PD Novice, Intermediate, Advanced and Expert

[nigel99 144]

Does anyone know where PD provide details on what they see as the prerequisites for each of their recommended categories?

Student is easy, but how are people expected to make realistic assessments without some guidance?

A rough approximation seems to me that Novice would be A license, Intermediate would be B license and then C and D license would be advanced. This would sort of align with the recommendations in the SIM (for US people).

Hopefully the details are simply hidden on their website somewhere.

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

[NWFlyer 2]

http://performancedesigns.com/docs/W-L_Interpretations.pdf

I think that's as close as it gets.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[DaVinciflies 0]

I don't believe the relationship with license, or jump numbers, is a direct one.

There are significant numbers of D-license holders who would not qualify for Advanced or Expert.

[mchamp 1]

It's really quite rather hard to categorize and I remember having a discussion about this interpretation a while back ago. Maybe PCchapman can come and elaborate as well

As far as the intermediate, expert and max I just can't quite get my mind around it.....Currently I'm on a sabre2 120 at 1.2 which is under the "Expert" category..... While on the other hand if I were to downsize to a Katana 107 I would therefore be under the "Advanced" category..

In no way would I say that a Katana 107 is more docile than my Sabre2 120 so it just difficult to wrap my mind around it. But I'll try and find out where I remember reading the correct interpretation

edit to add: I recently spoke to a PD rep at a boogie and they pretty much stated that to be able to jump a Katana you should have a minimum of 500 jumps and current regardless of wingloading and size.

For info regarding lift ticket prices all around the world check out
http://www.jumpticketprices.com/dropzones.asp

[nigel99 144]

Quote

http://performancedesigns.com/docs/W-L_Interpretations.pdf

I think that's as close as it gets.

I have seen that and it is still very vague. Personally I would feel happier if they provided a more detailed outline that mentioned specific skills.

To quote from the Novice category "people who haven't had a whole lot of experience with a long spot, off landings etc"

I would imagine that the vast majority of people with less than 200 jumps have limited exposure to these situations.

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

[nigel99 144]

Quote

It's really quite rather hard to categorize and I remember having a discussion about this interpretation a while back ago. Maybe PCchapman can come and elaborate as well

As far as the intermediate, expert and max I just can't quite get my mind around it.....Currently I'm on a sabre2 120 at 1.2 which is under the "Expert" category..... While on the other hand if I were to downsize to a Katana 107 I would therefore be under the "Advanced" category..

In no way would I say that a Katana 107 is more docile than my Sabre2 120 so it just difficult to wrap my mind around it. But I'll try and find out where I remember reading the correct interpretation

edit to add: I recently spoke to a PD rep at a boogie and they pretty much stated that to be able to jump a Katana you should have a minimum of 500 jumps and current regardless of wingloading and size.

Interesting, downsize to a Katana for safety

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

[yoink 321]

Quote

Quote

http://performancedesigns.com/docs/W-L_Interpretations.pdf

I think that's as close as it gets.

To quote from the Novice category "people who haven't had a whole lot of experience with a long spot, off landings etc"

I would imagine that the vast majority of people with less than 200 jumps have limited exposure to these situations.

Precisely. Which suggests that people with less than 200 jumps are probably best off jumping in the 'Novice' catagory - forgiving canopies and wigloadings. Sounds about right to me if you want to give safe advice to the masses.

Of course, you're never going to get anyone with just under 200 jumps to admit that. Far more likely will be people with that sort of experience making excuses why Intermediate or Advanced canopies are actually more appropriate for them...

You see, people like definition when it means they can reinforce their own opinions of themselves, but not when it conflicts with how they want to percieve themselves.

The 'Intermediate' catagory, from that report, reads to me like canopies and loadings that are suitable for people who are actively persuing canopy training. They have the skills to consistently make good decisions and the experience to back this up. They're actively trying to improve their piloting and are trying to learn advanced techiques safely. Doesn't that sound like it's someone in the 200 - 400 jump range? It's difficult to see it being much less... Of course, those same people will be absolutely CONVINCED that the same skills make them 'Advanced' pilots and that flying wings in a lower catagory is insulting somehow.


Again, pinning jump numbers to the definitions is pretty pointless and arbitrary. It's really about dedication to learning a separate skill and being mature enough to ignore the hubris of thinking you're better than you are. That only comes from time spent in the sport; time spent flying, time spent learning, time spent trying to better yourself and time spent seeing other people make mistakes. Someone could make 1000 skydives and still not be as safe under a loaded Intermediate canopy as someone who has practised for a few hundred jumps.

[nigel99 144]

Quote

Precisely. Which suggests that people with less than 200 jumps are probably best off jumping in the 'Novice' catagory - forgiving canopies and wigloadings. Sounds about right to me if you want to give safe advice to the masses.

Of course, you're never going to get anyone with just under 200 jumps to admit that. Far more likely will be people with that sort of experience making excuses why Intermediate or Advanced canopies are actually more appropriate for them...

You see, people like definition when it means they can reinforce their own opinions of themselves, but not when it conflicts with how they want to percieve themselves.

The 'Intermediate' catagory, from that report, reads to me like canopies and loadings that are suitable for people who are actively persuing canopy training. They have the skills to consistently make good decisions and the experience to back this up. They're actively trying to improve their piloting and are trying to learn advanced techiques safely. Doesn't that sound like it's someone in the 200 - 400 jump range? It's difficult to see it being much less... Of course, those same people will be absolutely CONVINCED that the same skills make them 'Advanced' pilots and that flying wings in a lower catagory is insulting somehow.


Again, pinning jump numbers to the definitions is pretty pointless and arbitrary. It's really about dedication to learning a separate skill and being mature enough to ignore the hubris of thinking you're better than you are. That only comes from time spent in the sport; time spent flying, time spent learning, time spent trying to better yourself and time spent seeing other people make mistakes. Someone could make 1000 skydives and still not be as safe under a loaded Intermediate canopy as someone who has practised for a few hundred jumps.

I completely agree with you. But I do feel that it would be helpful of PD to provide clearer guidelines. Something similar to the downsizing checklist that Bill Von wrote.

We need to keep in mind that by the time the average jumper has 25 jumps they have gone from nothing to being able to self jumpmaster, a huge learning achievement by any standard. It is not difficult to see how they can believe at 50 or 100 jumps they have "mastered" canopy flight. Leaving vague definitions does nothing to highlight how little they actually know.

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

[riggerpaul 1]

Quote

I completely agree with you. But I do feel that it would be helpful of PD to provide clearer guidelines. Something similar to the downsizing checklist that Bill Von wrote.

We need to keep in mind that by the time the average jumper has 25 jumps they have gone from nothing to being able to self jumpmaster, a huge learning achievement by any standard. It is not difficult to see how they can believe at 50 or 100 jumps they have "mastered" canopy flight. Leaving vague definitions does nothing to highlight how little they actually know.

Not so huge. In fact, barest tip of the iceberg.

One look at the accident reports should have any sane person realizing that there is more to this than meets the eye.

At 100 jumps, you've got maybe 100 minutes of freefall, and 500 minutes of canopy time.

600 minutes, 10 hours, to master an aviation skill?

In which physical skill does 10 hours make an expert? Skiing? Rock climbing? Bicycle? Piano? Golf?

Why do some people insist, hell, why do they even IMAGINE, that 10 hours would make an expert skydiver?

And, if PD said you should spend your first 100-200 jumps at 1:1 and below, how many would actually listen?

[hokierower 0]

Based on PD's wing loading chart, I (40 jumps, no canopy course...yet) fall under the advanced category for my Spectre 190 with an exit weight of 210. It flies much faster and is more responsive than the 230s & 210s that I used as a student but I have yet (knock on boner) to have any problems with it.

[DaVinciflies 0]

Quote

Based on PD's wing loading chart, I (40 jumps, no canopy course...yet) fall under the advanced category for my Spectre 190 with an exit weight of 210. It flies much faster and is more responsive than the 230s & 210s that I used as a student but I have yet (knock on boner) to have any problems with it.

Hope is not a strategy.

[hokierower 0]

Quote

Quote

Based on PD's wing loading chart, I (40 jumps, no canopy course...yet) fall under the advanced category for my Spectre 190 with an exit weight of 210. It flies much faster and is more responsive than the 230s & 210s that I used as a student but I have yet (knock on boner) to have any problems with it.

Hope is not a strategy.

True, but it is an observation about the minute differences which can result in either life or death

[yoink 321]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Based on PD's wing loading chart, I (40 jumps, no canopy course...yet) fall under the advanced category for my Spectre 190 with an exit weight of 210. It flies much faster and is more responsive than the 230s & 210s that I used as a student but I have yet (knock on boner) to have any problems with it.

Hope is not a strategy.

True, but it is an observation about the minute differences which can result in either life or death

OK. Given that you've noticed one of the minute differences that puts you in a risk catagory, what do you intend to do about it, if anything? Do you see as a big risk?

As a genuine question - I'm not going to give you a hard time no matter your answer - did you know about these sorts of catagories when you picked that wing? If so, why did you feel that the Advanced bracket was right for you? Genuinely interested.

[mchamp 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Based on PD's wing loading chart, I (40 jumps, no canopy course...yet) fall under the advanced category for my Spectre 190 with an exit weight of 210. It flies much faster and is more responsive than the 230s & 210s that I used as a student but I have yet (knock on boner) to have any problems with it.

Hope is not a strategy.

True, but it is an observation about the minute differences which can result in either life or death

OK. Given that you've noticed one of the minute differences that puts you in a risk catagory, what do you intend to do about it, if anything? Do you see as a big risk?

As a genuine question - I'm not going to give you a hard time no matter your answer - did you know about these sorts of catagories when you picked that wing? If so, why did you feel that the Advanced bracket was right for you? Genuinely interested.

Not to back him up on his choice of canopy nor do I condone it as I do not know him or have seen him land nor am I all that experienced, but just stating that I do not believe that just because he falls within the "advanced" category does not mean that he must be an advanced canopy pilot to handle it.

For example I load my Sabre2 at 1.2 and fall within the "expert" category(and also fall within Brian Germains WL chart) while IF I downsized to a Katana 107 I'd load it at 1.31 and yet still go BACK a category and be within the "Advanced". Again I'm still searching for that explanation I saw on a thread a while back ago......looking for the correct definition but so far its been eluding me! lol

For info regarding lift ticket prices all around the world check out
http://www.jumpticketprices.com/dropzones.asp

[hokierower 0]

Quote

OK. Given that you've noticed one of the minute differences that puts you in a risk catagory, what do you intend to do about it, if anything? Do you see as a big risk?

As a genuine question - I'm not going to give you a hard time no matter your answer - did you know about these sorts of catagories when you picked that wing? If so, why did you feel that the Advanced bracket was right for you? Genuinely interested.

I did not know that I would fall into the advanced category when I picked the canopy, however I did talk to multiple instructors & coaches and after specifying my canopy of choice (PD Spectre) and asking if a 190sf canopy would be appropriate, they said that based upon their observations of my canopy flying ability it would be an appropriate first chute.

I believe that a failure to properly separate myself from other jumpers in the pattern and performing aggressive manuevers at too low an altitude are the biggest risks I face as a low-time jumper. My solution is to restrict myself to flying a very "simple" pattern until such time that I can take a canopy control course OR have accrued enough personal experience that my skill under the canopy increases.

[nigel99 144]

Quote

I did not know that I would fall into the advanced category when I picked the canopy, however I did talk to multiple instructors & coaches and after specifying my canopy of choice (PD Spectre) and asking if a 190sf canopy would be appropriate, they said that based upon their observations of my canopy flying ability it would be an appropriate first chute.

I believe that a failure to properly separate myself from other jumpers in the pattern and performing aggressive manuevers at too low an altitude are the biggest risks I face as a low-time jumper. My solution is to restrict myself to flying a very "simple" pattern until such time that I can take a canopy control course OR have accrued enough personal experience that my skill under the canopy increases.

There is a common misconception that you need to "downsize for safety". I have been jumping both Sabre 2 190 and 210. I have had at least 2 people tell me that a smaller canopy would be "safer" as I would get better penetration.

I am happy to be corrected on this but both of these canopies have approximately 20MPH forward speed at a 1:1 wingloading. I wouldn't be happy jumping in much more than a 15MPH wind, so I still have 5MPH in the bag. I feel that spotting and canopy control are better ways of staying safe. Even if I ended up landing off I only have a 5MPH forward speed to deal with in my example. I would rather that than have to deal with a "fast" canopy on my first off landing(s).

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

[Ron 7]

Quote

To quote from the Novice category "people who haven't had a whole lot of experience with a long spot, off landings etc"

I would imagine that the vast majority of people with less than 200 jumps have limited exposure to these situations.

Then those with less than 200 jumps would still be considered "Novice".

Everyone wants to think they are not a beginner.... People want to envision themselves as experts...
But "want" does not make it real. Someone with 200 jumps IS a novice.

Someone who is "Expert" is the guy that is making many hundreds of jumps a year (AFFI, team guys etc). An "Expert" is not a guy that makes 100 jumps a year, even if he has been doing it 10 years.

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

[Ron 7]

Quote

I believe that a failure to properly separate myself from other jumpers in the pattern and performing aggressive manuevers at too low an altitude are the biggest risks I face as a low-time jumper. My solution is to restrict myself to flying a very "simple" pattern until such time that I can take a canopy control course OR have accrued enough personal experience that my skill under the canopy increases.

What happens if you find yourself on a bad spot in a small area? What happens if, while you are flying your "simple" pattern, another pilot almost flies into you?

Your canopy selection has to be for the WORST day and the WORST situation... Not nice calm winds.

I am not saying your canopy CHOICE is wrong... I do think your reasoning has some errors.

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

[nigel99 144]

Quote

Quote

To quote from the Novice category "people who haven't had a whole lot of experience with a long spot, off landings etc"

I would imagine that the vast majority of people with less than 200 jumps have limited exposure to these situations.

Then those with less than 200 jumps would still be considered "Novice".

Everyone wants to think they are not a beginner.... People want to envision themselves as experts...
But "want" does not make it real. Someone with 200 jumps IS a novice.

Someone who is "Expert" is the guy that is making many hundreds of jumps a year (AFFI, team guys etc). An "Expert" is not a guy that makes 100 jumps a year, even if he has been doing it 10 years.

I don't disagree. But at 200 jumps you can have a C license which is the second highest license. My personal choice is to stay on the conservative end of the spectrum.

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

[Ron 7]

Quote

I don't disagree. But at 200 jumps you can have a C license which is the second highest license.

Yes, but that is more an issue of the USPA not really being up to date.

If you are looking for a USPA license to PD alignment.... Well, I doubt it can be found

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

[nigel99 144]

Quote

Quote

I don't disagree. But at 200 jumps you can have a C license which is the second highest license.

Yes, but that is more an issue of the USPA not really being up to date.

If you are looking for a USPA license to PD alignment.... Well, I doubt it can be found

No not looking for alignment. It is just a mixed message that I was commenting on.

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

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

I don't disagree. But at 200 jumps you can have a C license which is the second highest license.

And it wasn't all that long ago that 200 jumps qualified you for a 'D' license.

Some areas consider you to have expertise in a skill after you are authorized to teach that skill. USPA allowing someone to become a coach at 100 jumps would indicate to me that 100+ jumps makes you at least an intermediate level skydiver in their eyes. (For the life of me, I don't know why the requirement isn't a 'C' license to become a coach).

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[nigel99 144]

Quote

Quote

I don't disagree. But at 200 jumps you can have a C license which is the second highest license.

And it wasn't all that long ago that 200 jumps qualified you for a 'D' license.

Some areas consider you to have expertise in a skill after you are authorized to teach that skill. USPA allowing someone to become a coach at 100 jumps would indicate to me that 100+ jumps makes you at least an intermediate level skydiver in their eyes. (For the life of me, I don't know why the requirement isn't a 'C' license to become a coach).

The times surely have changed and guidelines failed to keep up. 15-20 years ago where I first jumped a person who did more than a 100-200 jumps a year was very active. I don't think that anyone in our club had over a thousand jumps. Last weekend I was chatting to a young guy who did 114 jumps in June!

It has been an interesting discussion. Based on what I have gathered, the following form my personal views.

1) Student Category (as per PD website) would be <1:1 wingloading and would cover students and A license holders.

2) Novice category. B license and above with no further training. By the time you have your B license you "should" be able to have reasonable accuracy.

3) Intermediate. C license and above. But prior to jumping in this category ensure that you have undertaken further canopy training and drills. The SIM has the advanced canopy section that I have been using as a guideline for my own personal progression.

4) Advanced/Expert. Don't care as I don't intend to jump often enough or deal with the increased workload that these categories require of you.

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

[hokierower 0]

Quote

What happens if you find yourself on a bad spot in a small area? What happens if, while you are flying your "simple" pattern, another pilot almost flies into you?

Your canopy selection has to be for the WORST day and the WORST situation... Not nice calm winds.

I am not saying your canopy CHOICE is wrong... I do think your reasoning has some errors.

1. If I find myself in a bad spot with a series of very confined outs, I don't see how a larger canopy would help me other than keeping me aloft for a little while longer. While that may be enough to get me out of the situation, it may be enough to keep me from landing because the canopy keeps flying instead of sinking into my landing area of choice. I'm also a dumbass for not checking the spot before I jumped.

2. If I'm flying my simple pattern and a pilot almost flies into me, my canopy has nothing to do with the situation, it's my lack of heads up. The only way the canopy size would come into play is if it prevented me from seeing the other jumper. Does that mean I should choose a smaller canopy to reduce my blind spot?

Worst day & situation planning is good, but at what point is preemptive planning going overboard? An initial assessment of the situation on the ground, made with the help of instructors/coaches I trust, will help to prevent me from ending up in the worst case scenarios. In addition, choosing who I jump with and what kinds of jumps I participate in will help to ensure that I stay as safe as possible.

To wrap it all up, the items you quoted is not my reasoning, but the steps I plan on taking to keep myself alive.

[PiLFy 0]

I don't want to pick a fight w/you, Ross. I think you're dead wrong, though. Ron has >5,000 jumps. You have about forty... You should listen to him more. You wouldn't be the first Newbie to pick a canopy that's a bit too small, hoping to get away w/it. One day, you're faced w/a challenging set of circumstances, &.... Yeah, we're reading about you in the Incidents threads.

"I don't see how a larger canopy would help me other than keeping me aloft for a little while longer. While that may be enough to get me out of the situation, it may be enough to keep me from landing because the canopy keeps flying instead of sinking into my landing area of choice." You do realize that a larger canopy can sink into a tight spot, right? A smaller one will just stall & maybe kill you. Plus, you want to bounce off a tree @10MPH or 20MPH?

I'm new too, Ross. I think you're putting too much faith in others keeping you out of harm's way. People w/the best intentions can still make mistakes. They could not make any, but things still have a way of happening. I just happened to stumble onto this thread, & read your posts. Again, I'm not trying to start a row w/you. You do sound a bit too confident for your experience level, though. I'd hate to read here one day that you found out the hard way. There's a wealth of hard-earned experience on this site. Utilize it.