell the difference between the feel of a ripcord handle and a piece of your harness you should probably take up another sport. Bob Church NFS#27 bchurch.oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) (11/27/90)
bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) writes: >In article <8412@adobe.UUCP>, jackson@adobe.COM (Curtis Jackson) writes: >> In article <209@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) writes: >> }I have to agree with Bob. I believe that it is safest (on average) to >> }*always* cut away on a mal. >> >> NEVER say ALWAYS in skydiving, particularly wrt malfunctions. >That's true, each situation must be evaluated individually. The BSR's aren't >going to mean a rats rear-end when you impact the earth. Guidelines are >important but I think that too many people have gotten into the habit of >accepting them without question. For instance, the oft repeated bit about >always looking at your cutaway handle, reserve handle, etc. This is an >excellent way to die. I have had three instances in which I found myself [ Stuff deleted ] Hmmm... I think the main problem with this is that usually you do not have much time trying to evaluate the situation. It is always hard to tell exactly *why* someone bounced, since they can't tell you what happened. But if you read the incidence reports, there are quite a few fatalities where there is a strong suspicion that the jumper spent too much time trying to figure out what is happening, or trying to fix a problem, and then ends up going in. At least for straightforward malfunctions, such as bag lock, line over, pilot chute in tow and streamer, I think the best thing is to count to six, and if it isn't flying by then, go for the cutaway and the reserve handle. Especially if the mal is a high speed one, I will probably realize that something isn't right between a count of two and three. If I then start looking around to analyze the situation, it will take me at least two seconds (maybe more) to figure out what is going on. Then I have to decide on a course of action. By the time I get to that stage, I will be at approximately 1500 feet... Not much time left to actually do something. Sure, people have got away with openings as low as 300 feet, but I don't think I'd like to try that... Given the quality and reliability of containers and reserves, you have to be very unlucky to bounce if you go through with the standard emergency procedures, that is, count to six, and if it doesn't look good by then, get rid of it. I have to agree with Bob again though, there *are* situations where the standard approach won't work. Horseshoes and bits of canopy/bridle wrapped around limbs are probably the most critical ones. The question is, if you *do* find yourself in such a situation, does thinking about the problem and trying to find a better course of action actually improve your chances ? Are you not much more likely to make matters worse by losing time ? How experienced does a jumper have to be before an instructor can safely suggest alternatives ? I don't think there is a good answer to these questions. We are now talking about the inevitable risk every skydiver takes, that sometimes even very experienced jumpers die, because they get involved in a situation that cannot be dealt with in the time available. The very best jumpers can probably deal with non-standard situations in non-standard ways, and manage to save themselves where the standard emergency procedures would not have helped. However, I suspect that these people do the right thing at the time *instinctively*, without rational thought. In other words, they don't remember some piece of advice they have been given about the particular problem, and they don't look at what is happening and then consciously decide on a best course of action. Rather, analyzing the problem, deciding what needs to be done, and carrying it out are all one inseparable, instinctive process. The subconscious taking over and doing the right thing... Unfortunately, it is very difficult to teach that kind of thing. And it is probably impossible to recognize the jumpers who are capable of reacting in such a way. So what do you do ? The next best thing is to train jumpers to use emergency procedures that give the best average chances of surviving the mal. Sometimes those procedures are inappropriate, and then a jumper dies, or may decide to try something new that is not in the book, and lives. If the jumper did do something new, and lived, does that mean it should be entered into the book ? Not necessarily, I think. What works for one jumper may not work for another, and the fact that a different course of action worked does not necessarily imply that the standard approach would have failed... The whole problem is that different persons' ability to deal with new, unexpected situations varies greatly, especially when the right decision has to be made in a matter of seconds. Only when the situation actually arises can it be known how well a *particular* person can deal with it. Not exactly the kind of stuff that can be taught to students, or even to experienced jumpers, simply because the subject matter is intrinsically non-teachable... So, after all this, my opinion still stands: The safest thing to do, statistically, is to *always* cut away and deploy the reserve if the thing isn't flying by a count of six. Of course, there are situation where that may kill me. So be it. That is the risk I am taking. If I ever end up in a situation myself that isn't covered by the book, I *may* try something new. If I die, then standard emergency procedures *may* have saved me, but no one will know. If I live, it doesn't mean that I'll do the same non-standard thing again next time, or that I go and teach it to my students. All it means is that I did the right thing once, that next time it happens, the same right thing may not work again. Michi. -- -m------- Michael Henning +61 75 950255 ---mmm----- Pyramid Technology +61 75 522475 FAX -----mmmmm--- Research Park, Bond University michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au -------mmmmmmm- Gold Coast, Q 4229, AUSTRALIA uunet!munnari!ptcburp.oz!michi
mjducey@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Matthew J. Ducey) (11/28/90)
I'd like to point out that not every person is a hero. I'm willing to bet some "bounce" because they panic. A life and death situation will make everyone react defferently. AND don't plan on any mental course of action. Constant drill, I think is the answer e.g. walking away. You must drill your procedures again and again for the different situations. This will allow a "brain free" action on your part. When I had mine, I didn't even think about it, I just went into the drill I was forced to do over and over at Airborne school. am I babbling again? -- But I still like my ST... HP-48SX GEnie M.DUCEY SOCEUR (A) Bitnet mjducey@suvm "But Sgt. Airborne, look how high we are"! mjducey@rodan.acs.syr.edu
bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) (11/28/90)
In article <1990Nov27.184258.27135@rodan.acs.syr.edu> mjducey@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Matthew J. Ducey) writes: >I'd like to point out that not every person is a hero. I'm willing to bet >some "bounce" because they panic. Sorry, I cut off too much of the original post. I agree with you. I have had four high speed malfunctions and panicked every time. Fortunately, while my head was busy looking at the ground spread out my hands cut away and deployed my reserve. The only malfunction that really required any thinking was my first one ( it was my ninth jump ) when I had a sleeve lock. I pushed the belly mount reserve handle instead of pulling it. I finally started thinking enough to use both hands. As it turns out it wasn't the extra strength that did the trick but the corrected angle. Being a student I was opening high enough to regain my composure. It's important to open higher than normal when either we or someone we're jumping with is not current. Bob Church NFS#27 bchurch.oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu
bchurch@oucsace.cs.OHIOU.EDU (Bob Church) (12/01/90)
In article <1990Nov30.195958.3826@cass> jmills@cass (John Luke Mills) writes: >I might have missed this while I was away, but what is the >"officially recommended" procedure for a pilot chute tow? > >My intended plan is, "get very flat and dump my freebagged square >reserve. Don't pull the cutaway handle." This is certainly not official but if the pin is pulled something must be holding the bag in the container. This is probably pressure on the corners. This pressure will likely be relieved when the reserve is deployed; releasing the main bag. Now the big question is whether you want the main bag, pilot chute, etc attached to you while your reserve attempts to deploy. Key word here being "attempt". > >I have been considering adding, "reach back and hold the main >container shut", Due to the tendency of the main container to empty >when the reserve is deployed. > >What do you think of this hold the main container shut idea? > I try not to, it gives me nightmares :-). I'm not all that good at falling stable anyway and the idea of being in a tumble as two parachutes try to deploy is pretty frightening.
jmills@cass (John Luke Mills) (12/01/90)
I might have missed this while I was away, but what is the
"officially recommended" procedure for a pilot chute tow?
My intended plan is, "get very flat and dump my freebagged square
reserve. Don't pull the cutaway handle."
I have been considering adding, "reach back and hold the main
container shut", Due to the tendency of the main container to empty
when the reserve is deployed.
What do you think of this hold the main container shut idea?
)
o /
> / )__ __
/ / / ) )
/ ( / ( (
(__/
-- jackson@adobe.COM (Curtis Jackson) (12/02/90)
In article <224@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) writes: }At least for straightforward malfunctions, such as bag lock, line over, }pilot chute in tow and streamer, I think the best thing is to count to six, }and if it isn't flying by then, go for the cutaway and the reserve handle. Count to six. Tres scientifico. Sorry to be so sarcastic, but the key is not "count to" anything, it is altitude. When I was taught, it was drilled, beaten, and drummed into me that my first, best, and last defense against death was altitude awareness. That's why the BSRs say "decide to cutaway by 1800, cutaway by 1600" and not "count to six before you cutaway". }around limbs are probably the most critical ones. The question is, if you }*do* find yourself in such a situation, does thinking about the problem }and trying to find a better course of action actually improve your chances ? }Are you not much more likely to make matters worse by losing time ? }How experienced does a jumper have to be before an instructor can safely }suggest alternatives ? I don't know about Bob, but I was speaking personally when saying that absolutes are bad. I happen to know from many occasions, very few of them in skydiving, that when things get bad really fast my brain goes into overdrive -- it's like everything is happening in slow motion. I am lucky in that respect, and it has saved my butt on several occasions, but I certainly don't recommend that everyone sit back and have a smoke while they consider their particular malfunction. In my particular case, I can't say I always made the right decisions, but I could never say I didn't have enough time to think about the situation. This included breaking my ankle and tumbling down an incredibly steep hill over boulders, and using my hands to cushion my head as I came down headfirst on a boulder. Even in that unexpected frightening situation I still had the time as I flipped through the air to consider my next move. Not everyone's brain works that way in crisis, and even those of us who are lucky enough to have the ability still wish we had a skydive-style safety drill beaten into our heads so we could know up-front that we had something reasonable to do by default, and only *then* consider other courses of action. Enough babbling: I feel that the 1st defense is altitude awareness, the 2nd defense is a thoroughly internalized set of emergency procedures, and trying to think about the situation a lot is an often-worthy, if 3rd-class, level of defense. -- Curtis Jackson @ Adobe Systems in Mountain View, CA (415-962-4905) Internet: jackson@adobe.com uucp: ...!{apple|decwrl|sun}!adobe!jackson "Truth is stranger than fiction; and if it isn't, well, it oughta be." -- Mike Cross, from _The_National_Enquirer_Song_
michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) (12/04/90)
jackson@adobe.COM (Curtis Jackson) writes: >In article <224@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) writes: >}At least for straightforward malfunctions, such as bag lock, line over, >}pilot chute in tow and streamer, I think the best thing is to count to six, >}and if it isn't flying by then, go for the cutaway and the reserve handle. >Count to six. Tres scientifico. Sorry to be so sarcastic, but the >key is not "count to" anything, it is altitude. When I was taught, >it was drilled, beaten, and drummed into me that my first, best, >and last defense against death was altitude awareness. That's why >the BSRs say "decide to cutaway by 1800, cutaway by 1600" and not >"count to six before you cutaway". I have to agree, of course. The above assumed that you dumped at 2500 ft, and a count of six (at least if you count at "normal" speed) makes it six seconds, or about 1200 ft of descent at terminal velocity. Of course, if you didn't get around to dumping until 1200 ft, counting to six would probably be a bad idea :-) >}around limbs are probably the most critical ones. The question is, if you >}*do* find yourself in such a situation, does thinking about the problem >}and trying to find a better course of action actually improve your chances ? >}Are you not much more likely to make matters worse by losing time ? >}How experienced does a jumper have to be before an instructor can safely >}suggest alternatives ? >I don't know about Bob, but I was speaking personally when saying that >absolutes are bad. I happen to know from many occasions, very few of >them in skydiving, that when things get bad really fast my brain goes >into overdrive -- it's like everything is happening in slow motion. Yes, that may be so for you, but I do not think it generalizes to the average jumper. For inexperienced skydivers, in particular, a simple rule to stick with seems to be a lot safer than trying to decide on a course of action whilst the malfunction is happening. The point I was trying to make was that alternatives are certainly possible, and they may save your life where a normal cutaway would have killed you, but these alternatives are hard to teach, and certainly not student material. >Enough babbling: I feel that the 1st defense is altitude awareness, >the 2nd defense is a thoroughly internalized set of emergency >procedures, and trying to think about the situation a lot is an >often-worthy, if 3rd-class, level of defense. Agreed, no argument. Michi. -- -m------- Michael Henning +61 75 950255 ---mmm----- Pyramid Technology +61 75 522475 FAX -----mmmmm--- Research Park, Bond University michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au -------mmmmmmm- Gold Coast, Q 4229, AUSTRALIA uunet!munnari!ptcburp.oz!michi