Forums: Skydiving: Instructors:
Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating

 


Poll: Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating
Bring back the JM rating S/L-IAD only 55 / 81%
Keep thing the way they are 13 / 19%
68 total votes
 
ufk22  (D 16168)

Mar 1, 2010, 10:47 AM
Post #1 of 10 (2147 views)
Shortcut
Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating Can't Post

This is a copy of a letter I sent to Tom Noonan, USPA Director, after reading his report about changes to the AFF requirements. PLEASE keep comments S/L, we don't need another fight about whether AFF is better or worse or if we need an AFF JM rating.

Tom

I'm a long time jumper (20 years) who came up through S/L training. I'm currently jumping at a S/L dropzone in Fargo, ND, having trained and jumped for 15 years at a different S/L DZ in southern Minnesota. Both DZs train approximately 200 S/L student per year and do about the same number of tandems. Both are "club" DZs, where no one makes much money training students, but do it to try and keep new jumpers coming into the sport. Neither DZ has been able to implement the AFF program because of staff numbers and costs to prospective students. I'm a coach-E and S/L I-E. I'm writing to you after reading your posts at DZ.com. I'm not trying to start a AFF vs S/L or IAD discussion. As long as these programs all continue to effective train students and bring new people into our sport, I think it benifits all of us to make each program as safe and as efficient as possible.
My concern/issue would be to get the Jumpmaster rating reinstated for S/L and IAD, especially in conjunction with raising the coach rating requirements to 200 jumps.
I've conducted 4 coach courses over the last 4 years, with pass rates of about 60%. All but 1 who didn't pass my course failed because they didn't have the flying skills. 100 jumps just isn't enough for most people to have developed the ability to fly and remember enough about what went on in the dive to give an effective evaluation. If the candidate has been mostly freeflying, they probably can't do it with 200-300 jumps. While I do believe that a 200 jump minimum for coaching is more realistic, I could not support this change by itself.
Small DZ's are understaffed to start with, and taking the most enthusiastic candidates out of the mix would create a severe hardship, but bringing back the Jumpmaster rating for S/L and AID would be the best of both worlds. I know USPA wants a one size fits most type of progression, but the S/L or IAD program is differerent than AFF or AFP, and has different staffing needs. The main workload with students at this type of DZ isn't making coach dives with progressing students (only 30 % make a second jump, maybe 10% go on to freefall, and less than 2% continue on after that) or teaching the first jump course, which normally number 6-14 students and happen on 2 or 3 Saturdays a month. It's having the staff to get the 1st jump students and those returning for their 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th jump on static line out of the airplane.
Under the old Jumpmaster system, this could be done by someone with 100 jumps and a JM rating. Now, it must be done by someone with 200 jumps and an I rating. Think 3-5 Cessna loads of 1st jump students on each class day, each load proceeded by gear-ups and practice climb-outs, plus another 2-5 loads of returning students to make additional S/L dives. Consider the workload with 2 Instructors and 2 Coaches present that day. One Instructor must do the gear-up (coaches aren't considered qualified for S/L), work with the the students on exits, body position and practice rip cord pulls (method specific, coaches don't qualify), must then load the plane and go up with 3 students, put them out on 3 separate passes (we don't have more than 1 student in the air at a time because of radio instructions and the possibility of confusion), jump (or ride the plane down if you don't want to delay things by having to pack your rig), debrief and fill out log books. The second Instructor has a little time to work with the next load of students if he/she doesn't have to pack, but only for a short while because he/she is needed at the landing area to run radio and talk down the students. What can the coaches do? Nothing. If instead of 2 coaches we have 2 jumpmasters, 1 Instructor can always be available to do student training while the airplane is flying with one jumpmaster, the second jumpmaster is able to gear up students and work with them on their exits and the second Instructor can deal with the radio.
Consider the current USPA line of thought; with 100 jumps, someone can be considered competent to teach freefall skills and fly with a student, but must have 200 jumps to be considered competent to handle a static line exit. This seems counter-intuitive. To be a jumpmaster, a person doesn't need to be a great belly flyer and shouldn't need to have an I rating. They need to be able to do a thorough gear check, give the student a good spot, and safely get the student out of and off the airplane, while remembering details of the climbout and exit.


redramdriver  (C License)

Mar 1, 2010, 3:10 PM
Post #2 of 10 (2049 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

This issue has been brought up many times by small DZ's wishing to continue with the small club/DZ way of life. But USPA has in the infinite wisdom...decided they know better. But I totally agree with everything you've said. BTW...I have 2 S/L rigs all ready to go! Oh wait, we closed up, not enough JM's to keep the place going. And we were the same...1st JC, Radio, packing, dispatching students...we were always short...because.


Harmless  (D 30719)

Mar 2, 2010, 7:30 AM
Post #3 of 10 (1955 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

You have my support... as an S/L I and a Coach, in all honesty the coaching requires more skill.

There is no reason someone with a coach rating shouldn't be able to be checked off to jumpmaster a S/L student. As long as an S/L I is around for oversight and teaching.


kmills0705  (D 21696)

Mar 2, 2010, 9:56 AM
Post #4 of 10 (1922 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't disagree at all. I received my static line rating when you had to first go to BIC, then a JCC. Wait a year and then got to the ICC. As a jump master I was allowed to toss out a static line student. Then as an instructor I was... allowed to instruct. Meaning teach the first jump course.

I took a little break from the sport, came back and it is all flip flopped.

Now a coach can instruct and and instructor can toss the student out.

Now, I just need to point out that it is more than tossing out. There is a lot of teaching that the static line instructor does prior to jumping. We follow the dive flows for each category outlined in the SIM just as we do for the AFF students.

I also need to mention that a Coach can only teach the non method specific portions of the First Jump Course. An instructor (static line or AFF) must teach the method specific portions.


skydivekc  (D 18629)

Mar 21, 2010, 12:00 PM
Post #5 of 10 (1669 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kmills0705] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

Well looking at the poll results it's obvious with what little response has been submitted that there is a clear need to offer the original jumpmaster rating. I think USPA should reconsider this option after all if we want to increase the membership base of the organization and that alone $$ might get them to rethink a rating that has a usefull purpose, yet was tossed out for the larger staffed or full time turbine centers. This to could become another reason to drop out of the GM program and do what works best for us small DZ's needing to survive as well!!! I just think personally getting rid of a system that worked well for smaller DZ's and creating a new system that makes it even harder for weekend jumpers to get these ratings is killing our furture staffing needs and growth.


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 21, 2010, 3:02 PM
Post #6 of 10 (1641 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivekc] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
getting rid of a system that worked well for smaller DZ's and creating a new system that makes it even harder for weekend jumpers to get these ratings is killing our furture staffing needs and growth.

The move to go down that road is driven by those who run "rating schools", these same people tried to limit the I/E rating and made changes to the old I/E to make it harder for the small weekend 182 dz I/E's to keep their ratings, now you can go every two years at great expense out of pocket to keep one, most weekend 182 dz I/E's don't make a living with it and hardly make anything for a course to afford a trip to the west or east coast every two years. There are those in the current I/E -CD pool who wish to limit the number of additional CD's because they "already have a hard enough time making a living in the industry". These people could care less about your 182 operation and lack of staff, yet they all will say other wise to your face at PIA/DZO conf, because they would love to be paid to come to your dz and run a course for few hundreds a head and expenses and paid jumps.

I still have my JM patch, I earned it. It's funny how uspa made all the JM's grandfathered into I's and started the coach program to replace the JM's, yet those of us who had both ratings, JM & I were just left with an I and not grandfathered into coach. HQ's remarks were your an I already and can do all the things a coach can do. Yet they can hand out I's to former JM's who took no course for the I, and strip away a JM and not replace it with a coach, well unless you want to pay for it and take a course.


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Mar 23, 2010, 8:50 AM
Post #7 of 10 (1514 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

+1 Good Luck. Let me know when you get tired of hitting your head on the brick wall, we can have a drink.


skydived19006  (D 19006)

Apr 20, 2010, 6:22 AM
Post #8 of 10 (1379 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

Bill, et al

In the meantime why dont you write a waiver request? I had considered doing just that, and asked my Coaches who would be interested in dispatching IAD students, but had no positive response so dropped it like a used condom. What you need to do is write a proposal for a request to waive the specific BSR in order for your Coaches (listed by name). Id suggest that itll the waiver will be granted (I discussed this specific topic with the current USPA Prez while attending an IE certification course), you will need to indicate what additional training youll give the Coaches in order to get them qualified to dispatch students. This should be fairly simple, just cut/paste from the IRM the portions of the training specific to the SL/IAD I certification course directed at training for Category A, and B, and C maybe just B and C since the students were trained Cat A in the FJC by the Instructor. Id also suggest that these Coaches will be operating under the indirect (not with them in the airplane) supervision of a current SL/IAD Instructor. You may consider who signs the students log book as well? Maybe the Coach does the log book entry, signs it, and the supervising Instructor initials? Id think that the Instructor would still need to sign the license card under the potential waiver.

As far as running radios, or paddles (I like radios, then go to paddles on base or final), to my knowledge there are zero requirements in the BSRs regarding qualifications. Coaches can run radios, for that matter the manifest babe could do it. I may be wrong, I didnt search the BSRs.

Id be happy to help you with your waiver request. I had fun writing the waiver request to let Coaches work with students starting at Cat D, which was made standard after one year. Writing a waiver request, proving your point, and especially if multiple folks ask for the same waiver is one way to affect change in the BSRs.

Id also suggest that you email your request directly to everyone on the S&T committee, and Id personally send it to every member of the BOD. If you send it only to the S&T chair, it very likely will sit with him until the BOD meeting. Id also suggest that you talk with Todd, and your RD, give em a call!

Long-short posting on dropzone.com may make you feel better for venting, but will affect zero change in USPA policy. Write it up, and your Coaches will likely be dispatching SL students sometime this coming summer after the next BOD meeting!


peek  (D 8884)

Apr 20, 2010, 7:24 AM
Post #9 of 10 (1361 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydived19006] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I had fun writing the waiver request to let Coaches work with students starting at Cat D, which was made standard after one year. Writing a waiver ... is one way to affect change in the BSRs.

Long-short posting on dropzone.com may make you feel better for venting, but will affect zero change in USPA policy. Write it up (a waiver) ...

To all:

Martin is not only prolific poster of ideas and comments to dropzone.com for the benefit of skydiving, but also has gone to the effort of suggesting changes to USPA BSR's via the waiver system.

He sets an excellent example that I hope everyone can learn from. Some of this stuff takes work.


Rstanley0312  (D 31900)

Apr 20, 2010, 2:07 PM
Post #10 of 10 (1287 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ufk22] Static line/IAD Jumpmaster rating [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
This is a copy of a letter I sent to Tom Noonan, USPA Director, after reading his report about changes to the AFF requirements. PLEASE keep comments S/L, we don't need another fight about whether AFF is better or worse or if we need an AFF JM rating.

Tom

I'm a long time jumper (20 years) who came up through S/L training. I'm currently jumping at a S/L dropzone in Fargo, ND, having trained and jumped for 15 years at a different S/L DZ in southern Minnesota. Both DZs train approximately 200 S/L student per year and do about the same number of tandems. Both are "club" DZs, where no one makes much money training students, but do it to try and keep new jumpers coming into the sport. Neither DZ has been able to implement the AFF program because of staff numbers and costs to prospective students. I'm a coach-E and S/L I-E. I'm writing to you after reading your posts at DZ.com. I'm not trying to start a AFF vs S/L or IAD discussion. As long as these programs all continue to effective train students and bring new people into our sport, I think it benifits all of us to make each program as safe and as efficient as possible.
My concern/issue would be to get the Jumpmaster rating reinstated for S/L and IAD, especially in conjunction with raising the coach rating requirements to 200 jumps.
I've conducted 4 coach courses over the last 4 years, with pass rates of about 60%. All but 1 who didn't pass my course failed because they didn't have the flying skills. 100 jumps just isn't enough for most people to have developed the ability to fly and remember enough about what went on in the dive to give an effective evaluation. If the candidate has been mostly freeflying, they probably can't do it with 200-300 jumps. While I do believe that a 200 jump minimum for coaching is more realistic, I could not support this change by itself.
Small DZ's are understaffed to start with, and taking the most enthusiastic candidates out of the mix would create a severe hardship, but bringing back the Jumpmaster rating for S/L and AID would be the best of both worlds. I know USPA wants a one size fits most type of progression, but the S/L or IAD program is differerent than AFF or AFP, and has different staffing needs. The main workload with students at this type of DZ isn't making coach dives with progressing students (only 30 % make a second jump, maybe 10% go on to freefall, and less than 2% continue on after that) or teaching the first jump course, which normally number 6-14 students and happen on 2 or 3 Saturdays a month. It's having the staff to get the 1st jump students and those returning for their 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th jump on static line out of the airplane.
Under the old Jumpmaster system, this could be done by someone with 100 jumps and a JM rating. Now, it must be done by someone with 200 jumps and an I rating. Think 3-5 Cessna loads of 1st jump students on each class day, each load proceeded by gear-ups and practice climb-outs, plus another 2-5 loads of returning students to make additional S/L dives. Consider the workload with 2 Instructors and 2 Coaches present that day. One Instructor must do the gear-up (coaches aren't considered qualified for S/L), work with the the students on exits, body position and practice rip cord pulls (method specific, coaches don't qualify), must then load the plane and go up with 3 students, put them out on 3 separate passes (we don't have more than 1 student in the air at a time because of radio instructions and the possibility of confusion), jump (or ride the plane down if you don't want to delay things by having to pack your rig), debrief and fill out log books. The second Instructor has a little time to work with the next load of students if he/she doesn't have to pack, but only for a short while because he/she is needed at the landing area to run radio and talk down the students. What can the coaches do? Nothing. If instead of 2 coaches we have 2 jumpmasters, 1 Instructor can always be available to do student training while the airplane is flying with one jumpmaster, the second jumpmaster is able to gear up students and work with them on their exits and the second Instructor can deal with the radio.
Consider the current USPA line of thought; with 100 jumps, someone can be considered competent to teach freefall skills and fly with a student, but must have 200 jumps to be considered competent to handle a static line exit. This seems counter-intuitive. To be a jumpmaster, a person doesn't need to be a great belly flyer and shouldn't need to have an I rating. They need to be able to do a thorough gear check, give the student a good spot, and safely get the student out of and off the airplane, while remembering details of the climbout and exit.


I agree with most of what you said. It is kind of funny really. The coach rating allows us to do things a JJM could not do with the same amount of jumps and vice versa. Some going through the coach program are ready but I agree most are not. I think it is funny that those of us with the skills and the ability to teach a class cannot throw out a student on a static line/IAD. There should be training for a static instructor but I think it should be easier to progress towards learning to be an SLI and there should be more requirements to get a coach. I feel I was ready and I am happy I was able to progress with my coach rating at 100 jumps but I really do see the need to change requirements. I have been going up with I's and learning static teaching and the responsibilities of it all so I can be very prepared for my static course later this year. As a noob to the sport I can honestly say that the current system seems backwards and the way certain groups were grandfathered but not as "coaches" is just odd to me. The fact that you Wes would not be blows my mind.



Forums : Skydiving : Instructors

 


Search for (options)