0
MikeTJumps

Sunday's report: USPA BOD meeting

Recommended Posts

Have you consider the idea that he might be right.

Sparky



More importantly will the whole USPA voting establishment believe that he is better than all the other minds. This solution better than all other possible solutions. That should be your question.

My Idea's are based on a personal history of observation going back way before this issue and proposals. No he is not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Have you consider the idea that he might be right.

Sparky



More importantly will the whole USPA voting establishment believe that he is better than all the other minds. This solution better than all other possible solutions. That should be your question.

My Idea's are based on a personal history of observation going back way before this issue and proposals. No he is not better.



The online polls show he is in line with the majority of the membership.

And Sparky asked if he was right, not better, "better" is an opinions based answer, we no how that goes.

Matt
An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Have you consider the idea that he might be right.

Sparky



More importantly will the whole USPA voting establishment believe that he is better than all the other minds. This solution better than all other possible solutions. That should be your question.

My Idea's are based on a personal history of observation going back way before this issue and proposals. No he is not better.



Just what are your ideas? I have seen a lot of rhetoric from you and others but Douglas is the only one that has produced anything of substance. If there is other material out there that I am not aware of please enlighten me.

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Structure is needed if wingsuiting is going to be allowed to thrive/survive amongst DZO's and FAA.
Structure requires standards.
In USPA-land, standards=Rating Program.
... this guy just didn't follow protocol"



Aren't you the guy that used to tell new guys to just go out and experiment, because that was the best way to learn?

And now you seem to be saying that learning needs to be a regimented set of pre-defined steps which must be followed.

What changed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Structure is needed if wingsuiting is going to be allowed to thrive/survive amongst DZO's and FAA.
Structure requires standards.
In USPA-land, standards=Rating Program.
... this guy just didn't follow protocol"



Aren't you the guy that used to tell new guys to just go out and experiment, because that was the best way to learn?

And now you seem to be saying that learning needs to be a regimented set of pre-defined steps which must be followed.

What changed?



Nope.

Experiment with formations, positions, etc...sure. Experiment with an FFC? Nope.
Always been a proponent of formal training in wingsuiting.
As far as "what changed?" In my world, nothing has changed. In wingsuiting, what has changed is a lot of poor decision-making has demonstrated that "education" isn't working any better in wingsuiting than it has in swooping/downsizing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My idea's are that you don't need a skydive university version of a wing suit instructor to train experienced skydivers to remember their leg straps, exit wings closed and navigate an offset jump run.

I have been flying wingsuits since they have been introduced to the West coast and I fly an offset jump run on 100% of my jumps wing suit or not. How about you? Got a lot of WS experience? Or thousands of box man jumps and enjoy getting caught up in the current hysteria?

Sloppy exits and door jamb reserve and premature main deployments have been happening for decades before wing suits existed yet nobody is advocating we revamp AFF or ban reserves..... Right?

Then there is that USPA regulating a specific discipline of already experienced jumpers thingy..... It is pretty monumental......at least I think it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

My idea's are that you don't need a skydive university version of a wing suit instructor to train experienced skydivers to remember their leg straps, exit wings closed and navigate an offset jump run.

I have been flying wingsuits since they have been introduced to the West coast and I fly an offset jump run on 100% of my jumps wing suit or not. How about you? Got a lot of WS experience? Or thousands of box man jumps and enjoy getting caught up in the current hysteria?

Sloppy exits and door jamb reserve and premature main deployments have been happening for decades before wing suits existed yet nobody is advocating we revamp AFF or ban reserves..... Right?

Then there is that USPA regulating a specific discipline of already experienced jumpers thingy..... It is pretty monumental......at least I think it is.



I see personal opinion but no ideas. If as you say a “skydive university” is not need to teach wing suit flying what would you suggest?

My experience in skydiving is the topic of this discussion but just for you…..I have done some Crew, speed star competition, 4 & 8 ways, big ways up to 200, some free flying and a little bit of wing suit. Along the way I managed to earn a riggers ticket and a pilot license.

In all cased I would seek instruction from qualified people in each discipline. Except for Crew, when I started that no one knew much about it.

Today everyone and their pet goat are trying to make money off the sport and hold themselves up as a guru in their chosen discipline. How does a jumper find the right person out of the crowd?

As for “regulating a specific discipline of already experienced jumpers” that is already being done. A “C” lic. Is required to compete at the nationals and to get a Pro rating you must complete a course taught by a USPA I.

http://www.uspa.org/tabid/170/Default.aspx#986

I don’t have a dog in this fight as I am retired for the sport. But from I see one side of the argument has put forth a plan to assure that newer WS flyers leave the plane with some structured instruction and the other side says the “good ol boys” system works just fine. I think that for better or worse skydiving has out grown that method.

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

My idea's are that you don't need a skydive university version of a wing suit instructor to train experienced skydivers to remember their leg straps, exit wings closed and navigate an offset jump run.

I have been flying wingsuits since they have been introduced to the West coast and I fly an offset jump run on 100% of my jumps wing suit or not. How about you? Got a lot of WS experience? Or thousands of box man jumps and enjoy getting caught up in the current hysteria?

Sloppy exits and door jamb reserve and premature main deployments have been happening for decades before wing suits existed yet nobody is advocating we revamp AFF or ban reserves..... Right?

Then there is that USPA regulating a specific discipline of already experienced jumpers thingy..... It is pretty monumental......at least I think it is.



I see personal opinion but no ideas. If as you say a “skydive university” is not need to teach wing suit flying what would you suggest?

My experience in skydiving is the topic of this discussion but just for you…..I have done some Crew, speed star competition, 4 & 8 ways, big ways up to 200, some free flying and a little bit of wing suit.

Sparky



And did you suffer because those people qualified in crew, speedstar, 4 and 8 ways up to 200... didn't have USPA RATINGS IN THOSE DISCIPLINES?

The issue isn't about getting instruction, it's about whether only a USPA RATED instructor can give instruction in wingsuit, CRW, 4 & 8 way, bigways, headdown, sitfly, etc. to an already licensed skydiver.

Is this a slippery slope that you want us to go down?
...

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree John, training in ALL flavors is a major issue.

We need a standard teaching doctrine.
Much like in professional training.
It helps if we all use the same books on a similar subject.
;)

I would expect a professor to not only understand that, but to embracingly support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Today everyone and their pet goat are trying to make money off the sport and hold themselves up as a guru in their chosen discipline. How does a jumper find the right person out of the crowd?

Quote



I completely agree with you here.



As for “regulating a specific discipline of already experienced jumpers” that is already being done. A “C” lic. Is required to compete at the nationals and to get a Pro rating you must complete a course taught by a USPA I.



You are comparing apples to radial tires. Not everybody does nationals but if you want to represent some of the competitive best in a given discipline you probably have enough jumps for the license.

Some venues require a higher license because the LZ is tight and possibly close to water or gatherings of wuffos. Tight demos? Yeah sure the USPA should have increased oversight if I plan to land close to Wuffos. Open area demos don't need a rating and not everyone does demos.

But this measure requires everyone who wants to mentor in the WS discipline to get a rating. This will be all inclusive to everyone who wants to enter the discipline and everyone who wants to assist others enter the discipline. It is not an optional thing.

Douglas himself had some pretty consistantly comical exits as I fondly remember with hundreds of wingsuit jumps worth of experience and having gotten training by the best back in the day. I'd like to believe that now with thousands of wingsuits jumps of experience he has gotten better. Maybe all the tailstrike perpetrators just need more practice to clean up their sloppyness.

I haven't conducted a WS FFC course myself in a couple of years even though I was prolific back in 03-05. I haven't conducted one at Elsinore since Oct 04. In fact my last contribution was to assist another WS mentor with the in air evalutaion portion of some students as he had a large group. The good work is getting done. The discipline is growing and good mentors are making the largest contribution.

Have I seen quik and dirty WS briefings instead of complete and proper training? Yes but it is not the norm. Those are a small percentage. The mentors and instructors care a lot. They want to see the discipline grow and because they engage in it they ( we) all want it to be safe for everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well given that argument, not everyone jumps a wing suit either - as well as a large number that have made one wingy and will never put a suit on again.

I'd really like to see us shore up the training.
We have room for improvement - always.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for “regulating a specific discipline of already experienced jumpers” that is already being done. A “C” lic. Is required to compete at the nationals and to get a Pro rating you must complete a course taught by a USPA I.

http://www.uspa.org/tabid/170/Default.aspx#986

Needing a C license is hardly the same thing as what is being proposed here, and NO, there is not a required class for getting a Pro rating, only jump accuracy verification and a test.
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... and NO, there is not a required class for getting a Pro rating, only jump accuracy verification and a test.






Actually the application requires specifically that you've 'Received Instruction' in several areas...AND that those areas involving the use of specialized equipment, you demonstrate performance with it.

So depending on how you define 'a class' it is debatable I guess...however the fact that 'instruction' is required isn't arguable.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_PROProfCardapp_2010_11.pdf










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

... and NO, there is not a required class for getting a Pro rating, only jump accuracy verification and a test.






Actually the application requires specifically that you've 'Received Instruction' in several areas...AND that those areas involving the use of specialized equipment, you demonstrate performance with it.

So depending on how you define 'a class' it is debatable I guess...however the fact that 'instruction' is required isn't arguable.

http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Form_PROProfCardapp_2010_11.pdf


There is no requirement for a "class" and the instruction does not need to be done by someone with a USPA instructional rating.
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites