Basejumper.com - archive

Apologies beforehand if this is dealing with some subjects that has been discussed earlier.

Just having read through this entire list, I was wondering about a few things.

Has there ever been any fatalities in South Africa?

How come the fatalities heavily increase, (almost exponentially) after 2000? Is it purely ratios, because there simply were more jumps made?

Is there any kind of organization that represents BASE jumpers? (JW) Like USPA for SKydivers?

It looks to me like a lot of these fatalities could have been prevented. Correct Assumption or not?

Is a mal in BASE looked upon as preventable, that it is the packer's fault? or just like Mains in Skydiving, that it occurs and you have to accept and deal with it?

Sorry for the bombardment of q's here.

BTW Tom, thankyou very much for that article "getting into BASE". It very much made me think MUCH more seriously about the sport. Having 34 skydives with only a little linetwist on one jump, I think it is easy to forget how dangerous skydiving is if you dont deal with it properly. I cannot imagine BASE, and how much you have to trust your ability to pack a good opening. I have a lot of respect for those who engage in BASE jumping sensibly.

Nobody has anthing to say about that? Or is this just a slow section of the forums?

I guess this asks more from the way experienced jumpers, but anyone is more experienced than me here, so chuck in what you think, I would apreciate it!

I think you'll find that most of the people you your trying to reach, are un-reachable at this time of the week.

I'm sure you'll get answers, and if you dig deep enough, maybe you'll find some yourself.

I was supposed to be jumping today, but since TVH flaked out on me, I'll give you my take on it.
Flake = called in to work. Someones priorities are all screwed up.

Here goes (long):

Meaningful statistics are difficult to calculate, so the explanation for the fatality spike is open to debate.

I think your theory that a lot more jumps are being made now is a big factor.

Gear is certainly more reliable now, and the opportunity to learn vicariously through others mistakes is high.
In theory, we should be getting safer.
I don't know that this is actually happening.

It's inherent in the psyche of BASE to push the limits. More and more people are jumping lower objects, doing aerials, taking wingsuits off cliffs, and so forth.

Another factor is the increasing exposure that BASE is getting. For the most part, only the jumps that go well make it onto widely distributed videos.
When everything goes well, a very sketchy jump looks pretty easy.

IMO, DWs memorial jump is a perfect example.
PCA'd from an altitude that's so low that I'm reluctant to post it lest someone with minimal experience read it and assume they can jump from a similar height.

Three guys made perfect, uneventful jumps.

Watching the video makes it look easy, when it's not.

A friend of mine with 100 or so jumps recently asked another friend when BASE got so nerve wracking.
His answer?
"When you finally realized how f&@king dangerous it is!"


What I'm trying to say is that aside from the obvious spike in participation, there's a more insidious aspect to the fatality spike that relates to accurate or inaccurate risk assessment fueled by skewed publicity.

Your last comments to Tom express a similar sentiment: "Tom, thankyou very much for that article "getting into BASE". It very much made me think MUCH more seriously about the sport. Having 34 skydives with only a little linetwist on one jump, I think it is easy to forget how dangerous skydiving is if you dont deal with it properly. "
The same goes for BASE, but even more so.
-Josh

The list may not be totally complete. I know that Nick does his best, but not everyone is notifying him, I'm sure.


Not to my knowledge. I know of several accidents there that came pretty close, but no fatalities.


I'd guess that there are several factors:

1) Skydivers often feel that they can respect a terminal wall less, because it's "just like a skydive" (I've heard that so many times at dropzones I'm sick to death of it).

2) Big legal walls tend to evoke a "boogie mentality" where people feel safe and start trying weird, radical things that are actually quite dangerous. When that happens, people sometimes forget that there is a wall behind them.

3) Big legal walls often have lower legal sites right next to them. There have been lots of accidents when beginners, feeling confident about their new experiences on the big walls, moved over to the lower sites they probably weren't ready for.

4) There are lots of jumps made there. You'll notice, though, that in terms of accidents/fatalities per jump, the legal walls are far, far more dangerous that the legal spans.


Not really. The closest we come in the BASE world is probably the ABA (Australian BASE Association) in Australia, which is the most coherent nationwide BASE organization in the world. The Norwegian BASE Association is a bit looser, but the subset in Southern Norway, the Stavanger BASE Klubb, is probably the best run, most effective site preservation/instruction organization running. There have been numerous attempts to create BASE organizations in the US, but as yet very little has born fruit. I understand that another effort is underway now.

Another very effective BASE organization (in that it quickly, efficiently and effectively carries out it's stated purpose) is the United States BASE Association (the organization begun by the late Carl Boenish to hand out BASE numbers). Since the scope of the USBA's mission is very small (all they do is hand out the numbers), it doesn't really represent jumpers, so much as it gives us common ground, and a link to our history.


Every fatality could have been prevented had the jumper never taken up BASE jumping. Beyond that? I'm not sure I'd make any generalizations about preventability.

Some of the earlier fatalities would clearly have been avoidable had modern BASE gear been available through some temporal rift. But it was those fatalities that prompted the development of modern gear, so that would probably lead to some kind of weird time bending paradox.


The vast majority of BASE jumps are made by the packer. So, that would make it the jumpers fault. And in a philosophical sense, the jumper could have decided not to jump, so whatever happens after he leaves the exit is always his fault.

In a more general sense? I think that most BASE "malfunctions" (i.e. off headings, PC hesitations, etc) are generally viewed as unavoidable at the current level of gear technology.


That's a pretty good summary. Since your other option is to refuse to accept it and not deal with it, and choosing that option generally results in serious injury or death, people generally just accept and deal.


You're welcome. That's pretty much why I wrote it.

Just a quick comment about the big wall issue.

I feel it is not "just a skydive" either. However, you can treat it as just a skydive if you act accordingly. What we see nowadays is people with not so many skydives, and lacking basic skills like flat tracking, recovery to stability, basic aerials (stuff to be tried in freefall first) trying to learn this in a base environment. Unstable in freefall, try again (altitude permitting), unstable close to a big wall, here come the fatilities (edit: site names ~TA)

Big walls: respect them, and get your basics first.

Ronald Overdijk

I'm not so sure. Even with excellent terminal air skills, you are going to encounter one of two non-skydive conditions. Either you will open high (like a skydive) and be close to the wall (not like a skydive), or you will open low (not like a skydive) and be far from the wall (like a skydive).

In any case, there is always going to be a significant non-skydive-like factor involved.

First I want to say that Nick does an amazing job on that page.
I do want to note that the actual numbering is not in order of occurence.
You have to look at the dates themselves. The numbers seem to be the number in which they where entered into his database.
Just a small thing really.