MakeItHappen

Just want to point out that the BSR is waiverable by the FB. This means that DZ kids could (I think) get a waiver to the rule. I mean the FB grants waivers to sick kids on the Make-A-Wish type waivers... why not give a DZ kid the opportunity to jump? And I think that if a DZO that wanted to let any 16 yo jump at any time, they could also apply for a waiver. If they have a track record of lots of 16 yo jumping at their DZ without incident, I don't see why the FB would deny them a waiver. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I would think that that 'feature' is to simulate that the main was opened at 4500 ft and the slower descent is under a good canopy. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

FYI - CYPRES introduced a new feature at the beginning of 2013. Please see pg 21-24 in the manual CYPRES 2013 Manual If you have the latest software updates or a new CYPRES AAD you can set your activation altitude. And it's 'sticky'. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Craig, USPA never passed a BSR ( even temporarily ) about age limit of equipment. The BSR that you mention was about the age of jumpers. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

There was some anecdotal stories on this, but no hard data. Student refers to non-licensed jumpers. I agree with that. However, the new definition allows someone to go out and coach people with thousands of jumps and use those jumps to renew their rating. I think it ought to be changed so that the jumps used for recurrency must be with jumpers with less than 100 jumps. This is because the lessons you teach new jumpers are more closely related to the introductory topics in the ISP. The jumps you do as a USPA coach should be preparing the coach for further ratings. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

At the recent BOD meeting a motion was passed to add this definition to the SIM Glossary: Coach jump: A coach jump is any jump where a USPA Coach jumps with any person and provides instruction and/or critique to that person. Already in the Glossary are these two definitions: COACH A non-rated operative who provides advanced skydiving training. See also: Coach, USPA COACH, USPA The entry-level USPA instructional rating whose holder may teach the general (non-method-specific sections of the first-jump course) and conduct group freefall skills training and jumps with students, all under the supervision of a USPA Instructor. From the IRM Coach section pg 2 Section G.1.b (Currency Requirements) "....and made at least 15 coaching jumps in the last 12 months" This change means that USPA Coaches will be able to renew their rating by doing 'coach jumps' with experienced jumpers. They may never have to jump with a student. I'd like some constructive comments on this action. Thank-you. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I don't know why, but during the past couple of meetings, PIA has approached USPA about several issues. PIA sent representatives to pitch the age limit again. USPA did not change their rules based mostly on an assessment by the USPA attorneys. Another item that came up was the waiver. This motion passed the GM comm and made it to the FB. The motion was eventually withdrawn, but I think that it will reappear at a later meeting. This item was to add a clause to the GM pledge that required GM DZs to add mfgs as a class to the DZO's waiver. Objections to this included - the cost to the DZO associated with a waiver change - that no other 3rd party was singled out in the GM pledge to require mention in the hold harmless/waiver agreement - effective date of the requirement - alternative methods could be used by PIA to request that mfgs as a class be added to each DZ waiver PIA is asking USPA to do its legwork here. I think that PIA should create its own DZ distribution list and ask the DZOs directly to add mfgs as a class to their waiver. How difficult could that be? not very hard. USPA also should not be burdened with the task of verifying that mfgs are listed as a class (or individually) in each waiver. I'd like to know if there are DZOs out there that may object to this requirement too. Keep your eyes out for this in the future - it might come up again. BTW, I voted against the raising of the pull altitudes for C & D license holders. The raised altitudes also effect the AFF eval dives and the decision altitude cited in the IRM and SIM, respectively. These changes are going to be done by HQ - I don't know if the BOD will be able to vote on what HQ proposes before the manuals get reprinted this fall. I don't know how many S&TAs are going to object to giving waivers out for pull altitudes because they assume some additional risk, when before there was none. People are pulling higher now anyway. There was no reason to raise the altitude. Jay Stokes claims that this will 'force' the AAD mfgs to raise the AAD activation altitude. It's not going to 'force' them to do anything. They will have more latitude to do so, but 'forcing' them to do so is BS. If the AAD mfgs wanted to raise activation altitude (and they do want to do this), they are free to do so now and distribute another model, just like they did with the swooper model. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

07/29/13 This past weekend the USPA BOD passed a change to the Minimum Opening Altitudes for C & D licensed skydivers. The old rule was 2000 ft AGL. The new rule is 2500 ft AGL, with an option to waiver it to 2000 ft AGL by the S&TA. I voted against this change. This change has been brought up for many years. Until this weekend, it was always defeated. It was previously defeated because - there are many jumpers that jump in areas that have low cloud coverage during a significant part of the year - 2k is all they are going to get, - demo jumpers occasionally need to jump in low ceilings - 2k is all they are going to get and - there was no 'position paper' put forth by the parachute industry or a manufacturer. This position paper that was presented at this recent meeting has PD letterhead on it. I am unsure about whether it was sent to certain USPA BOD members via PIA or via PD. I did not get the missive until this morning, the day after the meeting, from Jay Stokes. We do have a PD employee on the BOD now, so I do not know the official path this document took. I do know it was not distributed to all BOD members before the meeting, no matter where it came from or how it was distributed. PD, as usual, presented a well written and accurate document. I do not have issues with anything in the document except that it does not tell the whole story. PD claims and/or slants the story about several fatalities of jumpers whose AAD fired at the appropriate altitude, yet their reserve failed to deploy fully before impact, to be the result of not enough altitude between AAD activation altitude and the ground. The whole story concerning this group of incidents includes equipment issues. Some of there are, and are not limited to: - location of the cutter along the closing loop - length of closing loop - flap closing sequence - number of flaps - geometry of flaps, especially in the corners of the container - pilot chute performance factors - whether the main is in the container - offset grommet distances - compatibility of canopy and container pack volumes - packing technique - etc What I object to is that PD explicitly implies that if you raise the activation altitude of the AAD then these fatalities will go away. That is an incorrect assessment of these fatalities and conclusion by PD. This was the 'reason' that many on the BOD used to justify raising the minimum pack opening altitudes for USPA C & D license holders. Mind you, that other parachute associations also have the same opening altitude as USPA, some even have lower altitudes. BPA allows display (demo) jumpers to open as low as 1500 feet AGL. To my knowledge, those organizations have not been approached to change their rules. This rule change is also wrong for other reasons. There are many places that have cloud cover and can only get 2000 ft AGL for significant times of their jump season. This new rule places additional liability upon the S&TA, when previously there was none, if the S&TA grants waivers to the new rule. Skydivers have been doing hop & pops from 2k for years and years and years with no problems. Now, all of a sudden, it's an issue?? It's only an issue if you jump certain equipment. If you use the proper equipment, there is no issue. I will work to have the implementation date of this change delayed so that more information may be given to the BOD. With the additional information, the change may be rescinded. Please write a Letter to the Editor ([email protected]) and copy the full board ([email protected]) with your comments. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Please send me any more comments on this topic. I am collecting all the comments for the mtg. I have a travel day and reading DZ.com goes down at the mtgs. BTW, there has been an idea floated that this may be better implemented as a 'kinda-sorta' merit badge, instead of a license. IOW, you get a 'badge' that says you have such-n-such performance level at such-n-such WL. Thanks for your feedback. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

ok -- I'm collating all the feedback for the mtg. If you have something to say please send it to me now. It's hard to keep up with email at the mtg and I have a travel day in there. Thanks for your input. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Gee whiz, Craig, what happened to your sense of humor? I just pulled the post to the top of the page with a sarcastic post. Anyone can still send me comments. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I want to thank everyone that replied with comments on these issues, all zero of you. I will pass on these comments to the N&E committee and FB at the next meeting. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

For USPA Members: I wish to direct you to the agenda for the Nominations and Elections Committee. http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Agenda_NE_2013_07.pdf The agenda document has an explanation/summary of issues related to changing the election schedule/timeline of the USPA board members. If you have any comments on this please contact me or reply to this thread. Based upon numerous comments from board members, staff members and USPA members, many issues have been identified and discussed in the summary document. If you think something has been overlooked or not represented, please contact me. Aerosoftware_AT_MakeItHappen.com where _AT_ = @ Please keep in mind that nothing specific is proposed at this point and anything and everything about the election needs the approval of the USPA membership. The N&E committee will be considering options at the next meeting (Jul 26-28) and may recommend something then. IOW, you don't have to bash USPA now, all you have to do is say I think 'such-n-such' seems like the best idea. Thank-you for your consideration of these issues. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

No John. We are saying that line tie strength is an important factor in deployment and cannot be ignored. Other factors include and are not limited to: - the location of the line ties - the length of the loops on each s-fold - the roll relationship between payload and bag - the width of each s-fold - the number of s-folds BTW, since we are talking about packing. IIRC, Mike was an extremely fast packer and packed for himself. He used a standard flat pack to fold the canopy. He stowed the locking loops on the bag. What I can't remember is if he stowed the rest of the lines on the bag or not. Can anyone from DeLand or watched him pack recently, confirm that he stowed the rest of the lines on the bag? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

"Grip on the line stows"? There is no "gripping line stows" at 120 MPH. Any coefficient of friction was long lost with the speed. Lines strip or dump because of mass imbalance between the span of lines between the bights and the bights themselves. See:http://www.jumpshack.com/default.asp?CategoryID=TECH&PageID=NEWSTOW&SortBy=DATE_D for the full definition of the phenomeon. The SPEED Bag, designed for thoes who prefer safety over work load, was a later development. John, I'm calling BS here. The force that it takes to extract lines from their stows is an important factor in the deployment sequence. I'll refer you to the several articles published by Purvis and Meyer (yeah that would be me) that address this issue. You are smart enough to go look them up. Let me know if you have trouble finding the articles. I have them sitting on my bookshelf. Unlike you, I have no vested interest to promote a particular mfg's product. My work was done as a scientific research project. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

While technically accurate, if the person with 2100 jumps has just raced to the ground (as most people do) then you could argue they haven't really learned anything more about flying their parachute correctly than the person who's done it 500 times but really been focusing on learning. edit: That said, the person with 2100 jumps has a much higher likelihood of having been exposed to more situations that can develop than the 500 jump person. Ian I don't agree with the "if the person with 2100 jumps has just raced to the ground (as most people do) " thing. I don't think that is true at all. Anyway, I've been mulling over performance tests. One that could be used is the performance factors used in sport accuracy. Sport accuracy is run during the US Collegiates, so it can be used safely for people with only a few hundred jumps on a particular canopy. Ian -- in the contrived example, what types of questions can you ask to each of those fictional jumpers that would produce answers to demonstrate that one person knows more than the other wrt canopy control. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Jump Numbers (total jumps, jump rate and currency) as metrics: Are jump numbers an indicator of skill or experience? Jumps numbers in a specific area are indicators of skill level and experience. Jump numbers alone do not determine the complete picture, but they do indicate trends. Frequency of Occurrence: If canopy problems were a one off issue then a do nothing approach could work fine. The fact is that canopy issues of landing and collisions are a predominant cause of injuries and fatalities. Severity of Occurrence: The severity can range from a bump or bruise to loss of life. The loss of life may include the person creating a hazard to those 'innocent bystanders'. Regulation: I don't like rules anymore than anyone else. I hate rules. I hate programming rules. But when they exist, I definitely know what the rules are. Why do we need rules? Rules exist because people cheat the spirit of the activity. Plain and simple. For instance, we have residential speed limits of 35mph or so. The reason those rules are on the books is because there were people that could not or would not abide by the spirit of slower speeds in residential areas on their own accord. Licensing: Licensing is a systematic way of requiring people to demonstrate skill, proficiency and currency in a particular profession. You need a license to do all sorts of things from cutting hair to installing solar panels to performing brain surgery. Why does licensing exist for some occupations and not others? It is related to the damage you may inadvertently inflict upon others if you did not have the requisite training, proficiency or skill level. Licensing is a manifestation of a society protecting the members of that society from the incompetent and ill-trained think they know it alls. To address Ian's comment about a MC license: A person with a MC license is better prepared for any type of MC than a person without a MC license, just as a person with a hazmat/tanker license is better prepared to drive a gasoline tanker across the country than someone that does not have such a license. Ability to Apply Logical Arguments: I am open to any and all comments if they are logical. When you resort to illogical and just plain stoopid reasons for your position, I can call you out on that. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Yeah, right. I'll just hop in a gasoline tanker truck and drive it cross country and be as safe as someone that has a license to do that. Enough with the idiotic replies, I'll be posting a lengthier reply to address issues that others have brought up. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I'd like to propose an alternative solution to the pervasive problem of canopy control and progression. As you may well know, errors of judgement in canopy control are the leading cause of injuries and death in skydiving today. Our community has made progress in this area by implementing standardized landing patterns at many DZs and separating swoopers and conventional pattern jumpers by space or time. Canopy progression solutions that have been proposed previously have serious drawbacks in implementation. For instance, a BSR change that specifies a WL versus number of jumps progression, similar to pull altitudes versus license level, is easily defeated and nearly impossible to enforce because of a determined jumper's ability to pad logbooks or substitute canopies without DZO/staff knowing about a substitution. Another solution of creating a canopy instructor rating suffers from targeting instructors for additional training when the real problem lies in targeting the individual jumper for additional training. Mind you, I am all for training current instructors of any discipline learning more about canopy control. But that misses the issue. The issue is that newer jumpers with no ratings and at lower level license levels are the ones that most need additional training. More experienced jumpers may also benefit from additional training. My alternative solution is to create a canopy licensing system that is akin to the various vehicle driver's licenses that are available in the US. In the US, one gets a learner's permit when they are 16 or so. Once sufficient training and performance tests are accomplished the license is upgraded to a standard driver's license. Later the license may be extended to various other categories, such as motorcycle, semi-truck, tanker, hazardous materials, school bus, chauffeur or tow truck. In each case, additional training and performance testing is required to add a category to one's driver's license. I propose that we look into creating various canopy licenses that are anchored to wing loading (WL), canopy planform/construction (rectangular, elliptical, crossbraced, etc) and experience level (#jumps) on each type of canopy. Each milestone would require a written test and a performance test. We currently do this for the PRO rating, without any PRO instructor rating. The exact specifications of what exactly would be on the written test and the performance tests is a to be determined (TBD) issue that would be hashed out by the industry and then adopted by USPA. I want your opinion and suggestions for such a plan. As many of you know, I am on the USPA BOD and can put this plan in front of the S&T Committee and get some action/implementation going. This won't happen at one BOD meeting. It will take several meetings to flesh out the details. The details will come from jumpers, instructors, industry leaders and board members. This will be a consensus adaptation of new policies. We need to come together to enhance the safety of jumpers as they progress over the years. Please let me know what you think about this idea. Blue Skies. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Of the 3 fatalities this weekend, Ken was the one I knew the longest. We first met at Marana in 1982 when we both only had a few hundred jumps. Ken actually did RW then too. He worked for IBM and took a nice severance pay package when they downsized. He moved to NorCal. Several years later I also moved to NorCal. I saw him all the time at the DZ, but we rarely jumped together because he went to the darkside of CRW-Dawgs. ;) We also saw each other because we went to events at Perris, Elsinore and Eloy. I remember the first time he gave me one of those 'Ken Oka' pull up cords. I didn't know what to make of it. At first I thought he was handing them out because he was running for the BOD. He said he wasn't running. It was this very humble man that wanted to make sure people remembered his name. At the time he wasn't know nationally. Over the years, he must have given me +20 of those pull up cords. I saw him at Nationals for the past +13 years, plus other events. Even tho he was a CRW-dawg and I was into FS, we still chatted and chilled together. Ken you are missed and everyone that met you knows your name. Blue Skies Ken. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Of the 3 fatalities this weekend, Larry was the one I had the most jumps with. We were on POPS, World Team and the Go-Fast 300-way loads together & probably some other dives here and there. In addition to that we were co-organizers of SOS records. I wasn't on any of the SOS record dives because I am still too young. But I did do the dive engineering of 4 SOS records, 2 in Elsinore and 2 in Florida. Larry & I saw eye-to-eye in how these dives should be arranged. We were both Lieutenants under the Generals that did not have as much big-way experience as we did. But we did have problems with directing the dives because of, shall I say, 'politics'. We had many side conversations about the 'politics' and tried to figure out how to make this go down the right path. We wanted the dives to follow the recruitment, dive engineering and slotting to follow what is standard for FS WRs. Somehow, we couldn't get the 'Generals' to see this path, even when safety issues were brought up because the loads were getting larger. All these side conversations are what I'll remember the most about Larry. I never met anyone that saw the vision the same way I did and was just as frustrated because 'politics' entered the picture. Of course, being on some FS WRs with Larry were cool too. Blue Skies Larry . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

Cliff will be greatly missed. I've known Cliff since the rigger meeting back in Muskogee days. One recent story was at the last PIA meeting in Daytona Beach. After arranging to get to Daytona from Deland on Thursday and then delivering a presentation to the new BOD members, I wanted to get something to eat. I didn't want a huge meal because it was already about 9pm. I walked down to the BK a block away from the Hilton. I stood in line and decided what to get. Then I looked at the people in front of me. It was Cliff, Karen and Adam (Cliff's son). I said 'Cliff, I see you are doing the fine dining like I am.' He laughed. The 4 of us had dinner together and talked about a number of issues facing skydiving today. It was nice because the long week of events that would keep both of us busy were not imposing any pressure on the length of time we spent there. Then just before we departed, Cliff said 'If you see anyone- don't tell them I'm here' I asked him why. He had just rolled in and said they still had to go to Walmart. 'What do you need to go to Walmart for?' They wanted to go get snacks and sammich fixin's because the cost at the hotel was too much. I laughed and said 'At least I'm not the only one that does that' Cliff & I have talked so much about so many fatalities over the years. What the jumpers did or didn't do, how the equipment worked (or didn't) It just seems so unreal now. Cliff and Ted Strong were two of the people I talked to A LOT about equipment issues. There is another huge void in the skydiving industry. Cliff you will be missed. My condolences to Karen and Adam. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

BUMP. Ask the Secretary who it was. It should be recorded in the minutes too. . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

I think I can set you up for a free place to stay in Deland. But you have to provide me a ride Sun night (Daytona to Deland around 9pm), Mon, Tues, Weds morning. email me at aerosoftware_AT_makeithappen.com _AT_ = @ . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker

well the $75 is still less the travel and accommodations. For those that have taken the recurrent online thing---- did it do the same thing as the live version? . . Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker