Instructor Ethitcs

[Deisel 35]

Based on the Sebastian wingsuit incident, I would like to start a related discussion. At what point are 'instructors' no longer responsible for others around them?
The responsibilities are spelled out and obvious when performing instructor duties. Even once a new jumper becomes liscensed, good instructors know that there is still plenty left to teach.
I believe that every jumper has a moral obligation to speak up when noticing any safety problem. There is also an obvious additional responsibility on anyone rated as an instructor of anything. But where are the lines between have to/need to/should/no need to check someone else's gear? How does this play out when away from your home DZ? We all have to live with our choices, but what happens when someone else does not live because of choices not made?

This is purely an academic discussion and in no way an attempt to poke anyone in the eye.

D

The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all.

[c10edges 0]

i was told from the first time stepping into manifest that no one was to blame for my injury/death except for me. I signed alot of gibberish that said it too... And when I decided to do AFF jumps, I was told that I needed to pull and save my own life. Thats just me though. Shakespeare was right... get rid of the lawyers.

[paulpiccolo 0]

I constantly thank the the senior jumpers for the words of wisdom that have kept me alive over the years. I.E. Nathan Dexter. Some people care and others don't. I'm an instructor with 800 tandems, but the input of those who know better, keep me out of the titanium club statistic. Some people are out to help others...some don't. We are ultimately responsible for our own safety, but advice NEVER hurts.

tandem whore

[peregrinerose 0]

I don't think my instructor duties ever stop. When working with a student, my job is to make sure they are geared up properly, have adequate training for the skydive they are about to make (including canopy/landing issues), and that they are ready to make the jump (as in not hungover, not panicking, etc).

With the wingsuit fatality, the 'instructor' did not ensure that the student was geared up properly, and given that mis-rigging with a wingsuit can be a very big deal (obviously), they dropped the ball. I wouldn't expect an AFF student to gear themself up on the second jump flawlessly (although many can, I still give them 3 gear checks), so why would a wingsuiter on a 2nd jump go without adequate gear checks given that misrigging is a known potential problem with wingsuits? Although the instructor is not to blame for the fatality, they did fail to do their job in the instructor capacity to prevent the fatality.

With regard to instructors and gear in general... I never stop looking at other people's gear. A month ago (not at my home DZ), I saw a D licenced skydiver with thousands of jumps with a leg strap improperly routed on the plane... it was twisted around in such a way that the cutaway handle was rotated toward his body and would have been less accessable. He had to remove and re-don his gear in the plane. Chances are, he would have been just fine jumping the rig as it was, but that also could have been a link in a chain contributing to an injury. I was not 'responsible' for this guy, he wasn't even jumping with me at the time. However I do believe it's important to keep an eye out for each other.

I would far rather speak up when I see something unsafe and at least try to remedy the situation than just let things go. I'm also a firm believer in education. I won't tell the 100 jump wonder 'no' to a wingsuit, I'll spend 1/2 hour explaining exactly why it's a bad idea at that stage of their lives. As I'm not a wingsuit instructor, I also refer them to experienced and ethical instructors, who will tell them exactly the same thing I did, but also offer to help them out once they have the experience behind them to support learning the new skill.

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[Andrewwhyte 1]

I think the most important duty of an instructor is to drive home the idea that the individual jumper is responsible for themselves. For those who are uncomfortable with that we have tandems.
That said I think we all have to be determined to not be the target of instructor shoppers. We all have seen them, if they don't get the answer they like from one instructor, they try another. Far too many instructors just want to be loved so much they will relax the rules in order to be the cool instructor. They allow jumpers to attempt what they are not ready for, and they pass students and novices for tasks they have not sufficiently mastered. There are others who will relax the rules because they think they are too stiff anyway. This is even more insidious because it undermines the entire USPA/CSPA/BPA etc. network of instructors. The system works because we take the signature of a rating holder at face value even if we don't know the individual. IEs need to be more diligent in identifying these people during courses.

[riggerrob 558]

At the start of any program (eg. Progressive Freefall or training a new rigger) I tell students that this is a process of shifting responsibility from the instructor to the student.
Aster I see a student perform a skill correctly three times (eg. opening their own parachute on a PFF dive) - without coaching - I start to back off a little.
Once they have performed a skill six times on their own, I revert to quietly scanning their performance.

As for keeping an eye on licensed jumpers ... I might casually scan licensed jumpers walking to the airplane, but most of the time I am too focussed on own student to give them any more than a brief glance.
While riding in the airplane, I quietly scan other jumpers' equipment, but only comment when something is mis-routed.
If there is a lull in mid-day activities, I might wander through the packign area, but only comment when something is mis-routed.

[bigbearfng 9]

With the wingsuit fatality, the 'instructor' did not ensure that the student was geared up properly, and given that mis-rigging with a wingsuit can be a very big deal (obviously), they dropped the ball.

__________________________________________________

First off I agree with most all you've said here.
However I'm having problems with the continued "throw down" of the instructor in this case.
There are several questions still left hanging.
As I questioned in Incidents.
What was his demeanor? Was he asked about proper gear up and he did the "WS gear check shrug" and said ya ya ya I'm good to go and already double checked everything? (he did already make one succesful WS jump with proper gear up)
Did he misrepresent jump numbers?
He did already get turned away once and just went down the road; which to me shows a trend in demeanor/attitude.

I don't know that there are any real answers for the following, but these (ethical?) Q's have sure been sticking in my head lately.
How far are you expected to go to verify jump numbers?
If you get resistance to your 1/2 hour explanation of why it's a bad idea at this stage, how far do you go to prevent him from doing something really stupid and getting hurt or worse?

This is beginning to feel like deja vu to when Ron tried to talk about not downsizing canopies too soon......and then finally wanted to tell them "told ya so!" as they're laying there femured in!

A lotta food for thought bouncing around here lately......hope everyone can learn from it, but if there's one thing I've figured out by now; there's always gonna be more DGITs.........

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

With the wingsuit fatality, the 'instructor' did not ensure that the student was geared up properly, and given that mis-rigging with a wingsuit can be a very big deal (obviously), they dropped the ball. I wouldn't expect an AFF student to gear themself up on the second jump flawlessly (although many can, I still give them 3 gear checks), so why would a wingsuiter on a 2nd jump go without adequate gear checks given that misrigging is a known potential problem with wingsuits? Although the instructor is not to blame for the fatality, they did fail to do their job in the instructor capacity to prevent the fatality.

I agree; and I think people who are emphasizing that the jumper was "a licensed skydiver with 100 jumps" are unduly glossing over this point. He was a novice wingsuiter, and mis-rigging one's own leg straps is a known and anticipatable mistake that can be made by novice wingsuiters in particular - and thus, extra vigilance for this potential mistake during gear-up should be undertaken by those helping train novice wingsuiters - and should be tolerated by novice wingsuiters, no matter how many previous (other types of) jumps they have.

[ufk22 32]

At what point are 'instructors' no longer responsible for others around them?
______________

The fact that I have an instructional rating doesn't mean I am any more or less responsible for those (not my students) around me than any other skydiver is.
__________

The responsibilities are spelled out and obvious when performing instructor duties. Even once a new jumper becomes liscensed, good instructors know that there is still plenty left to teach.
___________________

This is obvious, and I spend as much or more time "teaching" low time licenced jumpers for free as I spend teaching students.
_______________

I believe that every jumper has a moral obligation to speak up when noticing any safety problem. There is also an obvious additional responsibility on anyone rated as an instructor of anything.
___________________

If this is what you think, you obviously don't understand the progam at all. I'll certainly meantion any equipment problem that I notice to anyone, no matter there experience level, but I have no more authority or obligation to stop a licenced skydiver from doing something stupid that they choose to do than anyone else in the sport. If their experience level is known to me I can comment, but that's as far as it goes. This doesn't mean I won't talk to an S&TA about someone if I feel the need, but that really has nothing to do with whether I have a rating or not.
______________

But where are the lines between have to/need to/should/no need to check someone else's gear? How does this play out when away from your home DZ? We all have to live with our choices, but what happens when someone else does not live because of choices not made?
_______________

The lines are drawn by experience/license. Once someone has an A licence they CAN do most anything they want. My rating does not give me authority to stop stupid. I can comment, but....
If I ask a 50 jump wonder if they want/need a gear check and they say "no, I'm OK", there's nothing I can do to force them to submit. I may push the issue depending on how well I know the jumper, but legally/ethically I have no more authority or obligation than any other jumper in this situation.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[Deisel 35]

I agree that there is no legal obligation to do anything with anyone other than your student. But I think that ethically there may be.
Let me offer a hypothetical:
- you overhear two novice jumpers planning something unsafe. You express your concern but they blow you off. Do you drop it with a 'well I told them', or do you pursue it further. Sure, there is no legal obligation to stop them, but is it the right thing to do? Would you be burdened at all if one of them ended up injured or worse?

The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all.

[ufk22 32]

Quote

I agree that there is no legal obligation to do anything with anyone other than your student. But I think that ethically there may be.
Let me offer a hypothetical:
- you overhear two novice jumpers planning something unsafe. You express your concern but they blow you off. Do you drop it with a 'well I told them', or do you pursue it further. Sure, there is no legal obligation to stop them, but is it the right thing to do? Would you be burdened at all if one of them ended up injured or worse?

You totally missed the point. The point is my I rating has NOTHING to do with this. It's pretty hard to respond to a hypothetical this vague, but assuming these are licensed skydivers...
1. As an instructor, you're saying I have more obligation than I would with no rating??? An I rating means I am qualified to teach someone the basics of skydiving and have a responsibility to do this to the best of my abilities in a manner that is safe, prudent, and conforms to USPA recommendations and the BSR's. It also means I should deal with any unsafe or improper teaching methods or information from a fellow instructor THAT'S IT.
2. How do you propose I stop them?
3. would I feel any guilt because someone did something stupid after I had strongly warned them against it? No, I ain't your momma or theirs

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[DSE 3]

A somewhat similar discussion without the added burden of an actual incident or it's resultant emotion.

[ufk22 32]

Looked at the other thread. As an S&TA, there is more responsibility, but more importantly there is more authority to deal with this type of situation. An S&TA can ground someone (in theory). An "I" can't.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[DSE 3]

Quote

Looked at the other thread. As an S&TA, there is more responsibility, but more importantly there is more authority to deal with this type of situation. An S&TA can ground someone (in theory). An "I" can't.

Do you feel that at most DZ's if you see a gross safety issue or impropriety, that any DZO or S&TA will listen to whatever you have to say as an experienced person?

[peregrinerose 0]

Quote

Quote

Looked at the other thread. As an S&TA, there is more responsibility, but more importantly there is more authority to deal with this type of situation. An S&TA can ground someone (in theory). An "I" can't.

Do you feel that at most DZ's if you see a gross safety issue or impropriety, that any DZO or S&TA will listen to whatever you have to say as an experienced person?

I think that some DZOs are very receptive to input, but not all. Probably most DZOs fall into this category. Some DZOs will not address even blatant safety issues unless it was their idea to do so. Some DZ's brag about a 'no rules' or 'anything goes' type policy (I will not jump at these DZs as a result).

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[DSE 3]

Quote

Some DZ's brag about a 'no rules' or 'anything goes' type policy (I will not jump at these DZs as a result).

That would scare me as well. Never been to one. Some call Lodi a "no rules" DZ, but they do have a few firm, fast rules posted all over the DZ, and they're not negotiable. Bill is also very receptive to jumpers talking about safety issues. I guess my point is that Lodi is classified by many as a "no rules" place.

I agree...I'd never jump at an "anything goes" place. Is the East is that much different than the West?

[peregrinerose 0]

One I have in mind is proud of their 'no rules' policy on their web site and advertise themselves as such. I'm running into issues with that one as I'm trying to keep a friend safe, and they are undermining everything that my husband and I are telling him.

The other I've seen new A license jumpers (30-40 jumps) with cameras on their heads more than once, with the endorsement of at least one of their instructors, and I've worked with a few of their students with some very odd things being taught to them (AFF for first jumps are illegal, it's ok to loosen your leg straps under canopy)

Those are the only 2 that I know of that I won't visit (did I say either of them was in the east? )

Clearly, their policies work for them, they are, from what I understand, very large and busy DZs. I personally am just not comfortable with some of the things I have seen/read.... doesn't mean they are bad places, just not my cup of tea.

Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda

[ufk22 32]

Quote

Quote

Looked at the other thread. As an S&TA, there is more responsibility, but more importantly there is more authority to deal with this type of situation. An S&TA can ground someone (in theory). An "I" can't.

Do you feel that at most DZ's if you see a gross safety issue or impropriety, that any DZO or S&TA will listen to whatever you have to say as an experienced person?

Will and should depend upon how well they know me and their opinion of my judgement (am I "fair and balanced", or petty and have personal, vindictive agenda).
Again, kind of vague, "gross safety issue", probably take some kind of action(?)
"impropriety"(?) maybe, maybe not???
It really depends on the personality of the S&TA or DZO. Some are willing to make hard decisions and follow through, even dealing with friends and family, some are not.
But, getting back to the original thread, an "I" might or might not (but in most cases should) make your opinion carry more weight , but not necessarily.
An "I" rating, when dealing directly with licensed skydivers, doesn't mean you have any more authority or responsibility than you have as just a regular skydiver.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[Deisel 35]

Point taken, and admittedly a vague hypothetical. I get that the 'line' is the A lisc when it comes to responsibility. But there are many cases where new jumpers still have a lot to learn. I consider myself in this category. I don't think that there is anyone out there that believes that once someone has their A they know everything they need to know. We currently do not have any progression program in place, other than making more jumps in order to get advanced liscenses. None that are enforced anyway.
So the question here is "is there anyone responsible for the education of skydivers beyond the A?" I'm of the belief the instructors play some role here. Although it is not defined in any manual, ethically, an instructor bears the burden to educate outside the lines of the hard and fast rules.
Am I off here?

The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all.

[ufk22 32]

Quote

Point taken, and admittedly a vague hypothetical. I get that the 'line' is the A lisc when it comes to responsibility. But there are many cases where new jumpers still have a lot to learn. I consider myself in this category. I don't think that there is anyone out there that believes that once someone has their A they know everything they need to know. We currently do not have any progression program in place, other than making more jumps in order to get advanced liscenses. None that are enforced anyway.
So the question here is "is there anyone responsible for the education of skydivers beyond the A?" I'm of the belief the instructors play some role here. Although it is not defined in any manual, ethically, an instructor bears the burden to educate outside the lines of the hard and fast rules.
Am I off here?
[/reply
Yes, you're way off.
I'm starting to resent you thinking something is owed you because of my rating.
To repeat myself.
An I rating means I am qualified to teach someone the basics of skydiving and have a responsibility to do this to the best of my abilities in a manner that is safe, prudent, and conforms to USPA recommendations and the BSR's.
A lot of people with instructional ratings will work with low time jumpers for the same reason they got a rating in the first place, because they enjoy it.
A lot of people with instructional ratings might not be the best teachers of advanced skills.
The only person responsible for your education from here on out is YOU.
Yes, you've got a lot to learn, and the only way to learn is to make a lot of jumps and a lot of mistakes. Jump with a lot of different people and start figuring out who's telling what really happened and who's chewing you out to cover their own mistakes. When you get to the point you've learned it all and don't make any mistakes, realize that "it really ain't so", readjust your attitude, and start learning all over again.
When you know it all in this sport, is only means you're cocky and dangerous and stupid.
And when you don't get a little nervous before every skydive, get out of the sport. Taking things for granted is the fastest way to die.
Good luck, and if we ever run in to each other I'd gladly make a jump or two with you. Not because I'm obligated, but because it'd be fun.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

• Quote

[DSE 3]

Quote

So the question here is "is there anyone responsible for the education of skydivers beyond the A?"

Yes.
Yourself.

when you get out of compulsory (high school), who is responsible for getting you to college? You.
Seek out qualified teachers to help you grow.
I used a canopy coach to help improve my accuracy (thanks, Jack and Chris), I used another canopy coach to help me with my downsize and landing progressions. I took camera flight instruction from Mike Semanoff and Norman Kent, wingsuit instruction from Scott Campos, Scott Callantine, Justin Shorb. The list is long and never ending.

USPA has a pretty good direction, just look at a license card and it'll help you know how to progress.
Look to the canopy proficiency card to help you grow.
Look at those you'd like to emulate, and ask how they got there.
IMO, 500 jumps and the D license is where the "real" license to learn begins. Up to that point, it's mostly survival skills. After approx 500, you start to learn what you need to learn to become successful.
The responsibility to learn (and choice) are mine/yours. Once you have your A license, the only obligation is that of safety.

[Deisel 35]

OK, let's back the bus up here. A little truth in advertising - I have an instructor rating as well. I have also been an instructor of many things other that skydiving for nearly 2 decades. I don't think that anyone owes me anything.
The entire point here is that I don't think that there is very much oversight involved in skydiving education. To this point the only additional instruction that I have gotten outside of formal courses has been from folks around the DZ. Those that saw what I was doing (struggling) and offered a hand when I needed it. Most of the time it was things that I was completely unaware of. You don't know what you don't know.
Someone seeking out additional instruction during the learning process that takes place between jump # 25 and 500 is someone that realizes that they don't know it all. Thats a sign of maturity. What about all of those immature 50/100/200 jump wonders who think the have the world by the balls? Those that will only listen after first aid is needed. I've met plenty.
Yes USPA does have canopy and freefall skills progression recommendations, but where is the backstop that ensures someone does not get in over their head?
I'm of the opinion that the progression from A to D should be more closely supervised. Instructors should be the ones doing it.

The brave may not live forever, but the timid never live at all.

[slj678 0]

__________________________________________________
The lines are drawn by experience/license. Once someone has an A licence they CAN do most anything they want. My rating does not give me authority to stop stupid. I can comment, but....
If I ask a 50 jump wonder if they want/need a gear check and they say "no, I'm OK", there's nothing I can do to force them to submit. I may push the issue depending on how well I know the jumper, but legally/ethically I have no more authority or obligation than any other jumper in this situation.
___________________________________________________


^^^ I hope the instructors I jump with don't think like that. Yeah I have an A license now but ill be damned if I'm gonna tell somebody who has been doing this 10 times longer than I have to back off. I would hope most instructors would say how about you take your pride down a little before you get yourself killed and let me take a look. There isn't a single ounce of me that would be upset if an instructor came up to me and said hey would you mind if i check your gear real quick? Hell I welcome that with open arms because the number 1 thing I have learned so far is that you NEVER stop learning.

"I didn't know they gave out rings at the holocaust"

[ufk22 32]

Yeah, I see you've got a coach rating.
Are you really looking for help for yourself, or more just authority now that you've got a rating?
Sorry, USPA isn't the Marine Corp.
If skydiving had the kind of enforced structure you're talking about, alot of us wouldn't be skydivers.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[ufk22 32]

Quote

__________________________________________________
The lines are drawn by experience/license. Once someone has an A licence they CAN do most anything they want. My rating does not give me authority to stop stupid. I can comment, but....
If I ask a 50 jump wonder if they want/need a gear check and they say "no, I'm OK", there's nothing I can do to force them to submit. I may push the issue depending on how well I know the jumper, but legally/ethically I have no more authority or obligation than any other jumper in this situation.
___________________________________________________


^^^ I hope the instructors I jump with don't think like that. Yeah I have an A license now but ill be damned if I'm gonna tell somebody who has been doing this 10 times longer than I have to back off. I would hope most instructors would say how about you take your pride down a little before you get yourself killed and let me take a look. There isn't a single ounce of me that would be upset if an instructor came up to me and said hey would you mind if i check your gear real quick? Hell I welcome that with open arms because the number 1 thing I have learned so far is that you NEVER stop learning.

Whoa, Sheldon. Stop, take a deep breath, then go back and reread this thread. Maybe read s l o w l y so that you comprehend.
This isn't about what I'm willing to say or do, it's about AUTHORITY.
I can only give advice, not because I'm an "I", but because I'm concerned as a fellow skydiver. You say you'll listen. That's fine. What if you don't like my advice?
Do you want me, as an "I", to have the authority to TELL you what you may or may not do on your next jump or whether you can freefly or belly fly or what size canopy you will be allowed to jump after you've earned your license, and have the authority to ground you if you don't follow orders????
Sorry, not in my sport.
With freedom comes responsibility.
Personal responsibility for ourselves. If someone chooses not to exercise this responsibility............................................ pay the price or take up bowling!
I vote for freedom

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.