Basejumper.com - archive

I'm haven't taken up BASE jumping yet. Still trying to read up on it. I wanted to get a feel for what is the comfort level when it comes to the reliability of BASE specific gear. In other words, how many of the injury/fatality statistics lend themselves to BASE specific gear not functioning as expected.

In terms of "just getting open", my personal comfort level approaches 100%.

Most gear problems are things like off heading opening, or line twist, or whatever. And usually, those can be traced down to something other than the gear.

My personal results have pretty much been that the gear functions as expected virtually all the time. The only times I've had problems is when I've pushed the gear beyond it's design parameters, or experienced some other factor (environmental, pilot error, etc).

Except for both of the Twin FAlls fatalities

Both of the TF fatalities? So you're saying Mr. Butler's parachute failed to open? I thought it just dragged him into the river when he failed to cut it away.

And Mr. Stout? We've already been down that road.

WTF????

Gardner

P.S. BASE equipment works, and well. Usually it's a 1D10T user error that kills someone.

You beat me to it, Gardner...

The most recent one (guy from PA) seems to have been chalked up to an over-delay. I certainly wouldn't classify any of them as "gear failure".

Mark
BASE 346

Hello,
You should read ALL posted deaths here:
http://juliabell.home.att.net/

100% that my kit is going to open if i have rigged it up for the jump i am about to do............. there is no failure fear in my eyes - it just wont happen...

failure of gear (IMHO) occurs when then are other aspects missed.............. its not the gear that mals its the choices that the jumper makes that mals!!

just my thoughts..................

be safe people!

Gear when used in accordance with the manufacturers instructions for use will work absolutely every time....maybe!?

linked below is a sound introduction into assessing risks in B.A.S.E. that will hopefully assist you in finding your level of comfort. Everyone's is different.

Read it, Learn it, Live it.

Risk Management in B.A.S.E. article at basejump.org

I'm saying that base specific gear failed. Stouts PC failed and so did the one a couple months ago. If you read back in the archives, you'll see that he took a 3 second delay with a 42 inch PC. Is that an over delay?

Hmmm. Ordinary BASE gear, with no defects, can and will "fail" if deployed in a less than optimal way.

For example, if I misroute my bridle I can achieve a full-blown PC in tow that cannot be cleared before impact. There is nothing wrong with the equipment, but I didn't give it a chance to do its job.

Another example. If I deploy my PC while I'm freefalling on my back at low airspeed, I will likely have to accelerate more before the drag of the PC will overcome the additional force required to peel the shrivel flap in this "less than perfect" position. So while I may impact before the canopy can make it to linestretch, the gear did not fail. It did fail to stop me before I impacted, but since I did not deploy the system as designed I can't really blame the equipment.

There is only so much slack the manufacturers can take up for us. It's up to us to use the gear as designed. When properly constructed, assembled, and used, BASE specific equipment has a nearly perfect success rate. But when it really comes down to it, Read the warning label.

LeapFrogging . . . (Separate failure and malfunction.)

Failure is like that famous hang gliding company that decided to get in on the paragliding craze and figured what’s so hard about building parachutes. One of their early customers found out while flying at 3000-feet (with no back-up system) after every line separated from the canopy at the attachment points.

Failure is like that skydiving harness and container system in the late 1970s. If you cutaway and deployed the reserve the risers of the reserve would depart the harness. That system killed a half dozen people before the word (prenet) got around.

There has never been a BASE fatality (that I know of) as the result of catastrophic failure of either a canopy or a harness/container system. And this goes back to even before we’re all using BASE specific gear. But, be clear now, all I’m saying is no one has died BASE jumping wholly because their stuff blew up.

Malfunctions continue to kill and not only for the normal parachuting reasons, like mis-doing this or fumbling that, but sometimes because our ability keeps leapfrogging the technology, and BASE jumping has always been like that. And pilot chute malfunctions have been occurring since there’s been pilot chutes. These are the type where you stand around looking at a perfect pilot chute and wonder why it didn’t work.

Spring loaded and hand deployed pilot chutes in skydiving rigs almost always work, yet still often hesitate because they invert or get hung-up. However, terminal velocity is a terrific cure for bad luck, as almost any half glob will get a deployment under way when you’re going fast enough, and you have the time. Subtract the time allotted, and the airspeed, and there we are BASE jumping.

Rather then go back to our Hank 52s, which had enough heft you could almost throw your canopy to line stretch, the next great innovation in BASE jumping should be in pilot chutes. We damn near fixed everything else . . .

Nick
BASE 194

I beleive that he took a 38 and not a 42...... is this incorrect??

i do belive that the jumpers are the biggest minus in our systems...

that said,then the biggest concern to me that wont work would be the pc(hessitation),i do belive the rest of the gear will open after the circumstances you have packed it to operate under..

EDIT:uhh forgot to mention sliders.. i hate thouse things,but as i really near never use them,then im not the right person to talk about thouse things

He used a 38. I have personally used a 38 from that object on at least 30 occasions. I will continue to do so. I do not believe that a 38" PC will fail simply because of it's diameter at that altitude.

Why would you use a 38 on that object?

It is my opinion that a 42 is a better selection. Are you trying to reduce the frequency of PC hesitations?

What size PC would you recommend to other jumpers going to this site?

Personally I have taken everything from a 38 to a 48 off of this site. I definitely prefer the 42 though.

Just curious.

I didn't say I thought a 38 was a better choice. I said I have used a 38 on numerous occasions, and feel safe doing so, now and in the future.

I do think a 42 is a better choice. But I think a 38 is perfectly safe.

The PC only has to get the canopy out to line stretch by 5 seconds (over the water).

wow talking big difference here.(im not sure im whith here,are we talking that 486 S somwere in US?)

Personaly my largest/most powerfull pc is a 46´av zp pc (SL or LOW freefalls).My 42´av zp pc is the most used pc in my collection..

It is a big difference, and yes it's that bridge, but I wanted to see what the difference was in openings (vertical feet consumed) between the two PC's on identical delays.

The 38 still yielded openings with a good margin. None of the openings were anything concerning to me and most people watching didn't notice it at all. I didn't really notice much difference between the two PC's but that could be because of my relative inexperience.

In terms of vertical feet, the 38 isn't unsafe there and as long as you don't over delay it will do a more than adequate job of getting your canopy to linestretch in a timely manner.

I just prefer the 42 because I think it covers everything from a go-n-throw to the deepest delay you can safely take there. At the deeper end of the delay range there, I imagine a 38 would provide slightly cleaner openings (less center cell strip) but I think the benefits at that site aren't enough to convince me to use anything smaller than a 42.

Edit: For clarity, in the second paragraph I am talking about comparing the 38 and 42 inch AV series pc's by CR. The difference between a 38" AV pc and a 48" non-AV is quite noticeable.

how about 42áv zp and a similar 46`? i have heard that 42´has been taken to LOW freefalls...

I don't know... I mean, my gut is telling me that if you go below 300 feet you should have a 48" PC on. I think a non vented 48 with no cap or handle is the way to go.

300 feet is the lowest I have gone with a 46, and I went stowed at that height. If it's lower than 300, I think it's wise to put on the 48 and go hand-held.

Realistically, below 300 feet is getting down there. Put a 48 on, why not?

I should hope so...

I have a theory on this. I do beleive that a 42 is more consistant than a 46 in initial inflation and thus will prove more consistant at lower freefalls.
Although I will generally use a 46 for anything below 250ft or a 1 second delay(it just feels better knowing I have a 46 in my hand) , I have used a 42 for "my" lower end freefalls (around 200ft) - I dont beleive that there is much of a noticable difference in the 42 v 46. I have jumped similar jumps with a 42 & 46 and there have been occasions where the 42 has opened me higher than a 46 - this i beleive is due to the initial inflation. I have witnessed people "towing" in a 46 where there has been a problem in the initial inflation - smaller PC's are much more consistant in this. The folding and throwing methods can counter act this. Obviously this goes against convential wisdom and a 42 is deemed "skull collecting" at the lower end of 200ishft freefalls - but I think there a lot of people taking 42s off and having no problems. I have even heard of people taking 42's sub200.

There are other things to think about, with the closure system you are jumping and canopy size / weight - but generally I would say a 42 will and is more consistant and not much difference that a 46.

Anyone have any thoughts about this?? to maybe disagree (or agree) with my theory........

Be safe always......... my thoughts and opinions are truely worthless.............

Im whith you there,i use my 42áv zp pc all the way down to 250ft then my 46áv zp pc takes the jumps below that.IF i wanted a stronger PC,i would use my 45´zp pc whith load tapes.

i heard the lowest freefall whith a 42 were a US guy,freefalling 179ft

Did you fold the PC the same for both (ie mushroom as in your avatar?). Which size PC did you use on the low B you were telling me about? (the same B where Faber did more of a Jane than a Tarzan thing into the trees I believe. )

guys!

Take into account the weight of your canopy and this discussion of which pilot chute is correct totally moot. Have you ever watched a smaller jumpers deployment to see how quickly it happens? Think about it.

Taylor for survival!

Think for yourself and be safe.

I used a Hank 52" on a five cell Kestral for my B in 1982. Can you say strip??? The canopy flew so poorly that I might as well have been landing the pilot chute! I got away with it then but wouldn't do it again.

jon

Catastrophic failure is always a possibility, usually as a result of poor rigging.

I have a friend who jumped his canopy on a BASE jump just fine. Next jump, a skydive, it exploded. Not inspecting his canopy...

Another friend jumped his raven on a BASE jump and it tore on the top skin center cell all the way to the front cell tape and the tail pocket.

About pilot chutes, make sure you attach the bridle to the center line loop. This is a common mistake not doing this. Otherwise the tapes take the stress and can and will break.

Also, measure your pilot chute. There is a lot of variability in sizes. My 42 measured 38 and my 38 measured 32. The primary BASE manufacturers have gotten much better about quality control now.

mmmm........ I think I did think about that - All i was saying was "generally"



I always fold the PC in the same manner - except on 3 secs up high! - but I am so lazy that dont happen very often!!

I have taken both the 46 and 42 off that low B - I generally will use the 46 though for anything sub250ft.

that B is lower than 250ft,i did neither Tarzan or Jane,it were my canopy playing cheata