Radios and student training

[linus2270 0]

I just finished my AFF level 1 and yes, I chose to accept the risk, jumped, shit could have happened and I could have died, BUT I could very well maybe killed another student too.

Theoretical and practical knowledge will need to connect somehow during the learning process and when it comes to doing something that involves any risk of life, I will need an expert next to me to make sure that those two connected VERY WELL so that I don't goof up and kill myself or someone. And since AFF level 1 is not a tandem dive with somebody behind me to say 'yes' or a 'no' when my mind is saying 'maybe', radio-coaching is the only way.

If I'm learning how to knit, I don't need anybody next to me to tell me that I did something wrong. I can screw up, twist and tangle, but I can always undo anything however long it takes. If I'm learning how to skydive and have never come across unpredictable winds at high altitudes, with powerlines and other students nearby, I know I need an expert to tell me that the move I'm making is a risky one. There are just way too many possible mistakes that can't be undone, and only few seconds to undo anything I possibly can.

My AFF instructor (Pat of PVSS) has been teaching for years and he used our first names when he gave instructions over the radio. I was glad he was there. Eventually, that radio will be silent and when that happens, I'll be very happy.

[dragon2 0]

Quote

Theoretical and practical knowledge will need to connect somehow during the learning process and when it comes to doing something that involves any risk of life, I will need an expert next to me to make sure that those two connected VERY WELL so that I don't goof up and kill myself or someone. And since AFF level 1 is not a tandem dive with somebody behind me to say 'yes' or a 'no' when my mind is saying 'maybe', radio-coaching is the only way.

It's not the "only way", as has been proven by thousands of students already

Skydiving isn't something you can do while someone is holding your hand like it sounds you'd like it to be, and you need to be prepared for radio failure on every jump. Radio coaching may be nice, but it isn't a necessity, and not a given so you should be prepared to make your own fightplan on all jumps, just in case.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[tetra316 0]

And this is why I think radios can be a bad idea. It sounds like you want no responsibility but would rather have someone telling you what to do every step of the way. If that's the case skydiving is not for you!

You and you alone are responsible for you actions or in-actions. That is why the first jump course plus additional ground training is several hours long. If you don't feel ready to make a jump after that without a radio, you need more training. What if the radio had malfunctioned the first jump?

[Baksteen 84]

At some point you decided to learn how to knit without someone watching your every move.
When you signed up for the first jump class, did you *know* someone would be providing radio coaching?

What if radios weren't mentioned during the course and they weren't handed out before your first jump?
Would you have gone home?

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[davelepka 4]

Quote

You and you alone are responsible for you actions or in-actions. That is why the first jump course plus additional ground training is several hours long. If you don't feel ready to make a jump after that without a radio, you need more training. What if the radio had malfunctioned the first jump?

I would suggest that far more students malfunction on their first (few) jumps then radios malfunction overall. If batteries are charged, radios are turned on and volume adjusted properly, radios work almost all of the time. I cannot say the same for the performance of first jump students.

In no way does the presence of a radio mean that the training could be anything less than complete, but if you look at the number of students that return for additional jumps, or even go on to get a license, you can see the skydiving is not for everyone, and even after a full day of training and passing a test, not all of the FJC students are really 'ready' to make a jump.

While the radio isn't a guarantee of anything, it can (and has) turned a risk of injury into a non-event. A student who is, 'out to lunch' and not properly controlling their canopy, without a radio would end up landing off where ever they end up. If it takes the radio guy to instruct them on their every move to get them back to the DZ, where they land with a good flare and a PLF, then the radio saved the DZ the liability of an injury or damage to the gear.

Let's think about something we can all relate to, AFF level 1 students. Some of us have seen this live, but we've all seen it on video, the student with the 'deer in the headlights' look on their face. They don't reply to handsignals, and don't even try to pull the PC. Is anyone surprised when they see these videos? Probably not, because a first jump is a big deal, and skydiving isn't for everyone, so when a guy 'freezes up', it's accepted as a part of the game.

Now take that same idea, and transfer it to a static line or IAD student. There's a chance that the student is hanging under the canopy with that same 'lost' look in their eyes, and without a radio, what would the result be? Maybe it would work out OK, maybe not. I have talked down many students who had to be 'coached' into making that first turn, and in the end I'm gald I was able to do that as opposed to sitting on the ground asking, "Where's that guy going"?

The idea that you 'shouldn't' need a radio is correct. Just like you shouldn't need an AAD, a reserve, or even an AFF I. If everyone arched like they were supposed to, pulled on time, and every rig was packed correctly, what's the point of all of those things?

The point is that no student or skydive is perfect, and if all it takes is a radio help ensure a safe landing, then why not? It's the least expensive among the ADD, reserve and AFF I, and much like those things, it only needs to be used as much as the situaiton dictates, which sometines is very little, or just to say "You're doing great". But when a student is flying themselves into a bad situation, it allows the operator to put their knowledge and experience to use in flying them out of that situation.

Remember that even a twisted ankle on landing is a serious injury for the student. It puts them on crutches for weeks, and makes for a less then happy memory of the DZ. It may not get an ambulance or helo to the DZ, or make the nightly news, but to that jumper it's a pretty big deal. So if it takes a guy on the radio to make sure they find and land on the DZ, to instruct 'feet and knees together' and tell them to flare, then so be it. I'd rather find out that a student is a retard because of how much radio help they needed as opposed to finding out when they fly off into the sunset and land in a tree/powerlines/swamp.

[skypuppy 1]

I can't believe how many people here seem to think it's fine to require me, with thousands of jumps, to buy an aad for my rig,

but it's a cop-out to put a radio on a student.

I'm glad I came up the way I did....

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I can't believe how many people here seem to think it's fine to require me, with thousands of jumps, to buy an aad for my rig,

but it's a cop-out to put a radio on a student.

I'm glad I came up the way I did....

Geez, 'puppy.
Hard core are we?
Or, as is my suspicion, you're being sarcastic, eh?

I don't think you realize the value of the radio.
It's an available tool. Why not use it if you can?

Your comment sounds like the old, "I had to do it that way, you should too" mentality.

I didn't have radio on my '77 SL training. But then again, it would have been useless...its' not like we could drive those worn out, patched up T-10s all over the sky, right?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[pilotdave 0]

I'd love to learn more about DZs that are very successful without student radios. Do you have very big landing areas? Lots of outs? Few obstacles?

My DZ requires radios for all students right until they have an A-license stamp on their forehead. Nobody talks to them once they prove themselves, but they have a 2-way radio just in case. Very useful for when they land off. I found out recently that the radio requirement comes from the USPA as part of a water gear waiver (for a tiny pond a long way from the DZ that I couldn't hit if I tried).

We've got a pretty small landing area, lots of trees around it, houses, and miles of woods on one side of the airport. AFF out of a turbine plane often means long spots and some students have trouble finding the airport. I've debriefed students that didn't find the landing area until they were on downwind. It's hard to imagine we'd do too well without radios. If we went back to IAD out of a 182, maybe.

But if I could learn from a DZ that doesn't use radios, I'm listening.

Dave

[dragon2 0]

Quote

Do you have very big landing areas? Lots of outs? Few obstacles?

The landing area is quite big. Outs are available. Obstacles include the airport itself, glider + their runway, houses/farms, trees, lots of fields have corn and stuff, sometimes cows , barbed wire, ditches. No power lines or woods or big bodies of water really close.
We use 2x Grand Caravan. Sometimes the spot is long also for students, but most seem to find their way home. I see more problems with students dropped perfectly but fooling around until too late to make it back than with students coming back from long spots. We have people in the trees just about every year but not all of those are students
But all in all our DZ isn't the most difficult to land in so it may not be very comparable to yours.

See pic for our DZ, google maps is behind though with it's pictures the runway is way longer, extra water, trees and a lot of extra buildings have been added since the photo was taken.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[pilotdave 0]

A little more open than my DZ...

The landing area is just below and to the left of the runway.

Dave

[skymama 35]

Recently, I watching canopies landing at a dz (not my home dz). Two jumpers were coming in on their final; Jumper 1 was on a straight in approach, Jumper 2 was a little higher and off to the side. All the sudden, Jumper 2 did a 180 and turned into Jumper 1's canopy. His feet hit the top of Jumper 1's canopy, which collapsed but Jumper 1 recovered it and landed well. Jumper 2 went into a spin and recovered just before hitting ground.

Fortunately , no one was hurt. All the bystanders were in total disbelief at what we saw and couldn't figure out why Jumper 2 made that turn. I heard that they were both students on radio and that Jumper 2 was told by his instructor to make a turn to bleed off some altitude. I don't know anything else about the outcome of this event, other than hearing that the instructor was going to be spoken to. All I could think is that those guys were really lucky they were both on big canopies. It was scary to watch.

She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

[danielcroft 2]

Here's what the Ranch looks like when it's nice & green. Radios are a good safety measure here IMO.

Edited to add the actual google maps link: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=45+Sand+Hill+Rd,+Gardiner,+New+York+12525&sll=42.066345,-74.245517&sspn=0.043488,0.047765&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=45+Sand+Hill+Rd,+Gardiner,+Ulster,+New+York+12525&ll=41.674322,-74.15411&spn=0.043755,0.064116&t=h&z=15

[billvon 2,400]

>Why does everyone seem to think radios are a necessity today?

They're not, any more than AFF, square main parachutes or AAD's for students are. But they are pretty good ideas.

>Why are radios better then training and letting the students take
>responsibility?

Because with a radio you can let a student take responsibility or you can talk to them if they screw up - often saving them from injury. Without the radio you can let a student take responsibility, but then cannot talk to them if they screw up. That means 1) less learning takes place and 2) they have a greater potential for being injured.

[skypuppy 1]

You've totally misunderstood my post. I have no problem with radios. I had one on my student jumps in 1979, I gave radio control once I became an instructor in 80-81, I've been chief instructor at a couple of dz's where we've always used radios -- the one place that didn't we used an arrow, so the student was still following instruction from the ground.

I've never been to a dz where there was not some form of steering instruction being given to the student during the jump.

What I'm sarcastic about is especially people who say they have no problem with being required to use aads by their dz or national association, yet do not think students should have radios because they think the student should be doing things on his/her own....

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[tetra316 0]

I do admit they are a pretty good idea but I can't help think it takes away some of the learning process. I'm not advocating no ground to air instructions at all, just questioning the total control some seem to exert over students under canopy without letting them learn and yes, make some mistakes. At a bare minimum arrows on the ground or paddles to provide some guidance are great tools. But dictating every move of a student under canopy is not. What happens when they are taken off the radio? They don't know how to fly their canopy without instructions and make stupid mistakes that should have been made in the first couple jumps off AFF when there were perhaps fewer canopies in the air. In these cases I think radios delay the learning process rather than supplement it.

[billvon 2,400]

>But dictating every move of a student under canopy is not.

I agree. Generally I expect my students to fly their canopies and set up the pattern without my help. I always help them during the first flare, just because that's when the odds of injury are greatest. But after 3 jumps or so I expect them to be able to set up a pattern, flare and land on their own - so I don't talk to them unless they screw up badly enough that they're going to hurt themselves (like land downwind or into power lines.) That way, by the time they're off radio, they've proven they can fly without one.

[linus2270 0]

No, I didn't know that radios were going to be used until we started talking about landing procedures. The class was practically a safety & "troubleshoot" class and I was pretty confident that I was prepared to act properly on any type of scenario up there.

When I found out that we were going to have radios, I admit being happy about it because it did boost my confidence. It was more like a bonus:)

Would I have taken the class without the radio? Absolutely!

And BTW, I learned how to knit, use a sewing machine, change my toilet, replace a broken sprinkler head, change the filter of my pool and all sorts of stuff, without anybody's helpI know when I need somebody else's expertise

[linus2270 0]

>just questioning the total control some seem to exert over students under canopy without letting them learn

The instructor on the other end of the radio is not attempting to have total control. Please give a little more credit to instructors who were given these radios as TOOLS. They use a radio only to tell the student if they are doing something wrong that can potentially cause injury to herself/himself or others.

>dictating every move of a student under canopy

If one day you get the chance to stand next to these instructors, you'll learn that they don't dictate every move. That would make them unqualified AFF instructors.

>What happens when they are taken off the radio? They don't know how to fly their canopy without instructions

I was in my AFF class for 7 straight hours going through a very well regulated level 1 curriculum that educates every student how to fly a canopy.

A radio is not a necessity but it's a good tool. It would be nice to see a thread about "How radios are supposed to be used" because obviously, some people, and yes, probably some instructors, are not fully aware of how they are being used and why.

[tetra316 0]

Quote

>just questioning the total control some seem to exert over students under canopy without letting them learn

The instructor on the other end of the radio is not attempting to have total control. Please give a little more credit to instructors who were given these radios as TOOLS. They use a radio only to tell the student if they are doing something wrong that can potentially cause injury to herself/himself or others.

>dictating every move of a student under canopy

If one day you get the chance to stand next to these instructors, you'll learn that they don't dictate every move. That would make them unqualified AFF instructors.

You really haven't been around much, have you.

Get out and around more and you'll see what I mean. I have seen some exert total control and dictate every move. Also read some earlier posts. Others have experienced this first hand.

[linus2270 0]

No, I'm still trying to learn. I've been blessed with good instructors and I greatly respect each one of them. I do understand some of your concerns and I will keep them in mind.

[TheLackey 0]

Students are pretty much insulated from freefall mistakes that endanger others because of the supervision.

Canopy piloting for the first few jumps also needs some supervision, and better yet, some input. It differs among individuals for how long, but it is in the best interest for everyone on the jumprun, on the DZ and in the sport that those first flights end up in the best way possible until they can be trusted to do mostly the right things by everyone else involved.

You admit radios are a pretty good idea and that arrows or paddles are great tools.

Call me coddled, but the one-way radio conversation in the pattern helped. My I's never talked to me after jump three, but they could have if there was a problem after that.

Safety first.

Perhaps the issue is the over-talking guys you have seen and not the radios themselves.

And I haven't been around much either.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Quote

I do admit they are a pretty good idea but I can't help think it takes away some of the learning process. I'm not advocating no ground to air instructions at all, just questioning the total control some seem to exert over students under canopy without letting them learn and yes, make some mistakes. At a bare minimum arrows on the ground or paddles to provide some guidance are great tools. But dictating every move of a student under canopy is not. What happens when they are taken off the radio? They don't know how to fly their canopy without instructions and make stupid mistakes that should have been made in the first couple jumps off AFF when there were perhaps fewer canopies in the air. In these cases I think radios delay the learning process rather than supplement it.

I think that's more of an instructor issue than a radio issue.

We have a couple real good ones at my DZ (small DZ, static line) They will take a minute and talk to the student to get a "feel" for how much supervision they are going to need.

Some need more guidance than others. They also remove the radio guidance slowly, and have the student do at least one jump with no ground commands, but with a radio, in case it's needed.

They will also teach quite a lot about canopy flight. They have the student flare and then let up to understand how it surges. They have them hold longer and longer turns to show how turns increase speed. They have them do simulated patterns at higher altitudes to show how the wind affects ground track.
Having the student doing the manuvers while the instructor is telling them (over the radio) what to do and is explaining what is happening and why enhances instruction.

Although not every student is capable of learning all of that on the first jump, most are capable of learning at least some of it.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[skypuppy 1]

You really haven't been around much, have you.

Funny. I was going to say the same thing about you....

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Personally, I think I's should follow each student out the door, open nearby, top dock them and fly their sorry asses to the ground. At the right moment, let go of their canopies and yell flair.
Or, maybe just use the radios... Either method can work well when executed properly.

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[ufk22 32]

Quote

The Canadian incident in that thread and the dicussion of exactly what words to use or not to use when giving a student radio instructions under canopy is interesting. I rather think the whole idea of using radios to begin with takes away the responsibility from the student and intead places it on the radio operator. The exact opposite of what should be happening.

Quote

i rather think the idea of hanging on to a student and then giving hand signals takes away the responsibility from the student and instead places it on the AFF instructor.
When I went through my training, we were drilled on the landing pattern, initiation altitudes for downwind, base and final and when to flare. We were also drilled on recognizing mals and the whole is it there, square and steerable factor. We had no radios. Granted we did have someone in the landing area with paddles but those generally were only used for the last 200 or so feet and to tell the student exactly when to flare.

If after only 7 years in sport you're talking this way, I hate to think what you'll be like after 20. The "I was trained this way, I think I turned out OK, so that means the way I was trained must be the best" is normally an attitude I have to fight with the "old guard", took me 4 years for some of them to actually start using the ISP.

Why does everyone seem to think radios are a necessity today? Why can't students be trained enough to accept responsibility for themselves? I especially think this would be an advantage in any incident in that the blame can be laid no where else except on the student. Train them correctly and completely and if they choose to accept the risk and jump it's their responsibility. We all know, and in the case of students they should definitely be told, that sometimes shit happens and you die. But we still jump.

Quote

Why does everyone seem to think AFF Instructors are so necessary today? Why can't students be trained enough to accept responsibility for themselves? I especially think this would be an advantage in any incident in that the blame can be laid no where else except on the student. Train them correctly and completely and if they choose to accept the risk and jump it's their responsibility. We all know, and in the case of students they should definitely be told, that sometimes shit happens and you die. But we still jump.

I hope you're not as young as your photo looks, cause you talk just like the oldest skydivers I know

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

• Quote