0
MikeFB2764

Good Idea? Bad Idea?

Recommended Posts

I'm glad he stopped. Sounds like a decent guy that way.

I don't think it's safe.

But even if it was, I think it's a crappy tandem. If a passenger pays for video, the video should be about them, not the pilot. It's a crappy product to sell to the passenger.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

BUT there are quotes from USPA board members on here that are quoted within ongoing lawsuits.



Quote

What ever happened to "I can't comment on ongoing investigations?"



I believe the comments that may or may not have been made were BEFORE an investigation even began.

Quote

Other than that USPA, it's leaders, and discussion of current issues should happen in person or at a round table.



Are you going to buy everyone and airline ticket and hotel?
Quote

What happens if Jacko does loose his ratings and then decides that he wants to sue USPA because one of it's board members was posting here trying to ensure he couldn't use his ratings to earn a living?



Jacko's actions will seal his own fate.

j
Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like a personal vendetta not an objective opinion, what do you think of instructors getting their ratings back after student fall out of harnesses. Do you think you should loose your drivers license if you jump a red light. How about this, if you pack, jump or otherwise use your skydiving gear for any other purpose other what it was designed and tested for ,you cannot fun jump according to manufacturers spec. Wait, wait I got another one. You open lower than the recommended altitude, USPA yanks your membership. Those all fall into the same category of safety. The problem is not his action but the dicipline system. Re-evalute everyone then on a regular basis. In our world of aviation, a pilot must undergo a bi-annual review(psst. that means every two years). As a pilot commercial carrying passengers FAR part 135 for hire a pilot must undergo recurrent training every year. What separates a tandem instructor from this. He has to have a medical current, right?(3 years) same as a private pilot not a commercial pilot(every 12months). Recurrent training and re-evaluation is key to maintaining a rating. FlightSafety whom under most Airline and Corporate pilots train use this"The best safety device is a well trained pilot" or.........fill in the blank. Can you imagine the revenue Evaluators and course directors will generate!!!! USe the experiance of the TI's out there that offer that expertise rather than condemn them to revoked ratings. Please don't misconstrue this as a teaching ground for aerial stunts. Just regulate (1) THOSE GETTING RATINGS, AND (2) MAINTENANCE OF RATINGS. If USPA yanks the rating from him then IT needs to re-evaluate its standard and apply that standard to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What happens if Jacko does loose his ratings and then decides that he wants to sue USPA because one of it's board members was posting here trying to ensure he couldn't use his ratings to earn a living?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Jacko's actions will seal his own fate.

j



I would not be too sure about that. And Jan's 'actions on the internet while on the board' certainly will not help to seal Jacko's faith, should he decide to sue.
Of course a defense as proposed by "vanpilot" (paraphrased:It was just bad luck that I got caught and others didn't...) has the weakness that that is invariably the case with any misdemeanor or crime so there I wouldn't hold my breath, but a "witch hunt" and "punishing twice" is frowned upon in most legal systems in the western world...

Reinstating the ratings of people that actually had passengers fall out of the harness, while at the same time revoking this one?

I wouldn't want to go to court as USPA if that were the case...

Of course the "crappy video / stealing the scene from the student" argument is completely beside the point when it is about revoking ratings - next thing you know you could lose yours since you "don't look good on television"...
And how about all those pictures floating around of TI's pretending to be asleep behind their passengers? It would be laughable for anybody that knows what is realy going on but from the logic of what is happening here it is but a small step towards being accused of dozing off on the job... :$

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well a lot of what was said and what happened seems contradictory. First you stated that a complainant drew attention to USPA about the manuever. Then a letter was issued to Jacko stating don't do it again, a slap on the hand...am I right so far I dont want there to be confusion. All that time this thread was active right?? After he received the "letter" he stopped but the complainant wanted a harsher judgment. Am I still on the right track so this thread produced the necessary support from jumpers and 1 known of board member to take furthur action based on this thread. Am I correct so far. Resulting in the Interim Motion passed by the EC which you do not agree with.....???So by clarifying that process a complaint resulted in an action, an action resulted in a letter, the judgment was not harsh enough( where is it stated in the GM what is defined as harsh enough). This thread continued, so this thread resulted in a harsher punishment through the timeline of July to August. How am I doing so far? How is it that one channel that was bypassed has worked in his favor the result stayed the same, then got worse? Just so we are all on the same page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Well a lot of what was said and what happened seems contradictory. First you stated that a complainant drew attention to USPA about the manuever. Then a letter was issued to Jacko stating don't do it again, a slap on the hand...am I right so far I dont want there to be confusion. All that time this thread was active right?? After he received the "letter" he stopped but the complainant wanted a harsher judgment. Am I still on the right track so this thread produced the necessary support from jumpers and 1 known of board member to take furthur action based on this thread. Am I correct so far. Resulting in the Interim Motion passed by the EC which you do not agree with.....???So by clarifying that process a complaint resulted in an action, an action resulted in a letter, the judgment was not harsh enough( where is it stated in the GM what is defined as harsh enough). This thread continued, so this thread resulted in a harsher punishment through the timeline of July to August. How am I doing so far? How is it that one channel that was bypassed has worked in his favor the result stayed the same, then got worse? Just so we are all on the same page.



I really do wish I could tell you the whole story, but I can't right now. It would not be fair to Mr. Jackson.
Let's just say that right now, as of today, USPA has swung the pendulum waaaay tooo far on the opposite side from what the RD did.
And I will state that I or this thread did not have anything to do with that decision. It came from the Executive Committee.

That interim motion is subject to review by the FB at the next meeting.
As I stated before, I do not think the motion as written will pass the FB.
As I stated before, nothing on this thread had anything to do with the decision that came from the USPA Executive Committee.
As I stated before, if Mr. Jackson wishes to contact me about this, I'd be more than happy to explain to him what has happened and what to do about it. Right now, I'm on his side to ameliorate what has happened and so are some other directors and members.

.
.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Sounds like a personal vendetta not an objective opinion,



Nope, sorry, wrong. Don't know the guy but from what I've seen I don't like.

Quote

what do you think of instructors getting their ratings back after student fall out of harnesses.



I don't think they should have their tandem rating back if their student falls out of the harness.

Quote

Do you think you should loose your drivers license if you jump a red light



If I was caught doing it alot, yes.

Quote

How about this, if you pack, jump or otherwise use your skydiving gear for any other purpose other what it was designed and tested for ,you cannot fun jump according to manufacturers spec.



Why would I want to go out side the manufactures recommendations? I wouldn't. Have no need to.

Quote

The problem is not his action but the dicipline system.



If his actions weren't in question then no discipline would be needed.

You have alot of blah blah blah in some of your posts. We are not talking about driving a car or airline pilots we are talking about the actions of a certain tandem master. Its kinda like you are trying to draw away attention from the matter at hand.

I don't believe he has shown very good judgement on his part, nor has the DZO's that have witnessed and done nothing about it. All parties should be disciplined.

j
Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Sounds like a personal vendetta not an objective opinion,



BS.

Quote

what do you think of instructors getting their ratings back after student fall out of harnesses.



I think its wrong.

Quote

Do you think you should loose your drivers license if you jump a red light.



Nope, you should get a ticket....Get enough of those and you WILL lose your license.

Quote

How about this, if you pack, jump or otherwise use your skydiving gear for any other purpose other what it was designed and tested for ,you cannot fun jump according to manufacturers spec



Ah, the difference is the life you risk is only your own, not some students.

Quote

Wait, wait I got another one. You open lower than the recommended altitude, USPA yanks your membership.



Open lower and the DZO should ground you.

Quote

Those all fall into the same category of safety. The problem is not his action but the dicipline system.



BS, the difference is who's life you risk. I already told you that if you wanted to play student for Jacko, I wish you all the best. The difference is taking a student that pays for a safe jump and not pulling stunts. Really, you and Jacko wanna go crazy? Have a blast. Maybe finish the stunt with a tandem pond swoop. As long as it is two experienced jumpers I don't care what you do. I bet Judy would say the same.

Quote

The problem is not his action but the dicipline system. Re-evalute everyone then on a regular basis. In our world of aviation, a pilot must undergo a bi-annual review(psst. that means every two years). As a pilot commercial carrying passengers FAR part 135 for hire a pilot must undergo recurrent training every year. What separates a tandem instructor from this. He has to have a medical current, right?(3 years) same as a private pilot not a commercial pilot(every 12months). Recurrent training and re-evaluation is key to maintaining a rating.



They must maintain currency requirements and attend an instructors refresher seminar...But then again this is not a case of a dangerous skydive due to an error or mistake. This is a case of a guy using a students jump to get his rocks off. It was never a question of skill, it was a question of judgment.

And your "requirements" would not have prevented this anyway.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One instructor is in the process of getting his rating back after a fatality. Did you know that? The drivers' license is an example to parallel. I.E. one infraction and you are out according to your law. As for you going outside of manufacturers spec ever tried sitflying kneeflying head down or any of that funky stuff when the gear was not speed rated or TSO'd for it. How would this sport progress into the 21st century? If you missed the cases of examples I.E. driving or a suggestion of recurrent training you missed the point it is also a suggestion of direction for training, your suggestions are limited to Hang him!! You areentitled to your opinion. AS for diciplining all parties involved well does that include the previous dropzones and tandem examiners or those else out there that have and are still doing this. Hope you aren't on the jury we'll all hang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron one minute you like him then you don't? Ask JAn what the USPA ruled on diciplining him. definately not one ticket one offence? I never backed his judgment I deplored of the system used to convict a skilled intsructor, even you agreed if he stopped that was cool. One instructor is in the process of getting his rating back then what? As long as he falls face to earth he should be ok right. What kind of recurrent training would you give him? The courses, instructors seminars may as well be pay your bucks refresh your ticket because that is all it acheives there is no standard maintained from 1. examiner to examiner or dropzone to dropzone. The emphasis I placed is for a country wide standard MAINTAINED by USPA. that way everyone is held to a common standard. What is done one way on the east coast I'll bet is not done the same way on the west coast it is a variation. My "requirements" would not have prevented anything Ron, they are intended for education. You, if you are a TI, should be embracing standardization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Did you know that? The drivers' license is an example to parallel. I.E. one infraction and you are out according to your law.



Depends on the severity of the crime. Some see playing with a tandem students life as quite severe.

Quote

Ron one minute you like him then you don't?



Oh, I do LIKE him, but that does not mean he automatically gets to do as he pleases anyway, anyhow, he wants. It is stupid to think that liking the guy has jackshit to do with me thinking he did something dumb.

1. I like the guy.
2. He did some dumb shit.

Quote

I never backed his judgment I deplored of the system used to convict a skilled intsructor, even you agreed if he stopped that was cool.



Please reread what I asked
Quote

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2398080#2398080

Question....How has the jumper responded about this? Has he admitted he screwed up and is he willing to fly right? Or is he pissed and thinks he was doing nothing wrong.

IMO that makes a big difference in the level of punishment.



And
Quote

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2398871#2398871 "For me, if he admits his mistake he should not be crushed. If he thinks he didn't screw up...Then crush away."



I said if he REALIZED he did something stupid and quit. Some have told me that he took the "I have mad skills and those posers don't know crap" angle.

I don't know for sure that is how he acted, but I have had people tell me that is exactly how he acted and not one person has said he realized he was doing something stupid.

Quote

One instructor is in the process of getting his rating back then what? As long as he falls face to earth he should be ok right.



Well if Jacko does start following the rules, I see no reason he cannot continue to do tandems. But you notice that the guy you mention "is in the process of getting his ratings back". So let Jacko get his ratings back. I am not exactly sure how, but I bet there is a process in place. If he, or the other guy starts pulling stupid tandem tricks again....Then yank their ratings for good.

Quote

What kind of recurrent training would you give him?



The guy that dropped a student....To be honest I am not sure I would let them get a Tandem rating again. But he would have to go through a course held by the manufacturer on how to properly adjust a harness.

Jacko....Well his is not a lack of skill, so I would not make him go through retraining. I would simply reprimand him, and if I ever saw a stupid stunt like that again, yank his rating forever. His case was not lack of skill. You can teach people skills, it was lack of judgment. Not so easy to teach. And THAT IS WHY I KEEP SAYING HIS ATTITUDE IS A BIG FACTOR IN WHAT I WOULD DO.

Quote

The courses, instructors seminars may as well be pay your bucks refresh your ticket because that is all it acheives there is no standard maintained



There are TONS of standards. Not one Tandem maker I know, nor the USPA, recommends the laterals to be loose, or to use the student as a pommel horse.

Quote

My "requirements" would not have prevented anything Ron, they are intended for education. You, if you are a TI, should be embracing standardization.



Above education should be responsibility. You can teach people skills, and re-teach those that lack them. But if people choose to do stunts....Well you can only prevent them from being in that situation where they risk others.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Of course the "crappy video / stealing the scene from the student" argument is completely beside the point when it is about revoking ratings - next thing you know you could lose yours since you "don't look good on television"...



no where did someone say to "pull a rating because the video was crap" for the customer - that's a side comment about it being a purely selfish thing.

But, it's still about taking care of the customer - that's safety first, but also should include the entertainment and experience, and also the video they take home and that it's focused on them.

I'm on Ron's side, if he fesses up and follows the manufacturer's instructions, then he should keep flying passengers. I don't see a point in any further punishment (I'm not a big fan in the FB trying to make a point to other TMs. Their action should be specifically about this specific TM and how he's going to change his behavior).

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it Rumourville or true that USPA pulled his Tandem and his AFF rating, I also heard they Yanked his USPA membership for 7 years!!!!
If this is true i understand the stink........
If it is true the skydivers i have spoken to will be starting a petition.
If it is true that is BS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know the USPA response. Maybe it's in one of our recent mags. Maybe it's just between the TM and USPA and they can communicate it to the world if they choose to. (If he has recognized the manuver is not responsible and genuinely stopped doing it, then I'd agree that pulling the rating is overkill - pulling the rating should only be based on the board being convinced he's a danger to doing again, they can't go backwards in time and fixed the mistakes with a punishment now. The other issue is the S&TA in his area, what about that person? Did they know? If so, how long?). I'd sign your petition if he truly has stopped doing it or stuff like it with unknowing students.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this has been a long thread with alot of good ideas and thoughts towards safety but nobody has found a good solution. as far as i know nobody has come out to csc to address any issues. when something happens like this why doesn't anyone from uspa or strong come out and see the operation of the dz ? better yet why doesn't somebody just visit any dz and just observe the operation dz ? the faa does. maybe if board members visited a few dz's here and there they could see issues like this, make recommendations to the dz owner, have these problems go away before all this crap ever gets started.( before the FAA could get involved) bad calls were made by alot o people here, my dz lost 2 s&ta's, jacko lost his rating (meal ticket) all because somebody didn't stop to question these activities before 20 plus videos got out. we need to find a way to better police ourselves. we need to ask ouselves what if ? what if the ti is doing this and the student does that what could happen ? skydiving has taken some big hits the last couple years and we need to find a way to turn it around. lets start finding ideas to make our sport safer and head off problems before the s&ta's loose their ratings, before the ti looses his rating , before another student dies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His attitude was of compliance, he stopped. USPA still issued"yanked rating and more". I agree with you that his attitude would greatly affect a decision. He stopped is that not indicative of his attitide. His personality as long as I have known him has never been egocentric. His reaction should be testamnet to his attitude. He stopped. PERIOD. USPA still issued a punishment as if he was the one who dropped a student. During this whole thread I backed JAcko as a competant instructor. I did not agree nor condone at anytime with what was done. What I contested was the manner dicipline was issued. References made to him were charcter fiber for those who wished to hang him like jlmiricle. JAcko's attitude as an instructor and a pilot do not warrent the punishment he was issued. That is the point of this dicussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

all because somebody didn't stop to question these activities before 20 plus videos got out



and

Quote

before the s&ta's loose their ratings



my hit on this is: it should have been the damn job of the s&ta's to stop this behavior long before the above mentioned 20+ videos were put on a website. or do you want to say that these persons didn't have a fuckin clue to what was going on?
after all s&ta's are safety and training advisers for crying out loud! i guess they'd better take their job serious

but what do i care, i don't even live in the states... i'm outta here for good
The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i agree the s&ta should have stopped it but when the S&TA , TI, dzo , video, and aff instructor are the same person who polices this person. if the dzo and S&TA are the same person the conflict of interest may require some aditional guidance. maybe uspa and/or strong/ vector/ racer ect need to look a little closer at these dz's. even if the DZO and S&TA are different people what can one do to change the mind of a dzo that thinks he/she is correct. i know that most of the uspa board members are jumpers so why don't they visit a few dz's during the jump season and fill out an evaluation sheet on what they see. my shop (although i own it ) is secretly evaluated several times a year buy a couple of the companies i do buisness with and they send me a rating acording to what is seen and done. this sounds far better than what has tanspired lately

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Is it Rumourville or true that USPA pulled his Tandem and his AFF rating, I also heard they Yanked his USPA membership for 7 years!!!!
If this is true i understand the stink........
If it is true the skydivers i have spoken to will be starting a petition.
If it is true that is BS



If true, I would not agree to him getting his AFF rating pulled. Nor him getting kicked out of the USPA. While I *could* see him losing his Tandem rating. I would not agree to anything else.

But, like I said, the level of "punishment" should be adjusted to how he reacted.

I do not agree with his AFF ticket getting pulled if true.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

His attitude was of compliance, he stopped



Sorry, his reaction was to stop. His attitude about it is not the same as his action. Case in point....Years ago I had two big guys threaten to beat my ass if they saw me low pull again. I didn't low pull again, but I thought I knew what I was doing thay they were stupid. Now, I realize that they had my best interest at heart and would gladley buy them a few beers.

I stopped, but that was different than admitting it was wrong.

Quote

JAcko's attitude as an instructor and a pilot do not warrent the punishment he was issued. That is the point of this dicussion.



I agree the point is the events, and how he took the order to stop. The punishment I think might be harsh, but I am not involved enough to know how he reacted. I have been told that he did not admit he was wrong, but instead quit due to being pressured. I got this from a few good sources. And maybe the USPA over reacted....But since I don't know the whole story, I cannot be sure.

Do you know if he got his AFF ticket pulled also?
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not at liberty to say what ratings were yanked, out of respect to Jacko and the final decision of the USPA. I know personally the contents of the letter issued by USPA, and responded to them with my own as did other instructors who did not agree with the verdict. What I can comment on when I spoke with JAcko is he felt he had been unfairly victimized, he agreed to stop based on the request of a RD letter. If he did not think it was wrong I do not think in my profession and personal opinion of Jacko that he would have stopped, case closed. His attitude was positive to all parties involved resulting in compliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Re-evalute everyone then on a regular basis. In our world of aviation, a pilot must undergo a bi-annual review(psst. that means every two years). As a pilot commercial carrying passengers FAR part 135 for hire a pilot must undergo recurrent training every year. What separates a tandem instructor from this. He has to have a medical current, right?(3 years) same as a private pilot not a commercial pilot(every 12months). Recurrent training and re-evaluation is key to maintaining a rating.

All the parties where invited by the DZ, paid vacation non came out. The FAA are already involved thanks to RD. Ideas and suggestions come from interactive well educated, involved individuals in the sport not open days to look for problems. This thread has spun so far out of control I do not believe this is the last of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

no where did someone say to "pull a rating because the video was crap" for the customer - that's a side comment about it being a purely selfish thing.


Side comments tend to mix up issues. The issue here is jumping with loosened side straps and believing to possess the free fall skills to deal with the extra risk caused by that behavior.
Quote

But, it's still about taking care of the customer - that's safety first, but also should include the entertainment and experience, and also the video they take home and that it's focused on them.


Anybody else doing this 'jumping with passenger thing' can go right ahead and ruin every video for all I care. Crappy video doesn't prompt people to go to court and it doesn't prompt aviation authorities to impose restrictions.
Other than that a written reprimand ought to be sufficient - all passengers lived happily ever after, didn't they? :)

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Side comments tend to mix up issues.



obviously is has with you

Quote

Crappy video doesn't prompt people to go to court and it doesn't prompt aviation authorities to impose restrictions



and still does (mix up issues) apparently - I'll stop trying to clarify it to you

I agree with the main point as you noted - purposely jumping loose straps and purposely causing extra risk.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
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.

0