D jump requirements - USPA

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

I have a C license. Not having the D license would only stop me from being a Tandem Instructor or getting any of the awards. That isn't much of incentive to go through the trouble to get a D license.

Saying it changes me from an "Advanced Student" to an "Experienced Skydiver" doesn't mean anything to me either. It's just a label. I have done night jumps. I have all the qualifications for a D license I just haven't done the paper work. I just don't see any need for it.

And that's completely understandable, I went for years having a C after qualifying for the D...just didn't see the need to spend the money until I wanted the ratings that required proof of abilities.

I don't think anyone is saying just because a person has a D they are necessarily better qualified or more experienced than someone that doesn't have one but who can/has demonstrated the required skills...it is more just a means of 'certifying' that knowledge & experience.

Like many things, it's not what you know...it's what you can prove.

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

[beowulf 1]

I guess the thing is what incentive is there for anyone to put forth the effort to get a D license? What is it needed for that people want? Other then a TI license or awards what is there? If you make the D license harder to obtain then it will need be worth more or people like me won't bother with it. Hell I don't see a need for it right now. I don't want to be a Tandem Instructor. Right now I don't even want a coach rating. Right now my focus is on competition and pushing to win VFS Advanced first place at Nationals.

Also I don't care about labels you call me an Advanced Student and it wouldn't bother me at all. Now standing on the podium at Nationals! That's something!

[Bertt 0]

Some good ideas here; especially about demonstrating canopy skills.
One thing is didn't see was more equipment knowledge. Apologies if I overlooked something, but what about a requirement for packing a reserve (just for practice)?

You don't have to outrun the bear.

[billvon 2,396]

>Are you saying one should pursue a rating to teach in order to qualify as a license holder?

More like "you should be able to teach what you know to others before anyone considers you a true master of the sport."

>I believe being an Instructor is a calling that requires dedication and
>personality/communication qualities in an area not necessarily pertinent to the
>performance of Skydiving skills.

If you are a solo freeflyer, agreed. Even if you are a participant in a bigway, or a tandem camera guy, you may not need any of those skills.

But to become a leader in almost any aspect of the sport you need to effectively be an instructor. Bigway organizer? Even a team captain, plane captain or tracking leader? You have to be able to communicate and educate effectively people who may be less skilled than you are. Demo team leader with new people on the jump? 4 way team captain? Landing safety guy? Spotter trying to get people to maintain safe separations? Teaching and communicating is critical.

>I also do not think it should be contingent that 'all' D license holders be concerned
>with leadership roles at the drop-zone...

I agree. But for people who want to take on leadership roles, having experience in a wide variety of skydiving activities (and perhaps most importantly, being able to communicate with a wide variety of skill levels) is important.

And I might be answering the wrong question here. I'm answering the question "what should skydiving's highest license represent?" I think it should represent a very wide range of skills, someone who can both speak competently to many parts of the sport and help get other people up to their levels of competence. Maybe that's not the current D license; maybe it's an E or something. Or maybe the structure is wrong. Maybe C should qualify you to do everything that does _not_ require expertise in lots of things and leadership skills, and then the D is really the final, hardest to get level.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Saying it changes me from an "Advanced Student" to an "Experienced Skydiver" doesn't mean anything to me either. It's just a label

So? Try going to a DZ that does not know you and they are planning beach jumps that require a 'D'.

Just because you think the label is stupid does not mean it does not have uses.

Have fun with your 'C'... It makes zero difference to me.

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

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

I guess the thing is what incentive is there for anyone to put forth the effort to get a D license? What is it needed for that people want? Other then a TI license or awards what is there? If you make the D license harder to obtain then it will need be worth more or people like me won't bother with it. Hell I don't see a need for it right now. I don't want to be a Tandem Instructor. Right now I don't even want a coach rating. Right now my focus is on competition and pushing to win VFS Advanced first place at Nationals.

Also I don't care about labels you call me an Advanced Student and it wouldn't bother me at all. Now standing on the podium at Nationals! That's something!

I agree with you.

I believe the "D" in its current form is quite redundant. It gives permission to win a gold wings/badge award (big deal), and permission to go for a PRO rating. The PRO rating needs can be satisfied far better if incorporated directly into the PRO rating criteria and tests. The "D" isn't a leadership qualification or a teaching qualification. It really isn't a "license" at all, in the strict meaning of the word.

...

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

[firstime 0]

I didnt read all 4 pages of posts but I will chime in with

INTENSE canopy control with respect to WING LOADING

water training, 4pt 8 way, 8pt 4 way,night jumps are all good but they are not killing us. Look at the stats with D license holders. The #'s don't lie

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

Some good ideas here; especially about demonstrating canopy skills.
One thing is didn't see was more equipment knowledge. Apologies if I overlooked something, but what about a requirement for packing a reserve (just for practice)?

good point; i think not only a senior-, but also a master rigger ticket should be required. and a pilot's license - probably even a pilot instructor rating. you want to be proficient in ALL aspects of skydiving, right!? how about demonstrating basic managment-skills? accounting? maybe you should even have knowledge of plane-maintenance..

i could go on and on!

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[airtwardo 6]

I'm answering the question "what should skydiving's highest license represent?" I think it should represent a very wide range of skills, someone who can both speak competently to many parts of the sport and help get other people up to their levels of competence. Maybe that's not the current D license; maybe it's an E or something. Or maybe the structure is wrong.

Quote

Interesting point of view, there is definitely some validity there.

I was looking at 'leadership role' in a different light perhaps, but what you're saying makes sense.

Personally I don't see the need for yet another licence, but raising the standards for the highest one now could only help the sport in the long run.

What are your thoughts regarding a minimum set of standards that must be met annually in order to maintain a D license...like with the PRO Rating?

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

• Quote

[nigel99 143]

Quote

Quote

I guess the thing is what incentive is there for anyone to put forth the effort to get a D license? What is it needed for that people want? Other then a TI license or awards what is there? If you make the D license harder to obtain then it will need be worth more or people like me won't bother with it. Hell I don't see a need for it right now. I don't want to be a Tandem Instructor. Right now I don't even want a coach rating. Right now my focus is on competition and pushing to win VFS Advanced first place at Nationals.

Also I don't care about labels you call me an Advanced Student and it wouldn't bother me at all. Now standing on the podium at Nationals! That's something!

I agree with you.

I believe the "D" in its current form is quite redundant. It gives permission to win a gold wings/badge award (big deal), and permission to go for a PRO rating. The PRO rating needs can be satisfied far better if incorporated directly into the PRO rating criteria and tests. The "D" isn't a leadership qualification or a teaching qualification. It really isn't a "license" at all, in the strict meaning of the word.

I agree with the general sentiment here. Don't forget TI in your list though.

I still think that the D should be reviewed and made more difficult. Something a few people have hinted at is canopy control. Perhaps you should only be allowed to jump an HP canopy with a D license?

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I guess the thing is what incentive is there for anyone to put forth the effort to get a D license? What is it needed for that people want? Other then a TI license or awards what is there? If you make the D license harder to obtain then it will need be worth more or people like me won't bother with it. Hell I don't see a need for it right now. I don't want to be a Tandem Instructor. Right now I don't even want a coach rating. Right now my focus is on competition and pushing to win VFS Advanced first place at Nationals.

Also I don't care about labels you call me an Advanced Student and it wouldn't bother me at all. Now standing on the podium at Nationals! That's something!

I agree with you.

I believe the "D" in its current form is quite redundant. It gives permission to win a gold wings/badge award (big deal), and permission to go for a PRO rating. The PRO rating needs can be satisfied far better if incorporated directly into the PRO rating criteria and tests. The "D" isn't a leadership qualification or a teaching qualification. It really isn't a "license" at all, in the strict meaning of the word.

I agree with the general sentiment here. Don't forget TI in your list though.

I still think that the D should be reviewed and made more difficult. Something a few people have hinted at is canopy control. Perhaps you should only be allowed to jump an HP canopy with a D license?

most fatalities happen to D-license holders..

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[DaVinciflies 0]

Quote

most fatalities happen to D-license holders..

Most jumps are done by D-licence holders, particularly jumps on HP canopies, so that's not a useful statistic.

It's a bit like "marriage is the single biggest cause of divorce".

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

It's a bit like "marriage is the single biggest cause of divorce".

and what does that have to do with license-requirements? please stay on topic!



pretty simple to make you look like an idiot, right!?

if you quote, please do so in context..

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

Quote

Thanks to the guys that cleared up my facts about where the D requirement for TI comes from. Or at least it’s clear that it wasn’t USPA. But can anyone explain why this requirement is in place? What is it about a D that qualifies someone more to be a TI than having a C? Why is TI the only instructor rating that requires a D? Is this a holdover from the D = 200 jumps days?

I'm guessing (just guessing) it might be (at least in part) an attorney-advised policy. That way when a mfgr gets sued after an accident, it can't be accused of not requiring that TIs using its equipment have attained the highest-possible certification of expertise. So, for example, if the USPA ever creates an E license, I can see the mfgrs' respective attorneys advising them to require all their TIs to have E licenses.

That would be a pretty good guess, if I remember my conversations with all three of the US Manufacturers well enough.

They spend a great deal of time and money defending them selves even with the "higher" standard currently in place.

Matt

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

[DaVinciflies 0]

I quoted your entire post, and used an example from a different slice of life to illustrate how useless your "statistic" was.

If I have misunderstood the meaning of your post "most fatalities happen to D-license holders.. " please feel free to elaborate.

Otherwise, my point stands that your "fact" means nothing.

[billvon 2,396]

Your one warning. Cut it out.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I guess the thing is what incentive is there for anyone to put forth the effort to get a D license? What is it needed for that people want? Other then a TI license or awards what is there? If you make the D license harder to obtain then it will need be worth more or people like me won't bother with it. Hell I don't see a need for it right now. I don't want to be a Tandem Instructor. Right now I don't even want a coach rating. Right now my focus is on competition and pushing to win VFS Advanced first place at Nationals.

Also I don't care about labels you call me an Advanced Student and it wouldn't bother me at all. Now standing on the podium at Nationals! That's something!

I agree with you.

I believe the "D" in its current form is quite redundant. It gives permission to win a gold wings/badge award (big deal), and permission to go for a PRO rating. The PRO rating needs can be satisfied far better if incorporated directly into the PRO rating criteria and tests. The "D" isn't a leadership qualification or a teaching qualification. It really isn't a "license" at all, in the strict meaning of the word.

I agree with the general sentiment here. Don't forget TI in your list though.

Criteria to get a TI rating are best incorporated into the TI training and test. Still no need for a separate license.

...

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

[danielcroft 2]

Quote

Criteria to get a TI rating are best incorporated into the TI training and test. Still no need for a separate license.

Especially when the license requires nothing (well, except those two night jumps...).

[billvon 2,396]

>What are your thoughts regarding a minimum set of standards that must be met
>annually in order to maintain a D license...like with the PRO Rating?

For anything that qualifies you to do something specific (like the PRO rating) - I'd think that was a good idea. For a rating or a license that just means you've mastered a very wide range of skills - not sure. That seems like it has value in proving currency, but not so much when it comes to determining how wide someone's experience base is.