0
Para5-0

Wingsuit Instructor/Coach Rating Input Needed.

Recommended Posts

Quote

well at least we will still be able to jump wingsuits off of Antennaes when USPA bans wingsuiting.



Riiight... because spending hundreds of hours on this debate is so much easier than an outright ban. You've got it backwards, again.

And exactly how tall are the antennae around you?
www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to hear about you being harassed for basically doing your job. The only Email I sent was to my BOD and the rest is basically my dialog here.

I did recommend polling the entire USPA in this regard. Honestly if the " whole community" was for it I would fall in line with the rest and keep quiet And I know a lot of people would love that! Believe it or not even me. This shit ain't fun!. But that is clearly not the case.

You are right the WS community is fractionalized. The sub-committee got a detailed incident report. The information we get here is a statement like "hey guys stop hitting the tail or more DZs will ban us.... I can't give more details or more DZs will ban us". It is kind of hush- hush need to know only down here in the ranks. THAT is NOT the way to help your fellow jumper out, help police ourselves.

In my case personally ( not speaking for anybody else here) I would review this strike report with unprecedented scrutiny to include all other possible factors of a very clinically detailed root cause analysis by someone who has been at this a long time and not a knee jerk blame on initial training(1). And taking into account our member in good standing that presented this has a history of passionate presentations before the BOD requesting an implementation of a WS instructor rating back since 09 before the tail strike issues. This is what Law enforcement calls "priors". It isn't over there will be a redux at the next meeting, and the next and the next. different angle possibly, same objective.

Somewhere in some notes it stated the last minute petition against angered and unified the sub-committee into an in- favor vote . Now I'm not going to validate every name on a petition I didn't author for actual jumpers. The community, like this forum I'm addressing, is international. The petition had signatures of active and talented wingsuiters from non USPA dropzones but that do follow USPA protocol when it comes to training.The petition had names of very accomplished skydivers/ Wingsuiters who might have retired or are on hiatus for a while. The petition had jumpers, someone claimed, with as few as 100 jumps. They are still the constituency, they have a say. The petition featured USPA members who don't wingsuit but who do see the USPA regulating experienced jumpers in any discipline as a monumental change which should be visited very carefully. Every argument about AFFIs and tandem instruction growing pains does not equate and they see this even if the sub committee does not.

If you are not selling it to the other fraction there is probably a reason why. This was not a grass roots movement from within the community. Obviously some feel it was a political "end run".

Rich I completely agree on your assessment of the wingsuit community's dysfunction or disability to agree on this one subject. You can feel membership betrayal Or you can forgetaboutit and come out to the west coast for wingsuit events that will feature leadership, structure, discipline and cohesion like any gathering of like minded individuals in our sport.

Then again if you don't want to see anything to do with wingsuits, Go to Nationals. No wingsuits there.
LETS hear it for the free fallers!:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

well at least we will still be able to jump wingsuits off of Antennaes when USPA bans wingsuiting.



Riiight... because spending hundreds of hours on this debate is so much easier than an outright ban. You've got it backwards, again.

And exactly how tall are the antennae around you?


I was being ironic :D

they are 2,000' and 1950' and 1600'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

....

You are right the WS community is fractionalized. The sub-committee got a detailed incident report. The information we get here is a statement like "hey guys stop hitting the tail or more DZs will ban us.... I can't give more details or more DZs will ban us". It is kind of hush- hush need to know only down here in the ranks. THAT is NOT the way to help your fellow jumper out, help police ourselves...




The subcommittee received the same excel file graphic that was posted here on DZ.com, with one variation; They received the locations of the tailstrikes with DZO names.

Rich asked for a detailed list because some peopl refused to accept the numbers and made accusations of them being false. The Subcommittee verified them and discovered other tailstrikes in addition to the ones contained in the report. DZO's don't like to report incidents. See the latest Parachutist for details on that subject.

Almost everyone involved in the process cooperated fully with the BOD. My personal financial information was even looked at by the BOD due to accusations of "this is all about money."

Regardless of anything else, Rich took every accusation, denial, question posed here and on Facebook to heart. He took the time to examine everything, doing what I feel is an exceptionally thorough job at digging into facts vs the emotional rants. At times it felt similar to being dragged into a police station and having to answer difficult questions. Had everyone on the SubCommittee been as forthcoming and participated equally, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I volunteer to play myself! But I will need 200 practice jumps at multiple locations in my contract please. New harness, main, reserve, aad, as well. Preferably at a warm location if filming is in the winter time. that should cover the basics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I volunteer to play myself! But I will need 200 practice jumps at multiple locations in my contract please. New harness, main, reserve, aad, as well. Preferably at a warm location if filming is in the winter time. that should cover the basics.



You forgot to request the gear x2 so that you'd have a turn rig. Rookie mistake ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey,

I do have a thick skin probably thicker than most. In fact I dont think it is possible to piss me off. I think we can all find common ground especially if we could meet in person.

To give an example of why trying to do anything is disheartening. Take a gander at the comment Robin made in the DZ banned thread.

Quote

The political and operational dynamics of what's happening here is remarkably like what happened in the Third Reich: Hitler targeted Jews not so much because he hated Jews but because there were too many Catholics and not enough communists.



We are being compared to Hitler. I am just shaking my head right now. Is that really going to help wingsuitters as a whole? Not to mention it is a bit off kilter and distasteful, but what do I know.

I guess it is out of our hands and into the members. Let's see what they think about it and then move forward accordingly. If we are moving forward with it then input would be great. If we arent moving forward then alternate educational plans are in order.

I think I am going to bail out of this for a bit, otherwise I might start getting compared to Al Queda, serial killers, or rapists.

Thanks Talk Soon.
Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the polling process going to be the same as so far? Email sent with link to the poll? Just asking because I did not receive at least one that I know of and my email is valid as I received one poll in the past.
Again, not trying to be negative, just asking. Hopefully it will also be posted here.

I will be voting no on the rating and I it's been covered ad nauseam here so I will skip my reasoning.

The important question for me is this. If this is passed, and a rating is implemented in the future, what will we, as a community, do to prevent canopy fatalities.
We know without much research there are at least 10+ in the USA and many many more injuries that don't even make it to official incident report!

Again, if this is successful (and if this passes the majority, I will accept it) shouldn't we come up with a similar scenario for canopy control?
Besides required canopy course for a B license that I read of, there is no system of checks regarding wingloadings and canopy platform.

Before people call me crazy - consider this.
Canopy instructional rating and a little check box on the USPA membership card certifying that the jumper met a mini course and proved his skills (maybe Bill Von's list witnessed by canopy instructor) on a big canopy allowing him to fly a wing of let's say 1.3 wingloading and higher.
Another check box verifying that the jumper can jump cross braces.
Such individual comes to a new dz, during check in when someone looks at his rig and his uspa card they can say - hey what canopy do you have there - katana? velo? and no check mark on the high performance canopy or a high wing loading? Sorry, you cannot jump here.

If a wingsuit rating passes, why would this not be a viable thing to establish. It seems even easier to enforce than wingsuiting as someone's rig is being checked during check in. Also, every dropzone will have at least one experienced canopy pilot to keep an eye out on others.

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Designing an unbiased poll is very difficult. It's very easy for the poll designer to incorporate his or her biases into the questions. I hope that USPA will get expert help in doing this.
...

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The poll is going out with the 2012 election ballots. So electronically every USPA member will receive a ballot to vote for the BOD and attached to it will be a question, "Should USPA adopt the attached Wingsuit Instructor Rating?" Yes or No. The entire program will be attched and visable to view.

To answer the second part of your post. I will say that it has been discussed (wing load BSR, Canopy Instructor, endorsements) It is a very slippery slope to go down. The board in its current configuration, I would be very surprised if something could make its way to fruition. One of the arguements from BOD members is they do not want advanced discipline ratings and they believe that the WSI rating will open a can of worms. Notice I did not disagree with you, in fact I was very involved in the implementation of the B canopy proficiencxy card. I felt it was as much as we could get at the time. The basis for the card is to require a canopy course prior to a B license. Most if not all courses incorporate what was on the card and in the syllabus. A huge step in the right direction. Also and not out yet we approved some changes to the card this last meeting. Flight 1 had some very good suggestions to improve the card. Remember we said at its inception that it was just a starting point and it would require field testing and tweaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The slippery slope is exactly why I personally (not my business) is against the WSI by the USPA. Simple as that...I am not a member of the BPA even though I am UK Citizen for the exact same reason.

The teaching material that is part of this proposal is hugely valuable but that isn't the issue I have with the whole thing.

Who knows.....maybe by the time of the vote I might be persuaded...I am more open minded than some might think.


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

Hey,

I do have a thick skin probably thicker than most. In fact I dont think it is possible to piss me off. I think we can all find common ground especially if we could meet in person.

To give an example of why trying to do anything is disheartening. Take a gander at the comment Robin made in the DZ banned thread.

Quote

The political and operational dynamics of what's happening here is remarkably like what happened in the Third Reich: Hitler targeted Jews not so much because he hated Jews but because there were too many Catholics and not enough communists.



We are being compared to Hitler. I am just shaking my head right now. Is that really going to help wingsuitters as a whole? Not to mention it is a bit off kilter and distasteful, but what do I know.

I guess it is out of our hands and into the members. Let's see what they think about it and then move forward accordingly. If we are moving forward with it then input would be great. If we arent moving forward then alternate educational plans are in order.

I think I am going to bail out of this for a bit, otherwise I might start getting compared to Al Queda, serial killers, or rapists.

Thanks Talk Soon.
Rich



Hey Rich,

Sorry you got all jangled by the Third Reich analogy, but I did provide an alternative comparison -- not to al-Qaeda or serial killers but to Goldilocks and the Three Bears.

For the other readers of this thread, please find below the entire post, which riffed on Skybytch's post that it's goofy to go after a few unschooled wingsuiters while neglecting the longstanding and continuing issues with a lot of unschooled canopy pilots.

Before we go there, though, I want to give Rich a big shoutout for being one of the most proactive and dedicated board members I've known of in my almost 40 years of parachuting. You're a great asset to sport parachuting and your efforts on its behalf are valuable and much appreciated -- and that includes your participation in the current wingsuit silliness (talk about swatting a fly with a sledgehammer!).

Bottom line: The whole premise is ridiculous. When CRW started it was banned from many DZs, people were kicked off DZs for doing it, and if any member of the Golden Knights was caught doing it, they were kicked off the team.

Now, of course, it's embraced as a legitimate part of the sport, it is part of FAI world competition, and the Knights have their own CRW demo team -- all without a "CRW pilot rating" or any of the other balderdash associated with this proposed wingsuit rule/regulation/bureaucratic superstructure silliness.

Long tale short, we figured out a way to work it out -- all without creating another ridiculous and unnecessary bureaucracy, with its attendant gatekeepers, power brokers -- and added costs.

(BTW, I piloted the first 8-stack in the world built outside of California (CCR-55) and was a principal author of the original USPA safety and competition rules for CRW.)

To sum up, Rich, no disrespect to your slot or efforts intended; you're kinda like a lawyer (no offense intended there either!!) who defends an unpopular defendant. What you're doing is part of your responsibilities as a BOD member and I applaud you for it, even if the whole thing is in fact reminiscent of... Goldilocks and the Three Bears.

Anyway, here's the whole post from the General Forum vis a vis the recent BOD meeting:

Quote

Quote

Quote

To be fair, I don't believe there are any efforts in that direction currently but perhaps the broader question put to the membership would help guide the Board on whether or not USPA should persue this course. -- pms07



There's been an outcry to get some form of canopy related instruction/rating program in place for years now. How many noobs have died or injured themselves flying a wingsuit before 200 jumps? How many noobs have died or injured themselves flying a canopy that is beyond their ability to safely land in less than ideal conditions?

And yet it's wingsuits that get the attention. What happened to "education not regulation"? Oh, that only applies to canopies....

One more indication of how screwed up USPA is. --skybytch



Well, yes and no. It's easier to pick on the wingsuit community because there are so few of them compared to the "canopy community," which by definition includes everyone.

The political and operational dynamics of what's happening here is remarkably like what happened in the Third Reich: Hitler targeted Jews not so much because he hated Jews but because there were too many Catholics and not enough communists.

USPA never went after the skysurfing community because there weren't enough of them, and they don't go after the canopy community because there are too many of them. The wingsuit community, though, is just about right.

And if the Third Reich analogy's too politically incorrect, then go with Goldilocks and the Three Bears: Canopy community too big, skysurf community too small, wingsuit community just right. Chomp!

Same situation, though; a bureaucracy always chooses the path of greatest (perceived) benefit for the least amount of effort.

All this blah-blah aside, however, I'm witchoo 'bytch: USPA should focus more on the still-festering, significant and growing problem of hot canopies + unschooled pilots instead of bothering a small subset of its membership that is not causing much of a problem.

Unfortunately, this will never happen as long as USPA maintains its ongoing primary training focus on freefall FUN skills instead of parachute SURVIVAL skills -- especially when, once again, we have a Designated Skygod Expert driving a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist for reasons that relate only peripherally to safety.

44
B|


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
This may be off topic but I think a lot more important that some political back and forth.
Why is it that there is a tail strike every 27 days from a wing suit and there is nothing out there about them. I would say USPA and Wing Suit flyers are failing community as a whole. SHAME on both groups. Which I am a member of both groups.
As for a DZO not reporting it is another story but at least that one I can understand. They are driven by protecting their own interests more than others (which is sad).
Without the details about each strike. How can WE as a group educate and make informed decisions. Knowledge is power.

As for the coach rating in my view it doesn't matter unless the DZs are going to stop people who should not be jumping a suit. (i.e. no training and not enough jumps). The same goes for people who should not be swooping. I am not advocating for either of these.

This can also be enforced for our community. I just was at a boogie and a number of people who had planned to WS had not completed a course yet. There was someone at the bogie who is well known for being a great coach and is identified as such by one of the manufacturers. He was offering coaching and FFC. In the group I was with we told the new jumper (with 5 WS jumps) that he would not be flying with us unless he did the FFC. He did it and learned a lot. In another group this did not happen and the jumper did a jump for the first time without a FFC. He did okay and in the end many of the other wingsuiters went up and talked to him and his group about it.

For those who say self-policing does not work go visit a DZ in central California and see it in action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

pretty sure thats not off topic I think thats the point of the thread.

oh and tonysuits vs phoenixfly.



Can people stop pushing this shit. It isn't true. In the presentation in San Diego this was more than covered. Additionally I don't see how this could hurt tony and I don't really see how it helps Robi either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

pretty sure thats not off topic I think thats the point of the thread.

oh and tonysuits vs phoenixfly.



Can people stop pushing this shit. It isn't true. In the presentation in San Diego this was more than covered. Additionally I don't see how this could hurt tony and I don't really see how it helps Robi either.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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!
www.WingsuitPhotos.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