2 2
rohicks

Low turn impact from tandem instructor on the Bachelor show

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, gowlerk said:

As far as we can tell there is no particular reason to believe that rules (not laws) were broken. Poor judgement is not against the rules. Sometimes when people in positions of responsibility make mistakes we want to hold them to a high standard and bring them down. Like for example, a politician leaving his frozen state for a holiday in Mexico during a crisis. It is not against a rule, but it is not the standard we expect. 

Going after answers in this forum is unlikely to bring you any. If those involved are reading this they would be fools to start replying with words that would bring endless continuing questions. I'm Canadian and I don't know what USPA procedures are, but I also find it unlikely that this is something that requires any "investigation". It may require an incident report that would most likely be used for statistical reasons. Probably that has been submitted.

if said tandem instructor was 20, and it takes 3 years being a skydiver to get a tandem rating (it does in the us), then most definitely at least one rule was broken since you can't start skydiving until age 18.  i want to know just what kind of connections i have to have for a rating.  not really since i don't want one that i didn't earn, but i do want some answers as to why this happened.  that kid had no business being in that situation and it may now hurt our sport and bring more rules down on me.  fuck that noise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

if said tandem instructor was 20, and it takes 3 years being a skydiver to get a tandem rating (it does in the us), then most definitely at least one rule was broken since you can't start skydiving until age 18.

No one has confirmed his age yet. Looks can be deceiving so let's not assume anything yet. He could be in his 20s or early 30s.

Maybe someone should write into the Parachutist Mag inquiring about this to the editor. Maybe that'll get some eyes on it or make some noise if nothing else comes of this?
https://uspa.org/p/Submissions/Submit-Letter-to-the-Editor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Adrenadict said:

My USPA member # is 283426. B-43966, 300 jumps, coach rating, and in the process of getting a C license. I do not know anyone involved in the incident. My agenda is to simply find out if the laws set by the USPA are being followed. So, now that if you genuinely care about what my name is, you can see it. BACK to the original questions. 

Thank you. As was noted, anonymous posters often have hidden agendas. 
I'm not accusing you of that, but it's something that comes up. 

 

On 2/26/2021 at 7:12 PM, Adrenadict said:

As a paying USPA member, I believe I deserve to know the outcome of this. If this TI is indeed 20 years old, then I believe his first jump was before the age of 18, so who gave him this waiver? To be a tandem master you must have 500 jumps and 3 years in the sport. Another question is how many tandems does he have, is it enough to wear a camera? What was the USPA’s response to this incident? And a final question, how many tandem jumps are required before you can do a tandem hook turn? I was under the impression that this is an illegal offense that WILL get your rating pulled? Does anyone know the outcome? More details would be greatly appreciated. 

 

5 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

if said tandem instructor was 20, and it takes 3 years being a skydiver to get a tandem rating (it does in the us), then most definitely at least one rule was broken since you can't start skydiving until age 18.  i want to know just what kind of connections i have to have for a rating.  not really since i don't want one that i didn't earn, but i do want some answers as to why this happened.  that kid had no business being in that situation and it may now hurt our sport and bring more rules down on me.  fuck that noise.

Well, the TI was the son of the DZO. It's rather common for those kids to start early. It used to be legal, and now can be legal. 
Mike Mullen's sons all started very early, and are well respected in the community.
I personally know 2 sons of a DZO that started early. One was before the age change, the other was after with a proper waiver. The process isn't all that hard. Both 'boys' (now adults) are highly skilled, heads up jumpers. 
Given who the parent/DZO is, I don't think getting a waiver for an underage child would have been an issue.

As far as other 'rules', are they actual USPA BSRs?
Or are they the requirements of the tandem manufacturers?

I thought tandem CRW, camera rules, low turns, ect were mandated by the manufacturer. I could be wrong on that, and welcome correction if so.

I actually thought that this was all a setup by the TV people.
But it the TI got a tib/fib, then it may well have been real, and the TV crew just took advantage of it for dramatic effect.

And as far as 'hurting our sport', please.
It's been pretty well documented that accidents bring publicity and publicity brings customers. Even bad publicity results in an increase. 
The FAA doesn't care what we do to ourselves. Just what we do to the public. A TI getting hurt won't even show up on their radar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
6 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

The FAA doesn't care what we do to ourselves. Just what we do to the public.

They don't even care about that unless it involves an aircraft incident. I'm pretty sure they don't ever look at parachute landing injuries. Not even for tandems. They would regard the paying waiver signing customers just the same as all the other participants.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

They don't even care about that unless it involves an aircraft incident. I'm pretty sure they don't ever look at parachute landing injuries.

Well, that's not strictly true.

They care about demo jumps, especially ones that go bad and injure the public.
They care about Tandem students getting injured or killed. The 'falling out of the harness' incidents from a while back really got their attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Well, that's not strictly true.

They care about demo jumps, especially ones that go bad and injure the public.
They care about Tandem students getting injured or killed. The 'falling out of the harness' incidents from a while back really got their attention.

I can find news articles saying that the FAA was looking at Lodi after a pair of incidents. The article states that they will look at the records for the equipment. The FAA official had nothing to say about the TI performance. Yes, a demo jump will attract FAA attention, mostly because it requires FAA clearance and PRO ratings. That gives them a regulation to enforce. And that is what they do, they enforce regulations. There are no regulations to enforce around landing procedures for tandems so there is nothing to look into. If your paperwork is squared away they will walk away from the incident because they have no jurisdiction.

I can find no FAA reports about tandem harness incidents. Because although as people they may care they have no official function to regulate skydiving. I have never heard of a DZ ever being shut down or in trouble with the FAA (or TC in Canada) for any unsafe skydiving activities. Only for issues involving aircraft. When accidents happen you will often hear talk about government action. But none ever happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

I I have never heard of a DZ ever being shut down or in trouble with the FAA (or TC in Canada) for any unsafe skydiving activities. 

Hi Ken,

The local FSDO got a court order shutting down Ted Mayfield's dz.  They also did an emergency revocation of his rigger's license.

One of the local FAA guys began looking at the fatalities at Ted's dz and determined that he had more than all of the other dz's in the NW combined.  They used that info for the court order.

They also confiscated every rig on the dz when they showed up with the county sheriff.

I have never seen the actual court order, so there may be more or less in it.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

The local FSDO got a court order shutting down Ted Mayfield's dz.  They also did an emergency revocation of his rigger's license.

One of the local FAA guys began looking at the fatalities at Ted's dz and determined that he had more than all of the other dz's in the NW combined.  They used that info for the court order.

They also confiscated every rig on the dz when they showed up with the county sheriff.

I have never seen the actual court order, so there may be more or less in it.

Jerry Baumchen

Ah....There's one. The original bad boy who broke every rule in the book. And eventually someone found a way to shut him down temporarily by going after the one thing that is covered by regs. The rigging. That only goes to show just how much you would need to thumb your nose at the man before any real consequences happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Ah....There's one. The original bad boy who broke every rule in the book. And eventually someone found a way to shut him down temporarily by going after the one thing that is covered by regs. The rigging. That only goes to show just how much you would need to thumb your nose at the man before any real consequences happen.

Hi Ken,

And, until the FAA shut him down, he was a USPA Group Member.  Only after the court order was executed, USPA pulled his license & his Group Member status.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

And, until the FAA shut him down, he was a USPA Group Member.  Only after the court order was executed, USPA pulled his license & his Group Member status.

Jerry Baumchen

Not surprising. Membership comes with a fee and kicking someone out means giving up money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Thank you. As was noted, anonymous posters often have hidden agendas. 
I'm not accusing you of that, but it's something that comes up. 

 

 

Well, the TI was the son of the DZO. It's rather common for those kids to start early. It used to be legal, and now can be legal. 
Mike Mullen's sons all started very early, and are well respected in the community.
I personally know 2 sons of a DZO that started early. One was before the age change, the other was after with a proper waiver. The process isn't all that hard. Both 'boys' (now adults) are highly skilled, heads up jumpers. 
Given who the parent/DZO is, I don't think getting a waiver for an underage child would have been an issue.

As far as other 'rules', are they actual USPA BSRs?
Or are they the requirements of the tandem manufacturers?

I thought tandem CRW, camera rules, low turns, ect were mandated by the manufacturer. I could be wrong on that, and welcome correction if so.

I actually thought that this was all a setup by the TV people.
But it the TI got a tib/fib, then it may well have been real, and the TV crew just took advantage of it for dramatic effect.

And as far as 'hurting our sport', please.
It's been pretty well documented that accidents bring publicity and publicity brings customers. Even bad publicity results in an increase. 
The FAA doesn't care what we do to ourselves. Just what we do to the public. A TI getting hurt won't even show up on their radar. 

Joe, here's a rule: treat every student, and approach their safety, as if they were a member of your own family whom you loved. Would you send your daughter or niece out on a high pressure, TV Tandem Demo with a barely and, apparently, only technically qualified TI? Again, if this is the situation then egregious doesn't begin to describe what happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Joe, here's a rule: treat every student, and approach their safety, as if they were a member of your own family whom you loved. Would you send your daughter or niece out on a high pressure, TV Tandem Demo with a barely and, apparently, only technically qualified TI? Again, if this is the situation then egregious doesn't begin to describe what happened. 

Fully agreed.

Unfortunately, not everyone sees it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Joe, here's a rule: treat every student, and approach their safety, as if they were a member of your own family whom you loved. Would you send your daughter or niece out on a high pressure, TV Tandem Demo with a barely and, apparently, only technically qualified TI? Again, if this is the situation then egregious doesn't begin to describe what happened. 

my dad told me once that when you're leading troops, remember that all of them, even the stupidest, most worthless one had someone at home who thought he was the best thing on earth and treat him like it.  it stuck with me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Fully agreed.

Unfortunately, not everyone sees it that way.

Then help with the change. Again, I don't have the facts on this. I'm told it was a USPA official who runs a DZ. If this is an example of the care and concern they show the students who walk through the door at their own DZ they need to take down the sign. If USPA thinks this is just the way skydiving goes they need to take down the sign. But maybe, just maybe, we are ahead of our leaders on things. Maybe we are better than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2021 at 9:25 PM, gowlerk said:

As far as we can tell there is no particular reason to believe that rules (not laws) were broken. Poor judgement is not against the rules. Sometimes when people in positions of responsibility make mistakes we want to hold them to a high standard and bring them down. Like for example, a politician leaving his frozen state for a holiday in Mexico during a crisis. It is not against a rule, but it is not the standard we expect. 

Going after answers in this forum is unlikely to bring you any. If those involved are reading this they would be fools to start replying with words that would bring endless continuing questions. I'm Canadian and I don't know what USPA procedures are, but I also find it unlikely that this is something that requires any "investigation". It may require an incident report that would most likely be used for statistical reasons. Probably that has been submitted.

There is a very clear set rule that tandems can not perform a turn greater than 90* under 500ft in the BSRs, from view of the landing area during the male students landing compared to this landing, there should not have been any obstacle or lack of landing area to require such a hard turn, and even in an avoidance, 30-45* is almost always enough. While I understand your point about answers being found here, I have to disagree with the possibility of this being a simple mistake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Adrenadict said:

There is a very clear set rule that tandems can not perform a turn greater than 90* under 500ft in the BSRs, from view of the landing area during the male students landing compared to this landing, there should not have been any obstacle or lack of landing area to require such a hard turn, and even in an avoidance, 30-45* is almost always enough. While I understand your point about answers being found here, I have to disagree with the possibility of this being a simple mistake. 

And you are right, again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, nwt said:

Melissa Lowe is active on Facebook.

I'm not. I'm basically a cul-de-sac off the social media super highway. The only reason I signed up here was because I had a plan to con Von Novak into something and then forgot what it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JoeWeber said:

I'm not. I'm basically a cul-de-sac off the social media super highway. The only reason I signed up here was because I had a plan to con Von Novak into something and then forgot what it was.

Judging from her engagement on Facebook, I have to think she would be responsive to email or any other method of communication. She seems very accessible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I'm not. I'm basically a cul-de-sac off the social media super highway. The only reason I signed up here was because I had a plan to con Von Novak into something and then forgot what it was.

Hi Joe,

Re:  then forgot what it was

Welcome to old age.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I'm not. I'm basically a cul-de-sac off the social media super highway. The only reason I signed up here was because I had a plan to con Von Novak into something and then forgot what it was.

You just want more of that barrel aged beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nwt said:

Judging from her engagement on Facebook, I have to think she would be responsive to email or any other method of communication. She seems very accessible.

I met her back in the Sugar Gliderz day's. They featured at an event we had and everyone loved them. She's cool. But.....I have a serious disability in the eye's of USPA; I'm both a member and a DZO and thus have suspicious motives on two counts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another fine example of 1 set of rules for members and another for the BOD. Lots of bad decisions here. Pretty sure if a re-do was available, they wude want it. What is most disappointing is how very different the BOD's reaction is to this incident vs others in the past. They all knew this happened. Well aware it was coming out. When it did, the BOD response is to do an "internal" investigation and just ignore the whole thing. This organization collects over 4 Million a yr from us. Has seperate funds for airport access, Dillingham, Team competitions, Skydive Safety foundation and the US Parachute Team trust fund ( huh?). Has no accountability for the hundreds of thousands it gives to the ISMHOF and what happens to it. 

Just Ridiculous. If this was a company, the entire BOD wude be fired tomorrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/3/2021 at 10:58 AM, nwt said:

You should have been at USIS nationals last weekend--Bourbon County Stout was on draft and Sunpath was buying.

Damn can't believe I missed that (well, I've missed everything else this year.)

We had a Comic-con beer festival here years ago where Angel's Share, Older Viscosity _and_ Woot Stout were all on tap.  Amy had to drive home.

Back to the topic - years ago I worked a demo in Cabo for MTV sports.  We tandemed in the contestants for some reality TV show.  The logistics were nightmarish - but we pulled it off with no injuries.  I even got a fun jump in at the end over the beach.  But it was a huge amount of work, and anyone who thinks they can just get two TM's and pull off a demo for TV may learn the hard way how much work it is to do that safely and effectively.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2