AFF Standardized Meeting

[Skydivesg 6]

Actually Nick is an AFFI and a rigger. PD was a bit concerned about having him packing for others without one.

Be the canopy pilot you want that other guy to be.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Do you think I should be allowed to continue?

I haven't heard anything about prohibitions on anyone, from teaching anything.

I have only heard that USPA is considering curriculum to be taught by their potentially licenced canopy instructors.

Sort of how USPA creating the coach rating did not stop the guys at Skydive University from offering their curriculum.

If the USPA does their job right, then what you do will become less relevant, just as Skydive University is not what it used to be, either. If it all works out, that'll be a good thing.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Sort of how USPA creating the coach rating did not stop the guys at Skydive University from offering their curriculum.

If the USPA does their job right, then what you do will become less relevant, just as Skydive University is not what it used to be, either. If it all works out, that'll be a good thing.

You know, the USPA Coach rating didn't kill SDU, Rob inadvertently pushed SDU into a dark corner and was then over shadowed by the explosion of tunnels. That is the glossed over version, the other short answer is that politics is what really pushed SDU away from the masses, not the absurdly easy USPA Coach rating.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Para5-0 0]

I still teach a USPA Coach Course and a Skydive University Course together. I think they compliment each other nicely.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I still teach a USPA Coach Course and a Skydive University Course together. I think they compliment each other nicely.

The SDU course is a quality course when taught well, but it isn't a prominent in the sport as it was 8-9 years ago. Mark Futch taught SDU to my wife and a handful of our friends, all of whom became incredible fliers.

Anyways, the point was the the USPA rating program isn't even close to the same level of instruction as SDU. The USPA coach rating didn't kill SDU, SDU started moving away from prominence due to other factors, although it is still around.

As for a canopy coach rating, if one is created and thrust upon us, it could create another level of questionable teaching from questionable teachers. It will probably, however, make what I teach (and other established regional coaches) more valuable.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[ozzy13 0]

Im for further education period. C license 200 jumps is when you have to put 25 accuracy jumps down. Why not add a canopy course in. This is a point in a jumpers career that they have the opportunity to experience new things. Its when the hand cuffs are taken off so to speak. So its our job as Instructors help prepare them for that world. If we do that it will only help our sport be safer and grow.

A USPA coach rating allows you to teach canopy. So this is easy. If you have a Coach rating or high you can teach the course. Why is that hard. I'm not saying that a jumper with 100 jumps and just received his/her coach rating should be teaching canopy skills outside a first jump course setting. I just think we don't have to make this difficult. We do need to better educate people under a good canopy.

Never give the gates up and always trust your rears!

[ufk22 32]

Quote

Actually Nick is an AFFI and a rigger. PD was a bit concerned about having him packing for others without one.

I can understand PD being concerned about someone without a riggers ticket packing for others, potential corporate liability. I was refering to his training videos, but it's all the same.
Unfortuneately, if USPA codifies the canopy instructor rating, you may have to stop teaching for the same reason, potential personal liability.
I know skydive U still has their course, but who would let even the MOST qualified person work with students with only the Skydive U training and no USPA rating? Why? Not because the rating makes a better coach, but potential liability.

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 37]

Coaches are supposed to work under the supervision of an Instructor. Shouldn’t they (Instructors) be held accountable for the coach's quality of instruction or lack of? Everyone always seems to overlook the fact that coaches are not supposed to be operating on their own. Didn’t USPA intentionally put this provision in place in order to deal with so called bad coaches?

D

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

[Para5-0 0]

Quote

Didn’t USPA intentionally put this provision in place in order to deal with so called bad coaches?

I think it was more to have an instructor mentor, supervise, educate, and assist. All the time providing feedback so they become better coaches and quality potential instructors. Just guessing though.

[Deisel 37]

I guess that my point here is that there is already a system in place that is supposed to deal with instruction quality control. IMO, it’s not really enforced anywhere that I’ve seen. Does adding another layer of instructor qualification get us anything (useful) that we don’t already have?

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