Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#231

Post by bira » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 7:58 PM UTC

itsdevlin wrote: post #193

bira wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you willing to die for it?

In short, no. To bring a strawman into this: Would you die for your commute? What about a burger? A beer? All of these things kill people, and all of them can be avoided. People don't, because they like them. They accept the given level of risk by mitigating it as best they can, and going on about their lives. Risk is omnipresent. The real killer is when you don't understand the risk. If you think something has a 1:1…

I almost died choking on a chunk of meat once. It was quite interesting how my mind went blank as soon as I realized I had to do something or I was dead. No thoughts, no fear. Just absolute focus and the will to do anything. I'm not sure if it was me sticking a fork down my throat or a guy who was there who started to hit me on the back to do the trick. But after 20 or so seconds I was once again able to breathe. I was red, sweaty and in tears due to the stress and I couldn't speak but I was ok. I realize anything can happen at all times and I'm trying to be always alert and ready (chewing my food like a mofo and warning others to do the same - and to call themselves lucky I'm now trained to respond and keep them alive in case they pass out). So far, so good.

What I'm afraid of as far as base jumping is concerned is that you can't react to what's happening or you have just a few seconds. What if the chute doesn't open properly? What if the wind slams you on the rocks?

You are gambling with your fate. True that we all gamble with it when we eat, walk down the stairs, drive around etc. But at least in those daily circumstances we can take proper countermeasures and deal with whats' happening as it happens.

I would understand though if you know the risk of doing something and you still do it because it matters so much to you. If you could choose to die while doing what makes you happy wouldn't you?

I remember the first time I was on a plane. I was in such a joy that I thought "if I die now, I wouldn't care. I'm so happy I'd die happy."

We are all going to die. I believe it's better to die while doing what means the most to us, than not living fully and safe, ending up not appreciating our life cause we give it for granted.

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#232

Post by bira » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 8:05 PM UTC

wazoox wrote: post #196

itsdevlin wrote: post #177

Active BASE jumper and wingsuit pilot here. Instructor of both. 2016 was by far and away our worst year on record. We lost newbies, heros, and damn near all levels in between. Since then, a few sites have taken a more locked-down approach where we used to be welcome, and as a community we've made progress to band together to push education and conservative decision making over 'dude that was so sketchy.' A lot of peo…

If you need your mind to be quiet, and to feel present to your life, there are non-life threatening ways, like mindful meditation and psychoanalysis, or maybe even working in a charity.

Saving people in the ER or as paramedics is another of those instances. It doesn't have to be your life the one on the line.

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#233

Post by _tulpa » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 8:14 PM UTC

dkersten wrote: post #171

_tulpa wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Valid concerns, sure. But how is banning it a good solution? How do you even enforce a ban on a group of people who are okay risking their lives for fun? Maybe instead you get them contributing to a local SAR organization. Maybe they have to get insurance. Or something else more constructive and less ham-fisted than just making it illegal. Why is banning stuff so high on everyone's list of solutions to problems that…

> problems that don't really affect them? Perhaps because: > And it wastes the coroners time. means it does affect them (the tax payers)? Personally, I think as few things as possible should be banned/restricted. If things directly impact other peoples lives, then sure, but if its indirect or minimal, then perhaps not. Its a difficult balance though (but in general, I'm in the "the less government involvement in the…

> means it does affect them (the tax payers)?

Okay sure. but...

> About 10 to 20 die world wide in about a population of 1000 or so active jumpers.

How is 10-20 peoples worth of coronor time worldwide an appreciable number for taxpayers. Furthermore is it even remotely comparable to the cost of trying to enforce a ban, which would presumably also be funded by tax payers.

My point is more that you've at least thought about it a little, unlike the OP of this thread.

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#234

Post by WalterBright » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 8:16 PM UTC

Piskvorrr wrote: post #167

WalterBright wrote: post #31

Flying is not natural for humans. Our instincts are wrong, and our senses misinform us. This is well known among pilots, and why one has to fly regularly to keep the license, and why a large part of pilot training focuses on trusting the instruments rather than your body.

Typing on a keyboard is not natural for humans, and yet here I am doing just that, having gotten here in unnatural ways: by car, train, and bicycle. I don't think flying is any more unnatural than any of the myriad things that we do each day.

> I don't think flying

I've picked up a bicycle after not riding for 10 years, and it's true, you never forget how to ride. But this is just not true for flying. You must fly regularly or your license will be suspended.

A large part of instrument flying training is teaching you to ignore what your body is telling you and trust the instruments.

(My father was a flight instructor for the Air Force. When JFK Jr crashed, the first thing he said was "spacial disorientation". Weeks later, that was the conclusion of the investigation.)

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#235

Post by WalterBright » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 8:20 PM UTC

jiri wrote: post #73

WalterBright wrote: post #31

Flying is not natural for humans. Our instincts are wrong, and our senses misinform us. This is well known among pilots, and why one has to fly regularly to keep the license, and why a large part of pilot training focuses on trusting the instruments rather than your body.

Yes, this! Flying is hard and our instincts are wrong. Anyway, pilot training is focused on dealing with critical and problematic situations. To be able to fly with instruments only, without them in case of failure, to glide safely, to not fly in proximity to other objects ;-) etc. Unfortunately, IMO in wingsuit flying, the safety is so thin that it would be hardly significantly improved with regulated training.

The article mentioned an instance where the instinctive reaction would get you killed.

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#236

Post by chias » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 9:09 PM UTC

Havoc wrote: post #154

NegativeK wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's oversimplifying or discarding the revelation. People expected wingsuit BASE to become safer with experience; practitioners didn't expect it to be a toss of the dice no matter what.

>People expected wingsuit BASE to become safer with experience; And I'm sure safety does improve with experience. They're still rolling the dice though. Some roll it with better odds than others sure but ultimately: >On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

> And I'm sure safety does improve with experience.

The fact that people generally seem to assume it does (but that it actually doesn't) is the primary thesis of this article:

"What’s more worrying about wingsuit BASE fatalities, though, is that there appears to be no consistent bias toward experience."

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#237

Post by manarth » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 9:27 PM UTC

dahart wrote: post #209

clueless123 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here we go again.. (I think we discussed this topic previously) Skydiving, hang gliding,Paragliding and many other "adventure sports" contain a significan amount of risk.. the difference is that skydiving (not base jumping) is tightly regulated by the FAA, there are strict training requirements, equipment maintenance etc etc .. it is almost like flying a plane. so.. it is super dangerous compared to knitting.. but it…

Oh hey, you're right, we did discuss this a while ago. Nice to see you again! Yes, you're right that skydiving is safe compared to the sports that are more dangerous than skydiving. I agree and admit there are sports and activities that are more dangerous than skydiving. Wingsuit flying is one of them. Last time we talked, you said the risk of dying skydiving is 1 in 100,000 and pointed at the comparative table here:…

  Since nobody needs a license to get in a canoe,
  you may expect a higher percentage of people who
  are unprepared for the risks of canoeing to die doing it

Breaking down the numbers, the skydiving fatality rate is a reported 1 in 101,083 jumps. To normalise that to a per-year rate, we can take the USPA rate of 350,000 participants conducting 3,000,000 skydives per year [1]. That gives a mean of 8.6 jumps per year for each participant.

Given the 1 in 101,083 risk, that amounts to roughly a 1 in 11,750 risk of fatality per year.

The risk of canoeing in the linked article [2] is 1 in 10,000, so according to those reported statistics, skydiving is slightly safer than canoeing, significantly safer than boxing, is roughly 3 times as risky as scuba diving, and 5 times as risky as football.

[1] http://adventure.howstuffworks.com/skydiving8.htm

[2] http://www.besthealthdegrees.com/health-risks/

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#238

Post by manarth » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 9:36 PM UTC

cpncrunch wrote: post #218

Piskvorrr wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...which, of course, defeats the point "I did something insanely dangerous and did not die". Is there a way to increase safety while keeping the feeling of danger? That sounds like a contradiction to me.

Isn't it the feeling of excitement they're looking for, rather than danger? It just happens that this activity is exciting and extremely dangerous. What about kite surfing?

Kite-surfing introduces the risks of drowning and hypothermia.

Without looking through the stats, I wouldn't like to say which is more dangerous, and without data it would be reckless to assume one or the other because it "seems more dangerous", but kite-surfing comes with unique dangers that don't exist in skydiving, and vice-versa.

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#239

Post by barrkel » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 9:38 PM UTC

lillesvin wrote: post #219

barrkel wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason English speakers understand it is because "I would have" when contracted to the maximum "I'd've" sounds like "I'd of". The fact that the two are effective homonyms doesn't make both spellings right. Rather, the "of" variant just looks a little bit ignorant. Not much, just a little.

Yes, the fact that they sound very much alike is exactly what's seeping into the written language, and as any linguist (like myself) will tell you, the written language is not what drives linguistic evolution, it's the spoken language. Writing commonly lags way behind, ergo the spoken language drives evolution of the written one, not vice versa.

There's only a difference in the written word. In the spoken word, it's still "I'd've".

Re: Increasing numbers of wingsuit jumpers are dying (2016)

#240

Post by Havoc » Mon, Aug 28, 2017, 9:43 PM UTC

chias wrote: post #236

Havoc wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People expected wingsuit BASE to become safer with experience; And I'm sure safety does improve with experience. They're still rolling the dice though. Some roll it with better odds than others sure but ultimately: >On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

> And I'm sure safety does improve with experience. The fact that people generally seem to assume it does (but that it actually doesn't ) is the primary thesis of this article: "What’s more worrying about wingsuit BASE fatalities, though, is that there appears to be no consistent bias toward experience."

>(but that it actually doesn't) is the primary thesis of this article

Kinda.

It does improve safety in the sense that someone with zero jumps under their belt is far more likely to die than someone with some experience. That should be fairly self-evident and the fact that they even list a common beginner mistake shows this effect.

That quote you've got there to me is trying to communicate that experience will improve your odds but won't save you from my "on a long enough timeline..." quote.

The other thing that screw this up is that a noob and an experienced jumper won't be doing comparable things. So the experienced jumper is safer, but is also doing substantially more dangerous stuff. Measuring deaths vs experience doesn't capture that.