• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Community Reputation

0 Neutral


  • Main Canopy Size
  • Reserve Canopy Size
  • AAD

Jump Profile

  • Home DZ
    Skydive City, Skydive Sebastian and Skydive Deland
  • License
  • License Number
  • Licensing Organization
  • Number of Jumps
  • Years in Sport
  • First Choice Discipline
  • Second Choice Discipline

Ratings and Rigging

  • AFF
  • Tandem
    Instructor Examiner
  • USPA Coach
  • Pro Rating
  • Rigging Back
    Senior Rigger
  1. I cant say I blame you brother. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  2. It's a great question for sure. I wrote an article about it a few years ago for Blue Skies Mag titled: "It cost how much?" that explained the basics behind the costs of such a trip. By comparison as of late, I believe that both the North Pole and (organized) South Pole expeditions were on par with this cost, so it's not unheard of for these remote location trips to be so expensive. The primary issue with any expedition program like this is the need to set up a fully functioning drop zone in a remote location. We typically ferry equipment and staff from around the world to Kathmandu, which is quite costly. Then when everything arrives it has to be transferred again into the Himalaya into one of the most remote locations on earth. In all the years we have been doing this, my favorite quote came from Bill Booth: "The Himalaya is the land that the wheel forgot." He was basically saying that without roads, everything had to be walked in or flown into the region. Not that Yak rentals are very expensive.....but Eurocopter tac time/transport costs can be quite high in a location such as this, all of which ends up being reflected in our cost structure. So, the short answer is simply to say that to move a fully functioning DZ into the Himalaya is really really really really expensive.
  3. Thank you for sharing this incident. Based on the pictures that you have posted, specifically the one I am reattaching here, this incident most likely was caused during the closing of the container. if you look at where the golf ball is in your picture (just above the risers). When the packer brought the bagged canopy over the container, and placed it down to go tuck the risers into the side of the container and close the riser covers, the loose line, between the left riser and last stow, was on the ground around the blue golf ball. When the bag was then placed in the main pack tray, one of the excess lines wrapped around the blue golf ball/cable housing, and the main pack tray was closed in this configuration. With the flaps closed, it would be hard to see a single line wrapped around the cable housing, but that is 99.9% what happened. When you deployed, the wrapped line was caught around the housing and it impeded the deployment long enough for the bridle attachment to rip free. (Probably also a warn attachment as stated above due to maintenance.). And the resulting deployment issues you described occurred. That is why you see the golfball where it is up in the suspension lines, just above the riser, which is the same place it would have been when on the on the ground during the packing process that I described. This anomaly in packing is incredibly incredibly rare, but it can happen, usually during a quick turn to get rigs packed. Hope that helps to understand what most likely occurred. Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan
  4. Great question. I started with our examiner pool, as they are a direct link to both our new instructors that they train and the current instructors that work beside them. There is a new manual (95% completed) that should be out shortly, that will be updated with all of the current items pertaining to tandem. I have a few other projects that I am working on to tie the instructor population and the manufacturer together better for information dissemination. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  5. It's a listed procedure that we train people to follow. Your question is about semantics. Whether it's a rule, a suggestion, a recommendation, a regulation, or whatever. It is a procedure that UPT is asking our examiners to promote in the field with our current and future TIs. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  6. Hi Mike, Despite reason and logic presented, there will always be a small population of people incapable of following the rules, small ones and/or big ones. That's the ego side of what we do, there will always be someone, or some group that thinks the rules don't apply to them, or that they are better than the masses based on jump numbers. Can't change that, that's life. The reality is, despite a small fraction of our population, the majority of the tandem industry is comprised of professionals that want to do the right things, and in most cases, they just need to be educated, or in this instance, re-educated on these rules and regs. But to be clear, UPT (or any manufacturer) is not in the role of "enforcer". At this professional level, there shouldn't be a need for enforcers. Be that as it may, USPA BSRs are set up to provide a basic foundation of rules and regs that are meant to be enforceable and punitive if broken. Does that process work in it's entirety? Of course not, but it does work. At the end of the day, if any number of our tandem instructors steps up to and abides by a rule or reg intended to improve safety and reduce incidents, then we are better off for it. Just because a few people or groups refuse to comply, that doesnt mean we are going to stop promoting safety across the board. I'll close by saying that Ted Strong once told me: "You may not always agree or understand the rules and regs that I have tried to impart on my instructors. If you trust me and do what I ask of you, you will have an amazing career in this sport." Looking back on my tandem career, I'd tend to agree with him. My job is not to be a "canopy cop" or an enforcer. My job is to be an educator. I educate people on the best practices that will keep them safe. Most will listen and abide my the rules and regs, creating a safer tandem industry. Some won't. It's really that simple. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  7. Erika is correct, we (UPT) have been meeting with our examiners around the globe to emphasize a number of procedural items in an effort improve safety in the industry. One item being the requirement to reattach the side connectors to the instructor harness after opening, loosening them and reattaching. There are several reasons for it: - In the event of a breakaway due to canopy collision, post deployment, if the side connectors are not reattached, the student's legs will come forward ("up") as the instructor falls belly to earth, creating a drastically increased chance of unstable reserve deployment. (For anyone saying "I could never get into a canopy collision after deployment, it can happen. If you have a videographer get out after you and they are flying through your pattern to get back, the chance will always exist. Or, unfortunately, tandem instructors that ignore the "no tandem CReW" rule, risk collisions every time the bump end cells. And yes, tandems have cutaway from unintended CReW wraps flying to close together.) - As stated above, landing injuries, of any magnitude, are increased if the tandem pair is not connected at the side laterals. The instructor, and the passenger run a greater risk of injury. - For just leaving the side connectors dangling, that can create a bad day, the possibility that a dangling side connector can snag a toggle on a deep toggle turn. Its happened multiple times. At the end of the day, there are those that will argue that "in high winds, we need to be able to unhook quickly". Which is simply not true. The extra half a second it takes to unhook the side laterals in higher winds is simply a matter of proper technique, or better yet, accuracy, landing in front of catchers. If winds are so high that an instructor has only a micro second to unclip upper hooks because they couldnt land in front of their catcher and the winds are so high they only have a fraction of a second, then maybe the winds are just a tad bit above that persons performance envelope. The other argument, and this is an important the argument "Ive been doing this for thousands of jumps and never had a problem." The false premise there is that most problems only surface on the level of 1 in thousands, in tandem skydiving. You can get away with something 3000 times, but it only takes one instance of everything going wrong around you to create an incident, and in this case, an incident that is easily avoidable by following a quick, simple rule. In the end though, the reason for this, and a lot of the implementations that we are seeing across the board in the tandem industry are simply an effort to reduce incidents. There is nothing worse than investigating an incident that has repeated itself. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  8. I think AdD has made a good point on what can ultimately be taken away from this. At that, I'm going to lock the thread, the points have been made. If new information comes up, PM me and I will reopen the thread. Thanks, Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan
  9. Agreed. But they didn't happen overnight, they evolved over time as the practice of flying tandem video began to present danger areas and skill short comings. All I'm saying here is that the practice is too new to really understand any statistical/repeatable short comings. Depends on the context of the jump being made. For example, in certain parts of the world, it is entirely a "passenger" experience. In other areas it is used for training in a "student" oriented environment. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  10. This is certainly an interesting question. Procedurally, there is not a written policy for or against the use of handcams being worn by the students from our side of things (UUPT). We have provided our tandem examiners (and USPA) a document with specific requirements and processes for use of a handcam by a tandem instructor, but the idea of a student/passenger wearing the camera, is relatively new, so we do not have any formal guidance in that regard. If some is choosing to place a camera on their student/passenger, then the most appropriate statement to that effect however would be that: "The student should be properly trained to perform their student functions and tasks on the skydive (i.e., exit, free fall, landing, etc) and that if a camera is added to the student, it's addition should not be able effect the student/passenger's ability to perform these functions and tasks." With that said, I would say we are not for or against it, rather we remain neutral on the topic at this point. A distracted tandem instructor is equally as much as a concern as a distracted tandem student/passenger, so in either realm, the instructor or student/passenger should be properly trained to reduce the possibility of distraction by adding a camera. Hope that helps, Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan
  11. Hi Amyr I'm not sure which tandem system you are considering earning a rating on, but if it's Vector or Sigma, then the answer is unfortunately, no, you cannot jump a tandem rig solo unless your attending and participating in a course. To attend the course, you would need to achieve the 3 years in sport, 500 jumps, 50 jumps within the last year (currency) and have a valid Class III medical. Hope that helps clarify things. I can't speak for other manufacturers, but I would suggest contacting them directly if you have any questions, I know most of them and they are happy to answer these types of questions. Also, connect with Jen Sharp at Skydive Kansas, she runs a program called Female Skydiving Instructors and can probably answer your questions better than anyone as she is both a TI and a TE. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  12. Let's get back on topic here. Thanks, Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan
  13. The way you just did. When I remove a post, I typically message the person directly to let them know why. You do not have messages on, so I could not communicate that to you, hence the one sided process. Chuck's question was valid, your (above) response is valid, now let's keep back to the question of travel visa workers. Namaste, Tom Noonan
  14. Let's keep this thread about the original question, travel visa workers. Thanks everyone, Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan
  15. I'm going to lock this thread and leave it up as we have a couple of informative posts in here, but lets keep the discussion going in the original thread posted about the new BSRs. Tom Namaste, Tom Noonan