Forums: Archive: 2013-2015 USPA BOD Elections:
Summer BOD Meeting

 


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Feb 21, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #1 of 32 (4268 views)
Shortcut
Summer BOD Meeting Can't Post

Well looking forward, the next meeting is scheduled for August 3,4,and 5th in Minneapolis.

In the hopes it becomes a tradition, I will be organizing a jump day on Thursday August 2nd at Twin Cities. The last jump day had exactly 10 BOD members and 5 USPA Staff present. The weather was good and the sights were awesome at Skydive San Diego. We all had the opportunity to chat with the locals, making for a great day.

The purpose is to get out there meet and greet members and be available for any comments or concerns prior to the meeting. Keep in mind there are a lot of BOD members who follow these threads so they are listening and if need be can be contacted during the year if you have any problems. They are there for you the members and they should be representing accordingly.

I hope to see you there.

Blue Sky's
Rich Winstock
National Director


topdocker  (D 12018)

Feb 21, 2012, 10:11 AM
Post #2 of 32 (4187 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Rich-

lets do some CRW this time!

Craig


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Feb 21, 2012, 1:54 PM
Post #3 of 32 (4157 views)
Shortcut
Re: [topdocker] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

and pay all tolls, Dammit!


topdocker  (D 12018)

Feb 21, 2012, 4:49 PM
Post #4 of 32 (4135 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

I have no knowledge of what you are talking about.

top


Premier MidwestFreefall  (D 11112)

Feb 21, 2012, 8:06 PM
Post #5 of 32 (4119 views)
Shortcut
Re: [topdocker] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Me Neither...


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Feb 22, 2012, 9:48 AM
Post #6 of 32 (4076 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Well looking forward, the next meeting is scheduled for August 3,4,and 5th in Minneapolis.

In the hopes it becomes a tradition, I will be organizing a jump day on Thursday August 2nd at Twin Cities. The last jump day had exactly 10 BOD members and 5 USPA Staff present. The weather was good and the sights were awesome at Skydive San Diego. We all had the opportunity to chat with the locals, making for a great day.

The purpose is to get out there meet and greet members and be available for any comments or concerns prior to the meeting. Keep in mind there are a lot of BOD members who follow these threads so they are listening and if need be can be contacted during the year if you have any problems. They are there for you the members and they should be representing accordingly.

I hope to see you there.

Blue Sky's
Rich Winstock
National Director

Put VISIBLE Altimeters back on ALL Students.

Matt


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 22, 2012, 6:32 PM
Post #7 of 32 (4041 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Update the SIM to cover PLF's going forward/backward (ya know, almost like these canopies go in a direction other than straight down). Maybe then people will realize it's not suppose to be feet-knees-face (though I do get a kick out of watching people do it to demonstrate they know how during coach courses)

I talked to Jim Crouch about that a while back and he said it would be in the new SIM and it's not.


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Feb 23, 2012, 4:06 PM
Post #8 of 32 (3991 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Well looking forward, the next meeting is scheduled for August 3,4,and 5th in Minneapolis.

In the hopes it becomes a tradition, I will be organizing a jump day on Thursday August 2nd at Twin Cities. The last jump day had exactly 10 BOD members and 5 USPA Staff present. The weather was good and the sights were awesome at Skydive San Diego. We all had the opportunity to chat with the locals, making for a great day.

The purpose is to get out there meet and greet members and be available for any comments or concerns prior to the meeting. Keep in mind there are a lot of BOD members who follow these threads so they are listening and if need be can be contacted during the year if you have any problems. They are there for you the members and they should be representing accordingly.

I hope to see you there.

Blue Sky's
Rich Winstock
National Director

Put VISIBLE Altimeters back on ALL Students.

Matt

Make those items "recommended" a BSR. Camera Jumps being the first one to fix!

Make the Coach requirement 200 jumps.

Keep the 12 months as a Coach before getting an I rating, keep the "or over 500 Jumps", but ENFORCE the Instructional Requirements. The number of Coached Jumps and FJC's etc.

Raise Tandem I to 1000 Jumps.

Make the Handcam a 200 Tandem Jump minimum.

Make Handle checks a BSR.

Make overall Safety and Quality Student Training a Priority, not the DZO's pocket book the priority.

All DZO's on the BOD should recuse themselves from votes that cover any of the above items, as well as ones that include disciplinary actions if they themselves (or any BOD member) have been involved in unsafe skydiving operations and actions, to include FAR Violation sthey either admitted to or witnessed and did nothing to stop. (they should actually resign, but I will accept not running this time too).

Matt


loudtom  (D 23115)

Feb 24, 2012, 6:11 PM
Post #9 of 32 (3935 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Matt when are you going to run for board again???


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Feb 25, 2012, 12:16 PM
Post #10 of 32 (3903 views)
Shortcut
Re: [loudtom] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Matt when are you going to run for board again???

I am still debating even renewing my membership. I can jump at good DZ's with out one.

Matt


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Feb 25, 2012, 3:55 PM
Post #11 of 32 (3893 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

There are those that have the same views as you trust me. Wink


SStewart  (D 10405)

Feb 25, 2012, 4:39 PM
Post #12 of 32 (3890 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Matt when are you going to run for board again???

I am still debating even renewing my membership. I can jump at good DZ's with out one.

Matt

I have felt the same way many times Matt and I hope you reconsider. We need people like you on the board.


(This post was edited by SStewart on Feb 25, 2012, 8:06 PM)


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 27, 2012, 10:07 AM
Post #13 of 32 (3842 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SStewart] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Matt when are you going to run for board again???

I am still debating even renewing my membership. I can jump at good DZ's with out one.

Matt

I have felt the same way many times Matt and I hope you reconsider. We need people like you on the board.

I'd vote for him.


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Feb 27, 2012, 10:10 AM
Post #14 of 32 (3840 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SStewart] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Matt when are you going to run for board again???

I am still debating even renewing my membership. I can jump at good DZ's with out one.

Matt

I have felt the same way many times Matt and I hope you reconsider. We need people like you on the board.

Well, my member ship renewal is laying on the kitchen table, expires March 31st. I will think about renewing, as to the other thing, not right now, thinking about it that is. Thinking about two things is just too much work!Wink

Matt


trumanjsparks

Feb 28, 2012, 3:07 PM
Post #15 of 32 (3784 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Safety, ratings, things that keep stupid people from killing themselves....blah, blah, blah.
The only thing the BOD needs to know about MPLS is Art Songs Wings and Ribs. 42nd St and Nicolette Ave. Can't go wrong.


topdocker  (D 12018)

Feb 29, 2012, 12:09 AM
Post #16 of 32 (3753 views)
Shortcut
Re: [trumanjsparks] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Safety, ratings, things that keep stupid people from killing themselves....blah, blah, blah.
The only thing the BOD needs to know about MPLS is Art Songs Wings and Ribs. 42nd St and Nicolette Ave. Can't go wrong.

Ahhh, some advice I can sink my teeth into!

top


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Feb 29, 2012, 9:46 AM
Post #17 of 32 (3729 views)
Shortcut
Re: [trumanjsparks] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Safety, ratings, things that keep stupid people from killing themselves....blah, blah, blah.
The only thing the BOD needs to know about MPLS is Art Songs Wings and Ribs. 42nd St and Nicolette Ave. Can't go wrong.

If that is advice from you, that would make the trip worth it for sure!

Matt


Premier skybytch  (D License)

Mar 5, 2012, 7:51 PM
Post #18 of 32 (3627 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I am still debating even renewing my membership. I can jump at good DZ's with out one.

Wish I could. But the need to get the knees in the breeze after almost 2 years is going to force me to pay the money. Dammit.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Mar 6, 2012, 3:21 PM
Post #19 of 32 (3585 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Well looking forward, the next meeting is scheduled for August 3,4,and 5th in Minneapolis.

In the hopes it becomes a tradition, I will be organizing a jump day on Thursday August 2nd at Twin Cities. The last jump day had exactly 10 BOD members and 5 USPA Staff present. The weather was good and the sights were awesome at Skydive San Diego. We all had the opportunity to chat with the locals, making for a great day.

The purpose is to get out there meet and greet members and be available for any comments or concerns prior to the meeting. Keep in mind there are a lot of BOD members who follow these threads so they are listening and if need be can be contacted during the year if you have any problems. They are there for you the members and they should be representing accordingly.

I hope to see you there.

Blue Sky's
Rich Winstock
National Director

Put VISIBLE Altimeters back on ALL Students.

Matt

Make those items "recommended" a BSR. Camera Jumps being the first one to fix!

Make the Coach requirement 200 jumps.

Keep the 12 months as a Coach before getting an I rating, keep the "or over 500 Jumps", but ENFORCE the Instructional Requirements. The number of Coached Jumps and FJC's etc.

Raise Tandem I to 1000 Jumps.

Make the Handcam a 200 Tandem Jump minimum.

Make Handle checks a BSR.

Make overall Safety and Quality Student Training a Priority, not the DZO's pocket book the priority.

All DZO's on the BOD should recuse themselves from votes that cover any of the above items, as well as ones that include disciplinary actions if they themselves (or any BOD member) have been involved in unsafe skydiving operations and actions, to include FAR Violation sthey either admitted to or witnessed and did nothing to stop. (they should actually resign, but I will accept not running this time too).

Matt

Im down with 200 jumps for coach. Its just silly to say Cessna DZs wont be able to operate if this is changed. That's the excuse iv been hearing for years.


skyjumpenfool  (Student)

Mar 13, 2012, 12:56 PM
Post #20 of 32 (3502 views)
Shortcut
Re: [topdocker] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Hey Top... Your old CRW f-111 is here at Skydive Twin Cities. If you come up, are you willing to do some F111 CRW? Wink

Wink


topdocker  (D 12018)

Mar 13, 2012, 9:37 PM
Post #21 of 32 (3473 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjumpenfool] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hey Top... Your old CRW f-111 is here at Skydive Twin Cities. If you come up, are you willing to do some F111 CRW? Wink

Wink

How about i bring some more modern canopies and we jump them!?
Otherwise, yeah I would jump it.

top


SkydiverDZO  (D 29918)

Apr 9, 2012, 6:03 PM
Post #22 of 32 (3321 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

+1


Premier RickH  (D 18955)

Apr 16, 2012, 4:35 PM
Post #23 of 32 (3231 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

 

A while back, USPA asked DZO's for their input regarding what we were doing to address High performance landings at our perspective DZ's. I wrote a letter with my input.

First and foremost, a minimum jump number requirement (let's say 500 for arguments sake). Secondly, once you reach the jump number requirement, each DZO or S&TA at their DZ will determine by watching your canopy skills during this time frame to determine if you are a "candidate" to be a high performance canopy pilot, i.e. do you make proper decisions, not endangering the lives of yourself and others. Once you have been deemed a candidate, the DZO or S&TA will sign off your "candidate" card so that you can attend a High Performance canopy course, taught by skilled and licensed canopy instructors (Rated Course). After successful completion of the course, you are now the holder of an official :Canopy Pilot License. This endorsement would appear on your USPA card. This doesn't mean that you are cleared for 720's and attending swoop comps, this license is your license to learn. If you are not using due care and sticking with the guidelines set forth by the course, you can receive disciplinary action by the S&TA..progressive discipline: verbal warning, remedial training, suspension and finally revocation of your license for continued violations.

This way when 'DUMBASS" appears at my DZ,and when his gear is inspected while filling out our waiver and we notice his "Backpack" size container, he will then be asked to show his proficiency and skill level to fly his canopy by showing his High performance Canopy License. NO LICENSE, NO JUMP! If a DZO allows this person to jump that canopy without documented proof that they are capable, then they should be held negligent, in the case of an accident.

I have seen too many "low time" jumpers leave my DZ and go to another so that they will be allowed to jump their tiny canopies. These people are endangering the lives of everyone else that is in the air with them.

Example: I have a drivers license, does it mean I can drive a semi truck full of hazardous materials? No..I have to have special training and a license to prove it. I have a pilot license to fly single engine planes only...if i want to fly a jet...special training and license, twin engines, special training and license...etc.

I have an AFF, Tandem, Static Line , Pro and Tandem I/E, all special training I had to get to receive these licenses all required by USPA to conduct such activities> I am required to receive continuous training in order to keep my licenses current. As much as the USPA enjoys charging us for these licenses, here is another license that they can make more money from.

I here the term.."we should just police ourselves" IT AIN'T WORKING FOLKS"!!!!! The number one killer our sport..Dying under open parachutes..

Until USPA stops turning their heads and closing their eyes, this pattern will only worsen!!!!


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Apr 19, 2012, 7:57 AM
Post #24 of 32 (3175 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RickH] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Hey Rick,

I definately agree with your sentiments whole heartily....and I can with certainty say so does the full BOD especially the S&T committee. Even if I said lets go ahead and implement everything you said, there is a huge problem. It is not that our heads are in the sand at all. The problem is that each small idea must be completely thought out and vetted to some degree. Let me give you an example. you mentioned that once approved by the S&TA and DZO then they should take a advanced or high performance canopy course. Now that sounds great and please understand I am on your side with it but let me show you how the cogs slow down with just that one idea. The following questions WILL arise:
1) Who can teach the course?
2) How or what path can an instructor take to get that particular rating?
3) If we create that rating, who will teach it, where will we get the syllabus, how do we roll it out?
4) Now once created what impact will it create internally on our staff to oversee it?
5) What syllabus will we use, who will come up with the material, the course? Who will teach the Canopy high performance instructors to teach it?
6) What are the prerequisites for the course, the instructor, the candidate?
7) Who will come up with the instructor course and who will teach that?
8) Will we grandfather those in that are already competent?
9) Will we grandfather those who are already teaching canopy courses?
10) How will these new ratings fall into the hierarchy of ratings within USPA?


These are exactly what will have to be tackled to get just this one small request done. Can it be done? Yes but it will take a shit ton of work, and a shit ton of time. The current BOD up until this next election only sits for 2 years or four meetings. Then you have to start from scratch again. Yes the three year term will help get important things done but work in the interim will be mandatory. We are working on determining all of the above questions for a wingsuit rating right now. That means the sub committee is working in between meetings to answer all of the above questions. Not an easy task.

I am not being a nah sayer at all, I am just pointing out the process is very difficult to navigate through. I came onto the BOD wanting to change the world, but unfortunately as much as I would like to do, it has to be done slow and methodical. We can not make any knee jerk reactions to any one situation. Not saying this would be a knee jerk reaction by the way.

Anyhow, I can assure you that your thoughts and concerns are well represented and that all of us would like to see the statistics improve.

Rich Winstock
National Director


davelepka  (D 21448)

May 18, 2012, 8:03 AM
Post #25 of 32 (2912 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Even if I said lets go ahead and implement everything you said, there is a huge problem. It is not that our heads are in the sand at all. The problem is that each small idea must be completely thought out and vetted to some degree.

Of coruse. What's your excuse for not implementing anything he said, or anything anyone has said?

What about some basic WL restrictions? They've been in use for years in many countries, who all report very low numbers of open canopy incidents.

Brian Germain publushed a great chart many years ago, why not just implement that to start with? It's already written, just make it a 'rule' and put it in place. Allow jumpers to keep their current canopy, but require them to adhere to the chart for a downsize.

Here's the real problem with your response to the poster, you correctly point out the laundry list of steps that need to be taken, but that's it. There's no time-table, no inidcation that you're going to get started, it's just a 'it's complicated', and then nothing.

My daughter asked me how to bake a cake for grandma's birthday, and I said there's a lot of steps to baking a cake. HOWEVER, then I pulled out a mixing bowl and some flour and got to work knocking down those steps, one at a time, until we had a cake. Get it?

How about this - come up with a plan, an idea for how we can better train and equip jumpers in the areas of canopy control and selection. Then plot out all the steps needed to make it happen, and a rough time-table for completing those steps. Finally, appoint someone to tackle step #1 and let them get to work.

That would be progress, and it would represent far more then we've seen from the BOD on this issue in the past.

Here's a hint I've mentioned before - take advantage of the resources you have available. Talk to the people who are curently running canopy control courses and see what their thoughts are. Interview them seperately, and see if there are 'common threads' between what they say, this is how you discover the more widespread problems, and can help you to better tailor the USPA canopy control courses.

Here's another hint (and one that won't be popular with DZOs, both on the BOD or otherwise) - if the plan requires extra effort from them in the areas of administration and enfrocement and they protest on those grounds, fuck them. Think about it, if you require every jumper to take canopy control courses and to adhere to a WL limitation, it's going to cost every jumper time and money to do their part to solve this problem, and DZOs can put their fair share and take on the workload of shuffling papers and enforcing the rules. This is a huge problem for the entire sport, and it's going to take effort from everyone (jumpers, DZOs, BODs, etc) to solve it.

There no free lunch, but the problem at hand is that the BOD is made up of DZOs, and when it comes to voting on how much DZOs should pay for lunch, which way do you think their going to vote?


wmw999  (D 6296)

May 18, 2012, 8:12 AM
Post #26 of 32 (570 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
There no free lunch
And there's no way for a solution to be thought of that won't make someone unhappy. And that someone will spend a lot of BOD time talking to them, when they'd really rather just keep going.

This is a time when it might be tougher to be a BOD member, really, if anything is going to be legislated about wing loading. People will be nominated in the future based on their views on this issue, and on whether they think they can either enforce or dismantle any regulations.

For a BOD member, it's kind of like a lose-lose situation. That's part of the job, but might just be part of the reason why they're kind of loath to take the lead here.

Wendy P.


davelepka  (D 21448)

May 18, 2012, 8:25 AM
Post #27 of 32 (564 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wmw999] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
This is a time when it might be tougher to be a BOD member, really, if anything is going to be legislated about wing loading. People will be nominated in the future based on their views on this issue, and on whether they think they can either enforce or dismantle any regulations.

For a BOD member, it's kind of like a lose-lose situation. That's part of the job, but might just be part of the reason why they're kind of loath to take the lead here.

I accept your analysis of the situation, but not that it's a valid reason for the inaction.

Not a single current BOD member was elected before this problem had been apparent and long standing, and if they took a leadership position within the comminuty, it's their reposnsibility to lead, and that includes taking care of the tough issues.

It's a clear dereliction of duty on a grand and sweeping scale. The US is by and far the most active and highest concentration of jumpers, DZs, and manufacturers on the planet, yet our governing body has let this issue sit idle for years.

There simply is no excuse for canopy control and selection to be the #1 issue for the BOD. Literally 100's of jumpers have died under open canopies, and 10 times that have been severly injured, and this is not on the top of the page for the BOD?


wmw999  (D 6296)

May 18, 2012, 8:30 AM
Post #28 of 32 (560 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

It's not that it's a valid reason, it's just a reason. People are people, and not all of them are brave in the face of disapproval of their peers. One way around it is to form another peer group to provide support; effectively an organized PAC that will run some interference for the BOD members who do what the peer group wants.

Kind of like how it happens with the PACs in congress today Unimpressed. It's politics, and it's how things happen. But if you treat it as a human organizational problem, rather than as a technical problem, the reason for the inaction becomes clearer.

Wendy P.


(This post was edited by wmw999 on May 18, 2012, 8:32 AM)


Para5-0  (D 19054)

May 22, 2012, 12:56 PM
Post #29 of 32 (500 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
"How about this - come up with a plan, an idea for how we can better train and equip jumpers in the areas of canopy control and selection. Then plot out all the steps needed to make it happen, and a rough time-table for completing those steps. Finally, appoint someone to tackle step #1 and let them get to work."

Okay- I dont have time for a lenghty response but believe me when I say I understand how to get started. I just didnt have two hours to spell it out in one response. I along with others tackled the B license proficiency card and implemented it. This was done by the second meeting. For something so seemingly sinple it took monthes of work, hundreds of emails, tons of calls. Each member is working on specific items. Specifically, I am the chair of the Wingsuit Instructor sub committee. My task is to gather as much information from the field as possible and organize it and come up with a recommendation by next meeting. Just gander the wingsuit thread on it. We are attempting to include as many people as possible (reaching out for help) and not waste time in doing it. The canopy issue is an ever evolving issue and we will continue to change it. In fact we already made several improvements. I am also trying to tackle making canopy evaluations air and ground part of the AFF I/C course.

For lack of a better description, "this shit takes time"

I admit I volunteered for the job but it is very easy for 32000 members to sit back and say I would do this or that. I enjoy working towards a goal and watching it come to fruition, especially if you can attribute it to potentially saving lives.

Rich


(This post was edited by Para5-0 on May 22, 2012, 2:43 PM)


davelepka  (D 21448)

May 22, 2012, 9:15 PM
Post #30 of 32 (473 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Rich,

We've talked before, and I know you're a good dude and trying the best you can. Keep in mind that when I point out the things I do, I'm calling out the BOD as a whole. Just like there's nothing one person can do to make the changes I suggest, I don't want one person taking what I say personally. I speak about the BOD as a whole, because it would take an effort from the BOD as a whole to make changes.

In this case, look at your response to me. You outline how your balls are to the wall tyring to get the WS Instructor rating together in time for the next meeting. You explain some of the steps you're taking and the mountain of hard work you're putting in.

Your efforts should be applauded, but at the same time I can't ignore that fact that nobody is 'front burner-ing' the canopy control issues. Who's balls are to the wall to get that together in time for the next meeting.

I'll be frank for a moment, let's face it, the hoopla about the WS rating stems from the kid who fell out of his harness during a coached WS jump. That was one kid, and maybe there's another one or two that I'm not thinking of, but that leaves three (at most) WS training related fatalities. I'm not suggesting that they're acceptable in any way, but how many canopy related fatalities have there been since the kid fell out of his harness? Again, who is buring the midnight oil getting the canopy control program together?

Let's look at the newest issue, this business with allowing tunnel time to count toward an AFF rating. This is 'front burner' enough that it took top billing in the e-mail newletter, and got it's own online poll. Who the hell put this motion forth, and why is it getting such preferential treatment? Is this urgent BOD business, are there that many tunnel instructors chomping at the bit to get AFF ratings, and that many DZOs lining up to hire them?

I'm sure you see my point, and why I made the comments you quoted. There's action and progress galore on all sorts of other issues, but the canopy control thing continues to get short-shrift, and band-aid type solutions thrown at it. It's going on a decade of clearly being the biggest problem in the skydiving community, but it just continues to appear like it can't get any traction of any kind with the BOD.

Maybe it's easy for me to sit on the outside and point fingers, but at the same time, why wouldn't I be honest with my assesent, and simply be calling it like I see it? I have no reason to bad-mouth the BOD, or any desire to see them fail. I only wish that they would prove me wrong and take swift and significant action. Maybe I'm on the outside looking it, but maybe my vantage point gives me the clearest view of what's happening.

Seriously, thanks for your hard work. Thanks to all the members of the BOD for everythying they do because all of it has a place in skydiving. It's the things they don't do, and the place some of things should be taking (center stage) that bug me.


Premier LouDiamond  (D 25931)
Moderator
May 23, 2012, 8:35 PM
Post #31 of 32 (440 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I'll be frank for a moment, let's face it, the hoopla about the WS rating stems from the kid who fell out of his harness during a coached WS jump. That was one kid, and maybe there's another one or two that I'm not thinking of, but that leaves three (at most) WS training related fatalities. I'm not suggesting that they're acceptable in any way, but how many canopy related fatalities have there been since the kid fell out of his harness? Again, who is buring the midnight oil getting the canopy control program together?


I have to say I am in agreement with this statement and the questioning of priorities. I was at the meeting in Phoenix and sat in the room with a few other people from the wingsuiting community along with Jay Stokes where he said that the USPA doesn't support or want to entertain having to run a wingsuit instructor program, its one of the reasons the BSR on 200 jump minimum was passed. Yet here we are again tabling a discussion and a committee looking to fix a non existent problem that even if it is created, will do nothing to mitigate or eliminate any of the issues that the proponents of the rating are claiming exist.

However, there exists posts here on DZ.com dating several years back where the moderators among other users even went so far as to sign a document and send it to the USPA supporting the creation of a canopy control program by the USPA to address the number of people that continually kill themselves under perfectly good canopies. And here we find ourselves almost a decade later still wondering when USPA will make this one of the front burner priorities that will be seriously addressed and steps taken to at least start a program of some kind to move us closer to a workable solution. The canopy issue is like cancer, everything else that is getting front burner attention right now is like a runny nose. These issues need to be triaged and addressed in the order that is mostly like to keep skydivers alive, even if its despite themselves.

I will concede that this is not a black and white, clear cut issue with simple and easy solutions that will keep people from killing themselves under canopy. Even after one is created and steps taken by the USPA, there will be people who will still find a way to kill themselves and others under canopy but more needs to be done NOW to move us closer to a solution instead of continuing to sit on our hands and moan about how difficult a task it is while people auger themselves into the ground. Why this issue that has claimed more peoples lives than any other issue in our sport is still not at the forefront of the USPAs "get done now" list is beyond me. The BOD needs to stop shirking this issue to the side and stay on this issue until something is instituted, then it can move onto other matters within the sport. I am well aware the BOD works hard( and most appreciate that) and tries to get things done but I can honestly say that they need to reassess their priorities.


davelepka  (D 21448)

May 23, 2012, 9:04 PM
Post #32 of 32 (438 views)
Shortcut
Re: [LouDiamond] Summer BOD Meeting [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I was at the meeting in Phoenix and sat in the room with a few other people from the wingsuiting community along with Jay Stokes where he said that the USPA doesn't support or want to entertain having to run a wingsuit instructor program, its one of the reasons the BSR on 200 jump minimum was passed. Yet here we are again tabling a discussion and a committee looking to fix a non existent problem

Just to add fuel to that fire, we had a wingsuit FJC held at our DZ this weekend by a factory rated WS instructor, and he seemed organized, preparred, and worked with a group of 4 or 5 experienced jumpers for several hours before manifesting for jump #1.

As far as I'm concerned, if that's representative of what the factory ratings produce in terms of instructors and cirriculum, I say 'problem solved' and let's move on.

It seems that in the case of WS, the manufacturers saw the writing on the wall. Perhaps it was the example set by the canopy market, but they could see that the performance of their product was rapidly advancing, and that the skills of the users would need to advance as well. So they put a program toghether, and now they have an instructional method in place, and people to teach it.

Why does the USPA feel the need to persue this issue any further? They made a brilliant move with the WS BSR, but now they're lingering on the issue, and only going to muddy the waters if they start with their own WS rating. They laid down the BSR, so let the factory rated instructors deal with the relatively small number of jumpers (with 200+ jumps) who want to fly a wingsuit.

It's not like the tandem rating, where the 'students' are primarily non-jumpers, and there are 1000's of tandems being conducted every weekend as the backbone of the DZ industry. In that case, and in that scope maybe the USPA has a place in the ratings business, but when it comes to experienced jumpers who want to fly a wingsuit? Let the factory guys do their job.



Forums : Archive : 2013-2015 USPA BOD Elections

 


Search for (options)