DSE 3 #1 October 5, 2010 A PFC course will be held at Skydive Elsinore on Friday, Oct 22, the day before the skills camp at S'nore. Qualified candidates: ~100 wingsuit skydives ~USPA Coach rating ~Logbook ~Three possible jumps to receive two Satisfactory Scores. The criteria for the jumps is found in the score sheet, attached to this post. Contact Skydive Elsinore manifest to register, PM me if you have questions. (951) 245 9939 There is a wingsuit skills camp being held the following two days. Airports to fly into: ONT SNA LAX SAN PSP Elsinore has a bunkhouse for $7.00 per night, it offers internet access, nice showers, kitchen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #2 October 5, 2010 That's so adorable! Just like a real rating! Just curious... years ago birdman instructors jumped with "students" and phoenix fly instructors only taught on the ground and sent the student up for a solo. When did they change their mind? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #3 October 5, 2010 Quote years ago birdman instructors jumped with "students" Wow..do forward the name..I was never that lucky, and know quite a few people who got their FFC done without the instructor present in the air (or an instructor TRYING to be present). Actually quite similar to the way several people I know got that same rating. Only listening to a BMCI talk, not actually doing an examjump or jumps. A big flaw if you ask me. Long story short, there where a lot of bad apples. And the BMI/PFI and similar programs used to be nothing more but a cool name, and recommendation. Some people did great teaching. But in some cases, the teaching sucked. Bigtime. Quote When did they change their mind? About 2 years ago, it was made manditory for coaches to jump with students. And unlike the BMI program, the recent changes also involve taking the coach rating away when people are bad ws pilots, bad teachers, or exibit bad behaviour not fitting of someone coaching/teaching. Its a gradual thing. But with a good group of people (Ed, Chuck, DSE etc) we are trying to formalize training a bit more in terms of the PFC coach rating.JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #4 October 5, 2010 Birdman has a "rating by email" and "over a beer" program, too. Would you suggest Phoenix-Fly emulate those?Suits changed, times changed. Safety and a positive First Flight Experience are paramount. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #5 October 5, 2010 I didn't say one was better than the other or they were wrong to change. Just asking when. I definitely think this was a very good step. My first wingsuit jumps were in 2004 with a BMI that jumped with me. I was pretty surprised later on when friends paid to go up alone and not get any useful debrief. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #6 October 5, 2010 Quote I was pretty surprised later on when friends paid to go up alone and not get any useful debrief. I dont think that is/was specific to any kind of brand-related training, but more individuals that didnt deem it needed. In our views, not as it should be...JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #7 October 5, 2010 Well, it was phoenix fly's policy not to have their instructors fly with students. And I don't think you can have a reasonable debrief without having seen the person fly. So I'd say they couldn't provide much of a useful debrief. Not saying they didn't try. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #8 October 5, 2010 QuoteWell, it was phoenix fly's policy not to have their instructors fly with students. In the documents it only said 'optional', which I guess (before my time) was mostly putting in writing, what most BMI's did in practice already. That said...looking at the program in its current state, there are a lot of positive changes, that hopefully push it to a higher platform in theory and practical use. The renaming to PFC is part of making clear it leaves the PFI program behind, and starts something new (as well as no longer doing conversions from BMI>PFI)JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,254 #9 October 5, 2010 QuoteWell, it was phoenix fly's policy not to have their instructors fly with students. What? There's a big difference between "You don't have to" and "Don't". I can't remember ever seeing or hearing it being discouraged, and it certainly wasn't when I got my PFC from JB a few years ago. (And anyone who's taking money from a new wingsuiter to give a ground brief only is taking the piss.)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #10 October 5, 2010 QuoteWhat? There's a big difference between "You don't have to" and "Don't". The PFI documents I got handed down by James only noted that it wasnt needed, but was highly recommended. And I dont think I know anyone who just did the ground briefing and than told the student to 'have fun'. But appearantly some people did...but for sure, it wasnt what was in the PFI course materials either.JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #11 October 5, 2010 As the article on the DZ.com homepage suggests, the PF course has been gone over by some of the best. The USPA SIM additions were put together by a team of people, with a particular nod to Skwrl, Callantine, Horton for their spectacular efforts. We'll see those soon. Chuck Blue, Scotty Burns, Joe Kaufman, Jay Stokes, Tom Noonan, Benedikt Klees, Tom Deacon, Jarno Cordia, Robi Pecnik, myself, Andreea Olea, Jack Guthrie and others to a lesser degree put forth effort to make this program solid, more up-to-date, and hopefully a program worth respecting vs the "You're a really cool dude, I think you can teach and you can prolly fly a wingsuit" academy of wingsuit instruction. We're growing as a discipline. We've seen several growing pains. I suspect we’ll see more. For me...the tipping point was seeing the self-created rating of "Wingsuit Instructor 00X” and then not briefing a student, not gear-checking the student, not sitting in the aircraft anywhere near the student, and then trying to divert responsibility when an incident occurs. Had any one of us that isn't a "superstar legend" been grossly negligent in a student fatality it would have been the end of our skydiving career. Calling oneself an "Instructor" without holding even a Coach rating is an insult to those like you who have gone through AFFI or TI training in addition to the USPA Coach course, attending the requisite IERC's, etc. This alone demonstrated a need (to me) that quality instruction building upon tenets that the USPA has recently put into place with the new Coach Course program, would be beneficial to the discipline’s growth. Jarno and I worked closely together to make a Wingsuit Coach course (written as part of my Examiner training with USPA) into a PF course once it was clear that the USPA wasn't going to accept the concept of advanced training. I'm not sure exactly the date the switch was flipped, but it's been something on which we've been working for about 18 months, not long after Dan Kulpa was killed in Sebastian on his 107th skydive. The emails from folks reading the front page article have mostly been supportive and laudatory. I realize some folks don't believe in training for wingsuits. In the early days I think this was fine, as suits were smaller and I believe the talent pool was more compact and overall more capable. Today, wingsuits have become mainstream in our small sport. With the videos of Loic and Robi skimming cliffs, a number of people are coming to the sport motivated by the goal of flying a wingsuit. They'll probably never fly a wingsuit against a mountain like Loic or Robi, but they can dream about it, and they deserve good training so their first jump is a positive experience. I believe good training will help build our flocks and sustain our discipline. Having a training program not motivated by sales puts the focus back on safety and fun, too. I can honestly say I've not had a single "scary/bad/holy sh**" student since this program has become part of the training. Current PFC’s have reported significant improvement with students as well. The kinesthetics and isometric exercises seem to make a big difference. One military student who had experienced alternative training one week prior to taking the PF FFC commented on how much easier, how much more intuitive the PF FFC course was for him. Regardless, some will probably feel their personal program is better (and perhaps it is) and others will benefit tremendously as coaches in any discipline after participating in this program. In the Examiner process, I grew tremendously because my instructor made us work hard for it, and the PF program directly resulted from that I/E process. It’ll continue to evolve and grow, of course, as every living thing should. From my perspective, taking the road of “This was invented 10 years ago and it works” is ignoring new methods, teaching aids, and the dyamics of how learning processes change. . Your example of a coach flying with a student is a good one. There is no way that a proper debrief can occur when there is no coach to “observe and report” as part of that first flight. Video helps, but that also means the coach has to fly close enough to capture decent/useful video. And though there aren’t a lot of situations where a coach can assist a flailing student, or intervene in freefall, there are for sure scenarios where the presence of a coach did make a major difference. Be it assisting with navigation, reminders to do practice pulls, or getting a student to relax. Hence the need to also make sure all coaches are capable wingsuit pilots. We gladly welcome any feedback from anyone who has taken the PFC course. If nothing else, c’mon out and taste the difference. You might learn somethin new. And you might have something to teach, too. Hope to see some of you in S’nore or at other PFC courses down the road. I know Chuck and Scotty are both planning dates, and I’ll be touring throughout the winter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #12 October 6, 2010 Quote Quote I was pretty surprised later on when friends paid to go up alone and not get any useful debrief. I dont think that is/was specific to any kind of brand-related training, but more individuals that didnt deem it needed. In our views, not as it should be... It also cut down on costs. Now you guys aren't expensive, but I've seen other numbers... Another reason I've heard was that you could focus your first jump or first few jumps on your own, then get video/debrief after that. I did my first flight with a BMI, never got a debrief never even saw the video although I paid for his jump. Did 58 mph average that flight in a classic 1, including dummy pulls, so that jump couldn't have been that bad My 2nd flight was with another wingsuiter's first, that went fine as well (paid my own ticket of course LOL). Dunno if all first few jumps (what is it, 5?) need to be "supervised" with all jumpers... With the ~200 guys yes but we've got a few wingsuiters here with a couple k jumps, if they want they can (and will LOL) go alone. Actually when I went for my PFI I was surprised at this explicit mention of solo jumps, but I was kinda used to that anyway. I think there's not really such a thing as a one size fits all FFC, I'm more of a tailor as needed kinda girl On another note, I may want to try my arm/shoulder again this weekend, been too long since I've flown So if you're putting something together.... ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #13 October 6, 2010 Happy to see that at the PFC (and Sfly) courses at least are strict about the 100 minimum jump rule, and dont let non-relevant experience in other sports or diciplines downgrade the standard everyone should be striving for in instruction.JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdatc 0 #14 October 6, 2010 Quote Dunno if all first few jumps (what is it, 5?) need to be "supervised" with all jumpers... Really? 5 supervised jumps to start flying a wingsuit? Is there a 'logbook' endorsement now too??? _justin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeemax 0 #15 October 6, 2010 There is now in the UK. Actually, they're stickers. Two levels. The first allows you up to a three way, the second whatever you want.Phoenix Fly - High performance wingsuits for skydiving and BASE Performance Designs - Simply brilliant canopies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #16 October 6, 2010 Why is a coach rating needed for US jumpers, but not those from other nations? As far as I can see the coach course does some very basic level pedagogy (almost a joke, I have taken it) and concentrates on USPA's ISP and very basic freefall skills.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #17 October 6, 2010 Quote Dunno if all first few jumps (what is it, 5?) need to be "supervised" with all jumpers... With the ~200 guys yes but we've got a few wingsuiters here with a couple k jumps, if they want they can (and will LOL) go alone. I was one of these "couple k jumps" folks. On my first WS jump (Classic II) my so-called "instructor" in a GTi went unstable on exit, and then he couldn't catch me despite my doing practice pulls. I was supposed to fly straight ahead until he flew alongside me - which he never did. I didn't jump with him again!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #18 October 7, 2010 There are several reasons the coach rating is required; liability and knowing that the PFC has received training to teach are two of them. The Coach program is a required step for all USPA training paths and that too, is part of the reasoning behind the requirement. PF is looking at instructional rating requirements in other countries. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cpoxon 0 #19 October 7, 2010 Quote Why is a coach rating needed for US jumpers, but not those from other nations? The equivalent is in the UK. See item g in the requirements for the BPA Wingsuit Coach applciation formSkydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #20 October 7, 2010 QuoteWhy is a coach rating needed for US jumpers, but not those from other nations? With rules varying per country, and some not having the equivalent to the USPA coach course, as of now, its not manditory. But it is our intention to slowly build towards that, and make sure everyone teaching isnt just a good wingsuitpilot, but also has proven didactic skills.JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #21 October 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteWhy is a coach rating needed for US jumpers, but not those from other nations? With rules varying per country, and some not having the equivalent to the USPA coach course, as of now, its not manditory. But it is our intention to slowly build towards that, and make sure everyone teaching isnt just a good wingsuitpilot, but also has proven didactic skills. There are more ways of proving didactic skills than taking and passing a coach course. If the USPA coach course is anything to go by, any first year student teacher has better training in that area than a USPA coach.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #22 October 7, 2010 QuoteThere are several reasons the coach rating is required; liability and knowing that the PFC has received training to teach are two of them. . I fail to see that logic. If the FAA can exempt teaching professionals from the pedagogy training to be a CFI, why can't Phoenix Fly? There's more than one way to skin a cat.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #23 October 7, 2010 Quote There are more ways of proving didactic skills than taking and passing a coach course. If the USPA coach course is anything to go by, any first year student teacher has better training in that area than a USPA coach. practically: making sure everyone is a first year student teacher, on top of a skilled/experienced wingsuit flyer....it sorta thins out the herd a bit more huhJC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #24 October 8, 2010 Quote Quote There are more ways of proving didactic skills than taking and passing a coach course. If the USPA coach course is anything to go by, any first year student teacher has better training in that area than a USPA coach. practically: making sure everyone is a first year student teacher, on top of a skilled/experienced wingsuit flyer....it sorta thins out the herd a bit more huh That wasn't what I was suggesting and you know that. I was suggesting an alternate route, not a replacement route. We can also assume that any teacher more advanced than a 1st year student teacher is also better qualified pedagogically than a USPA coach.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 3 #25 October 8, 2010 Quote I was suggesting an alternate route, not a replacement route. We can also assume that any teacher more advanced than a 1st year student teacher is also better qualified pedagogically than a USPA coach. That makes it really easy for me as an examiner.Anyone that has a teaching certificate, is current as a teacher, and can pass the course the way the content is required to be taught without actually taking the course gets an automatic pass on the ground stuff. All they have to do is teach me exactly the way it is to be taught, but they won't have to take the class. It's called a "course challenge" and USPA offers it for most ratings. PF does the same. They still have to jump and satisfy the aerial portions, however. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
