Should 'PRO' Requirements be Increased?

[airtwardo 6]

I'm wondering what the general concessus here would be to raising the requirements to get a PRO rating.

My thoughts are that the current requirements are way to low.

I believe the requirements should be on par with a Tandem or AFF rating.
You should be tested on your knowledge as well as demonstrate in a more practical manner your abilities to perform under 'stressful' situations.

I also think the rating should cost much...much, more than it does now.
250.00-500.00 dollar range,
this money would be used to fund the overseeing of some demos by the ASO or Conference Director...or even create a new position.

Any thoughts?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[John4455 0]

Lets wait till I get mine first!!!!

How do ya like it Johnny?

[Ron 7]

Quote

I'm wondering what the general concessus here would be to raising the requirements to get a PRO rating.

I think its about right...How many accidents have we had with PRO rated jumpers since it has been raised?

Quote

You should be tested on your knowledge as well as demonstrate in a more practical manner your abilities to
perform under 'stressful' situations.

I agree...I don't know how we could do this. I think (I can't remember who said it here) that the PRO test should have one question..."Are you willing to CXL a paid Demo if the conditions are not right?" If the answer is yes, then you get the card.

I think that the program in place is pretty good. I would like to see more people go to classes for this, not just be able to land 10 times in a circle...Smoke, and flags are more than just spot landings. I think that this gets missed a lot.

Quote

I also think the rating should cost much...much, more than it does now.
250.00-500.00 dollar range,

This I don't agree with...In fact I am going to let my PRO expire. I have not done a DEMO in two years...Nor do I see one in my future. I can always get it again.

But if it were 250.00-500.00, I would have let it go a long time ago.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[quade 3]

Did you get a chance to read about the Jim Wallace Demo School article in Skydiving Magazine a few months ago?

It was a pretty darn thorough course. Maybe you could talk with him about some ideas.

I'm a little curious what additional requirements you'd put on the students. 1000 jumps? Intentional cutaways?

I also don't understand the rational behind raising the costs? Why would there need to be any additional oversight? Isn't the threat of FAA oversight enough of an incentive to do everything "correctly" already?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[diablopilot 2]

I wonder why you feel the requirements are too low. Have you heard/seen any incidens involving PRO rated jumpers? I think you may be better served to try to make sure people are not just having their renewals "signed-off" buy their buddies.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[waltappel 1]

Why do you feel the requirements are too low?

I do not mean this as an attack on you but I must ask whether your motivation is to reduce the number of qualified demo jumpers so you get more contracts.

A PRO rating is not all that easy to get and I see no reason to make the requirements more stringent. I could *possibly* see an advantage to having two levels of PRO rating--one for those who organize demos and another for those who simply do the jumps but are not involved in the organization, but even this seems a bit questionable.

Walt

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

I think its about right...How many accidents have we had with PRO rated jumpers since it has been raised?

Quote

Well that's hard to say...
I can't get any actual numbers from USPA as to how many and the payouts involved as far as insurance goes...
The problem is, the insurance payouts for injuries and damages done during PRO demos is 3 times that of the general membership. (insurance)
Obviously, the number of PRO jumps is just a fraction of the general membership...yet they do 3X the damage!
This tells me that the people doing these demos are not qualified to be putting people and property in harms way.

When I got my tandem rating...I was told that now more than just my life was at stake as far as my decision process goes.
I was tested and evaluated by people that knew what was going to be required of me to safely perform a tandem jump.
The equipment necessary to do this type of jump was specially designed and tested.
Non of which is true for Demos...
And if you are going into a stadium...MANY lives could be at stake.
I've seen demo jumpers injured and in 2 cases killed from using equipment that was not safe, and had NO business being jumped for demonstration purposes.
I think a minimum standards for gear pertaining to demos should be added to the BSR's.
There was a spectator that was KILLED watching a demo a few years ago!
Demo jumps are NOT ordinary skydives!
It's a skill...just like freefly or style or entering 50th...
A skill that must be learned, refined and practiced to be kept current.
If you have a Pro Rating and haven't done a demo all year, are you really ready to pack up, hop in a plane and land in a tight area?
I can be done...but eventually the odds will win...you can't lay off big ways all year and expect to close last every time at the record attempt.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

I also don't understand the rational behind raising the costs? Why would there need to be any additional oversight? Isn't the threat of FAA oversight enough of an incentive to do everything "correctly" already?

Quote

Basically because there isn't ANY oversight to speak of now.

When I go to any given city in the US...I'm expected to contact the ASO and or the Conference director as to the Demo I'm to perform.

I've done this..yet in the 20 plus years I've been doing demos as a PRO, I have never met in person with anyone as to who, what, when and where...

I could be Joe Lunchbox that had never done a demo before...'bought' my pro rating as is sometimes done...and be trying to do something destine for disaster!

Who would know?...and even if it were found that I had violated some regulations...
The USPA insurance will pay anyway...no questions asked!
(they have NEVER denied a claim)
And in most istances...the pilots ass is on the line with the Feds, not mine!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

I wonder why you feel the requirements are too low. Have you heard/seen any incidens involving PRO rated jumpers? I think you may be better served to try to make sure people are not just having their renewals "signed-off" buy their buddies.
Blue Skies, -jp-

Quote

Yes I have...WAY to many...

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[airtwardo 6]

***I do not mean this as an attack on you but I must ask whether your motivation is to reduce the number of qualified demo jumpers so you get more contracts.

Quote

I don't take your comment as an attack...
In fact, my goal would be to INCREASE the number of QUALIFIED Pro holders.

I have taken many demo wannabe's and helped guide them through what I believe to be a safe and methodical way of approaching demonstration jumping.
I've offered to assist as ground crew at my expense to people that I felt were in need of some additional coaching to pull one off.

I firmly belive that demo's are an important aspect to the skydiving industry...
No one is making a living doing demos...much less getting rich!
If I can help out to make a good presentation...I'm happy.
As are most of the true professionals doing this.

I've had guys try to sneak pictures of specialized demo gear utilized in our act...
I tell them- ASK me questions, I'll show you how to do it safely...you can kill yourself trying something that you 'think' might work.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[quade 3]

Quote

I could be Joe Lunchbox that had never done a demo before...'bought' my pro rating as is sometimes done...and be trying to do something destine for disaster!

Let's assume that the type of Demo you're talking about is a Level 2 or Stadium Demo as defined by USPA SIM Section 7.

Aren't those Demos already required to have the notification via FAA form 7711-1 and approval via FAA form 7711-2? Also, TSA waivers if required.

Yes, I'll admit that few FAA Inspectors will probably not completely understand what a skydive even is, but at least they'll be following the letter of the FARs in granting approvals.

Or is it your contention that a person could hire himself out as a Demo jumper, do a snow job on the approval process and the USPA would still pay the insurance? If so, I'd think the real issue is to have the USPA insurance company subrogate the 3rd party claim to the jumper. That way the USPA keeps a "good" reputation of providing insurance, but it comes out of the pockets of the weasle unqualified or shady Demo jumper.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[waltappel 1]

You have brought up some very good points in your posts and I think it is undeniable that demo jumps are in no way *ordinary* skydives. There is usually a lot going on and always some unknowns to deal with and a casual attitude can be disastrous.

I think the most important factor for doing good safe demo jumps is the attitude of each member of the demo team, and the most important part of that attitude is having the courage to say 'NO' when the situation warrants it. That is something that raising fees and requirements cannot instill in anyone.

I am all for some sort of apprenticeship or formal training, but that is something that is not readily available to a lot of jumpers and may not ever be easily available, because there is just not much of a demand for it in the skydiving community.

I agree with a lot of what you have to say, but I don't think raising requirements and fees is going to prevent demo accidents caused by poor judgement.

Walt

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Or is it your contention that a person could hire himself out as a Demo jumper, do a snow job on the approval process and the USPA would still pay the insurance? If so, I'd think the real issue is to have the USPA insurance company subrogate the 3rd party claim to the jumper. That way the USPA keeps a "good" reputation of providing insurance, but it comes out of the pockets of the weasle unqualified or shady Demo jumper.

Quote

The USPA will pay...as a point of past history anyway.

And the 7711's are just so much paperwork in most cases.
All it amounts to, (in my opinion anyway) is another case of government CYA.

...And Paul, we BOTH know of people the have completely circumvented the paperwork for this type of demo and gone ahead with the jump.
(You personally may not be aware they've done it...but you know of whom I speak)

And honestly these really aren't the types of demo's I'm most concerned about.
It's the 'company picnic' or the buddies wedding, things that need closer supervision.

And I agree on the 3rd party approach...
but, then lawyers are involved...and even more membership money is spent to recover something that likely should never have happened anyway.

It's just my contention that this thing needs to be more closely regulated...

And trust me I hate to think of trying to regulate our sport.

But I believe history is has shown that something needs to done.
People are getting hurt...property is being damaged, of this there is no question.

The movement by the BOD to do away with demo insurance is proof that an effect is being felt.

Perhaps just more education is required...but how many people would do it voluntarily?

Again..it's just my opinion...but it's a rating that is entirely to easy to get, considering the consequence if the holder is in over his head.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[quade 3]

Quote

And honestly these really aren't the types of demo's I'm most concerned about.
It's the 'company picnic' or the buddies wedding, things that need closer supervision.

Ok, so here's the big question, if you make a PRO rating very, very difficult and expensive to get, do you think this will encourage or discourage people from getting the training?

Because I don't think it'll stop people from doing the kind of wacky-assed bandit types of demos you're talking about. As a matter of fact I think it'll make them more likely to happen.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[masher 1]

Just thought you'd like to know the requirements for Aussie display licences, for comparison.


We have Display D, C, B and A. (lowest to highest) and a LDO (Licenced Display Organiser). For our demps you need an LDO to organise and coordinate and Display licenced jumpers to do the jump. The LDO can be one of the jumpers, as long as they have the right licence.

As far as costs go, I don't know what the tests for the A licence cost, but the licences themselves cost AU$60 for 12 months. You can upgrade for free in that period.

Just for your information. In 2002, 129 Display D's were awarded, no Display A's and there were 5 new LDO's. 28 jumpers got their F licence.

As far as I can tell, your PRO rating is a combination of an LDO and half a Display B. PROs can organise and carry out a demo, yes?


Italics are my own notes.

3.4.1. Display Licence "D" conditions: Applicants must hold a valid Certificate "B" (50 jumps) or higher.

3.4.2 Display Licence "C" conditions: Applicants must:
(a) Hold a valid Certificate "D" (200 jumps);
(b) Have made 20 consecutively nominated descents landing within 20 metres of the target centre (see 3.1.9);
(c) Have performed at least 5 display descents in the past 12 months.

3.4.3. Display Licence "B" conditions: Applicants must:
(a) Either,
Hold a valid Certificate "E" (500 jumps);
Or, alternatively,
(i) Hold a valid Certificate "D" (200 jumps)
(ii) Complete a course in display jumping approved by the Director Safety;
(iii) Be recommended for the Display "B" Licence by a Display Licence Examiner;
(b) Have made 20 consecutively nominated descents landing within 5 metres of the target centre (see 3.1.9);
(c) Have performed at least 5 display descents of Display Licence "C" standard in the past 12 months.

3.4.4. Display Licence "A" conditions: Applicants must:
(a) Hold a valid Certificate "F" (1000 jumps);
(b) Have made 20 consecutively nominated descents landing within one metre of the target centre (see 3.1.9);
(c) Have performed at least 5 display descents of Display Licence "B" standard
in the past 12 months;
(d) Demonstrate to an examiner the ability to land consistently within the minimum landing area specified in 5.7.9 under conditions specified by the Display Licence Examiner.



3.4.5. Display Organiser's Licence conditions: Applicants must, except on the recommendation of a Display Licence Examiner:
(a) Be a current member of the Australian Parachute Federation;
(b) Hold a valid Certificate "D" or higher;
(c) Have participated in, as parachutist, ground crew or assisting in the organisation of, at least twenty parachute displays in the previous four years;
(d) Have assisted in the organisation of at least five parachute displays in the previous two years;
(e) Be recommended by a Chief Instructor, Display Licence Examiner or the Director Safety;
(f) Pass examinations set by a Display Licence Examiner and be recommended for the licence by the Display Licence Examiner.


5.7.9. For holders of Display Licence "A" the minimum landing area clear of landing hazards and spectators shall be 500 square metres, or the minimum area allowed by 5.3.1, whichever is smaller, with a minimum of 5 metres between the target and the spectators.



3.1.9. Where an application for issue of any licence or certificate requires the applicant to have made consecutively nominated jumps, these jumps must be nominated before emplaning to, and the landing witnessed by, the DZSO of a Training Organisation, Chief Instructor, ASO, Event Judge at an accuracy competition, or a Display Licence Examiner. The application is to be verified by a Chief Instructor.


edit: added 2002 information

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Because I don't think it'll stop people from doing the kind of wacky-assed bandit types of demos you're talking about. As a matter of fact I think it'll make them more likely to happen.

Quote

Point taken...

I don't know what the answer is...
Maybe a sign-off after completing a class structured after Wally's would be of benefit.

I'm just looking for input, trying to get a fresh look at what I perceive to be a problem that will eventually effect the sport in a negative manner.

As I said, the demo insurance will in all likelihood be going away completely after the next BOD meeting in six months.
Can the general membership ins. be far behind?

If that happens what will be the effect on our sport...???
Well, for starters a lot of small dropzones will have to severely limit their operation if not close down altogether...They won't accept the liability involved in the day today operations. Many already are operating without coverage on their aircraft, as it's cost prohibitive.

As Chris Needles said in an editorial last year...we ALL need to take measures to limit the amount of "harm" we're causing. (I paraphrase)

I do find Mashers post of interest...
Seems our friends from down under have at least addressed the problem...and it make some sense.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[masher 1]

When you're being examined for your PRO rating, can the examiner set up an illegal/v. difficult jump for you?

For the A licence (only) the Examiner can set up a jump that they think is too difficult/dangerous for the jumper. Then if the jumper does the jump, then they are considered unprofessional for refusing the jump and get failed.

I've included a copy of the Examiner guidlines from the application form for you:

DISPLAY LICENCE "A" - TEST JUMPS
GUIDELINES FOR DISPLAY LICENCE EXAMINERS
The candidate should make enough jumps (minimum three) to satisfy the Examiner that they can perform his task of landing competently and consistently in tight and difficult areas. The target area and the conditions under which the jumps are made should be selected by the Examiner, but the conduct of the jump itself (including appointment of TCO, organisation of aircraft operation etc.) should be organised by the candidate.

The Examiner should select areas and conditions to include as many as practical of the following:
* Jumps in high winds.
* Jumps in light/nil winds.
* Jumps in wind of changeable speed and direction.
* Jumps in turbulent conditions.
* The area should not be larger than that allowed for the Display "A" (see Operational Regulation 5.7.9), and should preferably be somewhat smaller.
* The area should be surrounded by obstacles of a realistic nature (eg. cars, trees, buildings, people etc.), rather than using an open area such as a pit.
* A jump where the precise location of the target and its relation to hazards is not known at take-off.

In assessing the candidate, the Examiner should consider:
* Did the candidate perform competently?
* Did the candidate perform professionally?

Bearing in mind that the licence is the highest available display licence, it is reasonable to expect the candidate not only to land on the target, but also to land in a manner which would bear evidence of the skill of the jumper. A bad landing, even if accurate, should not be considered a competent landing.

An examiner may set a task which he considers too difficult (eg. into a very tight area, surrounded by dangerous hazards, and in poor weather conditions). They may then consider that the candidate's attitude is unprofessional if he does not decline to make the jump under those conditions.

Such a judgement, and in fact the conduct of the whole examination, requires a high level of maturity and integrity on the part of the Examiner. Examiners should realise that the Display "A" licence will be highly prized, and that their assessment of the candidate must be seen to be absolutely without bias and beyond reproach. There may be instances were an Examiner feel that he may be open to charges of bias. In these cases, he should request that another Examiner administers the examination.

Details of the test jumps should be attached to the Display Licence application form.

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[mjosparky 3]

Masher,
If USPA were to adopt similar requirements, it would be a good bet we would have far fewer Pro rated jumpers in the US.
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[masher 1]

But then wouldn't they be better qualified?


I don't know the specific things (for want of a better word) that each (Australian) licence allows the jumper to do other than landing in smaller areas.

When I first saw the requirements for the PRO rating, I was suprised at how low the requirements were (compared to ours).

Landing area is one. The minimum landing area aloowable for a PRO jump is 5000 sqft. (~22 m square) The minimum landing area for an A licence is 500 sqm (~22 m square). But the accuracy requirement for a PRO is equivelent to half a B licence.

That said, things like flag and smoke rigging are good. I don't know if they're included in the A examination, as the requirements aren't specifically outlined.

--
Arching is overrated - Marlies

[mjosparky 3]

Yes they would and I think that would be an improvement.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[wrightskyguy 1]

[

I also think the rating should cost much...much, more than it does now.
250.00-500.00 dollar range,
this money would be used to fund the overseeing of some demos by the ASO or Conference Director...or even create a new position.

Any thoughts?

[Ron 7]

Quote

As I said, the demo insurance will in all likelihood be going away completely after the next BOD meeting in six
months.
Can the general membership ins. be far behind?

As soon as the USPA drops the general membership ins....A large number of DZ's will drop out of the Group member program...I will drop my USPA membership as will MANY others.

The only reason I have the USPA membership is so I can jump at all the DZ's.

As for the PRO rating.....Well, there does need to be a better control over who can do a demo. I have not done a demo in two years...I still have kept my PRO current. But on the other hand I am not about to do a Demo anytime soon. I would need to train up for it (I have over 100 "live" Demos, and probley 500 "Training" jumps for demos.) So I see the need to be current...

Joe Snuffy does not see that. He fiqures he has a PRO, and he should be allowed to do a Demo. So when he gets offerd one he takes it with very little extra training.

The Golden Knights have made mistakes on Demos....And its their job, and they are the best in the world at it. What makes Joe Jumper as qualified?

Classes like the ones the GK's have given, and the ones offerd in CA. go a long way to making Demos safer....

Until the average jumper stops looking at demos as "just another jump". We will continue to have this problem.

I am letting my PRO go for just this reason..I have not done a Demo in 2 years...I don't plan on doing one, and I don't have the correct gear for one...I am not going to keep the rating just to have it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Did someone drop you on your head or something?

Quote

AHHH, Yeah John...
Right on Dude!
Great input Thanks!

Now it's nap time...I'll wake you if something good happens.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[airtwardo 6]

Hey Masher..
Is there any possibility I can get a hard copy of those rules as distributed by your oversight organization?

I really think you're on to something there!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[mjosparky 3]

Joe Snuffy does not see that. He fiqures he has a PRO, and he should be allowed to do a Demo. So when he gets offerd one he takes it with very little extra training.

The Golden Knights have made mistakes on Demos....And its their job, and they are the best in the world at it. What makes Joe Jumper as qualified?

Classes like the ones the GK's have given, and the ones offerd in CA. go a long way to making Demos safer....

Until the average jumper stops looking at demos as "just another jump". We will continue to have this problem.

I am letting my PRO go for just this reason..I have not done a Demo in 2 years...I don't plan on doing one, and I don't have the correct gear for one...I am not going to keep the rating just to have it.