Basejumper.com - archive

This is a cross between a rant and hope for solidarity.

A few days ago a good friend and an excellent RW skydiver and very good free flyer from the Midwest visited me in DC. While she has made a couple BASE jumps (i.e., 1-3) from a single A local to her (on someone else’s gear, packed and configured by another jumper, and without any expressed intent to continue in BASE), she repeatedly asserted that a “jump from a 3000 ft cliff is just a skydive.”

With only 25 BASE jumps (including some from those beautiful legal Norwegian fjord cliffs), I don’t consider myself an expert on anything BASE.

Is this just a repeat of a common misassumption (“misunderestimation”?) by skydivers about BASE, or do any active BASE jumpers really consider terminal E’s, “just a skydive”?

Marg

Hello,
A jump from a 3000 cliff is not a skydive, it's a BASE jump.
There's a big rock right there that isn't present on a skydive.
It has not been so much a misassumption as it has been
an assumption that is just plain wrong. There's a difference.
Read Nick's "list", there's a few skydivers there.
Avery

if a 3000ft cliff can fly,you need to wear a reserve and an ADD,plus you´ll need to be above 2000ft on your main canopy,then yes its a skydive.. but then again..

Jumping off a FIXED object whith a packed canopy(either 1 or 2) IS a BASEjump,thats the terms it were described in old days(i heard atleast).

Jumping off a 3000ft cliff and considder it a "low skydive" is foolish and stupied,before you get scared you could be dead...

Go to skydivingmovies.com and see the Norvegian tracking movies.
welcome to the mountains and Gridset

Easy to find just look for BASE and 5 stars


If you still call that a skydive?? welll..

As an experienced skydiver who recently (this summer) started BASE jumping I think that I understand both views. My first jump was from the Norway cliff and was perceived by me to be a "skydive with consequences". Quite enjoyable, quite--achievable... (please refrain from blasting me on this comment--it was my experience--not yours)

Now, 23 jumps (1 A and 23 legal S jumps) later I understand that to be a somewhat naive statement, but one that is, I am sure, shared by skydivers worldwide.

How to change these perceptions? I'm not sure--other than getting the experienced jumpers who make the trek to Norway to attend a formal or mentored BASE course and learn the differences first hand for themselves.

I see this as a perception mainly carried on by more experienced skydivers... "younger" ones tend to embrace BASE as a different sport with less prejudice *in my opinion*

That, in a rather long nutshell, is my take. Almost 8000 skydives and 24 BASE jumps later.

Anxiously awaiting arrival of my BlackJack so I can continue learning...

k

We should ask those dead skydivers who shared the same opinion before theyve gone.

You might want to have a look at this article by Tom Begic, which is sub-titled "Why a BASE jump is not a skydive--You can't skydive from a cliff".

Some of the easiest differences to point out:

1) On a 3000 ft skydive, you can dump immediately without fear of major consequences. Dumping immediately with a slider up rig on a 3000 foot cliff is very dangerous.

2) When you exit an aircraft at 3000 feet, you don't track for 10 or 12 seconds (minimum) before dumping, and you don't dump 500 feet off the deck.

3) When you have a 180 with line twists dumping at 3000 feet on a skydive, you don't immediately and repeatedly smack the side of a very large cliff and plummet to your death.


I'd definitely point your friend toward some of the very experienced skydivers who are also very experienced BASE jumpers (or even moderately experienced BASE jumpers). Perhaps if your friend can easily disregard your opinion, they are more likely to be swayed by those of people they might respect in the skydiving context.

I was thinking along the same lines as Tom's reply... A 3000 foot cliff would be very much like a skydive if you could open before 2500 feet (as on a skydive) without being near anything.

If (against common wisdom) you open at 2500 feet from the Norwegian cliffs, though, you'll be very near the wall. For the reasons given above, that'll be nothing like a skydive. The (much safer) alternative it to keep tracking until you're 500 feet or less above the ground. I don't expect anybody needs to be told why that's not typical skydiving fare.

Either way, not a skydive. When a 10,000 foot cliff with nothing but groomed landing area beneath becomes available, I suppose we can come back to this discussion.

Just ask the USPA if a jump from a tall terminal wall cliff is considered a skydive....We all know what their answer will be.

Human nature is ingrained with the "it can't happen to me" philosphy (at least it was until George Bush started lying to us about his business partners in the mid east ).

Many people only get the lesson when someone close to them suffers a tragedy of some sorts.

I have spent many years trying to convince skydivers that a 3000 ft cliff is not just a skydive. No matter which way you cut it, a BASE jump IS NOT, and NEVER will be a skydive. Any viewpoint other than the FACT that jumping off a cliff is a BASE jump is absolutely, purely, and utterly delusional behaviour/psychology. Avery makes a point in one of the earlier posts to this affect. The sooner skydivers realise this and accept BASE jumping for what it REALLY is, the sooner they will be able to participate in a safer manner, and the better will their skill progression be.

How do you convince people?? I have come to the point where I think/do the following:
- the person I am talking to IS an adult and is capable of making intelligent decisions based on common sense and fact. If they choose not to, it is a (sub)conscious choice they have made!!!!!!!
- I will provide any/all information that I possess, or will direct these people to others with greater expertise/skill/experience than I have.
- I will explain to them that there are consequences for their actions and behaviours, both good and bad (i.e. if you backslide at Kjerag, the rock face will scrape parts of your body off you, OR, if you do this right and have the right attitude, this is the likely good outcome, etc...)
- then I will offer them further assistance if they are willing to pursue my philosophy of training/jumping.
- that is it....

They are adults, they have been offered opinions, options, information, and contacts. It is up to them to do the right thing.

If they choose not to??????????????? They are making a very clear statement about how much they care for their own welfare. I will try to focus my energies on people who do care for their own welfare and want whatever assistance I can provide. In a nutshell, I am not going to try to convince people to do the right thing as my time could be better spent on people who have a higher probability of succeeding because they already want to do the right thing.

It is the 80 - 20 rule. Don't waste your time on the 20% whose mission in life is to generally be counterproductive. 80% of the population deserves/wants/needs assistance and will be greatful and appreciative of it. It is up to the other 20% to change that ratio.

r.e. the experienced skydiver thing. I remember when wingsuits first became popular. There were a number of "very experienced' skydivers/instructors who refused instruction because their definition of experienced was all-encompassing. Reserve rides resulted. And even then they could NOT see the error in their ways.

You are only experienced at what you are experienced at. e.g. Generally speaking, the most experienced maths teacher would more than likely have zero poetry teaching experience. Hence, just because they are a very experienced teacher, it does not mean they have any experience in poetry teaching. There is no point in extrapolating or massaging words. Similarly, An experienced skydiving instructor who only ever does tandems, IS NOT AN EXPERIENCED WING SUIT PILOT. In fact, they are a potential student wingsuit pilot at best. IF a person realises this, they have a greater chance for both survival and progression.

p.s. the truly gifted and those with the most potential and greatest successes are always students.

for me, it is really easy to clear the difference.
if it would be equal to a skydive (3000 ft or less, it doesn´t matter), it should not be a problem to
use regular skydive equipment, to exit in the line of "flight", turn 180 degrees and track as hell for, let´s say: 10 seconds, waive off and pull...

he should try this from:
a: an aircraft or a balloon
b: from a nice "E".

with the results on his body, he should be able to see the difference by himself.
my suggestion, he should try this from an aircraft first ... but in the end, it doesn´t really matter.

and give me his phone number.
probably there would be some used baserig for sale. okay - with some damages ...

honest:
as long as buildings, antennas, spans and earth are not flying (by themselves) - it is not a skydive.

interesting point of view: probably if he is standing on top of an antenna which is to be thrown from a cliff, that could be ... no- not a skydive, but worth to see ;-)
and still a base-jump

disclaimer: this is not to be meant as a serious advice!
don´t try this at norway ;-))

the usual argumentation: you are jumping, flying and landing under a parachute, so it is a skydive
is the same as:
you are driving with a F1-car on a race track, it has 4 tires and you are using seatbelts - so it is the same as going into town on friday evening with your chevy-nova...

It'd have to be, like, realllly overhung, wouldn't it?

 

"World Champion" skydiver Cheryl Stearns (still alive) had the same opinion at the edge of very tall cliff, refused instruction, and exited very very poorly, nearly resulting in a potentially fatal accident.

Interesting. I would like to know more about this, like where, when. Can you pm? For a moment I thought you were actually talking about Jan Davis.

Olav also had some interesting jumps from what I hear....

Yea, 3000 ft cliffs are skydives. So are 1800 ft antennas. In fact, anytime you go terminal with a BASE rig, it should be called a skydive.

Where does the energy come from to debate this stuff? I'm with the Abbie, let's jump instead...

skydivers...leave your rig and your logbook at the door...park your ego in the lot and bare your arse for all to see...then you might just win some respect,some mentors and an audience for your argument...if not go back to the DZ and leave living to the edge dwellers who know how to do it....flame away!

It is not surprising the instruction was refused and I would be interested in the details about this story.

yeah it's got me pretty damn curious too.

Hell the fuck no.

If you've stood on the edge, exited, and have lived to tell the tale, and you STILL call that a skydive, you are an idiot. Maybe once you're a good distance from the wall, and maybe in a wingsuit or solid track, it can feel like a skydive for a moment, but the first and last few seconds of freefall from even the biggest wall are indisputably different.

Maybe your friend is pulling too high.

Thanks to all who replied on dz.com and privately.

Marg

pretty solid arguement there

As I said 460 - I have NO sympathy for people with that sort of attitude. They are adults. They have a choice regarding their destiny. If ego affects their decision making, well.............. Ego can affect all of us at times, but when you are just starting out in a new activity with a much greater potential risk like BASE - you have no right to allow ego to make decisions for you.

On one hand I am surprised that Stearns would do that, on the other hand, nothing suprises me anymore.

Mother nature is a beautiful bitch. Stick with the beautiful....