Engine failure on t/o (e.g. Caravan)
Dean Thompson
recovering airspeed on engine failure by a mass movement toward the rear
exit sounds to me like a very plausible theory. I would like to see someone
who has data on some of the more common jump planes and who knows enough
about aeronautics sit down and figure out what IS going to happen in case of
engine failure soon after takeoff, and come up with some recommendations on
how the jumpers should respond at various altitudes. For example, it may be
that below 1000 feet jumpers in a plane such as the Caravan with a rear exit
should move towards the front of the plane and not try to exit, while above
1000 feet (or some altitude) all but the rearmost person(s) should move
towards the front while those at the rear open the door and jump. The
others could then move back a few at a time and jump. Obviously I'm making
this up as I go along, and I personally have never been in a Caravan, but it
does seem as though there should be SOME procedure for each plane.
I have an unrelated question for the group. I currently have 21 jumps and
am doing 20 second delays on T-10's. We are taught NEVER to try to cut away
under any circumstances -- in fact the instructor tries to avoid even having
the students know where the capewells (is that how you spell it?) are. The
idea is that it is far more likely that a student will panic and cut away
from a minor malfunction and/or cut away too slowly and too low. Instead we
are supposed to manually deploy the reserve (which has no pilot chute) by
throwing it down and away from us, and into the direction of the spin if we
are spinning. Recognizing that capewells are a relatively slow and tedious
way to cut away (two motions with both hands), and that serious malfunctions
on a T-10 are very rare, this procedure still worries me. Does anyone know
how safe it is to deploy a round reserve (with relatively short lines) while
under a Mae West on a T-10? How about a streamer?
Dean Thompson
d...@spice.cs.cmu.edu
kas
I believe Dean has made some extremely insightful (is that a word?)
points. Although nobody will ever know, I'd bet anything that the pilot was
not able to control the Caravan because of a mass shift to the rear of the
plane. We already know that that is what happened to the Loadstar. It had too
many bodies bunched up in the rear, and when it stalled it was too tailheavy
for the pilot to regain control--even after several of the jumpers got out
and lightened the load. Deans' suggestions belie his relative newness to the
sport. I think it would be a good idea to have a standard procedure worked
out that would give the pilot a fighting chance to save the plane and some
lives. The key point is BALANCE. If too much weight gets too far back, the
plane ain't gonna fly. For that reason, the ONLY time anyone should be at the
rear of the plane is when they are lining up at the door. If it's a big plane
and is dropping more than one group, those that aren't exiting should be
scrunched up as far forward as possible to help offset the mass of bodies that
is bunched up at the rear door. Don't move rearward until the first group
is gone. In the case of aircraft problems, regardless of altitude, Deans'
suggestions of keeping everybody forward probably IS the best solution. The
pilots' first priority is to get the plane into a stable glide, then and only
then can the jumpers exit in an orderly (but hastily) manner, if altitude
permits.
OK, now some comments about cutting away T-10's. I was taught the
same philosophy as Dean -- that is, "Something over my head is better than
nothing, so don't cut away until the reserve is hand deployed". With a pilot
chute-less reserve, it is generally possible to hand deploy alongside a T-10
with no problem. BUT, there are a couple of exceptions. If the 'functioned
main is spinning wildly, a cutaway IS necessary because the reserve will wrap
around it like a barber pole if you don't. A slowly spinning 'function need
not be cut away first, as long as the reserve is thrown in the direction of
spin. The other situation where a cutaway is mandatory is when the canopy
is snagged on the airplane. Fortunately, this rarely happens, but I did see
it happen once. The jumper in tow MUST MUST MUST cutaway before dumping the
reserve, otherwise all hell will break loose. Therefore, it is MANDATORY
that all jumpers know where those capewells are, and how to use them. Also,
high wind, water, or tree landings may require releasing the capewells.
With a high speed malfunction, such as a streamer, the reserve should
be thrown with both hands as hard as possible away from you. Never throw it
straight down, or it will rise up and wrap around you. You want to get it as
far out as possible so that it won't rise up into the main, either. With a
slow malfunction such as a Mae West, the skirt of the reserve canopy should be
grasped with both hands and snapped in the breeze like a bedsheet. This will
ensure that the canopy is "big" enough that it won't rise into the main when
you let go. The reserve is always packed so that the skirt is on the right
end of the container, just under the ripcord handle, so you'll always know
where it is. I know this method works, 'cause I've had to employ it.
A word of caution though. Presumably, since you've made over 20 jumps,
you will be buying your own gear soon. When you "graduate" to the more hi-tech
gear, you will HAVE to cutaway a bad main. Thus, when you make that step into
more modern gear, get EXTENSIVE training on cutaway procedures, until you can
do it in your sleep. I don't just mean have someone TELL you how to do it, I
mean DO IT many times from a suspended harness. You CANNOT hand deploy a
reserve safely if your main is a garbaged PC or Square canopy. Besides, you'll
probably have a piggyback rig, so you can't reach the reserve anyway. Ideally,
you should buy a rig that has single point release (i.e., 3-ring release) which
requires a single motion to accomplish a cutaway. If you buy an older rig for
your first rig, make sure it at least has the 1-1/2 shot capewells. They can
be safely cutaway, (they were used successfully for years), but they aren't as
fast as a 3-ring release system.
*
/ \
|---/---\---| Ken Scofield C-9355
| Gone | Hewlett-Packard PCD
| Jumpin' | Corvallis, OR
|-----------|
{ucbvax!hplabs, harpo, ogcvax}!hp-pcd!kas
Mike S. Balenger x8789
for 4 across. Maybe five. It stayed open all the time. Therefore, opening
the door was not a problem for exiting the plane. The plane was just very
low. In a high speed crash like that, the G-forces experienced in the cabin
would probably have been too great to get hold of anything with which to
propel one's self out the door.
***********
In reference to deploying a reserve before cutting away:
While I was an undergrad in Virginia, I orginized classes for a drop zone.
One of the guys in the class had THE WORST T-10 MALFUNCTION anyone on the
drop zone had ever seen. Many of them were old-timers in the sport. The
malfunction was just a line over which had caught a wad of material on top
of the canopy, causing a high (but not lethal) decent rate, and a 1-2 second
spin. The part of this that I think is important is that the WORST
malfunction that they had ever seen was not lethal. Had the student ridden
it in, and performed a good (granted, a REAL good) PLF, he could have walked
away from it with no broken bones or twisted ankles.
Students there had also been taught not to cut away. Instead, they were
taught to throw their reserve "down-and-out at a 45 degree angle in the
direction of a spin." When this student tried to do it, it didn't work.
Pictures taken of him with a telephoto camera seemed to show him holding
onto it so that it couldn't catch the air. He said that it kept blowing up
in his face, and he couldn't get it out into the wind.
Who is to say wether the student panicked, or the rate of decent was too low
to really catchh the reserve chute. In either case, after 2500 feet of
attempts the reserve finally inflated at about 200 feet, and took enough
weight off the main that the main cleared. He landed under two perfectly
good parachutes.
This incident has always raised some intersting questions for me:
-- Is it naive to believe that students can correctly execute complex
sequences to deploy a reserve?
-- What would he have done if his spot wasn't as good as it was? You can't
steer two parachutes.
-- Would it have been reasonable to cut away the main after the reserve had
inflated? What would have been the risks of the main fouling the reserve on
its way out?
-- Is a relatively slow malfunction like this really fast enough to catch a
reserve without a pilot chute, and get it out? If not, a cut away seems
appropriate.
-- Do jumpers panic so much that they would really hold on to the material
of a chute? If so, a cut away seems inappropriate.
-- Why aren't Steven's cutaway systems used on more conventional gear? (A
Steven's cutaway system is really quite simple. It automatically pulls the
reserve ripcord when the main is cut away. It also prevents only one main
riser from being cut away, a condition which could cause a streamer. It
consists of a piece of webbing which attaches the two main risers and the
reserve ripcord. If one of the main risers is cut away, it will not fly
away and cause a streamer because it is attached to the other main riser.
When the other main riser is cut away, it cuts away the main chute, and
pulls the pin of the reserve as you drop away from it. Thus, with a
Steven's system, if you only cut away one side, you are no worse off than
you used to be. True, you are only suspended by one riser, but you are
suspended. If you cut away both sides, your reserve is automatically opened
into clean air-- guaranteed.)
*******
Happily, the ole T-10's are a dieing breed. The new student squares are
safe, dependable, and more fun. They will win in the long run. The
one-shot cut away and reserve deployment is much easier to teach and
execute. The only drawback could be in altitude awareness, but I think this
is an easier thing to teach.
What does anyone else think about conventional gear, reserves, Steven's or
the like? How 'bout the letter to the editor of Parachutist which advocated
a gas or rocket deployed reserve?
Post comments here!
--
ihnp4!link!msb Michael S. Balenger (201) 949-8789
Brent P. Callaghan
>I have an unrelated question for the group. I currently have 21 jumps and
>am doing 20 second delays on T-10's. We are taught NEVER to try to cut away
>under any circumstances -- in fact the instructor tries to avoid even having
>the students know where the capewells (is that how you spell it?) are. The
>idea is that it is far more likely that a student will panic and cut away
>from a minor malfunction and/or cut away too slowly and too low. Instead we
>are supposed to manually deploy the reserve (which has no pilot chute) by
>throwing it down and away from us, and into the direction of the spin if we
>are spinning. Recognizing that capewells are a relatively slow and tedious
>way to cut away (two motions with both hands), and that serious malfunctions
>on a T-10 are very rare, this procedure still worries me. Does anyone know
>how safe it is to deploy a round reserve (with relatively short lines) while
>under a Mae West on a T-10? How about a streamer?
Wow! Are you allowed to pop a Capewell if you're getting
dragged ? That's what they were invented for.
I've had experience with both systems and I definitely favor
cutaway training. If it's good enough for experienced jumpers,
why not for students ? With a Stevens cutaway system or
equivalent reserve lanyard system its much safer than
hand deploying the reserve. While involved in training
the old method I witnessed two cases of serious injuries
after the reserve entangled with a spinning malfunction and
one fatality where the reserve entangled in a horseshoe
malfunction.
Hand-deployment of a reserve is no easy job. As soon as you
pull the ripcord you have a huge UNMANAGEABLE mass of nylon
spewing out of the reserve container. It's certainly not
an easy bundle that you can toss in any direction as your
instructor might have you believe. It so much easier for
a novice jumper to pull a one-pull-does-all handle,
get under a nice steerable reserve and get the hell away
from a nasty malfunctioned main.
I'm a firm believer in student tandem gear with a
one-pull-does-all handle and a lanyard assisted reserve.
--
Made in New Zealand --> Brent Callaghan
AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft, NJ
{ihnp4|mtuxo|pegasus}!poseidon!brent
(201) 576-3475
Bruce Florman
> the instructor tries to avoid even having the students know where the
> capewells (is that how you spell it?) are.
> Recognizing that capewells are a relatively slow and tedious
> way to cut away (two motions with both hands), and that serious malfunctions
> on a T-10 are very rare, this procedure still worries me. Does anyone know
> how safe it is to deploy a round reserve (with relatively short lines) while
> under a Mae West on a T-10? How about a streamer?
Although the equipment that you are using is becoming less common these
days, it was pretty much the standard for twenty years. There was always some
disagreement within the jumping community over training students to cut away
or not. It is clear that hand deploying a reserve into a really violent
malfunction is not terribly safe (I beleve that Gene Thacker's son was killed
a few years back when he hand deployed his reserve into a malfunctioning PC).
On the other hand, more than one student has decided to chop a canopy at only
a couple hundred feet and not lived to regret it.
At the DZ where I started jumping (Orange, VA) I saw three fairly bad
malfunctions on T-10s over a four year period (there were a couple others that
I didn't see). Two were Mae Wests and the third was just about indiscribable
(a doubly inverted triple Mae West or something like that). All were handled
successfully by students using the 'no cutaway/hand deploy' method, although
the last caused some anxiety when the reserve hung up briefly in the lines of
the main. I don't know how well the method would work on a streamer, but I
do know a fellow who got away with hand deploying a pilotchuteless reserve on
a total.
I suspect that the controversy raged so long (perhaps still rages) because
not cutting away seemed intuitively unsafe, but there was never much empirical
evidence against the method, while there were documented cases of students
cutting away too low to get a reserve out.
As more and more DZs begin to train their students on ram-air canopies, the
controversy is subsiding, since not cutting away a square may very well
collapse the reserve. I do have a friend who managed to land a one man
biplane when an AOD deployed his square reserve after his main was already
out. However, neither he nor anyone else recommends that as a standard
practice.
Bruce Florman, D-9019
Manhattan Beach, CA
Brent P. Callaghan
There was an episode of "The Brain" on PBS last night
(great series). One sequence used a 1st jump as
an example of a stressful situation. The exit &
deployment were fine, but the poor devil got brainlocked
into his count and pulled his reserve anyway. The reserve
proceeded to wrap itself around his lines and stayed
that way until a few hundred feet when it caught some
air. There he was with two uncontrollable canopies.
The sequence ended with him landing on the roof of a
building and an edited-in "OOOF!". I can't imagine
the same outcome if he had cutaway.
Cutting away the main with two canopies out is a
safe procedure. The main goes off to the rear and
the student swings forwards under the reserve. There's
no chance of the main snagging the reserve.
I enjoyed "Amazing Stories" the other night where the
gunner in the ball turret got stuck and the undercarriage
wouldn't come down. Very suspensful. It's a pity he
didn't know that the hole that got torn in his parachute
would have reduced his descent rate (assuming it was near
the periphery) and given hime some directional control
to boot!
I think the idea of rocket reserves is a joke. Reserves
open plenty fast enough already. I can just imagine this:
cramped up in a 185 with your buddy's rocket reserve &
AOD just a few inches from your face when the pilot decides
to spiral down... or being in the middle of a quadraplane
with a rocket reserve aimed at your butt, then the cowboy
stack pilot decides to spiral...
Blue skies!
Paul Fries
reserves (Strong Hawks, Might Maks, 26' LOPO). All student rigs are
Stevens Cutaway equipped, and all freefall rigs have AADs.
We MUST teach cutaway techniques as you cannot have a square and a round
out together. No problem, the rigs have three ring releases. Cutaways
are simple. We do not encourage the student to cut away when it is
not necessary. Rather, we give them the simplest, most basic techniques
that may be used to clear a square that has a correctable problem.
We do stress that the decision MUST BE MADE PROMPTLY, that ALTITUDE IS
PRECIOUS when you have a function going. We also take students to
3500' instead of 2800, again in the name of precious altitude.
We have VERY FEW student reserve rides. The main gear is just great.
The few times we have had student reserve rides, they were basically
uneventfull, once the procedure had been initiated. Point is that
late model student gear is very easy to use. Procedures are simple
and easy to teach. Since the procedures are not complex, the student
has a lot more confidence or less anxiety (which ever way you choose
to look at it) and hence, has a lot more fun.
If there is ANY PRACTICAL WAY that you can do your student jumping on
this type of gear, I cannot stress enough that you should. You will
have more fun, get hurt less, and in general have a better time.
W. Michael Babineau
> .................................... The exit &
> deployment were fine, but the poor devil got brainlocked
> into his count and pulled his reserve anyway. The reserve
> proceeded to wrap itself around his lines and stayed
> that way until a few hundred feet when it caught some
> air. There he was with two uncontrollable canopies.
I have seen this type of thing happen on several ocassions where second
or third jump students were doing TRCP's and went for the reserve ripcord
( front mounted reserves ) instead of the TRC. I have yet see to the reserve
and main tangle in this type of situation ( too bad I missed the show ).
The instructors at the DZ I started out at always told the student not to
cut away if the main and reserve were both deployed o.k. ....makes for a soft
landing but its no fun to spend an hour in the woods with a chain saw trying
to get the poor sucker out of the trees.........
--
W. Michael Babineau
Multiprocessor Systems Group,
Dept. of Computer Science,
University of Waterloo.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USENET: {ihnp4,allegra,decvax,utzoo,utcsri}!watmsg!wmbabineau
!watmath!wmbabineau
Brent P. Callaghan
>> safe procedure. The main goes off to the rear and
>> the student swings forwards under the reserve. There's
>> no chance of the main snagging the reserve.
>
> checking up on it. Isn't it better to
> come down on your main, that is if everything is
> okay with it, than to come down on your reserve. I
> was instructed to deflate the reserve by pulling on
> the lines furthest from me and bunching it up between
> my legs. It made sense to me, and that's the way
> I'm going to do it because that's the way my jumpmaster
> expects it, but is what you say better?
>
If you have been trained never to touch your capewells then
it's better to stick with the way you have been trained. I
have had a front mounted reserve pop out a couple of times
and managed to grab it and hold it between my legs before
any lines unstowed.
At my previous club I trained students to pull the reserve
in if it was not inflated. That's easy to do. I'm not sure
how easy it would be to collapse a fully inflated reserve.
I'm sure it would not be an easy job given just a few
minutes of canopy time. I doubt if it leaves enough time
to steer away from obstacles and turn into wind for a
landing. The possibility of injury is much less the sooner
the student is under a controllable canopy. Our student
reserves were steerable 26' LoPos. They had the same yellow
webbing steering loops as on the main.
Two canopies out occurs most commonly because the student
dumps the reserve during deployment of the main - perhaps
because of a pilot chute hesitation. I never saw anyone
have any problen chopping the main or landing under their
reserve. The only hassle was chasing down the main afterwards.
Do you know what kind of reserve you have ? It should at least
be steerable so you can turn into wind for landing.
Mark Smith
> it's better to stick with the way you have been trained.
>
> how easy it would be to collapse a fully inflated reserve.
> I'm sure it would not be an easy job given just a few
>
> Two canopies out occurs most commonly because the student
> dumps the reserve during deployment of the main - perhaps
>
> Do you know what kind of reserve you have ? It should at least
> be steerable so you can turn into wind for landing.
I'm told pulling in an inflated reserve is difficult,
especially at the end. There is a good chance of accidently
letting go of it and having it inflate again.
...
Actually, they trained me to come down under the main if
at all possible. When I look up to check my canopy and
see its plural, then the thing to do, that I left out
in my previous description, was to check the main chute.
If the main chute is okay, then come down on that. If
it's not, then I should use the capwells and cutaway.
The reserve is a round 28 (I'm not sure of anything else
about it) and the main is what they called a 'jumbo'
paracommander (I'm a big guy, +200 lbs). The reserves are
steerable, but don't have toggles on them; the steering lines
have to be identified while under canopy. They're very
simple and have no sleeves or other dampening devices on them.
What it comes down to, I guess, is that if you have to
down under a canopy (which is the preferred way of course),
it might as well be the main chute.
Mark
--
Mark Smith
NYIT Computer Graphics Laboratory
Old Westbury, New York
...{philabs,sbcs}!nyit!mark
kas
> I'm told pulling in an inflated reserve is difficult,
> especially at the end. There is a good chance of accidently
> letting go of it and having it inflate again.
Whoever told you that has never done it. And even if you did let go,
yes, the reserve would reinflate -- but so what? You would be no worse off
than you were before. The already-opened main would continue to support you
before, during, and after your attempt to collapse the reserve.
> Actually, they trained me to come down under the main if
> at all possible. When I look up to check my canopy and
> see its plural, then the thing to do, that I left out
> in my previous description, was to check the main chute.
> If the main chute is okay, then come down on that. If
> it's not, then I should use the capwells and cutaway.
Yes, you should come down under the main if possible. But what are you
supposed to do with the reserve if the main is OK? You can't cut it away,
and apparently you've been taught not to pull it in. It's generally OK to
ride down under both, but you won't be able to steer (at least not very well),
which may be a problem if there are landing obstacles in the area.
> The reserve is a round 28 (I'm not sure of anything else
> about it) and the main is what they called a 'jumbo'
> paracommander (I'm a big guy, +200 lbs). The reserves are
> steerable, but don't have toggles on them; the steering lines
> have to be identified while under canopy. They're very
> simple and have no sleeves or other dampening devices on them.
>
> What it comes down to, I guess, is that if you have to
> down under a canopy (which is the preferred way of course),
> it might as well be the main chute.
>>GASP<< I can't believe that you are not taught to cut away, since you
are jumping a PC for a main. With a T-10 canopy, it is possible (although not
desirable) for the reserve to open up inside the main, and still land safely.
If this happened, you would definately NOT cut away the main, because it would
foul the reserve. But with a PC, the center-lines make it impossible for the
reserve to open up inside the main, and cutting away the main would only make
the problem worse. Fortunately, it is extremely rare for a reserve to go up
inside the main -- but if it happens with a PC....