why require a tandem for AFF?

[jsaxton 0]

hey, I'm just a fun jumper, I no nothing about the training programs.

[rehmwa 2]

I like Bill's operation a LOT. Wish I could travel there more.

Tandem before AFF:

1 - only requires 1 jumpmaster
2 - easier to train
3 - lots of jumpers just get the 1 jump out of the way and quit

So for those that aren't really committed, it's a way to give them the ride, see if they stick with it, they get some learning, we don't waste a lot of instructor time on one jump wonders

Helps the serious students get more quality time with instructors not distracted by "one jump students"

I don't think Bill's DZ charges as much for anything, so doing the tandem there +AFF series is likely no more than other DZs for just AFF - but I don't know his prices lately (last 5 years or so).

My cynical hat says it's a money making thing, but if I take the hat off and really look at it, it has a lot of benefits for the student, other students, and the jump operation.

Cynical hat on - I believe a DZ has the right to make money (I know, odd concept for Californians). Since there are other DZs in the area, it's not like student don't have a choice in the matter either.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[AllisonH 0]

I realize this discussion has been focused on a specific DZ, but they certainly aren't the only one that requires a tandem before AFF. Skydive Arizona requires a tandem before (and tunnel time during) AFF, and Skydive Chicago requires two tandems before their AFP program.

[jsaxton 0]

Tandem $100
AFF $1000
==========
$1100

Much less expensive for the student than most AFF programs.

Quote

I like Bill's operation a LOT. Wish I could travel there more.

Tandem before AFF:

1 - only requires 1 jumpmaster
2 - easier to train
3 - lots of jumpers just get the 1 jump out of the way and quit

So for those that aren't really committed, it's a way to give them the ride, see if they stick with it, they get some learning, we don't waste a lot of instructor time on one jump wonders

Helps the serious students get more quality time with instructors not distracted by "one jump students"

I don't think Bill's DZ charges as much for anything, so doing the tandem there +AFF series is likely no more than other DZs for just AFF - but I don't know his prices lately (last 5 years or so).

My cynical hat says it's a money making thing, but if I take the hat off and really look at it, it has a lot of benefits for the student, other students, and the jump operation.

Cynical hat on - I believe a DZ has the right to make money (I know, odd concept for Californians). Since there are other DZs in the area, it's not like student don't have a choice in the matter either.

[billvon 2,400]

>Tandem before AFF:
>1 - only requires 1 jumpmaster
>2 - easier to train
>3 - lots of jumpers just get the 1 jump out of the way and quit

I think it's important to make the distinction between tandem-first and AFP. Some DZ's just recommend a tandem before the FJC to get students "used to freefall." It's a good familiarization tool and helps when students later go through a normal AFF program.

Another option is AFP, where, after a first jump course, a student does several tandems, having TLO's on each one. Once the instructor thinks they are ready they move on to AFF, which usually starts as a one-JM level 3 or 4.

[NickDG 23]

>>Much less expensive for the student than most AFF programs.
Granted, we can't dispute the cost savings . . .

But is that benchmark for student training?

Another poster said, "We don't waste a lot of time on one jump wonders." I've always considered one jump charlies the bread and butter of what Instructors do. And it goes without saying I've never thought anytime spent with a student is a waste of time.

He also said, "there are other DZs in the area, it's not like student don't have a choice in the matter either."

But we both know students aren't very equipped to make those kind of informed choices. If they were Skyride would have died on the vine. (Not comparing Bill to Skyride!)

And how is the single JM thing good for anybody except the DZO? It lowers the employment rate of Instructors when it is already too low. And a single JM struggling to keep someone with one tandem jump from sliding all over the sky isn't really doing much teaching. I did single JM AFF in a tandem progression program where they did three prior tandems and they are still a handful in the sky for one JM.

I think Bill is a character and an asset to the colorful fabric of the sport. But sometimes like Roger Nelson did, I feel he does some things not because they are better, but more so just because they are different . . .

And I can't look at that other thread posted by that student who failed in this program and just think, "Oh well, send in the next guy." Are we becoming less then Instructors and more like facilitators? Is that the high road?

I hate to go cliché on this, but the reason some phrases get overused is because they are so true. If the student failed to learn the teacher failed to teach. And this doesn't only apply to one place it's a sport wide issue. And I'm not saying what he's doing isn't safe, Bill has a good safety record over a very long period of time. I'm talking quality of instruction.

I don't like to sound like some in the Incident thread who demand to know every detail of every incident, but where student training programs are concerned I don't think anyone is above scrutiny. And the best programs should invite it. So give me numbers. How many students have went through this program, and what's the pass/fail rate?

Are they letting the cream of the crop students continue on while showing the slower students the gate? Is this the measure of the "weeding out" process? If so does anyone really think that's a good idea?

Every Instructor has faced those mornings where looking at the list of returning students they think, "Oh my god, he's here again and she's here again." Sometimes I'd like nothing better than taking them aside and telling them, "Sorry, you aren't cutting it, C-ya," on their third jump. But as much as it would make my day easier and stress free I've worked with too many bad students that later became great skydivers to do that.

In a way I "think" I might understand what Bill is doing. He's adding aptitude to an equation that only included desire and the ability to listen and be safe. And I can't say that totally sucks except for the students who can't hack the program. I can't shake my core belief if I send a student home a failure, I also go home a failure . . .

NickD

[jsaxton 0]

like I previously said. I no nothing about the training program, I'm just a fun jumper.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

And I couldn't tell from your post, but are we saying Bill counts on the fact some students won't finish the course so he can stiff them out of the remaining monies?

No, not the suggestion I meant to make. I believe an intent in the required tandem is to lower the frequency at which someone who paid the $1000 wants to back out and get money back. Stiffing people is rarely a good business plan.

Projecting my own feelings, and I think you'll agree to a degree, a never jumped student that shows up on a Thursday to do 7 jumps over the next two days - good chance it won't work out. It's also a pain for Bill to line up resources on the weekdays if it doesn't pan out. Weekends are about $100 tandems by the planeload.

Students shopping for price also have to weight the weekday versus weekend issue.

[NickDG 23]

In a small way this reminds me of something else that occurred years ago again involving students. It was a DZO I know and respect so he'll go nameless here.

He made a deal with a local finance company so that right after a first jump student landed he showed them a piece of paper where all they had to do was sign on the dotted line and the rest of their AFF plus a brand new complete rig was fully financed for them. And I'm pretty sure while the students were sitting in the FJC he was checking their credit ratings.

Like I said this DZO is a good guy and I really believe he thought he was doing a good thing for the students and the sport overall. The interest rate wasn't exorbitant or anything, but there was some problems I saw with it.

First off how vulnerable is someone right after their first jump? You know how excited they are so the chance they'd sign was pretty high. And you know how they all say "This sport is for me and I'll be back again!" But mostly they don't come back once the euphoria wears off.

And one of his arguments in favor of this was if they signed it sort of made them come back.

Second was the rigs they received. There was nothing wrong with them safety wise and they were sized appropriately so someone could make their first hundred jumps on it. But it was not a very popular rig and it had zero resale value in our part of the world. So the students who realized they really didn't like skydiving all that much got stuck with the gear.

So he thought it was a good thing, a valuable service even, but I thought it was just slightly below underhanded.

NickD

[jamiem 1]

Quote

So give me numbers. How many students have went through this program, and what's the pass/fail rate?

I'm not sure numbers exactly, but from every student I've seen they have passed. In my AFF class there was one student who wasn't progressing as fast as he should, and the instructor continued to work with him and helped him get good enough to pass.

Sure, was I kind of freaked out when I realized that every other DZ did two AFFIs instead of 1? Yes, but it was because I didn't research, I picked solely on price.

I have full trust in the instructors there and Bill would not allow a shady instructor in the sky by himself with an AFF student. Shit, Bill grounds people for far less than being unsafe in the sky!

But back to the real question...I think Bill requires a tandem before AFF simply because he likes watching them all watch his tandem safety video from 1970. Actuallly I agree, without a tandem prior you have NO IDEA what it is going to feel like in the sky, and why would he throw someone out like that with one instructor?

Note: I understand I have 98 jumps and don't really know anything...this is just my 2 cents.

And jaxton..."no swoop for you...come back 1 year". I have not jumped on a saturday in ages! I will be out this Saturday for the BBQ, you better be staying around, there will be a keg!

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

As an AFF instructor I personally like to see people do a tandem prior to AFF. It lets them experience the sensory overload of a first skydive in an environment where they have less responsibility and stress. In short it means there are less problem AFF first jump students. That said I don’t ever like to see someone do more than two tandems because then we have to fix their body position.

I'm still a young-enough AFFI to have a split decision on this.

On the one hand, I agree with the sensory overload statement.

On the other hand, it's hard enough to get them to keep their legs out and even harder to get them to do PLFs instead of the tandem butt slide.

All in all, I lean towards "no tandem" because of the tandem butt-slide training. I'm there with them to deal with the sensory overload, I am not with them to prevent the butt slide. It's awfully sad to see an eager student cut his career short with a tailbone/back injury on their first AFF/SL landing.

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

[NickDG 23]

Thanks, jamiem . . .

It's starting to sound much better now.

NickD

[peregrinerose 0]

Quote

Quote

As an AFF instructor I personally like to see people do a tandem prior to AFF. It lets them experience the sensory overload of a first skydive in an environment where they have less responsibility and stress. In short it means there are less problem AFF first jump students. That said I don’t ever like to see someone do more than two tandems because then we have to fix their body position.

I'm still a young-enough AFFI to have a split decision on this.

On the one hand, I agree with the sensory overload statement.

On the other hand, it's hard enough to get them to keep their legs out and even harder to get them to do PLFs instead of the tandem butt slide.

All in all, I lean towards "no tandem" because of the tandem butt-slide training. I'm there with them to deal with the sensory overload, I am not with them to prevent the butt slide. It's awfully sad to see an eager student cut his career short with a tailbone/back injury on their first AFF/SL landing.

Ditto that. Students that butt slide make me crazy and give me gray hair.... my hair's going to look like Pops' after another year of this Seeing one of my students break himself on a butt landing made me even more emphatic about it.

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[noname 0]

Quote

And how is the single JM thing good for anybody except the DZO? It lowers the employment rate of Instructors when it is already too low. And a single JM struggling to keep someone with one tandem jump from sliding all over the sky isn't really doing much teaching.

If the instructor has to struggle that hard then either you have a very poor instructor or a very poor student. My Lodi single AFFI was such a good flyer that he was not struggling just to keep me stable. He could have done that with one hand and made a sandwich with the other. And believe me, I was not the easiest student. I got solid ground instruction, then a through video debrief with plenty of attention and teaching.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

If the instructor has to struggle that hard then either you have a very poor instructor or a very poor student.

I disagree. All that does is play to the wide part of the bell curve. I wish you well if you take the AFFI course and, on a single-I jump, you get a CD "student" who goes completely fetal, and then tries to whip you off or kill you. Maybe you'll get him stable. Maybe you won't. Even if you're good.

[noname 0]

Quote

Quote

If the instructor has to struggle that hard then either you have a very poor instructor or a very poor student.

I disagree. All that does is play to the wide part of the bell curve. I wish you well if you take the AFFI course and, on a single-I jump, you get a CD "student" who goes completely fetal, and then tries to whip you off or kill you. Maybe you'll get him stable. Maybe you won't. Even if you're good.

So some students are so bad it takes two jumpmasters to get them stable?

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If the instructor has to struggle that hard then either you have a very poor instructor or a very poor student.

I disagree. All that does is play to the wide part of the bell curve. I wish you well if you take the AFFI course and, on a single-I jump, you get a CD "student" who goes completely fetal, and then tries to whip you off or kill you. Maybe you'll get him stable. Maybe you won't. Even if you're good.

So some students are so bad it takes two jumpmasters to get them stable?

No need to re-phrase me to change the meaning of what I said. If a student goes fetal, wildly unstable and panicky, a single instructor may have a tougher time getting him back under control than 2 instructors would; and if that happens, that doesn't necessarily mean that that single instructor is "a very poor instructor." No more; no less.

[noname 0]

No, it would mean you had a very poor student.

[JohnDeere 0]

Quote

No, it would mean you had a very poor student.

I think everybody else understood you the first time.

Hey Andy he clearlly stated poor instructor OR poor student! Try that reading comprehencion thing.

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!

[ZigZagMarquis 8]

Quote

He almost got me a part in the movie PLATOON. Dale was a friend of Oliver Stone and already had a part in the movie when he suggested me. He told me to send Stone a tape and I did. They called me in and I went through two auditions and had the part of Private Gator Lerner. And then at almost the last minute I got aced out by some guy I never heard of named Johnny Depp . . .

Hmmm... so you could have been Private Gator Lener?

[NickDG 23]

Well, I was leaner and meaner in 1986.

And I would've killed 'em in that Pirate movie . . .

NickD

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Try that reading comprehencion thing

Irony score: +10

[ZigZagMarquis 8]

Ooops, sorry, didn't mean it that way, it was the only pic of y'all I had.

Anyway, we ALL were leaner 20 years ago...

[NickDG 23]

No worries . . .
Besides, ya know what they say?

When you're proud of something you build a porch over it . . .

NickD

[ZigZagMarquis 8]

Quote

When you're proud of something you build a porch over it . . .