So, if we start standardized wingsuit training via USPA, does that mean the USPA should also create standardized training for other disciplines?
RW standardized coaching Freeflying standardized coaching Classic Accuracy standardized coaching Style standardized coaching Sport accuracy standardized coaching Performance canopy standardized coaching Camera flying standardized coaching Freestyle standardized coaching Skysurfing standardized coaching Demo jumping standardized coaching High Altitude standardized coaching etc.
When I read the mission of the USPA, it does not mention advanced training as a function of the USPA.
The United States Parachute Association (USPA) is a voluntary membership organization of individuals who enjoy and support the sport of skydiving. The association is incorporated in New York and follows the constitution and by-laws contained in the USPA Governance Manual. The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.
The USPA has already established minimum safety recommendations for wingsuiting, just as they do for every other discipline. The recommendations and wingsuit FJC outline are in section 6-9 of the SIM. What makes wingsuiting so different that users can't read the SIM and the instruction manual that comes with the suit, as well as the warning labels?
I believe USPA resources would be better used by focusing on the only part of skydiving we all do: Fly and land a parachute safely. We have enough ratings and requirements already.
Adding another rating will only raise the price of general membership and tax an already overburdened system. I know your document says it won't, but it will increase work load, so prices will increase.
If USPA does not believe that a canopy coach/instructor rating should exist (something 100% of the membership uses, and something that causes most of our fatalities), and left that for each individual dz to mandate, what would make wingsuiting a better candidate for a new rating?
As a serious question..What percentage of active skydivers jump wingsuits? (and where do those numbers come from?)
and another...Are the number of wingsuit incidents/problems so pervasive that it is more important to create a wingsuit instructor over a canopy instructor?
I know you aren't arguing validity or qualifications of one rating over the other, I'm just wondering.
(This post was edited by floormonkey on Sep 27, 2012, 2:29 PM)