Velopilot 0 #1 June 22, 2007 What if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #2 June 22, 2007 > What if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If they didn't exist starting tomorrow? Nothing much would change for years; the inertia of the training framework/BSR list would stick around at most drop zones. If they never existed? We'd have a hodgepodge of training programs, safety rules and performance guidelines. Some jumpers would track on breakoff; some would pull in sequence every 500 feet in the same space. (More out per pass that way.) Jumpers who wanted to land quickly to pack would pull at 800 feet to save time. Student injuries and fatalities would be significantly higher, since many places would be inventing student programs from scratch. At the higher levels not _too_ much would change. Nationals would likely be broken into an assortment of SSL-like meets. Jumpers would learn specific new procedures/skills via recognized coaches/organizers, but that's basically what happens now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krip 2 #3 June 22, 2007 Quote > What if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? Quote Two part answer: USPA (and it's predecessor) have been around for almost 50 yr's, and has gone thru some changes over that period, just like the sport of skydiving has, but USPA has failed to keep up. IMO Over the last 20 yr's we haven't seen any major changes except turning a jumper organization into a DZO trade group via the group member DZO program. Check the DZ websights that have the USPA seal of approval on their front page. It's a promo for the TM cash cow. The basic safety procedures your talking about for fun jumpers aka "up jumpers' havent changed since the DZO's took over. USPA chose to stay silent about seat belt usage until a tragic aircraft accident. Don't get me wrong Swooping is But USPA failed to respond with ANY guidance when swooping became a new discipline. The result of this inaction speaks for itselfThere's a large data base on the reserve repack cycle from other countries and it took USPA much to long to get the rules changed in this country. USPA isn't going to change or go away we got what we got. OTOH Dropzone.com with some of it's forums has had a major impact on the sport.And the sport is much better off because of it, and has probably saved lives. The speed of cyber space and the international exchange of info can't be beat. Three chears for HH Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #4 June 22, 2007 Without a large national organization to back us (USPA or something else), I doubt skydiving would still be legal. The FAA generally stays off our backs because they recognize the USPA as the organization that keeps us in line. I think skydiving would be viewed a lot like BASE jumping is now if the USPA had never been formed (and nothing else came along). I don't think most skydivers give the USPA credit for what they have done and continue to do for us... all we hear is bitching about what they haven't done. They're not perfect, but skydiving is still legal and sort of affordable, and I think the USPA has a lot to do with that. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #5 June 22, 2007 >But USPA failed to respond with ANY guidance when swooping became a new discipline. ?? There are two entire chapters of the SIM dedicated to swooping - one on "how to swoop safely" one on "here's how to run a USPA canopy coach course." I think the bigger issue is no one reads the SIM (other than to pass license tests.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bozo 0 #6 June 22, 2007 QuoteWhat if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? I'd be better off because I would be 50 bucks richer. bozo Pain is fleeting. Glory lasts forever. Chicks dig scars. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JustChuteMeNow 0 #7 June 22, 2007 Well I wouldn't recieve Parachutist every month and I wouldn't hear people bitching about USPA either Think of how stupid the average person is and realize that statistically half of them are stupider than that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #8 June 22, 2007 QuoteThere's a large data base on the reserve repack cycle from other countries and it took USPA much to long to get the rules changed in this country. That has more to do with the FAA then the USPA. It's really diffucult to get the FAA to make the change. The FAA regulates how often reserves are repacked not the USPA. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zing 2 #9 June 22, 2007 I'd never have paid for the lifetime USPA membership that expired after 12 months!Zing Lurks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tombuch 0 #10 June 22, 2007 We'd be facing very stiff regulation from the FAA, and probably different regulations in most of the individual 50 states. We would also see significantly more regulations at the local level, and far less access to local airports and airspace. Pilots would hate us, and what little jumping we did would be in very small pieces of isolated rural airspace. Demos away from drop zone probably wouldn't happen. The absence of national standards would make financial liability and exposure far more serious than it is now. The absence of third party liability would keep us off most airports, and we'd have far more issues with farmer McNasty's. We would be operating under part 135, and the expense and hassle of that would close most drop zones. The sport would be much smaller and more fragmented, and it's unlikely we would have sufficient critical mass to support the industry development that has made the United States one of the leaders in sport parachute technology. Safety would be a bigger problem due to the lack of national standards, and the inability of jumpers to communicate through a national network as the sport grew. I know I owe a lot to the 'parachutists' who came before me and established USPA as the voice of skydiving. I'm proud I've been able to help maintain that vision, and push our sport forward for all the new jumpers. Sure, USPA has a few problems, and some folks will always object to any organization, but I'm super glad we have had their representation and support at the national level. I've probably paid USPA is excess of $1,200 over the past 25+ years. It's been money well spent.Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AFFI 0 #11 June 22, 2007 Great Post Tom...Mykel AFF-I10 Skydiving Priorities: 1) Open Canopy. 2) Land Safely. 3) Don’t hurt anyone. 4) Repeat… Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hukturn 0 #12 June 23, 2007 I agree with Tom. If there were no USPA, you would have strong FAA involvement. And with the FAA comes even greater bureaucracy than USPA pushes. Don't get me wrong, I believe that much of what USPA has done is for the greater good of the sport. But, too much involvement can be just as bad as too little. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #13 June 23, 2007 QuoteWhat if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If uspa didn't exist, skydivers would form another national organization.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #14 June 23, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If uspa didn't exist, skydivers would form another national organization. And there would be the same people bitching about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #15 June 24, 2007 Quote ...I think the bigger issue is no one reads the SIM (other than to pass license tests.) Holy bejeezus and pass the peas...how right you are. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LloydDobbler 2 #16 June 25, 2007 Quote I agree with Tom. If there were no USPA, you would have strong FAA involvement. And with the FAA comes even greater bureaucracy than USPA pushes. Don't get me wrong, I believe that much of what USPA has done is for the greater good of the sport. But, too much involvement can be just as bad as too little. Actually, I kind-of agree by disagreeing (if that makes any sense): If there were no USPA, we'd have far less FAA involvement...b/c the FAA doesn't want anything to do with us, really (they've got enough to deal with keeping abreast of GA, without having to learn the completely different set of rules/approaches/best practices that go along with skydiving.) So the way I see it, the FAA would solve the problem by just banning the sport altogether. They'd wash their hands of us. And without the unified front to fight it, we'd find ourselves doing lots and lots of bandit jumps...provided we could find a pilot who'd take us, at risk of their license. Yeah, I resist some of the things that go along with having a national governing body...I think that anytime you have a national organization, you're going to have groups of members trying to assert what works best for them as rules for everybody...& in situations like that, there are few things scarier than a majority with a cause. But overall, I'm darn glad we've got the USPA. I shudder to think of what would happen legislatively without a group designed to set standards and combat issues arising from the negative stigma that whuffos have... ...but back to the main point, yeah, I think if not for the USPA being around, there's a strong chance that the FAA would get involved only long enough to shut down skydiving altogether.Signatures are the new black. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hukturn 0 #17 June 26, 2007 Hmmm..interesting perspective. I tend to believe that the FAA would heighten their involvement because there would be no USPA buffer between us and the FAA. I am not so sure that they would absolutely ban skydiving. But, I think that it would be much, muc more difficult. I believe that there would be extremely sparse dropzones and we wold have to travel long distances to jump. You do introduce a different problem. I am going to have to think on that one a little longer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azureriders 0 #18 June 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhat if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If uspa didn't exist, skydivers would form another national organization. The most insightful post in this thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #19 June 26, 2007 If USPA had never existed, FAA (most likely) agency would have stepped in decades ago in order to ensure consistent training and operational standards. Because the sport is small (few voters) and does not generate much revenue (little $ for lobbying), politicians tend not to pay much attention to the sport, but do pay attention to the outcries of "normal" people (whuffo citizens, relatives of jumpers) every time there is a death or serious injury. So over the years, what started as a simple set of rules intended to protect other aircraft and non-jumpers on the ground would gradually grow in complexity and restrictiveness, while FAA rules for GA, for example, would be kept in check by the much more politically powerful (more $) GA industry. In summary, not having USPA around would have resulted in FAA control of all aspects of the sport, and without political and financial clout, the sport would have little control over politicians. The result compared to what we have now: Bigger barriers to entry: (Class 3 medical, Psyc. Eval., permission of husband/wife, proof of insurance required prior to 1st jump) (Prospective jumpers with children require additional counseling and approval of FAA psychchologist) Lower performance/less innovative equipment: (Squares? Approved in 1992 after 25 year certification effort, developer now bankrupt) (Wingsuits? NO, developers either bankrupt or producing suits only for BASE jumpers) (AAD? Yes, Mandatory, $10,000, only one company survived approval process) (Tandems? Yes, but not profitable due to delays/costs associated with passenger medical/psyc evaluation requirements) Less innovation in subspecialties: (Swooping? Restricted to death years ago), (Formations? Yes, if approved by special committee. Expect 1 year for approval) There would fewer DZ's: (mandatory separation distances from roads, power lines, vinyards, cattle) Sucky DZ environment: (Old jumpers tell "good old days" stories about the time when beer was allowed at DZ'z) (DZ campfires no longer allowed after burned scrotum incident in 1973) (Nudity/Rowdy behavior? Prohibited by FAA after embarrasing CBS expose' in 1980) Lower incidence of accidents/deaths: (Much lower, but very few people jump. Who the fuck would want to?) "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #20 June 26, 2007 QuoteIf USPA had never existed, FAA (most likely) agency would have stepped in decades ago in order to ensure consistent training and operational standards. Because the sport is small (few voters) and does not generate much revenue (little $ for lobbying), politicians tend not to pay much attention to the sport, but do pay attention to the outcries of "normal" people (whuffo citizens, relatives of jumpers) every time there is a death or serious injury. So over the years, what started as a simple set of rules intended to protect other aircraft and non-jumpers on the ground would gradually grow in complexity and restrictiveness, while FAA rules for GA, for example, would be kept in check by the much more politically powerful (more $) GA industry. In summary, not having USPA around would have resulted in FAA control of all aspects of the sport, and without political and financial clout, the sport would have little control over politicians. The result compared to what we have now: Bigger barriers to entry: (Class 3 medical, Psyc. Eval., permission of husband/wife, proof of insurance required prior to 1st jump) (Prospective jumpers with children require additional counseling and approval of FAA psychchologist) Lower performance/less innovative equipment: (Squares? Approved in 1992 after 25 year certification effort, developer now bankrupt) (Wingsuits? NO, developers either bankrupt or producing suits only for BASE jumpers) (AAD? Yes, Mandatory, $10,000, only one company survived approval process) (Tandems? Yes, but not profitable due to delays/costs associated with passenger medical/psyc evaluation requirements) Less innovation in subspecialties: (Swooping? Restricted to death years ago), (Formations? Yes, if approved by special committee. Expect 1 year for approval) There would fewer DZ's: (mandatory separation distances from roads, power lines, vinyards, cattle) Sucky DZ environment: (Old jumpers tell "good old days" stories about the time when beer was allowed at DZ'z) (DZ campfires no longer allowed after burned scrotum incident in 1973) (Nudity/Rowdy behavior? Prohibited by FAA after embarrasing CBS expose' in 1980) Lower incidence of accidents/deaths: (Much lower, but very few people jump. Who the fuck would want to?) Sounds like what's happened/happening to general /sport aviation.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #21 June 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote What if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If uspa didn't exist, skydivers would form another national organization. The most insightful post in this thread. , yeah, really helps the intent of the OP ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #22 June 26, 2007 QuoteSounds like what's happened/happening to general /sport aviation. Not sure what you mean. The new Sport Pilot ticket and LSA seem to be a move in the right direction. "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azureriders 0 #23 June 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote What if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If uspa didn't exist, skydivers would form another national organization. The most insightful post in this thread. , yeah, really helps the intent of the OP Yeah, after posting I thought someone may take it that way. This thread has brought up some great conversation about what the USPA does and does not do. Maybe made some people realize what their membership has/has not done for them, so good job to the OP. However, for a straight forward point blank answer to the question as it was worded, Kallend was right on, IMO of course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #24 June 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteSounds like what's happened/happening to general /sport aviation. Not sure what you mean. The new Sport Pilot ticket and LSA seem to be a move in the right direction. It's just a return to almost the freedom of flying that existed 40 years ago. The population is up, but the number of active pilots is way down. Petty and excessive FAA regulation is the main reason, IMO.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #25 June 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote What if USPA didn't exist? Would we be better off or not? If uspa didn't exist, skydivers would form another national organization. The most insightful post in this thread. , yeah, really helps the intent of the OP Do you disagree with me?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
