What if you were Olav??

[Levin 0]

Since we've been talking about Olav for the past couple of weeks and everybody seems to have their own oppinions (the majority of which I think are unjustly negative). What i'm wondering is if you were Olav Zipster how would manage the AD license system and maybe even the Space Games??

If I was managing the AD system I would...

1. Change the ADA to AD Intermediate
2. Change the ADB to AD Advanced
3. Throwout the ADC
4. Change the ADD to AD Pro

Personally I believe the Freefly community as a whole would benefit from an independant freefly license system that 1st places an emphasis on safety and 2nd on personal achievement.

1. The requirements for the AD Intermediate should be priorized on skills that demonstrate safety. A freeflyer qualifying for the AD Intermedaite should prove that they are not a risk to safety, are in 100% control of their skydive and are responsible for their flying and actions in the air. The skills can be demonstrated by chasing the ball from the plane and catching up to it in a reasonable amount of time, say 10 seconds. After reaching the ball the freeflyer should fall relative to the ball on head level within arms reach for a few seconds before initiating a controlled close proximity 360 degree carve. Next a 2-hand grip, hand switch and release with one hand. Then a tap and chase followed by a one hand grip before 6500'. I would consider anybody to do this to be in control of and responsible for themselves in the air.

2. The requirements for the AD Advanced I would leave the same as the requirements for the ADB.

3. The ADC is the same as the ADA, only differences being it requires a 3rd transition and uses 2 balls. I think a 2 transition version of an ADC would make a better ADA test. But as it is right now I would throw out the ADC since I believe the ADB demonstrates more skill.

4. The requirements for the AD Pro I would leave the same as for the ADD since those requirements only demonstrate that you are a world class bad ass freeflyer.

To make the test available I would authorize 1 or 2 qualified individuals in each state or region to be able to administer the test. A set fee should be set for the test similar to a reasonable cost of a coach jump in which the authorized test giver would be paid the fee minus the slots. Instead, Olav would cash in on hundreds and hundreds of $20 application fees since his licenses would easily be available to anyone world wide. An irony of this reform I think would be that even though everbody would be paying even more for his AD test because of the application fee, everybody would all of the sudden think he is such a great guy since the test would be more available and other people could give it.

Levin
vSCR#17
www.freeflyers.com

[WrongWay 0]

You have excellent points there Levin! Bravo. The only thing I would change is your idea for the Intermediate License (the carving, poking, and chasing). Remember on student status (or I'm sure you know this if you're an instructor), the front and back loops are not for the sake of being able to to front and back loops, per se. They are demonstrate the ability to recover from an unstable position. Granted, in freefly, there really are no "unstable" positions, but where those really don't apply, corking does. Therefore, we should have four licenses, the first of which demonstrating some kind of transition for the sake of being able to recover from it, proving you're not going to cork if you get off your head. Your version of the A would make a great B test, then take the B test as it is today, and make that the C test. Then followed by Olav's D test. Now for my last concern, I think there should be four tests simply because of one thing. How many people are there in the world that can pull off the D? Three actually have it, and maybe ten or fifteen could do it but just haven't tried yet. So should we really make this nearly impossible test a prerequisite for going pro?? Maybe I just misunderstood you where you called it the AD Pro, and maybe that was just a name, but if it were the prereq. for going pro, I would find it unfair that even some of the best flyers out there today might not be able to hit it. Anyway, there's my two cents. I really like your carving and chasing idea by the way, really innovative.

Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.

[Zennie 0]

We've had this discussion before at the dropzone, but I'll throw it out here for discussion as well.

There's also a bit of disagreement as to whether the AD test accurately reflects one's skill as a freeflier. It definitely is a good measure of one's head down abilities, but what about all the other axes?

Many people (myself included) feel the Millennium Dive/3D Award is a more accurate measure of one's all-around skills as a freeflier.

So, if we're going to some up with an ideal test, why not have two parts? A ball component and a non-ball component? The ball component would be pretty much the same, but then add a 3-D award style dive to test all of the other aspects of flying.

If it were structured right, and fully challenged the flier on all axes, I think it would be a more accurate reflection of overall ability and also a more satisfying achievement.

Speaking of which.... hey Levin, I have another Vladiball still laying around. Wanna play with it sometime?

- Z
"Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

[Vertifly 0]

I agree with you on all points except for the D (Pro) test. It isn't quite clear to me why we need to prove this level of skill. I can't think of anywhere, other than the Space Games, where such notification would be necessary.

Only three people have been able to pass the D test. And as freeflyers, of course we ALL respect them for being able to accomplish this level of maneuvering in the sky. However, since only three freeflyers in the world have done this since the tests have been around (what?, like 6 years now), I think that the "D" test is less like a license and more like a competition (or proof of being a freefly god).

If the testing is about safety in the air, then I do not think that (1) flying with two sky-balls coupled with (2) being able to transition on every axis is the best way to demonstrate this. There are a limited number of situations where this type of dynamic flying would be useful.

Levin's point about being able to prove the ability to carve and fly down a tube is very good. After all, I truly think the test should be about saftey. But if this is also a TRUE test of FREEFLIGHT, what about head up flying too?

The license should be able to speak for itself. We should be able to walk up to someone, learn there license level (that is - if they have one), and immediately be knowledgable about how many freeflyers they should fly with on a skydive | or where to place them in a slot. It is about safety. Can they fly down a tube? Will they cork on their head or their feet? Can they move around from slot-to-slot intentionally, side sliding, backward and forward movement, faster and slower movement, turning 180-degrees and tracking away on their back?

Given ALL of these points, perhaps a "C" and "D" test are both necessary. Although, at minimum, it should include proving proficiency on your feet as well your head.

Based on these points, my suggestions are the following:

The "C" should include two transitions on your head then one transition on your feet. At the end of the dive, turning 180 and tracking away on your back is a requirement. Corking in anyway is prohibited.

The "D" should be similar except that it could include more transitions on feet and some stand up carving as well. Again, corking in anyway is a failure.

I also really liked this part from Levin too:

Quote

To make the test available I would authorize 1 or 2 qualified individuals in each state or region to be able to administer the test.

I think that this part is the most important. It provides the vehicle to universalize the testing system. However...

Quote

Instead, Olav would cash in on hundreds and hundreds of $20 application fees since his licenses would easily be available to anyone world wide.

...I see NO reason to give rights to Olav for the system. Anyone can dream this up and make it a reality. I think the proceeds should go to a not-for-profit organization that travels around the US promoting freeflying with boogies, free organizing, inexpensive coaching, medium-to-big way camps, film festivals, competitions, etc. etc. etc.

[Levin 0]

Although few, this thread has gotten some very good responses. If taken seriously it sounds like something productive could possibly come out of this discussion.

Wrongway, this reply has a couple of good points.

Quote

The only thing I would change is your idea for the Intermediate License (the carving, poking, and chasing). Remember on student status (or I'm sure you know this if you're an instructor), the front and back loops are not for the sake of being able to to front and back loops, per se. They are demonstrate the ability to recover from an unstable position. Granted, in freefly, there really are no "unstable" positions, but where those really don't apply, corking does. Therefore, we should have four licenses, the first of which demonstrating some kind of transition for the sake of being able to recover from it, proving you're not going to cork if you get off your head. Your version of the A would make a great B test, then take the B test as it is today, and make that the C test. Then followed by Olav's D test.

I know where you are coming from. I’m not disagreeing because I think you’re wrong. I think both of us are right and wrong. I disagree with you because of my own personal motive for suggesting a change in the system, or as some others have suggested, a new system in general. That motive is safety. That’s why in my initial post I said one that 1st places an emphasis on safety and 2nd on achievement. Personally I could care less about a license that shows you can do tricks. But a license that says I’m safe & responsible for myself, that if I cause a collision it’s not an accident; it’s my fault. A license that says, if you let me on you’re skydive I will not kill you. I guess I should say I am looking at this from a load organizer’s perspective. I think the requirements for the initial license should be as I stated. --->The skills can be demonstrated by chasing the ball from the plane and catching up to it in a reasonable amount of time, say 10 seconds. After reaching the ball the freeflyer should fall relative to the ball on head level within arms reach for a few seconds before initiating a controlled close proximity 360 degree carve. Next a 2-hand grip, hand switch and release with one hand. Then a tap and chase followed by a one-hand grip before 6500'. <--- Perhaps a 360 degree turn should be added before tap and chase. I think a demonstration of these skills shows total control of a given body position. Someone this proficient at a particular body position will not accidentally cork out of it. They have the ability to be responsible for their actions and they are not a hazard to safety.

And again, Wrongway, I see your point of view. Already my proposed system has singled out almost every freeflyer. The skills required for an AD Intermediate are the same skills required for bigway freeflying. There are hundreds of freeflyers in Texas but only about 15 maybe 20 of us statewide that could qualify for that license. So to keep interest in a new system there is a need for a lower license. One with maybe the same requirements as the ADA. But this license does not guarantee one is safe. However the requirements are already attainable for a sizable portion of the freeflying population. And it does say something about their skills.

Quote

Now for my last concern, I think there should be four tests simply because of one thing. How many people are there in the world that can pull off the D? Three actually have it, and maybe ten or fifteen could do it but just haven't tried yet. So should we really make this nearly impossible test a prerequisite for going pro?? Maybe I just misunderstood you where you called it the AD Pro, and maybe that was just a name, but if it were the prereq. for going pro, I would find it unfair that even some of the best flyers out there today might not be able to hit it. Anyway, there's my two cents. I really like your carving and chasing idea by the way, really innovative.

AD Pro was just a name. Since pros don’t have licenses, they have National titles, maybe AD Expert would be a better term. (I would say master, but I already used that term inappropriately once, so I don’t want to have to dig myself out of another hole). As I already said I don’t really care about the upper level licenses (exception – I do want an ADB license). One day when I get really good I will be proud of myself for what I’ve accomplished, not because I earned a certificate of achievement. But I am partly in the minority. I think the majority of freeflyers are interested in the upper level licenses because for them it symbolizes their personal accomplishments.

Levin
vSCR#17
www.freeflyers.com

edit: left the word "not" out of a sentence.

[Levin 0]

Quote

We've had this discussion before at the dropzone, but I'll throw it out here for discussion as well.

I’m sure we’ve had this discussion at the DZ before but I don’t think I remember. Every time I hear “Olav” or “AD” at the DZ (usually negative comments) I grow earplugs.

Quote

There's also a bit of disagreement as to whether the AD test accurately reflects one's skill as a freeflier. It definitely is a good measure of one's head down abilities, but what about all the other axes?

Freeflying = total body flight = belly, back, tracking, headdown, sit and the 3 axis’. And the 3 axis’ must be performed in all 5-body positions. I don’t think there is time enough in a skydive for all of that, much less adding a few seconds here and there to demonstrate control in the body positions. Of course it could be broken down into separate licenses but still would be an elaborate system. Such a test would be geared towards personal achievement; not safety.

Quote

Many people (myself included) feel the Millennium Dive/3D Award is a more accurate measure of one's all-around skills as a freeflier.

The 3-D Award is an excellent measure of ones skills as a freeflyer. This award shows the same control in 3 body positions that my make believe AD Intermediate shows in just one body position. Even though this award was designed for personal achievement, the difficulty in obtaining it demonstrates enough control that they probably have the skills to be responsible for their actions. Even this award does not demonstrate total body flight. Requirements include transitions but they do not require tracking, backflying, or full axis’. Problem with this award is that it requires 2 other people to obtain it. If there are no 2 other available people able to do it then you can’t readily obtain it regardless of wether you have the skills or not. Another problem with this award is that it does not require proof of achievement. The door is open to dishonesty and unfortunately it has already happened (please do not ask me to comment on that because I won’t). What if the ADB required 3 transitions headdown and 3 in a sit?

---> Off topic real quick. I’m watching discovery channel while I write this. They just showed a skydiver named Ken that hurt himself on a hook turn. To show the whuffo world what a hook turn is, the Discovery channel showed an animation of one. The animated parachutist did a hard 180 degree hook turn with a round canopy. <---

Quote

So, if we're going to some up with an ideal test, why not have two parts? A ball component and a non-ball component? The ball component would be pretty much the same, but then add a 3-D award style dive to test all of the other aspects of flying.

I think this could be a good idea. But it could mean even another license. Right now we have A-D. Easily we could have A-G. If we’re not careful we could end up with A-Z. Again a good suggestion. But for the sake of simplicity and other reasons I would have to vote no.

Quote

If it were structured right, and fully challenged the flier on all axes, I think it would be a more accurate reflection of overall ability and also a more satisfying achievement.

I think our differences here are due only to the different perspectives we are using to look at this. I am mostly interested in something readily available and recognized as a level of safety. To me, you seem to be more interested in the personal achievement aspect of a license system. The same interest the majority of freeflyers have.

Quote

Speaking of which.... hey Levin, I have another Vladiball still laying around. Wanna play with it sometime?

When are you coming out again?? I brought my wingsuit for ya last weekend, but the tropical storm rained us out. You were probably out base jumping anyway. Standing atop a 2k ‘A’ with thick rubber soled shoes waiting for the eye of the storm. I’m gonna have to pass on the Vladiball offer this time. I’ve seen enough of Trent’s videos to know that it will take more than a jump or 2 to dial that thing in. I can’t devote a day to it. Maybe after the last TSL meet. If you come out this weekend I’ll jump my ball with ya. Let me know which day. I owe Nick a ball jump. Yall can go together. One on One . I'm jumping the tube a couple of times this weekend. I've been carrying it with me every weekend but haven't jumped it in awhile so have to make sure it's in good shape for the AOT boogie. No holes or dents in the ring. Also have to rig up a new system for the cables. It popped off once at Waller and I almost lost it in the trees. If it pops off at Aggieland it could land in town and I'd loose it for sure. So you should definetly come out this weekend. I also plan on trying to see how many times I can go thru the stuff I wrote for the Intermediate license. If Nick is busy you are welcome to video. That is if you've brushed the rust off. Sorry to thro that at ya, but base jumping isn't going to keep you current.

Levin
vSCR#17
www.freeflyers.com

edit: added to last paragraph

[Levin 0]

Quote

I agree with you on all points except for the D (Pro) test. It isn't quite clear to me why we need to prove this level of skill. I can't think of anywhere, other than the Space Games, where such notification would be necessary.

It isn’t quit clear to me either, other than maybe to establish a pecking order. But apparently Olav thought of a need for it. Maybe he decided it was neccesary to fill a gap in a realm of endless possiblities. Even if the gap didn't need filling. Or maybe he did it to be D-1. And even if that is the case, who can't say they wouldn't have done the same?

Quote

Only three people have been able to pass the D test. And as freeflyers, of course we ALL respect them for being able to accomplish this level of maneuvering in the sky. However, since only three freeflyers in the world have done this since the tests have been around (what?, like 6 years now), I think that the "D" test is less like a license and more like a competition (or proof of being a freefly god).

If politics could be removed from the AD system I bet the number of ADD holders would total around 20+. And how about 6 yrs from now? I think later on down the road could be a demand for such a license. I agree, right now it is before its time.

Quote

If the testing is about safety in the air, then I do not think that (1) flying with two sky-balls coupled with (2) being able to transition on every axis is the best way to demonstrate this. There are a limited number of situations where this type of dynamic flying would be useful.

The test aren’t all about safety. In my original post I said 1st emphasis should be on safety and 2nd on personal achievement. Safety can be demonstrated with one license. The rest such as those with 2 spaceballs are for personal achievement only. I think the first license or 2 should emphasize control and the last 2 your bag of tricks.

Quote

Levin's point about being able to prove the ability to carve and fly down a tube is very good. After all, I truly think the test should be about saftey. But if this is also a TRUE test of FREEFLIGHT, what about head up flying too?

Ted said something to the same effect. The AD test is not a test of true freeflight or total body flight. Neither is the system I am suggesting. Check out my reply to Ted on this one.

Quote

The license should be able to speak for itself. We should be able to walk up to someone, learn there license level (that is - if they have one), and immediately be knowledgable about how many freeflyers they should fly with on a skydive | or where to place them in a slot. It is about safety. Can they fly down a tube? Will they cork on their head or their feet? Can they move around from slot-to-slot intentionally, side sliding, backward and forward movement, faster and slower movement, turning 180-degrees and tracking away on their back?

This is exactly what I think the initial licenses should show. A proven degree of control where one is responsible for their actions.

Quote

Given ALL of these points, perhaps a "C" and "D" test are both necessary. Although, at minimum, it should include proving proficiency on your feet as well your head.

Based on these points, my suggestions are the following:

The "C" should include two transitions on your head then one transition on your feet. At the end of the dive, turning 180 and tracking away on your back is a requirement. Corking in anyway is prohibited.

The "D" should be similar except that it could include more transitions on feet and some stand up carving as well. Again, corking in anyway is a failure.

I think you and I are definitely on the same page. I think this is going off the AD path so I’m ceasing the use of AD in my examples/suggestions. Ramon and I discussed an alternative system awhile back. He came up with the idea of Rebel Freeflyer#’s. From here on I’m going to use RF just for fun. Tell me what you think of this.

RF Beginner – (This a not a ball jump). Coach chooses either a sit stair-step, sit train or sit knee dock exit and tells the freeflyer sometime between 1 minute to jump and walking to the door. Exit has to hold for 5 seconds but does not have to be perfectly stable. Coach flies to distance of 10 feet from freeflyer. Freeflyer makes an altimeter check without loosing balance. For 12 - 15 seconds the freeflyer flies relative to the coach. During this time the coach very gradually makes small changes in the fallrate. While matching changes in the fallrate the freeflyer does not have to mirror image the coach. Instead the freeflyer demonstrates that they are aware of a change in fallrate by trying and reasonably matching the change. (It is at the coaches discretion if this requirement has been met). Coach lightly shakes freeflyers foot to check for overall stability. Freeflyer again makes an altimeter check without loosing balance. Next the freeflyer makes an in place 360 turn returning back their original heading which should be the coach. Then the freeflyer performs their choice of a flip or cartwheel. (The test is failed if the freeflyer at anytime corks, moves more than 5 feet out of place during spin and/or decelerates from camera frame during flip or cartwheel.) At 5000’ freeflyer looks all around to simulate clearing airspace, gives a waive off to the coach, turns his/her back to the coach and tracks away. (Ted suggested a non-ball jump in another post, but I don’t think this is what he had in mind.)

RF Intermediate – Freeflyer & Ballmaster exit together, headdown and docked. Once off the plane and on the hill the ballmaster releases the ball in front of the freeflyer. (If the exit spins to hell then the ballmaster holds onto the ball because the freeflyer has just demonstrated he/she has no business being in the air with one). After releasing the ball the freeflyer flies head level with the ball at a distance of no more than 6 feet or 3 arms lengths. After a few seconds the freeflyer makes a 360 degree turn moving out of place no more than 3 feet. Next the freeflyer transitions to a sit staying head level with the ball. (The test is failed if the freeflyer decelerates out of frame of the camera). The freeflyer performs a controlled in place 360 turn moving out of place no more than 1 foot. The freeflyer must then perform either a flip or cartwheel in either sit or headdown. The freeflyer must be headdown, on head level and within 3 arms lengths of the ball at 6500’. At 6500’ the ballmaster waives off and retrieves the ball. When the ballmaster grabs the ball the freeflyer turns a 360 degree turn and tracks away.

RF Advanced – Freeflyer spots for the test over an open uninhabited or designated area. Ballmaster sits in the door and drops the ball after double checking the spot. Freeflyer exits from camera step or rear float and may not leave the aircraft before the ball. Freeflyer must chase the ball, catch up and be within 3 feet or 1 ½ arms length and flying head level in 10 seconds. After flying relative for a few seconds the freeflyer does a controlled in place 360 turn. (The test is failed if the freeflyer moves out of place more than 1 foot). Then the freeflyer grabs the ball at chest level with 2 hands and switches the ball between them holding it in each hand for at least 1 second. Freeflyer then releases the ball back in the air. (If the ball accelerates or decelerates more than 2 feet the test is failed). As soon as the freeflyer releases the ball he/she turns a quick 360 turn staying head level (The test is failed if the freeflyer moves out of place more than 5 feet horizontally or 2 feet vertically). After the turn the freeflyer must fly to the ball head level and momentarily stop and drop to chest level. Freeflyer then taps the ball a minimum of 5 feet away from them. (Ballmaster needs to be to the side of the freeflyer when he/she taps ball). Freeflyer then flies to the ball stops momentarily and grabs it with one hand by 6000’. (Freeflyer is allowed to miss the ball once during final grab as long as the ball is knocked no more than 5 feet away). After grabbing the ball by 6000’ the freeflyer turns a 180 degree turn away from ballmaster and drives away to simulate clearing airspace before rolling over to a belly track. Freeflyer should be under open canopy by 4000’. (The test is failed if the freeflyer drops the ball during canopy opening or any portion of canopy descent; whether it be from 5 feet or 500 feet).

-- > Since the RF Advanced satisfies my motive for a license that proves one is safe, anything afterwards would be for personal achievement. I’m curious what people may think the ideal number of licenses should be and their requirements. < --

RF Expert – Freeflyer exits with ball in hand in any manner he/she chooses. Freeflyer must release the ball from a sit position within 7 seconds of leaving the aircraft. Freeflyer must then perform a spin, a flip and a cartwheel both headdown and in a sit. Freeflyer may choose to perform the maneuvers either left or right and may do them in any order. To better demonstrate control the freeflyer points at the ball between each maneuver. The tip of the finger may be no more than 1 foot from the ball. Freeflyer must retrieve the ball by 5000’. (The test is failed if 1. the ball accelerates or decelerates more than 10 feet upon initial release after exit. 2. the freeflyer decelerates out of camera frame during any of the maneuvers) (The test is failed if the freeflyer drops the ball during canopy opening or any portion of canopy descent; whether it be from 5 feet or 500 feet).

RF Master – Freeflyer may exit from any position outside the plane. Freeflyer gives a count and then drops from aircraft. Ballmaster waits exactly 1 second then drops the ball. Then what???

RF Pro - ??

Or are these last 2 even needed?

Quote

I also really liked this part from Levin too:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


To make the test available I would authorize 1 or 2 qualified individuals in each state or region to be able to administer the test.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I think that this part is the most important. It provides the vehicle to universalize the testing system. However...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Instead, Olav would cash in on hundreds and hundreds of $20 application fees since his licenses would easily be available to anyone world wide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


...I see NO reason to give rights to Olav for the system. Anyone can dream this up and make it a reality. I think the proceeds should go to a not-for-profit organization that travels around the US promoting freeflying with boogies, free organizing, inexpensive coaching, medium-to-big way camps, film festivals, competitions, etc. etc. etc.

I said that because my initial intent was to put myself and the reader in Olav’s shoes and think about how we would do things differently. There’s been a lot of talk about him on here lately and nothing really productive has come out of it. You are right. Anybody could dream this system up and Olav would have no rights to it. But the problem is making it a reality. The freefly community has to recognize and accept the system. And it has to have a demand for the licenses. The dropzones and local freefly load organizers, teams and pros have to recognize, accept and support and promote the system. It is crucial to have support from the entire community to not only make it a reality but also a success. The problem would mostly likely come from the already accomplished freefly crowd. Especially the one’s that have been around for a while. 1. The skills recognized by the licenses were achieved by this crowd ages ago. 2. A newbie cannot have a lower number. This is already a problem with the vSCR awards.

I can think of 2 ways that might make it work. 1. NO NUMBERS! At most the license should look real cool, say for example Rebel Freeflyer Expert and have your name and small photo on the front. The back (except RF Beginner and Intermediate) should read something like “This freeflyer has achieved and demonstrated skills that suggest he/she is in control of their flight and safe to themselves and others” Reason I would word it this way is because I don’t know a whole lot about civil law and even though I have stated “responsible for one’s actions” several times; I don’t think it would be good if a freefly license stated something that could possibly imply that one is legally responsible for their actions in the air. Only open the sport to more lawsuits. The back should have the name of the ballmaster in print and also be signed by him/her as well maybe their USPA member or license number on a separate line. Also could include anything else such as state, home dropzone, dropzone where license was earned. Should have a line for the date issued. Not the date earned. The date earned could establish a numbering system. I also think there should be a separate signature line for a witness (never ask the pilot or dzo). Since such a high percentage of freeflyers are the ones doing the hook turns it probably wouldn’t hurt to include an emergency contact number or a known allergy such as penicillin. 2. For a new system to work it has to have support from the local advanced freeflyers at a given DZ that are on teams, load organize or serve as role models for the local freefly community. For them to support it they need a motive. I think the cost for these license test should be the same as a high dollar coach jump. Say $65 -$75, with 100% of the proceeds after slots going to the ballmaster or coach. Even though many people complain that the test are too expensive, I believe their real complaint is that all the proceeds go to one entity. I personally do not believe there is anything wrong with Olav doing that. I’ve said that in past post. Only real problem is the structure and administration of the AD system doesn’t serve the best interest of the freefly community.

I believe that there is not only a demand but a need for some kind of freefly license system. I’ve spent several hours off and on thinking an typing about it. I would like to know what kind of interest there is and what the possibility is of making this happen. I think maybe I’ve thought of a simple plan that might make it work.

First off I want to say that I am not using my website for any kind of personal gain nor is my interest in starting a new license system in anyway for any kind of personal gain. Hopefully everybody’s seen the freeflyers.com thread and checked out the site. I think that website really nice and professional and could be very useful for promoting a new freefly license system or Rebel Freeflyer License. And in return the new license system would help promote freeflyers.com on a much greater scale, we can’t promote a nationally recognized license on a website dedicated to one particular state. If the freefly community is interested in a new system and okay with me using freeflyers.com as the official website for it, then I will in-turn, turn freeflyers.com into a national freeflying site instead of one dedicated just to Texas. I talked to Dan last night and he said it really wouldn’t be all that hard. The hard stuff is mostly already done. Of course he would have to be compensated for his time but it wouldn’t be much for just one person to pay. A representative from each state on the site would have ability to administrate and make changes. But that is only if the freefly community would be okay with me volunteering to keep track of everything. Otherwise I like the site like it is, dedicated to Texas. And I’m currently using the site to promote and get the word out about the freefly scene in Texas in hope that more people will come visit us. Florida and Arizona aren’t the only places to go in the winter.

Administering the licenses would be fairly simple. One person or organization keeps track of the records (myself). A record will be kept and constantly updated of those that qualify for license. A small number of advanced freeflyers in each state or region would be authorized to give the test. A list of those authorized would be on the website aside the list of license holders. Who authorizes someone to be able to administer this test? Answer is themselves, their local community, their friends. Everyone one of us knows if we have the skills to safely ballmaster someone else. You know it, your local dropzone knows it and your friends know it. To be an authorized test giver I think one should only have to ask. And unless they have a reputation alone that verifies their ability I think a video of them demonstrating the requirements for the RF Advanced and an endorsement from their Dropzone should be all that is required. The number of authorized test givers should not be limited to a very small number of people so that they can capitalize from it. The number of test givers for a given area needs to be small enough to keep the system simple and large enough to make the test readily available pretty much anywhere. The actual license would be sized to fit in a wallet, laminated with picture ID, cool looking and NOT numbered. The license can be distributed 2 ways, 1. onsite from the ballmaster that administered the test at the time it is given or 2. from me if a laminating machine is not available to the ballmaster at the time the test is taken. Of course I would want to be compensated for what it cost me. I’m not sure what the plastic sleeves cost but I’m thinking a dollar or 2 would cover everything including postage. Since there is no numbering system, there is no need for anybody to be in a hurry to take a test before they are ready. If someone fails a test twice in 30 days they should have to wait 90 days before they can take it again.

When a freeflyer earns a new license the ball master sends in the application plus $1 or 2 fee to cover my cost. The video is not required. It is obvious by looking at this that this entire proposed new system would pretty much have to be based on an honor system. Since the ballmasters will be policed only by the freefly community in general, success of the entire system greatly depends on their being honest, following the rules and upholding the requirements for each license and not trying to use the privilege as a primary source of income. And to make it a success it needs acceptance and recognition. This part is up to each of you...

I would really like to hear comments. Is there an interest in a new system? Is the system I have proposed a good one? Do we really need one? Does anybody really care? Personally I don’t think the world-class freeflying population does. Is the benefit to safety worth the possible risk of occasionally alienating new jumpers that don’t have a license? Is having a system that recognizes personal achievement worth the added bureaucratic b.s. and politics that it could potentially create (I think the absence of a numbering system will cure that)? So what do yall think? Is this project worth the trouble?

Levin
vSCR#17
www.freeflyers.com

[WrongWay 0]

Dude, I am all for your RF test. Those are some excellent ideas there. If you actually start giving those tests out, I wanna know, and I wanna take it. Bravo, my friend, bravo.

Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.

[Levin 0]

Quote

Dude, I am all for your RF test. Those are some excellent ideas there.

thanks dude. glad to hear it. Only one thing. It's not my RF test. It's our RF test. It's everyone's RF test.

the very sound of "your RF test" is the very reason why our present and hopefully past system has failed.

Levin
vSCR#17
www.freeflyers.com

[skymama 35]

Levin-

It took awhile, but I finally got through it all!

Quote

I believe that there is not only a demand but a need for some kind of freefly license system. I’ve spent several hours off and on thinking an typing about it. I would like to know what kind of interest there is and what the possibility is of making this happen. I think maybe I’ve thought of a simple plan that might make it work.

I think it would be quite useful to have a different freeflying license system, and one that doesn't have a lot of controversy surrounding it because people have issues with the creator. I personally know 3 people who have broken bones in freeflying collisions, one of them being paralyzed, so the safety part of your test that you stress is very important to me. Because of these instances, I'm pretty picky about what I will do on a freefly jump with someone. I very rarely agree to join a new group on a plane if they invite me at the last minute and there's no time for me to ask a few questions about what their skills are like. But, if someone were to say to me, "I have an RF-I", then I would be a lot more comfortable. And, the same goes for me trying to get on jumps with other people, most specifically men. I'm a middle-aged woman, not your typical freeflying. I know there is a lot of question in people's minds when I ask to jump with them, and rightly so. I want to jump with people who are just as concerned about safety as I am because I have 2 kids who expect me to come home at night. If we are all on the same page, then it will be good for all of us.

I too would like to hear more comments on what people think about a system like this, especially our more experienced freefliers that we have hanging around.

She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

[Vertifly 0]

Quote

I think you and I are definitely on the same page. I think this is going off the AD path so I’m ceasing the use of AD in my examples/suggestions. Ramon and I discussed an alternative system awhile back. He came up with the idea of Rebel Freeflyer#’s. From here on I’m going to use RF just for fun. Tell me what you think of this.

That is facetiousness at its finest. I like it.

Quote

First off I want to say that I am not using my website for any kind of personal gain nor is my interest in starting a new license system in anyway for any kind of personal gain. Hopefully everybody’s seen the freeflyers.com thread and checked out the site. I think that website really nice and professional and could be very useful for promoting a new freefly license system or Rebel Freeflyer License. And in return the new license system would help promote freeflyers.com on a much greater scale, we can’t promote a nationally recognized license on a website dedicated to one particular state. If the freefly community is interested in a new system and okay with me using freeflyers.com as the official website for it, then I will in-turn, turn freeflyers.com into a national freeflying site instead of one dedicated just to Texas.

Bottom line, I think this is a successful attitude to have. I also liked your response to the other comment regarding the license system being "OURS" (as freeflyers). Levin, I truly believe that this is what our sport needs.

Quote

For a new system to work it has to have support from the local advanced freeflyers at a given DZ that are on teams, load organize or serve as role models for the local freefly community. For them to support it they need a motive. I think the cost for these license test should be the same as a high dollar coach jump. Say $65 -$75, with 100% of the proceeds after slots going to the ballmaster or coach

If you need any of my help from Crosskeys, just let me know. Ball tests aren't exactly encouraged out here; although, the first test would be do-able and I would be glad to talk to Timmy, Stuey, and Adam about it so that we ALL can begin promoting the system when it's ready.

Quote

I would like to know what kind of interest there is and what the possibility is of making this happen. I think maybe I’ve thought of a simple plan that might make it work.

Perhaps more brainstorming would be needed for what is included in the test. Don't get me wrong, I think that the ideas you've come up with are quite acceptable, but maybe we (as freeflyers - if, at minimum, just the freeflyers on this forum) should ALL agree on the curriculum of the test and the purpose of the license itself. Having a core mission statement would help the focus of the system and, at the same time, make it clear to everyone why it is such a good idea. Which brings me to my next point:

Quote

First off I want to say that I am not using my website for any kind of personal gain nor is my interest in starting a new license system in anyway for any kind of personal gain.........

I think that the mission statement should also include what you said here: "...The new license system helps promote freeflyers.com on a much greater scale, we can’t promote a nationally recognized license on a website dedicated to one particular state." With maybe an added part about the need for the web page and the system itself.

Quote

And to make it a success it needs acceptance and recognition. This part is up to each of you...

You've got my vote dude.

Quote

Is there an interest in a new system? Is the system I have proposed a good one? Do we really need one? ***

I think this is loooooong overdue. More people complain about not having one than doing anything about it. The "need" for this does not only come from necessity of increased safety, but (I think) from its potential to promote the sport internally and to people who are just getting started.

Does anybody really care? Personally I don’t think the world-class freeflying population does. Is the benefit to safety worth the possible risk of occasionally alienating new jumpers that don’t have a license?

Quote

I'm sure that most experienced flyers understand that this would be quite useful. You're right though, I doubt that the freefly-gods think that it serves a substantial purpose; otherwise, we would probably already have one in place. I couldn't imagine that it would "alienate" new jumpers at all. If anything, it provides substantial short term goals.

Is having a system that recognizes personal achievement worth the added bureaucratic b.s. and politics that it could potentially create (I think the absence of a numbering system will cure that)?

Quote

LMFAO - I hate to say this, but anyone who promotes this system is probably in for the bureaucratic ride of their life. Let's face it, this idea has the potential to change our existing freefly environment if launched with vigor and done via the proper chanels. People in general resist change. It is human nature and skydivers are not above this. Screw it, man! You believe in it... And a lot of us on the forum (so far) believe in it. Go for it!!!

So what do yall think? Is this project worth the trouble? ***

Well worth the trouble. Please send me an email if I can do anything to help. Kudos. -Blue Sky's - David Colucci



.
.
.
.
.

[78RATS 0]

Quote

What if you were Olav??

I would hang out in Europe with Stephania, throw a Space Games for old time sakes, and get ready for the Worlds.

wait a minute........

The coolest thing ever is that he shot outside on the world record big way.

Rat for Life - Fly till I die
When them stupid ass bitches ask why

[Zennie 0]

Quote

That is if you've brushed the rust off. Sorry to thro that at ya, but base jumping isn't going to keep you current.

LOL. Actually, I have been skydiving a fair amount over the past month or so. We just keep missing each other. I plan to be out this weekend, so it would be really cool to try the birdman suit.

And yeah I'd love to do some ball jumps with you & Nick.

- Z
"Always be yourself... unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

[Levin 0]

Sorry for the silence. I wanted to think hard real quick about the whole project before making anymore comments.

We'll start discussing it next week. If you can find out, I would like to know those guys opinions. Their comments would be very helpful. But also ask others as well. Everyone's opinion is valuable to make this suceed.

Levin
vSCR#17
www.freeflyers.com

[apoil 0]

I'm just getting around to this thread, as you knew I would.
Lots of stuff that I haven't read through yet, but I wanted to make some initial comments before I pursue it further.

Quote

Personally I believe the Freefly community as a whole would benefit from an independant freefly license system that 1st places an emphasis on safety and 2nd on personal achievement.

Why does freeflying need a "license" ?

RW, CRW, these don't require a license.

Licenses are basic. Advanced stuff takes ratings.
AFF rating. SL/I Rating. Pro Rating.

But there's no rating for RW. There's not even any qualification to be an RW organizer. Or CRW, who says who can do that or who can teach it? It's technical and dangerous, but it seems to be pretty self regulating. Same with Skysurf, Freestyle, Style, Canopy Swooping.

Even video flying for tandems doesn't require any rating, and the USPA has often kicked around the idea that it should because those folks are potentially endangering the life of unlicensed jumpers.

Now as to a system that rewards accomplishment and recognizes skill? woo hoo I'm all in favor. Freefly progression is missing milestones, and there needs to be milestones well before the AD A test, which is pretty advanced.

And more important than the skill level for the testees, the ratings for the testers is even more critical.

An AD A is not a good candidate to be a ballmaster, an AD B is much more likely. But that's just being a ballmaster for a fun jump. Who can actually administer the tests?

Your suggestions are good. A controlled carve around the ball is an important skill. As it is now, one can pass the AD A with inadvertent orbiting around the ball. (I did - even though my test was not "legal")

Another thing that had come up as a suggestion in the early days of the test is controlled verticals, in essence an eagle with the ball.

Catching the ball in a head up position - a highly advanced maneuver - well worth demonstrating.

One handed versus two handed grabs is another distinction. Keeping in mind that it's a lot easier with the dominant hand. One should be able to do both, in both head up and head down.

Unfortunately, Olav didn't seem to be interested in giving away control of this system. This is a significant part of what alienated him from much of the highly experienced freefly community at the time. As members of his inner circle branched off to do their own things it became questionable as to whether they were authorized any longer to perform the A tests.

In fact, if you look at the wording of his "license" it really only gives you a "license" to fly with HIS "spaceball" in HIS "spacegames"
Ball jumps elsewhere are not condoned or authorized.

And it's just as well because they are a logistical nightmare in most places.

[apoil 0]

Quote

Many people (myself included) feel the Millennium Dive/3D Award is a more accurate measure of one's all-around skills as a freeflier.

while I like the 3D award, in concept. It is unfortunately 3 very very simple head down points for a proficient head down flyer, 3 very very simple belly moves for a proficient belly flyer, and 3 very very advanced sit moves for a very advanced head-up flyer.

So it's not perfect either, but it's nice.
And it's also unregulated. I could get one by just filling out the form, and it's only honor that keeps it honest.

[apoil 0]

Quote

Only three people have been able to pass the D test.

Only three people so far have bothered to make the effort to train and pass it.

There are plenty of people who are good enough to get it if they applied some effort, but they don't. Because they don't feel the need to prove that level of accomplishment to Olav, or anyone else. When you're that good everyone already knows who you are, or they will soon.

Especially since the two ball tests are pricey to take. You have to pay for three slots and two coaching fees plus watever additional "processing fee" there might be for certifying the result.

[apoil 0]

Quote

Freeflying = total body flight = belly, back, tracking, headdown, sit and the 3 axis’. And the 3 axis’ must be performed in all 5-body positions.

It doesn't end there. Try doing a 360 during an atmonauti dive.
You mention 5 body positions, but those are only discrete samples. There's a continuum of body positions all in between and all kinds of other odd positions, like knee flying, ass flying and shrimp flying, and stuff we haven't named yet.

[apoil 0]

Quote

Quote

Dude, I am all for your RF test. Those are some excellent ideas there.

thanks dude. glad to hear it. Only one thing. It's not my RF test. It's our RF test. It's everyone's RF test.

the very sound of "your RF test" is the very reason why our present and hopefully past system has failed.

That's what I'm talking about.

Some very good ideas there.

[Vertifly 0]

Quote

Only three people so far have bothered to make the effort to train and pass it.

May I make a suggested correction to your statement. Any derogatory opinions aside:

I think that only three people thought it that the D-license was valuable enough to make the effort to train and pass it. Let's face it, what meritocrocy does the "AD-D" really support?

This ongoing debate is to determine the need for a license at all; as well as coming up with a better system if one is useful. I think that the "AD" lacks a constitutional purpose - THAT IS THE POINT. Levin has brought up some pretty valid arguements for the usefullness of such a system.

You also mentioned that the test is "pricey". I agree with this point 100%. But would it be pricey if it was more applicable?

In other words, what is the cost benefit for the system in place now? to answer: About $100 per license (I paid about that much for my A). This was suppose to allow me to compete in the space games whenever it was going on. Have they made an effort to spread the First School nationally and involve all qualified freeflyers and dropzones for the better... I would have to say that I have not seen this.

The good thing that I've heard that my AD-A got my name printed on a web page somewhere and, that with about $3.85 + tax, I can get a large Frappucino at Starbucks.

[mags 0]

--------yawn......................

[apoil 0]

Quote

This ongoing debate is to determine the need for a license at all; as well as coming up with a better system if one is useful.

That's understood.

I'm of the opinion that licenses are for students and determining basic survival skills. Once you get into experienced skydiver disciplines (RW, Freefly, Skysurf, Freestyle, CReW, Swooping, etc) there is no license to do it, and there's no certification of who can and can't be an instructor.

The people who could have gotten the D were already running their own successful freefly schools, or training for competition.

My remark wasn't intended to denigrate the D "license". But the way you described it was in essence that there are only 3 people good enough to do it.

Quote

You also mentioned that the test is "pricey". I agree with this point 100%. But would it be pricey if it was more applicable?

In other words, what is the cost benefit for the system in place now? to answer: About $100 per license (I paid about that much for my A).

Yes, if it were more applicable the price wouldn't be as much.
Heck I don't even want to think how much money I spent getting an AFF rating.

Your figure of $100 per license is off. The C and D tests have two balls, and thus require two jump masters. That's two slots, plus two coach fees, plus your own ticket, plus whatever licensing fee. It's closer to $200 than $100.

[apoil 0]

Quote

--------yawn......................

Thanks for your contribution.

This is not a rehash of the same old discussion. This is an attempt to move things forward. If you find it boring, you are welcome not to read it. Those of us involved in this discussion wish to be, and we are not doing it for your benefit.

[whocares 0]

Start a new program all together. Talk to people in the sport, all levels, who need Olav

[mags 0]

Gentlemen...I am not an asshole, nor am I trolling for trouble by playing the devil's advocate.

I do have a question with regards to this topic and I am interested in some feedback...My question is not meant to be sarcastic nor antagonistic...

Why is it that people in this sport seem to be so dead set on measuring themselves against other people?
I understand the function of USPA licensing for the purpose of instructors ratings, or to seperate the novice jumper from the experienced one....I also understand that there is certainly a feeling of accomplishment following the successful completion of a skills test.....
When I took my AD test a couple of years ago, it was only so I would not get left out of the big-ways at the end of the day in Pahokee, and so I could participate in Olav's space games if I wanted....
I am not saying my reason for having taken the test is any better or worse than the next fellow, but it was certainly not ego driven for the purpose of bragging rights.....I have jumped with many AD qualified jumpers who cannot turn multiple point 5 and 6 ways because those jumps are very different than multiple point VRW.
It seems to me that many skydivers are more interested in having some sort of badge to show off, or conversation piece when they are at a new dropzone, or another little # to tack on to the end of their internet post....
Why don't people focus more on jumping for themselves and for personal accomplishment than for measuring their cocks against the next guy?

Now, before you guys unleash on me, know that I am not pointing fingers nor accusing any of you guys for being egotistical dudes..On the contrary I believe that many of you have good ideas and are genuinely interested in developing our discipline further.....
But any of you who are experienced flyers know exactly what I am talking about.....
All you have to do is go to a dropzone and see the ego leaking out of every pore of many jumpers...

I think this is a disease, unfortunately which has no cure.....

The closest thing to a cure is the new canopies which are now being manufactured which are non-descriminately weeding out many of these people who are letting their heads get ahead of their skills......

but now I am just ranting...sorry....

I just say jump as best you can, and let the tough skydives prove who is worth their salt!

ok...let the attacks begin...

C