Para5-0

I really dont want to screw up your mathematical fun but years ago nobody reported domestic violence. Does that mean that women werent abused or worse children weren't victim to emotional and physical abuse. Remember it was not reported so I guess there is no statistical data to support it. Fast forward: Oh wait a minute, why would a DZ or Instructor not report a problem? Maybe because of bad press, repercussions, loss of reputation and or money, loss of ratings. I made mention of this in another thread, "Is the AFF rating too easy", There are incidents taking place and that is a personally witnessed fact. In my small corner of the world if I see incidents not being reported then imagine if all DZ's are not reporting incidents. Now when I say incidents I am not refering to fatalities, as I see is the only statistic you are looking at. What about injuries, cyrus fires, off field landings, lost students (Oh you will really get no reporting in this one)... i see a problem with only looking at fatalities. Remember the example, if we only looked at women or kids that got beat to death then I guess it would look like a small problem, (Domestic Violence).

I could be wrong but I do not think that the Cessna DZ takes experienced jumpers up.

17 quotes, 30 reply to's, who the hell is talking to who in your post...why so confusing, let us know your thought and move on.

Just out of curiosity who ever said being a skydiving instructor was easy and cheap. Ask a commerical pilot taking passengers how much he paid for his ratings. Why do we have to be the gentler, kinder, generation.. It reminds me of socialization. Lets take all the jumps out there and distribute the number evenly thoughout the skydiving community so we are all equal and then everyone can become an instructor. Distribute the Jumps...I am starting a movement. OOPS I forgot I am a right wing conservative.

I think 175 is a good amount.

Just a thought, how about an average jumps per year number?

+1

Your analogy blows mine away because I saw that happen back in the late 90's by a respected I/E of the time. Again, keep in mind I am in NJ right now with 30+ inches of snow on the ground and doing what we do best in the Northeast, complain.lol The warm and fuzzy feeling I was refering to wasnt with myself it was with the new AFF guys/girls. Anyhow, your post is to the point of why if we had just a little bit of oversight of a new instructor, we can help them learn skills without almost killing someone. The old adage, no need to recreate the wheel. If I can debrief a new AFF and give them some help that would bnefit future jumps for them that is a good thing, hence the reason I am in favor of a probation period or JM rating. The example girl with the tata's should be under strict observation and be mentoring under a seasoned AFFI. Instead of just letting them go in the hopes thye dont really screw up. I know as a fact many DZ's do this already, so why not follow suit and make some minor adjuctments. This would be a much easier conversation over a cocktail after a day of jumping. As far as Ozzy, we are trying to save you from yourself schmuck, in the most loving way possible. I only have 5 freefly jumps because I have been babysitting you since you got your AFF. Wait a minute, kinda like I am suggesting to USPA, Why dont you post your first (Beer) off DZ landing for us to view? Let the rest of DZ.com enjoy the fine art of a 1 and a 1/2 front flip with a graceful face plant in the mud.

***There are solid AFFI's and there are weak AFFI's.*** We are on the same page for the most part, but isnt there a way to reduce the weak future AFFI's? Maybe if we ask ourselves why are the weak ones weak or how did the weak ones get to where they are?, we can start to correct the problem. I guess there are weak and solid in everything but we cant afford just to ignore the problem. I do not want to settle for,"weak AFF's. Weak AFF's lead to potential bad things for the sport. I imagine that there are solid and weak fighter pilots out there, but at least the bar is set so high that even the weak fighter pilots are pretty dam good pilots. That is what I am looking for through oversight, change if necessary, and continual support and debrief. I know there are weak AFF's out there, I just want to get back to the time where if you graduated an AFF course everyone was comfortable with your teaching and flying ability. I do not have that warm and fuzzy feeling, at all lately.

I am too far right at this point for a variety of reasons. Most would call me out of my mind I believe that the AFF rating should be 500 jumps, 3 years, 6 hours of FF, and a coach rating for a year with at least 15 coach jumps. (I wouldnt mind 1000 jumps but that is never going to happen). I also believe while I am at it, to take the coach course you should have a C license and 200 jumps. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/instructorchanges/ and tandem should be 1000 jumps, 3 years in sport, and a coach rating for one year.

that wasnt to you I just hit reply on the last post sorry...just an overall opinion which, nobody really gives a shit about anyway. sorry

I just cant buy into different standards across the board. We are governed by the United States Parachute Association. We should be able to come up with what a skydiver must possess and demonstrate to be responsible for another human life, (wether it be AFF, Tandem, IAD, Static) If you people, are tying to sell the fact that becasue a DZ is a small cesna dropzone, that we must lower the standards or actually keep them as low as possible so as to give instructors the opportunity to make DZO's money, I can not be objective. One AFF jump out of a cesna in bumfuck Dropzone is no different than one AFF Jump at a busy DZ. They both have the possiblilty of death to the student or instructor. Further, why would we not want our instructors to be the most qualified instructors that we can produce, thus limiting the possibility of said death. A waivered AFFI is like saying, okay you do not meet the qualifications but go ahead give it a shot. Not to mention the law suit that will come out of a drop zone that provides waivered instructors vs full fledged instructors. I can see the arguement now. I think this problem boils down to those making the decisions and what motivates their decisions to keep the requirements where they are. You need to look at each BOD members and their background and see how they vote. Which brings up another completely seperate topic as to why a DZO can be on the board to begin with, but I do not want to throw the thread into a tizzy and get a hundred PM's. The unmentioned fact: A DZO needs as many staff as possible to make as much money as possible. So why would they vote to increase requirements if it will reduce their staff? C'mon this is as much a political discussion as it is a common sense one. Safety and Training did not bring forth some suggestions because they felt they would not pass the board. So, hence the viscious cycle. and no I am not bashing DZO's just saying the conflict is possible. See for yourselves and make your own decision.

***I also think that a minimum number of coach jumps is better than "time since coach rating" as this speaks more directly to working with students as opposed to watching some period of time go by on a calender. *** If they are to remain current after one year they must have made 15 or 20, whatever it is, coach jumps...in theory.

I guess I am in the minority here, but I like a coach to come to me and sit down and explain everything that was done or taught. I then can debrief the coach a bit to help him/her out. Then I sign the card saying that I am satisfied it was done correctly. Bring me into court, as long as I dont just blindly sign cards I should be okay. The instructor signature is validating that in my opinion the coach conducted the ground/air properly, based on review. You can also use it as a good opportunity to orally quiz or test the student for comprehension. A coach should have instructor oversight, otherwise they would be an instructor. THeir has to be a chain of command so to speak to evaluate and help the coach learn to be a good instructor. If the coach just signs, you will or could loose some valuable debriefing for the coach.

Many DZ's have package deals where you can pay for all of the training up front at a discounted rate. That allows you to move along nicely. I would recommend planning or saving enough to get through AFF as quick as possible. It will give you the best chances of not having to repeat a level. If you wait three weeks and try to remember what took place on your last jump it might take half the jump to get the feeling back, at which time it is too late, and will cost you more in the long run.

Why not make that a hard rule instead of under 500 jumps? Simple: You must hae 500 jumps, 6 Hours ff, and a coach rting for one year. Is that asking to much of someone who will be responsible for students lives? This is the new politically correct me.

Keep them honest fellas, good job.

Tom, You should run for public office, you are patient, calm, professional, and I am proud of the work you have done. I am also greatful to JP and his dedication, along with numerous other members. I will be advocating as strong as I can for change and I will be at the Boston meeting. Let me know dates and locations. I would also be more than happy to help you with your research.

Good Luck.

I am still trying to figure out who this even effects. If you have 500 jumps you can take a coach course and an instructor course the next week. (NO CHANGE) If you have 100 jumps and a B license you get the coach rating, it will take a year to get the 6 hours of FF for AFF anyway. Either way will someone please tell me who this effects? Unless it is just a stepping stone. If the change was coach rating for 12 months and 500 jumps total to be eligible for an instructional rating I would be happy with the change. God forbid we entertain 200 jumps and a c license for coach. OMG..the world would come to an end, how dare anyone suggest that a new skydiver wait for 100 more jumps. Why dont we just make a coach rating the 100 jump reward, instead of a pie in the face, we can mail a coach rating and save a lot of time and effort.

The requirement should read. You must hold coach rating for 12 months AND have 500 jumps. This new rule does nothing to stop the problem. A guy with 500 jumps wants to be a tandem I, he can take a coach class this weekend and be a TI the next with virtually no student contact. The whole purpose was to get a potential instructor 12 monthes of teaching, student interaction experience. Why are we so afraid of offending people? Good to see the coach rating requirement to c license and 200 jumps was shot down. No comment..

I am very excited to hear something was done at the BOD meeting regarding rating requirements. Any updates or exact language of the changes would be appreciated. Thanks

Yes, hand them this: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/instructorchanges/ Specifically the 168 people working out in the field support. To inlcude DZO's, S&TA's, and instructors with thousands of jumps. Other than that have fun.

I tried to do two tandems for a wedding and it was a nightmare and ultimately abandoned. THere was a DZ there years back but it closed. There was several government agencies that you needed a bulldozer to get through the bullshit. If I remember correctly there are two smaller airports or strips..It was a long time ago.

Kim, that is funny before I read your post I had clicked to see where the OP was from also. I thought it was my DZ for sure.lol I bet we are not the only ones.