What's the worst that could happen?

[billbooth 10]

Quote

Quote

out of curiousity, what is your position when the ti is also the underage student's parent? how young is too young?

The legal risk to his company remains the same.

Bill, how do ski resorts and scuba outfits deal with this issue? Are they just big enough industries to handle the insurance costs, or do they have legislative remedies?

Ski resorts do have legislative relief. I don't know how SCUBA handles the problem, but in both cases, the industries are much larger, and therefore, insurance is available. There is NO insurance available for skydiving manufacturers. It's a shame that the US legal system is out of control, but it's a fact we have to deal with. I've been sued for millions of dollars six times. In each case, it was the waiver that save my company. With anyone under 18, there is no binding waiver, no matter how many relatives sign it. It's that simple.

[stratostar 5]

Bill,

How is it then, that UPT can still support XXX XXXXXXXXX the RD for the xxxxxxxxx region that holds a CD & I/E for your system?

It would seem quite clear he knew the rules for the game and would without a doubt know your views on this subject as a rated TM and as a CD I/E for UPT as well as strong and the USPA seat he holds as a BOD member and on the safety and training com. as well. Is that not just like pulling your zz top beard & slapping you up side the head and saying fuck you?

Are you telling us your going to personally see to it that UPT cuts any and all ties with the offender for putting your company as such a huge risk?

Or are you going to just let the slap on the wrist uspa handed out stand @ 90 days suspended rating?

Cuz if you do I say fair ball for all to start taking kids of any age in the USA and if you get sued, that's your problem.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[Tink1717 2]

Well let's see:
The USPA could revoke his rating.
The mfr could revoke his rating.
There could/would be repercussion for the DZ.
If the kids other parent found out about it there could be child endangerment charges.
The list gores on and on.

Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717

[davelepka 4]

I'll take the 'info' you've provided so far, and conclude that the thrid party info I heard is indeed true. What I heard didn't include the part about backdating documents to the BOD, which makes the situation even worse than I had first suspected (which is hard to believe).

So I guess it's safe to say that the RD for the Mideastern Region, none other than Kip Lohmiller is the dude in question.

I wonder if he put an ounce of thought into what he was doing. Imagine the backlash if he had goen in with a 12 year old girl as his passenger. If this had happened at a bandit DZ, it would have been as bad as bad gets for skydiving when it comes to public opinion.

Once the press caught on that an elected official of our governing body was not only invovled, but the actual instructor, what do you think the FAA would think about our ability to self-police?

This incident is really the dumbest of the dumb. I, in general have a pretty low expectation from skydivers, as I've found many of them to be selfish, immature, and chemically dependant (still nice and friendly, though).

I would hope that by the time you put the time and effort into something, and Kip ahs clearly down, you would have enough respect for the activity to steer clear of this sort of behavoir.

Not only does he hold several ratings, he's a tandem course director and a drop zone manager. To further his involvment, he threw his hat into the ring and ran for RD, feeling that he could represent this district and it's jumpers to the USPA BOD.

Why on earth would you invest so much of yourself into something, only to turn around and put it at such risk?

While this man may have the skills to fill his USPA membership card with ratings galore, he obviously does not have the character you would hope to back that up.

I for one would like to see him removed as RD of my district, and will be in contact with the USPA regarding this. Between having Kip as RD, or not being represented, I would take the empty seat at this point.

At least the empty seat won't engage in behavior potentially damaging to skydiving as a whole.

[stratostar 5]

Well I have talked to 3 (one of whom called me and told me about this) BOD members about it, who were all sent the photos of the jump, all 3 had the same story about applying for a waver after the fact, I see no reason for these BOD members to make up such a lie, I would however expect other sitting BOD members to lie out their ass about it and help to cover it up and seek the least amount of repercussion for the act, Sometin bout gold & bLk always have your back.

I also won't be surprised if UPT dose nothing about it, other then vent in a public fourm. Cuz you can't burn a place that just spent a ton on money on 10 or so TDM rig's and V3's all customed out.

As for removing him from the seat, don't hold your breath!(you might want to read the dribble contained in the governance manual) Your time would be better served running for the seat yourself, if you care that much as to how the region is represented.

After my talks with the BOD members I have little faith (or I should say less then before) in the USPA and could care less about the on goings of the org. it a fucking joke of a good old boy's club and you have to be in the "in crowd". I will pay my money in order to jump without hassle to my friends at friends DZ's, till I stop jumping, I will no longer waste my time voting or being an "active member" and I only really look at the photos in the mag.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[davelepka 4]

UPT is a private enterprise that I have no interest in. They can handle this situation any way they see fit.

The USPA, on the other hand, I do have an interest in as a dues paying memeber. They have taken it upon themselves to 'install' themselves into skydiving in the US, so I have to deal with them. The majority of DZs, and a bigger majorty of larger DZs are all group members, and seeing as I want to jump at these DZs, I have to be a member.

Either way, I'll have a look at the governance manual. I don't see how a BOD member could engage in such negligent behavoir, and retain their seat.

If they did impose a 90 day suspension of his instructional rating, that's an admission of guilt, and probably an appropriate course of action in terms of his ratings.

In terms of his seat on the board, that needs to be addressed, and handled as a seperate matter.

The last place you'll see me is on the BOD. I'm a member and have concerns about the USPA as a result of essentially being 'required' to be a member. If given the choice to not be a member, and still jump at group member DZs, I would save the $50 on USPA dues and spend it making two more jumps (or three hop n pops).

[UDSkyJunkie 0]

Quote

The last place you'll see me is on the BOD.

Ok, so... you're interested enough to try to unseat somone from the BOD, but you're not interested enough to take over. Do you have a recommendation for a replacement RD? Is anyone else even bothering to run? Right now we have someone who is engaged and works hard, and has made a poor decision. I would personally rather have that than have nobody.

have you met the guy? And I don't mean one time for 5 minutes years ago, I mean actually sat down and talked to him or watched him teach? I see him in action every weekend and can honestly say I have NEVER met a better instructor or DZM. And don't give me some line about being brainwashed... I came in with a bad impression from smear campaigns like this thread and it all changed after about 2 weeks of watching him in action. His energy level is incredible and contageous... makes the rest of the staff do a much better job than most DZ's, and the proof is in the number of people who have continued through AFF.

You're entitled to disagree, but I personally think it's sad that you feel it's necessary to bring someone down who is doing so many good things for the sport because of a single foolish decision. I'm sure you've done your share of blatant BSR violations over the years (and looked the other way while others around you, including those with ratings, have done the same). The claim of not being a BOD member, ect is no excuse and does not somehow exonerate you or make you a better person.

"Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

[Lucky123 0]

What's the worst that could happen?

The 12 year old girl could be killed

[DSE 3]

Quote

Right now we have someone who is engaged and works hard, and has made a poor decision. I would personally rather have that than have nobody.

If he made a bad decision, that's one thing (easily remedied). If the allegations made here are accurate, the bad decision isn't as egregious (IMO) as any attempt to cover it up might be. From my uninformed perspective, this is the issue that I'm most concerned about. Don't you think dishonesty to cover up an illegal act via bureaucratic means is a valid and large concern?

If the USPA as a governing agency feels that a short suspension was sufficient punishment, I don't know that it's in any one's best interest to challenge their decision unless they make a different decision in a similar situation.

How UPT (or any other tandem manufacturer) deals with it is their business with the instructor and USPA, not ours, IMO.

Quote

but I personally think it's sad that you feel it's necessary to bring someone down who is doing so many good things for the sport because of a single foolish decision

What if that foolish, but deliberate decision had cost someone's their life?

[davelepka 4]

Quote

have you met the guy?

Not really. Yeah for five minutes, but not really. Anyway you want to slice it, taking an udnerage tandem, and then backdating the paperwork is a little much for me in terms of an elected official.

He took it upon himself to open skydiving up to worlds more scrutiny than it needs. Regular jumpers trying to follow the rules cause enough bad press on their own. Do we really need an elected official adding to that burden?

Couldn't this jump have waited a week, or a few days to get the paperwork put through? That's the decision a good leader would make. We cannot legally do this today, but lets fast track the paperwork, and get this done three days from now.

Read my posts carefully, I mentioned that he may be a fine skydiver, instructor, DZ manager, whatever, but this isn't the guy we need to appoint as our local representative.

Pesonally, I'm not sure he has the judgement to be a course director, but that's none of my business.

As far as not wanting to be on the BOD, I'm as guilty as 99.99% of the membership who doesn't have the time to dedicate to that postition. This in no way invalidates my opinion about an official elected to represent my region in an organization to which I am a paying member.

[relyon 0]

Quote

... an illegal act ...

As with many topics, I prefer to keep my opinion to myself on this one, but I've got to ask: What is illegal? I've gone over FAR section 105.45 several times and don't see anything regarding age in the regulations. Am I missing something?

Bob

[CaptZypher 0]

(have you met the guy? And I don't mean one time for 5 minutes years ago, I mean actually sat down and talked to him or watched him teach? )

Well, I have met the guy many times and I have sat down with him and listened. Each time I found him to be arrogant and self centered and his favorite subject to brag about is Kip!

(I personally think it's sad that you feel it's necessary to bring someone down who is doing so many good things for the sport)

If you are trying to make him look like he has some integrity then how do you explain the fact that he stabbed the folks at a competing drop zone in the back after they diligently campaigned for him and were largely responsible for getting him elected?

Oh yea, on the pilot chute thing, Mr Lepka, you forgot to mention he's a rigger too.

If I had all the money Ive spent on skydiving, I'd spend it on skydiving!

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

... an illegal act ...

As with many topics, I prefer to keep my opinion to myself on this one, but I've got to ask: What is illegal? I've gone over FAR section 105.45 several times and don't see anything regarding age in the regulations. Am I missing something?

Bob

Too many people mistakenly feel that the word "illegal" refers only to issues that a court may adjudicate.
"Illegal" pertains equally to violation of rules within a specific organization. (FWIW, it's also a term we use in broadcast to describe color that goes beyond the NTSC standard.)

[relyon 0]

Thanks for the clarification.

I see this issue has brought out some fairly strong emotions. I'm curious though. How does taking an underage individual for a tandem differ from putting them on the back of a motorcycle and blasting off down the highway? Many times I've seen kids with no helmet or other safety gear clinging on to a driver who's doing 70+ mph.

Bob

[DSE 3]

Quote

Thanks for the clarification.

I see this issue has brought out some fairly strong emotions. I'm curious though. How does taking an underage individual for a tandem differ from putting them on the back of a motorcycle and blasting off down the highway? Many times I've seen kids with no helmet or other safety gear clinging on to a driver who's doing 70+ mph.

Bob

Dunno. Never seen it. Utah is a non-helmet law state, unless you're under 18. If you get caught not wearing a helmet under 18, you may lose your license. If the passenger is a child under 18, you might lose your license and be charged with reckless endangerment.
Outside of that, the difference is that the tandem instructor is given the rating based on understanding and complying with manufacturer requirements, and as a member (and in this case a Board Member) of USPA, the TI also agrees to abide by the rules of the governing organization. The manufacturer and governing body says "no 12 year olds on a tandem skydive in the USA."
Texas has helmet laws identical to Utah; it's illegal for someone under 18 to not be wearing a helmet on a motorcycle or ATV. So...little difference.

[stratostar 5]

Because the person who is taking the kid on thier bike is NOT the person doing the training acting as a DZ S&TA, DZ MGR,USPA Regional Director also Sitting on the national board for safety and training Com. (they are the ones who make up the rules we are to follow) CD & I/E for the gear MFG and the USPA, that means this dude is the one who is teaching others that it's not allowed to do that unless you jump through the right hoops ( the ones he thinks don't apply to him, but to everyone else) and he is also the guy who is to enforce the very rules he has decided don't apply to him, but would be required to enforce them on you!

You can't see the difference here? It's about the integerty of the training programs as well as the USPA system as a whole. This is a case of do as we say, not as we do.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[UDSkyJunkie 0]

Quote

Because the person who is taking the kid on thier bike is NOT...

.... unless said person is a cop. or a judge. or a politician. or employed by the BMV. or a driver's ed instructor. the list goes on.

One thing I think is interesting is that whenever the underage jumper issue comes up everyone screams "can you imagine how many people would get sued by the parents if they bounced?!" And it's a valid question, because the TI, DZO, Pilot, Mfr and others could all get in a lot of trouble... but how is it that they PARENTS wouldn't also have charges brought against them by the state? What happened to the child endangerment laws? The parents gave written permission. wether that's considered "legal consent" of the child is irrelevant. There is irrefutable permanent written proof that the parents allowed/encouraged their child to engage in a dangerous activity for which they have not reached the age of consent.

Curious if anyone knows of a situation where the parents have had allegations brought against them?

"Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

Because the person who is taking the kid on thier bike is NOT...

.... unless said person is a cop. or a judge. or a politician. or employed by the BMV. or a driver's ed instructor. the list goes on.

I don't understand your post. You're suggesting that police officers, politicians, judges are beyond the law? Quite the opposite, they're held to a higher standard.
[edited to add=I feel the same expectations should be applied to anyone who is a representative of our sport, or representative of any body of individuals.[/edit]
Here in our small town of 400, a police officer was relieved of duty after he took his 6 year old on an ATV ride without either of them wearing a helmet. The child was injured in a rollover, and the insurance company wouldn't pay all hospital bills because the child and parent were in violation of state law.
The officer was initially suspended, but later lost his job. However, he did not lose his license to carry a weapon, and is therefore employable as a police officer elsewhere.

[UDSkyJunkie 0]

Quote

I don't understand your post. You're suggesting that police officers, politicians, judges are beyond the law? Quite the opposite, they're held to a higher standard.

I may not have written clearly, but I agree with you.

Stratostar's comment was that the person putting their kid on a bike was not a DZO, instructor, S&TA, blah, blah, blah, and somehow that makes the bike sin more forgivable than the tandem sin because DZO's, ect are emplyed to be held to a higher standard.

My response was intended to say that maybe that's true if the biker is joe suburbia who works as an accountant and maybe doesn't know the law, or is ignorant and doesn't understand the risk (though neither makes them less guilty). But the biker could easily be a cop, ect who most assuredly knows the rules and the risks.

In the end, I'm agreeing that taking a kid on a motorcycle w/o a helmet is every bit as bad as taking a kid on a tandem. To those who say they've never seen this, good... I see it all the damn time in Ohio and it really pisses me off.

"Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

[relyon 0]

Quote

... You can't see the difference here? It's about the integerty of the training programs as well as the USPA system as a whole. This is a case of do as we say, not as we do.

Quote

I don't understand your post. You're suggesting that police officers, politicians, judges are beyond the law? Quite the opposite, they're held to a higher standard. ...

stratostar and DSE:

I certainly see both of your points and don't question either in any way. I very much agree with your views as to integrity and holding one's self (or being held to) to a higher standard, whether legally mandated or not. My point was that the risk to an underage child is the same, regardless of who is at the "helm", be it skydiving, motorcycling, or [insert high risk activity here].

I've been to every state except ND and currently live in Austin, TX. Since I've never rode any sort of motorcycle, I don't know what laws or regulations apply to them. I've seen the scenario I described many times in many places (notably in UT and TX, among others). I've seen police giving tickets for speeding a few miles over the speed limit completely ignore those on motorcycles.

Bob

[scottjaco 0]

Quote

Quote

What would you think personally about this happening?

Honestly?

I don't think a 12 year old anyone should make a skydive.

They don't have the maturity or wisdom to make an informed decision
regarding risk/reward.

The person could die. Tandems have gone in before and will do so again.

Nobody should be putting their life on the line until they are old enough to really understand that they could die.

For once, we agree on something. This is just foolish to push a 12 year old into a sport like this. Isn't there anyone older you can encourage?

Talk about growing up too fast.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Yeah, I know, people do not like long posts, but here is one anyway...

These are snippets from the USPA BOD Meeting Minutes.
They pertain to an underage tandem done by Bill Booth and changes to the USPA BSRs about age requirements.
After that I give 'my take' on the issue about underage tandems.

From Winter 2004

Quote

X C Interim Action 12/17/04 <--this is a typo in the minutes it should be 12/17/03
The S&T committee recommended approval of the following Interim action:
Motion 12 Passed, 16/2/3 (Mr. Bangs)
“Move to waive SIM Section 2-1.J.3 for a tandem demo into Kitty Hawk NC Kill Devils Hills on December 17, 2003 for Paul Fayard and Bill Booth for non-licensed passengers.”

From the RD report-out:
Richard then brought up how to approach Bill Booth and the under age Tandem. Richard will meet with Bill and determine at a later date if RD action is necessary.

From Summer 2004

Quote

12. The committee discussed the disparity in the BSRs with respect to the age limit for
tandems and other student progressions. The committee decided that this risk mitigation issue
was better administered by each DZO and instructor. This resulted in the following motion:
Motion 36: Passed, 15/5/1 (Ms. Meyer against) (Mr. Perry)
“Move to change BSR section D to read:
D. Age requirements
1. All Skydivers are to be either:
a. 18 years of age [FB]
b. 16 years of age with notarized parental consent [NW].”

See also page 27, Attachment B from Summer 2004. It is an image that cannot be copied here. You really need to read this first before reading the rest of the post.


From Winter 2005

Quote

Motion 53: Passed, 16/4/0 (Mr. Perry)
(Mr. Schachner, Mr. Hill, Ms. Meyer, Dr. Schlichtemeier – against)
“Move to change the waiver ability of SIM 2-1-D.1.b (16 years of age with notarized parental
or guardian consent) to Full Board.

Motion 54: Passed, 18/1/1 (Mr. Perry)
“Move to waive SIM 2-1-D.1.b the phrase"16 years of age" for Stormi Ober, age 14, Nicholas
Paul Gaucher, age 14 to make a tandem skydive.
The phrase "with notarized parental or guardian consent" in SIM 2-1-D.1.b will not be waived.
Stormi has terminal cancer and has requested the opportunity to make a skydive. Nick has
terminal cancer which caused his arm to be amputated a year ago. The cancer was recently
discovered in his lungs. He wishes to make a skydive with his father. They will both make
separate tandem skydives.”
The above motions were forwarded by a 5 in favor, 1 opposed and with the full support of the chair.

On 12-17-03, Bill Booth was about to do a tandem jump with his 17 yo daughter (only a few months away from her 18th birthday) at a high profile demo event (Wright Bros Centennial). There were 3 USPA BOD members present at this event (Glenn Bangs, BJ Worth and Madolyn Murdock). They realized a waiver was needed for a non-licensed jumper to do a tandem into a demo. They also happened to be on the EC. Mike Perry was contacted by phone. These 4 EC members represented a quorum of the EC. They passed the waiver on the spot, literally minutes before the jump.

After the demo jump, the spectators asked for autographs. Bill's daughter signed her name and "age 17". One of the BOD members saw this and said 'uh-oh'.

At the next BOD meeting (Winter 2004) when this interim action was presented to the FB for approval, another BOD member asked about the age of the passenger.

The BOD members that were at the demo said the passenger was underage and no waiver was granted for that. They did not know she was underage until after the jump.

There was a suggestion for a retro-active wavier, but that was shot down, mainly because some people were pissed at Bill (aka "he knew better") and not because they would not have given it, if it was asked for in advance.

Because several BOD members felt that Bill Booth had 'pulled a fast one' on the USPA BOD the BSRs were changed at the next meeting (Summer 2004). The new BSRs lowered the age requirement on tandem jumps.

Bill Booth was also contacted by his RD and asked to submit an apology letter.
(Bill Booth was awarded the Gold Medal for his contributions to tandem in the summer of 2003. This situation was a big embarrassment to USPA.)

At the Winter 2005 BOD meeting, some BOD members realized that the non-waiverability (NW) of the age made it impossible to grant exceptions. So the BSR was changed to allow exceptions with FB approval.

Immediately following that change were two 'Make-a- Wish' type requests - two dying children that wanted to do a jump. That combined motion passed. It is interesting to note that there were 4 BOD members that objected to the change in waiverability, yet two of those people actually voted for the 'dying kid tandems'.

Now, here is the place that I think USPA has totally fucked up its rules, waivers and implementation.
USPA has in place a system where a dying child can request a waiver to do a tandem jump. That may seem like a good and compassionate thing. The big drawback is that it may potentially expose USPA to a tremendous liability. I always vote no on the 'dying kid tandems' because it would be a very bad situation for any underage kid to die on a tandem, and add to that that the kid was sick, perhaps not physically capable of doing a tandem, etc, then you expose USPA to something it does not have to endorse.

The strange thing is that the healthy DZO kid waivers never get to USPA. They are done and then profuse apologies follow. It is probably because USPA can say, 'just wait until the kid is 16 there is no reason to push this now.'

I really don't have a problem with DZO kids (heathy ones) doing a tandem at 14 or 15 yo as long as the waivers are asked for in advance. I do not think it is the best interest of USPA and its members to grant waivers to 'some dying kid that always dreamed of flying'. The kid is sick. He may die. He may die sooner because of the physical requirements of a jump. This is even after the 'after the fact' incidents that show that 'not everyone is capable of doing a tandem jump'. This should suggest to the FB that the sick and dying kids should not be granted waivers, but the healthy DZO kids maybe could be.

--- sorry to make this even longer, but because of some posts that were censored I'll add:

USPA Statement of Medical Fitness:

Quote

"I represent and warrant that I have no known physical or mental infirmities that would impair my ability to participate in skydiving, or if I do have any such infirmities, that they have been or are being successfully treated so that they do not represent any foreseeable risk while skydiving. "I also represent and warrant that I am not taking any medications or substances, prescription, or otherwise, that would impair my ability to participate in skydiving."

Part of the BSRs

Quote

Medical requirements [NW]
1. All persons engaging in skydiving must:
a. Carry a valid Class 1, 2, or 3 Federal Aviation Administration Medical Certificate; or
b. Carry a certificate of physical fitness for skydiving from a registered physician; or
c. Have completed the USPA recommended medical statement.

Part of the SIM

Quote

4-3.D.3. All participants in skydiving must meet the USPA BSRs for medical fitness.
a. A person should be in good health and physical condition to skydive and should not be on medication; however, some conditions can be properly managed if the instructor knows about them.
b. A FAA flight physical or a doctor's statement of fitness for skydiving may be required in some cases.
c. The instructor also needs to know about any recent donations of blood.
d. People who participate in SCUBA diving should not fly for at least 24 hours afterward.

Any medical type statement that a DR may give a 'dying kid' for skydiving never sees the light of day with USPA.
Sometimes the people claim they have them. Sometimes nothing is mentioned about them. But I cannot recall a single instance where USPA asked to see such a permission slip. Even if USPA did see it, USPA has no expertise to grant exceptions based on a DR's note, made by a DR that has no idea what physical/emotional/mental stresses may occur on a skydive.

I won't comment of the alleged underage tandem in this thread because it is an ongoing issue.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[Hazarrd 1]

Quote

Curious if anyone knows of a situation where the parents have had allegations brought against them?

I won't comment on the discussion, but most child endangerment prosecutions involve drug use or crimes committed while the child is in the parent's custody. Parents are given significant discretion in choosing how to raise their children. The only time that discretion is called into question is for fairly egregious acts (skydiving COULD be one of them, but it at least involves some sense of judgment when compared to other acts).

I was curious anyway and did some research...definitely nothing involving skydiving. I tried just about every other dangerous sport and nothing really on point. The only time it seems relevant is in determining custody after a divorce and that involved a child riding on the back of their parent's motorcycle.

Ok - done with my legal rant.

.-.

[TMFSTX 0]

I think this is the first post I have written on DZ.COM and am only doing it because my Son is the individual that was taken on the tandem. In September of 2006 I created a program called Dreams of Fastrax. I commissioned my friend, skydiver and artist Kelly Green to create a piece of artwork that depicts a young child sleeping and dreaming about participating in our great sport. I contacted United Parachute Technologies and was granted permission to take children 12 and older with a terminal illness for a tandem skydive as long has they were strong enough and meet weight and height requirements. I contacted SkyVenture XP and asked if they would participate in this venture for those children that were not strong enough to handle freefall.

Our posters of the artwork Kelly produced are now sold across the country at Children’s Hospitals raising money for their hospice organization. Our Caravan is used in the Mercy network to take these children on plane rides or travel to the wind tunnels to experience the gift of flight.

Dreams of Fastrax are making the dreams of children come true with the gift of flight either in freefall, a wind tunnel or our aircraft. Their parents have all said that it seemed to give their children a renewed sense of energy and that they watch their videos over and over. Several of these children have since passed and we have received letters from their parents telling us how much this experience meant to them.

So what does this have to do with the 12 year old tandem? Since a friend of mine decided to send pictures of my 12 year old son to all of the USPA Board members and with so many people out their speaking untruths, I felt compelled to set the record straight. My Son, my beautiful 12 year old Son, my hero in life motivated me to create Dreams of Fastrax. I have been blessed with the time I have with him and as a Father will fulfill every dream he has until the good Lord calls him home. On a Sunday in August around 6:00 in the evening he approached me and said “Dad I want to skydive today? “ My Son is 5’10 195lbs and still strong enough to handle freefall, I looked at his Mother and she smiled and said it’s his dream. The rest is history! There were no dates falsified because no waivers were submitted. This was not a clandestine event as it was documented on video. Had there been time, I would have filed the waiver, but at that moment and that time these were the actions of a Father fulfilling the dreams of his child. My Son is now fulfilling his dream with his formation with Christ. Kip without hesitation knowing the risks performed this favor for me and I will forever be indebted for this special moment


Blue Skies and God Bless!

[Erroll 49]

Quote

I think this is the first post I have written on DZ.COM....

This is one of the most honest, sincere, eloquent, grammatically correct and non-confrontational posts ever posted on DZ.Com.

Bravo.

Stay strong.