Why is static line a dying discipline?

[dragon2 0]

Quote

In my opinion, that minute of freefall and ALL of the variables that you must control are the most important. Anyone can steer a canopy down (for the most part.) But it's the stability and freefall skills such as turning etc. that are the most important

And THAT is something I'd expect from an AFF baby

What is the most important part of the jump? That you land safely so you can jump again. SL jumpers get way more canopy time at first so they are free to focus on the most important part, getting down safely. A very good thing in my book.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Am I missing something?

Yes.
"S/L" really means "S/L progression". (Same with IAD.) Generally, you make your first 5 or so jumps on the static line. During your last 3 S/L jumps (usually jumps #'s 3, 4 & 5), you do a "dummy ripcord/pilot chute pull" - you're still deployed by the S/L (or IAD), but there's a handle you're equipped with to simulate the act of pulling a ripcord or pilot chute handle. Then you move on to your first freefall, which is usually a hop & pop. Then do increasingly longer delays (5 seconds, 10 seconds, 20, 30, etc.), demonstrating the ability to remain stable & on-heading. Once you're reliably stable on 30 second delays, you then practice other skills also taught in AFF: turns, back/front loops, barrel rolls, basic 2-person relative work, tracking, canopy skills. More often than not, a S/L or IAD student eventually works up to his A license in about 25 to 30 jumps, just as an AFF student does - but the overall cost is cheaper.

[Andy9o8 0]

Wow, 5 answer-backs in 6 minutes! Of course, I'm last, as economy of language is more or less impossible for me...

[GLIDEANGLE 1]

Quote

In my opinion, that minute of freefall and ALL of the variables that you must control are the most important. Anyone can steer a canopy down (for the most part.) But it's the stability and freefall skills such as turning etc. that are the most important

Most important is being able to walk to the hangar afterward. Canopy flight errors kill. Sometimes they even kill other jumpers who did nothing wrong. Turning points is cool.... Landing safely is essential.

The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

[eightate8at8 0]

Haha, I figured it was along those lines, just wanted to make sure. Thanks for correction!

[Gato 0]

Quote

Quote

In my opinion, that minute of freefall and ALL of the variables that you must control are the most important. Anyone can steer a canopy down (for the most part.) But it's the stability and freefall skills such as turning etc. that are the most important

Most important is being able to walk to the hangar afterward. Canopy flight errors kill. Sometimes they even kill other jumpers who did nothing wrong. Turning points is cool.... Landing safely is essential.

Very well said!

I'm glad I came up through S/L - it's not easy, but you know you've got it when you've got it. Having to "earn" freefall was a very humbling but enlightening experience for me - as soon as I was on 10-second delays, this sport became VERY personal to me. Maybe it's just the sheer speed that you don't experience in the beginning of the progression, when your decisions and actions need to adapt to that faster reality - where half a second really means something.

The Static Line progression is not a dying discipline - it's just not for everyone. And that's ok.

T.I.N.S.

[MarkM 0]

Quote

My DZO says that AFF gets pushed at turbine dz's because they can drop everybody on one pass.

Any chance your DZO's name was AJ? He told me the same thing back in 2000 when the DZ was at Waterloo. Always wondered how accurate it was.

I think tandems have killed it off. Tandems are very good $$ for DZs and it takes someone with a bit of training to do it, more so than a SLI. Someone with a tandem rating is likely to have/want AFF training or be more interested in the extra money made off that type of jumping.

Real shame though. When it was just SL being offered a student would come to the DZ wanting to "make a skydive", you'd do the 6-8 hours ground, have him spend $180 and when it was over, he could keep on jumping for $40 a pop. It made it real easy to come back out to the DZ over and over.

Now I take someone out and they want to do a tandem, still spend $180 and after if they want to jump again, it's another $180 for a 2nd tandem or $300 for AFF/ground school.

Most people get that "oh, it was fun but not THAT fun" look in their face.

[gearless_chris 1]

Quote

Quote

My DZO says that AFF gets pushed at turbine dz's because they can drop everybody on one pass.

Any chance your DZO's name was AJ? He told me the same thing back in 2000 when the DZ was at Waterloo. Always wondered how accurate it was.

I think tandems have killed it off. Tandems are very good $$ for DZs and it takes someone with a bit of training to do it, more so than a SLI. Someone with a tandem rating is likely to have/want AFF training or be more interested in the extra money made off that type of jumping.

Real shame though. When it was just SL being offered a student would come to the DZ wanting to "make a skydive", you'd do the 6-8 hours ground, have him spend $180 and when it was over, he could keep on jumping for $40 a pop. It made it real easy to come back out to the DZ over and over.

Now I take someone out and they want to do a tandem, still spend $180 and after if they want to jump again, it's another $180 for a 2nd tandem or $300 for AFF/ground school.

Most people get that "oh, it was fun but not THAT fun" look in their face.

Yep, as a matter of fact it is him. We're in Angola now. It has pretty much turned into a tandem dz. It's because a lot of the fun jumpers moved, he does still encourage fun jumpers, and IAD students.

"If it wasn't easy stupid people couldn't do it", Duane.

My momma said I could be anything I wanted when I grew up, so I became an a$$hole.

[loumeinhart 0]

I learned both ways.

s/l student at age 17. 4 jumps with practice pulls, a few more each with a longer delay.

-girlfriend-

Years later I did AFF split between 2 dropzones.

I wanted to inquire about re-training s/l method but I didn't speak up.

s/l would be offered and advertised if I were a dzo. It's less expensive, it's a solo jump, I think it's more fun, I don't think it's less safe.

[Dutton 0]

I am surprised no one has mentioned something yet.

Static Line students are by themselves from their first jump. While they may be assisted by a JM in the plane and given radio guidance on the way down, they know that they did everything themselves as opposed to "being attached" to someone (booo, gay...) on their first jump.
This makes for a more confident end product.
AFF is a little better in this regard, however...

It definitely disgusts me when an experienced jumper refuses to get out unless they are above 3,000.

weenies.

[thrillstalker 0]

i am about to start my aff at the end of the month. i shopped around and found the cheapest place i could that was also highly rated. it works out to 73 dollars a jump all the way to 25 and a license.

"Never grow a wishbone, where your backbone ought to be."

[rlucus 0]

Quote

i am about to start my aff at the end of the month. i shopped around and found the cheapest place i could that was also highly rated. it works out to 73 dollars a jump all the way to 25 and a license.

You are getting a great deal because Hans (The Farm) offers an awesome discount for the package.

But static line is still cheaper, and you don't have to buy it in a package. first jump is $175 then $45 per jump after... comes out to less than $51 per jump for your a license.

Almost a $600 dollar savings over your package deal (which is MUCH cheaper than most AFF programs.) My AFF came out to $82 per jump (with out any repeats, much more expensive if you have too repeat) and it is still cheaper than a lot of places I have seen.

*I am not bad-mouthing AFF, I think it is a great way to learn (although I like the programs that replace the first level with a tandem more)

[fadidawood86 0]

This seems to be an old thread, so I can hopefully help revive it......

As a newly minted solo COP holder, I can add some perspective to this as I have actually gone through both S/L and PFF (as known in Canada) programs.
I started as a student in May of this year on a Solo FJC S/L program. My first jump absolutely rocked and I was hooked instantly. I came back to the DZ over several weekends to continue my S/L progression as I had my sights set on getting my A license as quickly as possible.

I had a really difficult time mastering a proper exit and arch on the S/L program (jumping out of a Cessena 182) as there was barely any freefall time. I had to do 7 jumps with a static line before I was cleared for freefall.
While going up in the plane to do my first five second freefall, I totally froze up and could not make it out the door. The thought of jumping out of the plane and having to deploy my own parachute terrified me. I attempted a second jump the same day after getting a few different “pep” talks, and was able to pull off my 5 second freefall successfully.

The following week I started my 10 second freefall, failed once, and then had a nasty mal on my second attempt (unstable deployment, followed by the pilot chute being wrapped around my leg, then 5-8 seconds of struggling to free my leg, followed by a successful cutaway and reserve deployment). This was my 11th jump at the time. I came back one more time to repeat my 10 second freefall, but again could not make it out of the plane; my mind was fixated on the last jump, and the malfunction that occurred.

Eventually the DZO told me to go home, and never try skydiving again……

I took a month off and decided to rethink my priorities. I decided that I still wanted to skydive, and had to give this another shot.

I took a week off work, traveled to another DZ, and enrolled in their PFF program. I finished the program in about 3-4 days, including 20 minutes of tunnel time which were tremendously useful. I spent the remaining time at the DZ doing solo jumps and having a blast. I had a huge sense of accomplishment after completing my Solo COP, which encouraged me to continue pursuing my A license.

My feelings on the PFF versus S/L were that I learned a LOT more during the PFF program. The instructors were extremely supportive, and spent a lot of time briefing and debriefing each and every single jump. I also found it was very beneficial to do all the jumps back to back (if you can spend the $$) and complete the program in a span of 2-3 days, instead of coming back on weekends. The time in the wind tunnel with an experienced coach was invaluable; this took all the pressure off during my actual PFF jumps as I had rehearsed everything in the tunnel the night before.

All in all – I feel privileged and blessed to have tried both programs and completed the PFF successfully!
Now to bang out that A license!

Hope this post provided some useful insight on both programs

[JohnMitchell 14]

Thanks for the input.

[dthames 0]

Quote

All in all – I feel privileged and blessed to have tried both programs and completed the PFF successfully!

I too feel it was a benifit to have experience in both AFF and SL. When I see people saying a mix (proper mix) is better than either, I tend to agree.

Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”

[erdnarob 1]

I have dropped more than 2000 students in S/L years ago and I can say there is some advantage using such a method. As a jumpmaster when using S/L you always can start the deployment earlier manually by pulling at the S/L when the student exit isn't stable and before he/she flips completely over. In few occasion I have seen the student being put back on his belly due to the S/L tension when he had started to fall sideway. This is not possible when the IAD is used.

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[DeNReN 0]

Quote

This is not possible when the IAD is used.

disagree

[pchapman 261]

Re: fadidawood's experiences

While plenty of people have done fine going through static line, there is a bit of a military quality to it. If you can't hack doing what you need to do, or can't hack getting out of the plane on your own (as fadida did a couple times), you're done, tough luck, you might as well go bowling and stop wasting your money.

So static line isn't as forgiving if a student has problems. And many students with problems, make fine skydivers later, if they can get past their problems. PFF (and beyond that, the tunnel) gives people the TIME to sort out what they need to do.

(I was one of the first PFF instructors at fadidawood's DZ #1, who was trained by one of the head honcho's at DZ #2... who co-owns a tunnel. Very handy for them! )

[Baksteen 84]

Not the old [training method 1] is better than [training method 2] again...

You'll never convince someone who is dedicated to SL that AFF is 'better' - or vice versa.

The main reason for that is because there isn't a best method. You just have to choose the method that works for you; the student.

"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

[bernard 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gAzRXsc6HQ

My daughter took the french pac method, a sort of AFF method, with a not linked exit earlier in the course. I wanted to protect her from the sequence above, which could possibily happen on the s/l course. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gAzRXsc6HQ

[erdnarob 1]

WHY ????

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[pontiacgtp00 0]

I started with IAD jumps, loved it, and certainly was cheaper than the AFF route...but: Like others have said, I've seen some ugly openings with unstable IAD students. Hanging off the brace of a C182, instead of simply letting go/dropping, they shove off, flipping them on their back, sometimes even upside down. That's no good when the PC + bridle is out there whipping around. My home DZ never had any incidents with IAD openings as far as I know, but I think it could happen.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

I started with IAD jumps, loved it, and certainly was cheaper than the AFF route...but: Like others have said, I've seen some ugly openings with unstable IAD students. Hanging off the brace of a C182, instead of simply letting go/dropping, they shove off, flipping them on their back, sometimes even upside down. That's no good when the PC + bridle is out there whipping around. My home DZ never had any incidents with IAD openings as far as I know, but I think it could happen.

I spent about five years dispatching SL, then we converted to IAD. The SL was PC assist, and I saw more scary stuff there then I ever have with IAD. I've never seen a PC hesitation with IAD, happened quite often with SL. That Velcro assist needs to be replaced every 5 or 10 jumps, otherwise it's useless. I had one SL student roll off backwards, and catch the PC bridle in his armpit, stopping the deployment. I remember being a SL student and watching my own PC from my back and head down thinking 'looks like it's working!' IAD is generally just a cleaner deployment. The PC is in the breeze and pulling within a fraction of a second of the student letting go of the airplane. Never had exposure to direct bag SL.

Another "problem" with SL as compared to IAD, is that the students generally are trained to pull a rip cord. They'll have to convert at some point. Either that, or the DZ has to maintain SL rigs with spring loaded PCs, and others set up for hand deployment. The other option would be switching PCs all the time. I have heard of a DZ considering doing PC assisted SL with hand deploy pilot chutes, but don't know if anyone's doing it. Even with that option, you have to pack either for hand deployment, or with the PC inside the container set up for SL. SL as compared to IAD is just a pain in the butt rigging wise.

With IAD, the student starts on the same configuration that he'll be jumping later, no transitions for him or the DZ.

The one thing that I see as being difficult with IAD on a BOC is the practice throws. By the time the student is locating his practice PC the bag is out of the container, and it's not rigid anymore. They just have to be very deliberate in locating the practice PC. Though, once they've done those PPCTs, the real thing is relatively easy.

I don't know if this has been covered earlier in the thread, so I'll write it anyway. Static line is not economic when flying a "large" turbine. Doing one pass per student at 4,000' with 4 minutes between is not going to happen with a Twin Otter. Conversely, for the small mom and pop guys like my operation, doing one load per student with two instructors isn't economic either. It ties up the airplane (C182), and I've never had the staff to make it happen if I'd wanted to.

My opinion is that the training method is influenced by what works best for the aircraft than it has to do with what's "best." In other words "follow the money." Whenever you're told "it's not about the money." You can be pretty darn sure that it's all about the money.

Martin

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

AC DZ

[angle228 0]

Quote

Quote

I started with IAD jumps, loved it, and certainly was cheaper than the AFF route...but: Like others have said, I've seen some ugly openings with unstable IAD students. Hanging off the brace of a C182, instead of simply letting go/dropping, they shove off, flipping them on their back, sometimes even upside down. That's no good when the PC + bridle is out there whipping around. My home DZ never had any incidents with IAD openings as far as I know, but I think it could happen.

I spent about five years dispatching SL, then we converted to IAD. The SL was PC assist, and I saw more scary stuff there then I ever have with IAD. I've never seen a PC hesitation with IAD, happened quite often with SL. That Velcro assist needs to be replaced every 5 or 10 jumps, otherwise it's useless. I had one SL student roll off backwards, and catch the PC bridle in his armpit, stopping the deployment. I remember being a SL student and watching my own PC from my back and head down thinking 'looks like it's working!' IAD is generally just a cleaner deployment. The PC is in the breeze and pulling within a fraction of a second of the student letting go of the airplane. Never had exposure to direct bag SL.

Another "problem" with SL as compared to IAD, is that the students generally are trained to pull a rip cord. They'll have to convert at some point. Either that, or the DZ has to maintain SL rigs with spring loaded PCs, and others set up for hand deployment. The other option would be switching PCs all the time. I have heard of a DZ considering doing PC assisted SL with hand deploy pilot chutes, but don't know if anyone's doing it. Even with that option, you have to pack either for hand deployment, or with the PC inside the container set up for SL. SL as compared to IAD is just a pain in the butt rigging wise.

With IAD, the student starts on the same configuration that he'll be jumping later, no transitions for him or the DZ.

The one thing that I see as being difficult with IAD on a BOC is the practice throws. By the time the student is locating his practice PC the bag is out of the container, and it's not rigid anymore. They just have to be very deliberate in locating the practice PC. Though, once they've done those PPCTs, the real thing is relatively easy.

I don't know if this has been covered earlier in the thread, so I'll write it anyway. Static line is not economic when flying a "large" turbine. Doing one pass per student at 4,000' with 4 minutes between is not going to happen with a Twin Otter. Conversely, for the small mom and pop guys like my operation, doing one load per student with two instructors isn't economic either. It ties up the airplane (C182), and I've never had the staff to make it happen if I'd wanted to.

My opinion is that the training method is influenced by what works best for the aircraft than it has to do with what's "best." In other words "follow the money." Whenever you're told "it's not about the money." You can be pretty darn sure that it's all about the money.

Martin

Martin,
Up here in NEEEEbraska we have SL assist PCs that we also use has hand deployment PCs. IT works great and we don’t have any problems with the Velcro wearing out to fast. The only difference is that you have a soft strip of Velcro on your PC when packing it hand deployment. It does suck repacking every time you need something different, but it’s just a matter or opening the container and then reclosing the container. It is a pain, but not totally debilitating. PrCPs are the same as with IAD and we notice the same thing that the first practice pull seems to be easier.

Taylor

I am fucking your mom right now

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

Martin,
Up here in NEEEEbraska we have SL assist PCs that we also use has hand deployment PCs. IT works great and we don’t have any problems with the Velcro wearing out to fast. The only difference is that you have a soft strip of Velcro on your PC when packing it hand deployment. It does suck repacking every time you need something different, but it’s just a matter or opening the container and then reclosing the container. It is a pain, but not totally debilitating. PrCPs are the same as with IAD and we notice the same thing that the first practice pull seems to be easier.

Taylor

What's argument against simply converting to IAD? Is it the "Outhouse Argument"? As in we've been doing it that way for 50 years...

The Wichita area made the change when there wasn't a separate rating, so no paperwork, additional ratings to earn, etc. A guy like Stokes could transition all the instructors and IEs over the course of a day or two. Though, don't tell Jay I said this, but the way he teaches placement and throw of the IAD is not a good idea.

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

AC DZ