The Great AFF Experiment has been an Abject Failure . . .

[Ron 7]

Quote

Why? It still takes 25 jumps to be off student status.

It was explained, you ignored it and the data presented since you didn't like it.

It is simply because under AFF students are often ignored once they are done with level 7 unless they pay for coaches. But I have mentioned this before and you ignored it before.

And how the task load on SL jumps for canopy control is less. More focus = more learning.

The same reason you learn and teach BRM before you teach people the Australian peel off

Quote

As far as research there are tons of papers written about the kinesthetic learner

And I covered that... You have mentioned only ONE type of learner and ignored all the others since YOU are that type of learner.

You also have not provided anything but your personal example... again a personal opinion doe snot make a data set no mater how much you FEEL it does.

Quote

I'm not here to get into a pissing contest with you. I was responded to the original thread comment that stated that "AFF experiment was a failure" as a fact.

Instead you acted like AFF was better as a fact. How is that any different?

Like I said, it is impossible to continue the discussion as long as you ignore the points raised and instead focus on your personal favorite method based on your personal experiences only. And that is *exactly* all you have done.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

It is simply because under AFF students are often ignored once they are done with level 7 unless they pay for coaches.

Ok, how do you think AFF compares with SL when they are taught under the ISP?

I totally see where you're coming from if we're talking about 1998 (or dropzones that haven't progressed their student programs since 1998). What about today? AFF isn't 7 levels anymore (under the ISP). AFF students get WAY more attention than they used to in the good old days (when it was hard to become an AFFI ). SL students pretty much do the same thing as AFF students from Category D on, except SL instructors are only encouraged to exit with their freefall students to observe them in freefall. A perfect SL student will have a few more canopy flights by Category D than a perfect AFF student. But I'm still not seeing how the SL student is going to have so much more instructor attention than the AFF student under the ISP. In fact, the SL instructor may very well never even see the student land.

Dave

[fencebuster 7]

I have the good fortune to work at a DZ that follows the ISP. We are focused on getting students their A license and being heads up, safe skydivers, not just getting them to self-supervised status. Our DZ pays coaches well and they are respected as important cogs in the development of our students. DZs do not follow the ISP and that focus on getting students to self-supervised status and not A license are doing a disservice to their students. Our coach students G & H pay for 8 coach jumps and they get the benefit of that important training. DZs that don't account for CAT G & H are shortchanging their students, and that is a fact.

Charlie Gittins, 540-327-2208
AFF-I, Sigma TI, IAD-I
MEI, CFI-I, Senior Rigger
Former DZO, Blue Ridge Skydiving Adventures

[pilotdave 0]

I learned under the old system and now teach under the ISP. I totally agree with you.

I have an IAD rating, but I've never put out a real student and our DZ doesn't normally offer IAD anymore. Never even seen a SL jump in person. So I can see the difference between old school AFF and ISP AFF, but I have no background when it comes to SL/IAD vs AFF.

Dave

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

I learned under the old system and now teach under the ISP. I totally agree with you.

I have an IAD rating, but I've never put out a real student and our DZ doesn't normally offer IAD anymore. Never even seen a SL jump in person. So I can see the difference between old school AFF and ISP AFF, but I have no background when it comes to SL/IAD vs AFF.

Dave

Come out to the middle of the country, we'll show you IAD at my DZ, and I'll point you to a few SL DZs. How do you maintain an IAD rating without using it? "I've seen a little on TV!" Or is it expired?

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Like I said, it is impossible to continue the discussion as long as you ignore the points raised and instead focus on your personal favorite method based on your personal experiences only. And that is *exactly* all you have done

obtuse ... I give up

steveOrino

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

How do you maintain an IAD rating without using it? "I've seen a little on TV!" Or is it expired?

Got it last April, so I haven't had to keep it current. But I'll put out some experienced jumpers this winter to keep it current. I think AFF is the only rating that requires real students to keep current.

Dave

[g3ninfinite 0]

Quote

Quote

Like I said, it is impossible to continue the discussion as long as you ignore the points raised and instead focus on your personal favorite method based on your personal experiences only. And that is *exactly* all you have done

obtuse ... I give up

which is pretty much what he did too, how ironic. I'd have to give up too.

[Cheach 0]

While I can have no opinion on AFF...I didn't do it, I did recently go through SL. I think it was best for me because I had one/two objectives for like my first 10 jumps...Stability/Pull. By the time I was actually doing turns or loops- pulling felt natural and I had altitude awareness. I think that is the part that puts me the most at ease. No matter what happens- I know I can get stable and pull by the correct altitude. And I know I would have no problem having to get out low and pull.

They also started teaching me to spot on about my 11th or so jump. It helps understanding of wind and the effects it has. Me- "Uppers? huh?"..."oohhhhh"

Canopy skills- besides my landing- i think I have pretty good canopy skills. I tracked the wrong direction on one of my tracking dives(my bad)- strong uppers that day- and still made it within 10 yards of the target.

I woke up next to a blowup doll Ash....so what do you think?

[Ron 7]

Quote

Ok, how do you think AFF compares with SL when they are taught under the ISP?

I said "unless they pay for coaches". Anyone notice that a coach program was not needed till AFF? AFF was found lacking in many areas and the coach program was put into place to cover those failings.

Anyone notice that canopy classes were not needed till AFF? Anyone notice that packing classes were not needed before AFF?

My old SL students knew how to pack by the time they were on freefall, at one DZ they learned to pack BEFORE they ever jumped. My old DZ students were spotting the plane before they were off student status... Not just looking out and sorta spotting, they were spotting.

But since I have worked at 4 DZ's over the last 12 years I have found that no two instructors are equal, no two programs are the same, no two DZ's have the same focus.

The one constant I have seen is that by the very nature of the SL program it consistently teaches canopy control and spotting better. SL students are also not afraid of low exits.

I know AFF grads that still can't pack and still can't spot. A 3 k exit scares them to death.

I used to take all the 50-200 jump AFF grads to a smaller DZ and teach them to spot. For many it was their first real below 4k exit, and their 2nd hop n pop ever. Yet these same jumpers had already spent time in the tunnel to work on their freefall.

I still find the AFF program lacking in many areas. I wish the AFF program had a min of 5 low exits that the student had to spot.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Ok, how do you think AFF compares with SL when they are taught under the ISP?

I said "unless they pay for coaches". Anyone notice that a coach program was not needed till AFF? AFF was found lacking in many areas and the coach program was put into place to cover those failings.

One real failing of the old-style S/L / IAD progression program is the lack of instructor's in-flight feedback and correction on freefall skills. Staying in the plane, watching a student tumble, and then telling him, on the ground, "Next time try not to kick, and just relax" is a piss-poor way of teaching freefall skills to a student.

Quote

Anyone notice that canopy classes were not needed till AFF? Anyone notice that packing classes were not needed before AFF?

Early canopy classes have been needed ever since we started putting students out on squares - regardless of the freefall teaching method. And I don't know about you, but I found learning how to pack a round cheapo properly to be pretty easy, a lot easier than learning and mastering packing a square.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I said "unless they pay for coaches". Anyone notice that a coach program was not needed till AFF? AFF was found lacking in many areas and the coach program was put into place to cover those failings.

Anyone notice that canopy classes were not needed till AFF? Anyone notice that packing classes were not needed before AFF?

Not sure what any of this has to do with my question.

The ISP applies to both AFF and SL. Coach jumps are the same for both. They are not optional. They teach group freefall skills, something that will likely be more lacking in a SL student than an AFF student that has already done some group freefall.

Do you teach under the ISP, or do the DZs you work at still use the old AFF/SL program?

Not trying to say you're wrong about SL/AFF. Again, I am asking because you teach both and have a strong opinion toward SL. But if you're not teaching both under the ISP, your opinion about the student programs may not match reality at other DZs. If you use the ISP and you still have that opinion about AFF, I'm still trying to figure it out.

Dave

[Ron 7]

Quote

One real failing of the old-style S/L / IAD progression program is the lack of instructor's in-flight feedback and correction on freefall skills.

And I have never said anything different.

What I have said is canopy control, spotting, and low exits will save your life much more than turns in place. And that AFF's focus is clearly on freefall skills. While SL's initial focus is clearly on canopy control.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 7]

Quote

The ISP applies to both AFF and SL.

The ISP was not needed when SL was the norm. The AFF program made it so that the deficiencies of the AFF program had to be covered.... So "coach jumps" were created.

Technically, the ISP was to allow cross training from one method to another.

But when the SL program was the norm... there was no need for a coach program since it was already covered. When AFF took off people saw how it had many failings and created a new program to cover those areas.

Quote

Coach jumps are the same for both. They are not optional.

And the SL program had the "coach jumps" from the beginning. AFF had to add a rating and a program to match it.

Quote

Do you teach under the ISP, or do the DZs you work at still use the old AFF/SL program?

In my 12 years teaching I have taught under both AFF and SL, ISP and non ISP. Right now I just moved and don't work at a DZ in my new area.

Quote

Again, I am asking because you teach both and have a strong opinion toward SL.

I'm sorry you are not really getting my intent then. I think given an average student and an average instructor, that the SL program places more emphasis on skills that are more important for staying alive than AFF.

I think knowing how to spot, knowing how to fly a canopy, and being able to do a low exit is more important than turns, loops, and rolls. Further, once a person gets licensed they focus on Freefall skills and rarely, if ever, do they focus on spotting, canopy control, and low exits.

I think the fact that SL emphasizes those skills early on, and how AFF only really gives lip service to them later gives the nod to SL.

1. My 10 second SL students were spotting (with me making sure they were correct). My 30+ second students were spotting with me mostly doing nothing but checking like a normal jumper would. My SL graduation checkout students spotted without me even looking down. I know AFF grads with 100 jumps that could not spot a hop n pop from 3k, much less a group jump from 10k.

2. Every SL student of mine that ended up with a license could really pack a rig. Many had packed their FIRST jump and EVERY jump till they had a license. I know AFF grads that don't know how to pack, yet somehow got signed off.

3. Take a SL student with 20 jumps and an AFF student at 20 jumps and bring the plane over the DZ at 3k. Which student do you think is going to get out faster?

Quote

But if you're not teaching both under the ISP, your opinion about the student programs may not match reality at other DZs. If you use the ISP and you still have that opinion about AFF, I'm still trying to figure it out.

*Could* and AFF/ISP program do all of this? Yes. Does it happen? No.

I think AFF/ISP just barely gives lip service to those skills. For example, the low exit in AFF? I have seen it as high as 5k and their idea of spotting is looking for the green light.

ONE low exit is not going to get a person over their fear of low exits.

ONE time spotting (if it is even done) is not enough to teach real spotting.

AFF is hands down better to teach freefall skills. But I think the AFF/ISP program is lacking compared to the old SL in spotting, canopy control, and low exits. And those are life saving skills, 360 turns/back loops ect are not.

The program I liked best was the one where the students learned to pack in the FJC. The first time they ever jumped, it was their pack job.

They did 5 SL jumps then a 5 second delay, then a 10 second delay then a modified AFF style program that followed levels 4 - 7. It also had many of the "coach" jumps long before the coach program or ISP existed.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[mdrejhon 8]

Quote

ONE low exit is not going to get a person over their fear of low exits.

While my progression was a variant of tandem/AFF progressoin (dropzone's custom program), the dropzone observed I had a fear of pulling low and that caused even 4000 foot pulls to end up being too rushed, including one that resulted in linetwists.

Drpzone decided to let me jump out solo (instructor supervised from the plane) from full altitude to acclimate to pulling at 3500 feet, before my graduating hop-and-pop resulting in the solo certificate.

My altitude awareness, tumble recovery, and freefall movements were excellent. The first-ever frontloops and backloops I ever done, in front of a freefalling instructor, were commented to be 'flawless' -- they had difficulty tricking me into tumbling! (Jump #6 or #7, I think)
...But my pulls were just....consistently rushed. Linetwists ocurred at one time.

The prescription was to send me on a few supervised full-altitude solo's (at just regular experieced-jumper ticket prices, plus rig rental) just before my hop-and-pop that got me the official Solo status.

It was still an AFF-program variant that began with a few tandem progression jumps, but obviously custom tailored to me.

[danielcroft 2]

I wasn't around so I don't know but I would like to ask/point out the following.

The occurrence of two events in close proximity does not imply causality. From what I've read on DZ.com & heard from friends who have been in the sport *way* longer than me, there was a lot of other things going on about the same time which has reduced the cost of entry (as it were) into the sport. Not to mention higher performance canopies, larger jump planes, etc. I don't know if there's a direct correlation between AFF & Canopy classes etc.

[hallux 0]

NickDG i think you are a abject failure.....thanks for your rambling about the good ole days and your nice little trip down memory lane. Your commitment to holding on to the past is admirable but futile. Oh im sure that you guys did it better with your superior static line training. Should students also jump rounds or round reserves????? I mean you call AFF a failure.....but what real evidence do you have?????? Its not like AFF students are dying left and right. Its also not true that static line students are better skydivers. I dare you to try to prove that as a whole. Its also not like the sport is dying off due to AFF. As a matter of fact skydiving is about the only aviation industry that is surviving in this economy. Do they have alot to learn after AFF???hell yes! Are resources available and systems in place for that learning?? YES!
Do aff students know shit about spotting??? probably not. Do static line students know shit about seperation between groups??? I doubt it! Its all relative.... so quit whining like a sentimental know it all school boy bitch and worry about your own problems. WHat did AFF ever do to you??????

[tjm 0]

First off I started with static line (not the "good ole days", but only a few years ago), and have some respect for NickDG, and he is definatelty not a "school boy bitch".

S/L definatley gives you that feeling of being alone out there. There is something to be said about taking that journey to freefall w/o someone holding on to you. S/L students can progress just as fast as AFF student once signed off(which was only five s/l jumps for me).

I can't quite decribe the feeling of my first few jumps, but I love that feeling of being the only person to save your life(I know I had a static line and an FXC, but know one was next to me). I had to do my first static line jumps out of a cessna 206 w/ a cargo door. Hanging my feet over the edge, facing forward, pushing myself off and then obtaining the correct arch position. Also, riding up to altitude w/ to the exit w/ no door, I was scared shitless.

Proggressing right after my static line jumps I was able to progress quickly into doing greater things Vs. AFF. Mainly due to the fact that s/l jumps are mainly done at small dz's which can be more tolerant toward exceptions to the what a low time jumper can and cannot do.

This is definately an exception, but once off the first AFF jumps or static line jumps, a jumper should be to progress toward their A at a similar rate. I will say that most s/l courses will give more one on one time once a static line jumper has been signed off. I always hear about students being left behind at a big dropzones after completing AFF.

"Do aff students know shit about spotting??? probably not. Do static line students know shit about seperation groups??? Idoubt it! Its all relative..."

If static line students were put out from Otters, than yes they probably would know about separation, as that would be part of the lesson. From my experience, an AFF student should be able to spot. Its not rocket science.

Nick is not saying that AFF has failed, but only suggesting that is has not improved student retention rates.

Anyways, nothing against AFF, as I will probably get my instrutor rating for it soon (that is what dzs are leaning toward), but I will also get my s/l as well because it is proven and is much more about a jumper's personal journey and not just shooting out studenting by quantity and not quality.

my .02!

-tj

If you're not living on the edge; you're taking up too much room!

[hallux 0]

word!!

i know...it just seems like there is non stop whining on here about AFF.. geez let it rest already.

[Baksteen 84]

Quote

"Do aff students know shit about spotting??? probably not. Do static line students know shit about seperation groups??? Idoubt it! Its all relative..."

If static line students were put out from Otters, than yes they probably would know about separation, as that would be part of the lesson. From my experience, an AFF student should be able to spot. Its not rocket science.

I have a feeling that it's not the type of course that makes for shitty spotters, but the DZ/sport mentality.

Being a cessna DZ of course we place emphasis on spotting.
However, I bet that if SL-students were put out of an otter (especially at places where they don't do a go-around), they'd be just as likely to 'just go on green' as the AFF-student.

I've heard of at least one DZ were spotting is simply skipped and just signed off on the student's progression card - 'because the pilot does all the spotting the student doesn't need that task'.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[DanG 1]

Quote

I said "unless they pay for coaches". Anyone notice that a coach program was not needed till AFF? AFF was found lacking in many areas and the coach program was put into place to cover those failings.

Anyone notice that canopy classes were not needed till AFF? Anyone notice that packing classes were not needed before AFF?

"Not needed" is not the same as "not done". I learned static line. At 15 jumps I was signed off as a free bird and didn't know shit about freefall skils. My canopy skills, spotting, packing, etc. were just as good as someone who had 15 jumps and started with AFF. I got there cheaper, so it was right for me, but I think I would have been better rounded by doing AFF. After 50 jumps, it doesn't matter anyway.

- Dan G

[Ron 7]

Quote

My canopy skills, spotting, packingCrazy, etc. were just as good as someone who had 15 jumps and started with AFF.

You compared your abilities with a similar AFF student at that time? You held spotting/packing/canopy control competitions?

Also, a single data point does not make a data set.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[DanG 1]

It seems that you think everyone else's anecdotal tales are unimportant, but that your's are God's own truth. Give the "single data point" argument a rest.

My opinion is that at 25 jumps there is no difference between the methods. Yes, that is just my opinion, just like your opinion is just your opinion. I am not a proponent of AFF over static line. I think they are both equally good.

With the proper application of the ISP, the only difference between static line and AFF is how the student gets to Cat D. After that, the programs merge. Why you think a student who does five static lines is substantially better than one who does three two jumpermaster freefalls is beyond me.

- Dan G

[Ron 7]

Quote

It seems that you think everyone else's anecdotal tales are unimportant, but that your's are God's own truth. Give the "single data point" argument a rest

I never said my personal opinion. I base my opinion on teaching skydiving for 13 plus years in several different methods.

You are tyring to use your personal examples as some sort of proof.

And a single data point will never equal a data set.

Quote

Why you think a student who does five static lines is substantially better than one who does three two jumpermaster freefalls is beyond me.

It should not be that hard to grasp... 5>3

Also 5 jumps with a focus on one thing is worth more than 3 focusing on several.

A very simple concept to grasp.

You have not brought any data, just stated your personal opinion over and over.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[danielcroft 2]

So I guess this conversation is over.

It's hard to discuss something if people just continue to shout the same thing over and over.

Don't fool yourself into thinking that the lack of responses is because your opinion is right either.