Hooknswoop 19 #126 February 4, 2004 QuoteAlmost entirely. First the s&ta has to see the low pull. Second, as that person who saw the infraction, you know exactly where he grabbed the handle? You lazer him as you saw him pull? Really, the rule has no teeth unless someone makes a stink over it. I can tell a low pull very easily. Not difficult at all. When I was an A & TA I talked to several people about low pulls. They all stopped pulling low. I tried to ground someone for pulling at about 500 feet (very short canopy ride, fortunately he was jumping a hard-opening Sabre) and was over-ridded by the DZO ($). Quote And this will work? This will eliminate fatalities? I don't believe that for a second. Eliminate, no. I don’t think that is possible. Reduce, yes. Quote So rather than trying to spread canopy control around all the licenses (although I do feel that there should be at least a little more canopy something in the requirements for each of the licenses) why not use those five extra jumps students have to make now to build an intensive canopy control course within the student program? I did my first canopy control course (scott miller's) at jump #25 and it was perfect timing. If the student program is lacking in an area, let's beef it up! Don't reinvent the wheel and start imposing a whole bunch of bullshit on the rest of us--many of which have been through several canopy courses and worked with some of the best canopy pilots in the world--for something you can't guarantee will work. Because the jumper w/ 26 jumps and a Velocity loaded at 2.6:1 will still hammer in. Quote Bullshit. Every gear manufacturer I have seen has wingloading requirements/suggestions for each of their canopies. If someone cannot read and comprehend what the manufacturer is advising them, the should not be jumping anything. They can read, they don’t think it applies to them. They also put themselves in a higher category on the label than they should. He beginner/intermediate/advanced, etc categories are not defined. If every jumper that was outside those recommendations gave me a dollar, I would make a lot of money. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #127 February 4, 2004 QuoteYou and I agree on 99% of our thoughts however, your comment about S&TA's counting for nothing is completely off the mark. People seem to believe S&TA's are the "cops" of the DZ, not so. Safety and Training Advisors have many other obligations and being the DZ Cop is not listed as one. Many of us work very hard to increase awareness and training of all skydivers. Please do not insult us based upon one specific, non-enforceable problem in our sport. Didn't mean to put down S & TA's. They work hard to help others for no pay and get zero respect. (Which is why I turned down the position here in CO.) I would like to see the role of the S & TA to include enforcing the BSR's. If they don't, who will? Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnischalke 0 #128 February 4, 2004 QuoteBecause the jumper w/ 26 jumps and a Velocity loaded at 2.6:1 will still hammer in. No shit. We both have to concede to the fact that if this happens, education--no matter when it was administered--was worthless. (edit) and there is no way in the world words on a piece of paper can prevent some hell-bent knucklehead from trying it.(/edit) I appreciate what you're trying to do. I just don't think you need to spread requirements around someone's jumping career, when the most important things someone needs to know should be programmed into their heads as early as possible. If they know why they shouldn't jump a velocity at 2.6 (and not because 2.6 has reached a point of diminishing returns) with 26 jumps, or even a vengeance at 1.2, you might not have to worry about what they'll be doing at jump 46 or 96 or whatever. I like the idea of remedial canopy training for some stupid fucks, but seriously, leave that up to the dzo/s&ta. mike Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #129 February 5, 2004 QuoteBullshit. Every gear manufacturer I have seen has wingloading requirements/suggestions for each of their canopies. If someone cannot read and comprehend what the manufacturer is advising them, the should not be jumping anything. Ok...back to not reinventing the wheel. In piloting aircraft it has been shown that almost EVERY pilot thinks they are above average. That's how we get pilots flying into IFR weather without an instrument ticket. That's why when we hear people post here that they "are above average" I just shake my head. By whose standards? What have they proven? In flying aircraft we have a system of endorsements that really does not impose that much grief in proving to an instructor that you can handle a more complex aircraft than your basic trainer. High performance, complex, multi-engine are all add ons to one's pilot certificate. It is not hard to track and it does give the visiting pilot some proof to a FBO that does not know them an idea of what their background may be. And maybe that's part of this system. To give DZOs a chance to see what their background was. A story: I visited Quantum Leap in Sullivan, MO. I fly a Stilleto 107. I hadn't logged a jump in my logbood for a few months even though I had jumped. Most people have heard of me (not all...but many around the midwest at least). The DZO was skeptical of letting me jump there. We talked. And I didn't get defensive about being questioned. I just kept explaining my experience. I then was allowed to jump there. This does not mean I wasn't still being watched. After my second jump I opened up later in the groups and since my canopy was smaller than most there I caught up to some of the earlier exiting jumpers. I meshed with traffic and landed. The DZO came up and said "Nice way to get into the flow of traffic." At first I thought this was sarcasm and I had actually cut someone off. I said "say what?" He turned back around and said "Oh no...I really mean it. I liked the way you integrated with traffic." Oh, ok. Cool. I really didn't want to cause problems. A canopy WL BSR (with consideration of already printed WL suggestions by the manufacturer) would be a good way to give guidance to a broader spectrum. And yes, it can be enforced. Because we are pilots and we do need to prove (and document) that we are ready for each next level. We aren't all jumping Para-Commanders anymore. There is a WIDE spectrum of possibilities. We need to give guidance and support to those who can make a difference. We recognize it is a much more complex world out there in canopy choices than just cutting out different panels in a round cuz that's what Joe Blo tried out. The resulting landing injury is more than just a busted leg/ankle. Nowadays, it usually involves a coroner more and more. The stats don't lie about our history in skydiving. It used to be low/no pulls that caused fatalities. Now, it's canopy control / WL. We do need to do something about it and giving a tool to those who can enforce it is the best option. The form it will take has yet to be determined. That is where people's input on HOW to best address the problem can make the difference. There is a ground swell of support for this. So, you can be on the outside yelling in. Or, you can be on the inside guiding what it will look like.Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #130 February 5, 2004 QuoteThen please do not place the responsibility upon your S&TA without the "authority". Many people have indicated an S&TA has that authority. They do not. I completely disagree. If you have a solid professional relationship with a DZO that supports your decisions, you have all of the "authority" you need. Skydiving is a privilege not a right. If you compromise safety to the extent that I say that you cannot jump, your done. Mike S&TA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #131 February 5, 2004 QuoteI am happy for you that you don't jump out of planes anymore. Now since you do not, why don't you comment on your current sport of choice and leave us to our own devices. We small unworthy folk can take care of ourselves Hanz...He is more qualified to speak about this than me, and MUCH more qualified to speak than you. It is this exact attitude that made him quit, and makes me think about it..... You have what 200-300 jumps? You have seen me with blood on my hands more than once...And the last time I think it was a guy with 100 jumps and a1.5 WL right? Now that guy has been out of the sport over a year, and has $107,000 in medical bills. This kind of regulation WOULD have prevented that. It really is that simple. If you trust me, believe me when I say this would help."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #132 February 5, 2004 Mike, Good on you, and we do that relationship here at our dz however, take it upon yourself to prove with facts to anyone on this forum where the REAL AUTHORITY lays. Do not assume or present a political or social position based upon "relationships" and call it "authority". If you are in fact an S&TA you should know the "authority" presented to you by the organization that "appointed" you an S&TA. More importantly the limits of your "authority". Now you want to talk about DZO's? Facts..................... Disagree with that. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #133 February 5, 2004 QuoteGood on you, and we do that relationship here at our dz however, take it upon yourself to prove with facts to anyone on this forum where the REAL AUTHORITY lays. Those were facts, no subjectivity to it! The authority is valid. If I say you can't jump that ends it. Or are you saying that you can ignore what I say and keep jumping? NOT! QuoteDo not assume or present a political or social position based upon "relationships" and call it "authority". You seem to be confused as it is a representative position and not either of the above. And since there is dual authoritative authority, that of the USPA and that of the DZ, it provides about all of the "authority" I need. QuoteIf you are in fact an S&TA you should know the "authority" presented to you by the organization that "appointed" you an S&TA. More importantly the limits of your "authority". You are correct. That is part of the position. But understand that the authority given by a DZO may be different than that of the USPA. QuoteNow you want to talk about DZO's? Sure QuoteFacts..................... Disagree with that. You would have to state a fact for me to possibly disagree with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #134 February 5, 2004 Again, good on you. You have taken the typical road of cut and paste and confusion. Again, state facts, quote your reference in the BSR, SIM, FAR. If you are unable to do so then again, admit the "authority" is not there. I am sure we both "believe" in the same thing however, assumed or implied "authority" is not in fact the ability to enforce anything. The DZO can in fact ground or, lets state it in the true manner, refuse anyones business he wants. That is a business decision, not authority empowered by any association or government body. Please do not confuse the people who do not read a SIM, BSR's, or FAR's. Don't play word games. Give up your references, prove your points, show your facts. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jraf 0 #135 February 5, 2004 Ron I know, but you will agree that said 100 jump skydiver has talked to everybody on the DZ, and I think you remember who he all spoke to. I was there I remember the conversations, I remember what everybody and their cousin told the dude (don't do it, don't do it, don't do it) I remember the jump, I remember the landing and I remember the consequences up real close. Honestly would regulation help here? First of all he jumped without medical insurance, so should we not have that regulated? Second he jumped against the advice of everybody he asked. I am not heartless (ok, maybe I am) I was at the hospital before, during and after the surgery and visiting him many times after. As I mentioned I just am calling for the enforcement of existing regulations before we create new ones. As to my rather short treatment of my debate partner her - well Ron he asked for it, so he got it.jraf Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui. Muff #3275 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #136 February 5, 2004 QuoteHonestly would regulation help here? Yes, it would have. Instead of "don't do it." It would have been, "You can't jump that." QuoteAs I mentioned I just am calling for the enforcement of existing regulations before we create new ones. I thought you were of the opinion that there wasn't a problem? So your objection is that other BSR's aren't enforced and therefore no new ones should be made? Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #137 February 5, 2004 QuoteYou have taken the typical road of cut and paste and confusion. Again, state facts, quote your reference in the BSR, SIM, FAR. If you are unable to do so then again, admit the "authority" is not there. No, I have only factually responded to each of your points. If you are only talking about the USPA authority, then read the USPA Governance Manual as this is where the responsibilities and "authority" of an S&TA are written. And according to that manual an S&TA can even suspend an instructor rating for up to thirty days. Sounds pretty authoritative to me. QuoteI am sure we both "believe" in the same thing however, assumed or implied "authority" is not in fact the ability to enforce anything. I agree, but that is not the case here. QuoteThe DZO can in fact ground or, lets state it in the true manner, refuse anyones business he wants. That is a business decision, not authority empowered by any association or government body. I agree. QuotePlease do not confuse the people who do not read a SIM, BSR's, or FAR's. Again, I am not, but the above is not where the USPA authority comes from. It is in the Governance Manual. QuoteDon't play word games. Give up your references, prove your points, show your facts. Okay, FACT: The DZO can give the authority to enforce safety. FACT: The USPA Governance Manual gives an S&TA the authority to suspend instructional ratings for violations of the BSR's. FACT: Additional authority may be given to the S&TA in absence of a regional director by an officer of the USPA. FACT: Between the two corporations, safety can be enforced. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #138 February 5, 2004 Okay, here we go cut and paste. Quote Okay, FACT: The DZO can give the authority to enforce safety. FACT: The USPA Governance Manual gives an S&TA the authority to suspend instructional ratings for violations of the BSR's. FACT: Additional authority may be given to the S&TA in absence of a regional director by an officer of the USPA. FACT: Between the two corporations, safety can be enforced. Now you are getting to it. An S&TA can suspend a RATING pending review. Are you a rating holder? An S&TA cannot ground anyone! Get back on subject. The DZO can refuse your business but that is a business decision! You are starting to admit where the true "authority" is. With the DZO's! Tell me I cannot jump and guess what, you have absolutely no authority to stop me unless the DZO says so. The DZO can give you the "authority" to enforce his safety rules however, again that is a business decision.The USPA can give you what authority in the absence of an RD? To ground someone? No. Again show me where it says you as an S&TA have that "authority" even as an appointed RD! Even the USPA cannot ground a skydiver and enforce it! Want to Quotesuspend my ratings, go ahead. Will that stop me from jumping? No. Authority is the ability to enforce your decision. The DZO can enforce any business decision he makes only by refusing your business and not allowing you to utilize his facilities. Again that is a business decision! Can DZO's and USPA join forces, absolutely, and it takes the DZO's to do it. The "governance" does not give an S&TA the authority to ground anyone. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #139 February 5, 2004 Quotesuspend my ratings, go ahead. Will that stop me from jumping? No. YES, it will at my DZ! And if you don't think I have the "authority" try me. I guess my focus is different than yours. I don't care where the "authority" comes from. I am goal driven, so my focus is can I enforce the rules? The answer is YES and that is what matters to me. Read my original post, I stated that your statement was not true that I had the authority and I still do. That FACT still stands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #140 February 5, 2004 Some DZO's allow the S &TA to ground someone, some don't. The DZO could allow a Chief Instructor, Instructor Loader, anyone to ground people if they wish. That is a DZO choice. Being an S & TA does not mean you can ground people. The DZO saying you can ground people means you can ground people. One has nothing to do with the other. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #141 February 5, 2004 I agree, but in your own words, THINK goal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #142 February 5, 2004 Quote suspend my ratings, go ahead. Will that stop me from jumping? No. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- YES, it will at my DZ! And if you don't think I have the "authority" try me. I guess my focus is different than yours. I don't care where the "authority" comes from. I am goal driven, so my focus is can I enforce the rules? The answer is YES and that is what matters to me. Read my original post, I stated that your statement was not true that I had the authority and I still do. That FACT still stands. Again, you do not have the authority to ground me or anyone else. Please tell me I'm grounded, and then meet me at the DZ this weekend. Now if what you are telling me is that I cannot spend my money at your dz then you have the authority to not accept my money. Not to ground me. If that is what you mean by "try me" okay. I'll ask again, show me the regulation, authorization, BSR, SIM, FAR, law, ordinance, anything but a note from your DZO where you have the authority to ground anyone. Yes your focus is different, you believe you have the authority to enforce something that does not exist, except throught the business decision of a DZO. What rules are you taking about enforcing? Show me a "rule" or "regulation" in the BSR, SIM, or governance. We are talking about your authority to ground a skydiver? Not to enforce a DZO's business policy! Are you a rating holder? Your profile indicates you are a tandem Instructor and I believe you are an S&TA from your posts but unless you are going to threaten to break my legs or something, you are not going to be able to ground me or anyone else. Are you the DZO? If so you can refuse my money but you cannot stop me from skydiving, read that "ground me". Sorry Mike but you've got to accept the facts. Signing off for the night. Stay safe, see you tomorrow. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #143 February 5, 2004 I have used small words and spoken slowly. Think denial! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #144 February 5, 2004 Well thank you Mike. You have agreed to the facts and points I started this on. Believe me, I wish we had the real authority to protect some people from themselves, but we don't. I'll buy the next jump if you show up at our dz and I will not ground you Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #145 February 5, 2004 Okay, I'll still buy you that jump even with your insult, that has nothing to do with the subject. When it reverts to insults from facts it's gone far enough. Thanks for the small words. I forgive you for your denial. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #146 February 5, 2004 QuoteI'll buy the next jump if you show up at our dz and I will not ground you Deal, and if you come down here, I'll GROUND you so I can buy you a beer. Stay safe, Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #147 February 5, 2004 Well, you did not answer my question. Are you the dzo? If not we'll see what he says when I come down to spend a few hundred dollars.......... I don't drink but you can buy my Dr. Pepper for the night!James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #148 February 5, 2004 QuoteAre you the dzo? Nope, I didn't say I was insane did I? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #149 February 5, 2004 QuoteThose who stand to reap the financial benefits of a potential regulation like this are those who signed the letter, God bless their little hearts. Huh? I don't teach skydiving, I sell gear. How do you figure I'm going to make money on this? I'd make a whole lot more money if I didn't give a rats ass and sold anything to anybody. Billvon makes more money in his real job than me and a couple other people put together. Derek doesn't instruct anymore. Scott is in the military. Chuck is the only signer who could realistically stand to make a bit of money off required canopy control courses as he's the only one who teaches skydiving for a living. Put the crack pipe down dude. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #150 February 5, 2004 >There has been some serious misunderstanding. You and I > obviously went through or are talking of completely different AFF > training requirements. Not really. >I as told about landing acuracy I teach that as well, but I teach how to land a Manta, not how to land a 1.3 to 1 Sabre2. And they are not the same thing. >I was told about the effect of winds on landing I also teach that, but again, it's specific to canopies that students use. I cover HP canopy landing in wind at my 'graduate' course (which I usually try to do at water training) but people are free to skip that if they want to go to a more abbreviated water training. >I was told about the effect of low toggle turns and how to avoid them. I teach that as well. To survive in this sport, though, you need to learn how to survive low toggle turns. Saying "do not do them" is like saying "never get into a skid in your car." You have to learn how to deal with low turns, just as you have to learn how to deal with a skid to be a good driver. >Tha is the way it is done at ZHills. Its my home DZ. That's great; if more people got that training, more people would survive. >As mentioned, you probably are talking of a different AFF program > than I. Maybe the West Coast AFF is different than what we have in > Florida. In case it is not, I suppose someone is not doing their job > well. That would not be a problem of new regulation, but of > enforcing the existing. No. There is no requirement to teach _any_ HP canopy control in the ISP. You can complete every detail of the ISP under a .6 to 1 loaded DC-5 canopy and learn nothing about flying a HP canopy. That's the problem, and that's what I address in my proposal. It sounds like your DZ goes above and beyond the ISP, which is great. People are dying now because most DZ's do not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
