I'm unhappy about the Skyhook ad in the October Parachutist

I've been paying acute attention to any thread I can find discussing the Skyhook and everything I've seen or heard makes me think it's a great innovation. I admire the effort and time taken to develop it.

That said:

There's a full page ad for Skyhook on page 46 of the Oct Parachutist that rubs me wrong. It compares EP's with and without Skyhook. On the left half of the page is the "Non-Skyhook Cutaway Procedure"

1. Cutaway
2. Get Stable or Not
3. Pull Reserve Handle
4. Reserve Deploying

On the right half of the page: The Skyhook procedure

1. Cutaway
2. Smile

I'm annoyed that the Skyhook procedure omits pulling the reserve handle.

I see your point, but I think it's pretty obvious that they're being a little cute. Obviously everybody needs to train to pull both handles, but with a skyhook, you might just be at line stretch before you clear the cutaway cables. If not, well you'll already be pulling your reserve handle. But the reality is you'll probably be smiling under a fully inflated reserve while you uselessly pull the reserve handle as you trained.

It's maybe an exaggeration, not poor advice.

Dave

Quote

But the reality is you'll probably be smiling under a fully inflated reserve while you uselessly pull the reserve handle as you trained.

It's maybe an exaggeration, not poor advice.

Dave

Agreed. Bill Booth would never advocate not going through the full EP. Just a tag line IMO.

Quote

Agreed though. Bill Booth would never advocate not going through the full EP. Just a tag line IMO.

What do you call paying for that full page ad if not advocation? Why include it in the non-Skyhook procedure if it's implied that one will follow full EP's regardless of having an RSL or not?

Quote

Quote

Agreed though. Bill Booth would never advocate not going through the full EP. Just a tag line IMO.

What do you call paying for that full page ad if not advocation?

Advertising.

I'd like to talk to you about some ocean-front property I have for sale in Arizona.

Quote

Quote

Agreed though. Bill Booth would never advocate not going through the full EP. Just a tag line IMO.

What do you call paying for that full page ad if not advocation? Why include it in the non-Skyhook procedure if it's implied that one will follow full EP's regardless of having an RSL or not?

Granted, if it's a total main mal, (the way I understand how the Skyhook works), the smile could quickly turn into something a little more tense if silver isn't pulled.

Kinda agree with Labrys here. We all know Booth's commitment to safety and innovation. We know he wouldn't advocate not pulling the (edit) reserve deployment. But ads like this are intended for people that are in the market for a new container. A large percentage of this market will be newer skydivers (pre-A license students). Those jumpers may think RWS is saying they no longer have to pull silver. That's not a good thing, IMO.

Quote

Kinda agree with Labrys here. We all know Booth's commitment to safety and innovation. We know he wouldn't advocate not pulling the cutaway. But ads like this are intended for people that are in the market for a new container. A large percentage of this market will be newer skydivers (pre-A license students). Those jumpers may think RWS is saying they no longer have to pull the cutaway. That's not a good thing, IMO.

You mean the reserve handle.

Yeah, edited at the same time you posted

Quote

Granted, if it's a total main mal, (the way I understand how the Skyhook works), the smile could quickly turn into something a little more tense if silver isn't pulled.

I don't follow your train of thought.... there's nothing a standard RSL or Skyhook can do to help with a total mal.

Quote

I don't follow your train of thought.... there's nothing a standard RSL or Skyhook can do to help with a total mal.

He's saying the same thing as you are.

I think this ad is being very over analyzed... if someone saw that and assumed they didnt have to pull silver / (or reserve pillow) anymore, they are too dumb to be jumping. .

Back to my original point then... if it's so obvious why was it included in the non-Skyhook procedure?

Quote

if someone saw that and assumed they didnt have to pull silver anymore, they are too dumb to be jumping. .

EXACTLY!

My opinion is the whole point of the ad is to show/say that the skyhook will get you under your reserve at least 300 feet earlier than non-skyhook, no matter what the mal is.

Quote

Back to my original point then... if it's so obvious why was it included in the non-Skyhook procedure?

Because it wasnt ment to be training material or a manual?

Quote

they are too dumb to be jumping

Man, I hope you never decide to teach with an attitude like that. There is nothing natural, instinctive or obvious about skydiving. Everything must be learned. Students have to take in multiple sources of information and they often get conflicting advice. Hopefully, we can teach them what are the reliable sources of information, and the unreliable ones. Instructors are reliable, manufacturers are reliable, so are official publications (USPA, et al). That guy sitting next to you on the plane with fewer jumps than you - unreliable.

Point is, if an instructor says always pull silver, and a manufacturer says (maybe even implies) you don't have to pull silver anymore, who do you believe? I would hope that most or all students read the manufacturers instructions and advice, so I would expect a lot of students to believe the manufacturer. As a student myself, I *still* get conflicting information between very experienced jumpers and the manufacturer's instructions. I tend to believe the manufacturer.

Quote

Because it wasnt ment to be training material or a manual?

So.. if I wanted to take out an ad for standard RSLs in Parachutist it would be fine if I implied there was no need to follow a cutaway with a reserve pull because you would know I meant otherwise?

Very well stated

And like you said by believing the manufacture hopefully you RTFM right? Well, the manual probably says that you need proper training, which comes from your instructors, who hopefully told you "Pull Silver"... I know that this is a complicated sport, but seriously if someone looks at an ADVERTISMENT and says "Hey, I dont have to pull silver anymore" i'm willing to bet they are the same jackass that rides down to cypress fire because "the rig will save them automaticly and they can just enjoy the ride"

...

Quote

And like you said by believing the manufacture hopefully you RTFM right? Well, the manual probably says that you need proper training, which comes from your instructors, who hopefully told you "Pull Silver"... I know that this is a complicated sport, but seriously if someone looks at an ADVERTISMENT and says "Hey, I dont have to pull silver anymore" i'm willing to bet they are the same jackass that rides down to cypress fire because "the rig will save them automaticly and they can just enjoy the ride"

Or the same highly respected and experienced jumper who uses a Cypres 2 that's advertised as great for "Pond Swooping"? then goes in under a downplane after the Cypres fires because he exceeded it's limits?

Quote

Quote

And like you said by believing the manufacture hopefully you RTFM right? Well, the manual probably says that you need proper training, which comes from your instructors, who hopefully told you "Pull Silver"... I know that this is a complicated sport, but seriously if someone looks at an ADVERTISMENT and says "Hey, I dont have to pull silver anymore" i'm willing to bet they are the same jackass that rides down to cypress fire because "the rig will save them automaticly and they can just enjoy the ride"

Or the same highly respected and experienced jumper who uses a Cypres 2 that's advertised as great for "Pond Swooping"? then goes in under a downplane after the Cypres fires because he exceeded it's limits?

which were printed in the manual. You just proved my point, the ADVERTISMENTS directed it to swoopers, the MANUAL says that the cypress will fire when conditions are met. Which do you follow? The advertisment or other, more reliable sources?

My point was that I was annoyed by advertisemnt that conflicted with proper procedure. Your post supports that observation.

Edit to add: Let me make this analogy:

I'm going to design a new canopy. then I'm going to take out an ad in Parachutist and say something like this:

Your old canopy... flare when you land

My new canopy... just smile and land

Any jackass would know I really meant you still had to flare my canopy too? AND they would read the manual BEFORE they bought my canopy so that they would know I was just being "cute" when I implied there was no need to flare.

Quote

the MANUAL says that the cypress will fire when conditions are met

You're both right and wrong. The manual does state that:

Quote

It activates the release unit when it detects a rate of descent higher than 78 mph (35 m/sec) at an altitude of approx. 750 feet (approx. 225 meters) above ground level (AGL). In the event of a cutaway below this height CYPRES will operate down to approx. 130 feet AGL, however activation will not occur unless sufficient speed is obtained. Below approx. 130 feet (approx. 40 meters) AGL opening is no longer useful. For this reason, CYPRES ceases operation below approximately 130 feet AGL.

But the same manual, also states:

Quote

The Expert CYPRES is designed in a way that it won't restrict the skydiver in any way. Even extreme maneuvers during exit and in freefall, CYPRES will cope with it. Whatever you can think of under canopy like stalls, spiral turns, down planes, hookturns with the smallest canopies as well as any CRW, CYPRES will analyze these movements without problems. It won't interfere with any normal activities while skydiving. Only freefall to very low altitude will cause CYPRES to take action.

Now to be fair to Airtec, they have released an update to the manual:

Quote

September 23, 2005 info update: Recently some of the world's best canopy pilots have developed the skills required to exceed a vertical speed of 35 meters per second (78 mph) during their landing approach under open canopy, by doing multiple 360's. An Expert CYPRES that is subjected to these conditions under 1000 feet will, as designed, activate. Please take this into consideration.

However, Adrian did not have that information And BTW, I think we should probably get back to the original topic. Airtec has not made a statement that the investigation is concluded, AFAIK, so we shouldn't assume (edit for PC) that the CYPRES did anything out of accordance with the manual.

Like it has been said, it is advertising and nothing more. It was never intended to circumvent any emergency procedures.

Even you knew to pull silver, or are you saying that after seeing the ad you would change that? Are you saying that you would ignore the owner’s manual, your training etc.? All that the ad showed is one particular malfunction and what the result would be under the two scenarios.

I will convey your thoughts though to the marketing people.