0
Skwrl

USPA Wingsuit Coach Rating Proposal

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

I don't need to guess, and I don't need to ask. Given whos been working on what in our community I think I know.

I've examined the work behind this in person if its the same effort I saw, going public. It is far, far more thorough and professional than anything else I've seen including my own wingsuit instruction work... by a long shot. I'll have to seriously improve my own game to meet this standard.

And I agree, this needs to be very thoroughly discussed, in the open, by the community. I think it will be.
-B



Thanks for the good words, Brian. Any instructional program should be challenging, rating or not. It should never be about ego, but rather teaching and flying skills, and understanding what people need to know in order to provide training in the most safe and informative manner possible, with as many resources as possible.

T'is I and a couple of others working towards achieving a Wingsuit Coach/Instructor's rating. It's a long, long shot, and likely impossible (this is the third year it will have been presented).

It is a means of consolidating the training methods found in the SIM (which had a group of 14 contributing authors). It's also a means of encouraging those who teach wingsuiting to take responsibility for their training information and methods.

Nothing has changed in the proposal from the first one three years ago, except this time we won't have reps from multiple wingsuit manufacturers begging USPA for a rating program. A number of DZO's have been polled, and that's about the only additional information that is being offered.
I don't expect this one to be any more successful than the previous attempts, yet it does have a great deal more support than ever before. That's very encouraging.



Is there a link to the details of the proposal?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section6/tabid/169/Default.aspx#984

The SIM is the syllabus Coaches should reference for FFC's. If you've read the 2010/2011/2012 SIM, you've perhaps noticed there are a number of references to coach responsibilities.
The rating program should be similar to S/L, IAD, etc. in its implementation/training/system for several reasons.

Recommended requirements for coach candidates are similar to current and past manufacturer's requirements.
-100 WS jumps (on a personal note, I'd like to see this as a higher number, but the reality is what it is).
-USPA Coach rating
If the USPA accepts the rating proposal, then the USPA Coach Course would be the template to the WS rating, ie; Two SATisfactory jumps out of three attempts, using an eval sheet identical to the current USPA Coach Course eval sheet (changed up to be relevant to wingsuiting).
I've attached a PFC Eval sheet; this is a proposed template, although there are some changes I'd like to see made, based on live student experiences and coach course experiences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of where the Wingsuit Coach rating comes from the best prerequisite I see is the USPA Coach Rating. You need to be able to teach, communicate, and prioritize safety more than you need to be a good wingsuiter to conduct a FFC. Achieving the USPA Coach Rating is a good way of managing this requirement.

The problem comes with keeping that USPA rating if you are committed 100% to the discipline of Wingsuiting. I may have missed it but I don't think it is written clearly if Wingsuiting coaching (including FFC) count as the 15 coached jumps you need to keep the rating. I know when I have tried renewing mine I have received mixed responses from instructors and Coach IE.

Any one on one coaching related to Wingsuiting, be it FFC, performance, flocking, or aerobatics should count towards renewal of the USPA coach rating.

If changes are going to be made in the direction of a USPA Wingsuit Rating then I think a stepping stone is to have the IRM recognize Wingsuit coaching the the BSR being amended to requiring a coach rating AND being an experienced Wingsuiter.

Can I get an answer to my question now? :)

Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hardly ever post, but in the light of what is brewing now I make an exception. For the record I have over 1000 WS jumps, 10 years in the sport, in both Europe and the US.

The USPA agenda is frightening. Each time regulators put one foot in the door, for the good and safety a the sport they genuinely want to make safer, they end up over regulating and eventually destroying the sport. This is how general aviation was shrunk in the US (with less and less pilots each year), and this is what happened in Europe with skydiving in general and WS in particular. Let me elaborate.

But first, lets back track 2 months ago: the Wing Suit tandem buzzing topic in the US Parachutist magazine did not happen in a vacuum. It was the first of a coordinate set of attacks against WS freedom. It aimed at frightening the skydiving public and prepare minds for tough regulation againt WS punks. We now see this regulation coming in the USAP safety agenda. For those who do not read the magazine, it was a group of experts and readers, sometime buzzing offender themselves, implying that DZO, wingsuiters and tandem master were not able to self regulate, and freedom killing regulation needed to be enacted to avoid an accident of WS buzzing tandems.

The new USPA coach rating proposal then becomes a very natural thing to do, but make no mistakes, it means just one thing: more regulation, less freedom.

The French already made the mistake of following this approach and of let the wolf in. A bunch of rules http://www.ffp.asso.fr/IMG/pdf/Reglementation_WING_SUIT-2.pdf was enacted. So called experts made tons of money training the WS coaches and wannabe wingsuiters, then passed more regulation to force WingSuiters to use the sucky gear the regulator himself was manufacturing (in an obscene conflict of interest) and that nobody would have used otherwise. More regulation then flourished to make the regulator's competitors illegal, all in the good name of better safety. Example: leg pouch is forbidden there for enhanced safety, with the (unintended!) consequence of impeding a competitor's penetration of the French market. Bottom line: all those rules resulted in an almost total annihilation of the sport there. The safety gain is negative, because people then go base jumping with gear they did not try from a plane before, and kill themselves in avoidable accidents.

The US approach of relying on self regulation, trusting DZOs and the responsible people of the community works well. The attempt to change this is an insult to us all. Please do not make the US look French.

For those have a problem with true facts in general and this post in particular, my name is Guillaume Richard, I live and jump in Texas.

Blue sky.
Talk is cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


>>>snip
If changes are going to be made in the direction of a USPA Wingsuit Rating then I think a stepping stone is to have the IRM recognize Wingsuit coaching the the BSR being amended to requiring a coach rating AND being an experienced Wingsuiter.

Can I get an answer to my question now? :)



I'm not clear on what you're wanting in the above sentence. Are you suggesting the BSR should be amended that one must possess a Coach rating to fly a wingsuit?
I'd strongly disagree with that idea. Any step forward by the USPA should have zero impact on any wingsuiter that isn't providing FFC's in my opinion.

If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?

For your convenience, I've attached the USPA Instructor Rating org chart. I believe Wingsuiting is one of the potential instructional ratings to fall under "Other."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


>>>snip
If changes are going to be made in the direction of a USPA Wingsuit Rating then I think a stepping stone is to have the IRM recognize Wingsuit coaching the the BSR being amended to requiring a coach rating AND being an experienced Wingsuiter.

Can I get an answer to my question now? :)



I'm not clear on what you're wanting in the above sentence. Are you suggesting the BSR should be amended that one must possess a Coach rating to fly a wingsuit?
I'd strongly disagree with that idea. Any step forward by the USPA should have zero impact on any wingsuiter that isn't providing FFC's in my opinion.

If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?

For your convenience, I've attached the USPA Instructor Rating org chart. I believe Wingsuiting is one of the potential instructional ratings to fall under "Other."


I am saying to coach someone to fly a wingsuit the experienced wingsuiter should also be a USPA coach (http://www.uspa.org/tabid/169/Default.aspx#984). That is a more reasonable compromise than a full blown Wingsuit Coach Rating.

An experienced wingsuiter without the ability to communicate or prioritize tasks correctly is a useless coach\mentor\instructor.

That isn't my major point however, I am more concerned about the inability to keep a USPA Coach Rating based solely on wingsuit coaching. I think that is the real gap.

In IRM Coach Section 1.G.B you will see you need 15 "coached" jumps a year to maintain a coach rating. I have had people interpret this including Wingsuit coaching and others insist it is only pre-A coaching license.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Man_IRMEssentials.pdf

I still don't have an answer to my original question, you are an coach IE. Do wingsuit FFC & coach jumps count?
Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?



Experience of one jump repeated 100 times does define an experienced wingsuit flier.

The criteria should revolve around some kind of quantifiable performance metrics.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?



Experience of one jump repeated 100 times does define an experienced wingsuit flier.

The criteria should revolve around some kind of quantifiable performance metrics.




I agree with you, John.
Those metrics should be/are part of the proposed evaluation procedures. If one cannot perform to the standard, one doesn't achieve the rating, similar to any other rating program.

"Do Wingsuit Coaching jumps count towards maintaining a Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating?"
As there is no Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating, the answer would be "maybe." You might find an S&TA willing to sign off on WS Coach jumps as counting, but the USPA position doesn't currently define this.

If a rating program is implemented, then of course FFC's and WS coaching would apply towards maintaining a coach rating, just as renewing an AFF/I, IAD/I, SL/I, T/I rating include the coach rating renewal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote



If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?



Experience of one jump repeated 100 times does define an experienced wingsuit flier.

The criteria should revolve around some kind of quantifiable performance metrics.




I agree with you, John.
Those metrics should be/are part of the proposed evaluation procedures. If one cannot perform to the standard, one doesn't achieve the rating, similar to any other rating program.

"Do Wingsuit Coaching jumps count towards maintaining a Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating?"
As there is no Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating, the answer would be "maybe." You might find an S&TA willing to sign off on WS Coach jumps as counting, but the USPA position doesn't currently define this.

If a rating program is implemented, then of course FFC's and WS coaching would apply towards maintaining a coach rating, just as renewing an AFF/I, IAD/I, SL/I, T/I rating include the coach rating renewal.



Would you sign off a coach renewal if the jumps were only wingsuit based? A S&TA isn't required, an Instructor or Coach Examiner can also sign it.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_rating_renewal_2009_07.pdf

My point is I don't think it should be a "maybe", I think the IRM should clearly state that the coach jumps need not be pre-A license Belly jumps which is how many interpret it. That would allow wingsuit, freely, canopy coaching all to count towards a Coach renewal.

I suppose I need to write a letter to USPA and get myself on a future agenda!

Simon
Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote



If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?



Experience of one jump repeated 100 times does define an experienced wingsuit flier.

The criteria should revolve around some kind of quantifiable performance metrics.




I agree with you, John.
Those metrics should be/are part of the proposed evaluation procedures. If one cannot perform to the standard, one doesn't achieve the rating, similar to any other rating program.

"Do Wingsuit Coaching jumps count towards maintaining a Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating?"
As there is no Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating, the answer would be "maybe." You might find an S&TA willing to sign off on WS Coach jumps as counting, but the USPA position doesn't currently define this.

If a rating program is implemented, then of course FFC's and WS coaching would apply towards maintaining a coach rating, just as renewing an AFF/I, IAD/I, SL/I, T/I rating include the coach rating renewal.



Would you sign off a coach renewal if the jumps were only wingsuit based? A S&TA isn't required, an Instructor or Coach Examiner can also sign it.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_rating_renewal_2009_07.pdf

My point is I don't think it should be a "maybe", I think the IRM should clearly state that the coach jumps need not be pre-A license Belly jumps which is how many interpret it. That would allow wingsuit, freely, canopy coaching all to count towards a Coach renewal.

I suppose I need to write a letter to USPA and get myself on a future agenda!

Simon



What you're dancing around then, is that you feel a USPA Coach rating is all that should be required to provide First Flight Courses, is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote



If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?



Experience of one jump repeated 100 times does define an experienced wingsuit flier.

The criteria should revolve around some kind of quantifiable performance metrics.




I agree with you, John.
Those metrics should be/are part of the proposed evaluation procedures. If one cannot perform to the standard, one doesn't achieve the rating, similar to any other rating program.

"Do Wingsuit Coaching jumps count towards maintaining a Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating?"
As there is no Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating, the answer would be "maybe." You might find an S&TA willing to sign off on WS Coach jumps as counting, but the USPA position doesn't currently define this.

If a rating program is implemented, then of course FFC's and WS coaching would apply towards maintaining a coach rating, just as renewing an AFF/I, IAD/I, SL/I, T/I rating include the coach rating renewal.



Would you sign off a coach renewal if the jumps were only wingsuit based? A S&TA isn't required, an Instructor or Coach Examiner can also sign it.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_rating_renewal_2009_07.pdf

My point is I don't think it should be a "maybe", I think the IRM should clearly state that the coach jumps need not be pre-A license Belly jumps which is how many interpret it. That would allow wingsuit, freely, canopy coaching all to count towards a Coach renewal.

I suppose I need to write a letter to USPA and get myself on a future agenda!

Simon



What you're dancing around then, is that you feel a USPA Coach rating is all that should be required to provide First Flight Courses, is that correct?



You are going to a lot of effort to create a conspiracy again here....the facts are:

My USPA Coach Rating expired in Dec 2011 and I need to get it renewed and so far 3 people have said they don't feel that my wingsuit coaching jumps (including FFC) should count and I need to do some belly jumps with non licensed skydivers. I don't agree and honestly I think I might be a danger in that situation...I admit it.

Does knowing that make my question any different? I think not.

Without a rating I am not a professional and cannot therefore ethically charge a penny for coaching. It also creates other insurance and tax complexities but I don't want to go into that one bit.

All I want is to get my coach rating renewed. I can see that as a Coach Examiner you cannot give me an answer so I wrote to my BOD instead. Sorry, I thought you might have been able to shed some light on it.



Simon
Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem here is you have a noob to the sport who starts skydiving and becomes an instructor as fast as he can. He gets five years into the sport, pounds himself into the ground, then gets out of the hospital and declares himself a leading expert in Wingsuiting. He touts his ideas all over the Internet, builds a following for his Wingsuit school and video services, and then submits a self agrandizing and massive conflict of interest proposal to USPA declaring his authority and expertise to regulate Wingsuiting.
Of course, no one knows who this person is. But my sense is he is like the other mad geek newbie wingsuiters who would like to pretend their discipline is more complicated and important than it really is. You don't need a FJC to use a jumpsuit. Afterall, Wingsuit is nothing more than a jumpsuit. Certainly their are some things everyone should know about safely flying any jumpsuit. I am all for this person publishing a pamphlet of safety tips. But the attempt to create an industry out of Wingsuit FJC's is so overt and ridiculous it is laughable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I gave you your answer. It's just not what you want to hear.

Since USPA does not explicitly recognize coaching jumps outside of the ISP program, the answer cannot be specifically given until the BOD votes on it. Until then, you're likely going to receive 22 different answers.

It seems you don't understand how rating programs work. Attend an IRC (you're supposed to anyway, every 2 years), and you might have a better understanding.
Don't blame me because USPA has not defined wingsuit coaching jumps. A few of us are trying to change this.
An ISP coaching jump has a specific syllabus, has a pedagogy, a method through which the effectiveness a coach may be measured.
Wingsuiting currently does not, and therefore it cannot be defined at this time.
You demand clarity; a wingsuit coach rating absolutely clarifies this conversation.

Quote

so far 3 people have said they don't feel that my wingsuit coaching jumps (including FFC) should count and I need to do some belly jumps with non licensed skydivers. I don't agree and honestly I think I might be a danger in that situation...I admit it.



Sorry, I don't buy it. Specifically name the S&TA, I/E, or Instructors who told you this. Send me a PM, I'll talk to them privately if you wish.

Again, please answer the question.

Do you feel that a USPA coach rating is all that should be required by USPA, for someone who is teaching First Flight Courses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok this is getting very interesting very quickly.

I've already been contacted by others with concerns about this, and I have taken those concerns into account in my own thinking about the idea.

There are two sides to every conflict. I'm going to try to discuss/lay out both sides here. Warning: long.

First, the place I started myself: Against.
Why:
I -am- one of the self taught freelancers out there teaching. I am -not- a self-proclaimed "instructor" only because I went and got a PFI rating back when those were current...PFI#62 if I remember right. But I went and got that manufacturer rating purely to gain credibility and recognition from the established technical and teaching authorities of the time of what I had already been doing. What I wanted was a higher authority's approval and confirmation that I was doing the job right because I didn't feel right about teaching wingsuit without having somebody who knows better review my work.

Back home, there were no BMIs or PFIs. Wingsuiting was exotic and rare and lethal as hell with an even worse reputation than skysurfing. Nobody knew better, nobody knew the rules, and there was no higher authority available. Since I was the only wingsuiter around at the time with hundreds of flights, I became the local authority by default. I didn't take up wingsuit instruction by inclination. I was pushed into it. Since I felt quite uncomfortable thrust into the role of instructor I took the job very seriously.

I put a lot of emphasis on things like exit technique... wind and direction judgement, safe gear combos, heavy on the survival behaviors and threat vigilance. Look for sneaky things that can kill you. The lives of the pilot and anyone remaining on board depend on you spotting these things FIRST. Like the combo of low tail, higher exit speed than normal, bigger suit and loose wings. We were all explorers at the time, working in unfamiliar new territory. Many, maybe most of us early adopters took a very diligent and systematic approach to hazard awareness and management- it probably slowed down our progression some but thats pioneering, it was up to us to find out and pass on what is and is not safe to do. It was as "wild west" as any explorable territory that exists, these days... Total freedom, total self authority, total self responsibility and we loved it.

I eventually went and got a Skydive University Coach rating... one of the only times I have taken off my wingsuit in the last nine years... because I wanted to actually learn a thing or two about teaching, and boy, did I. Going to learn at the knee of Rob Laidlaw was one of the smartest things I ever did, taught me a whole new world of "Wow I didn't even know I was that ignorant." I doubt I retained more than 1/10th of what he taught me but that tenth made me ten times better a teacher than I had been.

What I notice is this: When I started I was properly scared. All kinds of "One wrong move and I'm dead" stuff. I paid attention to every little thing. Since I didn't yet fully understand what did and did not matter, everything did. Nothing inspires vigilance like being handed a responsibility you don't think you're ready for and don't want. It made me very determined to not let people down. I did my homework. I read everything I could possibly find about wingsuiting so I didn't accidentally destroy the aircraft or kill people with my amazing new powers. Much of it, learned on this same forum. My instruction technique is still somewhat awkward and all over the place, but I tend to be that much more thorough to compensate. I still use notes sometimes to make damn sure I'm not forgetting to teach something important by sheer oblivious familiarity. Its easy to assume somebody knows how to turn, for example. Or when. Easy to forget just how overwhelming a wingsuit flight can be, especially for first-timers. We have made it look too easy.

Now.
The game has changed. We are no longer rare or new. Wingsuit flight is no longer the same mostly uncharted territory it was. It is no longer viewed with quite the same fear and respect it used to be. It is everywhere... and familiarity breeds contempt. And complacency. Even among its teachers. Yeah, that includes me. Especially me.

When it was something even multi-thousand jump jumpers were afraid to try, it was treated with the proper respect necessary and there were amazingly few incidents considering the relative inexperience of the total wingsuit population at the time, but we tended to be very well informed. Know or Die. It is no longer restricted to the most experienced and competent jumpers looking to expand their horizons.

Now that it is something theres video of from every dropzone, we get goofballs who think its no big deal, rack up 200 jumps just to get past the guards, then strap on half a dozen GoPros and an X2 as their second suit for their 15th wingsuit flight and teach by example with a fresh dent in the plane. These people are learning a casual and dismissive attitude before they even start.

Which brings me to the opposing opinion in this matter:

FOR:
The opinion: We need a nationwide USPA Wingsuit Instructional Rating. Call it Coach, Instructor, whatever, but the argument is we need it, we ought to have it, and the current proposal is how it ought to be done.

WHY: See above. The wild west exploration days are done. The Miami Tailstrike Yahoos are out there and they're growing in number. Any place where there's nobody who knows any better, that shits gonna keep happening. Take a good look at swoopers in the last decade and their amazing splat rate. That's us, that's where we're headed if we don't get a grip, right now. Except given our inherent properties including interacting with the aircraft in ways swoopers do not, we have the capability of making a MUCH bigger mess. If any of us fear regulation NOW, just wait till one of us drops an Otter into a suburban neighborhood. Extra credit if we bag more than one family while we're at it.

The Miami Tailstrike boys obviously weren't considering the possibilities. They most likely didn't even know them. We got lucky.
Therein lies the problem. We've BEEN lucky. For how long? So far we've mostly only bagged ourselves when we screw up. Thing is, we got a perfect storm of factors working to increase the danger... the combo of a sudden population burst of people armed with wingsuits and no real clue what they can do, cultural exposure saturation making it easy for newbies to get the impression wingsuits are no big deal, and a sudden flood on the market of easily and cheaply available wingsuits of such performance that it makes it very easy, much easier than it used to be, to get in real deep trouble, real fast.

Wingsuiting is in many ways even less forgiving than it was when I started, right when enough people are taking it up that we're statistically certain to include a subpopulation of ignorant and careless yahoos in great enough number to show up on radar with the incidents they cause.

The proposal to create a USPA wingsuit rating is an attempt to address this. Its effectiveness at accomplishing that is very much open to debate but I personally think it will at least help, depending on how it is implemented. As I see it, its more information-promotional than regulatory, the idea being to aggressively push the information out there and make it available. The existence of a systematic and universally recognized codification of wingsuit survival basics could go a long way toward cutting down on ignorance as a source of incidents. And having to pass a rather rigorous examination in exchange for the credibility and the right to call oneself an actual "USPA Wingsuit Instructor" will act as a filter. Anyone wishing to hold that title must and will have to be skilled enough and informed enough to train and learn seriously enough to get it. The idea is, anyone holding that title DID pass muster with someone equal or greater in knowledge and skill, with regard to an actual objective standard... which we do not have yet because that rating doesn't exist.

Conclusion, my own opinion:
I see it as a good thing for our community provided one qualification: Keep it optional.

There is a USPA Coach rating. So far as I am aware, its existence does NOT forbid freelance, unrated coaching of advanced skydivers. If I want, I can go look up and pay for lessons from YippeKiYay's Freefly School, and Mr. Yippee who is without any ratings at all but has roughly 45,329 freefly jumps is still free to teach me whatever he wants. His school succeeds or fails based on whether his product, the actual lessons, are actually effective and accurate. But if Yippee WANTS to, he can jack up his recognition and credibility tenfold by going and getting The Official USPA Coach Rating and tack on some "Real Credentials."

I'd like to see us move that way. Create a rating as a standard to look up to, not a barrier to get past. Leave the field open to competing instructional methods.

If it is made too difficult to spread what knowledge you have, I.E.. by forbidding freelance wingsuit instruction without a USPA rating, then it will be counterproductive and may have the effect of actively suppressing one-on-one knowledge propagation because of fear of getting busted teaching something without a rating that says you're allowed to. THAT, is the regulation we fear. I'd like to think I've made something of a contribution to the wingsuit community over the years. I could not have done much of it if there had been rules forbidding me to do it without jumping through hoops and submitting to someone else's judgement first, someone who may not have even been as informed and experienced as I at the time, especially considering the -relative- rarity of wingsuit pilots with multiple thousands of flights under their belts, even today. There are and will be others, like me, operating on their own, being as careful and conscientious as they know how, and creating new knowledge for all of us. I don't want to stop them. If we listen, we might even learn something.

-B

We're free. Lets keep it that way.
Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I gave you your answer. It's just not what you want to hear.

Since USPA does not explicitly recognize coaching jumps outside of the ISP program, the answer cannot be specifically given until the BOD votes on it. Until then, you're likely going to receive 22 different answers.

It seems you don't understand how rating programs work. Attend an IRC (you're supposed to anyway, every 2 years), and you might have a better understanding.
Don't blame me because USPA has not defined wingsuit coaching jumps. A few of us are trying to change this.
An ISP coaching jump has a specific syllabus, has a pedagogy, a method through which the effectiveness a coach may be measured.
Wingsuiting currently does not, and therefore it cannot be defined at this time.
You demand clarity; a wingsuit coach rating absolutely clarifies this conversation.

Quote

so far 3 people have said they don't feel that my wingsuit coaching jumps (including FFC) should count and I need to do some belly jumps with non licensed skydivers. I don't agree and honestly I think I might be a danger in that situation...I admit it.



Sorry, I don't buy it. Specifically name the S&TA, I/E, or Instructors who told you this. Send me a PM, I'll talk to them privately if you wish.

Again, please answer the question.

Do you feel that a USPA coach rating is all that should be required by USPA, for someone who is teaching First Flight Courses?



I am going to give you a taste of your own medicine and not name names....you know it happens as you just said there are 22 answers out there. Annoying isn't it, cast doubt on the facts. So if you want pretend those 3 don't exist and I will start over with a new survey, can I send you my paperwork for renewal please?

I think as a minimum someone coaching in wingsuiting should hold a current USPA Coach Rating. I don't think a separate USPA Wingsuit Coach Rating should be a priority for the BOD at this time, I think there is a lot of work to be done in the area of canopy safety.

I also think when it comes to fighting battles it would be easier to get wingsuit coached jumps recognized as coach currency jumps than a new program. You admitted yourself the chances were slim so why no take better odds as a stepping stone?

I don't want the US to become like Europe...I left the UK to come here for good reasons! Freedom Fries!!!
Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote



If 100 WS jumps isn't enough to define "an experienced wingsuiter," then what is the right number in your mind?



Experience of one jump repeated 100 times does define an experienced wingsuit flier.

The criteria should revolve around some kind of quantifiable performance metrics.




I agree with you, John.
Those metrics should be/are part of the proposed evaluation procedures. If one cannot perform to the standard, one doesn't achieve the rating, similar to any other rating program.

"Do Wingsuit Coaching jumps count towards maintaining a Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating?"
As there is no Wingsuit Coach/Instructor rating, the answer would be "maybe." You might find an S&TA willing to sign off on WS Coach jumps as counting, but the USPA position doesn't currently define this.

If a rating program is implemented, then of course FFC's and WS coaching would apply towards maintaining a coach rating, just as renewing an AFF/I, IAD/I, SL/I, T/I rating include the coach rating renewal.



Would you sign off a coach renewal if the jumps were only wingsuit based? A S&TA isn't required, an Instructor or Coach Examiner can also sign it.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_rating_renewal_2009_07.pdf

My point is I don't think it should be a "maybe", I think the IRM should clearly state that the coach jumps need not be pre-A license Belly jumps which is how many interpret it. That would allow wingsuit, freely, canopy coaching all to count towards a Coach renewal.

I suppose I need to write a letter to USPA and get myself on a future agenda!

Simon



What you're dancing around then, is that you feel a USPA Coach rating is all that should be required to provide First Flight Courses, is that correct?



You are going to a lot of effort to create a conspiracy again here....the facts are:

My USPA Coach Rating expired in Dec 2011 and I need to get it renewed and so far 3 people have said they don't feel that my wingsuit coaching jumps (including FFC) should count and I need to do some belly jumps with non licensed skydivers. I don't agree and honestly I think I might be a danger in that situation...I admit it.

Does knowing that make my question any different? I think not.

Without a rating I am not a professional and cannot therefore ethically charge a penny for coaching. It also creates other insurance and tax complexities but I don't want to go into that one bit.

All I want is to get my coach rating renewed. I can see that as a Coach Examiner you cannot give me an answer so I wrote to my BOD instead. Sorry, I thought you might have been able to shed some light on it.



Simon



As a Coach Examiner: No, you need to do Coach Jumps for the Coach rating. The FJC Coach is working with None-Licensed Skydivers. Maybe after the Meeting they will change it, but that is the way it is now.

The FFC Coach should have to do Wing Suit Instruction for that rating to stay current. Just Like an AFF and Tandem I has to do two different jumps for those ratings.

Matt
An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



The FFC Coach should have to do Wing Suit Instruction for that rating to stay current. Just Like an AFF and Tandem I has to do two different jumps for those ratings.

Matt




We're in agreement, but there are at least two C/E's that are of differing opinions, and one of them has signed off wingsuit coaching as qualifying for the 15 required. This is one of the by-products of the rating; the jumps would qualify as coaching jumps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think there is a definite line between an 'instructor' and a 'coach'.
my definitions:

an 'instructor' - is someone who trains for the first time. Trying to give the student the best of knowledge to be successful.

a true 'coach' - refines, enhances, and advances skills based upon their knowledge and accurate observations made. Coaching can happen at different levels of skill. One coach may be good for teaching acrobatics, while others are not.

In any instructor rating out there, the main difference is that they receive consistent training. Some 'coaches' do not. I've seen inconsistent, non productive, training of even UPSA coaches. Over the years in wingsuit training from an instructor, there has been poor, inconsistent training that leaves items out or is pretty much nonexistent.

I have been somewhat torn about what do to with ws 'coaching'. On one hand I do believe a ws coach should be no different than a FF coach.
This coaching usually involves a trade of $ and it is left of the the jumper to seek out a coach to learn from. Sometimes the value the jumper receives from the coach for the $ isn't worth much in the end while some times it is.
Sadly to say, some people don't know better or don't have a good coach available to them so they can still learn bad or incorrect things. They get no to little value for there money. There's been a lot of that going on over the last couple years.

One the other hand, I feel that, unlike FF, wingsuits tend to have more tendency to be a bit more personalized to the equipment (wingsuit size/style), body type, and and flying style.. There is no 'one stop shop' or 'catch all' in coaching wingsuits like in other disciplines. Someone who is 5'6 130lbs may not know how people who are 6'2 230lbs should fly or visa versa.

There's a difference between a person going up with a friend to do some 'coaching' and a person who portrays themselves as a 'coach' and expects to receive a form of compensation from a person or group. It's the responsibility of the coach to know their knowledge and limitations and be truthful with those so seek coaching. Again, sadly, this happens everywhere across all disciplines, but I see a greater number of poor 'coaches' out there in wingsuiting than in FF, etc because they want to be looked up to, want the $ and/or they aren't truthful with themselves.

a USPA coach rating provides nothing for above. It just means they've learned a form of methodology.

I don't think many of the tail strike problems are largely due to no or improper first time instruction. Sure the stats may indicate that, but I don't fully believe it. Could first time instruction have helped prevent these? Maybe. Is it better to learn and build a foundation of skills correctly the first time? sure.

I know this is a little off topic - Like canopies, I don't think or want any regulation to happen with wing suit size but additional and correct knowledge transfer to newer wingsuiters can help. Maybe this was address in the recent B license requirements for canopy piloting, but I'm not sure.
I'm surprised how many people I've talked to this past year who purchased larger suits who later succumbed to the knowledge that the suit wasn't the right suit for them. Suits are a tool in your toolbox. The larger suits have been driven by glamor and unnecessary need . They increase the learning curve of many and exaggerate poor flying.. making the skies more dangerous.


Am I favor or a 'instructor' program: maybe if it is structured right. There's numerous reasons why I've never jumped on board the manufacturer programs which have been around in the past.

Am I favor or a 'coach' program: No, but I'd like experienced ws pilots be more honest with themselves.

Where is my fizzy-lifting drink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I appreciate the direct answer Matt.

I would like to see a written definition of what a USPA Coaching jump is because I can't find one yet more than a few people tell me it pertains only to unlicensed skydivers. That cannot quite be accurate because a currency jump counts.

The PFC rating requires a current USPA Coach rating, as does FlockU. I just wonder how those are supposed to be maintained.

I hear opinions but I don't see anything actually in writing. The IRM section I referred to earlier says:

"b. having taught or assisted with the general portion of at least one first-jump course and made at least 15 coaching jumps in the last 12 months".

This stuff can be like the FARs where somewhere else a Coaching jump if defined...I just want to know where that is! :-)

Maybe there are some meeting minutes somewhere that clarify it?
Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



The FFC Coach should have to do Wing Suit Instruction for that rating to stay current. Just Like an AFF and Tandem I has to do two different jumps for those ratings.

Matt




We're in agreement, but there are at least two C/E's that are of differing opinions, and one of them has signed off wingsuit coaching as qualifying for the 15 required. This is one of the by-products of the rating; the jumps would qualify as coaching jumps.



If you agree that this is the rule then why did you doubt I have heard from 3 people that they wouldn't sign my renewal?

No need to answer.

Yours, Confused
Summer Rental special, 5 weeks for the price of 4! That is $160 a month.

Try before You Buy with Wicked Wingsuits - WingsuitRental.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



If you agree that this is the rule then why did you doubt I have heard from 3 people that they wouldn't sign my renewal?

No need to answer.

Yours, Confused



You seem to be frequently confused. How can I help you be less confused?
I agree with Matt; I don't agree it's the rule. The rule is not literally defined. That's why there are C/E's, S&TA's that will sign off on non-ISP jump renewals. I'm not one of them.
I'd like to see that changed.
It's unfortunate this confuses you.
Lemme know if I can help you further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0