Recommended Posts
QuoteSitting in on one class and teaching two more is not enough training.
I agree with you, but that is the point, too. That this is an intro-rating, to have you working closely with folks that know exactly WTF (usually), AFF-Is. Sort of a Sea Daddy type of system, AFF-Is help grow Coach rated jumpers then they eventually move on to other ratings.
Is that how it is done? Probably not, I know that hows its working in Aggieland. That's how I became a TM from a being a packer...worked with an AFF-I till I got my Coach rating, got my coach rating and worked with an AFF-I/TM until I got my TM and am continuing to work with him to become a better TM and eventually an AFF-I.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
kallend 1,683
Well, I'll repeat my question with slight change to the wording.
5 years ago beginners could be mentored by very experienced skydivers with 1,000s of jumps (as I was - thanks, guys). Many of these experienced folk hadn't an instructional rating because they didn't want one.
Now we have coaches with 100 - 200 jumps mentoring the beginners after a very brief qualification course, while people like Winsor are not allowed to do it unless they fork out $$ and time.
How was it determined that this was a better method?
Are beginners actually getting better mentoring under this scheme?
Has anyone bothered to find out?
Does anyone intend to do an assessment of the new procedures?
5 years ago beginners could be mentored by very experienced skydivers with 1,000s of jumps (as I was - thanks, guys). Many of these experienced folk hadn't an instructional rating because they didn't want one.
Now we have coaches with 100 - 200 jumps mentoring the beginners after a very brief qualification course, while people like Winsor are not allowed to do it unless they fork out $$ and time.
How was it determined that this was a better method?
Are beginners actually getting better mentoring under this scheme?
Has anyone bothered to find out?
Does anyone intend to do an assessment of the new procedures?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Seriously? Assuming US dropzones here: I don't know of a single non-USPA dropzone that does not require their instructors to be USPA rated. I also can't think of a single one that doesn't follow some form of "standard" instruction program like the ones used at USPA group member dropzones. True "outlaw" operations generally do not exist for long.
Chuck
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites