The only point I'm really trying to make here is that once the conspiracy wagon gets rolling it's easy to jump on and find reason to support the momentum, whether there is real basis for it or not.
I'm mean...in retrospect, does anyone really believe that the LAPD framed OJ?
They can't even thin out traffic after a Dodger game! 
But there was sure enough 'theory' as to how and why a police department set up a sports figure.
Without actual facts, all we're doing is bitchin' in a gossip circle and allowing emotion to over rule logic.
In a+b=c...if ya only know what c is, it's pretty had to say with certainty what the 'exact' true value of b really is.
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
Krip 2
QuoteHooknswoop posted a thread a few days ago that suggested the USPA group membership program be eliminated and replaced with a DZ Inspection program. Hoping not to put words in his mouth, the USPA would basically endorse DZs that were inspected and found to meet safety requirements. Maybe they have to provide aircraft maintenance records, pilot training records, injury analysis, gear rental availability, instructors per student ratios - and scored "pass" or "fail" or on an point scale. DZs would compete for the coveted 5 star "good housekeeping seal of approval." Part of the scoring could even be "acceptable marketing practices".
There is a Skyride settlement thread where people are posting similar comments - and frustrated that the USPA would endorse a DZ they don't appreciate.
Almost everyone I talk to seems to believe the Group Membership program simply puts the USPA in conflict of interest with it's membership body.
Some would argue that the USPA should represent skydivers, and we need representation not only with the FAA, but with the DZOs who maintain the aircraft, etc.
Some would argue the USPA, thru the group membership program, grows our sport and provides assets to the DZs where we jump.
Well, we are the members. So voice your word. Perhaps the elected officials will read.
Class Class what happened to the origional subject USPA GROUP MEMBERSHIP.
If you reaLLY want to get off topic we can start discussing the USPA coach program
One Jump Wonder
Oh but let's talk about how those Jumpmaster wings we earned are no good no more and leave the coach talk out of it........
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo
QuoteOh but let's talk about how those Jumpmaster wings we earned are no good no more and leave the coach talk out of it........
What wings?
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
bozo 0
QuoteOh but let's talk about how those Jumpmaster wings we earned are no good no more and leave the coach talk out of it........
Ive got the worthless Jumpmaster/Instructor wings and at one time was AFF rated. The AFF course was the hardest thing I ever did in skydiving.
bozo
Pain is fleeting. Glory lasts forever. Chicks dig scars.
billvon 2,881
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Have we proven that it hurts the members?
Good question actually. If it results in about the same training after AFF level 4 (ignoring the coach issue for now) then it's arguably a wash.
Good question actually. If it results in about the same training after AFF level 4 (ignoring the coach issue for now) then it's arguably a wash.
I remember following the whole AFF debate several years ago and think it came down to defining the standards as apposed to lowering them. that is my opinion, the intent may have been as you say but I think not after Talking to 2 very respected AFF CDs.
We had what 7 or 8 AFF CD's then (we have 14 now?) who all had different courses and different pass rates.
Now there is a black and white written standard for all CD's, there is one grading system on what is passing or not. There is practice in the course to understand the grading system (remember the grading system is only seen marginally in the Couch Course). You have 4 jumps to pass but can only use a rejump 1 time. If you fail a Cat C and rejump (and pass it) you can't fail the Cat D or your done.
But I still say the GM program as it stands is toothless and does work against the Individual Membership as the perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues is there.
We had what 7 or 8 AFF CD's then (we have 14 now?) who all had different courses and different pass rates.
Now there is a black and white written standard for all CD's, there is one grading system on what is passing or not. There is practice in the course to understand the grading system (remember the grading system is only seen marginally in the Couch Course). You have 4 jumps to pass but can only use a rejump 1 time. If you fail a Cat C and rejump (and pass it) you can't fail the Cat D or your done.
But I still say the GM program as it stands is toothless and does work against the Individual Membership as the perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues is there.
An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!
So, start being safe, first!!!
But I still say the GM program as it stands is toothless and does work against the Individual Membership as the perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues is there.
Quote
I can agree OR disagree with you Matt, because I personally don't know the 'facts' of any instances in which the BOD made a decision the clearly benifited the GM's over the general membership.
Do you know of any issues before the board, past or present where the membership is being 'harmed' because of the as you say "perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues."
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
MakeItHappen 15
QuoteDo you know of any issues before the board, past or present where the membership is being 'harmed' because of the as you say "perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues."
I know of several.
Definition of a 'student' jumper:
In 1998, the definition of a student jumper was changed from 'until cleared for self-supervision' to 'until obtaining an A license'.
This was motivated by DZOS at a DZO Conference in Phoenix proclaiming that their marketing of their 'more than 7 level' jump programs could not compete with other DZs that proclaimed the conventional 7 level program.
I remember one DZO from Ohio proclaiming that their DZ 'could not compete' with a neighboring DZ that claimed 'be a jumper in 7 jumps' because they had a 20-level program and their program was BETTER (as they stated). USPA HAD to do something to level the playing field.
The student definition was changed primarily to provide a marketing advantage over supposedly backward DZs. It was the squeaky DZOs that promoted and succeeded in getting this change made.
Many DZs still sell the 'get certified in 7 jumps' idea. You see new jumpers proclaiming their success at 'passing AFF'. Have you ever heard a new jumper claim 'passing SL' or 'passing IAD'?
The downside of this, aka the detriment to jumpers, is that the new jumpers now must do more jumps to clear student status, fewer people are available to jump with them beyond the 'cleared for self supervision' point. Costs to the new jumper are more.
Part of this was reversed with the BSR change that allowed D-licensed jumpers to jump with the 'new-age' students under certain circumstances. SIM 2-1.E.6.b
When the A license was bumped up to 25 jumps, then there are even more jumps that a new jumper must do at more cost.
Certification Courses at USPA GM or pay an exorbitant fee:
Certification courses must be held at USPA GM DZs, unless you pay some extravagant fee. This increases the cost to members. USPA members attend these courses, even when they are held at non-GM DZs. How does the extra fee help members? It does not. All it does is restrict the number of places that a certification course may be held or increase the cost of a course. That seems to be a good case of restraint of trade and anti-trust.
Hosting US Nationals
Long ago, US Nationals could be held just about anywhere by anyone. Today, the rules say you must be a GM. The GM program deliberately and willfully constrains the hosting of Nationals to GMs. It does not matter if 100% of the jumpers at a DZ are individual USPA members, the DZ cannot host Nationals unless the DZ is a GM.
Group Member Program does not pay all its bills
For many years, the GM program has operated in the red. The money to pay for the deficit comes from the rest of the individual members.
--
Many years ago there used to be a TMMI (or some such acronym) program. This provided liability insurance for students that were not USPA members and was available to GMs. This program disappeared last century. There are remnants of this in the relationships DZs have with airport authorities. Many airport authorities believe, or are lead to believe, that there is some additional insurance provided when a DZ is a GM. This, at one time, was true, but it has not been true for at least 7 years.
The only USPA liability insurance available is the policy that comes with your USPA membership. IOW, there is no liability insurance for student jumpers that are not USPA members.
.
.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker
The most recent tiff I can remember is the Coach/D license thing.
I still say for Liability it is better to have a person who was tested and certified (no matter how week you think the process is).
I think it sucks it raised the cost and should have been a slot only type venture (and the RW/ VRW / CRW Professional Coaches are where I think payed coaching is supposed to be).
I think that decision was for DZO's and not the new members of the Org.
Fast Trax sponsor issue at the World Meet(?) as reported in Skydiving magazine I think, they brought a sponsor with them but could not use them cause USPA had one (at less compensation for the Team I believe). USPA said no as not to lose the funds but Fast Trax was willing to make that up.
That decision was for the Comp Com and not for the Competitors (no not a DZO issue but a point of the BOD not looking out for those members).
Of course I am not privy to all facts and can only form MY OPINION on what I have been able to learn. If I learned more it could be a new opinion.
Just my take. I welcome more facts or points of view, after all that is what this is for!
I still say for Liability it is better to have a person who was tested and certified (no matter how week you think the process is).
I think it sucks it raised the cost and should have been a slot only type venture (and the RW/ VRW / CRW Professional Coaches are where I think payed coaching is supposed to be).
I think that decision was for DZO's and not the new members of the Org.
Fast Trax sponsor issue at the World Meet(?) as reported in Skydiving magazine I think, they brought a sponsor with them but could not use them cause USPA had one (at less compensation for the Team I believe). USPA said no as not to lose the funds but Fast Trax was willing to make that up.
That decision was for the Comp Com and not for the Competitors (no not a DZO issue but a point of the BOD not looking out for those members).
Of course I am not privy to all facts and can only form MY OPINION on what I have been able to learn. If I learned more it could be a new opinion.
Just my take. I welcome more facts or points of view, after all that is what this is for!
An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!
So, start being safe, first!!!
Well my post is moot now as there is far better info above it.
The Coach D license thing has had a longer effect than I even considered.
The Coach D license thing has had a longer effect than I even considered.
An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!
So, start being safe, first!!!
QuoteQuoteDo you know of any issues before the board, past or present where the membership is being 'harmed' because of the as you say "perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues."
I know of several.
Definition of a 'student' jumper:
In 1998, the definition of a student jumper was changed from 'until cleared for self-supervision' to 'until obtaining an A license'.
This was motivated by DZOS at a DZO Conference in Phoenix proclaiming that their marketing of their 'more than 7 level' jump programs could not compete with other DZs that proclaimed the conventional 7 level program.
I remember one DZO from Ohio proclaiming that their DZ 'could not compete' with a neighboring DZ that claimed 'be a jumper in 7 jumps' because they had a 20-level program and their program was BETTER (as they stated). USPA HAD to do something to level the playing field.
The student definition was changed primarily to provide a marketing advantage over supposedly backward DZs. It was the squeaky DZOs that promoted and succeeded in getting this change made.
Many DZs still sell the 'get certified in 7 jumps' idea. You see new jumpers proclaiming their success at 'passing AFF'. Have you ever heard a new jumper claim 'passing SL' or 'passing IAD'?
The downside of this, aka the detriment to jumpers, is that the new jumpers now must do more jumps to clear student status, fewer people are available to jump with them beyond the 'cleared for self supervision' point. Costs to the new jumper are more.
Part of this was reversed with the BSR change that allowed D-licensed jumpers to jump with the 'new-age' students under certain circumstances. SIM 2-1.E.6.b
When the A license was bumped up to 25 jumps, then there are even more jumps that a new jumper must do at more cost.
Certification Courses at USPA GM or pay an exorbitant fee:
Certification courses must be held at USPA GM DZs, unless you pay some extravagant fee. This increases the cost to members. USPA members attend these courses, even when they are held at non-GM DZs. How does the extra fee help members? It does not. All it does is restrict the number of places that a certification course may be held or increase the cost of a course. That seems to be a good case of restraint of trade and anti-trust.
Hosting US Nationals
Long ago, US Nationals could be held just about anywhere by anyone. Today, the rules say you must be a GM. The GM program deliberately and willfully constrains the hosting of Nationals to GMs. It does not matter if 100% of the jumpers at a DZ are individual USPA members, the DZ cannot host Nationals unless the DZ is a GM.
Group Member Program does not pay all its bills
For many years, the GM program has operated in the red. The money to pay for the deficit comes from the rest of the individual members.
--
Many years ago there used to be a TMMI (or some such acronym) program. This provided liability insurance for students that were not USPA members and was available to GMs. This program disappeared last century. There are remnants of this in the relationships DZs have with airport authorities. Many airport authorities believe, or are lead to believe, that there is some additional insurance provided when a DZ is a GM. This, at one time, was true, but it has not been true for at least 7 years.
The only USPA liability insurance available is the policy that comes with your USPA membership. IOW, there is no liability insurance for student jumpers that are not USPA members.
.
Now THAT'S what I'm talking about!
Many us lowly 'general' members only know of an item or two that may effect us on some seemingly obscure level.
Having it out on the plate like that allows me to form a better more informed opinion regarding what's actually going on and the effect it is having.
My question, in your opnion is there anything the GM program does to 'help' the sport / general membership?
Just trying to learn as much as I can...
~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~
bozo 0
[Many us lowly 'general' members only know of an item or two that may effect us on some seemingly obscure level.
Having it out on the plate like that allows me to form a better more informed opinion regarding what's actually going on and the effect it is having.
My question, in your opnion is there anything the GM program does to 'help' the sport / general membership?
Just trying to learn as much as I can...
Excellent post Jan. Thats why I voted for you.
Jimbo youre asking great questions and getting good answers...too bad the majority of jumpers here would rather hang in the Bonfire and talk about kitties , boobies and other bullshit while their organization is going to hell.
bozo
Pain is fleeting. Glory lasts forever. Chicks dig scars.
I have been a member of USPA since 2001. And although I do not have a lot of jumps, I have kept up with the sport and the evolution of the USPA. I think that one of the problems that USPA is having is trying to be an active controling governing body in a sport that prefers to have very little rules and regulations other than those imposed by the FAA. And I think it is running hand in hand with the Federal Government from the aspect that the Federal Government was originally formed mainly for homeland security. A couple hundred years later, you can't smoke in a public place without breaking the law. USPA is heading in the same direction. If USPA were to spend more of it's resources on working with the FAA on laws governing the sport, or on helping DZ's in trouble with local authorities or other airport, airspace or FAA restrictions that have been closing DZ's instead of getting into the business of how a DZ operates it's business (other than supporting safety) and being involved in subjective support and marketing, the sport will stand a better chance of surviving. Outside inferences should be our biggest threat that we should be combating. Instead it is the in-fighting and soap opera mentality at the drop zones that threaten the sport. I go to the drop zone to be with good friends. It is my recreation when I get an opportunity to be off of work and away from all of the office bullshit. The last thing I want is more office bullshit in my place of retreat away.
The bottom line is simple. USPA has got to get focused on the things that will help the sport and provide support to all of it's members. To safe guard our homeland security. We as members have got to go back to having fun. The one main reason I jumped a second jump was the great atmosphere of fun people who were having a great time. It was fun. That drop zone was destroyed by loosing it's hanger at the airport as well as the soap opera. How many more DZ's will go out of business because of lack of support with the local's? How many DZ's will go out of business because nobody wants to be hanging around a bunch of people bitching about rules or shortcomings of the self imposed governing body? United we stand, divided we fall. And this applies to not only keeping USPA honest but also the longevity of our sport.
The bottom line is simple. USPA has got to get focused on the things that will help the sport and provide support to all of it's members. To safe guard our homeland security. We as members have got to go back to having fun. The one main reason I jumped a second jump was the great atmosphere of fun people who were having a great time. It was fun. That drop zone was destroyed by loosing it's hanger at the airport as well as the soap opera. How many more DZ's will go out of business because of lack of support with the local's? How many DZ's will go out of business because nobody wants to be hanging around a bunch of people bitching about rules or shortcomings of the self imposed governing body? United we stand, divided we fall. And this applies to not only keeping USPA honest but also the longevity of our sport.
bomber 0
QuoteQuoteDo you know of any issues before the board, past or present where the membership is being 'harmed' because of the as you say "perception of DZOs on the BOD voting for DZ issues over Individual issues."
I know of several.
Definition of a 'student' jumper:
In 1998, the definition of a student jumper was changed from 'until cleared for self-supervision' to 'until obtaining an A license'.
...[snip]...
The downside of this, aka the detriment to jumpers, is that the new jumpers now must do more jumps to clear student status, fewer people are available to jump with them beyond the 'cleared for self supervision' point. Costs to the new jumper are more.
Maybe I'm just drinking the kool-aid, safety of _existing_ jumpers seems like a good reason for these changes, regardless of whether it was championed by a DZ that had a business case for it.
If I'm looking for someone to jump with and ask "are you student", I expect an answer of "no" to mean that they have at least the basic skills required for an A license. That doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me. Sure it makes it a bit harder for new, unlicensed jumpers, to jump with people, but until they get a bit of practice that sounds like a good thing. Until you've spent enough time to get a license I don't really consider you part of the "membership", so IMO the "detriment to jumpers" is through the indirect route of fewer jumpers getting fully into the sport.
Quote
Certification Courses at USPA GM or pay an exorbitant fee:
Certification courses must be held at USPA GM DZs, unless you pay some extravagant fee. This increases the cost to members. USPA members attend these courses, even when they are held at non-GM DZs. How does the extra fee help members? It does not.
I can think of a way that is helps: it provides an increased level of trust that the standards for the certification is being followed. If you are conducting a course at a DZ that follows the USPA guidelines, you're going to have a harder time signing someone off just because they're your buddy because there's likely to be other people around that will act as checks and balances. I think this impression of responsibility is key for giving the ratings the necessary respectability to make them actually worth something, and not just in the eyes of skydivers, but to people outside of the sport. (i.e. regulators and lawmakers)
PhreeZone 16
QuoteIn Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification Courses at USPA GM or pay an exorbitant fee:
Certification courses must be held at USPA GM DZs, unless you pay some extravagant fee. This increases the cost to members. USPA members attend these courses, even when they are held at non-GM DZs. How does the extra fee help members? It does not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can think of a way that is helps: it provides an increased level of trust that the standards for the certification is being followed. If you are conducting a course at a DZ that follows the USPA guidelines, you're going to have a harder time signing someone off just because they're your buddy because there's likely to be other people around that will act as checks and balances. I think this impression of responsibility is key for giving the ratings the necessary respectability to make them actually worth something, and not just in the eyes of skydivers, but to people outside of the sport. (i.e. regulators and lawmakers)
These standerds are to be the same no matter where the location is. Here is one for you, if you wanted to hold a course in the middle of winter at a DZ that did not have heated classrooms you may not have the option to teach it at a local hotel's meeting area since the hotel is not a group member. It all comes down to how the person filing the paperwork for the class wants to word it. Do they mention that the classes will be in the hotel or not. The checks and balences you mention are in place (or I should say are not) at every DZ I've ever been to. If the Course director is the DZO or DZM and he needs coaches so they can get their tandem ratings quickly there is nothing stopping him from just signing them off. There is no check to make sure the student actually passed the test or has any ability at teaching past the signature of the course director on their card. Passing of low quality instructors is said to be occuring today and yet the only places that offer courses are Group Member DZ's.
Why is it that we have more injuries reported in the incidents forum here then the USPA publishes in Parachutist? S&TA's are to report injuries to the USPA but only seem to report some of them. Shouldn't Group Members report items like that?
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
And tomorrow is a mystery
Parachutemanuals.com
MakeItHappen 15
QuoteMy question, in your opnion is there anything the GM program does to 'help' the sport / general membership?
I finally thought of something.
The online DB of members helps out the membership when they forget their USPA card or don't have it yet.
There are benefits for the DZO:
- discount rates on Parachutist advertising
- an email newsletter that comes out once in a while
- ability to use AAD funds, on approval of the BOD
- listing on USPA web site that promotes their DZ to the general public. (I only put that here because 'in theory' that's what it is supposed to do.)
- use of the USPA GM logo(s)
QuoteMaybe I'm just drinking the kool-aid, safety of _existing_ jumpers seems like a good reason for these changes, regardless of whether it was championed by a DZ that had a business case for it.
If I'm looking for someone to jump with and ask "are you student", I expect an answer of "no" to mean that they have at least the basic skills required for an A license. That doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me. Sure it makes it a bit harder for new, unlicensed jumpers, to jump with people, but until they get a bit of practice that sounds like a good thing. Until you've spent enough time to get a license I don't really consider you part of the "membership", so IMO the "detriment to jumpers" is through the indirect route of fewer jumpers getting fully into the sport.
For the most part, a 'novice' jumper (that was the term to refer to jumpers cleared for self-supervision but did not have or qualified for an A license) did not have a problem finding qualified people to jump with. Most DZs and other jumpers made sure a novice was on appropriate skydives.
QuoteI can think of a way that is helps: it provides an increased level of trust that the standards for the certification is being followed. If you are conducting a course at a DZ that follows the USPA guidelines, you're going to have a harder time signing someone off just because they're your buddy because there's likely to be other people around that will act as checks and balances. I think this impression of responsibility is key for giving the ratings the necessary respectability to make them actually worth something, and not just in the eyes of skydivers, but to people outside of the sport. (i.e. regulators and lawmakers)
This makes no sense. The people that conduct the course are USPA rated. They run the same course, no matter the GM status of the DZ.
The 'level of trust' that you allude to applies to the course director, not the DZ.
A DZ, GM or not, runs a certification course to get more rating holders.
.
.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker
JerryBaumchen 1,333
Hi Phree,
I think ( note the personal opinion ) they should have to but they are not req'd to report any incidents. I know, I worked on something like this 1 1/2 yrs ago and was 'told' by the USPA HQ.
JerryBaumchen
QuoteShouldn't Group Members report items like that?
I think ( note the personal opinion ) they should have to but they are not req'd to report any incidents. I know, I worked on something like this 1 1/2 yrs ago and was 'told' by the USPA HQ.
JerryBaumchen
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites