Sparky008 0 #1 December 23, 2011 Hi, i start my first course tommorow, and i have to make a decision on weather to do a static line course or an accelerated freefall course...........about the same price for both. can you help me make a call please Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #2 December 23, 2011 QuoteQuoteHi, i start my first course tommorow, and i have to make a decision on weather to do a static line course or an accelerated freefall course...........about the same price for both. can you help me make a call please AFF Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Sparky008 0 #3 December 23, 2011 cheers.............. any particular reasons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #4 December 23, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Hi, i start my first course tommorow, and i have to make a decision on weather to do a static line course or an accelerated freefall course...........about the same price for both. can you help me make a call please AFF Don't fall for that oneI'm from the old school Static Line route and think that it has some advantages ... Altitude and timing perceptions (for a start). But I understand and see why 'some' from the I-want-it-all-and-I-want-it-now generation would skip a few steps. BUT they both end up in the same place at the end of the day. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jclalor 12 #5 December 23, 2011 I learned 28 years ago and loved the SL. I just think with AFF you become more comfortable with the sport in a much faster time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #6 December 23, 2011 Quotecheers.............. any particular reasons? The reason is easy. We learn to skydive by being exposed to the freefall environment for extended periods. AFF was developed to give students that exposure from the very first jump. It also allows for instruction and correction during the skydive which dramatically steepens the learning curve. Or as I have always told folks, static line training is like wading around in the shallow end of the pool, while AFF is like jumping into the deep end with a pair of lifeguards by your side. Most people learn faster and better with AFF.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dthames 0 #7 December 23, 2011 I am in AFF and will continue in AFF. Circumstances prompted me to do a static line jump after my first two AFF jumps. Since then I have done three more static line jumps. The main reason was to practice canopy work. But when it is 35F at ground level, 5000 feet sounds better than 11,000 feet. I plan to continue my AFF next week in warmer weather. The static line jumps have taught me a lot (nothing about freefall as I was always hooked up). I feel better off having had the experience. I know I can land (under normal conditions) without it being an issue. If you did one static line jump first, you would have your first landing behind you when you started AFF. DanInstructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jclalor 12 #8 December 23, 2011 QuoteIf you did one static line jump first, you would have your first landing behind you when you started AFF. Not only will your first landing be behind you but also a few hundred dollars. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #9 December 23, 2011 QuoteQuotecheers.............. any particular reasons? The reason is easy. We learn to skydive by being exposed to the freefall environment for extended periods. AFF was developed to give students that exposure from the very first jump. It also allows for instruction and correction during the skydive which dramatically steepens the learning curve. Or as I have always told folks, static line training is like wading around in the shallow end of the pool, while AFF is like jumping into the deep end with a pair of lifeguards by your side. Most people learn faster and better with AFF. Although I'm not an instructor, I've become a fan of 3-element hybrid training, which unfortunately (IMO) most DZs don't offer. 1. 1 or 2 tandems to help get past the big hump of fear and sensory overload, and early intro to canopy control and landing. Less theoretically needed (IMO) when simple round mains were being used, now not a bad idea when students' brain-overloaded first jumps include the higher skill set of piloting and landing a ram-air. 2. A couple S/L or IAD and hop & pops each, to learn the basic skills of saving one's own life after jumping out of an airplane, and basic canopy control and landing - but NOT to over-emphasize freefall stability (beyond the basic arch). Removes the inherent bullshit - the big weakness of the S/L / IAD progression method - of not having enough seconds of time to get your mental shit together, and then to get yourself stable, before it's pull time. ("You didn't arch, and you dumped on your back. Go back up and do it again. And try not to kick this time." Fuck that.) (Also less multi-tasking than is the case in AFF jumps.) 3. Then a few modified AFF jumps to learn basic freefall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #10 December 23, 2011 Static line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites 3mpire 0 #11 December 23, 2011 I learned on static line. So I can only speak to that experience. And I will also say that you can't really go wrong with either, so don't believe that you will be a shitty skydiver if you do one or the other simply because of the method. It's up to you to do the work and learn the material either way. That said, I am happy that I learned on static line, and here are the reasons why: * learning in skydiving is incremental. The idea is that you only add one new ingredient to your skydive at a time so that you can focus on learning the new skill that will make you a safe jumper. Static line starts literally from the last part of the skydive and builds its way up to full altitude. Your first jumps aren't skydives. You're basically just a canopy pilot, and your only job is to make sure your canopy deployed correctly and that you fly a good pattern and land. Once you have done that, they add one new thing, practice touches, to get you started on learning how to reach for your pilot chute. Etc. Etc. By the time you get to your first freefall, you already know how to do everything else, so you are only focused on one new thing. * static line reinforces self reliance another thing I appreciate about static line is that from the very start you are 100% responsible for your own safety. it is up to you to identify a malfunction, it is up to you to pull, it is up to you to execute your EPs. This is not to say that you don't also have responsibility for these things in AFF, however with the analogy above about being in the deep end of the pool with life guards, you know that when push comes to shove they'll do everything in their power to save your life if you forget or lock up. I can't speak for what that knowledge does in an AFF student's head, but just like some people in an emergency lock up and just wait for the AAD to fire, I wouldn't be surprised if some people let their instructor pull for them (or in their mind think that that is an option--something like "i'm going to do this jump and pass but if i screw up they'll save me"). SL has zero room for that mind set, so I like that you are very aware that YOU are responsible for yourself from jump 1. This is the way it will be for the rest of your skydiving career, so it doesn't hurt that this mentality starts in your FJC before you even touch a rig. * static line teaches the vritue of skill based reward (progression) I never did a tandem before I did my first SL jump. So I did 13 "skydives" before I got to go to 13k. And let me tell you, I was SO HAPPY to experience free fall for that long, because I felt like I had earned it. You don't just pays your monies and gets the reward. You had to prove over several jumps that you were properly trained enough to conduct the dive safely. A big problem in our sport today is people progressing too quickly. We're like rats that were trained from the very beginning that if you press the lever, you get a reward. SL instills a different mind set, that yes you can do whatever you want, but you have to show that you know wtf you're doing. With each jump you get more and more independence to exercise your own judgement, especially once you're on solo status and you can do an "unsupervised" solo jump. But with each progressive step forward you make, you're aware that it's up to you to know what to do and how to do it. Once you are licensed you can basically do whatever you want most of the time. People might give you shit for it, but short of an S&TA grounding you, it's your call. Having the mentality from the start that you build up to things, and experiencing the gratification you feel for "earning" the right to do something is like training a rat to go through an obstacle course before they push the lever. You come out of your training not "hard wired" to just go for immediate gratification. Do SL trained jumpers say "fuck that shit" and go straight into rapid downsizing and all that? Sure. But that's on them, and their training was trying to teach them a different path SO WHICH IS BETTER? Neither is better. Like I said,I've never done AFF, i'm not an AFF instructor, and I honestly don't know all the details of how AFF deals with these same issues. I'm sure an AFFI could fisk my posts above and say how AFF deals with those same issues. So don't take this as saying that AFF *doesn't* teach you these things. but for me, the points above seem to be relatively unique to SL or were at least apparent enough to me to make an impression. Long story short, you can do either, and here is why I think SL is good, and don't let anyone tell you that SL is not applicable or somehow inferior. Thousands of skydivers learned on SL, including many of the icons of the sport. But make your own decision for your own reasons. Don't take my word for it, and don't take anyone else on this board's word for it. That's the first rule really of skydiving. Talk to real live instructors and ask good questions, then make up your own mind for yourself. blue skies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dragon2 0 #12 December 23, 2011 My personal take on AFF vs SL: If you have any issues whatsoever with picking things up quickly, either mentally or physically, and/or don't have USD100-1500 to spend all in one go, SL seems like the best route to take. Also take the weather into account: starting SL in crappy weather gets you more potential jumps than starting AFF in that same weather. SL: teaches you one step at a time is way cheaper to start with repeat jumps are way way cheaper you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of money you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitude SL instruction is often more of a group thing you can still jump even with lowish cloudcover you can jump without having to worry much about instructor availability you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is quite normal you could get nicknamed Dope on a Rope AFF: you get to do a lot of stuff from jump #1 you get to experience freefall from jump #1 repeat jumps are pricey you'll have a better freefall skillset at a lower jump number you can be a solo freefall skydiver sooner AFF instruction often is more one-on-one you need basically clear skies to jump you may have to wait longer between jumps (depends on availability of instructors) you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER you could get nicknamed AFF Baby Both methods will get you in the air and get you towards your A license. And by that time it doesn't matter much anymore which method you did. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PiLFy 0 #13 December 23, 2011 Wait a second. I thought some people are pushing for static line training's return because it's significantly cheaper? Where are you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #14 December 23, 2011 Quote Static line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport. Then why don't you guys offer it?"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites fencebuster 7 #15 December 24, 2011 +1. Great analogy!Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208 AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dks13827 2 #16 December 24, 2011 I personally agree with Andy's 3 step approach. That is exactly what I would have told my daughter if she wanted to enroll after the tandem jump she made a few years ago. Me ? I was static line and liked it. My own view is that I would not have liked AFF without having done a tandem or 2. Just my guess. But go with your own decision. Any of the methods are proven to work. And, you can change course if need be. Good luck and enjoy the hell out of it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #17 December 24, 2011 Quote Quote Static line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport. Then why don't you guys offer it? Logistics and popularity. I would if I owned the company.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #18 December 24, 2011 QuoteStatic line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport. Back in the days of an 8 or 10 jump AFF course I would have agreed. However if a student is learning at a drop zone that requires 25 +/- jumps to complete trainig regardless of method, I disagree that static line has any advantage over AFF and content that the opposite is true. Every jump ends with a canopy flight (hopefully, anyway), so any canopy exercise or training that can be conducted on a s/l jump can also be conducted on an AFF jump. Additionally, AFF students typically saddle considerably higher than s/l students, giving them more altitude to perform those exercises. 25 canopy flights is 25 canopy flights no matter what a student does before getting nylon overhead. AFF has the additional HUGE advantage of giving the student long-term exposure to terminal velocity (which is heads above s/l for learning freefall maneuvers) and that has to be considered in the decision process. IMO, AFF is a far superior overall training doctrine and since the OP indicated that the 2 programs are about the same cost I see no advantages to choosing static line.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #19 December 24, 2011 Quote SL: teaches you one step at a timeQuote so does AFF is way cheaper to start withQuote The OP said at his DZ the cost is about the same repeat jumps are way way cheaperQuote Possibly true, but only if they are needed you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of moneyQuote Not true. The OP already stated that at his DZ the costs are about the same. Moreover, a student makes exactly one canopy flight per jump regardless of what type of jump it is. AFF students typically have much LONGER canopy flights because they routinely open considerably higher than s/l students, giving them more time to perform exercises. They also get to learn how to "solve the puzzle" created when the opening point isn't exactly where they expected or not perfectly on the wind line. Landings are only one aspect of learning canopy flight, so to simply count only the landings to dollars as a means of determining value is very short-sighted. If you measure the value by the time under canopy, any cost advantage of s/l is pretty much negated. you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitudeQuote Not even sure what that means In the early days of AFF, there was a distinct advantage to s/l for canopy training because AFF students did only 7 or 8 jumps before being cleared for self-supevision, and that's usually where canopy training ended. s/l students had the advantage of making 20 - 25 jumps under supervision, giving them a dollars vs jumps advantage, which certainly is a factor in canopy proficiency. Since students learning at drop zones that use USPA's 25 jump program (or some variation on that theme) make as many jumps under supervision on either program, the only advantage left to s/l is cost. That advantage is pretty much blown to hell when you look at the skill level of graduates from each program.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #20 December 24, 2011 Chuck, how many people are dying in freefall or from failure to get a parachute deployed these days? Nope, it's the canopy flight that is killing them off more often than not. AFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. Some programs are more capable of addressing this but SL programs on the whole do a much better job of teaching canopy flight from the get go. I think you confuse the USPA AFF program with the A license program. All the USPA programs have evolved that by the time AFF, TAF, SL or IAD students get to the A license park they should all be at very equivalent freefall skills but experience tells us the SL/IAD students will understand and be higher skilled canopy pilots. More than 5 years ago I drew up an outline for my "dream" program. It began with 2 to 3 tandems focused on deployment and canopy flight. Then followed by 3 to 4 SL or IAD jumps (prefer the IAD) to focus on canopy flight, finishing with 4 to 5 AFF style jumps and the subsequent coach type jumps to finish license requirements. One day.....---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #21 December 24, 2011 QuoteChuck, how many people are dying in freefall or from failure to get a parachute deployed these days? Nope, it's the canopy flight that is killing them off more often than not. AFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. Some programs are more capable of addressing this but SL programs on the whole do a much better job of teaching canopy flight from the get go. I think you confuse the USPA AFF program with the A license program. All the USPA programs have evolved that by the time AFF, TAF, SL or IAD students get to the A license park they should all be at very equivalent freefall skills but experience tells us the SL/IAD students will understand and be higher skilled canopy pilots. More than 5 years ago I drew up an outline for my "dream" program. It began with 2 to 3 tandems focused on deployment and canopy flight. Then followed by 3 to 4 SL or IAD jumps (prefer the IAD) to focus on canopy flight, finishing with 4 to 5 AFF style jumps and the subsequent coach type jumps to finish license requirements. One day..... People aren't dying under canopy because they went through AFF instead of static line, they are dying because they are being allowed to buy and fly canopies they aren't ready for and allowed to fly them in dangerous ways. The acceptance within the sport of rapid advancement to high performance canopies and aggressive flying techniques is - by far - the leading cause of canopy incidents today. Two facts for you: 1. There's no data to support the idea that skydivers who went through AFF have more canopy incidents per capita that static line grads later in their careers. 2. Skydivers had only a fraction of the canopy related incidents of today when hi-performance canopies were flown only by the most experienced pilots. The method of training in a student's first 25 jumps is NOT what's killing people with hundreds or thousands of jumps. If we want fewer canopy deaths there's a sure-fire to make it happen. End the proliferation of mid-level skydivers flying hi-end hot rod canopies. It's really that simple.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peek 20 #22 December 24, 2011 QuoteAFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. I don't know if you have talked to him about this, but Derek (HookNSwoop) told me that he has found that his AFF students who get pre-AFF tunnel training do better under canopy because the freefall part is more familiar and not so overwhelming to them that they need to recover/relax from the stress of the freefall under canopy, but instead can perform their planned canopy maneuvers better. That supports your above statement as far as I can tell. I think many instructors intuitively or empirically know that S/L-IAD students learn canopy control better than AFF students, but it is nice to find a way to put it into words. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #23 December 25, 2011 I make it a point not to talk to him.However I spent 2 years as a tunnel instructor and I found the same thing. I continue to find it in students that use tunnel time in their programs, however few DZ's have the luxury of one nearby. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites waveoff5500 0 #24 December 25, 2011 SL cockblocks freefall!"its just a normal day at the dropzone until its not" 1653 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ShcShc11 0 #25 December 25, 2011 Quote My personal take on AFF vs SL: If you have any issues whatsoever with picking things up quickly, either mentally or physically, and/or don't have USD100-1500 to spend all in one go, SL seems like the best route to take. Also take the weather into account: starting SL in crappy weather gets you more potential jumps than starting AFF in that same weather. SL: teaches you one step at a time is way cheaper to start with repeat jumps are way way cheaper you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of money you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitude SL instruction is often more of a group thing you can still jump even with lowish cloudcover you can jump without having to worry much about instructor availability you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is quite normal you could get nicknamed Dope on a Rope AFF: you get to do a lot of stuff from jump #1 you get to experience freefall from jump #1 repeat jumps are pricey you'll have a better freefall skillset at a lower jump number you can be a solo freefall skydiver sooner AFF instruction often is more one-on-one you need basically clear skies to jump you may have to wait longer between jumps (depends on availability of instructors) you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER you could get nicknamed AFF Baby Both methods will get you in the air and get you towards your A license. And by that time it doesn't matter much anymore which method you did. ''you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER'' LOLL guilty as charged. Scares the shit out of me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Sparky008 0 #3 December 23, 2011 cheers.............. any particular reasons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #4 December 23, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Hi, i start my first course tommorow, and i have to make a decision on weather to do a static line course or an accelerated freefall course...........about the same price for both. can you help me make a call please AFF Don't fall for that oneI'm from the old school Static Line route and think that it has some advantages ... Altitude and timing perceptions (for a start). But I understand and see why 'some' from the I-want-it-all-and-I-want-it-now generation would skip a few steps. BUT they both end up in the same place at the end of the day. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #5 December 23, 2011 I learned 28 years ago and loved the SL. I just think with AFF you become more comfortable with the sport in a much faster time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #6 December 23, 2011 Quotecheers.............. any particular reasons? The reason is easy. We learn to skydive by being exposed to the freefall environment for extended periods. AFF was developed to give students that exposure from the very first jump. It also allows for instruction and correction during the skydive which dramatically steepens the learning curve. Or as I have always told folks, static line training is like wading around in the shallow end of the pool, while AFF is like jumping into the deep end with a pair of lifeguards by your side. Most people learn faster and better with AFF.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dthames 0 #7 December 23, 2011 I am in AFF and will continue in AFF. Circumstances prompted me to do a static line jump after my first two AFF jumps. Since then I have done three more static line jumps. The main reason was to practice canopy work. But when it is 35F at ground level, 5000 feet sounds better than 11,000 feet. I plan to continue my AFF next week in warmer weather. The static line jumps have taught me a lot (nothing about freefall as I was always hooked up). I feel better off having had the experience. I know I can land (under normal conditions) without it being an issue. If you did one static line jump first, you would have your first landing behind you when you started AFF. DanInstructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #8 December 23, 2011 QuoteIf you did one static line jump first, you would have your first landing behind you when you started AFF. Not only will your first landing be behind you but also a few hundred dollars. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #9 December 23, 2011 QuoteQuotecheers.............. any particular reasons? The reason is easy. We learn to skydive by being exposed to the freefall environment for extended periods. AFF was developed to give students that exposure from the very first jump. It also allows for instruction and correction during the skydive which dramatically steepens the learning curve. Or as I have always told folks, static line training is like wading around in the shallow end of the pool, while AFF is like jumping into the deep end with a pair of lifeguards by your side. Most people learn faster and better with AFF. Although I'm not an instructor, I've become a fan of 3-element hybrid training, which unfortunately (IMO) most DZs don't offer. 1. 1 or 2 tandems to help get past the big hump of fear and sensory overload, and early intro to canopy control and landing. Less theoretically needed (IMO) when simple round mains were being used, now not a bad idea when students' brain-overloaded first jumps include the higher skill set of piloting and landing a ram-air. 2. A couple S/L or IAD and hop & pops each, to learn the basic skills of saving one's own life after jumping out of an airplane, and basic canopy control and landing - but NOT to over-emphasize freefall stability (beyond the basic arch). Removes the inherent bullshit - the big weakness of the S/L / IAD progression method - of not having enough seconds of time to get your mental shit together, and then to get yourself stable, before it's pull time. ("You didn't arch, and you dumped on your back. Go back up and do it again. And try not to kick this time." Fuck that.) (Also less multi-tasking than is the case in AFF jumps.) 3. Then a few modified AFF jumps to learn basic freefall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #10 December 23, 2011 Static line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
3mpire 0 #11 December 23, 2011 I learned on static line. So I can only speak to that experience. And I will also say that you can't really go wrong with either, so don't believe that you will be a shitty skydiver if you do one or the other simply because of the method. It's up to you to do the work and learn the material either way. That said, I am happy that I learned on static line, and here are the reasons why: * learning in skydiving is incremental. The idea is that you only add one new ingredient to your skydive at a time so that you can focus on learning the new skill that will make you a safe jumper. Static line starts literally from the last part of the skydive and builds its way up to full altitude. Your first jumps aren't skydives. You're basically just a canopy pilot, and your only job is to make sure your canopy deployed correctly and that you fly a good pattern and land. Once you have done that, they add one new thing, practice touches, to get you started on learning how to reach for your pilot chute. Etc. Etc. By the time you get to your first freefall, you already know how to do everything else, so you are only focused on one new thing. * static line reinforces self reliance another thing I appreciate about static line is that from the very start you are 100% responsible for your own safety. it is up to you to identify a malfunction, it is up to you to pull, it is up to you to execute your EPs. This is not to say that you don't also have responsibility for these things in AFF, however with the analogy above about being in the deep end of the pool with life guards, you know that when push comes to shove they'll do everything in their power to save your life if you forget or lock up. I can't speak for what that knowledge does in an AFF student's head, but just like some people in an emergency lock up and just wait for the AAD to fire, I wouldn't be surprised if some people let their instructor pull for them (or in their mind think that that is an option--something like "i'm going to do this jump and pass but if i screw up they'll save me"). SL has zero room for that mind set, so I like that you are very aware that YOU are responsible for yourself from jump 1. This is the way it will be for the rest of your skydiving career, so it doesn't hurt that this mentality starts in your FJC before you even touch a rig. * static line teaches the vritue of skill based reward (progression) I never did a tandem before I did my first SL jump. So I did 13 "skydives" before I got to go to 13k. And let me tell you, I was SO HAPPY to experience free fall for that long, because I felt like I had earned it. You don't just pays your monies and gets the reward. You had to prove over several jumps that you were properly trained enough to conduct the dive safely. A big problem in our sport today is people progressing too quickly. We're like rats that were trained from the very beginning that if you press the lever, you get a reward. SL instills a different mind set, that yes you can do whatever you want, but you have to show that you know wtf you're doing. With each jump you get more and more independence to exercise your own judgement, especially once you're on solo status and you can do an "unsupervised" solo jump. But with each progressive step forward you make, you're aware that it's up to you to know what to do and how to do it. Once you are licensed you can basically do whatever you want most of the time. People might give you shit for it, but short of an S&TA grounding you, it's your call. Having the mentality from the start that you build up to things, and experiencing the gratification you feel for "earning" the right to do something is like training a rat to go through an obstacle course before they push the lever. You come out of your training not "hard wired" to just go for immediate gratification. Do SL trained jumpers say "fuck that shit" and go straight into rapid downsizing and all that? Sure. But that's on them, and their training was trying to teach them a different path SO WHICH IS BETTER? Neither is better. Like I said,I've never done AFF, i'm not an AFF instructor, and I honestly don't know all the details of how AFF deals with these same issues. I'm sure an AFFI could fisk my posts above and say how AFF deals with those same issues. So don't take this as saying that AFF *doesn't* teach you these things. but for me, the points above seem to be relatively unique to SL or were at least apparent enough to me to make an impression. Long story short, you can do either, and here is why I think SL is good, and don't let anyone tell you that SL is not applicable or somehow inferior. Thousands of skydivers learned on SL, including many of the icons of the sport. But make your own decision for your own reasons. Don't take my word for it, and don't take anyone else on this board's word for it. That's the first rule really of skydiving. Talk to real live instructors and ask good questions, then make up your own mind for yourself. blue skies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #12 December 23, 2011 My personal take on AFF vs SL: If you have any issues whatsoever with picking things up quickly, either mentally or physically, and/or don't have USD100-1500 to spend all in one go, SL seems like the best route to take. Also take the weather into account: starting SL in crappy weather gets you more potential jumps than starting AFF in that same weather. SL: teaches you one step at a time is way cheaper to start with repeat jumps are way way cheaper you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of money you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitude SL instruction is often more of a group thing you can still jump even with lowish cloudcover you can jump without having to worry much about instructor availability you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is quite normal you could get nicknamed Dope on a Rope AFF: you get to do a lot of stuff from jump #1 you get to experience freefall from jump #1 repeat jumps are pricey you'll have a better freefall skillset at a lower jump number you can be a solo freefall skydiver sooner AFF instruction often is more one-on-one you need basically clear skies to jump you may have to wait longer between jumps (depends on availability of instructors) you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER you could get nicknamed AFF Baby Both methods will get you in the air and get you towards your A license. And by that time it doesn't matter much anymore which method you did. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PiLFy 0 #13 December 23, 2011 Wait a second. I thought some people are pushing for static line training's return because it's significantly cheaper? Where are you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #14 December 23, 2011 Quote Static line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport. Then why don't you guys offer it?"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fencebuster 7 #15 December 24, 2011 +1. Great analogy!Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208 AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dks13827 2 #16 December 24, 2011 I personally agree with Andy's 3 step approach. That is exactly what I would have told my daughter if she wanted to enroll after the tandem jump she made a few years ago. Me ? I was static line and liked it. My own view is that I would not have liked AFF without having done a tandem or 2. Just my guess. But go with your own decision. Any of the methods are proven to work. And, you can change course if need be. Good luck and enjoy the hell out of it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #17 December 24, 2011 Quote Quote Static line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport. Then why don't you guys offer it? Logistics and popularity. I would if I owned the company.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #18 December 24, 2011 QuoteStatic line. You will become a much better pilot of the parachute through this process, and that is what will keep you alive in this sport. Back in the days of an 8 or 10 jump AFF course I would have agreed. However if a student is learning at a drop zone that requires 25 +/- jumps to complete trainig regardless of method, I disagree that static line has any advantage over AFF and content that the opposite is true. Every jump ends with a canopy flight (hopefully, anyway), so any canopy exercise or training that can be conducted on a s/l jump can also be conducted on an AFF jump. Additionally, AFF students typically saddle considerably higher than s/l students, giving them more altitude to perform those exercises. 25 canopy flights is 25 canopy flights no matter what a student does before getting nylon overhead. AFF has the additional HUGE advantage of giving the student long-term exposure to terminal velocity (which is heads above s/l for learning freefall maneuvers) and that has to be considered in the decision process. IMO, AFF is a far superior overall training doctrine and since the OP indicated that the 2 programs are about the same cost I see no advantages to choosing static line.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #19 December 24, 2011 Quote SL: teaches you one step at a timeQuote so does AFF is way cheaper to start withQuote The OP said at his DZ the cost is about the same repeat jumps are way way cheaperQuote Possibly true, but only if they are needed you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of moneyQuote Not true. The OP already stated that at his DZ the costs are about the same. Moreover, a student makes exactly one canopy flight per jump regardless of what type of jump it is. AFF students typically have much LONGER canopy flights because they routinely open considerably higher than s/l students, giving them more time to perform exercises. They also get to learn how to "solve the puzzle" created when the opening point isn't exactly where they expected or not perfectly on the wind line. Landings are only one aspect of learning canopy flight, so to simply count only the landings to dollars as a means of determining value is very short-sighted. If you measure the value by the time under canopy, any cost advantage of s/l is pretty much negated. you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitudeQuote Not even sure what that means In the early days of AFF, there was a distinct advantage to s/l for canopy training because AFF students did only 7 or 8 jumps before being cleared for self-supevision, and that's usually where canopy training ended. s/l students had the advantage of making 20 - 25 jumps under supervision, giving them a dollars vs jumps advantage, which certainly is a factor in canopy proficiency. Since students learning at drop zones that use USPA's 25 jump program (or some variation on that theme) make as many jumps under supervision on either program, the only advantage left to s/l is cost. That advantage is pretty much blown to hell when you look at the skill level of graduates from each program.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #20 December 24, 2011 Chuck, how many people are dying in freefall or from failure to get a parachute deployed these days? Nope, it's the canopy flight that is killing them off more often than not. AFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. Some programs are more capable of addressing this but SL programs on the whole do a much better job of teaching canopy flight from the get go. I think you confuse the USPA AFF program with the A license program. All the USPA programs have evolved that by the time AFF, TAF, SL or IAD students get to the A license park they should all be at very equivalent freefall skills but experience tells us the SL/IAD students will understand and be higher skilled canopy pilots. More than 5 years ago I drew up an outline for my "dream" program. It began with 2 to 3 tandems focused on deployment and canopy flight. Then followed by 3 to 4 SL or IAD jumps (prefer the IAD) to focus on canopy flight, finishing with 4 to 5 AFF style jumps and the subsequent coach type jumps to finish license requirements. One day.....---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #21 December 24, 2011 QuoteChuck, how many people are dying in freefall or from failure to get a parachute deployed these days? Nope, it's the canopy flight that is killing them off more often than not. AFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. Some programs are more capable of addressing this but SL programs on the whole do a much better job of teaching canopy flight from the get go. I think you confuse the USPA AFF program with the A license program. All the USPA programs have evolved that by the time AFF, TAF, SL or IAD students get to the A license park they should all be at very equivalent freefall skills but experience tells us the SL/IAD students will understand and be higher skilled canopy pilots. More than 5 years ago I drew up an outline for my "dream" program. It began with 2 to 3 tandems focused on deployment and canopy flight. Then followed by 3 to 4 SL or IAD jumps (prefer the IAD) to focus on canopy flight, finishing with 4 to 5 AFF style jumps and the subsequent coach type jumps to finish license requirements. One day..... People aren't dying under canopy because they went through AFF instead of static line, they are dying because they are being allowed to buy and fly canopies they aren't ready for and allowed to fly them in dangerous ways. The acceptance within the sport of rapid advancement to high performance canopies and aggressive flying techniques is - by far - the leading cause of canopy incidents today. Two facts for you: 1. There's no data to support the idea that skydivers who went through AFF have more canopy incidents per capita that static line grads later in their careers. 2. Skydivers had only a fraction of the canopy related incidents of today when hi-performance canopies were flown only by the most experienced pilots. The method of training in a student's first 25 jumps is NOT what's killing people with hundreds or thousands of jumps. If we want fewer canopy deaths there's a sure-fire to make it happen. End the proliferation of mid-level skydivers flying hi-end hot rod canopies. It's really that simple.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peek 20 #22 December 24, 2011 QuoteAFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. I don't know if you have talked to him about this, but Derek (HookNSwoop) told me that he has found that his AFF students who get pre-AFF tunnel training do better under canopy because the freefall part is more familiar and not so overwhelming to them that they need to recover/relax from the stress of the freefall under canopy, but instead can perform their planned canopy maneuvers better. That supports your above statement as far as I can tell. I think many instructors intuitively or empirically know that S/L-IAD students learn canopy control better than AFF students, but it is nice to find a way to put it into words. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites diablopilot 2 #23 December 25, 2011 I make it a point not to talk to him.However I spent 2 years as a tunnel instructor and I found the same thing. I continue to find it in students that use tunnel time in their programs, however few DZ's have the luxury of one nearby. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites waveoff5500 0 #24 December 25, 2011 SL cockblocks freefall!"its just a normal day at the dropzone until its not" 1653 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ShcShc11 0 #25 December 25, 2011 Quote My personal take on AFF vs SL: If you have any issues whatsoever with picking things up quickly, either mentally or physically, and/or don't have USD100-1500 to spend all in one go, SL seems like the best route to take. Also take the weather into account: starting SL in crappy weather gets you more potential jumps than starting AFF in that same weather. SL: teaches you one step at a time is way cheaper to start with repeat jumps are way way cheaper you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of money you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitude SL instruction is often more of a group thing you can still jump even with lowish cloudcover you can jump without having to worry much about instructor availability you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is quite normal you could get nicknamed Dope on a Rope AFF: you get to do a lot of stuff from jump #1 you get to experience freefall from jump #1 repeat jumps are pricey you'll have a better freefall skillset at a lower jump number you can be a solo freefall skydiver sooner AFF instruction often is more one-on-one you need basically clear skies to jump you may have to wait longer between jumps (depends on availability of instructors) you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER you could get nicknamed AFF Baby Both methods will get you in the air and get you towards your A license. And by that time it doesn't matter much anymore which method you did. ''you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER'' LOLL guilty as charged. Scares the shit out of me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
diablopilot 2 #20 December 24, 2011 Chuck, how many people are dying in freefall or from failure to get a parachute deployed these days? Nope, it's the canopy flight that is killing them off more often than not. AFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. Some programs are more capable of addressing this but SL programs on the whole do a much better job of teaching canopy flight from the get go. I think you confuse the USPA AFF program with the A license program. All the USPA programs have evolved that by the time AFF, TAF, SL or IAD students get to the A license park they should all be at very equivalent freefall skills but experience tells us the SL/IAD students will understand and be higher skilled canopy pilots. More than 5 years ago I drew up an outline for my "dream" program. It began with 2 to 3 tandems focused on deployment and canopy flight. Then followed by 3 to 4 SL or IAD jumps (prefer the IAD) to focus on canopy flight, finishing with 4 to 5 AFF style jumps and the subsequent coach type jumps to finish license requirements. One day.....---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #21 December 24, 2011 QuoteChuck, how many people are dying in freefall or from failure to get a parachute deployed these days? Nope, it's the canopy flight that is killing them off more often than not. AFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. Some programs are more capable of addressing this but SL programs on the whole do a much better job of teaching canopy flight from the get go. I think you confuse the USPA AFF program with the A license program. All the USPA programs have evolved that by the time AFF, TAF, SL or IAD students get to the A license park they should all be at very equivalent freefall skills but experience tells us the SL/IAD students will understand and be higher skilled canopy pilots. More than 5 years ago I drew up an outline for my "dream" program. It began with 2 to 3 tandems focused on deployment and canopy flight. Then followed by 3 to 4 SL or IAD jumps (prefer the IAD) to focus on canopy flight, finishing with 4 to 5 AFF style jumps and the subsequent coach type jumps to finish license requirements. One day..... People aren't dying under canopy because they went through AFF instead of static line, they are dying because they are being allowed to buy and fly canopies they aren't ready for and allowed to fly them in dangerous ways. The acceptance within the sport of rapid advancement to high performance canopies and aggressive flying techniques is - by far - the leading cause of canopy incidents today. Two facts for you: 1. There's no data to support the idea that skydivers who went through AFF have more canopy incidents per capita that static line grads later in their careers. 2. Skydivers had only a fraction of the canopy related incidents of today when hi-performance canopies were flown only by the most experienced pilots. The method of training in a student's first 25 jumps is NOT what's killing people with hundreds or thousands of jumps. If we want fewer canopy deaths there's a sure-fire to make it happen. End the proliferation of mid-level skydivers flying hi-end hot rod canopies. It's really that simple.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peek 20 #22 December 24, 2011 QuoteAFF is simply too overwhelming for many to safely pick up the talents of canopy flight at the same time as freefall. I don't know if you have talked to him about this, but Derek (HookNSwoop) told me that he has found that his AFF students who get pre-AFF tunnel training do better under canopy because the freefall part is more familiar and not so overwhelming to them that they need to recover/relax from the stress of the freefall under canopy, but instead can perform their planned canopy maneuvers better. That supports your above statement as far as I can tell. I think many instructors intuitively or empirically know that S/L-IAD students learn canopy control better than AFF students, but it is nice to find a way to put it into words. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #23 December 25, 2011 I make it a point not to talk to him.However I spent 2 years as a tunnel instructor and I found the same thing. I continue to find it in students that use tunnel time in their programs, however few DZ's have the luxury of one nearby. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waveoff5500 0 #24 December 25, 2011 SL cockblocks freefall!"its just a normal day at the dropzone until its not" 1653 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShcShc11 0 #25 December 25, 2011 Quote My personal take on AFF vs SL: If you have any issues whatsoever with picking things up quickly, either mentally or physically, and/or don't have USD100-1500 to spend all in one go, SL seems like the best route to take. Also take the weather into account: starting SL in crappy weather gets you more potential jumps than starting AFF in that same weather. SL: teaches you one step at a time is way cheaper to start with repeat jumps are way way cheaper you spend a lot of time under canopy and have more landings for the same amount of money you have to work for it to get to freefalling from altitude SL instruction is often more of a group thing you can still jump even with lowish cloudcover you can jump without having to worry much about instructor availability you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is quite normal you could get nicknamed Dope on a Rope AFF: you get to do a lot of stuff from jump #1 you get to experience freefall from jump #1 repeat jumps are pricey you'll have a better freefall skillset at a lower jump number you can be a solo freefall skydiver sooner AFF instruction often is more one-on-one you need basically clear skies to jump you may have to wait longer between jumps (depends on availability of instructors) you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER you could get nicknamed AFF Baby Both methods will get you in the air and get you towards your A license. And by that time it doesn't matter much anymore which method you did. ''you'll think exiting from 3.500ft is the scariest thing EVER'' LOLL guilty as charged. Scares the shit out of me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
