1 1
baronn

BOD Meeting July 2018

Recommended Posts

>If you're a weekend jumper and not a competing athlete and your home country
>abides by the FAI or USPA - what do you stand to gain from these rules changes,
>exactly?

Probably nothing.

If you are a weekend jumper, what benefit to you is a change in the PRO rating? None. and yet they "waste their time" with it.

If you are a world class competitor, what benefit to you is a change in the AFF program? None. And yet they "waste their time" with it.

If you are a wingsuiter, what benefit to you are USPA recommendations on exit sequencing? Almost none. And yet they "waste their time" with it.

If you can't make it to Safety Day, what good is it to you? None. And still they "waste their time" with it.

No rule, program or license is going to help everyone. Things that help competitors might not help weekend jumpers. Things that help weekend jumpers might not help demo jumpers. Things that help demo jumpers might not help students. But we still make changes to help those kinds of jumpers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Except people have repeatedly claimed the USPA does not enforce any of its rules, and if it's not enforced then it's not really a requirement now is it?



They don't enforce the RULES. They do enforce the REQUIREMENT that DZO's require membership.

I don't even know why you mentioned it. You admitted they don't enforce the rules.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some more information about the IPC and standardization of CoP requirements. This is written by the well known American, Pat Works. It explains how the push to standardization was from a meeting of the IPC in San Diego. Which I do believe is still on the US side of the Great Wall.

It also explains how another American, Mr. Joe Crane, was instrumental in the creation of the FAI/IPC.


http://works-words.com/NSM-WIKI/WP/wordpress/wiki/skydiving/org/associations-2/fai-international-parachuting-commission/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And for those of you who may not like how a GM DZ operates, or their policies, or their procedures, USPA cannot dictate how they operate, only that they follow the BSR.



And yet the USPA allows GM DZ's to avoid doing handles checks on tandems. USPA allows DZ's to perform tandem turns greater than 90* below 500 feet. USPA allows DZ's to let people with fewer than 200 jumps jump wingsuits. I mean they are against the BSR's, but zero enforcement.

Quote

The only real difference between a GM DZ and a non-GM DZ, is that the GM DZ requires USPA Membership of anyone on solo self supervision.



So why should the USPA require people to be members if NOT for just forcing membership?

And since I bash the GM program, maybe you, as a BOD leader, can tell us all the benefits to the individual members of the USPA of the GM program? Maybe I just don't get it....Enlighten me, educate me.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And yet the USPA allows GM DZ's to avoid doing handles checks on tandems. USPA allows DZ's to perform tandem turns greater than 90* below 500 feet. USPA allows DZ's to let people with fewer than 200 jumps jump wingsuits. I mean they are against the BSR's, but zero enforcement.


That's like claiming you saw someone speed and they didn't get pulled over, so traffic laws and police are useless wastes of money.

I have heard people (DZO's, instructors, organizers) talk to tandem masters about 90 degree turns - and they based it on the BSR's. So it happens. I am sure you saw a case where it didn't. That happens too. Those things happen a lot less when there are rules to back them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So why should the USPA require people to be members if NOT for just forcing membership?




Who said they weren't? Of course they are. And yes, the main purpose of that policy is to fund USPA. So just start there if that's your main objection. Like I've already said, the people with skin in the game control the assets and take the risks. If you want to play in the playground that they own you have to follow their rules. Or you can build your own playground. It's far cheaper and easier to buy a membership though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the people with skin in the game...



It's cute you keep saying that. What makes you think I have no skin in the game? I have worked at DZ's (skin in the game) for over 25 years in several different roles.

So aside from your little snide comment being nothing more than trying to play the player and not the ball... It is also baseless.

This is the last time I reply to your little snide comments... Bring substance or expect to be ignored going forward.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon

Quote

And yet the USPA allows GM DZ's to avoid doing handles checks on tandems. USPA allows DZ's to perform tandem turns greater than 90* below 500 feet. USPA allows DZ's to let people with fewer than 200 jumps jump wingsuits. I mean they are against the BSR's, but zero enforcement.


That's like claiming you saw someone speed and they didn't get pulled over, so traffic laws and police are useless wastes of money.

I have heard people (DZO's, instructors, organizers) talk to tandem masters about 90 degree turns - and they based it on the BSR's. So it happens. I am sure you saw a case where it didn't. That happens too. Those things happen a lot less when there are rules to back them up.



Can you cite examples where the USPA actually took action against a DZ for violating BSRs? I can only think of one example, but 100% of the drop zones I have visited did at least one thing that was in violation of BSRs. Some DZs do it openly. One rather famous DZ with many well-known jumpers has a sign in manifest that says you need a B license and 100 jumps to jump camera. The SIM clearly states you need a C license. Some drop zones violate BSRs on every single load everyday. It's exceedingly common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's cute you keep saying that. What makes you think I have no skin in the game? I have worked at DZ's (skin in the game) for over 25 years in several different roles.




But you never accept the basic premise. Skin in the game does not mean being an employee. It means risking all your assets to buy airplanes and fly people like you. Your complaint seems to be that membership is required. I am merely stating why it is so. USPA exists on your back, but you can throw the monkey off if you want to. Most people see the value. Apparently you don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Westerly

... Some drop zones violate BSRs on every single load everyday. It's exceedingly common.



I appreciate your thoughtfulness, and the topics you bring to this thread, but I'm going to have to throw your insistance on examples back at you! :)

What dropzones are those that violate BSR(s) on every load?
Which BSRs?
What area of the country?

In my area, I'm seeing good compliance with BSRs and other important activities related to safety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Can you cite examples where the USPA actually took action against a DZ for violating BSRs? I can only think of one example, but 100% of the drop zones I have visited did at least one thing that was in violation of BSRs. Some DZs do it openly. One rather famous DZ with many well-known jumpers has a sign in manifest that says you need a B license and 100 jumps to jump camera. The SIM clearly states you need a C license. Some drop zones violate BSRs on every single load everyday. It's exceedingly common.




You may be confusing SIM recommendations with BSRs. They are not the same thing. I've never been to a USPA BoD meeting, but I can bet they are similar to the CSPA meetings I have attended.

USPA is not a regulatory agency and has little power beyond expulsion to enforce it's policies. It was ever thus. And this very argument is never ending. Compliance is mostly encouraged not coerced. It is mostly an attempt to influence the culture, and culture changes slowly. If you want change your best bet is to become involved with the leaders of your DZ and encourage it. But don't go overboard or you will make enemies very quickly. Try your best to set an example and when you see stuff that you don't think is safe stay off the load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Can you cite examples where the USPA actually took action against a DZ for
>violating BSRs?

In general, DZ's don't violate BSR's, jumpers do. I've never seen a DZ jump through a cloud, for example.

If your question is "Can you cite examples where the USPA actually took action against a member for violating BSRs?" then here they are -

================
USPA Disciplines 13 Members in 2017

Five Minute Call | April 2018

When USPA receives a complaint about an individual member or a Group Member drop zone violating rules or acting in an unsafe manner, the USPA Board of Directors’ Compliance Group investigates the allegations using a specific process that the USPA Governance Manual outlines. The Compliance Group—consisting of the chairman of the Safety and Training Committee, the chairman of the Group Membership Committee, a national director who is not on the Executive Committee, the director of safety and training and the appropriate regional director—formed in 2013, when USPA changed its disciplinary process in an effort to consistently handle investigations. After the Compliance Group completes its investigation, it forwards a recommendation to the Executive Committee along with the details of the investigation. The Executive Committee can decide whether to vote on the recommendation as presented or request changes or additional information from the Compliance Group before rendering a final decision.

In 2017, the Compliance Group investigated allegations involving 17 USPA members and took action against 13 of them. In one instance, a member appealed, and the case has not yet been finalized, so the details are not included here. USPA took disciplinary action regarding the following:

• Three members for violations related to the issuance of new instructor ratings. USPA suspended a USPA Tandem Instructor Examiner’s examiner ratings for 60 days and issued a letter of censure to a tandem instructor and drop zone owner for conducting tandem jumps when USPA had not issued the tandem instructor’s rating due to clerical reasons after the instructor completed the rating course. Neither the member nor the drop zone owner followed up to ensure that USPA issued the rating.
• Two members for violating the required distances from spectators while landing on a demo jump. USPA delivered a letter of censure to both jumpers, who passed over a crowd line while lower than 50 feet and landed closer than 15 feet laterally to spectators at the end of high-performance landings.
• Two members for submitting falsified documents related to USPA ratings. USPA suspended one member for 180 days for falsifying records to attend a tandem instructor certification course. USPA revoked one member’s membership and all ratings for falsifying a Federal Aviation Administration Third-Class Medical certificate in an attempt to renew his USPA Tandem Instructor rating.
• Five members for actions related to unsafe skydiving. In separate incidents, USPA suspended the USPA Tandem Instructor ratings of two members for 180 days and required them to receive retraining before reinstatement due to tandem jumps that resulted in low main-canopy deployments and activations of the automatic activation devices. USPA revoked the tandem instructor rating of another member due to multiple tandem skydives conducted in an unsafe manner. USPA also suspended a USPA Tandem Instructor’s rating for 60 days and required retraining with an examiner due to repeated unsafe exits during tandem skydives. USPA revoked the membership of another member due to continual violations of the Basic Safety Requirements.

Skydivers, and particularly rating holders, should understand that “willful, flagrant and continual BSR violations,” grossly negligent acts that endanger themselves and others, and falsification and misrepresentation of USPA documents and applications will subject them to actions against their USPA credentials.
==================

>100% of the drop zones I have visited did at least one thing that was in violation
>of BSRs.

Hmm, that hasn't been my experience. But I am sure that you can see such violations at many DZ's.

Again, I have seen people speed almost every time I've driven. Doesn't mean that cops or traffic laws are useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And yet the USPA allows GM DZ's to avoid doing handles checks on tandems. USPA allows DZ's to perform tandem turns greater than 90* below 500 feet. USPA allows DZ's to let people with fewer than 200 jumps jump wingsuits. I mean they are against the BSR's, but zero enforcement.



USPA does not "allow" any of the above. USPA is not a police force but anytime that USPA is made aware of any of the above, action is taken. I have been involved in every disciplinary procedure as either a member of the Compliance Group or the Executive Committee for the last 20 years and every item you list has been involved in a disciplinary action.
If you see something unsafe, that is a violation, or that you are concerned about you should report it to the Director of Safety and Training, or your Regional Director, or both. If you see something unsafe and take no action then you are part of the problem. USPA doing "zero enforcement" is complete nonsense.

Quote

So why should the USPA require people to be members if NOT for just forcing membership?



USPA does not require anyone to be a member. As part of the GM Pledge, all skydivers at least on self supervision must be USPA members to jump at a GM DZ. Some, probably most, non-GM DZs require the same. A very strong reason that any DZ would require USPA membership is the liability insurance that it brings. Many public airports, and private, are much more amenable to jump operations if the jumpers have insurance and the demo industry would virtually disappear without the demo insurance that is provided through your USPA membership. This insurance is not available from any other source, it costs USPA about $240,000 per year for the premium, that works out to about $6.00 per member, about the cost of a burger.

DZs operate as a business, or club, but in the case of insurance there is no difference. What business would operate knowing that any customer can virtually put them out of business by having an accident. Who pays when uninsured Sammy Swooper plows into a spectator, or another jumper, and injures them severely? Who pays when Stevie Student plows into a Cadillac CTS V minding its own business in the parking lot? Why should these DZs take the risk of a jumper who has no liability insurance and, probably, no money to pay for his skydiving mistake? USPA insurance has paid out on many, many, of these claims and to avoid repetition, you can see my previous post on the subject.

Quote

And since I bash the GM program, maybe you, as a BOD leader, can tell us all the benefits to the individual members of the USPA of the GM program? Maybe I just don't get it....Enlighten me, educate me.



From my exalted position I am happy to educate and enlighten, grasshoppa.

Here are the benefits to the individual USPA Member that jumping at a GM DZ provides and they are all safety related:

GROUP MEMBER PLEDGE
-----------------------------
Comply with the USPA Basic Safety Requirements (BSRs), which include compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations relevant to skydiving operations, including aircraft operations.

Ensure that all pilots employed or utilized for the purpose of parachute operations hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and a second-class medical certificate.

Ensure that all aircraft utilized for the purpose of parachute operations comply with commercial maintenance requirements described in U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 91.409(a) through (f) as applicable.

Ensure skydiving staff of the Group Member (i.e., the undersigned applicant) are appropriately qualified and trained in accordance with the Skydiver's Information Manual and (where applicable) hold current USPA ratings commensurate with their duties.

Establish landing procedures that will include separation of high-speed and normal landings. These landing procedures must be prominently displayed and communicated to all jumpers at the drop zone.
----------------------------

Without question, the above are a benefit to the individual USPA Member. GM DZs have lost their Group Membership for not complying, and GM DZOs have lost their individual USPA Membership for not complying.

Mike Mullins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If you see something unsafe, that is a violation, or that you are concerned about you should report it to the Director of Safety and Training, or your Regional Director, or both.



Tried that. A DZO doing AFF without a rating. The RD’s response: “What do you want me to do, take away a rating they don’t have?”

Quote

USPA does not require anyone to be a member. As part of the GM Pledge, all skydivers at least on self supervision must be USPA members to jump at a GM DZ.



Read that again, slowly.

Quote

From my exalted position I am happy to educate and enlighten, grasshoppa.



Love this!:D

Quote

GROUP MEMBER PLEDGE



Is not worth the paper it is written on.

I have seen every one of those pledges ignored. USPA knows they are being ignored. They can’t or won’t do anything about it.

Let’s remove the mandatory membership requirement and see what happens.

Maybe the insurance alone will make being an USPA member worth it. Let’s find out.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

If you see something unsafe, that is a violation, or that you are concerned about you should report it to the Director of Safety and Training, or your Regional Director, or both.



***Tried that. A DZO doing AFF without a rating. The RD’s response: “What do you want me to do, take away a rating they don’t have?”



I do not know who the RD was, but that is both an incorrect and unacceptable answer. That is why I specifically said to report it to the Director of Safety and Training and the RD. That way action is assured to be taken and an RD cannot ignore the problem. Any DZO that is a USPA member, or any USPA member, that does AFF without a rating will lose their membership, or license, or both. So, if you want this action to stop then report it to the Director of Safety and Training where it will then be disseminated to the Compliance Group, and the applicable RD.

Quote

USPA does not require anyone to be a member. As part of the GM Pledge, all skydivers at least on self supervision must be USPA members to jump at a GM DZ.



Quote

Read that again, slowly.



I did read it again, slowly, and my answer is the same. USPA is not requiring you to be a member, the DZ is. You are free to jump without USPA membership anywhere the DZ does not require it. You can jump anyplace that the land owner will allow it and the airspace does not restrict it. Any number of skydivers, USPA members or not, can get together and jump wherever it is legal, you do not need any membership from USPA to do this. USPA is not forcing any DZs to be GMs, they are free to make that decision, and if they choose not to be GMs, they are free to allow non USPA members to jump.

Quote

From my exalted position I am happy to educate and enlighten, grasshoppa.



Love this!:D

Quote

GROUP MEMBER PLEDGE



Quote

Is not worth the paper it is written on.

I have seen every one of those pledges ignored. USPA knows they are being ignored. They can’t or won’t do anything about it.

Let’s remove the mandatory membership requirement and see what happens.

Maybe the insurance alone will make being an USPA member worth it. Let’s find out.

***Derek V



USPA will take action whenever any violation is reported in a credible manner. Including dates, location, people, and video is helpful. Just because you "have seen every one of those pledges ignored" does not mean that USPA knows about them. If you are concerned, then do something about it, report it, and USPA will take action.

And, as explained above, there is no mandatory membership requirement. Comply with FAA regulations and you are free to do anything you wish. No BSRs, no GM, nothing but the FAA. Find an airplane, find a field, and jump. No dealing with that pesky USPA, no membership dues, do as you please.

Mike Mullins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If you see something unsafe, that is a violation, or that you are concerned about you should report it to the Director of Safety and Training, or your Regional Director, or both. If you see something unsafe and take no action then you are part of the problem.



Isn't that the job of the S&TA? Last I checked, I don't work for the USPA.

Quote

USPA does not require anyone to be a member. As part of the GM Pledge, all skydivers at least on self supervision must be USPA members to jump at a GM DZ.



Uh, you make the GMDZ's pledge to ONLY allow group members to jump there... So how is that not requiring individuals to join?

Quote

Many public airports, and private, are much more amenable to jump operations if the jumpers have insurance



That explains why the DZ would want to be a group member, but not why the USPA demands that only members are allowed to jump at GMDZ's.

Quote

DZs operate as a business, or club, but in the case of insurance there is no difference. What business would operate knowing that any customer can virtually put them out of business by having an accident.



If it is such a great thing for the DZ, then why MAKE it required?

Quote

Comply with the USPA Basic Safety Requirements (BSRs), which include compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations relevant to skydiving operations, including aircraft operations.



Which you and I BOTH know is ignored all the time. Again, Tandem Videos through clouds as proof.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/adjudication/civil_penalty/CaseFile/view/2017/2017-3.pdf

Didn't seem to follow the BSR's.... That was 2017 and yet they still seem to be a GM.

Quote

Ensure that all pilots employed or utilized for the purpose of parachute operations hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and a second-class medical certificate.



Which, as you know, is an FAR so the BSR is unneeded and any DZO that would ignore federal LAW is not going to pay attention to the BSR. ZHills had an issue where they were having a pilot fly without a single commercial ticket. The pilot had a multi, but not a single. This was a GMDZ.

Quote


Ensure that all aircraft utilized for the purpose of parachute operations comply with commercial maintenance requirements described in U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 91.409(a) through (f) as applicable.



And the FAA cited a GMDZ here in Florida for a pilot replacing a mixture knob. And Bill Dause was given the Chester Judy Safety Award by the USPA while that same year getting 440K dollars in fines from the FAA for not doing maintenance, yes, not a GM member, but he won a SAFETY AWARD from the USPA! And AGAIN, this is an FAR and if the DZO is going to ignore them, the BSR means nothing.

Quote

Ensure skydiving staff of the Group Member (i.e., the undersigned applicant) are appropriately qualified and trained in accordance with the Skydiver's Information Manual and (where applicable) hold current USPA ratings commensurate with their duties.



You may have me on this one.

Quote

Establish landing procedures that will include separation of high-speed and normal landings. These landing procedures must be prominently displayed and communicated to all jumpers at the drop zone.



Again, you may have this one.

So you have quoted BSR's that mimic FAR's and I have given examples of GMDZ's ignoring them. You might have me on the two last examples.....
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Last I checked, I don't work for the USPA.

If you don't want to be bothered, that's fine. You then don't get to complain about it.

>Uh, you make the GMDZ's pledge to ONLY allow group members to jump there... So how
>is that not requiring individuals to join?

Because you, Ron, could rent a plane, get some friends and jump. No requirement to join USPA. Or you could go to Lodi, or one of the many non-USPA DZ's out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If you don't want to be bothered, that's fine. You then don't get to complain about it.



You assume I have never said anything. But the USPA is supposed to have the systems in place to hold people accountable.

And, last I checked... Free country and all that, so I am allowed to complain as much as I want. Unless, you Bill are saying people don't have the right to complain about an organization they are member of????

Quote

Because you, Ron, could rent a plane, get some friends and jump. No requirement to join USPA. Or you could go to Lodi, or one of the many non-USPA DZ's out there.



You are avoiding the point... That is your right, but it is dishonest.

The USPA is trying to play both the DZ organization and the member organization and is requiring the individuals to be members to jump at GMDZ's

If the USPA was so great, they would not need to try and force people to join to jump at GM DZ's.

And the GM program really provides no oversight at all. It is basically advertising.

If the GM program actually did something other than make a DZ sign a piece of paper which I have SHOWN they ignore..... Then maybe you could make an argument that them forcing individuals to join would have merit.... But we ALL know the USPA does not enforce the GM pledge.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron

Quote

If you see something unsafe, that is a violation, or that you are concerned about you should report it to the Director of Safety and Training, or your Regional Director, or both. If you see something unsafe and take no action then you are part of the problem.



***Isn't that the job of the S&TA? Last I checked, I don't work for the USPA.



The S&TA is appointed by the RD, period. He is only as good as the RD requires. Some are very good, some are not. If you are concerned about safety and violations and the S&TA is not doing his job, then report it. If an RD is not doing his job and is appointing S&TAs that are not doing their job, then elect someone else.

Quote

USPA does not require anyone to be a member. As part of the GM Pledge, all skydivers at least on self supervision must be USPA members to jump at a GM DZ.



Quote

Uh, you make the GMDZ's pledge to ONLY allow group members to jump there... So how is that not requiring individuals to join?



DZs are free to be a GM DZ or not. If they choose not to be a GM DZ then they are free to allow non-members to jump there. It is not a matter of insurance, a GM DZ and a non GM DZ have exactly the same USPA liability insurance as long as the jumper is a USPA member.

The liability insurance is an individual benefit and is in effect regardless of the DZ. So, again, it is a DZ decision. They are not required to be a GM and if they choose not to be then they can choose to allow non members to jump.

Regardless of GM or not, they probably will not let non members jump because NON-USPA MEMBERS DO NOT HAVE LIABILITY INSURANCE. Why should any business or person risk their livelihood to allow someone to jump with NO LIABILITY INSURANCE just because that person does not like USPA? It is virtually universal in the US that you have automobile liability insurance so when you hit someone going 70 mph their injuries are covered. So why would a swooper going the same 70 mph and hitting the same person not be required to have insurance?

Quote

Many public airports, and private, are much more amenable to jump operations if the jumpers have insurance



Quote

That explains why the DZ would want to be a group member, but not why the USPA demands that only members are allowed to jump at GMDZ's.



Again, it is a DZ decision. GM or not, they have the same insurance if the jumpers are USPA members. Even if they are not a GM, they most likely will require you to have USPA membership for the insurance. Of course, if they are dirt poor meth heads that own nothing, they are judgment proof and have nothing to lose so they may indeed allow those without liability insurance to jump. However, those DZOs that have put time and money into a business that is their livelihood would probably prefer not to lose everything they own because someone who has no insurance kills a spectator on a high performance landing gone bad. USPA is not demanding membership, the DZ is demanding membership regardless GM or not.


Quote

Comply with the USPA Basic Safety Requirements (BSRs), which include compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations relevant to skydiving operations, including aircraft operations.



Quote

Which you and I BOTH know is ignored all the time. Again, Tandem Videos through clouds as proof.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/adjudication/civil_penalty/CaseFile/view/2017/2017-3.pdf

Didn't seem to follow the BSR's.... That was 2017 and yet they still seem to be a GM.



First, there is the statute of limitations that USPA must abide by in disciplinary procedures, which is one year. This action actually started in 2014 and the violation was earlier than that. When a complaint is made to the FAA it does not necessarily mean that USPA hears about it. Next, typically is a case such as this the DZ simply blames the pilot and the pilot is often not a USPA member. "We told him not to do it". Pilot is usually not available to refute this. I am not saying that this is what happened in this case, I am saying this is what typically happens. Recently, there have been actions taken against members in this region, and one DZ in this region did voluntarily relinquish their GM for their own reasons.

Quote

Ensure that all pilots employed or utilized for the purpose of parachute operations hold at least a commercial pilot certificate and a second-class medical certificate.



Quote

Which, as you know, is an FAR so the BSR is unneeded and any DZO that would ignore federal LAW is not going to pay attention to the BSR. ZHills had an issue where they were having a pilot fly without a single commercial ticket. The pilot had a multi, but not a single. This was a GMDZ.



Yes, I agree it is a FAR. However, some DZOs argued that they were not paying their pilot and they did not need to use a commercial pilot. USPA wanted to make it crystal clear that it was required and that is why it is in the pledge.

Quote


Ensure that all aircraft utilized for the purpose of parachute operations comply with commercial maintenance requirements described in U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 91.409(a) through (f) as applicable.



Quote

And the FAA cited a GMDZ here in Florida for a pilot replacing a mixture knob. And Bill Dause was given the Chester Judy Safety Award by the USPA while that same year getting 440K dollars in fines from the FAA for not doing maintenance, yes, not a GM member, but he won a SAFETY AWARD from the USPA! And AGAIN, this is an FAR and if the DZO is going to ignore them, the BSR means nothing.



The Chester Judy award:The USPA Safety & Training Advisor in consultation with the drop zone owner selects one individual from the drop zone to which the award is appointed..... If you do not like who got it, talk to the S&TA and the RD that appointed him. If the S&TA says someone gets the award, they get the reward, period.

Quote

Ensure skydiving staff of the Group Member (i.e., the undersigned applicant) are appropriately qualified and trained in accordance with the Skydiver's Information Manual and (where applicable) hold current USPA ratings commensurate with their duties.



Quote

You may have me on this one.



Quote

Establish landing procedures that will include separation of high-speed and normal landings. These landing procedures must be prominently displayed and communicated to all jumpers at the drop zone.



Quote

Again, you may have this one.



Quote

So you have quoted BSR's that mimic FAR's and I have given examples of GMDZ's ignoring them. You might have me on the two last examples.....



The FAR's are quoted in the GM pledge to make it absolutely certain that the GM knows exactly what is required and gives no wiggle room for what may be their particular interpretation of the FAR.

Bottom line: You will most likely be required to be a USPA member at a very high percentage of all DZs. GM or non GM, doesn't matter. What matters is that for the same reason that the state requires you to have liability insurance on what can kill, main, or do property damage, your car, the DZ is going to also require you to have liability insurance on what can kill, maim, or do property damage, your parachute. USPA is the only one providing said liability insurance.

Mike Mullins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>You assume I have never said anything.

No, that's why I had that "if" in there. But if you have complained and nothing happened, let us know the details. What did the S+TA say? The RD? Did you bring it up to the board?

>Free country and all that, so I am allowed to complain as much as I want.

Yep. But if you are part of the problem, I'm not going to take that seriously. (Nor will most people.)

>The USPA is trying to play both the DZ organization and the member organization and
>is requiring the individuals to be members to jump at GMDZ's

And the pilot organization (don't forget those BSR's that refer to pilots) and the government-interface organization (we are often badgering the FAA for what we want.) Often there are conflicts between all of that. USPA usually does a reasonable job managing all those conflicting wants, needs and mandates.

>If the USPA was so great, they would not need to try and force people to join to jump at GM DZ's.

And if USPA was so bad, you'd quit and drive to a non-USPA DZ, to meet up with all the other people who think USPA is useless. But I have a feeling you like the convenience and commonality of the nearby USPA DZ's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

USPA is not requiring you to be a member, the DZ is.



This is dishonest at best.

Remove the requirement from the GM pledge and let the chips fall where they may.

Derek V



I disagree.

However, feel free to contact the Chair of the GM Program, Chuck Akers, and ask him to put the following item on the GM Agenda for the next BOD meeting:

"Discuss the requirement for USPA Membership at GM DZs and the possibility of removing the requirement".

You may go to the meeting next board meeting and state your case, or you may send emails or letters, or you may even possibly skype into the meeting.

Contact and meeting info:

Chuck Akers
Gulf (GU) Regional Director
Chair, Group Membership
USPA Member # 49855, D-10855
chuckakers@comcast.net
19514 Pitchstone Dr.
Tomball, TX 77377
(832) 630-1213

The Winter 2019 USPA Board of Directors Meeting:

USPA BOD: February 1-3, 2019
Hyatt Regency Dallas
300 Reunion Blvd E, Dallas, TX 75207
(214) 651-1234
FFI: uspa@uspa.org

I have given you all the contacts, addresses, dates, the procedure, and have ever written the agenda item for you.

Complaining on DZ.com is not going to help you with your goal of removing the requirement of USPA Membership at GM DZs. I have told you exactly how to go about achieving your goal. It is up to you to follow up with it and enlist whatever support you think you have.

However, in the unlikely event that you prevail I doubt that there will be any additional DZs that will allow you to jump without USPA Membership, aka liability insurance.

Those that complain about having to have USPA membership to jump at a GM DZ are a small minority, but please indulge your passion.

Mike Mullins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skyfox2007

Baksteen,
In my previous comments, I also stated, "or representation from many of the other nations who might abide by their rules." See your quote my comments in your previous reply to me.

This has nothing to do about about bilateral international relations - one country and another. It has everything to do with how one multinational organization influences private business and personal conduct in others, be it in the states or in the Netherlands.

This affects us all...American, Dutch, or wherever you come from.

-JD-



Personally I think it is a great idea to try and standardise the international licences. Makes life for DZO's of DZs with visiting foreign jumpers a lot easier.

I also think it is a good idea to have jumpers hone their basic freefall skills on their belly a little bit before allowing them to progress to full time freefly / canopy disciplines.
"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

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
1 1