Reasons not to buy an AAD

[skypuppy 1]

>The question is, where is that point?

That is indeed the question. A license is a good point. You could make an argument for later (B license? C?) but that should be on a DZ to DZ basis, not a national one.
________________________________________________

Here I tend to agree with you. The problem I have with making it mandatory for a-licenced people is you're saying 'I know they should be able to make their own decision, but this one is too important to allow them the choice, and we'll make it for them'.

Once you've established you can legitimately remove an a-licenced jumper's right to choose, it's a simple matter to say, 'I know this D-licenced person should be able to make his own decision, but this one is too important to allow him a choice, so I'll make it for him".

So I go with as soon as a person has an a-licence, we're saying he knows enough about the sport to determine his own advancement, or at least where to go to for advise, etc., to decide his path. And therefore he should be able to dictate his own progression, within the established guidelines....

In other words, I really don't agree with dzo's making rules about mandatory aads above and beyond the national organizations, but I will agree with it grudgingly as long as I still have the choice of withdrawing from that dropzone and going down the road to one that doesn't infringe on my right of choice.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[billvon 2,400]

> The problem I have with making it mandatory for a-licenced people is
>you're saying 'I know they should be able to make their own decision, but
>this one is too important to allow them the choice, and we'll make it for
>them'.

I agree that it should not be made mandatory by the USPA or by the FAA. However, not all DZ's are the same, and some have specific operational or safety issues that may mandate things like different wind limits (i.e. no jumping at Otay during Santa Anas) specific equipment usage (i.e. water gear mandatory at an oceanside DZ) or discipline limitations (i.e. no wingsuiting; airspace problems.)

As you've said, a good solution if you do not like such restrictions is to choose a different DZ.

>Once you've established you can legitimately remove an a-licenced
>jumper's right to choose, it's a simple matter to say, 'I know this D-licenced
> person should be able to make his own decision, but this one is too
>important to allow him a choice, so I'll make it for him".

We do that now; we don't let A-licensed jumpers do demos, night jumps, live water jumps etc. It seems to have worked out OK.

[Baksteen 84]

Quote

>The question is, where is that point?

That is indeed the question. A license is a good point. You could make an argument for later (B license? C?) but that should be on a DZ to DZ basis, not a national one.

It's C-licence over here - a national rule, but I don't have a problem with it.
I guess it all depends on what you're used to.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[skypuppy 1]

Once you've established you can legitimately remove an a-licenced
>jumper's right to choose, it's a simple matter to say, 'I know this D-licenced
> person should be able to make his own decision, but this one is too
>important to allow him a choice, so I'll make it for him".

We do that now; we don't let A-licensed jumpers do demos, night jumps, live water jumps etc. It seems to have worked out OK.
______________________________________________

Again, as far as I'm concerned that's two different things. The examples you list are things they have to qualify and get endorsements in order to do -- not a piece of equipment to do without. And again, if they can make a-licence people wear them, why not b-licence, why not c-licence -- dammit just makem all wearem.....

Besides -- in canada we do allow a-licence people to do night/water jumps -- they just need to get the endorsement....

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

I believe your country is also the site of the first confirmed aad fatality, eh? but if you're used to it.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[billvon 2,400]

>And again, if they can make a-licence people wear them, why not
>b-licence, why not c-licence -- dammit just makem all wearem.....

For the same reason that they don't prohibit D-license holders from doing some demos, even though they prohibit A-license holders from doing them. The argument is the same - "if they can prohibit A-license people from doing them, why not C-license or D-license?" Still, it hasn't happened.

[skypuppy 1]

In Canada they have actually taken away the right for c and d Certificated jumpers to do demos. In order to do any demo in Canada a jumper needs AT LEAST a C AND an exhibition jump rating....

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone