0
Para5-0

Wingsuit Instructor/Coach Rating Input Needed.

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

Quote


can you provide DSE's bank account history to back up your point?



He probably could. USPA heard this "get rich" BS from one or two opposition people, just as one or two have posted references here. USPA did ask if they could investigate my finances. Permission was given, and indeed, my finances were examined by members of the subcommittee.
They really did their due diligence.



I'm guessing they found that skydiving for a living has made you wealthy beyond all of our wildest dreams... right? :D

Not to mention this has NO bearing on the Tony vs PF thing the poster was replying to (which in turn has no bearing on the actual topic of this thread). It's like a chain of unrelated bullshit!



Thanks. I can understand being against the proposal. Personal shit that has transpired between folks in the wingsuit world really have no place in any of this debate. I think its fine if you are for or against this but the theory that the BOD will allow this issue to become a tool for personal vendetta is hilarious. I hope by this pointing time people have at least viewed the materials that were presented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Not to mention this has NO bearing on the Tony vs PF thing the poster was replying to (which in turn has no bearing on the actual topic of this thread). It's like a chain of unrelated bullshit!



BOOBIES!!!



Thank you.
...

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

Thanks. I can understand being against the proposal. Personal shit that has transpired between folks in the wingsuit world really have no place in any of this debate. I think its fine if you are for or against this but the theory that the BOD will allow this issue to become a tool for personal vendetta is hilarious. I hope by this pointing time people have at least viewed the materials that were presented.



+ Eleventy billion to this!

Can we please pull the personalities out of the discussion and focus on the proposals? Claiming that Spot is in it to make a fortune (like there's a fortune to be made in wingsuiting instruction!) is complete bunk - given the amount of time he's invested, the fact that he's a pretty diversely talented guy, and given that at most he'd be one of 5 or 7 WSI/Es around the country if the proposal is adopted, I can think of about 12 different ways off the top of my head that he could make more money per hour invested.

It's as silly as the argument on the other side of the coin that "if we don't adopt a WSI rating, the FAA is going to shut down wingsuiting and give us all wedgies..." Let's stick to reality and sanity.

I have friends on both sides of this discussion. And I'm still on the fence, myself. Reasonable people can disagree. But let's be reasonable as we disagree. Let's focus on the merits of the proposal, not the messengers from each side. Yes, there are a lot of grudges and other bullshit on both sides. But whether you agree or disagree with the proposal, it's an important one to talk about like rational grown ups.

Everybody - read the proposal. Think about whether you want a mandatory rating program, whether you want something else in its place, or whether you don't think anything has to change. Talk about that stuff, not the people who want it or don't want it.

Other than that - like a lot of people - I'm pretty tired of the whole subject...

Quote

BOOBIES!!!



Unicorns!
Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography

Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the theory that the BOD will allow this issue to become a tool for personal vendetta is hilarious.



The question isn't that vendettas will be allowed by the BOD, which I agree is hilarious. The reality is that vendettas exist. I can guide you were to look to make up your own mind.

And I agree they should not be motivation for a proposal. They should not be part of the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the theory that the BOD will allow this issue to become a tool for personal vendetta is hilarious.



The question isn't that vendettas will be allowed by the BOD, which I agree is hilarious. The reality is that vendettas exist. I can guide you were to look to make up your own mind.

And I agree they should not be motivation for a proposal. They should not be part of the discussion.



I'm aware of most of the issues. I've only heard one side and I haven't let that cloud my judgement. It doesn't have a place in this period. Perpetuating them and using them as a half asses attempt at counter arguement has left us where we are. Judging by Rich's comments the negative responses have been largely inappropriate. And if the weren't largely that then the "volume" of a few has greatly overshadowed the bulk of responses. That doesn't serve the community as a whole and its a piss poor way of communicating. I doubt we can all get along but can we act like adults? I'm happy to hear you out next time I see you at Elsinore.

Apologies for spelling errors, etc. I'm typing this on a phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesome. So is this thing done? Or is it going to re-emerge in a few months with a different name?

I think most people agree that some beefing up of the WS language in the SIM is a good compromise. Any talk around that?

Thanks for the update!
Apex BASE
#1816

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a clarification: it was not a parlimentary manuerver at all. Many discussions were held about this topic because of its divided nature. Several directors voiced an opinnion that they were okay with it worded differently so it was meant to be a friendly ammendment. Unfortunately, someone called it to question without giving the option for the ammendment.

After the second motion and the request for secret ballot it failed. So the system worked. Both sides were passionate and fought for what they believed and more importantly what they believed the membership wanted. That is there job to represent membership.

With that said, a BSR was referred back to Safety and Training for the next meeting making it mandatory for the first flight jump to be conducted by a instructor or coach who has at least 200 wingsuit jumps. These numbers are not set at all but it was made in a motion by Mr. Mike Mullins. It seems that both sides were in favor of this idea but it needs to be discussed in full at committee. It allows for a compromise that both sides can have input on.

Rich Winstock
USPA National Director

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

mandatory for the first flight jump to be conducted by a instructor or coach who has at least 200 wingsuit jumps.



Maybe everyone can agree on that. Not sure who would argue against it, except those with less than 200 wingsuit jumps who want to give FFC's. :D I can't remember how many wingsuit jumps I had when I got a BMI rating years ago, but I think it was in that ballpark.
www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would get my vote for sure. I have long believed that to coach in any discipline you carry more weight if you are at least a USPA Coach or country equivalent.

When I got my coach rating I was in the same class as Nick Batsch. His opinion was that to be a canopy coach he should be a USPA Coach. He passed by the way. ;)

If you want to charge money for it and therefore be considered a professional it is only ethical to be at least a rated coach.
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


It would get my vote for sure. I have long believed that to coach in any discipline you carry more weight if you are at least a USPA Coach or country equivalent.



If the "skydivers must take a first flight course taught by a current USPA Coach with over 200 wingsuit jumps" proposal passes, I have two recommendations.

First, I hope the S&T Committee clarifies that wingsuit coaching and first flight courses would count toward the coach jumps that are needed to keep an active USPA Coach rating.

Right now, the IRM requires that a USPA Coach has to conduct a certain number of "coach jumps" each year to maintain his or her rating. (I'm not a USPA Coach and I don't have a copy of the IRM with me, so I don't know what that number is, but I'm sure one of you guys does.)

I understand that there's at least some disagreement over whether a "coach jump" must be a jump with unlicensed skydiver (i.e., a belly jump) to count toward that number, or whether wingsuit coaching would count.

People who don't do a lot of non-wingsuit jumps might have a hard time keeping an active rating if wingsuit coaching and instruction doesn't count. I know a number of highly trained, very skilled wingsuit instructors who simply don't take the wingsuit off enough to maintain their rating without this tweak.

Second, I'd encourage the S&T Committee to allow people with lapsed Coach ratings (for the reason I described above) to renew their Coach ratings through certification that they conducted the required number of wingsuit coach jumps. Otherwise, you're forcing people to re-certify as a belly jumper just to do wingsuit first flight courses, which doesn't make much sense to me.
Skwrl Productions - Wingsuit Photography

Northeast Bird School - Chief Logistics Guy and Video Dork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


It would get my vote for sure. I have long believed that to coach in any discipline you carry more weight if you are at least a USPA Coach or country equivalent.

When I got my coach rating I was in the same class as Nick Batsch. His opinion was that to be a canopy coach he should be a USPA Coach. He passed by the way. ;)

If you want to charge money for it and therefore be considered a professional it is only ethical to be at least a rated coach.



I fail to see that the air-skills part of the USPA coach rating have anything whatever to do with teaching a FFC. Please enlighten me.
...

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

I fail to see that the air-skills part of the USPA coach rating have anything whatever to do with teaching a FFC. Please enlighten me.



The air-skills portion? Do you mean the evaluation jumps?

Almost nothing, however my coach examiner did a lot more than take me on a couple eval jumps. We learned about teaching methods. How different people learn differently i.e. visual, audibly, hands on, etc. We spent a large portion of the course teaching. I think that applies somewhat.
I am an asshole, but I am honest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A coach rating demonstrates the ability to teach. Only part of it is in air skills. The more important part is accepting that you have someone's future in your hands and have a responsibity to understand what you are educating someone on.

A good coach understands that if they are asked a question they don't know the answer to they have to get an answer and not just make it up.

Honestly it is not that hard. If you don't have the drive to get a coach rating you shouldn't be teaching. It just shows you take the matter seriously.

I won't have any heartburn if it doesn't pass but it is a very fair compromise and wouldn't hurt other disciplines if it set a standard.
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

A coach rating demonstrates the ability to teach. Only part of it is in air skills. The more important part is accepting that you have someone's future in your hands and have a responsibity to understand what you are educating someone on.

A good coach understands that if they are asked a question they don't know the answer to they have to get an answer and not just make it up.

Honestly it is not that hard. If you don't have the drive to get a coach rating you shouldn't be teaching. It just shows you take the matter seriously.

I won't have any heartburn if it doesn't pass but it is a very fair compromise and wouldn't hurt other disciplines if it set a standard.



Sorry, Wick:

It's not a compromise: it's a clusterfink.

USPA coach ratings are adjunct ratings to the basic instructor ratings. Coach ratings have nothing to do with training already experienced parachutists how to fly a wingsuit.

And if you say the value of the rating is in the way it helps you teach -- and then turn around in the next paragraph and say "honestly it's not that hard," then it's a priori worthless anyway because learning how to help people learn is hard.

As for the 200-wingsuit-jump requirement before teaching FFCs... I think that doesn't fly either. For example, I taught some "FFCs" back around 2000 when I had 20 or 30 wingsuit jumps, but at that time I also had 3,000 skydives and had trained 3,000+ static line, tandem and BASE students over 30+ years of jumping.

Now compare that to someone who has the 200 wingsuit jumps but only a few hundred total jumps and no other instructor experience.

Who's going to give the better FFC? Who would you rather learn from? There is no right or wrong answer to either question, of course, because of multiple other unlisted variables, but the bottom line is: Since there is no WSI rating on which to base requirements such as jump numbers and/or a USPA Coach rating, the whole "compromise" clusterfink is just plain silly.

Congrats and kudos to the BOD for stoning the WSI. Hopefully, that turkey won't try to play phoenix and rise from the asses to plague us again, and a great way to help ensure that is to poop-can the silly compromise before it grows any feathers.

B|
44
SCR-6933 / SCS-3463 / D-5533 / BASE 44 / CCS-37 / 82d Airborne (Ret.)

"The beginning of wisdom is to first call things by their right names."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I fail to see that the air-skills part of the USPA coach rating have anything whatever to do with teaching a FFC. Please enlighten me.



The air-skills portion? Do you mean the evaluation jumps?

Almost nothing, however my coach examiner did a lot more than take me on a couple eval jumps. We learned about teaching methods. How different people learn differently i.e. visual, audibly, hands on, etc. We spent a large portion of the course teaching. I think that applies somewhat.



REAL teachers take years to learn about teaching methods, not a long weekend.

The way some people with USPA coach and instructor ratings go on about their pedagogical knowledge is laughable.
...

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I totally agree. However if you are so bad you can't get a coach rating that would be an indicator that you cannot share knowledge very well.

I have said before that if someone is an instructor for another serious type of activity then that is good indicator also. I would trust a Dive Master with Wingsuit experience over someone with zero teaching certificates. It just demonstrates and ability to share information and take people's safety responsibility.

At the end of the day I don't personally care too much. People should be motivated enough about their safety to seek out a mentor that has a good track record. If someone is going to take your money they should be a professional and that means a rating...in wingusiting the manufacturers offer that and most require a coach rating so it kind of already exists.

If USPA feels like they have to do SOMETHING then this would be fair to me. I am not as passionate about it as I am against a WSI.
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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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