Jumper Integrity & Logbook Veracity

[GLIDEANGLE 1]

Perhaps my search strategies are weak. I can’t find a discussion about this.

I have come to the conclusion that many jumpers lack the integrity to log their jumps accurately.

++ I know of a jumper who admitted to falsifying log entries to show night jumps in order to qualify for a D-license.

++ I know of jumpers who have falsified many log entries to show sufficient 2m accuracy jumps for a C-license.

I suspect all sorts of other “pencil whipping” or “gun decking” occurs in logbooks every day.

Particularly sad to me is the lack of any sense of shame by these folks. There seems to be a complete lack of a sense of personal integrity. Integrity seems to have been replaced with a sense of “It is only a logbook, it doesn’t really matter.” The concept of telling the truth for its own sake seems lost.

Why do I care? I care only because decisions are sometimes made on the basis of logbooks. Some of these decisions are inconsequential, some have potential negative consequences for the jumper, some have potential negative consequences for OTHERS who will rely on the belief that the jumper has the skills reflected in his or her logbook.

I guess that this is just another manifestation of the unrestrained selfish/narcissistic attitudes and behavior that I note in far too many skydivers. Fortunately, there are many jumpers who demonstrate sound character, despite the lack of it around them.

The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

[dninness 4]

I have recently heard of similar things, especially surrounding some jumpers who I hold (or at least, previously held) in high esteem for their skills and abilities. Not that they're lacking in skill, mind you, but that they're lacking in the integrity to follow the rules.

When I entered the sport some 15+ years ago, I told myself that I would never "bear false witness to my logbook." Basically, what you read in my log is the unvarnished truth. If I fucked up, its there. If I was the hero, its there. But you won't read "0m from target" when I was 25m from the X, or I don't add points to the skydive so I can qualify for my SCR or something. (there may be some rounding errors in my math, and recently after pumping all my jumps into Excel I discovered that I apparently can't add times worth a shit and I really have like 10+ minutes more freefall time than my logbook reflects, and I skipped a jump number accidentally back in 1997. Duh..)

But fudging my numbers for licensure? No friggin' way. For a rating? Never. Thats just .. stupid.

Those numbers are there for a reason.

NIN
D-19617, AFF-I '19

[grimmie 173]

George Foreman (skydiver, not boxer) must have about 168,000 jumps by now.




Old farts will get it...

[billvon 2,384]

I have avoided that issue in its entirety by giving up on logbooks altogether.

[dninness 4]

Quote

I have avoided that issue in its entirety by giving up on logbooks altogether.

I've considered it, believe me. But if someone asks me to prove "Did you do X type of jumps last year?" I want to be able to say "Why, yes, I did X plus Y number of those jumps... And you can verify that right here.."

NIN
D-19617, AFF-I '19

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

George Foreman (skydiver, not boxer) must have about 168,000 jumps by now.




Old farts will get it...

Yeah but he was a porn star too, logging 'jumps' carries a bit different connotation with him.


(how's that for an 'old fart' getting it?!)



~ Addressing the OP;

I understand your point and applaud your honesty & integrity.


That being said, I haven't kept what you might consider a 'complete' log in years...accurate but not detailed.

I keep tabs on my jump jumpers and freefall time with the beepie thing in my helmet, transferring data when convenient which tends to be monthly at best.

I never travel with a logbook because losing it would be a catastrophic pain in the ass.

My PRO Rating is real and up to date, most DZ's understand the currency requirements necessary to hold it, and if not my home DZ is on speed dial.

You are at a stage where documentation is important regarding your licenses and ratings...you are responsible enough to see the value in doing it right ~ Good On You!

As you've observed, many people don't feel an accurate representation is critical, so be it...takes all kinds to fill the load.

Look book police don't really exist, but when it's all said and done you KNOW that the book in your hand is biographical and not a work of fiction...take pride in the fact that when it 'really' doesn't matter in the big picture ~ you take the high road anyway.

Remember it's not just in Skydiving~
-words & deeds being askew are a Poser's blessing and curse...'seem' to get farther faster, but the foundation is weak.

They know it, often peers do too...usually it shows in time.


Whatever the future holds down the road, being true to yourself is something you won't ever regret doing.

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

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

Hi GLIDE,

I made my first jump in Feb '64 and it was taking place then & before then.

I personally know of one person who sat down with another jumper one evening and filled in his logbook to get a D license; it was needed for a competition he wanted to attend.

Another guy ( really a braggart in the true sense of the word ) would, after a number of beers on a Sat nite, go home and log 'jumps.'

Back then we called them P-51 jumps; not out of a Mustang airplane but for the Parker P-51 ballpoint pen.

Take the high road & let those who live in their own world remain there.

Personally, I have never logged a jump that I have not done, but some do lack details. I probably have a hand-full of jumps never logged; no big deal for me.

JerryBaumchen

[CSpenceFLY 1]

I haven't logged a jump in year. Lucky for me I knew Scotty Carbone when I showed up at WFFC in '05. Yeah, they still let me in.

Now reserve repacks,there is another story.

[mjosparky 3]

When you get right down to it a log book is only important to the person who owns it. It is a record of what you have accomplished, where you have been and people you have met along the way. It can also be a reflection of a person’s character. If a person will lie to himself in something like a skydiving log book he will lie to just about anyone about anything. As was mentioned, in the last few years it seems to be on the increase. It just might be that the “entitlement generation” feels it there “right” to falsify records, official or not.
As others have stated, you are to be commended for going with integrity over what amounts to lying and cheating.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[billvon 2,384]

> But if someone asks me to prove "Did you do X type of jumps last
>year?" I want to be able to say "Why, yes, I did X plus Y number of those
>Jumps... And you can verify that right here.."

Yeah, I can see that. I guess I don't have much of a need to do that any more.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

I have avoided that issue in its entirety by giving up on logbooks altogether.

How do you know you have 5500 jumps and not 5600 or 5100 jumps? Is 5500 just a guess?

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[iowa 0]

I have a former student that has been adament about her 25 jumps within 2 meters for her C.

She's done it. Good for her, really.

I think 1 out of 8 jumps within 2 meters is a ridiculus requirement at 200 jumps. So do the STA's and other I's.

It is just ignored in the log book checks.

So are the night jumps. I enjoy them, many people hate them and don't wnat to do another after the first.

I understand the arguements both ways. I do not agree with USPAs accuracy #'s for C or the night jumps for D.

I keep an accurate logbook (now daily, not by jump), I bet most with over 1000 don't. Be proud of your record, but, don't expect everyone else to live up to your standards.

Keith

''Always do sober what you said you would do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut.'' - Ernest Hemingway

[diablopilot 2]

The "check" to "balance" loose integrity in logging should be the instructors/S&TA's/RD's that sign off on further progress

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[captain1976 0]

On the other end of this issue, I personally didn't log my jumps after getting my D in the early 80's. 5 to 10 jumps a day sometimes made it a pain in the ass and I didn't jump at other DZ's so it really didn't matter.

Only about 2 years ago did I start logging again as I have more opportunity to jump at other drop zones and currency must be established.

My log book and profile shows about 1200 jumps because that's what is logged. I would estimate an additional 2,500 to 3,000 would be more accurate, but what does it really matter? Though I jump about every weekend, I don't want or need any more ratings.

You live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime

[faulknerwn 36]

You don't think accuracy is important? Being kind of accurate on 12.5% of your jumps doesn't matter? Accuracy skills will save your life when you have to land off the airport. Being able to land close to where you mean to on 12.5% of your jumps is not an onerous requirement.

Accuracy is a life-saving skill that is WAY too ignored these days.. I think S&TA's that blow that off shouldn't have that rating..

[GLIDEANGLE 1]

Quote

I think 1 out of 8 jumps within 2 meters is a ridiculus requirement at 200 jumps. So do the STA's and other I's.

OK, so y'all think the standard is wrong. Fair enough. What have you done to attempt to persuade the USPA BOD to change the standard? Simply ignoring the standard does no one any good.

I don't know if the standard is reasonable or not, it took me over 400 jumps to get 25 2m landings. Unquestionablely, that is 'cuz I am a slow learner about landings (it took me forever to stand up more than half of my landings...)

The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

[wmw999 2,116]

I agree entirely. I believe the requirement was the same when the C license was only 100 jump, thereby upping the accuracy requirement.
Canopy learning, control, and accuracy are well worth some dedicated jumps for. We're willing to spend jumps on 2-ways, 4-ways, and all kinds of stuff. The stuff under canopy is a survival skill, not just a cool skill.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 2,384]

> Is 5500 just a guess?

More or less. When I renew my license I go over the last year. ~80 jumps doing video for a team, ~50 jumps with students, ~60 fun jumps . . I guess the exact number isn't too important to me.

[beowulf 1]

My Neptune is my log book. I haven't kept a written log book since about jump 600. Log books don't mean much to me. If you don't have the skills then it will show.

[jsaxton 0]

now that you're rich and famous ;-P

[iowa 0]

Yes, I do think accuracy is important.

Two meters, 12.5% of your first 200 jumps is an onerous requirement.

I think it is a great goal, but a bad requirement.

Land safely first.

We've all seen people being sucked into the pea pit trying for that accuracy (be it C or PRO) and do something stupid to get there.

Pea pits aren't as common (or as well maintained) as they once were.

The PRO requirements are to land; standing up, without running out, within a ten meter diameter circle on ten "declared" jumps. I have no disagreement with that. Great training for demos.

I would say that the C accuracy requirement is more stringent than the PRO requirement.

I'm just saying that asking for that kind of accuracy (six and one half feet) is asking for people to get hurt trying to make it happen.

Keith

''Always do sober what you said you would do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut.'' - Ernest Hemingway

[strop45 0]

Agreed, getting down safely without hurting myself or anyone else is no 1 priority. Now at the risk of being flamed, what does 'landed within 2 metres' actually mean? Is that first touch the ground within 2 metres?

The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein

[JohnMitchell 14]

I still log 'em all in those little paperback student logbooks. Sometimes I'll put 5 tandem or 4 AFF jumps on one line, with several minutes of freefall in the appropriate column. I certainly don't write a tome for any jump. I guess it's just an old compulsion to count them up that I don't want to quit. I don't use a logging audible, so it's the only record I have.

I think many, but not all, who don't log overestimate their # of jumps. I can think of a few friends that certainly have.

[DSE 3]

Quote

My Neptune is my log book. I haven't kept a written log book since about jump 600. Log books don't mean much to me. If you don't have the skills then it will show.

I too, quit paper logs as soon as I got my D. I do keep a daily log downloading my Altitrack into Jumptrack. Maybe someday Paralog will accept Altitrack data....but I do tend to keep a "novel" of my jumps when it's merited.
As an instructor, I keep a separate (paper and digital) logbook of students, with a novel about those jumps in the event I need to recall anything. My handwriting is barely readable so keyboard input is preferable.

[Calvin19 0]

I no longer keep a logbook.

I lie with a smile on my face to a DZs when they tell me I am not current. Been told me my 'illegal' skydives do not count toward my currency. Right. Fuck them.

I hold a D license, with legitimate jump numbers.

I have as many night skydives as I do day jumps.

I take an unreasonable amount of pictures, and my albums function as my logbook. not 100% accurate, but it's a useful ballpark figure.