Basejumper.com - archive

I never jumped much but I've still kept in touch with a lot of people in the fixed object community. Friends are still dying. And I guess that will always be the case. However, more recently I have been seeing a lot of FB posts from jumpers I know calling for a structured self-policing approach to risk management. I don't think this call has to be in vain.

Like I said I don't have much BASE experience but as an air force pilot I'd like to propose something that works in military aviation called the "Step chit". It's essentially a risk management sheet that you fill out before every mission which tallies your risk factors for the sortie in the form of points. For low risk missions (e.g. low point tallies) you can self approve and "step" to the mission. For medium/high risk missions you get a quick sign off from the operations folks before you go and then for the no-shit super high risk missions you get official approval from command before you can step. It's a quick, methodical and simple solution to self-policing in a world with a lot of moving parts and a lot of danger and I feel like it could be useful to jumpers who are interested in being smarter about planning their jumps.

I'm attaching an excel spreadsheet demo version of a jumper "step chit" that I built based on the AF step chit. You are free to play with it and I also included a screenshot of what it could look like filled out properly. The idea is to enable jumpers to slow down, take a minute to think about the jump they are about to make and take the proper action in response to the level of risk.

In the air force world this is a regular part of all mission planning, just another form we quickly fill out before going up and it takes just a moment to do. It is considered somewhat complacency proof because it requires another human being to say you are good to go when the risk is appropriately high, and is a measurable way to look at the level of risk you are about to take on. There are other things you can do with this sheet (we also use it to not just observe risk but to mitigate individual factors as well in briefings) but I figure a first step would be to get the community's eyes and input on it.

Ideally I would love to see some really experienced jumpers/mentors and members of the community look at this and make it better. Is this something people would or should use? Can it be altered to be more meaningful or representative of risk based on what the BFL and experience tells us how people are dying?

I like this idea. The numbers/factors should be tweaked and I would love to see lots of experienced jumpers from different disciplines help with expounding on this.

Even if it isn't actually filled out / used for each jump, it would assist with taking a step back, being objective, and analyzing all the factors before making the decision to jump. It also helps to represent that, often times, the biggest risk comes from lots of little things stacking up and eating through your margin for error.

Anyone else want to comment especially in light of the debauchery this month?

It is rebells among rebells, it will never be mastered by rules.

Except you change the ground of playing.

We know Kjerag model is working, we know organized jumps is working, and we know Troll wall law stopped jumping there almost for 5 - 6 years until the new generation showed up. Still it was no death in Troll for 13 years there between 1986 and 1999.

I think the amount of response you have gotten gives you the answer?

my measley $0.02-

Not saying your idea is a bad one in principle. But it's a super awkward tool for amateur BASE, and futile without supervision. Even operationally, how frequently do you actually re-vamp the sortie because of ORM? Usually, it just means a higher-level supervisor signs off on the mission and you press on. In BASE, the individual jumper is the ultimate waiver authority and every single rule is waiver-able.

I think a better plan = better community mentoring. But a barrier is, sometimes the more-experienced people (understandably) want nothing to do with anyone they consider risky, unteachable, or progressing-too-fast.

Sending a PM with some other thoughts that are probably TL;DR for the general interest.

It would be interesting to run all of the known data from the BFL through this and see if ther3 is any info to be had form it. What % of jumpers could not have prevented the fatality, etc. Then there would of course be quite a few who knew they were already operating in the Black Death margin and accepting of it. But this a decent idea of a way to actually look at it as a number, so it is not (as easy) to rationalize some risky decisions.

Most jumpers I have met, accept black death on them selves, but when it happens to their friends, it is shocking.

Why so?

And so often mentionend before, hendling relatives after, is devastating. Nothing is worse than that. It is the most difficult to do.

Harden up, and get ready for it.

The shared experience of death may be one of the main factors as to why the bonds are so strong. And those "bonds" and relationships are one of the big reasons why our experiences and jumps are so worth it. It's a vicious cycle.

I have been considering something similar after breaking my leg on my last jump. Totally unavoidable, I was definitely not in the right headspace for jumping and I feel that having a more concise pre-jump checklist would have resulted in a different outcome.

I work in high risk environments and this kind of risk assessment is standard procedure. It's pretty easy to scoff at but I've definitely noticed a difference when people pay attention to a list of hazards and take a moment to consider them before undertaking a task.

Some may argue that it's taking the fun and feeling out of it and making shit more clinical and regimented. To each their own for sure, personally I've learned the pitfalls of intuition. Complacency kills.

Nice job on the list, I'll be giving it some further thought for sure.