PhreeZone (D License)
Moderator
Feb 13, 2011, 3:42 PM
Post #1 of 62
(2801 views)
Shortcut
USPA changes tandem BSR
Can't Post
Per notes on the USPA website the BOD this meeting changed the BSR's around tandem skydives:
Additional highlights of the meeting include— • The Basic Safety Requirements were changed to require all student tandem skydives to be conducted in accordance with the specific manufacturer’s age requirements for the tandem system used for that jump.
I heard from someone there the vote was around 13 for this change and 4 against with 3 abstaining. I understand that this BSR is waiverable only by a full vote of the BOD so there is still an option for the Make-a-wish tandems and other special situations but general under 18 tandems are not allowed.
Feb 13, 2011, 4:04 PM
Post #2 of 62
(2779 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Per notes on the USPA website the BOD this meeting changed the BSR's around tandem skydives:
Additional highlights of the meeting include— • The Basic Safety Requirements were changed to require all student tandem skydives to be conducted in accordance with the specific manufacturer’s age requirements for the tandem system used for that jump.
I heard from someone there the vote was around 13 for this change and 4 against with 3 abstaining. I understand that this BSR is waiverable only by a full vote of the BOD so there is still an option for the Make-a-wish tandems and other special situations but general under 18 tandems are not allowed.
And to be clear a USPA BSR applies to every MEMBER of USPA who conducts Tandem Instruction.
I think it is a step in the right direction. USPA should not be dictating the age in which one can start to skydive. In this case they fell back to Manufacturers rules, some may see no difference and may even see a further restriction.
But now is there is away to legally protect the Manufacturers, then we can do away with the age debate.
Feb 14, 2011, 4:19 AM
Post #5 of 62
(2520 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
well different local rules, as in Switzerland there is no (AFAIK) age limit... There are a lot of different local rules throughout the world which differ from USPA rules and regulations, and not all apply.
Feb 14, 2011, 5:58 AM
Post #6 of 62
(2480 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Generally as I understand the manufacturers are interested in the tandem student being able to execute a contract. The manufacturers want to be protected by an enforceable participation agreement. If in Australia a parent can actually waive their child's right to sue, then the manufacturer would indeed be protected.
It would be best to check with the manufacturer.
In this country every state sets the legal age of contract, most are 18, some 19 years of age.
Feb 14, 2011, 6:22 AM
Post #7 of 62
(2466 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Additional highlights of the meeting include— • The Basic Safety Requirements were changed to require all student tandem skydives to be conducted in accordance with the specific manufacturer’s age requirements for the tandem system used for that jump.
What am I missing here? Doesn't the FAA already require equipment to be operated within any limits the manufacturer puts in place? Pretty sure that would include following age restrictions, and the BSR's already call for all skydiving to be conducted within the FAR's.
Sounds like following age restrictions set in place by the manufacturers was already covered.
Feb 14, 2011, 9:59 AM
Post #8 of 62
(2362 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Admitting the global nature of the markets for tandem equipment, why do the manufacturers set an age limit in the first place?
If what they want and need is protection from lawsuits, why don't they just say that they require an enforceable liability waiver to be in place?
If some county allows parents to waive the rights of their children, it all still works fine. Any dropzone anywhere can still insist that their waiver be signed by the actual person whose rights are waived. That's not a problem, since any jurisdiction will have a notion of who can enter into a legally binding contract.
That allows them to be protected in any jurisdiction, and doesn't force our concept of the law on any other jurisdiction either.
It isn't really about age at all. It is about getting a liability waiver, isn't it?
(This post was edited by riggerpaul on Feb 14, 2011, 10:01 AM)
Feb 14, 2011, 10:02 AM
Post #9 of 62
(2355 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
Per notes on the USPA website the BOD this meeting changed the BSR's around tandem skydives:
Additional highlights of the meeting include— • The Basic Safety Requirements were changed to require all student tandem skydives to be conducted in accordance with the specific manufacturer’s age requirements for the tandem system used for that jump.
I heard from someone there the vote was around 13 for this change and 4 against with 3 abstaining. I understand that this BSR is waiverable only by a full vote of the BOD so there is still an option for the Make-a-wish tandems and other special situations but general under 18 tandems are not allowed.
And to be clear a USPA BSR applies to every MEMBER of USPA who conducts Tandem Instruction.
I think it is a step in the right direction. USPA should not be dictating the age in which one can start to skydive. In this case they fell back to Manufacturers rules, some may see no difference and may even see a further restriction.
But now is there is away to legally protect the Manufacturers, then we can do away with the age debate.
Feb 14, 2011, 11:46 AM
Post #12 of 62
(2292 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Admitting the global nature of the markets for tandem equipment, why do the manufacturers set an age limit in the first place?
If what they want and need is protection from lawsuits, why don't they just say that they require an enforceable liability waiver to be in place?
If some county allows parents to waive the rights of their children, it all still works fine. Any dropzone anywhere can still insist that their waiver be signed by the actual person whose rights are waived. That's not a problem, since any jurisdiction will have a notion of who can enter into a legally binding contract.
That allows them to be protected in any jurisdiction, and doesn't force our concept of the law on any other jurisdiction either.
It isn't really about age at all. It is about getting a liability waiver, isn't it?
I repeat -
Why pick an age at all?
It isn't about age, it is about liability, and a waiver.
If an age must be mentioned, mention the age of legal majority for whatever the jurisdiction.
I am still in Reno at PIA but I will give a full brief of the thought process when I can. As far as age of legal majority: it varies from 16-21;and in one state you need a H.S. degree. The manufacturers wanted it to be age of legal majority, but were happy with what came out of the BOD.
A 16 year old can still do AFF, IAD, or Static in the U.S.;but make no mistake about it the manufacturers want this changed as well.
Note: If a US TI uses a out of country tandem rig that is tsod and has no age requirement, the BSR is not being violated.
Waivers will continue to be accepted for special underage circumstances, and the manufacturers will allow the jump with the waiver in place. IE: Make A wish or certain terminal situations.
(This post was edited by Para5-0 on Feb 14, 2011, 1:27 PM)
Feb 14, 2011, 1:30 PM
Post #16 of 62
(2230 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
Quote:
Why mention a specific age in the first place?
1. Easier. 2. Maybe the Tandem manufacturers are using the age of majority in the State the company exists? Florida's age of majority is 18. New York's is 21.
NY is 18. As per this site. There are three states and district of Columbia that are higher from what I see. So in those states that the age is higher they are still going to be exposed. I think it was to set one standard across the board. It's funny because a 16 year old can still do aff.
(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Feb 14, 2011, 1:36 PM)
Feb 14, 2011, 1:48 PM
Post #17 of 62
(2212 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
NY is 18. As per this site. There are three states and district of Columbia that are higher from what I see. So in those states that the age is higher they are still going to be exposed. I think it was to set one standard across the board. It's funny because a 16 year old can still do aff.
You got me. I just looked at the first site I found that claimed to list ages of majority. My bad.
Still, Florida is 18, and there are places that are higher. So, while New York is not a proper example, the problem is still real - Using the Florida law could result in a liability problem somewhere else.
Feb 14, 2011, 2:32 PM
Post #18 of 62
(2189 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
Admitting the global nature of the markets for tandem equipment, why do the manufacturers set an age limit in the first place?
If what they want and need is protection from lawsuits, why don't they just say that they require an enforceable liability waiver to be in place?
If some county allows parents to waive the rights of their children, it all still works fine. Any dropzone anywhere can still insist that their waiver be signed by the actual person whose rights are waived. That's not a problem, since any jurisdiction will have a notion of who can enter into a legally binding contract.
That allows them to be protected in any jurisdiction, and doesn't force our concept of the law on any other jurisdiction either.
It isn't really about age at all. It is about getting a liability waiver, isn't it?
I repeat -
Why pick an age at all?
It isn't about age, it is about liability, and a waiver.
If an age must be mentioned, mention the age of legal majority for whatever the jurisdiction.
Why mention a specific age in the first place?
I do believe the wording is "Age of Majority" in the letter signed by the Manufacturer's to USPA and that is what is in UPT's end user agreement IRC.
Feb 14, 2011, 4:23 PM
Post #20 of 62
(2150 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
No, the local FSDO says they have no age requirement implied in the FAR. Same for a Physical.
Matt
This may be the problem. There's nothing in the FAR's about age or a physical, but what if there IS in the manufacturer's requirements? FAR's dictate equipment must be used within the restrictions set by the manufacturer.
Are they bothering to check the requirements of the manufacturer of the equipment in question? By default those are FAR's too.
Maybe you have to sue a company in the State they exist?
In that case, 18 for FL would be a valid signature.
I very much doubt any of these companies have idiots for lawyers.
That question was rhetorical.
No, I do not think their lawyers are idiots.
But, as I said, it would be very narrow minded to not admit that the gear is used all over the world, and that laws in other places will be different.
In the US, we have the notion of reciprocity. Your driver license is good in any state, etc.
Contracts that are not binding in the state in which they are made, are not binding in any other state, even if it would have been binding had it been made in the state of the lawsuit. That is, if the legal age for a waiver is 21 somewhere and a 19 year old signs a waiver there, the fact that it is 18 in Florida does not make that waiver binding in Florida, even though a 19 year old could sign a binding Florida waiver.
With this in mind, it is difficult to imagine how any particular number would be selected.
Matt Cline posted that the letter from the Manufacturers used the term "Age of Majority" was used in the letter from the manufacturers to USPA. That's as it should be. The manufacturers are interested in controlling liability, not the particular age of the customer.
Feb 14, 2011, 6:51 PM
Post #22 of 62
(2094 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
The only references to following manufacturers guidelines in the FAR that covers tandems is the proper use of the harness and the maintenance of the AAD. Like I said in my last post, there may be another FAR that mentions always following all manufacturors guidelines, but if there is, there should be no need to make specific references to harnesses and AADs in this FAR.
Feb 15, 2011, 7:41 AM
Post #23 of 62
(1975 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] USPA changes tandem BSR
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Per notes on the USPA website the BOD this meeting changed the BSR's around tandem skydives:
Additional highlights of the meeting include— • The Basic Safety Requirements were changed to require all student tandem skydives to be conducted in accordance with the specific manufacturer’s age requirements for the tandem system used for that jump.
I heard from someone there the vote was around 13 for this change and 4 against with 3 abstaining. I understand that this BSR is waiverable only by a full vote of the BOD so there is still an option for the Make-a-wish tandems and other special situations but general under 18 tandems are not allowed.
13 for 4 against 3 abstaining
That is only 20 and there are 22 board members. So, 13 decided to stick their nose in where it doesn't belong, 4 had the good sense to not create a new BSR, 3 did not have the courage to vote either way, and 2 did not even show up.
Meet the new board, same as the old board.
I would like to know how each member voted, every vote should be by name.
1
