| Date | Location | Category | Age | # Jumps | AAD?/RSL? | Dropzone.com Report | Dropzone.com Discussion | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/11/2003 | Coolidge, AZ | DMAL | 26 | 964 | N/N | #744629 | ||
| Description: The jump was from a twin otter, and planned tandem video. The tandem exited last, at an altitude of 9500 agl.(due to broken cloud layer ceiling) 7 jumpers exited prior to the tandem and videogapher...all were uneventful skydives. The videographer experienced a malfunction at pull time possibly associated with a non-cocked pilot chute or a pilot chute in-tow. The jumpers own video indicated a extended free fall, with no main deployment. The jumper initiated his EPs by his reserve handle first. It is likely the release of pressure on the main in the container allowed it to drop below him and began to inflate between his legs. With the reserve fully inflated, the main inflated with suspension lines wrapped around jumpers right leg. Jumpers own Video shows him grabbing and pulling the cut away pillow, then tries to free himself from main suspension lines. The tension between the main and reserve canopy caused a downplane configuration. He cleared himself of the lines. As the main left, the right main riser became tangled with the right rear riser of the reserve, resulting in whipped cinch knot. This was was observed at the accident site. The jumper died of his injuries moments after impact. | ||||||||
| Lessons:Not an easy situation to deal with. The outcome may have been different if the deceased had cutaway first. Then again, he may have impacted without pulling anything after wasting time cutting away. This jumper didn't give up and nor should you. Make sure you have a plan. | ||||||||
| USPA Description: After an uneventful freefall filming a tandem jump, this jumper threw his pilot chut to initiate deployment but experienced a pilot-chute-in-tow malfunction. He responded by deploying his reserve, which opended normally. However, as the reserve deployed, the main parachute also deployed, with the lines entangling around the jumper's legs before it inflated. The jumper released the main parachute and then freed his legs, but the cutaway main canopy entangled with the reserve risers and the reserve ripcord. The two canopies began to spin around each other in a downplane configuration, with both canopies diving the rest of the way to the ground. He died at the scene from the hard landing. | ||||||||
| USPA Conclusions:As in many fatal accidents, a chain of events culminated in the outcome, and changing any of them may have prevented it. The jumper picked one of two acceptable options to respoind to the malfunction and pulled the reserve. In this case, the reserve deployed and inflated normally, and then it appears - as often happens - that the release of tension on the container from the reserve activation allowed the collapsed pilot chute to deploy the main parachute. Unfortunately, the bad tumbled below him as the lines unstowed, and the lines entangled with the jumper's leg or legs. A cutaway ight have been useless up to this point, because the main parachute had not fully deployed. Also, it was discovered that the riser release system had stiffened from lack of maintenance and may have required more force than usual to disengage. By the time the jumper had freed his legs from the linesm the main had inflated. The left riser released, and the main canopy rotated around behind the jumper. During this rotation, the right-side main riser released and entangled with the right-side reserve riser and the reserve ripcord still in his hand, locking the two risers together. At that point, the jumper apparently, released the brakes on the reserve, and the two canopies began a diving right turn. The jumper spent the remaining time trying to free the main canopy. While dealing with this malfunction, this jumper found himself several times in relatively unchharted waters. He might have released the main too early in the sequence of events, but there are no clear-cut procedures for dealing with an entanglement once the reserve parachute is deployed. There are alos pros and cons to jettisoning the reserve ripcord while executing malfunction procedures. After the downplane began, it may have been a better choice to recover control of the reserve. Certainly, he was doing the best he could and continued working with the situation until he struck the ground. However, some choices made prioer to the jumper could have been handled better. The first and foremost preventable factor was the initial pilot-chute-in-tow malfunction. Most often - and apparently the cause of this instance - the problem results from not fully seating or cocking the inner bridle on a kill-line collapsible pilot chute. A jumper can prevent this problem with careful packing followed by a routine equipment check before putting on the gear. Most collapsible main pilot chute bridles have a window to show that the kill line is in the right position inside the bridle. Second, performing the recommended periodic maintenance may have allowed the risers to release more freely and resulted in a clearner cutaway. Finally, larger parachutes would have provided a slower descent rate, which may have allowed for more time in a spinning situation to regain control and possibly led to a survivable landing. |
||||||||
| Name | Marc W. Bunnell | |||||||