Any word on the multiple riser releases one person had at the Perrine several months ago?
This is serious business. I've heard that it was not a rigging error on the jumper's part. Was it mis-manufactured? If so, was it a one-time mistake? If not, it may repeat itself and surely someone will receive serious injury if not death.
Does anyone have any info?
The second/third/fifth hand information as I heard it:
The riser released on one side only.
This was due to a manufacturing error. Specifically, the cut-away cable was too short on one riser.
The cut-away handle/cable assembly was the original manufacturer assembly.
The rig in question was manufactured by Basic Research. Apparently, Basic Research later examined the rig and found no defect. The rig was also reportedly examined on site by very experienced jumpers, who could not identify any defect.
Perhaps someone from Basic Research can tell us what their inspection of the gear showed?
When checked on the ground, the cable appeared long enough. However, when loaded, one cable apparently slipped through the three ring assembly and released the riser.
The take home lesson appears to be: be sure to check your cut-away cable length by hanging in your harness (a few feet off the ground) before jumping.
As always, your safety, including the integrity of your rig, is your responsibility. In my opinion, it is the responsibility of the jumper involved to have checked the gear before jumping for manufacturing defects.
All my information is at least second hand (from people present, but not from the jumper involved or the manufacturer). Take it with a grain of salt, as I may be completely wrong.
Thankfully, this resulted in close calls, not injury or death.
Think, think, think and check, check, check.
--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@ucdavis.edu
As I heard it second hand, Vertigo was on sight, but the manutacturer of the rig in question was BR. However, the lesson as presented by Tom holds true regardless of the specifics of the incident.
As I remember the jumper was Motor Joe. I talked with a jumper who was present at the time and he confirmed that it wasn't the jumpers error. I was told it happened twice. Scary #####!
Joe, if you're out there, can you enlighten us as to the outcome?
Skin.
I talked to people present, they said the rig was manufactured by BR. Vertigo was present to assist the jumper and inspect the gear after the first seperation; motorjoe actually jumped it a second time where it did the same thing. Manufacturers error. Its true its the jumpers responsibility entirely to assess the gears jumpability, but I dislike Aiello's suggestion that this absolves the manufacturer from any shadow, or taint. Whoever manufactured the rig takes damage to their reputation and rightfully so. Check, check, check. Life is Pain, anyone who says any different is selling something...
>I dislike Aiello's suggestion that this absolves the manufacturer from any shadow, or taint.
I had not meant to say that the manufacturer's reputation should not be damaged as a result of the incident, or their possible errors.
I think that morally, on this or any BASE jump, you are solely responsible for your own safety. Even if your rig explodes on opening, it is still, in my opinion, your responsibility.
Every BASE jumper should either be knowledgable enough about rigging to check their gear, or willing to accept responsibility for the consequences if they are too lazy (choice of word intentional) to learn.
One of the core elements of BASE is total personal freedom. This requires total personal responsibility. If you do not accept responsibility, you will never be free.
--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@ucdavis.edu
True enough, Tom, but taken to an extreme I think it falls apart (bad pun intended).
What if you bought a new canopy and the brake lines (and suspension lines) were all sewn with dental floss? Damned hard to see that on inspection, but on opening the whole thing would explode in a dentist's nightmare. Is the jumper responsible for that?
I do make an assumption when jumping branded gear that the core fundamentals which are hard to personally certify are sound. That the F-111 isn't some bargain basement crap, that the lines are quality and not shoelaces in disguise. Sure, I'll also review this stuff each and every time I pack, but even with far more experience than I have, it is going to be hard to determine some internal flaws until they manifest themselves in a massive failure.
Your point is well made nonetheless - our gear is our responsibility, and if you don't know enough to really inspect your gear (or have someone else do so), then you are playing Russian Roulette. And if the loaded chamber comes up, don't be running to mommy with complaints.
Still, it is nice for me to know that the gear manufacturers in our sport are, by and large, smart and experienced people who not only know their own stuff but also jump it routinely. That's no panacea for the statistical certainty that manufacturing errors will crop up if enough rigs are sewn together over time, but it is a good baseline from which to start.
The only truly safe jumps are the ones we do not do.
Peace,
D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com
>What if you bought a new canopy and the brake
>lines (and suspension lines) were all sewn with
>dental floss? Damned hard to see that on
>inspection, but on opening the whole thing would
>explode in a dentist's nightmare. Is the jumper
>responsible for that?
Yes. That's why I jump all my new gear from an airplane, with a reserve, before I take it off an object. The best way to do this would be with a belly mount reserve, but I usually just put it in a skydiving rig and accept responsibility for defects in my container.
--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@ucdavis.edu
P.S. I'm a Libertarian--can you tell?
Reference to your post script:
Does that mean you loan people books? Nice to see you break the stereotype of flakey chicks with no t!ts, Tom.
:7
So, basically, when your not injuring yourself due to your poor judgement in base, youre beating a dead horse and preaching to the choir. Base jumpers are by definition not litiginous people and take full responsibility for the actions and the consequences. Motorjoe did. He excercised good judgement in his responses to the manufacturer's error. Your intentionally shifting the focus from the rigging problem to the esoterically obvious "jumper responsible for everything" is typical of your reputation, and you continue to trumpet it in apparent defense of BR. But more to the point: a certain amount of trust is invested with the manufacturer--we'll never sue them, we take responsibility for our actions ( a foregone obvious), but we expect basic competence to assist us with our own imperfections. Case in point, after motorjoe jumped this container and after the unintentional cutaway, Jimmy with Vertigo, a master rigger, and manufacturer and experienced basejumper inspected the gear and reassembled it; not finding a fault. Motorjoe jumped it again with the same result. Few of us are master riggers, almost none of us know how to build canopies or know how to inspect fabric density or composition; these RESPONSIBILITIES fall to the Manufacturer. If vertigo's Master rigger couldnt find anything wrong how do you expect the actual average jumper to? Quit your history of poor judgement and quit defending BR!
Please stay tuned for a complete and formal response from Basic Research regarding this issue.
Thanks!
>is typical of your reputation...
>Quit your history of poor judgement and quit defending BR!
Hey Rocky,
I don't think we've ever met, but drop me an email, and maybe we can hook up for a jump sometime.
Or, at least I can try to find out what it is that I've done to irritate you so much. It sure sounds like you have some major issues with me. Maybe we can work them out.
--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@ucdavis.edu
This rig was sent to us immediately after the incidents occurred. We received the rig in a disassembled state, including the links to the risers having been opened and removed from the canopy suspension lines. This made it impossible for us to check for proper assembly. We were, however, able to check all of the parts to see if they met our manufacturing specifications. These parts were inspected by three separate riggers on our staff: Todd Shoebotham, Bill Stampfle, and Larry Wolfe. These were our findings:
The alignment of the risers was good. The measurements for the yellow cutaway cables and cutaway housings met specifications. The risers, including rings, white loops, and cable pocket were all correct. We did not see any signs of stress on the yellow cutaway cables, as they were free of kinks, dents, or scrapes. To be clear, we restate that the yellow cutaway cables were of the proper length.
We reassembled the risers to the rig and could not find any discrepancies in the system whatsoever. Todd states that the risers were perfect, and he absolutely would jump them himself.
We asked for a second opinion of a rigger outside of Basic Research. Moe Viletto, a master rigger, inspected the rig and risers, and also could not find any errors or problems in the system. It was obvious to Moe that there were no short cables.
Since we were not able to inspect the rig as it was assembled when jumped, we can only make assumptions of what went wrong with this system. One assumption is that the cutaway grommet system may not have been assembled to specifications. If the cutaway housing grommet was not employed properly, there could be enough freedom of movement to allow the cutaway cable to be pulled free during deployment. Looking at the condition of the equipment as returned to the factory also adds to the assumption that the jumper was a victim of inferior rigging techniques. But these are only assumptions that can be made from the evidence presented. We place no blame on anyone; we can only state that the items in question met specifications.
Basic Research has never seen this problem occur with our equipment in the past. We certainly wish we had the answer as to why this happened. We, as manufacturers, stand behind our products 100%, and feel fully confident that this problem was not related to our manufacturing processes. We definitely believe that this was an isolated occurance, and we do not expect to see this happen in the future.
In conclusion, we did install an L-Bar riser system to this jumper's container at his request, and returned his three ring risers to him. We would welcome any further inspections by anyone that would care to do so.
Sincerly,
Karen Thomas
Basic Research
If the rig was inspected on site after the first incident and reassembled to occur again, what could have been missed if it was a master rigger who inspected it and reassembled it on site. In other words what are we looking for in terms of rigging inefficiencies if a master rigger on site was unable to determine a problem either.
So he jumps the rig, and the risers mysteriously release. So master rigger inspects it, says it's ok. So he jumps again, same thing, risers release. Sends it off to manufacturer, they say it's ok. These are dangerous circumstances, and dangerous people. A well base jumper should be smarter than a master rigger.
It's hard to figure it out in those last few seconds on the way down.......
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks