USPA Membership

[Hooknswoop 19]

If USPA membership was not mandatory, would you renew yours?

Derek V

[sammielu 3]

Can I have a 3rd option: I would not renew if I could still jump & work at my home dz and take the boogie trips I take in winter.

[indyz 1]

I'm not sure I understand the question. USPA membership already isn't mandatory.

[kuai43 7]

It costs $55/year.

The benefit they've provided by advocating for us:
- to keep skydiving largely self-supervised
- to maintain public airport access (just this is invaluable)
- to provide insurance for possible dumb-fuckery
- to standardize and professionalize student training
- to present a public image that keeps us from looking like a bunch of fucking yay-hoos.
- to promote a unified competition/record-setting standard and opportunity.
- etc.

That's just a bit over two damn jump tickets. Jesus fucking christ. Can you do better?

Every fight is a food fight if you're a cannibal

Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man. - Anthony Burgess

[Fanello1775 0]

Well said. Yes, I would still pay even if it were not mandatory. To turn a phase from our Founding Fathers, if we do not fly together, then we will surely fall apart.

[RMK 3]

I've renewed my USPA every year since 2002, even though I don't live there and many years have not made any jumps in the US.

It's a very reasonable cost and I find them professional and like the way they do things. My own BPA here at home - not so much (I somewhat begrudge the annual cost to them)

"Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes"

[ufk22 32]

kuai43

It costs $55/year.

The benefit they've provided by advocating for us:
- to keep skydiving largely self-supervised
- to maintain public airport access (just this is invaluable)
- to provide insurance for possible dumb-fuckery
- to standardize and professionalize student training
- to present a public image that keeps us from looking like a bunch of fucking yay-hoos.
- to promote a unified competition/record-setting standard and opportunity.
- etc.

That's just a bit over two damn jump tickets. Jesus fucking christ. Can you do better?

THIS
+1

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.

[Hooknswoop 19]

If it so great, why is it mandatory?

Derek V

[Divalent 89]

Hooknswoop

If it so great, why is it mandatory?

Derek V

That is a question you probably should address to the DZOs where you jump, as they are the ones that make it mandatory for you.

But in general I think the answer is: to minimize freeloading.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

That is a question you probably should address to the DZOs where you jump, as they are the ones that make it mandatory for you.

Group Member DZ's are required by the USPA to require membership. It isn't the dzo's.

I think if USPA membership was worth the $55.00+/year, it wouldn't need to be mandatory.

Derek V

[diablopilot 2]

I don't know a DZO that requires USPA membership from it's customers BECAUSE of the Group Membership, but rather because it shows a baseline of experience and the third party insurance is worth it.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Ron 7]

No

The USPA has many times proven to be an advocate for the manufacturing industry while not supporting the members.

Case in point, the USPA caved to the manufacturers to require a medical to do tandems when medicals are not required by the FAA for skydiving, flying Light sport, Balloons, or Gliders. This includes teaching Light Sport, Balloons, or Gliders. In addition, the EAA and the AOPA (who really do advocate for the members) just helped push a law that will do away with the Class Three medical for all recreational pilots.

There are other examples of the USPA siding with manufacturers over members.

The USPA has made it so you have to be a USPA member to jump at USPA DZ's. And made it so DZ's want to be a member because it is cheap advertising. This makes it so people have to join the USPA. If they dropped this, the USPA membership would drop till they showed they were actually beneficial instead of just forcing you to join.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[rmarshall234 13]

Yes I would still renew and I do. In fact I just did two days ago. Even though I haven't jumped in a few years.

I've been a USPA member since 1978 and now for the past two decades, a holder of FAA Certificate(s). What the USPA provides that many jumpers don't realize is the ability to operate as a "self governed" entity and still use the National Air Space that the FAA controls. Trust me when I say this....you _do not_ want anymore FAA oversight than you currently have. Which is practically zero. Continue to operate in a reasonably responsible way killing only ourselves, continue to keep USPA advocating on your behalf, and with a little bit of luck and the holding back of time, you will not have to see what the rest of us have to deal with on a daily basis. It ain't pretty.

[demonstalker1 0]

In 1962 I started skydiving at the age of 15.. I called the old PCA the father of the USPA, to join... whoever I spoke with told me I couldn't join or jump till I turned 16... I already had over 100 jumps and they really pissed me off.... So I refused to join or apply for a license until I forced to... Think back now I wished I had joined... Sometimes we are our own worst enemy..

Quote

• Quote

[wmw999 2,121]

I paid yearly during all the years I wasn't jumping; now I'm a life member. I'd do it the same again, except I'd join as a life member a whole lot sooner.
If you don't like something about the operations, get involved and change them. No one can change it exactly what they want, but that's true of any organization.
USPA isn't too big for one person to make a difference if they try and if they work with people rather than against them.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Phil1111 910]

IMO the USPA poll illustrates more than the posts here. Currently 50%, more or less. Wouldn't buy membership.

The LODI accidnt and the treatment of a non USPA DZ:

"airdvr wrote:
I don't believe Ed's comments helped either.

"Skydiving will never be a perfectly safe thing to do," said Ed Scott, executive director of the USPA, a nonprofit organization which works with state and federal officials to promote skydiving safety.

"If you don't find a location listed on our site, you don't know what you're getting, you don't know what the standards are," Scott said. "The important factor with tandem skydiving is the certification and instructor."

Are not helpful when informing the media and public. Its self serving. The US and other countries need people like Bill Dause to keep the government and organizations like USPA, CSPA, BPA and others in check.

Every organization, without checks and balances. Will grow and grow, until some outside force brings its growth into check. $55 a year membership isn't insignificant when 10-30 or 50 membership checks are set off by a DZ after every weekend.

Yes the money buys insurance and a magazine. But it also buys jumps for the student. For the majority of students who make 2-3 jumps that money adds up.

USPA museum, er. the Skydiving Museum & Hall of Fame. How many jumpers go to Fredericksburg, Virginia to see it? Seems like a waste of money for the average jumper and student who buys membership.

Generally speaking USPA, CSPA, BPA, etc do a good job. But without independent DZ's like LODI and thats whats great about the US. The budgets these organizations grow and grow. Providing more and more "services".

As far a non members getting something "free" off the backs of members. The FAA has no interest in direct oversight of skydiving, hang gliding or other airsports. They just got a directive re third class medicals for AC up to five passengers.

Toggle (D License) wrote:
"The following are my observations based on 20+ years at Lodi:

Lodi is not a USPA Group Member DZ because Bill Dause does not see the value in paying the Group Member annual fee to the USPA.

Bill Dause is a USPA member himself and as an individual, he values the USPA.

Bill Dause requires all of his graduating AFF students to join the USPA and get their USPA license."

So group membership fees, add $55 for every student and you're taking about allot of money that could be spent on jumps. Experienced jumpers don't see $3000, $6000 and higher amount checks sent off every weekend for the jumpers who may never see a DZ again. Insurance can be bought directly by the DZ operator to include possible damage to third parties by his customers. Its probably a small rider on an existing policy.

The LODI thread with some comments on USPA:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4810236;page=5;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

[kallend 1,623]

Phil1111

I don't believe Ed's comments helped either.

"Skydiving will never be a perfectly safe thing to do," said Ed Scott, executive director of the USPA, a nonprofit organization which works with state and federal officials to promote skydiving safety.

So what is false about that statement?

Quote

"If you don't find a location listed on our site, you don't know what you're getting, you don't know what the standards are," Scott said. "The important factor with tandem skydiving is the certification and instructor."

Given that all standards are minimum standards, what is false about that statement?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Phil1111 910]

kallend

***
I don't believe Ed's comments helped either.

"Skydiving will never be a perfectly safe thing to do," said Ed Scott, executive director of the USPA, a nonprofit organization which works with state and federal officials to promote skydiving safety.

So what is false about that statement?

Never said it was false.

Quote

"If you don't find a location listed on our site, you don't know what you're getting, you don't know what the standards are," Scott said. "The important factor with tandem skydiving is the certification and instructor."

Given that all standards are minimum standards, what is false about that statement?

Never said it was false There are pretty complete discussions in the Lodi thread as to the completeness of USPA scrutiny of standards and the lack thereof.

It is absolutely guaranteed if there is no enforcement actions by an organization. It is most likely because they are not looking, not investigating, or not prosecuting.

In the context of the accident and investigation. The statement is not helpful to either the public or the media. It implies a lack of standards for non members and/or LODI.

[ufk22 32]

USPA offers 90 day "temporary" memberships for first jump students through all member DZ's. $20.
This does not give voting rights but does include the liability insurance.
Anyone with a business insurance policy, call your agent and try to get that kind of liability coverage.
If you'd rather have the FAA totally in control??????
If you'd rather have an "enforcement nazi" setup like BPA???
USPA doesn't go out looking for enforcement actions, they deal with what is brought to them. I know of more than one individual that has lost ratings from USPA because of malfeasance.
Is it always fail, never any "good old boy" crap? No, but it's better than most, and with the new policies adopted a year or two ago, should be even better now.

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.

[jacketsdb23 45]

Quote

In the context of the accident and investigation. The statement is not helpful to either the public or the media. It implies a lack of standards for non members and/or LODI.

If [and i mean IF, as I find it hard to believe myself] if the TI was not rated by mfg. or USPA, this statement would be true.

Losers make excuses, Winners make it happen
God is Good
Beer is Great
Swoopers are crazy.

[jlmiracle 7]

kallend

***
I don't believe Ed's comments helped either.

"Skydiving will never be a perfectly safe thing to do," said Ed Scott, executive director of the USPA, a nonprofit organization which works with state and federal officials to promote skydiving safety.

So what is false about that statement?

Quote

"If you don't find a location listed on our site, you don't know what you're getting, you don't know what the standards are," Scott said. "The important factor with tandem skydiving is the certification and instructor."

Given that all standards are minimum standards, what is false about that statement?

It gives the non-knowing person a false sense of security that ALL USPA GM dropzones are safer than ALL non-group members. Though what was quoted may not be literally false, it has false implications, and IMO, was malicious.

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Every organization, without checks and balances. Will grow and grow, until some outside force brings its growth into check. $55 a year membership isn't insignificant when 10-30 or 50 membership checks are set off by a DZ after every weekend.

Tandem students are not required to be USPA members.

Which drop zones are bringing in 50 AFF students every weekend?

Quote

USPA museum, er. the Skydiving Museum & Hall of Fame. How many jumpers go to Fredericksburg, Virginia to see it? Seems like a waste of money for the average jumper and student who buys membership.

The Skydiving Museum is a separate entity. None of your USPA dues goes to funding the museum. And it is going to be located in Florida, not Virginia.

Quote

As far a non members getting something "free" off the backs of members. The FAA has no interest in direct oversight of skydiving, hang gliding or other airsports.

Yet. Keep killing civilians (tandem students) and see how long that lasts.

- Dan G

[Phil1111 910]

DanG

Quote

Every organization, without checks and balances. Will grow and grow, until some outside force brings its growth into check. $55 a year membership isn't insignificant when 10-30 or 50 membership checks are set off by a DZ after every weekend.

Tandem students are not required to be USPA members.

Which drop zones are bringing in 50 AFF students every weekend?

Quote

USPA museum, er. the Skydiving Museum & Hall of Fame. How many jumpers go to Fredericksburg, Virginia to see it? Seems like a waste of money for the average jumper and student who buys membership.

The Skydiving Museum is a separate entity. None of your USPA dues goes to funding the museum. And it is going to be located in Florida, not Virginia.

Quote

As far a non members getting something "free" off the backs of members. The FAA has no interest in direct oversight of skydiving, hang gliding or other airsports.

Yet. Keep killing civilians (tandem students) and see how long that lasts.

I'm not disagreeing that these national associations don't have value. I'd suggest that they tend to have limited motives for cost controls.

1. Museum is independent but its my understanding they received about $200k from USPA.
- the museum has already bought land and its not in Florida.
Setting the museum aside.

2. The big bad FAA has been a flag waving issue for late night beer drinking conversations on the DZ for decades and decades.
- Hang gliding has had student and passenger fatalities.
-Base jumping fatalities.
- Paragliding student and passenger fatalities.
and there has never been any suggestions of FAA direct regulation of those activities.
IMO its the big bad boogie bear in the night argument.

Your statement "Yet. Keep killing civilians (tandem students) and see how long that lasts." in the context of the LODI accident and the statements of:
"The director of an organization that certifies skydivers said Thursday that the instructor who led a tandem jump in Northern California that turned fatal didn't have the required advanced parachuting certificate...Ed Scott, the executive director of the parachute association, said officials searched its records using several variations of Kwon's name and found nothing. "
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/california-skydiving-teacher-fatal-jump-lacked-certification-n628881

There are some other quotes attributed to USPA which are either false or self serving. None of which helps the sport. All of which, IF FALSE, provide nothing but ammunition for politicians, FAA activists, and others who would seek to start direct regulation of skydiving.

So IF in fact these USPA officials can't control their mouths when TV cameras and microphones are in their faces. How much benefit is that membership money when its used to fund the ammo thats shooting your members in the feet?

I am directly referring to the statement(s) attributed to USPA officials which make misleading references to USPA rules. When its the FAA requirements that must be met. Ones that pour gas on the fire of this sport.

Or is it that USPA leadership and executives can't discern the law and their own regulations. Which from other posts and discussions in the LODI thread aren't enforced anyway. After all as long as the check clears and an agreement is signed the DZ is automatically safe. No enforcement needed.

[DanG 1]

Quote

There are some other quotes attributed to USPA which are either false or self serving. None of which helps the sport. All of which, IF FALSE, provide nothing but ammunition for politicians, FAA activists, and others who would seek to start direct regulation of skydiving.

So IF in fact these USPA officials can't control their mouths when TV cameras and microphones are in their faces. How much benefit is that membership money when its used to fund the ammo thats shooting your members in the feet?

You're assuming the statements are false.

Quote

I am directly referring to the statement(s) attributed to USPA officials which make misleading references to USPA rules. When its the FAA requirements that must be met. Ones that pour gas on the fire of this sport.

The FAA requires a tandem instructor to hold a "Master" parachutist license. That's not a USPA rule, it is an FAA rule.

- Dan G

[Phil1111 910]

DanG

Quote

There are some other quotes attributed to USPA which are either false or self serving. None of which helps the sport. All of which, IF FALSE, provide nothing but ammunition for politicians, FAA activists, and others who would seek to start direct regulation of skydiving.

So IF in fact these USPA officials can't control their mouths when TV cameras and microphones are in their faces. How much benefit is that membership money when its used to fund the ammo thats shooting your members in the feet?

You're assuming the statements are false.

Quote

I am directly referring to the statement(s) attributed to USPA officials which make misleading references to USPA rules. When its the FAA requirements that must be met. Ones that pour gas on the fire of this sport.

The FAA requires a tandem instructor to hold a "Master" parachutist license. That's not a USPA rule, it is an FAA rule.

He absolutely has to know the difference between the USPA rules and FAA regulations. If he doesn't he is incompetent and I second the suggestion that was made in the last week on DZ.com that he be fired.

The statements in the story are attributed to him and thats the sole basis for which I would give him any benefit of doubt. That he did not say them. Statements are attributed to him that:
"The director of an organization that certifies skydivers said Thursday that the instructor who led a tandem jump in Northern California that turned fatal didn't have the required advanced parachuting certificate.

The Federal Aviation Administration requires tandem-jump instructors to receive training and a certificate from the United States Parachute Association, which found no records of Yong Kwon"...
" Ed Scott, the executive director of the parachute association, said officials searched its records using several variations of Kwon's name and found nothing.

Scott said tandem-jump instructors are required to have three years of experience, made more than 500 jumps and completed a three-day tandem-jump course that includes 10 jumps. "

The FAA recognizes other FAI license issuers and the training qualifications that they have and ED SCOTT absolutely knows that without any doubt. So is the representation that he made to the media would be either he checked "its records". Is irrelevant if Mr. Kwon had the qualifications from the UK, Canada, France, S. Korea, Australia, Etc. Etc. Etc. All of which ED SCOTT absolutely knows. He should have said that the FAA will conduct an investigation and THEY should be contacted. A final report will be issued by the FAA and until then I would be speculating as to the causes of this accident or qualifications of anyone.

The above point is exactly the same point that other members here made in other posts.

As all of this relates to what members of the USPA get for their money. I'd say the value is down to about.... the value of insurance from a separate insurance company. That for certain has more qualified employees than the USPA. As Mr. Scott should NOT have said anything like was attributed to him in the NBC story. Such statements do NOTHING to help the public and media view this sport. They hurt it.

As this conversation has entered troll space I'm done.