Basejumper.com - archive

I had, and still have discussion about BASE with fellow BASE jumper. He is much more experienced jumper than me, and he have ten times more base jumps than I, and more than 20 times skydives, so people listen him. I won't write in what we disagree (though I'm tempted, cos we disagried a lot) but one thing that he claimed shocked me. I'm don't have experience he has, but I like to think base (And I'm not thinking on anything else unles I have to), I did not miss any post here, and I did read BLINC tech archives more than couple times (infact, I have all tehnical post in my comp), but I think his statement is completely wrong, irresponcibile (I don't want to say, - bul&shit)!

I stated that 60 meter (196 ft) cliff freefall base jump is demanding jump, and his answer was.


I doubt that that kind of jump is routine, but what d phuck I know.
So I would like to hear your opinion about that and you can maybe convince me that it is routine, so I can apologise him.



Thanks in advance, and sorry for spelling, mozilla hate spell check

Igor Pesun

PS: He stated that in front of group of unexperienced base jumpers.

It's routine for 90% of the jumps.

When something goes wrong, it goes wrong in a hurry, though.

You don't get to find out how your skills are (or how demanding the jump is) until something goes wrong.

I think this is a pretty typical misconception in BASE. If everything goes right, it's easy. That doesn't mean it _is_ easy, because it's when everything goes wrong that you get to the hard part.

Routine? Perhaps. But easy or safe? I don't think so.

As part of the unexperienced base jumpers' population I can only reply (since I was reading the discussion you're referring to), that you're taking the subject out of the context!
Even though I have only 32 jumps, I understood what the other guy tried to say...
And maybe for others, not knowing the story behind: the discussion started with which jumps are easier/harder:
1. Slider off- low altitude ( 60-150 m)
2. Slider up - subterminal ( 151-300m)
3. Slider up - terminal (300m +)

My humble opinion was that No.2 jumps are the hardest and No.1 the easiest (I've done all three kind)...Igor, life would be dull if everyone would agree about everything!

Which brings up an interesting question. Massive improvements in gear have greatly reduced the chances of offheadings and line-overs. What if this is actually making the sport more dangerous, because people (myself included) are less exposed to the risks.

I wonder if I would already be base-jumping if one in every three jumps would be an offheading and one in every eight jumps would be a line-over. If the answer is no, then I actually shouldn't be base-jumping yet. After all, the statistical law-of-great-numbers doesn't apply on the one jump that shit actually hits the fan.

Let's go back to pre-tailgated skydiving gear, just to make the sport safer!

I totally agree with you. The assumption (mine and others) was taken in a manner if everything goes right... And of course no base jumps are easy and safe! After all we are talking about BASE here

It's a good habit to plan for the worst on every jump. Personally I think the worst can be a lot scarier on the low jumps (#1) than on the terminal jumps (#3). I agree that the sub-terminal slider jumps are the sketchiest (less distance from object than the terminal ones, but a slider on a low airspeed opening yielding inconsistencies).

Well my opinion that someone that is learning (and that thread was learning thread) unexperienced base jumpers can not state that kind of statement. Are you really agree with ewery answer or ewery statement that he or I wrote?Someone that is learning me can't say things like It is better to be near cliff when you have linetwists, becouse impact will be lower, cos' linetwists are more or less hard to solve and it is helicopter ride, and not write to me that I nead to (and to you) clear danger of impact first, and then deal with line twists...
You want me to continue?
I did not learn anything from that thread. Did you?

Edited to add:
You don't know how sorry I'm that discussion we had was not in english...

Honestly I didn't learn anything out of dialogue of exercising who is more right or smart... And the thread was meant in totally other direction than you two guys brought it at the end... Luckily I have my own brain and luckily I know and have jumped together with quite some experienced jumpers (e.g. Hannes, Pecnik, Stane,........) who lived through quite some "worst case scenarios" and of course they also don't agree in everything!
My personally favourite way is to go the safest way even if it's not the easiest and as Tom said: to plan for the worst on every jump... and not take it for granted! And believe me, from what I've learned in this little time is that not the manuals on the PC and not the long threads on the forums, but jumps and time bring the experience and knowledge to one!!!

But you are right, there are lots of guys getting into BASE, following one of mine favourite's A. Einstein's sayings: Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

I think it all comes down to what you are asking..

If you are freefalling 200' objects, the canopy will open in time, 99.9% of the time. That is not "demanding".

But when you freefall a 200' cliff, and it opens in time, but doesn't open facing the good direction- you'll be busy for a few demanding seconds..

Quick and related-
81 meter (260') free fall, with no chance of object strike (read suspension cable over valley), I can land in any direction (big feild) and assuming no wind.
is a 42" pilot chute for a 222 daggar ok? guessing it will be fine, but i do have to be stowed because i have to drop from hanging by hands.
I'm leaving in an hour, please be quick! I dont have a 48, but i might be able to borrow one.

Borrow 48...

I would use a 42 at 300ft (usually use a 46), but would use a 46 or 48 at 260

I can only reflect on my limited experience and overly analytical thinking, but I was far more comfortable at a 480' span my first 6 jumps than I was a couple of days ago on a 170' E.

I felt that I had more time to deal with issues that arise at the higher altitude. I had no problem climbing over the rail, thinking for a few seconds, and jumping.

The low height object took me 15 minutes to get off both times I jumped it. It was much different looking at the ground and knowing if things went wrong I would have almost no time to deal with it and a hard surface a very short distance below. Both jumps went well with an on heading, 2-3 second canopy ride. Was it easy? In a way... Once you step off there's not much to do but land and if things go bad there's not much you can do!

However, in retrospect, with the higher speeds and longer delay of the taller object there are more variables that need to be accounted for. The lower object seems like it either works or it doesn't, but that's probably what had it take me so long to exit. It was definitely a WAY more intense experience for me!

consider 48 borrowed-
thanks, cheers. ("let go" and throw!)
i'll post in 5 days when i get back...

It's when it doesn't work that things get interesting, and that's where the real difficulty of any jump really lies.

-----------------------------------------------------------
What if this is actually making the sport more dangerous, because people (myself included) are less exposed to the risks.
-----------------------------------------------------------
,,, so, the one who is driving the car with bad brakes would be safer, cause will be more exposed to the possible crash?! I do not get your point

If brakes would fail every 50 kilometres, a lot less people would drive, possibly making driving safer from a statistical point of view.

I am wondering if the influx of new base-jumpers is partially caused by the fact that the tailgate has brought line-overs into the "I'll take my chances..." camp, from a statistically point of view, for some.

It's like being on top of the cliff and wondering: "I have a .3 percent chance of an offheading. I'll take my chances." If the chance was closer to 50 percent, a lot less people would be on the edge, and those that would be, would be much better prepared to deal with it.

Hopefully that makes more sense...

Cheers,

Jaap

There is a 220ft cliff 5 minutes down the road from my house. I have done 60 jumps from it, stowed a couple of times, 5 or 6 roll-overs, the rest have all been handheld freefalls. Provided you have a decent on-heading, don't jump in excessive wind and avoid low turns it is nice and easy. The worst off-heading I have had there was a 120 right and that was exciting. If you have a complete 180 you are going to be my hero if you walk away uninjured.

For me, these "easy" jumps have a habit of lulling me into a false sense of security. I actually find it a more demanding jump than many others around now, and hence jump it less often. However, they are great jumps for learning about your gear.

JaapSuter,
I know ( in the way ) what yoiu ment, but...

Following this theory we would be end up being in mddile century time still

The % of off headings and line owers are far lower than we expect. (IMHO)

Better equpment saves BASE jumpers regardless of how many are jumping, 10 or 10 000 , so this should be the way we all follow.

Hence the "" after my comment about going back to pre-tailgated skydiving gear.


Which will lul some people into a false sense of security, as JesseP pointed out.


Totally!

Strewth skippy - and I bet the 'good' landing area is that little pile of rocks between the dunny and the billabong. When an Aussie says it is 'nice and easy' I bet it is the same as when they say 'lets go out for a quick beer'. Both will lead to pain.

I told the person I jumped the 170 footer with that I needed to jump this object more to get over my fear of it and he replied "If you get to the point you don't fear it you should probably quit jumping it because complacency will kill you."

IMO the altitude of the object has very little, if anything, to do with how easy or difficult a jump is. basejumping in general is very easy, it's doing it safe that can be challenging. all these altitudes can be jumped safely, if you have sufficient spacing to objects during the jump, and there's a good landing area.

how easy or difficult a jump is, is decided by what you make of it. johnnyb's lowpull in lauterbrunnen f.ex., is that an easy jump, because it's full speed? or a gainer from a 70m cliff? not far from where i live there a wirespan of about 250m into a gorge. no good landing area makes this a winter jump as the snow is covering the rocks and boulders. this is a subterminal slider up jump, and when the snow is fine i'd say it's definitely an easy one.

altitude is a factor where you either have enough or you don't (the inbetweens are risky but few...). the other factor are far more interesting and important when it comes to assessing a jump.

You've answered your own question. If YOU find it demanding then IT IS.

I find sub-200' freefalls very demanding of my reactions, of my experience and possible very demanding of my bones. JesseP is very current, having done hundreds of low altitude Aussie jumps in a very short space of time. 200' freefalls place less demands on him than they do on me. Someone of his calibre perceives the risk differently than I do.

I'm sure you perceive the risk of a 200' f'fall differently than your friend does.

After all, it's our perception of what we think we can and can't do that ultimately protects us from ourselves. If we did things that are outside our ability on the insistance of others we get hurt.

This is why some people walk away from a jump and some don't - and walking away can never be regarded as a bad choice.

g.

To
IxIc

Then why learning thread?
If everything goes right, any jump is not demanding. Why then track from the wall, when you can learn erials?
Do you get my point?
ixIc:

I don't have experienced jumpers to jump with, and I'm relying on my own experience and on what I learn from BASE forums, so I wan't things to be clear.I take BASE serious, and ofcourse Ill look for others people opinion, cos my life depending on that, even if Mister X think that this post is my attempt to discredit him. It is not.
You see I did not write his name, cos name is not what it matters but statements he written to me. And when I gott statements from experienced BASE jumper stating (among others) what is written below, ofcorse that I'll search for others opinion and I'll argue his attempt to teach me.
Cos, that is not teaching.

(After discussion, and my opinion that it is better to cliff jump from 486ft 3 sec SD and avoid ofheading and even linetvist, cos your delay can be the same 3 sec when jumping SU)


>You can get line twists becouse of 3second delay at SD jump, cos momentum can swung >you into twists even if jou have nice onheading opening

And when I ansvered him that delay is not cause in that case, but bad body position, and that same body position could make worse when jumping slider up, I got answer

>It is what you say, but it is what I told you.


Or things like…

>Jumping slider up from 486ft is pleasant jump consider you don't have wall behind you

And on my answer that it is fun and easy with 2 sec delay not 4, which I backed up with Dwain's post about usual jumping delays from Snake River 486ft span, and Dwain post about altitude that canopy consume at 4sec delay slider up, I got answer..

>I have videos, and I know what people jumping that span told me»

(BTW, ther was a video of a guy doing 5sec from that span, but it is jump over deep wather, So can it be safe to take 4 sec slider UP from that altitude over hard ground?)


Or …

>Statistic has show that SU subterminal jumps are more demanding than others»


Where is that statistic?
I looked at the «List» and I did not that impression about fatalities from cliff jumps (actually I think that I saw that terminal walls have most casualties).


Or things like…

> only the slim majority of jumpers at KL comp. could get to 4s mark becouse they had trouble with ground rush …


(However they don't have problems vith 4s SU from 500ft ??)
There was many other things in that tread…

BTW, I asked him (couple of times)where he would like to have 180 off, on 200ft ff jump, or 180 on any altitude raging from 500ft to 1000 ft, but he avoided to answer me.
(only to show him that it is not easy to answer on his first question abuot what jump is most demanding, cos answer depends on many things, and that he can't use word statistic, becouse hi is not having one)

And Ofcourse that I'll argue with person that writes me…


«I must say that you smiled me to my heart with your post on dz.com, becouse it seems that you dont have anybody who will listen to you or give you advice in Croatia»


Yes I don't, but…(I'm still polite enough to not write his name…)
Is that my shame or his?



Igor

PS: Sorry on bad english, I dont have time to correct it, but if something is not clear, say and I'll rephrase it…

Kinaa,

Posting private correspondence into the forum, of whatever kind, is poor etiquette.

In this case, you are also the translator, so it's difficult for us (i.e. those without the language skills) to read the original for nuances.

Please stop this. It's starting to look like a personal issue. I'm sure it's something you can discuss with the jumper in question.

My first thought:

It's always better to learn from those near you, speaking your native language, than try to wade through a foreign language on an internet forum. There are so many little complexities here that you almost always learn more from long term, person-to-person interactions. Internet forums are good as backup resources, and checks on the current state of the art, but no substitute for real people.


Slider up delays are done here pretty regularly. The primary consideration is usually wind (because if it's strong from behind, you must have altitude to turn around and set up landing). In calm winds, slider up is done regularly by many experienced jumpers.



This is absolutely correct. Those numbers were gathered at the Petronas comp, and on a few weekends here. Slider up subterminal jumps have markedly worse heading and noticeably higher malfunction rates. This is likely because they are among the slowest, least predictable (low airspeed slider deployment is often not smooth) inflation sequences.


This is also true. I was there. Of the 18 jumps I've logged off the PT, 3 exceeded a 4 second delay. I am not certain if this is because of ground rush, but we could argue causes all day. The real fact is that, as stated only a slim majority of jumpers took delays of 4+ seconds.


Much of this is object dependent. Jumping into a clear canyon with soft water below is significantly less intimidating than jumping an underhung building.

which is the most advice line in this tread...

jumping off a 300ft S shouldnt be a problem,but make a forest just below leave some gnarly boulders and perhaps some power lines arround your LZ you might wont find the object that easy anymore......

are you used to have 20+ secs canopy flights you might dont want to freefall the sub 200ft area aswell,which will give you werry litel canopy time compared to what your used to...

Im not sorry to call myself lucky luke,im sure it will save my nice a$$ one day

My apologies to all of you. I got some doubts, and you helped me, wich is why I posted it.

Thank you all.

Igor Pesun

I have heard the statement that Australia has mostly advanced/dangerous exit points. I do not know if this is also true for America, but I have heard this statement a few times about Oz exit points.

Could the original statement sub 200' jumps being routine, have been a the above wrongly worded or misunderstood.