Re: [robibird] Austria
With all due respect Robi, your post makes me sad. Why are discussions on protection always presented as an either-or thing? Can't we have both? Armor and skill.
You don't see experienced Nascar drivers get into their car without a helmet, laughing at the newbies with their confidence boosting protection. Instead, they collectively agree that protection is a good thing, and build comments like: "having experience and skill is a must" on top of that.
You don't see free solo climbers laugh at those that use rope, making comments like: "if you were a skilled climber, you wouldn't need rope." Instead, the climbing community collectively agrees that wearing a helmet and using a rope is a smart idea. They also agree that skill and preparation are a must as well.
I know of at least one recent fatality where body armor, a full face helmet and a vented canopy could very well have made for a significantly different outcome. I know of at least three people who came out of an object strike with zero injuries, thanks to their choice of gear. At least two of these jumpers had great skills too, but as many agree: sometimes, shit just happens.
Allow me to rewrite your post a tiny bit, for the sake of argument...
In reply to:
What I meant to say with saying ''
BASE-specific-gear - no brain'' is the kind of approach I have seen (99.99% super young base jumpers) who think they are invincible with
BASE-specific-gear
stronger than rock
faster than speed of light...
It is very natural to feel that way when they are young ( you know what I think - right

) but to carry on that kind of behavior is nothing else than stupid.
It is not bad idea at all to have the
BASE-specific-gear, but much better is to think and listen yourself, to know your own limits and at the end to call or ask for important things about any site no matter how easy it looks.
Sounds reasonable, right? Yet using skydiving gear for BASE jumps is considered a foolish choice by most contemporary BASE jumpers.
What about the tailgate? Damn those new kids on the block who think they are invincible to line-overs and can't even properly use the Line Release Mod. We should make sure all beginners jump without a tailgate for their first hundred jumps. That way they won't feel invincible and learn to use the LRM.
The thing is, we have many gear improvements that have been proven in the field. Body armor, vented canopies and full-face helmets are some of them. There is simply no reason to jump solid slider-down objects without body armor, a full-face helmet and a vented canopy.
I know, you're making a point about people wearing body armor and using that as an excuse for their jumping behavior and sense of protection. But let's not blame the armor. Instead, let's assume the armor is a given and shows an intelligent choice. Once that's established, let's talk about attitude and beginner skills.
Also, let me state that I think that certain jumps can be made within relative safety without body armor. You won't hear me judge if you do long slider up tracking flights without any armor. Neither will you hear me judge if you jump a friendly span in t-shirts and shorts.
However, I cringe every time I see a new video on MySpace, YouTube or SkydivingMovies, with a bunch of high fiving yahoos jumping in t-shirts and shorts, all having a blast together. Put differently, anybody visiting my town and interested in jumping my local slider down cliff better bring a vented canopy and body armor. If not, you'll have to find somebody else to show you where the exit point is.
Harsh? Maybe, but I don't want to have to drag dead bodies out the canyon. But can't you still die even with vents and body armor? Sure you can, but you have to try a lot harder.
Let's try some made-up statistics. These are totally pulled out of thin air. They are meant to get people thinking.
Jumper categorization:
Group A: Unskilled jumpers without body armor: 30%
Group B: Skilled jumpers without body armor: 30%
Group C: Unskilled jumpers with body armor: 20%
Group D: Skilled jumpers with body armor: 20%
Chance of dying on object strike:
Group A: 90%
Group B: 30%
Group C: 60%
Group D: 10%
How much damage can we expect:
Group A: 90 * 30 = 2700
Group B: 30 * 30 = 900
Group C: 60 * 20 = 1200
Group D: 10 * 20 = 200
Total damage: 5000
If you haven't dismissed this as pointless math yet, what can we learn from this?
First, what group should we worry about the most? It's pretty obvious; we should focus on group A, train them to be more skilled, and get them to wear body armor.
However, there is a second lesson. Body armor is a much easier thing to obtain than skill. You just put down some money and you got it, no repeated training necessary. Most will discount this as a bad thing, but I'll argue that the stats above show that we can very easily reduce damages. How? Well, imagine everybody started wearing body armor tomorrow:
Group A: 90 * 0 = 0
Group B: 30 * 0 = 0
Group C: 60 * 50 = 3000