Wingsuit Instructor Rating and USPA

[peggs82 0]

Quote

Scott, the PROBLEM is that there is no standard curriculum, no standard metric, and no standard evaluation protocol for the various WS "instructor" ratings.

...even if the "instructor" has a piece of paper from a manufacturer. SHE MAY NOT GET WHAT SHE THINKS SHE PAYS FOR.

To play devils advocate for a moment
Correct me if I'm wrong, but up until just recently, weren't Strong and Sigma ratings, just a piece of paper from the manufacturer? Both had different curriculum and requirements?

edited to add only..... Yes I know that those are recognized by the uspa.... like I said...just playing devils advocate... Gotta stir the pot

[VectorBoy 0]

To play devils advocate for a moment
Correct me if I'm wrong, but up until just recently, weren't Strong and Sigma ratings, just a piece of paper from the manufacturer? Both had different curriculum and requirements?

edited to add only..... Yes I know that those are recognized by the uspa.... like I said...just playing devils advocate... Gotta stir the pot

Yes tandems were a loophole in the rules until recently. But, to play on your devilishness, Tandems were a very high profile part of skydiving at most dropzones. Tandems were a major part of the profits at some larger dropzones. Tandems have had quite a few high profile deaths caused by a spectrum of reasons.

Meanwhile you can take every fatality in a modern wingsuit skydive and barely fill a 206 load. Wingsuits are not the major profits for any dz or anybody to include wingsuit manufactures. wingsuits are not that high profile and above all else wingsuits ( modern ones) are not that leathal not even remotely.

We are just not that special that we need the uspa to be our watchdog.

[kallend 1,620]

One loophole doesn't justify another.

Fact is, I (or anyone else) can set up the Fly-By-Night (TM) evening school for wingsuit training, print my own instructor rating certificate, hang it on the wall, and go into business claiming to be a rated wingsuit instructor.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[peggs82 0]

Quote

I (or anyone else) can set up the Fly-By-Night (TM) evening school for wingsuit training, print my own instructor rating certificate, hang it on the wall, and go into business claiming to be a rated wingsuit instructor.

I made your calling card

[DoubleD83 0]

I wish more people wouldn't charge to help out with wingsuits. Wingsuit manufacturers suggest jumping with a certified instructor to cover their butts if something happens and now people are trying to make money off of it to fill their own pockets. The issue is not the $20. Wingsuit "ratings" have become a business for some people and that seems strange when you consider that wingsuit ratings are, in reality, meaningless.

There's a lot of people who work hard to get where they are, like Matt Hoover. His own work speaks to how good he is--not necessarily his ratings. People work hard to make wingsuiting a better and safe sport. People are doing cool stuff here at our ski resort (cutting away from a paraglider with a wingsuit and base rig) that combines different sports in exciting ways. So "quality" isn't a rating, but what people can actually see you doing.

If there is such a thing as a wingsuit rating, it is at best only as good as a coach rating, and how many people actually go with a coach who doesn't also have an AFF rating? Not many. Only new skydivers who don't know any better.

I wonder how many dz's make it a rule that you have to go with a certified wingsuit instructor?

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

Quote

I (or anyone else) can set up the Fly-By-Night (TM) evening school for wingsuit training, print my own instructor rating certificate, hang it on the wall, and go into business claiming to be a rated wingsuit instructor.

I made your calling card

Thanks , but I'm not paying any royalties

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

I wonder how many dz's make it a rule that you have to go with a certified wingsuit instructor?

Send me $25 and I'll send you a "Fly-By-Night Wingsuit School(TM)" instructor/examiner rating. For $100 you can be an instructor/examiner/course director. I can make you an archbishop in my church, too.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DoubleD83 0]

I'll pay you for the last one since no other church will let me in.

[voodew1 0]

Quote

There's a lot of people who work hard to get where they are, like Matt Hoover. His own work speaks to how good he is--not necessarily his ratings.

Matt used to be good at what he did but then he moved to Texas which will make him a pot stirring worthless TWAT - if he follows suit with the rest of the Texicans

The pimp hand is powdered up ... say something stupid

[peggs82 0]

I hope that this will be my last post on this subject. In no way should this be taken as an arguement to any one post. Think of it as my "free thinking" for the day. - And believe me I try to think as little as possible
I've actually thought a lot about this topic. What it means to have a manufactuer rating... What it means for the USPA to require a USPA sanctioned rating... What it means to coach for free... What it means to coach for a fee....

Over the past few posts since I've thrown my thoughts into the ring, I've seen an interesting paradox of thoughts....

On one hand, people don't respect the manufacturer rating because it is just that, a non sanctioned rating. Somewhere along the line, [lets call it] the "prestiege" of the rating was tainted. For some, it was the bar incident. For others, it was the fact that we now have 800000000 (yes I said 8000000000) manufacturer's who all have "ratings". "Look at me!! I'm a real WS manufactuer b/c I have a rating!!!!

On the other hand, people are genuinely concerned about the quality of instruction for the student, and rightly so. Whats to say that this slot and possibly another $20 is worthwhile??

Now, I have made it clear that I don't care either way about if you teach with or without a "rating". I myself do not have one, and I will coach. (I hope that whoever I have coached before, and is reading this will vouch for the value of my instruction.)

I also will not coach unless both Chuck and Jeff (who both hold ratings) pass on them first. Why? Because I see both of them as the better value for the student...even if they DO charge!!

So I ask you what solves this interesting paradox of problems? The problems being a non-respected Instructor system, and concern for value of instruction???

-Perhaps a standardized rating? A consortium of WS manufacturers coming together? Perhaps the USPA BPA or whoever should get together? Maybe we will look upon high, and god or the Flying Spaghetti Monster will bestow upon us a "Universal WS Instructor Rating" - hmmm UWSI.... I smell a new rating

Would that make everybody happy? No... it would not. Wanna know why? No? Well this is my post and I'm going to tell you anyway

Now we would have bureaucracy in the discipline. Mad about people charging before??? Get ready - b/c now someone has something concrete to charge for. "I have THE rating...I'm bona fide!!" God forbid that only UWSI's are allowed by DZ's to do anything WS teaching related. Would it be like a AFF jump cost wise?? Can't aford to pay for the rating? Sorry....you can't teach anymore...too bad you bought 5 suits for people to try...



Now...lets go a different direction shall we?

Let us travel back in time.... back to a day when all skydivers did was fall on their belly's. Along comes some clowns who think..."I want to fall another way!"

Boom! - Now we have freeflying, a BRAND NEW discipline. Its wonderful!!! "We are few in numbers...but we have a GREAT community!!"... "Wanna learn head down? Surrrreeee!!! I'll teach ya!...No I don't charge b/c I love the discipline!!"

Fast forward a few years - do you think this very same conversation went on? Do you think they lamented people calling themselves coachs? Do you think that they hated the idea that people were charging for these services???

They didn't have "ratings" but they came up with schools. East Coast Freefly, Monkeyclaw, CK1... Last I checked, about the very same proportions of these "coaches" hold the same amount of ratings that most Wingsuit schools have. Yet, I don't hear anyone questioning the value of their instruction???

When will the time come that we realize that as the discipline matures, its going to become just like every other discipline?? How long did it take for it to become acceptable to charge for FreeFly coaching? When will we wake up and realize that in this world of skydiving, if you want to learn something...someone is out there who will teach you...for a price.

Your job, as a student and a CONSUMER, is to do honest research and detirmine FOR YOURSELF if that price is worth it

[The111 0]

Quote

Quote

There's a lot of people who work hard to get where they are, like Matt Hoover. His own work speaks to how good he is--not necessarily his ratings.

Matt used to be good at what he did but then he moved to Texas which will make him a pot stirring worthless TWAT - if he follows suit with the rest of the Texicans

I'll never be as good as you, Jason. So is the top TWAT called a TWAT-I/E?

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

great post, Phil
It's my guess that the majority of the people reading this do not jump at dropzones with four Otters on the ramp or in the hangar like we do at Z Hills. Likewise, most of the people reading this who teach/coach wingsuiiting do not have the overhead that we do at Z Hills. The Birdhouse is not a gift from management. I don't stop jumping when there is no one to organize in wingsuits. I own my own tandem rig and my own AFF student gear to make money with. No money to make? I am still jumping for fun out of pocket.

Skydiving is expensive.......Period. Even the most experienced skydivers pay for packing and what I will now deem "continuing education", even within their primary discipline. There are TONS of jumpers out there more than willing to pay for the knowlege and expertise that the very-accomplished have worked long and hard to perfect. This, regardless of any specific USPA rating. I possess the highest BirdMan instructional credentials because I helped revise the sylabus some time ago. Do I think that there will ever be a USPA wingsuit instructor rating? No, and I don't care. It won't happen unless they create aa freefly instructor rating/requirement. If it ever does happen, though, I will obtain it, just like I did with my AFF, tandem, and SLRatings. I will do it just like I did when USPA created the PRO demo rating, even though I had already jumped into three different bowl stadiums prior to its inception. As a skydiving professional, it's my duty to be as “qualified” as I need to be in order to do those things safely and within the confines of the BSR's.

I don't really care that there are some non-rated guys (without even the rudimentary Coach rating) teaching wingsuiting. So long as that wingsuiter really DOES have the experience to effectively train. Make no mistake: a first flight course IS instruction and it needs to be comprehensive and taught in a logical manner. Some "experts" out there simply do not provide that level of competence and professionalism. We provide all of it here and will simply not feel bad about flying aBMCI flag alongside my other "real" ratings.

Chuck

[The111 0]

Quote

Even the most experienced skydivers pay for packing and what I will now deem "continuing education", even within their primary discipline. There are TONS of jumpers out there more than willing to pay for the knowlege and expertise that the very-accomplished have worked long and hard to perfect.

Last year Norman Kent wanted to pay me for backfly coaching... and I was astounded and thanked him, but I recommended he go to Jeff instead (since 90% of his freefall time is probably spent backflying, and I don't by any means consider myself a "great" backflyer).

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[DSE 3]

Quote

Last year Norman Kent wanted to pay me for backfly coaching... and I was astounded and thanked him, but I recommended he go to Jeff instead (since 90% of his freefall time is probably spent backflying, and I don't by any means consider myself a "great" backflyer).

but...Norman is a pro. He understands that experience isn't gained for free, and highly experienced people who might be also considered "pro's" make the learning curve for him less steep.
And therein, IMO, lies the value in a person who not only knows the subject, but also knows how to share it with others in a manner that helps them grow and arrive more quickly at the various points of their journey.
I've had three wingsuit courses, and two of them followed similar roadmaps, although they each may have lingered longer at various points along the way.

That said, just because someone is good at something doesn't mean they're able to teach others what they know. it's not uncommon to find someone with lesser knowledge be the better teacher, simply because they have an innate ability to teach.

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

It was actually jeff and I that went to DeLand and taught Norman to backfly out of the PAC 750, but I did not get or ask for a penny. Me and norm have been friends since 2001. Hell, he made out with my ex-wife back in the day zt the specizl olympics!! That does not bothet me at al;.

[base200 0]

That said, just because someone is good at something doesn't mean they're able to teach others what they know. it's not uncommon to find someone with lesser knowledge be the better teacher, simply because they have an innate ability to teach. ***

I just want to make sure I understand your point. Do you think it is ok for someone who doesn't have a lot of experience to teach someone how fly a ws just because they talk well?

[bodypilot1 0]

Quote

There's a lot of people who work hard to get where they are, like Matt Hoover.

And Matt gives away the photos he takes, right?

www.WestCoastWingsuits.com
www.PrecisionSkydiving.com

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

if my spelling is fucked up its because i am responding on my pda..We did not charge norm because we got fantastic stills in trade from other boogies. Ultimately, pros get paid and hacks do not. We ate not hacks at Z Hills.

[VectorBoy 0]

They didn't have "ratings" but they came up with schools. East Coast Freefly, Monkeyclaw, CK1... Last I checked, about the very same proportions of these "coaches" hold the same amount of ratings that most Wingsuit schools have. Yet, I don't hear anyone questioning the value of their instruction???

[bodypilot1 0]

Quote

An individual was put on the roster without owning a suit and having precious few jumps in wingsuits, How experienced do you think he is?

You right, Glen. I think that is wrong myself.

www.WestCoastWingsuits.com
www.PrecisionSkydiving.com

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

That said, just because someone is good at something doesn't mean they're able to teach others what they know. it's not uncommon to find someone with lesser knowledge be the better teacher, simply because they have an innate ability to teach. ***

I just want to make sure I understand your point. Do you think it is ok for someone who doesn't have a lot of experience to teach someone how fly a ws just because they talk well?

TALK is not equal to TEACH. TEACH is not equal to TALK. Confusing the two is a big error on your part.

I have been a professional educator for 37 years and a pilot for longer. If I wish to become a FAA rated flying instructor (which I don't) I am automatically exempted from the having to take the "teaching skills" part of the requirements for a CFI by virtue of my teaching experience.

OTOH if I want to be a USPA coach (which I don't), I have to take a course on teaching methodology.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DSE 3]

Quote

That said, just because someone is good at something doesn't mean they're able to teach others what they know. it's not uncommon to find someone with lesser knowledge be the better teacher, simply because they have an innate ability to teach. ***

I just want to make sure I understand your point. Do you think it is ok for someone who doesn't have a lot of experience to teach someone how fly a ws just because they talk well?

No, that's not my point. There is a point at which someone has skills that qualify them to instruct. Where that point is (I believe) cannot be qualified. Kallend talks about how he's exempt from having to certify for this or that, IMO, that's just as far off the mark. Time in sport does not equal experience, and does not grant the authority nor ability to teach. Skill, currency, etc all add up to those things, IMO.
But...once that point is reached, there are more highly experienced people that may well not be able to teach, and significantly lesser experienced that are skilled, but are far more qualified to teach.

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

You are wrong, Glen. I was at CK for a POPS meet the ddayy Adam Rosen made his 500th jumpp. He had been on the monkeyclaw “team” roster for two yyears. The only person in that organization who had real skills was Heath Richardson. They all sucked in competition when they went to nationals.


On your other topic, there are two of us at Z hills with over 2000 wingsuit flights.

[kallend 1,620]

Quote

Quote

That said, just because someone is good at something doesn't mean they're able to teach others what they know. it's not uncommon to find someone with lesser knowledge be the better teacher, simply because they have an innate ability to teach. ***

I just want to make sure I understand your point. Do you think it is ok for someone who doesn't have a lot of experience to teach someone how fly a ws just because they talk well?

No, that's not my point. There is a point at which someone has skills that qualify them to instruct. Where that point is (I believe) cannot be qualified. Kallend talks about how he's exempt from having to certify for this or that, IMO, that's just as far off the mark. Time in sport does not equal experience, and does not grant the authority nor ability to teach. .

I think you misunderstand what I wrote. The FAA in its wisdom exempts professional teachers (like me) from having to take the teaching skills part of the training to be a flight instructor (CFI). WHY? Because a few hours of very basic instruction on teaching methodology geared towards non-teachers who want to be CFIs is not going to have any value for someone who is already an experienced teacher.

OTOH the USPA thinks that my 37 years as a teacher (with 5 Excellence in Teaching Awards hanging on my office wall) is no match for the teaching methodology part of its 3 day USPA coach course.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pilotdave 0]

Oh the horror! You might have to take the same course as everyone else if you want a rating! How awful! USPA SUX!

The teaching skills part of the coach course is repetitive to anyone that's read the coach section of the IRM too... I think I had to come to the course with the written test completed. Then we spent an entire day learning the material on the test that we'd already passed. That was... fun.
Dave