Skymonkey2 0 #176 November 29, 2009 I agree, the requirements to become a coach should be higher, at the July Board meeting in San Fran, myself and a couple of other Board Members tried to raise the mins to 200 jumps, it passed committee, but at the full board, there was a lot of resistance, and the two others in the S&TA committee that favored the change backed down and left me alone to fight it. This is the politics of your BODs. On the AFF side, I was at a dz in the mid-west for a week and witnessed an AFF jump with a newer AFF I and a non rated instructor, the student was 150 lbs, and wearing a cotton jumps suit (slow) the AFF I was 217lbs and in a tight RW suit, (fast) once the student was released the student was in a back sliding turn, not the AFF I or the want to be AFF I stopped the student, the student pulled in a back sliding turn, when the I's landed they said the student was to fast, I don't know that could be the student was stable on his belly, and the way they everyone was dressed made no sense. Makes me wonder! Then last week someone failed an AFF I course for the seconded time. The individual drove the next day to another examiner and in one day was an AFF I, when she was at the first examiner she jumped with multiple AFF I's and they all told the examiner that she was not ready, I ask how can that be. One thing is, it is all about the money!!!!! And this skydiver only had 380 jumps!!! A near similar situation happened this summer, an examiner let two young skydiver take the AFF course without meeting the minimum requirements and told them he would put a waiver in to UPSA, because they have so much tunnel time, I guess experience does not matter anymore!!!! The waiver did not get approved, but the two were told as soon as they meet the mins they can work with students, crazy!!!! Last I checked we have had more student and Instructor cypress fires in the last two years then ever, I can't show stats, but I get calls all the time, and some of the BOD members know this because we talked about it. By this spring we will have more then 30 AFF I/E's and some of them have only been in the sport for 3 years. Think about it.......AFFI-E, Tandem I-E, S/L I-E, IAD I-E, Coach I-E Students are our future teach them well Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deisel 37 #177 November 30, 2009 Aren't those the USPA minimums that you're talking about? If it's good enough for USPA then ...The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skymonkey2 0 #178 November 30, 2009 Yep, but that does not mean it is right! and really I don't think 380 jumps is really the min.AFFI-E, Tandem I-E, S/L I-E, IAD I-E, Coach I-E Students are our future teach them well Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Para5-0 0 #179 November 30, 2009 I have been advocating a time as coach requirement. If you make it a 12 month requirement then at least you should have a guy with and extra year and 20 coach jumps (In theory). That will enhance the Tandem I as well, guys are taking the coach course just to get their Tandem I, clearly stating "I am just getting this to get my Tandem Rating" I have had multiple students one week in the Coach course and the next in a tandem I, without making one coach jump or working with one student. I hear that knowing they will not make one coach jump, and I get discouraged, teaching the class. It will also give us some coaches who if they relly want to be Instructors will wait the 12 monthes. What would be the harm? Flame Away! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harmless 0 #180 November 30, 2009 QuoteYep, but that does not mean it is right! and really I don't think 380 jumps is really the min. 200 jumps 6 hours Freefall"Damn you Gravity, you win again" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deisel 37 #181 November 30, 2009 I would be in complete agreement with a time requirement. The issue with the TI situation is the requirement to already have an instructor rating before taking the course. Not the guys that already know that they ant to be TIs and not coaches. I would also be in favor of a more structured route to AFFI. Currently I'm going to friends to 'hook me up' with training dives in order to prep for the course. There should be a better way.The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tetra316 0 #182 November 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteYep, but that does not mean it is right! and really I don't think 380 jumps is really the min. 200 jumps 6 hours Freefall There is no minimum for jump numbers, just the 6 hours freefall time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasted3 0 #183 November 30, 2009 And a C licenseBut what do I know? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Harmless 0 #184 November 30, 2009 SOrry, yes I remembered wrong. It is a C license... (but in my defense that is nearly the same thing as saying 200 jumps ) "Damn you Gravity, you win again" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fasted3 0 #185 December 1, 2009 I know; I posted in your defence. The 6 hours is what will hold you back. It took me 275 jumps or so, with 100 of them in a wingsuit. Note: 100 wingsuit jumps in no way gave me any help toward becoming an instructor. For most people you are looking at 360 jumps. Many may not be ready at that point, but if someone has really dedicated themselves toward instruction, and meets the requirements imposed by real world testing, I think they could do the job.But what do I know? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #186 December 1, 2009 QuoteNot the guys that already know that they ant to be TIs and not coaches. By being a USPA Tandem instructor, you are a part of the teaching process, not a "ride operator".---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog 2 #187 December 1, 2009 Quote For most people you are looking at 360 jumps. Many may not be ready at that point, but if someone has really dedicated themselves toward instruction, and meets the requirements imposed by real world testing, I think they could do the job. You are kidding........isn't it time for a reality check here. The requirements are a joke. Whatever happened to depth of knowledge? At 360 jumps how have you mastered any skills? Jeez, c'mon guys. AFFI isn't a badge to aim for, this isn't the boy scouts. Remember you have REAL lives in your inexperienced hands.......... It is the end result of experience, knowledge and skill., which CANNOT be got after 360 jumps. Anyone can get lucky on a course (and there has been plenty of anecdotal evidence on that) Having done both the USPA and BPA AFF ratings I can say I do prefer the requirements of 1000 jumps and at least 3 years in the sport.Journey not destination..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #188 December 1, 2009 QuoteFor most people you are looking at 360 jumps. The only way you get 6 hours of freefall from 360 jumps is if each and every jump is from 13.5k+ with and opening at or lower than 2.5k. That requires a turbine aircraft, good weather and a good spot for every jump. No freeflying either, that goes too fast. The 6 hour requirement has beeen around for a long time, long enough that when it was made not everyone has access to a turbine aircraft and good weather for every jump. If you take that number to a Cessna DZ where they exit at 10.5k, you're looking at more like 500 jumps. Factor in some low clouds and hop n pops, and the jump number goes up. The other thing to remember is that 6 horus was also established when the AFF course was a lot harder to pass. You could show up with 360 jumps, but you wouldn't make it through the first 3 jumps. I think 6 hours needs to be ditched in favor of a min. jump number requirement, and I think it should be higher than 500. Probably closer to 750. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #189 December 1, 2009 Minimum times for coach ratings need to be implemented. I think you need to have a basic coach rating for at least a year before getting higher ratings. Too many times you will see a coach course scheduled for Friday-Sunday and the AFF course scheduled Monday-Sunday. The signature is not even dry yet on the Coach rating before the AFF class has started and the instructor has never jumped with any real students before they are able to take someone on a Cat C 2 release dive for their first instructor jump. The mentoring that comes with a properly ran coach program really helps train and teach both the student and the coach for their next steps. Also go back and review the USPA BOD meeting notes, there are multiple requests for the 6 hours to be waived over the last few years. The 6 hours is to be a prerequirement to take the course, not something that is to be waived after attending a course to make sure the paperwork is correct. I'm also not sure how during the coach/AFF camps that they are able to have signed off cards for the prerequirements since they have never jumped with a student or done the necessary ground preps outside of the experienced jumper realm in the classroom. I'd like to see a time in sport requirement linked to the AFF rating similar to tandem since its just too easy to get 300 jumps in a year anymore and not really have seen that much to be able to pass that knowledge on to your students. Tandems have it to at least make sure the person has been around to experience the sport and to learn its lessons.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
djmarvin 2 #190 December 1, 2009 Time in the sport brings about a lot of knowledge that would not be otherwise gained. I agree with several posters here. The minimum requirements for ratings should be reconsidered by our board (yes I have and still actively persue this conversation with board members). Several years ago we raised our requirements for licenses. It takes more time/jumps to gain licenses, but to become an instructor the numbers have remained the same for many years. The talent pool grows as well the skill sets, why not mandate more if more is available! Why settle for minimal instructors. (yes I realize there will always people who will aquire a rating with the bare minimums) DJ Marvin AFF I/E, Coach/E, USPA/UPT Tandem I/E http://www.theratingscenter.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Para5-0 0 #191 December 1, 2009 Amen to your post, I can give ample amount of examples..... I would love to hear from the 52 skydivers that voted that the standards were ok for Coach rating and more importantly the 6 asswipes who think it is too difficult. Who are they polling in this issue of Parachutist? How the hell is 100 jumps too difficult? how about we just give Coach ratings with the A license, we can make it a sign off on the yello card this way the coach rating can be lowered to 25 jumps. Wake up people will you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #192 December 1, 2009 Were the requirements for the old static line and IAD jumpmaster too easy? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #193 December 1, 2009 I like the Coach Time in Rating Requirement, add a Mentor Signature for a number of jumps through out the year and I think we will raise the level of ability of our I Candidates. This would sort of mirror the old JM to I transition. I think that system actually made for better informed and better "skilled" Instructors. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
propofol65 0 #194 December 1, 2009 Let's not forget the most important part...Not everyone can be an effective instructor/teacher. Sure some skate by in an AFFI course, but will they really be effective instructors? Maybe, maybe not. I want an AFFI to be knowledgeable and most important, be able to teach effectively to all levels of students (not everyone learns the same, so an instructor should be able to teach to different learning styles). Just my $0.02 worth Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deisel 37 #195 December 2, 2009 Not sure that I agree. There are many people out there that do tandems with no intention of ever taking up the sport or making a second jump. Sure there are some that end up catching the bug and doing AFF, but I would bet that the percentage is pretty low. There are also folks that only do tandems for the sole purpose of making money (hard to believe, I know) and servicing tourists. If these folks don't want anything to do with teaching (which is how I feel about tandem instruction), why would anyone want to force them into it? What kind of students would/do they turn out? To me it makes about as much sense as forcing someone to be a TI in order to be a AFFI. Personally I don't see a problem with the whole tandems for money side of it. I say let the AFFIs teach and the TIs give rides. DThe brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skymonkey2 0 #196 December 2, 2009 Yes there are a few waiver requests for the 6 hours, but only two examiners filled the request, and both of them did it after the course, and only one of the got approved, and the individual that got aprroved was a tunnel rat. Tunnel time does not make up for in the air experience, I have had a couple of tunnel rats come to my courses I know. I guess it is ok to ask for forgiveness instead of permission. And one of the Examiners is on the BOD's figure that out. 275 jumps and 250 jumps, you are now an AFF (this happened at your dz phreezone) I. YEA lets party......AFFI-E, Tandem I-E, S/L I-E, IAD I-E, Coach I-E Students are our future teach them well Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skymonkey2 0 #197 December 2, 2009 You have turned out quit the politition, your mentor did well. There are a lot of examiners out there that give really good pre-course, an AFF I is not always the one that should get you ready for your course, yes there are some that can. By April we will have about 30 AFF I/E's in the US, what is to become of the standards, we are already seeing AFF students having AAD's firing, AFF I's having AAD's firing one AFF student died, I just got an email from a DZ in the N.E. area were two students got away and one was almost fatal. What is next. I remember when the E/I rating was hard, before the new I/E there were only about 70 I/E's, we have made it a joke. As an I/E you were supposed to be the expert in the sport of skydiving, AFF I/E are bragging about having a 90% sucsesses rate, I don't know how that is so. wait I know, it is about the money, not the standards that we once held, we are becoming a joke in the skydiving communittee, I have talked to several instructors from around the world. For the coaches, if you think about it a coach has more complexed skills to teach, and now we are asking someone with 100 jumps who really has not figured out how to skydive to teach someone. I still don't get it. I received a message on dz.com about the coach issues, and his regional director and a national director in his are came up with more reasons why not to the how to fix the problem. Little help here, is what he asks for, me too.AFFI-E, Tandem I-E, S/L I-E, IAD I-E, Coach I-E Students are our future teach them well Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #198 December 2, 2009 QuoteFor the coaches, if you think about it a coach has more complexed skills to teach, and now we are asking someone with 100 jumps who really has not figured out how to skydive to teach someone. I still don't get it. I received a message on dz.com about the coach issues, and his regional director and a national director in his are came up with more reasons why not to the how to fix the problem. Little help here, is what he asks for, me too. It would sound as though you're not a fan of the coaching program? Have you ever passed someone through a coaching course that has very weak belly skills, but can speak/teach well? Or passed a student that met the technical requirements, but left you with a feeling of "they'll be alright" when they finished the course? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #199 December 2, 2009 Quote The issue with the TI situation is the requirement to already have an instructor rating before taking the course. ? AFAIK there is no requirement for a tandem ride operator candidate to have an instructor rating prior to taking the course. At least in the US. I'd love to see a time in sport requirement for AFF I candidates that matches the requirement for ride operators. I'd also love to see the same requirement that used to exist back in the JM days - you had to be a JM for a year before you could become an I. That year usually provided some "seasoning" and served as an apprenticeship of sorts for the potential instructor. Requiring I candidates (regardless of training method) to have held a coach rating for at least one year prior to going for an instructor rating would hopefully do the same thing. Not sure I would support a time in sport requirement for new coaches, though. New jumpers who are excited about the possibility of giving back to the sport by working with others are gold. They should be encouraged, not discouraged. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #200 December 2, 2009 Quote? AFAIK there is no requirement for a tandem ride operator candidate to have an instructor rating prior to taking the course. At least in the US. Prerequirement to get a tandem rating is a current instructor rating. It used to be the BIC now its the coach course is required.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
