SkySlut 0 #51 June 27, 2003 I think that you are nitpicking now...you know what I am getting at...knowledge or relative wind and air deflection...it really is the same thing, whether you are on your belly or sitflying, whatever. Its just different muscle groups for the most part. But there is something to be said for understanding those basic principals. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #52 June 27, 2003 Quote1) The coach rating-basic coach rating for those who dont really want to teach rw, but need it to get their tandem rating, etc. Have an advanced coaching rating that is geared towards people interested in actual rw coaching. why have more than one rating...One thing you need to learn is the USPA it's LAZY...And it takes FOREVER to have them do anything. Quote3) Make some changes in the SIM so it is more clear on who can jump with who...tough one, but I am sure that we can make this happen. they are already there...I's and coaches. I was a S/L JM for 7 years..I wanted to get my Tandem and my I....I had to take the BIC...Well I had been teaching students how to skydive for 7 years. And before that I taught martial arts. Why the hell did I have to take the BIC? Because the USPA said so...end of story. If you want to do something...do what it takes to do it. Ron"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
SkySlut 0 #53 June 27, 2003 Trust me...any beaurocratic body is slow...but action from the people, i.e. proactive DZs can make it happen and voices from the people. Discussion is a good thing. The USPA board members are still skydivers (slackers with a bit of ambition, no offense to any board members), they dont have a majical gift to put perfect rules into place...the majority of the ideas come from discussions like this and ideas from voters, etc. If we dont like it, change it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #54 June 27, 2003 >knowledge or relative wind and air deflection...it really is the same > thing, whether you are on your belly or sitflying, whatever. That's 100% true. But a great canopy pilot can't just hop in the seat of an F-14 and take off, even though aerodynamics is the same for everyone, everywhere. They are two different kinds of flying and they need to be trained for the (very different) kinds of flying required. >Its just different muscle groups for the most part. But there is >something to be said for understanding those basic principals. I agree with that too. You can learn those basics freeflying or doing RW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkySlut 0 #55 June 28, 2003 QuoteThat's 100% true. But a great canopy pilot can't just hop in the seat of an F-14 and take off, even though aerodynamics is the same for everyone, everywhere. They are two different kinds of flying and they need to be trained for the (very different) kinds of flying required. I would think that you would have to agree that you would have to start out on a cessna before you would have to progress to a F-14, yeah??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #56 June 28, 2003 QuoteI would think that you would have to agree that you would have to start out on a cessna before you would have to progress to a F-14, yeah??? At one point in time that was actually sort of true -- at least for the Air Force using Cessna 172s and T-37s A few years ago they switched their primary trainers to things that are a bit more advanced. Quote RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, Texas -- A T-6A Texan II aerial demonstration aircraft flies side-by-side with a vintage T-6 Texan. The two-ship flyby is called a "Texan Flight." The T-6A Texan II is flown by Maj. Todd Daggett, team chief and show pilot. The vintage T-6s are flown by a cadre of military aviation enthusiasts. (U.S. Air Force photo) This particular aircraft is pretty freekin' advanced for a primary trainer. But of course, I digress . . . back to the topic at hand.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkySlut 0 #57 June 29, 2003 Well, we wouldnt put a student under a velocity would we? Gotta learn to crawl, before we walk, then run in this sport. I do realize that some are naturals and progress faster than others and they shouldnt be held up in their progression either...its a fine line. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #58 June 29, 2003 Don't get caught in the devil's advocate argument with him. The physics are exactly the same. Just as the physics of flight are the same for a Cessna 150 or a B747. The physics apply to both exactly the same. The difference is speed as you stated. Now, if you want to discuss discipline, that is another story. Hauling trash or crop dusting, RW or FF. Along with speed comes the reduced window of opportunity to react to a situation. Who cares if it's 200 RW or 200 Sits, the coach who is flying with the student that is who. They should ask the Coach with that requirement if it needs to be RW or FF and argue with him. Don't get caught in an argument with the "experts" Barry. Skydiving is skydiving and it's a narrow road. When we move into our favorite disciplines is where the road "widens". There is no "dark side" it's just the other skydivers over there. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sducoach 0 #59 June 29, 2003 Quade, Help me here. Am I reading you right? Quote At one point in time that was actually sort of true -- at least for the Air Force using Cessna 172s and T-37s A few years ago they switched their primary trainers to things that are a bit more advanced. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, Texas -- A T-6A Texan II aerial demonstration aircraft flies side-by-side with a vintage T-6 Texan. The two-ship flyby is called a "Texan Flight." The T-6A Texan II is flown by Maj. Todd Daggett, team chief and show pilot. The vintage T-6s are flown by a cadre of military aviation enthusiasts. (U.S. Air Force photo) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This particular aircraft is pretty freekin' advanced for a primary trainer. But of course, I digress . . . back to the topic at hand The T-6 was used prior to WWII as a trainer of basic, aerobatic, formation, and instrument training. With several hours in a B model doing aerobatics myself, I'm not sure I'd call that an advanced aircraft compared to the Beech Mentor or the T38. Clear this up for me. Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkySlut 0 #60 June 29, 2003 I agree...I dont particularly agree that you need 200 jumps just to be considered to FF, but I am just stating some FF coaches attitudes. I am not a FF coach by any stretch of the imagination. I just really enjoy the devils advocate thing. It may not be my position really but it makes for some great discussion and people are opening up their minds to things that they may have not thought about before. I have gotten several PMs that have been great discussions as well. One of the things that people from the opposing sides seem to notice is that we actually have the same viewpoint in a roundabout way. Its good to bat around ideas on concepts, even though they may never happen or even be possible, but its good to sort out the logic of some of these things. Check out how many views there are on this thread. I havent seen a thread with so many views since the tit-ee bar thread!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mustard 0 #61 June 29, 2003 QuoteThe USPA board members are still skydivers (slackers with a bit of ambition, no offense to any board members), they dont have a majical gift to put perfect rules into place...the majority of the ideas come from discussions like this and ideas from voters, etc. If we dont like it, change it. LOL! Ya know, I got on the BOD in order to make some changes in safety & training, and I got a quick wake-up call at my first BOD meeting in January. The USPA BOD is made up of skydivers just like you, and most of us hope to make a difference not just for now, but for the future as well. This may or may not happen, because changing anything *is* like pushing a rope. You've got to be dedicated, and realize that you are a group, not a single person, so the best change comes from those who care enough to put out some effort -- and money. This is not a paid position, it's hard work to make anything happen. It needs to be representative of what the skydivers want to see change. Everybody knew that AFF was just not cutting it, the ISP came out as a first step. It's better but not perfect. But, that said, I am really quite happy to see how many people really do want to effect some real change, and are willing to expend effort to make it happen. Skyslut (Barry) is just one person I've met who impresses me with his dedication to make changes that matter to him. I'm heading off to the BOD meeting in two weeks, and we have a full plate of things to discuss. I will post here my wrapup of what happened in S&T, for sure! *** DJan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #62 June 29, 2003 Did ya look at the photo? If ya do I think you'll see we're both right. The newest primary trainer for the Air Force is named the T-6A Texan II in honor of the WWII era aircraft.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #63 June 30, 2003 QuoteQuade, Help me here. Am I reading you right? Quote At one point in time that was actually sort of true -- at least for the Air Force using Cessna 172s and T-37s A few years ago they switched their primary trainers to things that are a bit more advanced. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, Texas -- A T-6A Texan II aerial demonstration aircraft flies side-by-side with a vintage T-6 Texan. The two-ship flyby is called a "Texan Flight." The T-6A Texan II is flown by Maj. Todd Daggett, team chief and show pilot. The vintage T-6s are flown by a cadre of military aviation enthusiasts. (U.S. Air Force photo) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This particular aircraft is pretty freekin' advanced for a primary trainer. But of course, I digress . . . back to the topic at hand The T-6 was used prior to WWII as a trainer of basic, aerobatic, formation, and instrument training. With several hours in a B model doing aerobatics myself, I'm not sure I'd call that an advanced aircraft compared to the Beech Mentor or the T38. Clear this up for me. Blues, J.E. The T6 maiden flight was in 1940. WWII started before that in most of the rest of the world. There was a similar trainer that pre-dated the T6, but it had a less powerful engine and fixed landing gear.... 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 sducoach 0 #64 June 30, 2003 Quade, You are the man! I did not see your picture before. Tell me more. That looks like a hybrid Mentor and something else. What is it and who is the manufacturer???? Thanks and Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChileRelleno 0 #65 July 3, 2003 QuoteMy question is...if he really enjoys coaching so much...why wouldnt this person get a rating??? or do they know it all already??? Yo Bro, I love jumping with newer jumpers and have thought about taking the coach course but it all boils down to time and money for me. I love watching the light go on in their eyes when they realize that (whatever) wasn't so hard, when I lay a stable base and have them 4 pts on me (star,sidebody,cat sidebody,star) and they're howling with happiness on the ground at 4pts, when a B license jumper asked me if I would do a RW nightjump with'em after he just did his 1st solo nightjump and felt his passion for this sport afterwards. But Vomitar my Bro I just can't get the time, place and money to come together in one spot. I don't know it all and never will but I'd like to learn more. But i still get told sometimes "Your not a coach, he/she has to go solo", well dude "Screw that!" Bye the way hows it hanging? hope lifes being good to ya! ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414 Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkySlut 0 #66 July 3, 2003 I think that this thread has really been getting into semantics, but the thing is that I think that everybody agrees that things need to change because the current system is not making anyone happy. No biggie. Things will change in time. Things are pretty good down here in FL. Its not too hot, but I still have managed to drink quite a few cold beverages to keep cool. How are things on your end??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites winsor 186 #67 July 3, 2003 QuoteQuoteThat's 100% true. But a great canopy pilot can't just hop in the seat of an F-14 and take off, even though aerodynamics is the same for everyone, everywhere. They are two different kinds of flying and they need to be trained for the (very different) kinds of flying required. I would think that you would have to agree that you would have to start out on a cessna before you would have to progress to a F-14, yeah??? Why bother? The thing is equipped with a simply teriffic ejection seat, and it would be a waste not to use it. Knowing what you're doing is imperative only if you expect to LAND the thing. Blue skies, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jumpgod 0 #68 September 3, 2003 I'm a coach myself with only miminal experience. I can only say that I would recommend a more experienced instructor over myself 100%. Students do crazy things up there and you've got to be ready for anything...even as a coach. My incidents: 1) unstable students -- chasing them all over the sky 2) students tracking underneath me and me having to bolt before they deploy 3) students tumbling and then pulling low 4) and most of all, students with no or very little canopy experience...and this isn't a major subject which coaches spend either much time training or instructing on... I leave the instruction to the veterans when able. Prospective coaches, be ready and don't be hesitant...be very aggressive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riddler 0 #69 September 4, 2003 QuoteThere is nothing in the BSR's that says you have to be a coach to jump with a new jumper 2003 SIM Section 2-1.6.b All students engaging in group freefall jumps must be accompanied by a by a USPA Coach until the student has obtained a USPA A license. Maybe I'm wrong, but I interpret that to mean that just the opposite of what you said. By group freefall jump, I interpret two or more jumpers, one being a student and one being a coach, or more than two jumpers, but at least one coach in there somewhere. But I do agree with everything you've said here. Heck - there are people without a Coach rating and thousands of jumps that won't jump with me because I'm a 200-something jump wonder. If those guys want to jump with a student, I would definitely encourage the student to do so - and I would surely be a little jealous I also doubt any DZ would prohibit that.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #70 September 4, 2003 QuoteQuoteThere is nothing in the BSR's that says you have to be a coach to jump with a new jumper 2003 SIM Section 2-1.6.b All students engaging in group freefall jumps must be accompanied by a by a USPA Coach until the student has obtained a USPA A license. Maybe I'm wrong, but I interpret that to mean that just the opposite of what you said. By group freefall jump, I interpret two or more jumpers, one being a student and one being a coach, or more than two jumpers, but at least one coach in there somewhere. But I do agree with everything you've said here. Heck - there are people without a Coach rating and thousands of jumps that won't jump with me because I'm a 200-something jump wonder. If those guys want to jump with a student, I would definitely encourage the student to do so - and I would surely be a little jealous I also doubt any DZ would prohibit that. Let's be clear on this - a coach with 110 jumps may take three 12-jump wonders on a 4-way, but three experienced 4-way competitors but no coach rating may not take one 24 jump wonder on a 4-way. Makes sense.... 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 billvon 2,400 #71 September 4, 2003 >2003 SIM Section 2-1.6.b Unfortunately the SIM I have here is the 2001 SIM, so I'm out of date. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riddler 0 #72 September 4, 2003 I think 2001 was prior to introduction of Coach regulations, but I was just starting my skydiving then, so I'm not sure. The 2003 SIM is available on-line now, thanks to Mustard, Jan Meyer and others. And I mis-stated - it's 2.1.E.6.b Ed to add - I am not advocating this - just stating what the USPA regs are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
mustard 0 #61 June 29, 2003 QuoteThe USPA board members are still skydivers (slackers with a bit of ambition, no offense to any board members), they dont have a majical gift to put perfect rules into place...the majority of the ideas come from discussions like this and ideas from voters, etc. If we dont like it, change it. LOL! Ya know, I got on the BOD in order to make some changes in safety & training, and I got a quick wake-up call at my first BOD meeting in January. The USPA BOD is made up of skydivers just like you, and most of us hope to make a difference not just for now, but for the future as well. This may or may not happen, because changing anything *is* like pushing a rope. You've got to be dedicated, and realize that you are a group, not a single person, so the best change comes from those who care enough to put out some effort -- and money. This is not a paid position, it's hard work to make anything happen. It needs to be representative of what the skydivers want to see change. Everybody knew that AFF was just not cutting it, the ISP came out as a first step. It's better but not perfect. But, that said, I am really quite happy to see how many people really do want to effect some real change, and are willing to expend effort to make it happen. Skyslut (Barry) is just one person I've met who impresses me with his dedication to make changes that matter to him. I'm heading off to the BOD meeting in two weeks, and we have a full plate of things to discuss. I will post here my wrapup of what happened in S&T, for sure! *** DJan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #62 June 29, 2003 Did ya look at the photo? If ya do I think you'll see we're both right. The newest primary trainer for the Air Force is named the T-6A Texan II in honor of the WWII era aircraft.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #63 June 30, 2003 QuoteQuade, Help me here. Am I reading you right? Quote At one point in time that was actually sort of true -- at least for the Air Force using Cessna 172s and T-37s A few years ago they switched their primary trainers to things that are a bit more advanced. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, Texas -- A T-6A Texan II aerial demonstration aircraft flies side-by-side with a vintage T-6 Texan. The two-ship flyby is called a "Texan Flight." The T-6A Texan II is flown by Maj. Todd Daggett, team chief and show pilot. The vintage T-6s are flown by a cadre of military aviation enthusiasts. (U.S. Air Force photo) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This particular aircraft is pretty freekin' advanced for a primary trainer. But of course, I digress . . . back to the topic at hand The T-6 was used prior to WWII as a trainer of basic, aerobatic, formation, and instrument training. With several hours in a B model doing aerobatics myself, I'm not sure I'd call that an advanced aircraft compared to the Beech Mentor or the T38. Clear this up for me. Blues, J.E. The T6 maiden flight was in 1940. WWII started before that in most of the rest of the world. There was a similar trainer that pre-dated the T6, but it had a less powerful engine and fixed landing gear.... 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
sducoach 0 #64 June 30, 2003 Quade, You are the man! I did not see your picture before. Tell me more. That looks like a hybrid Mentor and something else. What is it and who is the manufacturer???? Thanks and Blues, J.E.James 4:8 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChileRelleno 0 #65 July 3, 2003 QuoteMy question is...if he really enjoys coaching so much...why wouldnt this person get a rating??? or do they know it all already??? Yo Bro, I love jumping with newer jumpers and have thought about taking the coach course but it all boils down to time and money for me. I love watching the light go on in their eyes when they realize that (whatever) wasn't so hard, when I lay a stable base and have them 4 pts on me (star,sidebody,cat sidebody,star) and they're howling with happiness on the ground at 4pts, when a B license jumper asked me if I would do a RW nightjump with'em after he just did his 1st solo nightjump and felt his passion for this sport afterwards. But Vomitar my Bro I just can't get the time, place and money to come together in one spot. I don't know it all and never will but I'd like to learn more. But i still get told sometimes "Your not a coach, he/she has to go solo", well dude "Screw that!" Bye the way hows it hanging? hope lifes being good to ya! ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414 Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkySlut 0 #66 July 3, 2003 I think that this thread has really been getting into semantics, but the thing is that I think that everybody agrees that things need to change because the current system is not making anyone happy. No biggie. Things will change in time. Things are pretty good down here in FL. Its not too hot, but I still have managed to drink quite a few cold beverages to keep cool. How are things on your end??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 186 #67 July 3, 2003 QuoteQuoteThat's 100% true. But a great canopy pilot can't just hop in the seat of an F-14 and take off, even though aerodynamics is the same for everyone, everywhere. They are two different kinds of flying and they need to be trained for the (very different) kinds of flying required. I would think that you would have to agree that you would have to start out on a cessna before you would have to progress to a F-14, yeah??? Why bother? The thing is equipped with a simply teriffic ejection seat, and it would be a waste not to use it. Knowing what you're doing is imperative only if you expect to LAND the thing. Blue skies, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumpgod 0 #68 September 3, 2003 I'm a coach myself with only miminal experience. I can only say that I would recommend a more experienced instructor over myself 100%. Students do crazy things up there and you've got to be ready for anything...even as a coach. My incidents: 1) unstable students -- chasing them all over the sky 2) students tracking underneath me and me having to bolt before they deploy 3) students tumbling and then pulling low 4) and most of all, students with no or very little canopy experience...and this isn't a major subject which coaches spend either much time training or instructing on... I leave the instruction to the veterans when able. Prospective coaches, be ready and don't be hesitant...be very aggressive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #69 September 4, 2003 QuoteThere is nothing in the BSR's that says you have to be a coach to jump with a new jumper 2003 SIM Section 2-1.6.b All students engaging in group freefall jumps must be accompanied by a by a USPA Coach until the student has obtained a USPA A license. Maybe I'm wrong, but I interpret that to mean that just the opposite of what you said. By group freefall jump, I interpret two or more jumpers, one being a student and one being a coach, or more than two jumpers, but at least one coach in there somewhere. But I do agree with everything you've said here. Heck - there are people without a Coach rating and thousands of jumps that won't jump with me because I'm a 200-something jump wonder. If those guys want to jump with a student, I would definitely encourage the student to do so - and I would surely be a little jealous I also doubt any DZ would prohibit that.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #70 September 4, 2003 QuoteQuoteThere is nothing in the BSR's that says you have to be a coach to jump with a new jumper 2003 SIM Section 2-1.6.b All students engaging in group freefall jumps must be accompanied by a by a USPA Coach until the student has obtained a USPA A license. Maybe I'm wrong, but I interpret that to mean that just the opposite of what you said. By group freefall jump, I interpret two or more jumpers, one being a student and one being a coach, or more than two jumpers, but at least one coach in there somewhere. But I do agree with everything you've said here. Heck - there are people without a Coach rating and thousands of jumps that won't jump with me because I'm a 200-something jump wonder. If those guys want to jump with a student, I would definitely encourage the student to do so - and I would surely be a little jealous I also doubt any DZ would prohibit that. Let's be clear on this - a coach with 110 jumps may take three 12-jump wonders on a 4-way, but three experienced 4-way competitors but no coach rating may not take one 24 jump wonder on a 4-way. Makes sense.... 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
billvon 2,400 #71 September 4, 2003 >2003 SIM Section 2-1.6.b Unfortunately the SIM I have here is the 2001 SIM, so I'm out of date. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #72 September 4, 2003 I think 2001 was prior to introduction of Coach regulations, but I was just starting my skydiving then, so I'm not sure. The 2003 SIM is available on-line now, thanks to Mustard, Jan Meyer and others. And I mis-stated - it's 2.1.E.6.b Ed to add - I am not advocating this - just stating what the USPA regs are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
