utahsteve1

Look at aspects regarding learning how to fly an airplane. There is a clear, defined progression. Look at beginner CFI's. you CAN'T(not shouldn't) go directly from freshly minted CFI in a 152, to multi engine instrument instructor in a week. The reasons and dangers should be obvious. What's the difference when a freshly minted coach can go from not being allowed to be with or touch an AFF student in the air, but can go and get a rating involving the most complex gear the sport has, the most complex environment an instructor will be subjected to; the whole situation needing a seasoned professional to get it right over and over and over... Seasoning and aspiration is what develops respect in any sport. Whoever got rid of AFF JM's was an idiot for one reason. It was the only way to take a freshly minted JM and put him/her in the air with a AFF I and begin really teaching them what's what in the real world. They had to develop respect. You want to be a captain of a commercial passenger aircraft? Aspire to it and EARN IT. You want to be a Tandem Master? Aspire to it and EARN IT. The system we have evolved in this sport(for whatever reason) has not developed this type of progression and I feel has undermined it. I'm really happy with the idea of the coach program. Beats the shit out of BIC, or nothing to AFF JM(which is where I came from in '87). The rest of what we have developed is garbage and like it or not, aware or not, we are reaping what we have sown; cows are coming home... Finally, here's your real problem, one I have been alluding to; If a DZO or Manager of whatever size DZ doesn't like what a TI/E or S&TA is doing regarding enforcement or discipline, all they have to do is uninvite(Get off my DZ) the enforcer/whistle blower with NO real ramifications. Try doing that to the FAA guy doing a ramp check. Right. We fear the FAA because of what they CAN do, not WHAT they do. Who is going to set the standards and enforce the standards when the standard bearer can be told to fuck off with impunity? Ya ever wonder why people get shit on? Simple; shit rolls downhill. Why? Gravity, of course. in order for shit to roll downhill under the force of gravity it must start at the top. Good shit rolls downhill and bad shit rolls downhill. There is a of bad shit at the top we are atoning for down here it seems... Good Luck waiting and hoping for an idiot system to reach a collective epiphany... Like I said, "'nuff said" HAPPY NEW YEAR Y'ALL!!!! Utah

It's all about getting and proving experience. It's all about having to learn and earn respect. It's all about raising the bar. It's all about REALLY understanding what you are asking yourself to do. The general public deserves no less; and generally, tandem is their first experience in the sport. TM's should aspire to be the best; and shut down if they are not...(how's that for Dudley Do right). Once again, unfortunately there are a lot of skydivers with TM ratings; precious few Tandem MASTERS... 'nuff said... Utah

Martini Time; it's all downhill from here... Utah

I have been... As you can tell, I do not want nor am I getting paid to be a politician... I've been watching this shit regarding tandem go downhill for a long time. Problem is people at the top act as if a TM doing a first jump passenger has anything to do with being an instructor. A first jump tandem is an introductory flight. A demo. A very lucrative demo. Tandem is a completely different animal than any other inductive/instructive situation. Whether SL, IAD, AFF, AFP, IAF, KMAss, MFU, or any other type of program, it's all the same; solo gear, self-responsibility. I have said this before; there should be no TI or TI/E rating. It confuses the situation. There should be Tandem Masters and Tandem Master/Examiners. To get to TM you must do Coach for a season and at least 50 jumps, then AFF for a season( could be same season) for at least 50 jumps, then qualify for TM etc. There should be only 1 USPA I/E rating covering everything (and you have to achieve everything to get it). There should be a coach rating, combined SL/IAD rating, AFFJM, AFFI. We have made this more complicated and convoluted than going to get your private pilots license. We have NO real authority to make anybody do anything. The FAA does. Try as they might the USPA has the same real authority as AAA. You don't have to join to drive... Tandem is too dangerous and too deadly to be dumbed down like it is. Just listen to the storys and watch the videos. Then look for the results. No crack down, no cracked heads. blah, blah ,blah... just a lot of yahoos going 'fuck you tryin' to get in the way of MY fun... (while we kill and maim unnecessarily, in my opinion and experience) Utah

This is some correspondence regarding what I have seen the last 22 years of doing tandems. This also went to the USPA (read bottom up) All a TM has to do is get a rating from UPT once. From then on UPT has nothing to do with them. Scenario: 5 years after getting the rating from UPT and USPA, whose guidelines is he going to follow? The path of least resistance and let's him/her getaway with the most. It's just natural... As an UPT I/E there's not jack shit I can do with a TM following USPA guidelines such as deciding to jump with a coach with 200 jumps total When UPT says 500 min... That's just one example of many. From: [email protected] Date: September 29, 2009 9:13:39 AM EDT To: "Mark Procos" Subject: RE: USPA/UPT Tandem minimums Thanks for getting back to me, Mark. This dumbing down and graying of the requirements for tandem masters is not healthy for the general public(our passengers). I could not find anywhere in the SIM or IRM any words that states that a USPA TI must follow the Manufacturers minimums. This just helps to degrade the respect that tandem requires. It seems strange to me that it took 25 years to drop 2 passengers, 15 years to get into ADD firings into deploying mains, etc. The last couple of years, I've been amazed at the number of young divers with the perception that the skill set required to be a TM is less than that of an AFF I. They(through ignorance) profess to me that they want the TM rating first while they generate the skills and confidence to take on the AFF rating! In all my years, I've had not heard anything like this until recently. Most of us understand the progression of the Manufacturers desire to distance themselves from the day-to-day regulation of TM's. However, old guard folks like me have warned of the degradation potential in this. Now it is in writing. I would like to suggest a public written statement by the manufacturers stating the absolute requirement to follow manufacturers standards. We need this to solidify the field. As you said "go figure". Well, I am and I do not like what I'm seeing... Steve Webb 914-588-0190 [email protected] -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: USPA/UPT Tandem minimums From: Mark Procos Date: Mon, September 28, 2009 11:58 am To: Webb Steven R. Howdy Steve Yes, USPA is misguided in certain areas including this one. They also tell us the minimum age is 16. Go figure. That said uspa only places a minimum standard and the TI has to follow the guidelines laid out by the manufacturer. That is why a person has to go through a manufacturers course first. Mark On 9/25/09 8:53 PM, "Webb Steven R." wrote: Hi Marks... Mark K, the page in the IRM concerning minimums is 171. Mark P., I emailed Mark K. earlier with this discrepancy. I also copied to Mark K some text messaging between Kip and me. All I've got to say is 'this is bullshit, fire me". I watched Buddy go in at Sandwich in '88, the 3rd Tandem double fatality and test jumped his gear when it came back from RWS with blood stains on the main lift web. The guy that hit him had almost 200 jumps. This 300 jump USPA min is disrespectful to people who paid the price for our advancement. If you read the IRM closely, It says Coach OR 300 jumps. You can get a Coach rating with a 100 goddamn skydives!!! Excuse the fact that I've had a martini, but WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON HERE... Sorry I'm such an asshole, Steve Webb 914-588-0190 [email protected] Utah

We are reaping what we've sowed. Shame on us collectively for being such dumb fuckin' yahoos. I am a blond from Kentucky, a dumb ass truckdriving biker. And y'all manage to lower the bar to the point that even a dumb ass like me, who is dumb as a box of rocks with the grades to prove it, has to stand up and say 'are ya finally ready to get your shit together and get this right? Ya dumb fucks? What are ya waiting for, the FAA? Ya dumb fucks...' Utah

..."The ugly truth is, that an individual fucked up and nobody caught it. Absofuckinglutely! So who is to blame for not catching it? My point exactly. responsibility is shared amongst MANY people on the DZ, from the DZO, to the people who trained her, to the TI that geared her up, to the TI himself, the cameraperson, the other TI's on that load, and for that matter, even the other skydivers on that load for not speaking up. No one gets out of an airplane with a tandem harness that looks like hers did....UNLESS that method of putting a tandem harness on a student was 'normal' and had been seen many times before; accepted in the 'culture' on the Dropzone as the way things were done." There are a lot of 'skydivers' with Tandem ratings. Very few Tandem Masters. We(skydivers) are naturally on the fringe of aviation as a whole and our penchant to be yahoos is evident. I/we have been saying for years that the attitude that must be created during the training of TM's is that when you go from an AFF jump to a Tandem jump, your attitude needs to change from 'I am a skydiver with an instructor rating' to 'I am a professional pilot in command of a commercial passenger flight'. And act accordingly. That is why Tandem must be the LAST rating available, period. With the manufacturers giving it up to the uspa and the uspa having a lot in common with AAA when it comes to regulatory strength, these results are to be expected. Utah

This dumbing down of the system of requirements for instructors was what some of us were bitching about, when did RWS drop the AFF minimum, over 15 years ago? Due to strongs market pressure and lower bar? It took us over 20 years, then bam, 2 drops. 15 years then bam, cypres firings. I/we warned about this potential. Now we've got kids with coach saying they want to get the tandem rating 1st because they want to build their skills to get the AFF rating and make money at the same time. And the no-teeth regulations say OK! Are you seeing these tandem videos? The uspa has about as much regulatory strength as AAA. I've been saying to my candidates for years; 'you try hard enough, you can really fuck this up'. I used to chalk up a lot of the early fatalities to ignorance and evolution. Now our only excuse is stupidity. Now I'm scared... If strong has to go down to get the tandem bar raised to where it was in the past or even higher, don't let the screen door hit 'em in the ass.... Utah

As long as everything else physiologically is normal, the harnessing and dive with a sliding landing should be nominal. Just make sure you design the exit facing the wind (no back to wind tailgate exits, for example) to insure the wind doesn't catch the passenger leg straps and move them down. You could, depending on the length of the legs, bind the legs together with tape (at the crotch and the ends) I have done it both ways with good results. Utah

"If you can't deal with all of this then there is no future" FOR YOU "in tandems." word, word, word, brah... go figure........ Utah

I've done tandem jumps with 20+ jumpers in the air with me. It is 100% my responsibility to know and vet each skydiver in my airspace. It is also 100% my responsibility to know where the drogue will end up when I place it. If a videographer or skydiver gets hit with a drogue, it is not his fault. It is the TM's fault, 100%. If, after I place the drogue, the videographer or skydiver in my airspace fly's into it, then it his fault, 100% If you get hit with a drogue because the TM dumped it right out the door, contact the Tandem I/E and report it. It is one of the primary issues concerning UPT in the I/E manual. I have grounded people in the past for re-training concerning this issue. It is no joke. Steveorino's got it 100% right... (this is from another thread) Whens the last time y'all considered the correct procedure for a skydiver entangled in your drogue? How's this sound? Say it looks like he's tied up real good. There is no potential for a drogue release. This is a reserve only situation. You must immediately upon determining that he is not going to untangle, disconnect the RSL and cutaway. This move sets you and your passenger up for future clean air. Next, try to cut the drogue bridle with the hook knife to free you from the entangled skydiver. Why? Because I bet he would much rather just have to deal with a bridle and drogue vs. drogue, bridle, d-bag, main, suspension lines, risers, I mean cut the guy some slack (bad pun) IF YOU'VE GOT THE TIME. Then move to clean air and deploy the reserve only. The alternative is if you can't for some reason cut the drogue bridle, you have to dump your main into the poor guy, fall away, move to clean air and deploy the reserve(don't look back). Now let's say that just after you chop and disconnect the RSL, the SOB manages to clear himself and you're back to standard drogue fall. I personally am going to deploy the main, fall away, get clean air and deploy the reserve. I would just as soon not deploy into a drogue if I don't have to(although it appears to be relatively safe to do so). Utah

Knew that would get a rise... Please, instead of dogma, add to the conversation by offering a real world suggestion as to why some have more locks than others. I know on all the rigs I've owned, a single band works fine and so does 2(the amount of usable band out of the grommet is the same, just less tension). I'm asking for real world input about these locks. Is high tension on the primary 2 stows combined with too big a stow, a viable reason we're seeing more locks? Are the bands too strong, have they changed? Tube stows used to be wrong, too. Look what comes with the rigs now. Many years ago(late 80's early 90's) I went on a personal crusade against the long bands. They were showing up on most of the rigs where I jumped. I'd cut 'em off and get into all kinds of fights. So I took a different look and approach. I went down to RWS and had Lucky And Bobby build me 2 tandem d-bags with the 4 grommet flap extended 2" and I put them in my 2 rigs. The results were more efficient (easier) locking stows, locking stow band breakage reduced by at least 2/3 due to reduced tension. I reported the results and let it go. Never saw another set of bags like 'em. Packers loved 'em. Depending on all of the different variables when putting a 370, 340, 384, 421 in the bag, sometimes it can be a bitch at the 2 primary locking stows and so I understand using the longer band method. I do not condone it or teach it, but accept the reality of it. If a rig I jump has that configuration, I pack it. If it's a single, I pack it. Real World. I do know that higher than necessary tension at the stows can create lots of problems(breakage of the locking stows prior to extraction from the container is one that comes to mind). Should we make tandem tube stows at the grommets mandatory and solve it for good? (I'm sure that'll get a rise, can't stop stirrin'...) Utah

I do know some TM's jumping UPT(me included) and packers use 2 tandem bands put together to make 1 longer band. This is done to make it easier to do the first 2 locking stows. These first 2 stows are very tight due to the size of the canopy and bag configuation. Using a single band and excessive bite size on the first 2 stows say 3 or more inches, may be a contributing factor. I've never come close to a bag lock maybe because of less tension on the primary stows and I never stow more than 1 1/2" interior. The 2 high speed mals I've had were slider streamers on old 421's, which is a whole different subject. Utah

Ah, Yoda Bob... Love your last sentence, I thought I was the only one... Utah

Tandem is not for everyone, which is hard to swallow for some considering the earning potential. It is easy to say that the first thought should not be about the money, but come on... All I can say at my experience level is that I am convinced there is no 'boogey man' and that if you are attracted to a certain discipline, pursue it until it doesn't make sense and then suck it up and move on. The idea is not to allow yourself to get into something that is over your head, but at the same time don't avoid it until you can make an informed decision. Tandem is intense not because of the complexity of the gear but the fact that you are dealing with the general public, start to finish, completely relying on your skill. It is a different 'ballgame' Utah