{"id":26937,"date":"2020-07-21T12:30:35","date_gmt":"2020-07-21T12:30:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.skydivemag.com\/new\/?p=26937"},"modified":"2020-07-21T12:33:45","modified_gmt":"2020-07-21T12:33:45","slug":"hard-deck-for-what","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.skydivemag.com\/new\/hard-deck-for-what\/","title":{"rendered":"Hard Deck for WHAT?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Many jumpers are confused about the term \u201chard deck\u201d and how it differs from the term \u201cdecision altitude\u201d <\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
This skydiver has a misrouted toggle \u2013 how long should he try to ‘fix it’?<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Decision Altitude<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Defining \u201cdecision altitude\u201d is easy: Skydiver\u2019s Information Manual<\/a> Section 5-1, Skydiving Emergencies, states that in a skydiving emergency:<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

“C. You should decide upon and take approriate actions by a predetermined altitude:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Student and A-license holders: 2,500 feet<\/em><\/li>
  2. B-D license holders: 1,800 feet” <\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Hard Deck<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    However, defining \u201chard deck\u201d is a bit trickier. It can have\na number of meanings, depending on the situation in which it is used, and its\nusage has changed over the years. At its core, though, \u201chard deck\u201d simply means\na crucial altitude. The confusion comes in because there are many different\nkinds of hard decks. Understanding the meaning of the term as it\u2019s being used\nrequires context. You have to ask yourself \u201chard deck for what?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    At its core, though, \u201chard deck\u201d simply means a crucial altitude”<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"
    The skydiver is now at 2,000 feet. Let’s say he has chosen a ‘Decide and Act altitude of 1,500ft and Hard Deck of 1,000ft, he has anther 500 feet in which to cut away or fix the issue.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    History<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    The term originated with fighter pilots. \u201cHard deck\u201d was slang for an altitude (10,000 feet or so) that represented ground level during flight training exercises. If you went below the hard deck, you had hypothetically crashed and were out of the exercise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    At some point skydivers adopted the term, but it had a different application. Prior to 2002, the Skydiving Emergencies section of the SIM<\/a> recommended two altitudes: one for deciding on and initiating emergency procedures and one for having executed those procedures. Jumpers began calling these altitudes the \u201cDecision altitude<\/em>\u201d and the \u201cHard deck<\/em>\u201d, although neither term appeared verbatim in the SIM<\/a>. In 2002, USPA removed the secondary (\u201chard deck\u201d) altitude from the SIM<\/a>, in part to acknowledge that emergencies vary and may require different responses at different altitudes. The \u201cdecide and take appropriate action\u201d altitude<\/a> was the sole altitude recommendation that remained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    However, just because the hard-deck altitude was gone from the SIM didn\u2019t mean jumpers stopped using the term. They simply began using it in different contexts. And the SIM didn\u2019t stop recommending altitudes for certain procedures. One example is found \u201cOff-Field Landings\u201d in SIM Section 5-1: \u201cA jumper attempting to return from a long distance should keep alternatives in mind along the way and begin an approach into a clear area by 1,000 feet.\u201d In this context, the SIM<\/a> is providing a hard deck for deciding upon a landing area and starting the approach: It\u2019s 1,000 feet.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"
    At 1,000 feet \u2013 if this is his Hard Deck \u2013 the jumper loses the option to cut away, he can now only land with this parachute, or add a reserve canopy by pulling the reserve handle.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    1,000 feet<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    One-thousand feet is a recurring theme. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In an emergency, although a jumper should decide and act <\/a>by their decision altitude, they do not actually lose the option of cutting away until about 1,000 feet, since they still have enough altitude for the reserve to deploy fully. You lose your option to cut away at or below your hard deck; the only handle you have the option to pull is your reserve, to get more fabric out to slow your descent. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In this case, the hard deck for cutting away is 1,000 feet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Other Hard Decks<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Adding to the confusion is that USPA rating courses use the term \u201chard deck\u201d but in a completely different context. For example, in the Accelerated Freefall Rating Course, an instructor candidate must deploy the evaluator (playing the student) by 4,000 feet or receive an automatic score of unsatisfactory on that jump. That same candidate must also track away and have their pilot chute out by 2,500 feet. So, in these contexts, the hard deck for deploying the evaluator\u2019s canopy is 4,000 feet and the hard deck for deploying their own canopy is 2,500 feet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    your decision altitude is very simply the altitude at which you must decide and act during an emergency” <\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    The bottom line is that your decision altitude is very simply the altitude at which you must decide and act during an emergency. Can your decision altitude also be your hard deck? Yes, but it is simply the hard deck for deciding and acting. However, that\u2019s not the only hard deck in skydiving. Hard decks are simply the altitude above which an action must occur or below which an action must not occur. The term only has meaning in context, so if you\u2019re ever confused, don\u2019t forget to ask, \u201cHard deck for what?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Hard deck for what?\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"
    ‘Hard Deck’ can be used in different contexts \u2013 a breakoff altitude, a canopy deployment altitude or the altitude below which you will not cut away.
    Photo by Gustavo Cabana Imaging<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
    \n\n\n\n

    Note: <\/strong>This article originally appeared in the July 2020 issue of Parachutist, the official publication of the U.S. Parachute Association, and also on their website here<\/a>. It is reprinted here with permission. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/div>\n\n\n
    <\/div>
    <\/a><\/div><\/div>
    <\/a><\/div><\/div>
    Visit Us<\/a><\/div><\/div>
    <\/a>
    <\/span>
    <\/a><\/div>
    <\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
    <\/div >