Help Is this high enough to die reliably?

[Gothsinner]

 

[Kirkscoobz]

In theory yes, you'll probably die before you hit the bottom mind, although it is possible to get up in injured and walk away.

 

[Throwaway9787]

No

 

[calendulo]

No, it is not.

Barely 20 mts or 25 mts.

 

[1234dave]

In theory yes, you'll probably die before you hit the bottom mind, although it is possible to get up in injured and walk away.

 

[Gothsinner]

No, it is not.

Barely 20 mts or 25 mts.

4 stories, but if not I guess that's a shame I'll have to find another way :(

 

[calendulo]

4 stories, but if not I guess that's a shame I'll have to find another way :(

Then shorter. 3 mts each. 12 to 16.
Forget it.

 

[DreamCatcher]

View attachment 14314

High enough you might die, sure. But falling off a ladder can be fatal. It's very unreliable though.

High enough for a reliable death, definitely not. At that height I'd give you a less than fifty percent chance of success.

 

[Gothsinner]

No, it is not.

Barely 20 mts or 25 mts.

Then shorter. 3 mts each. 12 to 16.
Forget it.

Thanks :). I'll look for another method :(

 

[Worndown]

No. High enough for life changing injuries.

 

[Codieb1]

I've researched a lot about jumping since I'm on a 9th floor apartment. I absolutely wouldn't even think of attempting anything below 6 floors

 

[Gothsinner]

High enough you might die, sure. But falling off a ladder can be fatal. It's very unreliable though.

High enough for a reliable death, definitely not. At that height I'd give you a less than fifty percent chance of success.

Oh that's a shame :(

I've researched a lot about jumping since I'm on a 9th floor apartment. I absolutely wouldn't even think of attempting anything below 6 floors

It's a shame that's the highest building in a 10 mile radius :(

 

[thomasdoyletad]

Instead of listening to internet experts just do the calcs yourself. You know how quickly humans accelerate in free-fall on average? If not look it up. You can google this shit in seconds, and if it's high enough to hit the ground at over 17+ meters per second (that's anything over about 17 meters free-fall, which is looks to be to me) it's a near-as-makes-no-difference fatality rate of 100% no matter how you land as long as deceleration is more or less instant. But don't believe me.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930020462.pdf here's a NASA paper on human acceleration tolerances.

Yes, people can and do survive insane falls, but it usually has to do with where they land. Falls of over 30 meters (around 100 feet) have a recorded fatality rate that's so close to 100% the survivors are best considered freak-accidents and usually involve people landing in deep snowdrifts or some other cushioning substance, or getting snagged on something, hitting things on the way down which imparts rotational inertia, and so on all of which can reduce their falling speed considerable, either way near-or-absolutely immediate medical attention is usually required and it mostly fails from falls of over 30 meters/100 feet. You will rupture multiple internal blood vessels, and you'll also experience massive blood loss from broken bones. That alone will kill most people more or less instantly if the brain trauma alone doesn't since your brain is going to be slammed against the inside of your skull which is little different to taking letting a major leaguer take a baseball bat to your head.

People can die falling as little as 6 meters (and as the paper shows even a 12 meter free-fall is enough to produce fatal results if deceleration is instant, which it will be if landing on concrete, you'll just take longer to die) increasing the height beyond about 30 meters, ironically, will probably just make it harder to jump and give you more time to think about it on the way down. People reach a terminal falling speed (which is different to terminal velocity; the maximum falling speed of a human body, which you'll be lucky to reach even in a 100 meters free-fall since the longer the fall, the more chance of tumbling) very quickly assuming they're in a complete free-fall and hitting a solid surface. Just don't wear baggy clothes, do it on a day with low wind-speeds and jump well clear off the edge so you don't snag anything on the way down.

 

[DreamCatcher]

I'd suggest looking into other options, there is probably something in the methods section that might work better.

I hope you find peace regardless of what you end up with

 

[Gothsinner]

Instead of listening to internet experts just do the calcs yourself. You know how quickly humans accelerate in free-fall on average? If not look it up. You can google this shit in seconds, and if it's high enough to hit the ground at over 17+ meters per second (that's anything over about 17 meters free-fall, which is looks to be to me) it's a near-as-makes-no-difference fatality rate of 100% no matter how you land as long as deceleration is more or less instant. But don't believe me.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930020462.pdf here's a NASA paper on human acceleration tolerances.

Yes, people can and do survive insane falls, but it usually has to do with where they land. Falls of over 30 meters (around 100 feet) have a recorded fatality rate that's so close to 100% the survivors are best considered freak-accidents and usually involve people landing in deep snowdrifts or some other cushioning substance, or getting snagged on something, hitting things on the way down, etc, reducing their falling speed, either way near-or-absolutely immediate medical attention is usually required and it mostly fails.

People can die falling as little as 6 meters (and as the paper shows a 12 meter free-fall is usually more than enough to produce almost fatal results)

Increasing the height, ironically, will probably just make it harder to jump and give you more time to think about it on the way down. People reach a terminal velocity (which is different to terminal velocity; the maximum falling speed, that takes over 100 meters free-falling) fairly quickly.

I'm not really sure I understand..

I'd suggest looking into other options, there is probably something in the methods section that might work better.

I hope you find peace regardless of what you end up with

Thank you, you too

 

[calendulo]

Instead of listening to internet experts just do the calcs yourself. You know how quickly humans accelerate in free-fall on average? If not look it up.

NASA expert:

Chapter: Spinal Cord Injuries Following Suicide Attempts

Open access peer-reviewed chapter

www.intechopen.com

26 or 27 failures jumping cases.

It is from a mate prochoice of yours.

Do not shows high.

All fail.

 

[thomasdoyletad]

Again, read the paper and do the calcs, and maybe read my post again because you seem to have ignored most of it. It's basic math. There's no great mystery to it. In a world where tens of thousands of people suicide every year there are going to be all sorts of freak survivals.The same is true of just about every popular method of suicide. It doesn't alter basic principles or physics or the tolerances of the human body.

 

[Gothsinner]

Again, read the paper and do the calcs, and maybe read my post again because you seem to have ignored most of it. It's basic math. There's no great mystery to it.

Calm down jesus all I said was I was confused no need to get aggressive

 

[thomasdoyletad]

Calm down jesus all I said was I was confused no need to get aggressive

Sorry if I came off as aggressive, but you'd be surprised how often people will say a method is no good because 0.02% of people survive it or because there's an article about some drunk guy in 1984 who did it and survived. Just about no methods are absolutely certain. Even things that would be 100% fatal can be prevented by outside interference. The idea of wanting some kind of 'risk free,' form of suicide honestly seems absurd to me. There is always risk. Hell, some of the most popular methods used on this sight (like inhalation) entail absolutely horrific risks. The key is preparation. If you want to make it work chances are you will. After all we only get news articles about the people who survive. Not the tens of thousands who succeed, unless they're some kind of celebrity.

 

[calendulo]

Calm down jesus all I said was I was confused no need to get aggressive

No, nobody is agressive. Is a debat.
He has showed an Nasa report, but you are who want to jump, not him.
I have showed 27 failures became in 27 para - tetra - quadra plegics.
You'll to need a higher spot. It is safer.

 

[Gothsinner]

Sorry if I came off as aggressive, but you'd be surprised how often people will say a method is no good because 0.02% of people survive it or because there's an article about some drunk guy in 1984 who did it and survived. Just about no methods are absolutely certain. Even things that would be 100% fatal can be prevented by outside interference. The idea of wanting some kind of 'risk free,' form of suicide honestly seems absurd to me. There is always risk. Hell, some of the most popular methods used on this sight (like inhalation) entail absolutely horrific risks. The key is preparation. If you want to make it work chances are you will. After all we only get news articles about the people who survive. Not the tens of thousands who succeed, unless they're some kind of celebrity.

True risk is always there. Pro lifers do that where they say don't do that you will just hurt yourself just because 1 person survived,

 

[Roger]

After all we only get news articles about the people who survive. Not the tens of thousands who succeed, unless they're some kind of celebrity.

That's an odd statement.

 

[thomasdoyletad]

True risk is always there. Pro lifers do that where they say don't do that you will just hurt yourself just because 1 person survived,

IMHO, I think the best thing we can do is give people the best data available and let them make up their own minds. Obviously there is always risk, even if it's just the risk of being caught and sanctioned.

I have showed 27 failures became in 27 para - tetra - quadra plegics. You'll to need a higher spot. It is safer.

27 failures, jumping at what height, and onto what surface, and out of how many people who jumped and didn't survive? And how quickly did medical intervention arrive in those cases? I mean what's the failure percentage where other causes involved, i.e did they tumble, snag obstacles, what was the wind-speed, or was it a straight free-fall?

You'll to need a higher spot. It is safer.

Not necessarily. The longer you free-fall the greater the chance you'll end up tumbling which will reduce your acceleration, and the longer there is for a gust to blow you into a snag. Of course if by higher you mean a 50 story skyscraper that's another matter, but most extremely high platforms are difficult to access and have security to prevent jumpers. Also many are in build-up areas where the odds of hitting an occupied vehicle or injuring someone else are real, if small, and I imagine most would prefer to avoid that. There is a 'sweet spot,' of places that are high enough for the fall to be fatal, but not so high that you have to worry about rotation (since you want the smallest possible point of contact with the ground to maximise the impact, and landing feet-first is just as good as head-first if you're travelling fast enough) yet not so high they're likely to be guarded or inaccessible to the public. I'm not saying this guy should jump. But he put up the thread. I'm trying to give him the data to make the decision as to what height/speed is likely to produce fatal results, and how to avoid common pit-falls like rotation, snagging, etc. I don't know what options are available for this person. Maybe this is all they have. So what I'm saying is get on Google and do the Calcs if you want to know if it's high enough because it's not rocket science, and there are plenty of websites which will do the complex math for you; just enter the numbers and your body-weight and they'll give you the results, and if it's above 17 meters per second (or more if you want a margin for error) and you're hitting a solid surface, and jump clear of the edge with minimal wind to avoid snags, then it's almost certainly going to be fatal.

That's an odd statement.

But generally true, unless you're talking about obituaries.

 

[MAIO]

View attachment 14314

If you landed on the crown of your head probably. I would advise against it though.

 

[Gothsinner]

If you landed on the crown of your hand probably. I would advise against it though.

Hand? You mean head?

 

[Jessica5]

In theory yes, you'll probably die before you hit the bottom mind, although it is possible to get up in injured and walk away.

Nobody dies or even goes unconscious before they hit the ground. That's just a stupid thing people tell themselves because they're scared of the tumble downward. If that were the case, every single skydiver would die before they're able to inflate their parachute. The truth is that if you jump from the 86th floor of the Empire State Building, you'll be alive, conscious, and screaming for 85 floors, until you hit the ground.

Anyway, that structure is not close to high enough to reliably cause death.

 

[TAW122]

Yeah I would advise against it, too low of a height, much more chance of survival with lots of serious injuries, with the chance of ending up as a vegetable.

 

[Jessica5]

The top floor of that building is the 4th. That would be a 3 story fall, which supposedly has a 50/50 chance of death. If you get on the roof, that would be a 4 floor fall, which has better odds. That is, assuming that there's at least one side of the building that's not covered by the 2nd-4th floor balconies. If you jumped off the roof onto the side you're photographing, it would be a one story fall, because the 4th floor balcony sticks out well beyond the roof.

Anyway, I would not recommend this jump at all.

 

[Gothsinner]

The top floor of that building is the 4th. That would be a 3 story fall, which supposedly has a 50/50 chance of death. If you get on the roof, that would be a 4 floor fall, which has better odds. That is, assuming that there's at least one side of the building that's not covered by the 2nd-4th floor balconies. If you jumped off the roof onto the side you're photographing, it would be a one story fall, because the 4th floor balcony sticks out well beyond the roof.

Anyway, I would not recommend this jump at all.

The roof is a car park. Yeah I've kinda realised it's not gonna work :(

 

[Kirkscoobz]

Nobody dies or even goes unconscious before they hit the ground. That's just a stupid thing people tell themselves because they're scared of the tumble downward. If that were the case, every single skydiver would die before they're able to inflate their parachute. The truth is that if you jump from the 86th floor of the Empire State Building, you'll be alive, conscious, and screaming for 85 floors, until you hit the ground.

Anyway, that structure is not close to high enough to reliably cause death.

If you look at my writing i did say probably, as in life everything is a probability,