marks2065

being a ti is different from being a affi . i didn't get an aff rating because i didn't feel my skills were good enough. but i have seen people pass that were not as good as me. i have also seen people fail the old course 2 or 3 times then take the new course and pass easily. i have seen some of the differences between the courses and thought they made it easier. this happened at the same time everyone was crying for more aff instructors. this is my observation. i am not aff nor have i taken the course but if someone else that is an aff instructor under the old course could tell me if what i see is right i would apreciate it

if 7 years was the sentence i think uspa needs to get hit upside the head. i didn't like what happened and spoke my peace on that but now we need to talk about what is good for a disiplinary action. how can you have a student die and serve less time? that's like giving a murderer a speeding ticket and a speeder a life sentance.( just my thoughts ) not to mention it should be only directed to the ti rating. he didn't do anything wrong with an aff, flying a plane or jumping by himself so those areas should be excluded

my biggest was about 285 - gives you a fast fall and good swoop but i don't think it was worth the thirty dollars after i thought about it - btw short TI's be carefull when the student is taller - i once saw a student ( 1 foot taller than the TI ) stand up and walk right out the door with the instructor hanging on his back. so make sure all attachments are good before the door opens

i agree the s&ta should have stopped it but when the S&TA , TI, dzo , video, and aff instructor are the same person who polices this person. if the dzo and S&TA are the same person the conflict of interest may require some aditional guidance. maybe uspa and/or strong/ vector/ racer ect need to look a little closer at these dz's. even if the DZO and S&TA are different people what can one do to change the mind of a dzo that thinks he/she is correct. i know that most of the uspa board members are jumpers so why don't they visit a few dz's during the jump season and fill out an evaluation sheet on what they see. my shop (although i own it ) is secretly evaluated several times a year buy a couple of the companies i do buisness with and they send me a rating acording to what is seen and done. this sounds far better than what has tanspired lately

this has been a long thread with alot of good ideas and thoughts towards safety but nobody has found a good solution. as far as i know nobody has come out to csc to address any issues. when something happens like this why doesn't anyone from uspa or strong come out and see the operation of the dz ? better yet why doesn't somebody just visit any dz and just observe the operation dz ? the faa does. maybe if board members visited a few dz's here and there they could see issues like this, make recommendations to the dz owner, have these problems go away before all this crap ever gets started.( before the FAA could get involved) bad calls were made by alot o people here, my dz lost 2 s&ta's, jacko lost his rating (meal ticket) all because somebody didn't stop to question these activities before 20 plus videos got out. we need to find a way to better police ourselves. we need to ask ouselves what if ? what if the ti is doing this and the student does that what could happen ? skydiving has taken some big hits the last couple years and we need to find a way to turn it around. lets start finding ideas to make our sport safer and head off problems before the s&ta's loose their ratings, before the ti looses his rating , before another student dies.

i think the dzo's forget that the experienced jumpers do drop a lot of money - maybe not as profitable as a tandem but i know i drop a couple thousand each year at my dz and have also brought in over 50 tandems in 13 years - they need to remember that these tandems went with me and every experienced jumper will bring in tandems. i think that a dzo should treat the customers weather new or old better and should always find time to talk to any customer

i like the thought of having at least 1 hookup on a tandem student before door open if they are near the door - to many times i saw students sitting in the plane with the door open and nothing between them and the door. i always sat in front of the student or kept their seat belt on until the door closed or hook up - i have had a couple bumpy rides that could easily cause anyone to fall if standing. i have even seen a jumper fall out of an otter at 3000 feet from a bumpy ride with a questionable pilot

dive out exit or head up doesn't make a difference - what i found was a lazy exit caused most of any problems i had - my exits greatly improoved when i took charge of the exit and not let the student's body position make the exit - make your legs put you out in the wind were you want to be

i don't want to see the dz ripped apart i want to see it safe. and i think that anyone who has a safety issue should be heard and the problem addressed. there is alot of unsafe things that go on at alot of dz's that i have been to. i have never been unsafe with a student and followed all guidelines set up by uspa and strong when doing tandems. as far as my solo jumps i haven't been in an unsafe position while jumping since my early days of jumping when andre , the dzo at the time in june of 98, put me staight on those issues. and if you were a currant jumper at csc you would know that . as i said earlier that i have done some things in the past that were stupid but when confronted by some of the dz staff and older jumpers i changed my ways. something that is badly missed and needed at csc again

there are many dangers in this sport that a student will never know or understand. if you want to test new concepts or ideas do it on yourself or an experienced skydiver with his concent. a student should never be used for this. i know that none of the students were told that this stuff was dangerous nor would they understand if they were told. when strong gives his ok that this is safe and alowed i will accept it - until then i think the dzo and the s&ta should end it. i don't think the ti or the dzo are qualified to change or test new ideas that don't fit into the guidelines set up by strong or uspa unless they are guided by them. we have all done stupid things over the years but when relized most of us correct the problem. i hope the people involved see what is happening and quickly revert back to the propper guidelines. a few years back an issue with the drouge deploying on exit wrapping around the student or ti stopped us from doing unstable exits. i hope that we don't have an incedent before this practiced is stopped

i jump at the dz in question and the discussions going on at th dz are very indiferent on if this is good or bad. i don't belive this is a good idea but all i can do is express my opinion. i started jumping in 93 at hinckleyand have always prided ourselves on our safety . in the past anyone could see a safety issue and adress it but we don't have that anymore. our comments are heard but rarely resolved anymore. most of the curant jumpers watch and shake their heads when they see some of the things we see on student jumps. i hope this is resolved quickley and safely so we can again say i want to bring my friend here to have a first jump