2 2
baronn

BOD Meeting July 2018

Recommended Posts

Ron

Quote

Ron, your logic is faulty.



I disagree. I think you put too much trust in an organization that I feel you don't really know about.

I base my opinion on being in the USPA for over 25 years and seeing many of the errors.

***You say you're an instructor and have ratings, and then say that ratings are irrelevant and should be dropped.



Show a quote where I said that... I'll wait.

Quote

Well, of course, if you are dropping your membership now and loose your ratings, you don't loose your skills



What about "ratings" makes you think I gained skills? A jumper with 1K jumps and ZERO USPA ratings or licenses is sure to know more than some guy with an "A" license... Or do you disagree? A guy with an FAA riggers ticket knows more about gear than some random guy with a "D" license.

Quote

But the point is you DID go through the training and ratings process.



So did all those people who later had their rating revoked because they didn't meet the standard. Yet the USPA gave them a rating.... Didn't catch the error till there was a fatality.

Quote

Did you learn much more in other ways and are you much better than what's necessary to achieve these ratings? I bet you are! But none of that is an argument against the ratings.



I learned NOTHING in the ratings programs.... Have you gotten any USPA ratings? If not, then you really have zero idea how easy they are.

I fear you are putting too much faith in the USPA. Again, they gave ratings to a BUNCH of people that later had to be taken away because the students didn't meet the standards... This happens MUCH more than you would think.

People have been signed off for water training they never took. People have been signed off for night jumps they never did. Your faith in the USPA license and rating system is misplaced.

I get it... I believed the USPA for YEARS. I feel like a fool.


Ron may be many things, but his logic is far from "faulty" Ron has been making coin and doing right for skydiving for many years. A lot of people here should take notice of his logic, consideration and care.
Brett Bickford Did Not Commit Suicide.

He is the victim of ignorance and faulty gear. AND as in the movie: "12 Angry Men," of an ignorant and callous jury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooo, here we are knocking on the 1 yr anniversary of a few members of the BOD voting to fund the continuing failed fiasco known as the ISMHOF. This scam continues to induct members into a fake museum that doesn't exist, doesn't have a location, building plan, time schedule or anything that cude be called, in the most generous way, a plan to actually get this project finished. To all the Geniuses that decided to divert members funds into this mess, please give us an update. Half a century and counting...…..

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2018 at 2:55 PM, ChrisD2.0 said:

I learned NOTHING in the ratings programs.... Have you gotten any USPA ratings? If not, then you really have zero idea how easy they are.
 

Wow, you must have worked really hard to come out of USPA courses learning nothing.

Quote

People have been signed off for water training they never took. People have been signed off for night jumps they never did.

Yep.  There are unethical people out there.  The right solution is to call them out on it - not to blame a few thousand people for what one person does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, billvon said:

Wow, you must have worked really hard to come out of USPA courses learning nothing.

Yep.  There are unethical people out there.  The right solution is to call them out on it - not to blame a few thousand people for what one person does.

Don't feed the trolls.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All,

     This thread originally started as a conversation about last year's summer BOD meeting's decisions.  One of those decisions was an increase in the RW requirements for B and C licenses.  I made a number of comments about how much harder it would be for skydivers at small DZs jumping from Cessnas to meet said requirements:  5 formation skydives with at least 3 participants to attain a B-license and 10 formation skydives with at least 4 participants to attain a C-license. 

     I’m still not in agreement with it and in light of some recently acquired perspective.  We recently moved to a new area where only small Cessna-equipped drop zones are available.  Our aircraft fits a max of six jumpers, but only three are capable of fitting on the outside of the aircraft – two on the step and another in the door.  But this exit configuration is hard on the aircraft and pilot and places the aircraft, pilot, and jumpers still inside at risk.  That many jumpers hanging on the outside of such a small aircraft creates so much asymmetrical drag that the aircraft begins to lose lateral stability, oscillate, and approach stall speed at a high-power setting – all of the required ingredients for a spin (I’m about 20 hours away from a Private Pilot’s License).    

     The lower altitude at which these small drop zones carry their jumpers also presents an obstacle.  Like I said before, we can only fit three in the door.  The number four jumper must remain inside the cabin and exit a few seconds later – after the jumpers in his group are already several hundred feet behind and below him/her.  Turning even one successful point in a four-way from a Cessna at 10K is a beer-worthy feat! 

     I have also starting hearing experienced jumpers encouraging younger, aspiring jumpers to visit larger drop zones that are better suited to completing the RW requirements.  And during a year when the weather isn’t cooperating and DZs large and small are experiencing some tough times, can the latter really afford to be losing business because the USPA wants to live up to some international standard that only benefits the very small percentage of our community that wants to compete at large international venues?  Many of these folks are sponsored, jump for a living, and already possess advantages and are afforded opportunities that we mere mortals only dream of.

     To be clear, I love my new drop zone and prefer the atmosphere and slower pace to any of the larger DZs in my log book.  But the USPA needs to revisit this one.  Yes, it’s only 5 or 10 jumps, but that’s easier said than done and the second and third-order effects are a net negative.  Let’s put the emphasis where it really belongs:  on the more dangerous canopy phase of parachuting. 

-JD-

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Why do you think ratings exist? To be given away? What purpose would it serve if it doesn't rank and identify what's the minimum skill set that each person with that rating has? You don't need a higher license to jump out of planes, the rating is just there to reflect the basics of your skill and experience. If you travel, it's used as a reference to which landing areas you are qualified to land, which jump sizes you should be doing etc... In multiple countries, like Brazil, two A license holders can't do a two-way, for example. The more jumps you have, the lesser your license means.

Edited by daffes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, skyfox2007 said:

... Our aircraft fits a max of six jumpers, but only three are capable of fitting on the outside of the aircraft – two on the step and another in the door.  But this exit configuration is hard on the aircraft and pilot and places the aircraft, pilot, and jumpers still inside at risk.  That many jumpers hanging on the outside of such a small aircraft creates so much asymmetrical drag that the aircraft begins to lose lateral stability, oscillate, and approach stall speed at a high-power setting – all of the required ingredients for a spin (I’m about 20 hours away from a Private Pilot’s License)...   

   

I'm guessing that you are jumping a U206.

I've never jumped or flown one of those.

But launching a 4 way chunk from a 182 is simple. One hanging from the strut, toe on the step. One 'in the crotch', sitting on the strut facing backwards. One on the step, hands on the strut, one in the door. 

Flying a 182 with those three on the outside is also not difficult. I gave a cut, so power was back some. I would have to drop the nose just a touch to keep speed up. The drag on one side was a bit odd, but not a big problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, skyfox2007 said:

All,

     This thread originally started as a conversation about last year's summer BOD meeting's decisions.  One of those decisions was an increase in the RW requirements for B and C licenses.  I made a number of comments about how much harder it would be for skydivers at small DZs jumping from Cessnas to meet said requirements:  5 formation skydives with at least 3 participants to attain a B-license and 10 formation skydives with at least 4 participants to attain a C-license. 

     I’m still not in agreement with it and in light of some recently acquired perspective.  We recently moved to a new area where only small Cessna-equipped drop zones are available.  Our aircraft fits a max of six jumpers, but only three are capable of fitting on the outside of the aircraft – two on the step and another in the door.  But this exit configuration is hard on the aircraft and pilot and places the aircraft, pilot, and jumpers still inside at risk.  That many jumpers hanging on the outside of such a small aircraft creates so much asymmetrical drag that the aircraft begins to lose lateral stability, oscillate, and approach stall speed at a high-power setting – all of the required ingredients for a spin (I’m about 20 hours away from a Private Pilot’s License).    

     The lower altitude at which these small drop zones carry their jumpers also presents an obstacle.  Like I said before, we can only fit three in the door.  The number four jumper must remain inside the cabin and exit a few seconds later – after the jumpers in his group are already several hundred feet behind and below him/her.  Turning even one successful point in a four-way from a Cessna at 10K is a beer-worthy feat! 

     I have also starting hearing experienced jumpers encouraging younger, aspiring jumpers to visit larger drop zones that are better suited to completing the RW requirements.  And during a year when the weather isn’t cooperating and DZs large and small are experiencing some tough times, can the latter really afford to be losing business because the USPA wants to live up to some international standard that only benefits the very small percentage of our community that wants to compete at large international venues?  Many of these folks are sponsored, jump for a living, and already possess advantages and are afforded opportunities that we mere mortals only dream of.

     To be clear, I love my new drop zone and prefer the atmosphere and slower pace to any of the larger DZs in my log book.  But the USPA needs to revisit this one.  Yes, it’s only 5 or 10 jumps, but that’s easier said than done and the second and third-order effects are a net negative.  Let’s put the emphasis where it really belongs:  on the more dangerous canopy phase of parachuting. 

-JD-

A few comments:

1) Yes, it can be hard to get an advanced license with a small aircraft.   I started skydiving at a small DZ with one, then two, then one C182's.  We were lucky to get in one "fun" jump (i.e. an actual 4-way) a weekend, and that's only if we showed up at 7am and made sure a pilot was there, too.  This is not a bad thing - it means that if you don't get experience you can't get an advanced license.  Because you don't have enough experience.  Which is how licenses work.  Licenses aren't "you've been in the sport for two years and you deserve some recognition" - they are both indications that you've reached a level of experience (based on jump numbers and types of jumps you've done) and that you are ready to learn something new (like getting an AFF rating or learning to do demos.)

2) It sounds like you are saying that it's hard to get experience/freefall time from a C206 that only goes to 10K.  Keep in mind that many DZ's only have C182's that go to 8500 - so you have some benefits there.

3) There have been hundreds of thousands of 4-ways launched from 182's and 206's without much increase in risk.  If your pilot is uncomfortable with them, then by all means don't do them - but learning to do 4-way is a pretty basic skill.  Once you get a new pilot and/or go to different DZ's you'll have that opportunity.

4) There has been no time, ever, when DZ's haven't "been experiencing tough times."  And right now we are in the middle of a booming economy.  DZ's make money on students, not upjumpers - so losing a few upjumpers to other DZ's doesn't hurt DZ's financially very much.  It does hurt them in the long run because those jumpers tend not to stick around.  But that's because they have one C206 and a conservative pilot, rather than "USPA makes them leave."  

As another data point, when I started at that aforementioned one-182 DZ, we'd often go to the Ranch on Mondays (when our DZ was closed) to take advantage of their "$13 to 13,500" deals during the week.  We had to, to get enough jumps to get licenses and ratings.  And going to a different DZ taught me a whole lot more than just getting some extra high altitude jumps did.  It meant I met new people, had new coaches, saw new gear, learned about new aircraft, had to learn new outs - and all of that is critical to someone who wants to be considered an "expert" skydiver (which I believe is what the C license used to be called.)

Finally:

5) "Turning even one successful point in a four-way from a Cessna at 10K is a beer-worthy feat!" - Nonsense!  Why, one year at Lost Prairie we turned 7 points from 4K!  They even wrote a song about it.  Although come to think of it that might not be a good feat to try to duplicate . . .

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2