mark

Here's a link to the SL/IAD Proficiency Card. You have to do the items without a star, but SL and IAD are similar enough that if you have one rating, you should be able to add the other rating in a very busy half-day or so. Check out the exact requirements for course directors and candidates in IRM Essentials.The course director has to have been an IAD Instructor for at least three years, and put out at least 100 students, plus some other small stuff. There is no minimum course size, so one-on-one is okay. Mark

Touche. I should have said "100-jump C-license holder with a Jumpmaster rating." The original thread started by asking about a Coach performing the duties of a static-line Instructor. Your example, though sobering, doesn't address this issue. I do agree with you on this: an individual who has earned an instructional rating is more likely to be in tune with the safety and training requirements of students. The key for any new rating holder is the same as the key for skydivers at all levels: adequate, tactful supervision. It is morally wrong to fail to supervise new instructors as they begin to exercise their new privileges, just as it is morally wrong to allow newly-minted "A" license holders to jump in conditions which exceed their abilities. If the DZO allowed a non-rated or newly-rated Coach or Instructor to perform duties without supervision, he bears a large part of the responsibility for the consequences. Mark

Sorry, no. An instructor may not assemble or pack for anyone except himself or herself. FAR 105.43(a) (reprinted in SIM Section 9-1): "The main parachute must have been packed ... by a certificated parachute rigger, the person making the next jump with the parachute, or a non-certificated person under the direct supervision of a certificated parachute rigger." Also FAR 105.47(b): "No person may attach an assist device ... to any main parachute unless that person is a certificated parachute rigger or that person makes the next parachute jump with that parachute." Check out FAR 105.47(a)(2) while you're at it. When was the last time you saw this checked? Mark

In almost 25 years as a static line instructor, I've seen all of these done, some more than once, always by a static line instructor, never by a static line jumpmaster (when there was such a thing) or coach. My personal favorite: instructor fell out of the airplane, leaving his static-line student hanging on the strut. Coaches teaching the FJC? A coach may teach the generic portions of an FJC, which means 90% of a static-line FJC: everything except "Put your feet out, climb out, look up and go!" It isn't hard to teach a prospective rating holder how to teach static-line exits. I agree it's a BSR violation for a Coach to teach exits to students. Whether it's a safety issue depends on the individual teacher, not the rating he or she holds. Coaches packing student gear and rigging static lines? You are right -- coaches shouldn't be doing that. Neither should Instructors. There is nothing in any Instructor Certification Course that authorizes Instructors to pack student gear or rig static lines. If you are doing that without a rigger ticket or the direct supervision of a rigger, you are in violation of FAR 105.43(a), which is legally more serious than a BSR violation. Coaches spotting? They teach the canopy control portion of the FJC, and they supervise Cat F/G/H students spotting, so they're capable. Coaches dispatching static-line progression students (on static line or freefall)? There are some static line handling skills that every new static line handler needs to learn, but that's true whether they have 50 jumps, 100, 200, or 500. As for observation skills, a coach able to observe student body position on a Cat F/G/H skydive is certainly able to observe a student's body position on a short delay while the coach remains in the aircraft. Again, I agree that it is a BSR violation for a coach to put out Cat A/B/C/D/E students, but whether it is a safety issue depends on the individual, not the rating. Coaches debriefing? They can debrief a Cat F/G/H jump, all of which have more going on than a static-line Cat A/B/C. It wasn't so long ago that a 100-jump C-license holder could put out static-line students at any point in their progression. From a safety standpoint, what's changed? Mark

The categories work roughly like this: Cat A: Intro - 2 s/l jumps Cat B: PRCPs Cat C: First freefall (5 sec delay), two 10-second delays. Goals: hover control, solo pull Cat D: Turns Cat E: Recovery from instability To put intentional disorienting maneuvers in earlier than Cat E would mean including them before turn training was complete. I don't think you intend that. Could you elaborate more on what you had in mind? Mark

Lottery = tax on the mathematically illiterate. Every time you play, I win. Mark

Thanks, Frognog. You said it better than I. Mark

Nick, I've been to the web site, I read the mathematical description, and I'm convinced that miniforce rings decrease the pressure of the loop on the cable. I'm just not convinced it makes any difference in actual conditions. If you are asking me to do real-world tests, it leads me to believe that Aerodyne has not done any such tests, and Aerodyne cannot say what the reduction in pull force at the pillow end of the cables would be. Advertising "35% reduction in pull force" for most skydivers implies "at the pillow end," and while there would be some reduction in pull force at the pillow end, it is certainly less than 35%. Mark

Nick, My question remains: by how much when measured at the pillow end of the cables? Mark

Having read the article from the Aerodyne web site, I can accept that the force on the loop is reduced by 35%. That doesn't tell the whole story, though. What matters to me is how much force it takes to extract the cables through the cable housings. Only part of the resistance is from the pressure of the loop on the cable. A much greater part is friction of the cables inside the housings, because of contaminants on the cables and inside the housings (which I can do something about), and from bends in the housings (a rig design issue). Can Aerodyne say how much better their miniforce rings are when they are considered as part of the entire riser release system, on a typical skydiving rig which may or may not have had recent owner maintenance on the release system? Mark

From Poynter's, where he talks about pulling down the apex of a round main parachute, but applicable to pilot chutes as well: "The adding of a center line to pull down the [apex] will increase the projected diameter... Ultimate canopy spreading is achieved when the center line is the same length as the suspension lines. Drag may be increased by about 18%." For "the suspension lines," substitute "the mesh" or "the tape on the mesh." to describe what's going on with a typical non-spring pilot chute. Being off by a half inch (1 cm) or so either way isn't going to change the drag very much, and given the number of folks I've seen happily jumping pilot chutes with kill lines a couple inches short, I'd say an inch either way might be enough for a call to the manufacturer but not a cause for great alarm. Mark

From http://www.cypres-2.com/: "According to Airtec's current standard of knowledge, the total lifetime of CYPRES 2 should be 12 years." No word yet on whether that will be 12 years + 6 months (the maintenance window limit) the way a Cypres-1 is limited to 12 years + 3 months. Mark

Older editions of the PD Reserve Owner's Manual describe the pull test, which could be read as being part of the inspection required at every repack. In the 2002 edition, the wording is clearer: "Fabric testing should be done annually (at the appropriate repack cycle)." There is still some ambiguity there: "should" is not the same as "must." The FAA does not require riggers to perform reserve manufacturer recommended maintenance, in contrast to AADs, where the "recommended" maintenance is mandatory. The procedure is the same in either case. Para-Gear sells appropriate clamps (basically Vise-grip pliers with 1-inch wide rubber-faced jaws), clamped 3 inches apart; a 30-pound load is applied for 3 seconds. The test is done three times: at the left end top surface, the right end top surface, and the center top surface near the trailing edge. These are the areas most likely to fail first. The manual provides additional details on exactly how to do the tests. Mark

You can try cutting the rubber bands in half. They'll stretch more easily and last almost as long as standard-width bands. I've been using standard-width small bands, single-wrapped, for six or eight hundred jumps. Sometimes the stows look loose, but as long as the center locking stows are tight, it doesn't matter to the opening. There might be some small contribution to decreased opening shock, but the primary function of the non-locking stows is to reduce the possibility of lines entangling with the container. Mark

The "A" in S&TA is for advisor. I couldn't find any place in the SIM where it stated an S&TA had any authority. I did find this in SIM Section 1: "The S&TA is a local jumper who is available on your dropzone to provide you with administrative services and information." And in the SIM Glossary: "A local person ... available to provide advice and administrative assistance." The previous version of S&TA was called "Area Safety Officer" or "Club Safety Officer," and the job title was changed to reflect a different role: advisor, not enforcer. I see the S&TA-DZO relationship as a cooperative one, and in most cases we can work things out. Got an unrated guy who wants to coach his SO? How about pointing out the "A" license requirements, and suggesting that the best course of action is to develop the skills necessary for the "A" license exam? Does the DZO want a general policy that allows unrated but otherwise qualified jumpers to coach? Draft a waiver while you point out that the coach program is the source of new instructors, but remember that if the DZO chooses a course of action that reduces his pool of future instructors, that his stupid choice to make, not yours. >> If a non-rated guy can put people out... If a student is cleared for self-supervision, then having a more experienced jumper on the load helping with organizing and spotting is a good thing. >> Is it ok for an "A" licensed jumper to coach? If he or she has the skills, why not? I'd prefer only rated coaches, but if the DZO and I agreed that an unrated someone was qualified, I'd have no problem with a waiver. >> Can we just put students on any load and expect the people on the load to oversee their jumps? Ask Bill Booth how many jumps his FJC instructor had! Seriously, though. We agree that qualified folks should supervise student operations. The questions should be, " How can we cooperatively manage the necessary degree of supervision?" Mark

I'd guess the FAA wouldn't have much to say about installing Vigils in Cypres set-ups. Riggers are charged with ensuring compatibility when assembling components. We don't give it a a second thought when we assemble Smart reserves in containers which are approved based on testing with PD reservers. Installing a Vigil in a Cypres-ready rig is not a legal problem. The freebag accepts compatible reserves; the Cypres set-up accepts compatible AADs, including Vigils. Mark