Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
USPA and FAA reg violations

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

tombuch  (D 8514)

Oct 10, 2005, 3:25 PM
Post #26 of 141 (1990 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
PS-
About the Sentinels---
I do know of a rigger and former DPRE that would actually testify in court that it is negligent to use a Sentinel today, given all the other available AADs. Technically, you can use them, but from an industry standard practice, it's way below standards.

Given all the things you listed, I would ask for better AADs first before fixing the other problems. Sentinels actually meet all the rules.

.

It's my understanding that the Sentinels were all removed from service and can NOT be used. I remember this issue with another DZ many years ago. I believe the manufacturer (SSE?) stopped supporting the Sentinal, and forbid their use in the civilian market. 105.43(c) says "If installed, the automatic activation device must be maintained in accordance with manufacturers instructions..."

I would not even consider putting a student out (or jumping with a rig) equipped with a Sentinel unless the manufacturer has approved that use, and the AAD is maintained according to the manufacturer guidelines.

Many of the other issues seem equally serious. I'd call the regional director, and if that doesn't answer the question, contact Jim Crouch (Director of Safety and Training) at USPA. Following all that, I might even consider calling the FAA directly, given the AAD issue.
.


MakeItHappen

Oct 10, 2005, 6:24 PM
Post #27 of 141 (1942 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tombuch] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It's my understanding that the Sentinels were all removed from service and can NOT be used. I remember this issue with another DZ many years ago. I believe the manufacturer (SSE?) stopped supporting the Sentinal, and forbid their use in the civilian market. 105.43(c) says "If installed, the automatic activation device must be maintained in accordance with manufacturers instructions..."

Going from memory here….
SSE withdrew (or recalled) the Sentinels, but then about a year later said they could be used, but would no longer be supported. That was around 1992 or so.

About 4-5 years ago, there was a student fatality that involved a Sentinel. The DPRE that did the investigation said the Sentinel fired and that it fired at x many feet. (I think x was between 1500 and 1000 feet. I'd have to go read the report again.)

Roger Allen told me that there was no way to determine firing altitude or even if it occurred on the jump in question.

The former DPRE said, and I think Roger said this too, that technically the Sentinel was legal, but from a modern technology, industry standard POV, the Sentinel was considered obsolete.

I definitely agree that Sentinels should not be used today.

.


MakeItHappen

Oct 10, 2005, 6:32 PM
Post #28 of 141 (1939 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nvanduyn] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
To not have an AAD on a student rig is just scary. If a student were to freak out, trying to remember everything, and loses altitude awareness...

splat

It not as hopeless as you make it out to be. At lot of us went through student status with no AADs or only had one on our first hop-n-pop.

It can be done. It is not encouraged nowadays.

.


MakeItHappen

Oct 10, 2005, 6:35 PM
Post #29 of 141 (1936 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Hooknswoop] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Hey Derek,

USPA is not a police agency.

It does not issue tickets or assess fines.

USPA does try to convince DZOs to follow modern training techniques.

If you have a problem with that, then join USPA, become a member of the BOD and change the policies.

I'm invoking the 'take your turn at bat' rule.
If you are not out there taking a turn at bat, where you can strike out or hit a home run, then you have no more pull than an irrate fan that's mad at a favorite player for striking out. Unless you are out there jumping and taking an active role in what goes on, your voice carries only in your own bathroom.
If you want change, get out there on the playing field.

.


(This post was edited by MakeItHappen on Oct 10, 2005, 6:48 PM)


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Oct 10, 2005, 7:11 PM
Post #30 of 141 (1920 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Hey Derek,

USPA is not a police agency.

It does not issue tickets or assess fines.

USPA does try to convince DZOs to follow modern training techniques.

They don't enforce their own rules. Seems to me it is because of a conflict of interest. GM DZ's are listed on USPA's website, giving the impression that they are 'endorsed'. They aren't, but from the wuffo's perspective, it looks that way. GM DZ's use that to their advantage in advertising, "DZ xyz isn't a GM DZ which means they don't have to follow the BSR's"

Quote:
If you have a problem with that, then join USPA, become a member of the BOD and change the policies.

I'm invoking the 'take your turn at bat' rule.
If you are not out there taking a turn at bat, where you can strike out or hit a home run, then you have no more pull than an irrate fan that's mad at a favorite player for striking out. Unless you are out there jumping and taking an active role in what goes on, your voice carries only in your own bathroom.
If you want change, get out there on the playing field.

I took a turn at bat. Example: Me: "XXX/DZO is doing AFF w/o a rating, I have video." RD: "What do you want me to do, take away a rating he doesn't have?" USPA doesn't care. Like you point out, they know DZ's treat the 'pledge' as a joke and they don't care. Just send'm a check. Who is looking out for the student's interests? No one. By the time they figure out that the DZ was violating the BSR's, it is too late and the cycle continues. Prime example: USPA lowering the standards to become an AFFI.

"I'm invoking the 'take your turn at bat' rule." is a copt-out. You wanted on the BOD, so did the other BOD's. Do your job and fix it. Quit making weak excuses why a DZ doesn't follow the BSR's/FAR's.

Derek


exnavykds  (B 28231)

Oct 11, 2005, 6:47 AM
Post #31 of 141 (1862 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
It's ok for the radio operator to get a can of Coke during climb to altitude.

You seem pretty quick to come to the defense of a DZO with very few, if any, facts to back up your assumptions. When you have a DZ that is conducting first jump courses with a total of TWO staff members present, one of which is the chief instructor/S&TA/pilot and the other is the jumpmaster, who do you think is available to man the radio? (Much less conduct radio or some other form of ground communication with the students while landing)

Looking over the posts, there seems to be about a 70/30 split here, with 70% saying something needs to be done, and 30% saying ignore it or take your business elsewhere.


mark  (D 6108)

Oct 11, 2005, 7:07 AM
Post #32 of 141 (1847 views)
Shortcut
Re: [exnavykds] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
[W]ho do you think is available to man the radio? (Much less conduct radio or some other form of ground communication with the students while landing.)

I do not know the specifics of this situation. More generally, though, there is a gap between what is legal and what is prudent.

Prudent would be a knowledgeable person on the ground, manning a radio link to the aircraft, and manning either the primary or back-up radio link to receiver-equipped students under canopy.

Legally, though, there is no FAR or BSR requirement for dz radio communication with the aircraft. The dz ground-to-air communication to the aircraft may be panels or smoke. If the FCC didn't mind, it could be cell phone. The person manning the ground-to-air communication does not need to have any ratings, and could be a whuffo, spouse or student. The FAA requirement is for contact with ATC. And there is no FAR or BSR requirement for student radios.

Mark


exnavykds  (B 28231)

Oct 11, 2005, 7:22 AM
Post #33 of 141 (1839 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mark] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Legally, though, there is no FAR or BSR requirement for dz radio communication with the aircraft. The dz ground-to-air communication to the aircraft may be panels or smoke.


BSR section H, item 3 states that manned ground-to-air communications are to be present on the dropzone during skydiving operations.

Again, speaking up for a DZO with little or no facts to back up your assumptions. One pilot, one jump master, two students, one experienced jumper, all in the same plane - who is manning the communications on the ground?! No one, no whuffo, no spouse, no student. Every warm body on the DZ is in the plane.


tombuch  (D 8514)

Oct 11, 2005, 7:39 AM
Post #34 of 141 (1828 views)
Shortcut
Re: [exnavykds] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Legally, though, there is no FAR or BSR requirement for dz radio communication with the aircraft. The dz ground-to-air communication to the aircraft may be panels or smoke.


BSR section H, item 3 states that manned ground-to-air communications are to be present on the dropzone during skydiving operations.

Again, speaking up for a DZO with little or no facts to back up your assumptions. One pilot, one jump master, two students, one experienced jumper, all in the same plane - who is manning the communications on the ground?! No one, no whuffo, no spouse, no student. Every warm body on the DZ is in the plane.

Kevin:

I agree that every drop zone should have a ground radio that will reach the airplane, and every student should have a radio receiver for canopy control instruction. It doesn't always work out that way, although again it should.

If we go way back in time, there were no radios and students were "talked in" by bullhorn or a big arrow that somebody on the ground pointed in the direction they were to turn. Radios are far better. Some drop zones only use radios for the first few jumps, and some let the instructor jump with the transmitter and then talk the students down when he lands. It's not the best way to handle it, but it is "legal" under the BSR's.

There is no requirement for actual radios. A drop zone MUST have some way to communicate with the airplane, and that can be satisfied with smoke or a big fabric "X" that somebody pulls out to say "don't jump." That somebody could be a whuffo, or a non-rated skydiver. Again, that's not the best way to handle communications, but I believe it is legal under the BSR's.

A formal FAA radio to reach the airplane is a really good idea, and portables are only a few hundred dollars. Not every drop zone will have a "manned" base station, or even an available portable, but they are good ideas. Still, they are not required.

Several of your other issues seem far more serious to me. The radio isssue you write about strikes me as a reflection of a very poor safety culture, but not a violation in itself.
.


livendive  (D 21415)

Oct 11, 2005, 7:53 AM
Post #35 of 141 (1822 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Hooknswoop] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
On the students packing for other students. The 'supervision' part means that a rigger is available. It does not mean a rigger has to stand watch over each and every pack job.

Actually, it does. In the latest revision, the FAA added the word "direct" preceding supervision. This is to clarify that the rigger isn't just supposed to available, but actually supervising.

"(a) The main parachute must have been packed within 120 days before the date of its use of a certificated parachute rigger, the person making the next jump with that parachute, or a non-certificated person under the direct supervision of a certification parachute rigger."

From the definitions at 14 CFR 105.3
Quote:
Direct Supervision means that a certificated rigger personally
observes a non-certificated person packing a main parachute to the
extent necessary to ensure that it is being done properly, and takes
responsibility for that packing.

Blues,
Dave


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Oct 11, 2005, 10:13 AM
Post #36 of 141 (1788 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nvanduyn] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
To not have an AAD on a student rig is just scary. If a student were to freak out, trying to remember everything, and loses altitude awareness...

splat



Crazy

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hee!
Hee!
That was the norm when I started jumping back in the 1970s. I also remember the DZO telling me (a freefall student doing 15 second delays) "quit being such a wimp and give that AAD-equipped [chest] reserve to a firs-timer."
These days, 10-year-old Expert Cypres can be picked up for a song, ergo electronic AADs are inexpensive insurance.
Standards are slowly improving.


(This post was edited by riggerrob on Oct 11, 2005, 10:18 AM)


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Oct 11, 2005, 12:08 PM
Post #37 of 141 (1763 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Yep. An AAD (then called an AOD) was only required for my first freefall. After that, it cost $2 extra to rent a reserve with an AAD on it.

But I did have to buy an altimeter to do delays higher than 15 seconds -- any combination of counting and maneuvers was seen as being a dumb idea (and it probably is).

Wendy W.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Oct 11, 2005, 12:32 PM
Post #38 of 141 (1751 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tombuch] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Kevin:

I agree that every drop zone should have a ground radio that will reach the airplane, and every student should have a radio receiver for canopy control instruction. It doesn't always work out that way, although again it should.

i think he is saying there is no manned radio, no bull-horn, no smoke, no paddles, nothing. I.E. no manned communications.

Derek


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005, 12:37 PM
Post #39 of 141 (1747 views)
Shortcut
Re: [exnavykds] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

>Looking over the posts, there seems to be about a 70/30 split here,
> with 70% saying something needs to be done, and 30% saying
> ignore it or take your business elsewhere.

I recall an incident a while back where I bought a new car (a Honda CRX) and it made a funny noise. I mentioned this to some bored government contractors at lunch one day. By the end of lunch they had diagnosed it (a power steering pump belt or bearing) come up with a quick fix (gummy stuff to spray on the belt) a permanent fix (return to dealer for warranty repair) a general theory on the issue (foreign cars suck) a general overall conclusion (it's these cruddy foreign cars that are destroying america) a grand strategy (they should tax all imported cars really heavily) and left satisfied they had solved the problem.

When I looked at it later, it was a leaf poking through the radiator shroud hitting the fan. I summoned up all my engineering education and experience and removed the leaf. Lo and behold it fixed the problem.

So it's great that people come to conclusions, but I've learned that often it's better to wait to see what the problem really is before deciding on a solution.


MakeItHappen

Oct 11, 2005, 1:11 PM
Post #40 of 141 (1737 views)
Shortcut
Re: [exnavykds] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
You seem pretty quick to come to the defense of a DZO with very few, if any, facts to back up your assumptions. When you have a DZ that is conducting first jump courses with a total of TWO staff members present, one of which is the chief instructor/S&TA/pilot and the other is the jumpmaster, who do you think is available to man the radio? (Much less conduct radio or some other form of ground communication with the students while landing)

I threw in that Coke example because sometimes newer jumpers see stuff they think is a major safety gig, when it is not. You did not give specifics (at the time of my post) to indicate what type of things you had seen.

As others have said, there are no requirements to communicate with students under canopy. It's a good thing, but not mandatory.

It sounds like a very tiny Cessna DZ. Maybe the day you saw the un-manned radio was the day 3 people called in sick??? Is this a recurring problem? Maybe you can be 'on-call' for this dz when they are short-handed?
This is not 'defending' the dz, just asking questions about its operations.

About the packing (thanks Dave for the definition) - a rigger will hover over someone learning to pack. Once they are proficient, the rigger can go do other things as long as he's available to answer questions and it still meets the " Direct Supervision means that a certificated rigger personally observes a non-certificated person packing a main parachute to the extent necessary" requirement. You should come to the next PIA Symposium and hear the riggers hash this out.

I think the biggest problem the dzo faces is getting new AADs with an apparently small budget. Maybe you can help find some second hand AADs. The dzo could sell one or two rigs or increase prices to get a better AAD for some of the rigs. Then he could build some cash flow to replace the other AADs.

Is this DZ a Group Member?

GM or not, I think your best course of action is to contact the RD.

.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Oct 11, 2005, 1:46 PM
Post #41 of 141 (1719 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
About the packing (thanks Dave for the definition) - a rigger will hover over someone learning to pack. Once they are proficient, the rigger can go do other things as long as he's available to answer questions and it still meets the " Direct Supervision means that a certificated rigger personally observes a non-certificated person packing a main parachute to the extent necessary" requirement. You should come to the next PIA Symposium and hear the riggers hash this out.

It doesn't say "is available", it says "personally observes" and "direct supervision". That means they have to watch the parachute being packed. The FAA changed the FAR specifically to address this. How can a rigger "personally observe" if they aren't standing there watching it being packed?

As for riggers debating the FAR's, LOL! Get rigger's opinons on who may alter a mainSly. The only opinion that matters is the FAA's.

Why does the USPA allow DZ's that violate the FAR's/BSR's to continue to GM DZ's? What about the pledge? What exactly does "self-regulate" mean? Do whatever you want and police yourself? Anarchy?

Derek


AndyMan  (D 25698)

Oct 11, 2005, 1:56 PM
Post #42 of 141 (1714 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It sounds like a very tiny Cessna DZ. Maybe the day you saw the un-manned radio was the day 3 people called in sick??? Is this a recurring problem? Maybe you can be 'on-call' for this dz when they are short-handed?
This is not 'defending' the dz, just asking questions about its operations.

Yes, it is defending the DZ.

You're making excuses for a DZ who isn't obeing FARs and BSR's. You're suggesting students and customers volunteer their time to help a DZ obey the rules?

Quite frankly, that's astounding.

If the USPA isn't going to take a hard line on basic safety issues, how the hell is a low-time jumper supposed to?!?!?

_Am


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Oct 11, 2005, 2:00 PM
Post #43 of 141 (1710 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If the USPA isn't going to take a hard line on basic safety issues, how the hell is a low-time jumper supposed to?!?!?

Clearly USPA doesn't do anything except say they are breaking the rules and if you don't like it, you do something. Thanks a lot. This is one of the big reasons I quit skydiving. USPA is a joke.

Derek


MakeItHappen

Oct 11, 2005, 3:11 PM
Post #44 of 141 (1697 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
It sounds like a very tiny Cessna DZ. Maybe the day you saw the un-manned radio was the day 3 people called in sick??? Is this a recurring problem? Maybe you can be 'on-call' for this dz when they are short-handed?
This is not 'defending' the dz, just asking questions about its operations.

Yes, it is defending the DZ.

You're making excuses for a DZ who isn't obeing FARs and BSR's. You're suggesting students and customers volunteer their time to help a DZ obey the rules?

Quite frankly, that's astounding.

If the USPA isn't going to take a hard line on basic safety issues, how the hell is a low-time jumper supposed to?!?!?

_Am


Let me give you an analogy.

Say there is some newly minted A license holder that you happened to come across.
This jumper has 'not tracked off', 'pulled underneath others', ' did not wave off', 'cut someone off on final', 'did a low turn', etc, etc. He endangered himself as well as others.

Most jumpers would try and help this jumper out. A one-on-one jump, a mini-safety lecture, a tracking class etc

Very few jumpers would tell this jumper to 'get the hell out of here - you are a danger to us all and we don't want you.'

Now, with these DZs that are generally smaller, some people want USPA to just shout 'Get the hell out of here - we don't want you.'

Other people realize that with just the right amount of 'training' these dzs can be just as safe and viable as the big-wig hot shot dzs.

If you think helping a jumper is ok, then you should also think that helping a dz is an overall benefit to the sport.
It is the same social mechanism at work, just different customers.

.


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Oct 11, 2005, 3:20 PM
Post #45 of 141 (1685 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Let me give you an analogy.

Say there is some newly minted A license holder that you happened to come across.
This jumper has 'not tracked off', 'pulled underneath others', ' did not wave off', 'cut someone off on final', 'did a low turn', etc, etc. He endangered himself as well as others.

Let me fix the anaolgy for you: Same jumper, knows he should wave off, track, etc, but doesn't care. Doesn't want to learn how to do that stuff and tells everyone he does know how to track and wave off and does on every jump. In fact he will sign something (pledge) to that effect.

I'm not helping someone that doesn't want help and lies about what they do and know and I'm not going to try and tell people that they are OK and just need some guidence.

Derek


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005, 3:29 PM
Post #46 of 141 (1678 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Hooknswoop] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

>Same jumper, knows he should wave off, track, etc, but doesn't
>care. Doesn't want to learn how to do that stuff and tells everyone he
>does know how to track and wave off and does on every jump.

Now, Derek, you've been around skydiving long enough to know that that is EXACTLY what a lot of newbies do. "I can handle that canopy! I'm not incompetent." "I wasn't backsliding - the rest of the people were floating." "I am flat tracking!" I see these people every year at the WFFC; heck, I'm one of the people who volunteers to plan dives for them so they don't kill themselves by getting in over their heads. Most people have some compassion for these newbies, because many of them were that way themselves.

Jan's point that USPA tends to try to help GM's first is a good one, although I would also point out to her that there are times when you have to realize the carrot isn't working any more. Which they often realize; several GM's memberships have been pulled over the years for various reasons.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Oct 11, 2005, 3:31 PM
Post #47 of 141 (1680 views)
Shortcut
Re: [exnavykds] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm not sure I'm clear on how you can make the assumption that I'm over reacting since, up to this point, we are talking in hypothetical generalities.

This sure as hell does not sound like hypothetical generalities to me. You are giving chapter and verse.

Quote:
If we are dealing with ONLY the violations I witnessed first hand, we can start with these...

BSR section H, item 3 states that manned ground-to-air communications are to be present on the dropzone during skydiving operations.

BSR section K, item 2.d states that all students are to be equipped with a functional automatic activation device (AAD) that meets manufacturer’s recommended service schedule (this is also mandated in FAA regulations, section 105.43.c).

BSR section K, item 2.f states that a steerable reserve canopy appropriate to the student’s weight be provided.

BSR section K, item 2.g states that a freefall student must be equipped with a ripcord-activated, spring-loaded, pilot-chute-equipped main parachute or a bottom-of-container (BOC) throw-out pilot chute.

FAA regulations, section 65.111 clearly sets forth the criteria as to who can and cannot pack a main parachute.

FAA regulations, section 105.43 states that a reserve parachute must have been packed by a certifificated parachute rigger within 120 days before its use.

It appears you may have a personal ax to grind in this deal. Is there more to this story that you are not telling us?

Sparky

No I am not defending the DZO, just wondering what the whole story is.


(This post was edited by mjosparky on Oct 11, 2005, 3:34 PM)


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Oct 11, 2005, 4:19 PM
Post #48 of 141 (1650 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
to track and wave off and does on every jump.

Now, Derek, you've been around skydiving long enough to know that that is EXACTLY what a lot of newbies do.

Sure, but we aren't talking about a newbie. Sounds like this DZ has been around for at least a little while and you can;t convince me they don't know they are violating the FAR's and BSR's willfully. Then to sign the pledge that says they aren't breaking them.....I have no sympathy and USPA lets them do it.

You don't let newbies get away with that crap either.

Derek


(This post was edited by Hooknswoop on Oct 11, 2005, 4:20 PM)


exnavykds  (B 28231)

Oct 11, 2005, 5:08 PM
Post #49 of 141 (1634 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
This sure as hell does not sound like hypothetical generalities to me. You are giving chapter and verse.

Actually Sparky, if you take the thread in context, I was asked what kind of rules and regs were being violated. I listed a few, certainly not all, without giving any specifics about the nature of the violations. Nice try though.

Quote:
It appears you may have a personal ax to grind in this deal. Is there more to this story that you are not telling us?

This is a typical company-line response. Vilify the witness and take the attention off the accused. Sparky, you'd make a good trial lawyer. I suppose now, in self-defense, I'd have to call to the stand 20 or so eye witnesses to verify my testimony? LOL

I think we're missing the point here. The question is, what actions, if any, should be taken. This is not about putting a DZ out of business, its about correcting a problem and making our sport safer. If its acceptable for a DZ to violate BSRs then lets eliminate the word "rule" which implies that they are set forth by some authority for the purpose of being followed. Lets call them BSGs (basic safety guidelines) or, better yet, BSSs (basic safety suggestions).


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Oct 11, 2005, 5:57 PM
Post #50 of 141 (1604 views)
Shortcut
Re: [exnavykds] USPA and FAA reg violations [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This is a typical company-line response.

it's also a reflex response to particularly vigorous online complaints about a business, too. Over the past 10 years I've seen some real doozies, sometimes from fired employees.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)