Marking Jumps

[Nitrogenius]

Out of curiosity, what's the big issue? I think jumps in florida as a whole are either pretty clear or intentionally hidden. You go to Mexico or France and you really start to see some funky stuff.

jupp

[bamafan]

Are we talking about the process of installing a marker and jump spool to make a jump or are we discussing things such as double arrows indicating a jump is near??

[Lanny]

Good point from Bamafan!

There is now a little more consensus here in Mexico on how permanent arrows are placed to indicate jumps. More details here: http://creerlineas.com, but basically jumps should be a minimum of 2 m and a maximum of 10 m from the mainline, and that they should be marked. Jumps that have a compelling reason to be hidden (such as for conservation or safety) and jumps that have traditionally been “hidden jumps” will be left as is, unless otherwise voted on by the community.
There is also the convention that double arrows are placed at "significant" jumps, such as those that complete a circuit or traverse. What constitutes "significant" largely depends on the whim of the original explorer.

There is huge variation in marking a jump that a dive team have installed to form a temporary T. Personally, I like to keep it simple and regardless of how a team wishes to dive (team/individual markers or cookies/arrows/REMs/Clothes Pegs), teach that a personal marker is always placed on the exit side of a temporary or permanent T. I see a lot of people jumping off an arrow without marking the exit side of the temporary T they have formed, and don't think that method is sufficiently clear or consistent.

Marking is a contentious subject, and I am sure there will be some interesting debate.

[Jack Hammer]

I'm all for less permanent markers for jumps. IMO, more markings equates to more tunnels get beaten to crap, more cave damage.

[Dominick Gheesling]

Are we talking about the process of installing a marker and jump spool to make a jump or are we discussing things such as double arrows indicating a jump is near??

I was thinking more of the double arrow indicating a jump location not so much how my team marks a spool/jump that we install.

[bamafan]

I was thinking more of the double arrow indicating a jump location not so much how my team marks a spool/jump that we install.

The best jumps are generally not marked

[Nitrogenius]

I was thinking more of the double arrow indicating a jump location not so much how my team marks a spool/jump that we install.

double arrows is a good point.. totally used in a different context in Mex than in US..
In Mex you mostly find them at a mainline T that is leading to different exits.. the double arrow then marking the faster/closer exit.. Sometimes there is a Jump as well, but that is more "coincidence" then..

[Kelly Jessop]

The best jumps are generally not marked

Or the jumps intentionally left off a map, that are very sensitive areas, or very difficult to do.

[Dominick Gheesling]

double arrows is a good point.. totally used in a different context in Mex than in US..
In Mex you mostly find them at a mainline T that is leading to different exits.. the double arrow then marking the faster/closer exit.. Sometimes there is a Jump as well, but that is more "coincidence" then..

I always think of the double arrow in the cave the same way that it works in hiking in the usa: Double Blaze means there is a potential direction change, navigation change and the hiker needs to pay particular attention and the hiker should be able to see/verify their next trail marker from that Double Blaze. Seems like a great way to mark jump points. Really it is the idea of a standard or consistency that most concerns me. I think we talk a great deal about standardization in training, equipment configuration, etc. why would we not apply the same thing to navigation? And yes, I realize not all jumps are or will be marked but why not mark the ones that can be agreed upon in a consistent manner?

[rddvet]

I always think of the double arrow in the cave the same way that it works in hiking in the usa: Double Blaze means there is a potential direction change, navigation change and the hiker needs to pay particular attention and the hiker should be able to see/verify their next trail marker from that Double Blaze. Seems like a great way to mark jump points. Really it is the idea of a standard or consistency that most concerns me. I think we talk a great deal about standardization in training, equipment configuration, etc. why would we not apply the same thing to navigation? And yes, I realize not all jumps are or will be marked but why not mark the ones that can be agreed upon in a consistent manner?

Cause it’s just like politics. Everybody has their idea and knows it’s the absolute best and refuse to consider other viewpoints or come to a conclusion that’s best for all. At least in the QR they’re starting that process with a single line committee. We’ll see how that works out over the next 5 years.