0
bigbearfng

Gap in training post AFF?

Recommended Posts

I wanted to get some input from instructors here.
I've had several friends completing AFF and continuing to get their A license.
Of course lottsa questions from them, referred to their instructors; also recommended to read these forums, specifically incidents.
Just one example is "tail strike" in incidents-they both brought it up to me and were suprised with the info they'd read, and said they had no idea of a need to dive out especially on emergency exits.
These are my fellow skydivers and friends-this greatly concerns me.
I always pass on my SIMs for free to newer jumpers and encourage them to read it, however it is not required for them to buy one and read it....
There seems to be a gap I'm seeing in education of newer jumpers, just from what I've personally seen and some of the questions/comments in some threads.
I know I was in sponge mode and still am trying to soak up all the info I can to stay safe and not end up in incidents, but not all students/ new jumpers are to the same extent and a lot know nothing of DZ.COM.
So do you also see this "education gap"?
Should it be required to actually buy a
SIM and read it? Not just a USPA membership?
Not insinuating a fault with instructors, but rather with the system, and I realize there is always going to be that HUA student too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've spent a couple hundred bucks on copies so far this season to ensure every student gets a handout of the SIM section for each category of the ISP. I also bought several SIMs and put them in manifest along with a sign-out sheet. I encourage all post-AFF students to take them home for a week at a time and read up. It also makes them handy for when the students are sitting around on a weather hold.

Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The SIMs if available in a pdf file for nothing. I have downloaded my copy and have it on my computer, my palm pilot, and printed a hard copy for my jump bag. There really isn't any reason someone can't read a SIM.
POPS #10623; SOS #1672

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FYI, from the USPA website:
Quote

For technical reasons, this on-line reference version of the USPA Skydiver's Information Manual is not an exact or official duplicate of the 2008 SIM, and the .pdf version is missing some layout marks and important USPA forms and applications that accompany the hard copy. In the event of any discrepency or to obtain the full text and graphics, please refer to the official, bound version sold through USPA and authorized distributors.


"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Albert Einstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't agree with you more. If I was dictator, my first edict would be that every U.S. skydiver own a hardcopy of the SIM...and be required to read it with with written tests to verify learning.

Grinds my shorts thinking about how many ignorant jumpers there are out there when knowledge is so readily available.

Knowledge is power. To many of us are powerless when it comes to skydiving.

And another thing in agreement...all you instructors out there thinking that training is nothing more than air skills are wrong...dead wrong. How many of you pass your students along doing jumps and not doing knowledge? Yes, waaaaaay too many of you.

You teach them some knowledge and sign off on the progression card? What in the world makes you think they know it 5 minutes later? Sad really.


[:/]
Thanks, bigbearfng...got my day started off in a shitty mood.
:D:D:P

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not believe that there is a gap in the ISP, rather that there is a gap in the common application of it. It is very common for students to be “released” from AFF and then receive no further organized training. When they get to 25 jumps, they start looking for someone to sign off all of the skills in Categories F-H and to sign off on their check dive. That is a poor system that allows the student to develop bad habits, compromises safety, fails to retain skydivers, and produces licensed skydivers who believe they know far more than they really do.

The ISP is designed so that students move from the care of their AFF instructors in Category E to the care of other instructors, coaches, or properly rated skydivers to continue their progression through the remaining categories. Contrary to the common practice of just turning people loose to learn on their own at the end of Cat E, the SYSTEM calls for continued organized training through the rest of the student progression. For instance, the very first training jump after successful completion of AFF should cover aircraft emergency procedures and exits, which your friends evidently missed. From the 2008 SIM, Cat F:

Quote

You'll learn more about how to handle aircraft emergency exit procedures independently. Emergency review includes power line recognition, avoidance, and landing procedures. During this category, former AFF students should make a practice clear and pull from 5,500 feet, followed by a clear-and-pull jump from 3,500 feet, as required for the A license.



The "gap" is not in the "system", but in the failed application of the training program. Tell your friends to find a coach or instructor who takes the remaining categories on their progression card seriously and will work with them to complete their A license training.

A good coach or instructor will spend the time covering ALL of the SIM material for that category, not just the freefall skills portion. There is a good thirty minutes of "classroom" for every jump through Category H. It is just as intense of a training program as the first five Categories and should be taken just as seriously by the students and the instructors. The instructor/coach should be training both the SIM material AND the exit, the freefall, and the canopy portion of the jump. The student should be learning the skills on the ground, practicing the skills on the ground, understanding the skills on the ground, and then going and trying them in the air. Afterwards, there should be debriefing and corrective training. Often, it will take multiple jumps and ground school sessions to cover the learning required for a single category.

Come on people, this isn’t bowling we are teaching. Doing it right protects not just the student, but everyone they jump with. The life you save might be your own (or more importantly, it might be mine).

[/rant]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I do not believe that there is a gap in the ISP, rather that there is a gap in the common application of it.
[snipped for bandwidth and readability]

Come on people, this isn’t bowling we are teaching. Doing it right protects not just the student, but everyone they jump with. The life you save might be your own (or more importantly, it might be mine).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
****> I agree with the assessment. AND - as a certified USBC Bowling Coach, I also agree! Although, I have seen some very screwed-up elbows, wrists, fingers, and knees from untutored bowlers!

As a teacher/coach/mentor in a variety of other sports, I KNOW the value of reliable information! The very first thing I did after my first tandem (after trying to calm down, and giving the instructor a case of beer :)) was to hit the Pro Shop for information. I purchased the 2008 SIM, and have not been able to put it down, marking what I believe to be critical pieces of information at each level.

As a clueless newb, the SIM has been priceless in my decision process to continue on with the sport, and manage my expectations.

I would make it a mandatory purchase with the FJC/AFF training as working/classroom material.

Blue Skies and Safe Landings Always,

Chaaaz, AKA, SkyPainter

Live deliberately; Dare greatly; Land gently
SkyPainter
SOS 1304, POPS 10695, DS 118

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
About eight years back I wrote an article called "The training gap" for PARACHUTIST. It concerned this very topic.

A few years later the ISP came out, which went a long way towards addressing those issues. However, as an optional program there will always be those who simply don't bother with it. They just do the minimum needed to fill out the A license card.

Whose fault is it? Well, everyone's. The student gets that A license card and starts filling it out. They see "Calculate the wing loading of both main and reserve canopies and compare the sizes against the manufacturer’s published recommendations." They really want to get that A license; then they can stop jumping that damn student gear.

So they ask an instructor for help. He tells them how it works. So they find out what gear they are jumping, do the math, and look up the manufacturer's recommendations on the web. And they are done with that part of the card.

The purpose of that part of the card, of course, is to get people to learn about the effects of jumping a canopy that's too small for them - and they haven't learned that. The instructor was helping the student by doing what they ask him for. The student just wanted to get that damn card filled out.

I used to teach a 'graduate course' during water training. Nothing special about water training, but for most jumpers it is the last formal education they ever get - so I figured it was my last chance. I'd spend about 90 minutes going over everything from tailgate aircraft to jumpsuits to big-ways, then do the water training at the end.

That lasted until another instructor started telling jumpers "I can do that for ya in fifteen minutes, if you don't have all night to sit around."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, owning and reading the SIM is a good thing.

The money I spent on STRUCTURED training after AFF in Skydive University was quite worth it. Yes, I know many folks think that SDU is just a rip-off... but your post shows that there is a need for structure after AFF.

I have never liked the term "graduating from AFF". It implies far more accomplishment than is warranted. Perhaps a term like "completed phase one" would be better, as it implies further phases.
The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree completely that there is a gap in post-AFF training. This is most likely a product of the system AND the individuals going through it. When I completed my A-license card, most of it was pencil-whipped and I didn't learn what was on there until I was going through the Coach course with DJan Stewart at a different DZ. Different DZs will have different standards for education. Some dropzones will actually include a lot of the material from the ISP when teaching AFF-level skydives. But the bottom line is that instructors want to get in the sky more to make money and students want to get in the sky more because it's COOL. As an AFF instructor I'll tell you that much of the material that should be taught to students often goes untouched and most of the emphasis is on the freefall manuevers. This is where I think doing lots of working tandems or even the old static line program had it right--give the student time and attention to develop canopy skills--this is, after all, where most people in the sport get hurt. Most of the people I've known to get hurt in freefall have over 10,000 skydives.

But the problem really goes beyond canopy work. How many AFF instructors really teach students the first thing about spotting the aircraft? How many coaches teach it? How about separation between groups, times to advance to new disciplines, the complexities of the equipment, improving accuracy, the real pros and cons of RSLs and AADs. These are all issues (and just a few issues) that jumpers need to learn about. Most people learn about these things as they go along in the sport, somewhere between 7 and 700 jumps, sometimes more. Every one of those people who hasnt been given an opportunity or been given the requirement to think about and discuss those issues is a liability on your dropzone. I don't necessarily mean in the legal sense but think about the freefly solo jumper exiting after your head-down group. Do they know what they're doing when it comes to spotting, freeflying correctly, freefly-friendly gear, etc.? They are a liability to every other jumper on the dropzone and themselves.

Andy9o8 writes, "Continuing education often doesnt continue unless it's mandatory"...that might be true. But I also think that it's a lot more likely to happen if it doesnt get nickel-and-dimed out to every student. "How was I supposed to learn that?" "Get coaching!" That's an easy way to blow it off. But is there a way to improve the system all together? I've considered the idea of doing a First Jump Course Part 2 between being cleared for solo freefall and getting their license. I also know of other programs that simply continue requiring instructors for maybe 20 of the 25 jumps--those five being for a couple of solos and a couple of hop and pops.

Could you imagine raising the cost of getting your license by $500 and actually coming out of it a much better skydiver? Or being required to complete a three hour course to watch videos of your landings, discuss a FEW advanced aspects of canopy flight, or the nitty gritty of your equipment? If we want to stop seeing licensed jumpers cut off others in the patten and hook themselves in and if we want to stop seeing students bewildered and afraid of everything, we need to make a change to the system that's letting them move on with such limited knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The "gap" is not in the "system", but in the failed application of the training program. Tell your friends to find a coach or instructor who takes the remaining categories on their progression card seriously and will work with them to complete their A license training.



Yours was a fantastic post and it said everything I would have, had you not already said it.

If you use the four-page card and tell your students up front that they are not done with training until they complete every task on their A-card then they will not be out there flapping; lost as to what they need to do. I use the four page card and I have my students complete all the tasks in the order dictated by the card. They are jumping with AFF rated instructors until completion of E3 tasks, then continue, in order all the way through the rest of the progression, generally still with me. It amazes me that there are still so many schools out there that announce that so and so "just graduated AFF" and then leave it up to the student to ask "what's next?"

Chuck Blue, D-12501
AFF/SL/TM-I, PRO, S&TA


Chuck

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