lug

*** In the ISP Catigory E Should read as Category F Memento Mori

Ok,I see what you are saying and yes I am out of context so the answer would be no. In the ISP Catigory E once the student is cleared to self jumpmaster and going to make a solo jumps they should be supervised by either a coach or instructor on the aircraft to verify the correct spot, cloud clearance, exits separation, and gear checks. Now my point address the DZ that does not want to tie up an instructor or coach for the coaching student doing a solo, then the only way around this is for a none coach or instructor rated jumper to supervise the student. Hence Secton 2-1 E 6. has to be filed. Memento Mori

Yes if the S&TA files a formal waver to the BSR’s Section 2-1: E 6 annually with the USPA. Remember all of you guys out there that a coach can not work with a student with out the supervision of an instructor. I define supervision as being on the DZ some place easily found. How the USPA defines it I don’t know, would any one care to reply this? As for giving advice. Care should be given when addressing an individual who is still on student status, they are at the most primitive level of skydiving and any advice should be generic if given. Further if you can not give solid advice than push them to their instructor. I say this because this problem of wrong advice giving to student will never end. I see it even on this web sit. What a student called once cleared from student statues and does not have their A license? A Neophyte? Memento Mori

I believe you intended "B" license with 100 jumps minimum and not C. I also agree with the current USPA requirement where all new instructor ratings require the coaches’ ticket first. To say that the C/I does not need the coaches rating is surley going to lead the Wing Loading BSR to its death before seeing S&TA committee. HOOKnswoop needs to be clarify his C/I rating. Memento Mori

I think you need to just come out and say it. You want every skydiver to Type Rated for the Parachute they are able to use. I have said this before but apparently it has fallen on deaf ears. Think— think of your Proposal as a Type Rating I have mentioned before just like or similar to a pilot being Type Rated for specific aircraft where the pilot has one license but multiple rating. This would allow your Proposal, to leave out the A through D license gibberish all together. I think you are asking too much which will most likely open Pandora ’s Box. Besides you have repeatedly stated that one can advance to a higher wing loading by showing skill and knowledge allowing them to be waived to a higher wing loading. Now this is a problem area, who can sign and file a waiver for wing loading? You said C/I AFF/I, AFF/IE, S&TA. I think this would force unnecessary changes with in the BSR’s. I think the wording you should be thinking of is CLEARED, the individual has been cleared for XYZ canopy that can be listed on their license. Just some lose ends. Memento Mori

Is not to bad a piece of work I am still trying to digest all of it, but for now I am cutting into piece and having a look. In your C/I ratings since you refer to them as instructors. Will the C/I be able to administer A, and B, license test like all other instructor can do now including the A license check dive. If not, I think, you should call it something else like, Canopy Coach or Canopy Trainer. License with canopy sizes limitations that cuts into my freedom to choose and that a bad idea. Instead, focus on this whole thing as a rating, kind of like aircraft pilots have to go through. Think of it as being Type Rated for a specific aircraft or configuration. Wow what a concept. Just prove knowledge and skill. No waivers need to be filled or particular licenses needs to be acquired for the rating. I think the key is being type rated it gives people the option to go or not to go small with out affecting their licensing.. Wing loading, shape, size, or combination of the three would classify the different type ratings. Memento Mori

Sorry Auryn I just don’t see the line over all I see is a tension knot between the outboard D line with the next inboard line on your right side. I can see that some tension knots are land able and others are not, so it is however up the pilot to do a controllability check. Now I wasn’t there and I didn’t see it but you made your decision and you obviously were ok. Regarding just a line over I will cut away and pull my reserve with out debate. Memento Mori

I think there should be at least 50% of the participants from the region on a state record and 75% on a regional record. All the rest are hired guns. Memento Mori

I like what you have to far and what others have said there are some good points made on this thread. Although there are a few areas, so I will toss in my two cents. Weather its called coaching or mentoring it means the same, so there shouldn’t be confusion in that I am talking about the same program. I couldn’t agree more with the cost you suggest for coaching. Although you forgot gear rental and the coaches services. The minimum should be at least both slots, gear rental, pack job for the rental unless the student is packing for them selves. Right now, I feel the coach should be paid for their service. Remember instructors are getting paid for teaching students how to skydive and the USPA Coach is doing the same but the coaches rating are now the introductory level for instructing, gone is the Jumpmaster rating. If the coach gives the money back to the student that is vary cool, and yes that is what it was like before the ISP. As you can tell there is a side of me that feel coaches should be paid. My argument is that the coaches have to pay a coach’s course fee similar to an instructor course fee, hopefully not as much, in order to get the rating. The candidate has taken their own money, paid an evaluator for the course to be evaluated. During the course, just like an instructors course, they are evaluated on weather or not the candidate can effectively instruct and accurately evaluate a student’s in air skills. How much coaches should be paid, its not up to me but all coaches or instructors making coaching jumps should be paid the same. At my DZ coach’s pay is the same as an AFF reserve side instructor, $15. Ok, I might be an ass to those in control but I’ll say it, Drop Zones shouldn’t view the student in the coaching program as a added profit vehicle. DZ’s already have a profit built into the gear rental and jump slots. Think about it students have paid a lot just to get off student status, they don’t need to be gouged. This needs to be done during debriefing after the successful skydive clearing the student from student status if not earlier in their training.If it is not being done than someone is dropping the ball. This can be done but the S&TA needs to file a waver to the BSR first (Section 2-1: [E] 6) annually with the USPA. Care should be taken on who can jump with the coaching student. There are a lot of skydivers with good intentions but they just don’t have the skills to teach. Sorry for crushing some of your egos reading this thread but its true. Memento Mori

***For me it was; politics, attitudes, egos, lack of aircraft maintenance, and a generally poor safety attitude. I looked at the effort I was putting into it and the return I was getting out of it and all the hassels and decided to hang it up. So far no regrets. Derek Think Quote I hear what your message and at times, I feel the same, you are not alone. In addition, I also feel burned out, the sport has lost some of its zing. Memento Mori

I never got my B I jumped and got the C then D. There are three benefits of the B license: night jumps, Coaches rating at 100 jumps, and 90 days to remain current. If the B license benifits are not of intrest to you, don't bother. Save you $20 and put it towards a higher license. The D license is the one I question right now. When you have the D, you can get your pro rating, you have six months to remain current, and you can get their tandem rating. Memento Mori

I am divided on which one I like the best, so I will have to say both are. The Otter I find is more difficult to have a consistent exit with the side step facing the RW like AFF. I find it challenging and I like that. Not every exit is the same but I try to make it picture perfect, which makes it fun. I also dive out at about a 45-degree angle of line of flight towards the tail into the RW. The hard part is making sure the student understands they don’t need to help by pushing off. All they need to do is have their hands out in front like diving in a pool and their feet on my ass arching on go. The C-208 I find a no brainier and I can do it vary fast. I exit sitting on the egde with my left foot on the threshold sometimes in the corner of the rear door jam and threshold, with right foot out side the plane. My left hand is holding onto the inside bar the right is on the floor beside me. The student has their legs out side and they are somewhat arching with hands crossed. The student is hanging off of me out side the plane. I Slightly pull up with my left hand putting some weight on my left foot and right hand then pushing off with the left foot and pivot on my right hand to facing the RW. My right arm is keeped locked until I have cleared the threshold. When I do this I am lifting and clearing the bottom of the rig from the floor. I have over 700 of these exits and have never had a problem like rig damaged or premature drogue extraction, yet. By any means do I mean I will never have a problem or that it will not happen to someone else. I am 6’1” so there might or might not be an advantage over the shorter instructors. I do know quite a few shorter instructors, then me, and they have not had a problem. As for the C-182 I have not done vary many of them but I am more comfortable diving them out. Sometime with the student, feet are behind the landing gear or their right foot on the step with mine, left knee on the threshold. How I approach the door and how the student feet are situated depends on their size and shape. Memento Mori

QuoteRhetorical question: Why would anyone order a Sigma WITHOUT a Skyhook?[/reply For the same reason there are instructors who, disconnect the RSL. If there is a spinning Malfunction, they want to recover or get to a favorable position before they dump the reserve. Remember the tandem fatality one or two years ago in California. Reserve entanglement with the body. Not sure which instructor or student. Outcome instructor lived student died. ] Memento Mori

It took me 12 jumps to get off student statues A license qualified in skills eight years ago. Once I reach jump 20 I mailed off the application. Memento Mori

Lowest main deployment was 1,600’ saddled out at 1,200’. A license, boy wonder lost altitude awareness while free flying. Many jumps later tracking from a 60 way I had a jumper in front and below pitching out at about 2,000’. Rolled around him. Checked altitude, I was at 1,500’ after the maneuver looked at both handles garbed both and pulled reserve only. I would estimate I was below 1,000’ when the pin was pulled. During the reserve opening the cypress did fire but the loop was slack and it didn’t cut the loop. Expensive skydive but in reality it was cheep. After opening I was at 500 after un-stowing the breaks Memento Mori