TomNoonan

As Doug said, its not uncommon. Whether its as an EIN or an LLC, or a corporation, the pros and cons vary from state to state. I am not a lawyer, but if you have assets that you would like to protect in the event of an injury based lawsuit, you may want to investigate the differences between working under an EIN, LLC or Corporation. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi We are using TP-400 and Sigma II -370 tandem mains in the Himalaya. To date tandem landings have been limited to 12.350ft MSL. As we go to the higher DZs, 15,000ft, 16,900ft and 17192ft MSL, those have been sport (solo) landings so far. We have an excellent drop zone at 15,000ft, but due to the weather complexities and size of the dz up there, we need next to perfect conditions for tandem landings at 15k. Each year we plan it, but always exercise patience. For example last year the wind conditions were perfect, but we had a fresh snow cover to contend with so we could not identify the ruts and rocks in the grounds visually, so we called off the jump. Hope that info helps. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Greetings everyone, We are a few weeks out from the next UPT Tandem Examiner standardization meeting and I just wanted to confirm for anyone that has not responded back that the dates are confirmed for June 25th, 26th, (Wed, Thurs). We still have Friday the 27th slotted for anyone that cant make the 25th, but to date 100% of the respondents are on for 25/26. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Just a quick recap, the UPT Tandem Examiner standardization meeting was a great success. We had 26 people in attendance for a two day meeting in Bad Tolz, Germany. Thank you to everyone that attended and participated. Next meeting is at Chicagoland Skydiving Center (CSC) in Rochelle, IL this month. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Greetings one and all, For the last few years I was trying to figure out a way to share the Everest Skydive experience with my skydiving friends that didn't have the large amount of $$ to be able to jump in the eastern Himalaya, aka, the Everest region. In lieu of that, last year, I invited some friends to trek with me to Everest Base Camp at the conclusion of Everest Skydive for a much much less expensive trip, so that they could at least see Everest Skydive the drop zone and operation, see Mount Everest with their own eyes, and go to Everest Base Camp. Then when we were done, instead of walking all the way out, we "borrowed" our Everest Skydive Eurostar, and flew it to Pame, Pokhara, a lake side village in the western Himalaya and made some helicopter skydives beside the Ann Purna range of the Nepali Himalaya. It wasn't a boogie per say, just a group of skydivers that wanted to have some fun and skydive in a remote, exotic location. 100% success all around, so our event organizers in Nepal have green lighted a return to Pokhara again for more skydives including a new drop zone at 11,500ft MSL in a remote village called Manang. (Wikipedia Manang and you will understand the term "remote"...lol) Anyways, we're at it again, Nov 4th-Nov 20th, if anyone is interested in learning more about it, check out the FB event page here: https://www.facebook.com/events/721172624612009/?notif_t=plan_user_joined And video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbtPi03o_zc Email me at: [email protected] if you have any questions or would like more info. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

We are now only a few days away from the EU IE standardization meeting. Just wanted to reach out one last time to anyone that hasn't been in touch with myself of Frank Carreras that is planning to attend the meeting. [email protected] or [email protected] Shoot one of us an email and let us know. Hotels are booking up fast and we have a large number of people attending, its going to be a great meeting for sure. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Greetings to all of our central US UPT Tandem Examiners, I have just sent out an email to our list of central US Tandem Examiners (and bordering states) regarding the upcoming UPT Tandem Examiner Standardization meeting that is being held in Rochelle, IL on June 26th, 27th, 2014. Unfortunately, like the EU meeting email I sent, quite a few emails have bounced back as undeliverable, and while I have been able to connect with many of you via Facebook, if you are an examiner in the central US or central Canada or any surrounding states and you have not received my email, please email me at: [email protected]. We are also encouraging DZOs and S&TAs that are involved in overseeing their tandem operations to join us. Any questions, of course email me and I will get back to you asap. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

I just picked up a Deepseed soft helmet from Chuting Star for my front rides on tandem courses and I love it. Noticeable upgrade from the traditional leather frappe hat with the lining. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

It appears that the appropriate direction to find the answer has been provided, so at this point I am going to lock the thread unless there is some compelling reason to unlock it. If there is, send me a message and I will reopen it. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Your question is clear, but you are asking your question in the wrong place, directing it to the wrong audience. No one on this website (that I am aware of) works for the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Aeronautics Division. For specific Massachusetts rules and regs: Contact MassDOT Aero. They have a website, an email address and a phone #. I communicate with them regularly through all three mediums. For national rules and regs as they pertain to USPA Group Member DZs, contact USPA. Same thing: They have a website, email and phone #. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

An often missed benefit of a helmet, especially the ones with a good amount of padding inside is that they do a tremendous job at muffling the sound of the engine. Turbine's are one thing, but when you spend 30-40 minutes of every hour on a busy day sitting in a noisy piston Cessna, day after day, month after month, year after year, it can take its toll on your hearing. Ear plugs do a good job, but its a noticeable difference with the helmet. Best noise reduction is both, but it can also be hard to hear the student if you have ear plugs in and a helmet on. Just my .02 on Cessnas and helmets. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Greetings to all of our UPT Tandem Examiners overseas, I have been sending out emails to our list of overseas UPT Tandem Examiners regarding the upcoming UPT Tandem Examiner Standardization meeting that is being held in Munich, Germany on May 15th and May 16th. Unfortunately quite a few emails have bounced back as undeliverable, and while I have been able to connect with many of you via Facebook, if you are an examiner in Europe or any surrounding country and you have not received my email, please email me at: [email protected]. We are also encouraging the national federation safety officers that are involved in overseeing federation tandem ratings to join us as well. Any questions, of course email me and I will get back to you asap. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

I applaud Skygod, Kolla, Lara and the rest of the team over at BSM for taking the initiative to dedicating a month to headlining their website with safety related articles across the spectrum of skydiving disciplines and gear. Check it out and if you haven't run your Safety Day yet, scroll through their articles and see what you can use to bring to your DZ. www.blueskiesmag.com Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

General comment, not directed at anyone in particular: If you are conducting a UPT Vector/Sigma tandem course, the candidate is required to obtain the current/valid medical prior to making any jumps on the Vector/Sigma tandem system, even as a solo jumper in the course. On page two of form 05553 "Tandem Instructor Certification Form" it states that the candidate needs to possess the required pre-quals including the class III when making application for the training, not the rating. The USPA IRM is worded in a way that says the candidate must possess the class III to earn the rating rather than to attend the course, but the intent is the same, the candidate is intended to have the medical before the course starts. The reason is simple. Every so often a person fails a medical. Sometimes for foreseen reasons, some times for unforeseen reasons. Either way, when an examiner that trains someone to make tandem jumps without a valid medical for the candidate, they risk that the candidate can (and it has happened multiple times already) then fail the medical, but go on to misrepresent that they have a rating, based on having attended the course. There has even been one tandem fatality on a tandem course jump years ago with a highly skilled tandem examiner, so to say that "they're with me, nothing is going to happen" is not an absolute either. One of the worst things that could happen to tandem in this day an age is a tandem instructor candidate involved in a fatal tandem training jump incident without possessing the necessary documentation, in this case, a valid medical, to be authorized to be making that training jump. If anyone, instructor or examiner, has any questions about the specifics of medicals as they pertain to UPT, please feel free to contact me at [email protected]. If its for Strong of JS, contact their tandem administrators with certification questions. And of course USPA's Director of Safety and Training is also available for consultation on any tandem system trained under USPA. As an FAA rep once told a rigging class I was in 12 years ago: "If you ask us before the mistake is made, we can help correct it. If your talking to us after an accident happens, our hands are tied." I am attaching the verbiage of the UPT form to this post. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi guys, Yes, anyone that wants information on the UPT Sigma examiner course can email me at [email protected] or Jay Stokes at [email protected]. I came on board with UPT just after the first of the year to work on the tandem training program and I am really excited about the energy that is being focused on all things tandem at 1645 Lexington Ave. This is going to be a busy year with tandems and I'm looking forward to working with all of the Vector/Sigma instructors and examiners out there. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

How about working as a rigger full time at one of Europe's busier rigging lofts? Would he be more likely to see things like that there? Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Hi John! Can you edit me from [email protected] to [email protected]? Thanks Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

While what scrub wrote is a little cryptic, I think I can help shed light on the perceived issue at hand. I started skydiving in the late 1990s, so basically started skydiving just before the hand cam (in the US anyways) rose to prominence as a viable/economic solution to the ever rising costs of operating a DZ. If you time warped back to a DZ in 2001, you would see a part of skydiving that has seen a sharp decline since hand cam came around. The packer who packed to save enough money to buy cameras and get enough experience to fly camera. They usually started as fill ins to turn loads, which eventually evolved into a full time video slot. This full time slot provided a cost effective way to get to 500 jumps and hopefully have enough cash put away to take a course and earn a tandem rating. That process played out across the country, presumably the world, at the time. When hand cam became both popular and economic, those video slots started to shrink, as less opportunities to fly outside video were available. Over the years prior to hand cam, there were many dedicated videographers that could make a living on video alone. Today, not so much due to hand cam. How does that "kill the sport?" Well, basically if the logic is logical....lol, then hand cam has drastically reduced the opportunity of skydivers to work up to a tandem rating in the sport through outside video. Just my .02 on the subject. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Thanks again buddy for that letter. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

I can speak from personal experience that the canopies I have landed at higher altitudes at our Everest Skydive dropzone land great, even in low and no wind conditions. In the 6+ years we've been jumping up there, I'd have to think back to 2008 to truly remember someone sliding in a landing on a sport canopy on a no wind day. We even stand up tandem landings up there often on TP-400s and Sigma II 370s in low wind conditions with lighter passengers (under 200lbs). For sizing comparisons, my sport jump exit weight is 230lbs. At sea level, I jump a Velocity 96. At 12,350ft, I prefer to jump a Navigator 200 At 14,900ft, I prefer to jump a Silhouette 260 and At 17,192ft, I jumped a Navigator 280. All stand up landings in low wind conditions. If you decide to make this jump and would like some more info, feel free to email me at [email protected] and I will offer any info/assistance I can on high altitude landings. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

The short version answer: After the incident in May 2006, Strong Enterprises made y-mods mandatory on all harnesses by the end of that year I believe. UPT also came up with a version of the Y strap that incorporated a bungee system to allow some give of the strap during opening shock that was an optional component that could be integrated into existing systems. Whether a Strong or UPT harness, if the passenger harness is fitted properly AND the side laterals are tightened, the y strap has no loading, no job to do, the properly fitted harness absorbs the load. So, why now is the question? Well, its been made clear by the FAA that the next time a tandem student is ejected from a harness, tandem skydiving, as we know it today, a self regulating industry will cease to exist as we know it. After the two incidents that occurred across both systems, both outlier events to a certain extent based on body mass and unforseen circumstances. It was rationalized by many that "after all that", no tandem instructor would allow a tandem student to enter an aircraft, let alone exit an aircraft without a properly fitted student harness. Then the video that went viral around the world surfaced, with a grandmother holding onto to her harness for (literally) dear life. Her harness had not properly been fitted. For the tandem industry and the organization (USPA) it was a cold hard wake up call that passenger harness fitting, was and will continue to be the Achilles Heal of the tandem industry. This left little choice on the part of the SB. So why wasn't it just done in 2006? Well, like with the implementation of any new system, there was a plausible concern that in trying to solve what was rationalized as an outlier problem (harness fitting issue) that it could create a new problem (increase in injuries associated with the mod, such as spinal compressions, or ankle/leg injuries on landing. (That is one of the reason the UPT passenger harness has the bungee system, to allow the strap some freedom of movement). Enough time has passed now with the y straps that were in the field to give everyone involved a level of comfort that the addition of this strap will not cause a new problem. (I do not speak for either Strong or UPT in an official capacity, these are just my opinions from working with both companies over the years). Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

This video is probably 9-10 years old. It looks like however, it wasn't posted until 2010. FWIW, the practice of doing that sort of thing has already been addressed by USPA and the manufacturers on a macro level, I want to say in 2007, maybe 2008. This does bring up a few excellent points though to consider in this digital universe. If something is on video it will live forever somewhere and if it ends up on the internet, it will circle the globe. That being said, this isnt the first time a questionable practice has been published in an online video format and probably won't be the last. (I remember seeing a video a few years ago online of a tandem videographer actually docked on a tandem pair under canopy doing CRW.) These sort of things are of course extreme examples of poor judgement that tend to raise a flag and get everyone's attention, but I would offer everyone reading this a consideration. What about the not so extreme errors in judgement we allow on video? Take handles checks for instance. All the (US anyways) tandem manufacturers train us to check our handles after setting the drogue. How many tandem videos are out there, especially hand cam videos, where the tandem instructor doesnt check his (or her) handles? My point is simply that we, as an industry, should be considering everything we are doing (or failing to do) as tandem instructors. And what effect that will have when published for the world to see. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Not debate, simply disagree. Actually, I didn't even respond to the OP, I was actually responding to another poster in the thread who said it first. I was agreeing with another poster's comments. I believe that anyone earning an AFF I rating should exhibit a proficiency in their own canopy flight as well as a fundamentally sound and quantified ability to teach canopy flight to others. Really? I didnt realize I was on official "BOD time" when I chose to respond to something I didnt agree with here (the canopy skill level of current AFFIs as suggested by the OP). I thought I was just Tom the AFF I/skydiver on the road with wifi and responding as I could with the time I had in between travels. Next time, I'll put on my BOD hat and clock in before I reply so as not to provide future "invaluable contributions to this thread" for you. Did you miss the part up thread where I offered my email address and said that if you, or anyone wanted to discuss this issue with me that I was all ears? And went on to say, if you want to publish my responses, agreed with or not, here on the forum, you were welcome to? How is that not showing interest Robin? I'm taking the time to continue to respond to your statements about me and my post today as I have a little time before I hit the road, but I may not in the next few days, so emailing me, you or anyone else that has BOD related questions on this subject, I am happy to listen, as I always have been, and always will be. Closing thoughts on your responses Robin: 1) I was on the BOD as the SE Region Director for 2 years, and now I am on as ND in my first term. At no point in time do I remember seeing you present any proposals to the Safety and Training Committee about the fatally flawed canopy training, or whatever your calling it, that is currently being implemented today. No presentation, no paper proposal by Robin Heid. You never contacted me directly, never emailed or called to discuss this issue with me while I was or am (again now) a representative of the BOD. So, I apologize, but if it weren't for DZ.com, I as a BOD member, would have no idea what your position is on the subject. Perhaps you will consider emailing your documentation to the Safety & Training chair and we can start from there? 2) I believe there were 40+ AFF I/E in Daytona the Saturday following PIA for the standardization meeting. Were the documentation that you posted here for Pops made available to Jim Crouch for the meeting to be address by the people that are out there today teaching this stuff? I ask because I honestly don't know, I wasnt there. I wanted to be, planned to be, but one of my best friends requested that I help him get back in the air that very same day at ZHills and I couldnt be in two places at once. and finally 3) And since you ended your reply with a sarcastic comment about why people voted for me Robin, I'll close by saying, the people that voted for me, voted for me because I am willing to listen to all sides, and I speak up and voice my opinions on the board, even if they are not the popular path. If you were at the last BOD meeting in the gallery, you would have seen that regarding the "preposterous proposal" as you called it. If you were at the meeting when I was on the board as the SE director, and the idea of replacing a portion of freefall time with tunnel time for AFFI candidates, I was one of the proposals most vocal opposers. This was before I ever heard of you, knew your thoughts, or saw your posts. I disagreed with the premise wholeheartedly because being an AFF I is more than just teaching freefall, you have to teach canopy control equally as well, and there is no tunnel time replacement for canopy control experience gained to be passed on through flying in a tunnel." Anyways, as I've said now repeatedly, you have my contact info, if you want to discuss this with me, great, email me and we will arrange a time and place, otherwise if you want to keep picking apart my comments and adding sarcastic remarks, by all means you are welcome to do that too here. One route would lead to a dialogue between us, the other probably won't, as I simply lack the time to keep going back and forth with you on here. (BOD hat off now). Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Im not trying to limit anything Robin. You, and anyone else that wants to contribute to the thread is free to do so. I was simply replying to this, the first sentence of the OP's post: And again......I am simply saying 1) I havent seen that, or anything close to that, at all over the last few years, so if it happening, as Im a BOD member as you pointed out, where specifically is it being seen? Places, people and dates? Doesnt have to be public, simply send me a private message. I dont see it at all that way, and I actually travel quite extensively to USPA DZs domestically and abroad. As for the remainder of your point/counter point of my reply, again, I will leave the content of my posts up the community to decide for themselves its merit, or lack there of. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com

Again, I was replying again, to the OPs statement that today's AFFIs are not landing at the DZ with great regularity. (Paraphrased). and again, in my limited experience compared to you, I don't see it. That is the only statement I was responding to (casually). As for AFF Is landing off. They did it occasionally in your generation, occasionally in my generation and they will do it occasionally in the next generation. And again, I'll ask. Who are these AFFIs teaching bad canopy flight? you say USPA knows, is there a secret file I am unaware of? in practical application however, it's a fair assumption that hopefully everyone is trained that if you make a low turn and impact the ground without a wing level over your head, you will gravely injure yourself or kill yourself. Yet, skydivers of all levels and training backgrounds have and will continue to make bad decisions when presented with the low turn scenario. 90+ percent of all plane crashes at all levels are pilot error, does that suggest that the FAA needs to mandate a better pilot training? Maybe they do. Maybe USPA does too. I'm all ears and willing to listen. But there are a number of issues out there today that need to be addressed. Including canopy flight training. But to go back to the original post. I do not see a lack of canopy skill in the AFFIs out there. That was a baseline of this thread. That was what I was responding to, if you want to keep debating everything else here, I welcome you to, but I'm done here. I've said my peace, the community can decide the merits of my comments based on their content. Namaste, Tom Noonan www.everest-skydive.com