Integrated Student Program vs AFF

[foxykatie 0]

As I've been reading online I've noticed some schools mentioning ISP vs AFF. I am signed up to do level 1 AFF in a couple weeks. One website said that AFF is "obsolete." What are your thoughts?

[stratostar 5]

Quote

One website said that AFF is "obsolete."

Really, care to share with us just where this tidbit of info is so we can read it for our selfs.
My thought is, I call BS on that statement!
Go do AFF if that is what you want to do, it is a good program as long as it's not at the DZ that would say as posted above.

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

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

As I've been reading online I've noticed some schools mentioning ISP vs AFF. I am signed up to do level 1 AFF in a couple weeks. One website said that AFF is "obsolete." What are your thoughts?

From what I understand, AFF is a part of the ISP. The ISP is supposed to take students from no skydiving experience to an A license. There are a variety of instructional methods to take you to an A license, which are incorporated into the ISP. AFF is the start to one of those methods.

It is far from obsolete. Incomplete, perhaps, as the AFF progression alone will not get you to an A license, but an AFF program combined with follow-on jumps will get you there. That's what the ISP is all about.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[djmarvin 2]

What is the ISP? From the Skydiver's Information Manual, published by USPA.

AFF is a training method within the ISP.

Read the above link to better understand the choices you have to learn how to skydive.

DJ Marvin
AFF I/E, Coach/E, USPA/UPT Tandem I/E
http://www.theratingscenter.com

[FlyinseivLP2 0]

As has been said, AFF is NOT obsolete. AFF is one of the training methods that can be used within the ISP. Any DZ saying AFF is obselete probably doesn't have a staff qualified to do it.

[foxykatie 0]

Thanks for all the information everyone!

[riggerrob 562]

The best training programs - as outline in ISP - incorporate tandem, S/L, IAD, wind tunnels, AFF and coaches.
Tandem is great for getting people over their initial fear and sensory overload, but then tandem's training value rapidly diminishes.
Static-line - or Instructor Assisted Deployment - jumps from 3,000 feet are great for teaching you how to fly a parachute.
Wind tunnels are great for teaching the basics of freefall stability, turns, etc.
Accelerated Freefall is the best way to learn basic freefall survival skills.
Finally, coaches can help you round out the solo skills required for an A License.
No one instructional method is the "best." Rather, different instructional methods are better at different levels of the learning curve.

[popsjumper 2]

As usual, riggerrob has a way of putting things in perspective.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

Other people have piped in and said the same, but I, as a guy that used to manage an "ISP school" will tell you that "AFF" is not dead. What is dead are the schools that think that they can get away with just doing seven levels and signing a guy off as "experienced". No matter what discipline you learn in, you are still not a qualified skydiver until you have that "A" stamp on your card.

I got into a philosphical debate at the bar here in Z-hills when I got here about this. You see, the person who was arguing in favor of the "seven levels and you are done" stuff" was all bent out of shape that we, at Raeford, were making people do what is in essence nine levels to get past cat E. They were all like "why charge a guy more money if they are able to complete the TLO's in seven" I told them that we never forced a person to do all nine jumps. If a person could complete the TLO's for multiple jumps on one skydive, then that's great! It was rare that a good student could not complete all the "AFF" stuff (cats A thru E) in six or seven jumps. Where the difference comes into play though is here: some dropzones pretty much mandate that you get "training video" on each of your AFF levels. That's outside video for those of you not paying attention. Outside video takes another slot and costs the student a ton of money. At Raeford, an "ISP" dropzone, we never pushed outside video for AFF. The great majority of instructors all jumped their camera helmets on those jumps though, with .3 lenses, and thus got the exact same debriefing benefit for doing this "inside" video (which we did not charge for). Ultimately, the end cost for the student is about exactly the same. Seven levels here (z-hills school, but this applies to all such schools) with "forced" video or nine levels up at Raeford (and elsewhere) with no incurred video cost. The student would not see a difference at all in cost if they were to do all "nine" levels of ISP-based AFF at my old DZ. The only people that have a gripe are the "outside" AFF video guys who are losing out on their ramen money. In my opinion that is simply not a valid complaint.

In the end, it does not matter what method you chose; I teach them all and will teach my freelance students any combination of ways. The only thing that matters is that you check every single block on the A-license proficiency card without having to "crawl under a poncho" and perpetrate a fraud by signing off on shit that your student has not actually completed.

I hope that makes sense,

Chuck Blue
D-12501
AFF/SL/TM-I, BMCI-4, PRO, former S&TA and manager of a pretty busy turbine DZ school.

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

In the end, it does not matter what method you chose; I teach them all and will teach my freelance students any combination of ways. The only thing that matters is that you check every single block on the A-license proficiency card without having to "crawl under a poncho" and perpetrate a fraud by signing off on shit that your student has not actually completed.

I'm surprised that more instructors/schools don't take that approach. I was a S/L student till I started struggling mightily on my first jumps off the dope rope. I did a few AFF jumps, then eased back into the S/L progression. I always looked at it as "I have a card that needs to get filled out" and I worked with a set of instructors who looked at it the same way and were flexible with instructional approaches to help me meet that goal. I guess it's easier at a small-mid size DZ like the one where I started out...

In the end it took me 37 jumps to get to A, through a combination S/L, AFF, repeat jumps, extra jumps to work on stuff, H&Ps just to get in the air b/c the weather sucked, etc.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[stratostar 5]

Quote

"I have a card that needs to get filled out" and I worked with a set of instructors who looked at it the same way and were flexible with instructional approaches to help me meet that goal.

You almost have to do it that way, because everyone
learns at a different pace, I have seen very few people nail all of their students jumps without repeats, no matter what trainning method their using.

As a side note, I'm a cameraman #1, (AFF-I, SL-I,IAD-I) I think forcing someone to have outside video on all jumps is being greedy, while I might like to make "my raman money" that day, I used to be a student too once, on a tight buget.
That would have kept me on the ground instead of skydiving, the cost is high enough for students today without forcing them to pay more for outside video on every level.
Most of our students are collage kids, and they already can't afford the extra for video and stills on level one, let alone pay the extra cost for video on every level, if we tried to do that we would lose a huge number of students to the cost factor.

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