azureriders

I have three rides on each and I will tell you that either will get you to the ground safely. So you can make the descion yourself, I just recommend you be SMART about it.

Funniest thing I have heard all day. Obviously you have never had to spend very much time working behind these "son bitche's"

WHY?? Now before everyone jumps on board here, I know there is the case of selling High Performance gear to the newby and we all need to be wary of that..... However, After my tandem and when I decided to take the FJC, I went home, got on Ebay, and purchased the cheapest "complete rig" available. Had no idea of what I was getting, got it home and disected it, piece by piece. Had no intention on jumping it, it is just how I am. I was the most gear aware person in my FJC FYI, the rig was an talon 1, maveric main, and 5 cell swift reserve. Packed and sold by a rigger as inspected and jump worthy. Knowing what I know now, I would indeed say the rig was jumpable, all be it out dated. Did the seller do anything wrong, I say no, he just cleared out some onld junk, helped out a 'would be skydiver' and pocketed $350. A win win situation in my opinion. For what its worth, the swift is still in service, by a rigger that I gave it to, the maveric is in my closet, and the talon was my wife's first, and now standby, rig. Probably the best money I have spent in skydiving yet, if you consider the training I got from it. Under your system, I would have missed out on this. Now, for you new jumpers, I am NOT recommending you go by some old gutter gear to examine, it is just what worked for me. for those "thinks this looks fun" type that lpdwntnd is speaking of, good luck with that, and remember, Darwin is watching. and even for those who are eager to downsize beyound your skills, and seek out gear and places to jump where people may not know your skills, as an Instructor in this sport I will strive to give you all the sound advice that I can possibly give, but I must warn you, Darwin is watching you too. Yet I know, as well as you do, that no system we could implament will keep you from finding a way to kill yourself. If I thought it could, I would support it to no end. Sorry for the length and the hijack, and no offense meant to you lpdwntnd, but it really bothers me that so many people think that micro governing ones oprotunites will reduce risk for those being governed.

I have had packers pack my brakes unstowed. Yes I know I should do it myself. On a spectre at 1.4 : 1, the slowest opening ever experienced. On a safire I at 1.6 : 1, SLAMO. YMMV and obviously this does not answer your question specificly.

Yes, it can be a common problem. I make a habit of checking my indicator light from exit position on every jump. I have turned the camera on from the step, and even on the hill if I couldn't get the TI to give me a sec.

I had a very similiar situation at just about her experience level. although one toggle would not release, it was not due to a step through, I was practicaly at sea level, and I had a fair amount of rear riser practice for some one with 250ish jumps. I landed it and walked away with no issues. I will say however that is was not only the practice with rear risers, but also with PLFs that saved my day. I hit pretty hard.

Although I know of at least one AFF-I from the old style certification course who should not be teaching our fine sport, and I am sure there are more, I still must agree with you on this point, 100%.

Please do not take a single comment out of context of the rest of my post. So did I, but I still have the training and responsibility to make the right choice in this situation. And although it does not sound that way by your response to my post, my opinion and yours seems to be identical in this situation.

kallend, you are one of the few on here that I almost always totaly agree with. Today, I will simply almost totaly agree with you. absolutely. And even taking that further, in time and with training I believe all skydivers should strive to make their EYES be their primary, and any other device should then be the back up. Again true, for if things are not identical they can be said to be diferent. However, a digital altimeter CAN fail in any way that an analog can, and then in many other ways as well. My conclusion: The alti-2 galaxy is the most reliable altimeter you can buy. The galaxy may not be as precise as some others on the market, but in terms of failure modes, its reliability is second only to a well trained set of eyes.

yes, and after one engine fails, the other could also. I know the situation is rare but it can and has happened before. jvair, I have no doubt that the choice made was made with a lot of thought and to the best judgement of those on board. I also understand that if it was your choice you are going to stand behind that choice, as you should in my opinion. However, this would never have been my choice. I am not leaving my student behind and unatended, it is just not going to happen. I would also be very cautious of who I left my student with. If the pilot changes his command to everyone out, is the Instructor on board going to have my student bail on his main before taking his own student out???? We use a dedicated radio Instructor on the ground who radios all our students in. I still pack a radio on each and every AFF jump as a back up. We also have our students wear the radio all the way through to AFF program, even though they normally do not need it half that long. With these back ups in place, I honestly believe my choice in your situation would have been to take my student with me. If not, then it would have been to stay with them, but never to leave them alone.

I have replaced kill lines, repaired briddles, replaced briddles, etc, all of which I would consider more than easy enough to warrent a repair over replacing

Everyone needs a purely mechanical analog altimeter in their gear bag. IMO, the alti-2 galaxy is the best one on the market. I also recommend you use this altimeter until you are comfortable with the FACT that anything digital, IS going to fail you at some time. When you are comfortable you can handle that situation when it happens, then buy what ever you like. With all that said, and knowing how hard I push analog to novice jumpers, I do prefer a digital read out altimeter myself, but I do adhere to my above comments.

This is also the only thing I could think of as well. The reserve cable should have enough slack to allow you to arch very hard with out popping the reserve pin. You are a tall guy and if you are in the habbit of "ARCH, Reach, Pull, ARCH" or something similiar, it is possible that your arch is actually pulling the reserve pin. If this is the case, you should be able to recreate the situation on the ground. Put the rig on, sinch all the legs straps down tight, and arch as hard as you can, see if the reserve fires. If not, well then I have now idea.

Some schools (and as I understand your home DZ does) use a Tandem progression where a number of working tandems are done where the student activates deployment of the main canopy before moving on to one AFF Instructor. So, whether the DZ in question uses a Tandem Instructional program like you went through, or if they are using straight AFF, ikon was correct to 'assume' that this was not the students very first jump, even if prior jumps may have been tandem rides. However, 1 jump, 7 jumps, or 17, I am not leaving MY student behind.

Short Answer, YES. Long Answer, I think we can all agree that no matter how much we discuss AC Emergencies, we can not cover every possible situation and therefore descions will have to be made on the fly at times. That said, I can not think of one possible situation where I would leave my student behind unless he was fighting to stay and the ground was getting close. Side note, Bryan Buechler and I once took a Level-1 out at 8 grand on and AC emergency. We were over the DZ and had PIC permision to pull at normal altitude and the student had a great L-1. There was a big laugh as I convinced the student that because he wanted to do L-2 that same day, we were going to get out early so we could get down quicker and get him back up sooner

Ok, I guess this is almost a direct thread hi-jack although not meant to be. It has been mentioned a few times here that coaches are expected to work for free. I would like know exactly what is meant by free. Our coaches have their slots covered plus $6. They can put the $6 bucks in their pocket, or pay a packer with it. I find most coaches to be very happy with this, and I still do coach jumps as often as I have time for this same pay as well. Is this online with what you call free, being that they really make no profit, OR, are you saying that they are expected to cover their own slots where you jump??

I guess this is the basis for my difference of opinion on a lot of coach related discussions, as there is no snicker following 'USPA Coach' at the DZ that I work at. I can honestly say the rating is respected there, and rightfully so as we do have some good coaches working there. I do still understand that this is not the case all the time and to a degree I understand why. There are definitely some guys that are in and out occasional at the DZ with coach ratings that do not work there regularly and that I do not want coaching my students. There are also plenty of TIs running around that I would prefer not to use their Coach ratings at all. (whole other topic and I am not trying to bring that up here, just my observation.) I was at another DZ once doing some RW when the "Head Instructor / S&TA / Pilot for this load" informed me that there was a A license required hop and pop going out and if I minded double checking the guys spot and gear, I said no problem, then he followed up with a statement to the point that the student had a coach with him, but you know......... I honestly didn't get it; if he has a coach, what is it you want me to do again? Until after I observed the coach at work. No gear check, no instruction or teaching, just "get out". Ok, now I understand why I was asked to help. But again, I will point out that this was not a 100 jump wonder coach, the guy had over a 1000, just no respect for the rating nor the job he was charged with doing. I guess the point to my rambling is, I do understand that there is a lack of respect for coaches out there, and rightfully so based on the actions of some. However, as I said up post, this is the fault of the Coach/Es, S&TAs, DZOs, and AFF/Is that allow this type of sub par instruction to take place. I think the system we have in place is pretty good and works well when implemented well, all the way down to the coach rating. I also do not believe that the 100 jump requirement is the problem for any all of this. I do not see that many coach rating holders with under 2 or 300 jumps anyway. The ones that I do see, seem to take the job much more serious than the 1000 jump coaches. At times this can make the lower numbered guy a better coach. JMO. If you think that the USPA Coach rating is a meaningless rating, I would charge you with the task of going out and being the best Coach there ever was and therefore raising some respect for the rating. If you hold a higher rating, show some respect for your coaches and demand a higher standard from them, that would help the system better than anything else you could do. (Again my opinion and not directed directly at you LloydDobbler)

There are a lot of very good points here. All of which may not be exactly online with my views, but very valid all the same. I do agree that 200 jumps (or more) would be a "better" requirement. I have however trained a couple of 100 jump wonders who made great coaches, they just require a bit more supervision. They are taught in my course to seek out, as well as accept this supervision. I have also had a candidate or two with 900+ jumps who was asked to come back later when more prepared. As with most things in skydiving, it is not all about the numbers, IMO. Back to the signing issue. I do agree that coaches should be able to sign more than they are, and at the same time think it imperative that they not be able to sign all the blocks on either card. I too trust the coaches at my DZ to do a good job, and I am continuously checking to make sure that happens. It does happen often though that I am signing off a check dive and stamping a card for someone who has received training at multiple DZs. In this case I do not know all the initials on the card and honestly it would make me feel better that it was an instructor that I don’t know, rather than a coach I don’t know, who had signed this guy off on his swoop to dock, etc. This one made me laugh. For the examiners who make a living doing such, I have no problem believing another big coach course will help there bottom line. However, for the work that most Coach Examiners put into a single course, well let’s just say we don’t do it for the money we are making. Good thread, lots of good points.

Anyone who thinks a coach rating is not instructional in nature is missing the whole point of the rating in the first place. YES, the coaches that work under my supervision make my job way easier. So much in fact that there is no way I could turn over the work load that I do with out them. Period and no more discussion needed on this from my point of view. As quoted before, a coach rating is the first Instructional rating of three. Just by the nature of things, an entry level is going to be easier to obtain than a more advanced level, no matter what subject we are speaking of. Unfortunately, that also means that there will be some that obtain the entry level with out truly deserving it. Some that just squeak by, and even more that after obtaining the entry level, decide that teaching is not for them and then decide not to pursue further. Why stop there, once we are all "I" rated, lets all just say we are all "I/E" competent. This way the day after we start teaching skydiving, we can turn right back around and start teaching others to teach skydiving. Yeah, that sounds smart It all comes down to the fact that we need levels of instructional ability and responsibility. Call them Coaches or Jump Masters, call them Course Directors or Examiners. It doesn’t really mater what you call them, as long as they are in place. There are plenty of entry level Instructional rating holders (Coaches) out there that do a great job assisting the Instructors, but have no where near the experience or ability to jump with first time jumpers. Obviously this is just one example of there limitations. Instructors make up the core of our Instructional rating hierarchy, but similar to coaches, there are still limitations. Most Instructors are not ready to train other Instructional rating holders. This is where the upper level rating (Examiner) comes in. The Examiner rating comes with the most responsibility, and rightfully so is the hardest rating to obtain. There is a ladder system even within the Examiner ratings, as a Coach/E is much easier to obtain than an I/E. If you look even closer, you will see that there are only 2 or 3 people in all of the USPA teaching the IERC (Instructor Examiner Rating Course). This is obviously the hardest level of Instruction to reach and completing the Instructional ladder. All of these ratings work together by utilizing the ability of each teacher, and yet not overloading, or placing too much responsibility on anyone who is not ready for it. Personally I think the ladder of ratings in the USPA has just enough steps, not needing any more, and at the same time unable to stand for any less. Some people still insist that our Coaches are the weak link in our instructional rating system. In actuality, the Examiners, DZOs, S&TAs, and Instructors are by far weaker than the coaches. These are the people who pass out coach ratings like candy, allow coaches to work outside of their limits, and fail to provide the proper supervision that our young INSTRUCTIONAL RATING HOLDERS need in order to perform their job to its fullest.

just a word of caution from some one who has had more large scraps and burns than I can count. After about the fourth day, neosporin and most other creams start doing more harm than good. Don't ask me to explain why, had a doctor explain it to me but it was over my head, but I do know it to be true. Get some 'neosporin' and 'courtazone 10' which is available pretty much everywhere neosporin is. Treat the scrap with one for three days then switch to the other for three days. keep switching back and fourth until healling is complete.

Not true. If you are using the 4 page A license card, which it sounds as if the original post is, then a coach may only sign the blocks marked with a "C", Pilots may only sign blocks marked with "P", riggers may only sign blocks marked with "R", and Instructors may sign any block on the card. If you are using the 2 page A license card, every block must be signed by an Instructor. An A license card is an application and can be denied if the above is not followed. However, as was stated above, having an Instructor co-sign 'should' be sufficient. As for the question of how does a coach do his job if he can not sign the card, I often wondered the same thing when I was only a coach. Now I am an AFF Instructor as well as a Coach Examiner. When a student and coach bring me a card to sign off blocks, I ask questions, mostly about the why of things. Why do you think you have to perform two swoop to docks to get an A license, etc etc. If they give me the right answers, I know my coach is doing a good job. It is a huge help in knowing that I actually supervising, even though I am not actively involved in the skydive. Some people think coaches are the weak link, personally I think unsupervised coaches and/OR Instructors who do not properly supervise coaches are the weak link. I have some great coaches who work under my supervision, but still I would not want them signing all blocks on A license applications and therefore reducing the amount of supervision they get.

Congradulations on your graduation. Nope, I do not do tandems, My cutaway was on the sunset load, so if you left early you would have missed it.

29 jumps and 30 canopy rides. Damn what a weekend.

Yeah, I understand the , but it worked out for him. The bag locked about half way to line stretch. The instructor grabed the lines with a quick yank that cleared the stow and deployment continued as expected. I was only videoing and it had my heart pumping just thinking of his hand in the lines.

your closest is going to be Crowley. They have recently changed hands so I am coping the email I recieved for you: Now, if you are looking for a turbine, come see us at Gold Coast. It is a bit of a drive but well worth it. I live in La, but make the drive to GC every weekend. GoldCoastSkydivers.com