GM Pledge?

[Hooknswoop 19]

From the April issue of 'Parachutist';

USPA's response to the FAA regarding the NTSB's "demanding improvement in jump plane maintenance and jump pilot competency.":

"Work continues, but the Group Member Pledge will incorporate requirements to provide information about the maintenance program and maintenance interval of each jump plane operated by a DZ."

In another paragraph of the same section regarding Safety and Training:

"[, the vast majority of drop zones are still not separating canopy traffic-even with the change to the Group Membership Pledge in 2008 that required each group member DZ to come up with a plan to separate canopy traffic and to disseminate that information to their jumpers."

USPA has hard evidence and admits that the GM Pledge is being ignored (at least in part) by "The vast majority of drop zones" , so they plan on adding further requirements to a worthless 'pledge' to satisfy the FAA. They are either have a serious case of denial about the effectiveness of their GM 'Pledge', or are knowingly selling the FAA a shovel full of B.S.

If DZ's can ignore part, parts, or the entire GM 'Pledge' without any adverse consequences, why have it all? What is the point of the GM 'Pledge'?

DV

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Ummm, settling with Skyride cut the nuts out from under the USPA. They have agreed to not interfere with the operation of individual businesses. If the FAA wants something done they better get off their asses cause our judical system has made the GM pledge null and fucking void.

[The_Don 0]

Yep. The GM pledge is a joke.

Where do you spend your jump money people?

It DOES make a difference.

I am NOT being loud.
I'm being enthusiastic!

[SStewart 13]

Quote

If DZ's can ignore part, parts, or the entire GM 'Pledge' without any adverse consequences, why have it all? What is the point of the GM 'Pledge'?

The Pledge is a "feel good" measure and nothing more. The entire group membership program is a total joke and does nothing for the individual member of USPA.

You ask "what is the point?"

There is none.

Onward and Upward!

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

***

The Pledge is a "feel good" measure and nothing more. The entire group membership program is a total joke and does nothing for the individual member of USPA.

You ask "what is the point?"

There is none.

I'm a GM, and can argue either side of this issue. On one side the USPA does keep the FAA at bay, and has been instrumental in a few decisions made by the FAA, and exceptions to FARs. That's the argument for the GM Program, it keeps DZs open, and airplanes flying, so the Individual Member has a place to skydive. The FAA recognizes the USPA as an self governing organization, and the GM program is part of that whole bit.

On the other side of the argument as I see it; the USPA can do these same things without the GM program. The GM program was started in the 1980s (as I understand), so the USPA did it's "thing" for 25 years +/- without the GM Program.

As I understand, the USPA has pulled membership (successfully) in the past, but not since the whole "Georgia Fiasco." Rumor has it that one Missouri GM is on the chopping block, but no ax drop as yet. Theory has it that the USPA would rather attempt to reform our fallen angels as opposed to damming them.

As far as the pledge, and separation of landing areas, I was one of those DZOs who raised his hand to "who has not separated landing areas?" at the DZO conference. We fly one C182, and have only one or two folks who make high performance landings. I learned that separation by time is also an acceptable method. Our skydivers work it out on a load by load basis, either by time or area. Additionally, since there are never more than four skydivers in the air at any time, it's normal to know where the other three folks are, so less of an issue. So, we've done it for a long time, just not really in an official way.

Another DZO I know did honestly comply with the landing area requirement. She officially does not allow any "hook turns", so again it's a moot point. She did take an aerial photo of the city's sewage treatment ponds, and declared that the high performance landing area. I guess my point is that separate landing areas is not an issue at a lot of DZs, but we all should be maintaining our airplane/s.

In the end, I do not fear USPA's authority. I fear loss of my or friends lives. I also live in fear of a law suit. The USPA could pull my GM and Individual memberships, and I could still do what I do without missing a beat. Though the FAA does require that the TI "(iii) Holds a master parachute license issued by an organization recognized by the FAA."

At the Winter BOD meeting I asked for clarification on a point. I understood that the USPA was considering notifying the FAA of unsafe or illegal operations. It was made extremely clear to me that the USPA has no intention of ever being a whistle blower to the FAA. I could see both sides of that issue as well.

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[DSE 5]

Martin,
I agree with every point you make, but would also like to add this small caveat;
The semi-new BOD and the new leadership seem to have an aggressive edge. I haven't been around as long as most, but have a pretty good idea of what things have been like in the past...maybe I'm wrong.
If I'm right, you'll likely start seeing more pressure related to safety issues. Yet I can't imagine the USPA turning safety-challenged dropzones over to the FAA, either.

[LloydDobbler 2]

Quote

As far as the pledge, and separation of landing areas, I was one of those DZOs who raised his hand to "who has not separated landing areas?" at the DZO conference. We fly one C182, and have only one or two folks who make high performance landings. I learned that separation by time is also an acceptable method. Our skydivers work it out on a load by load basis, either by time or area. Additionally, since there are never more than four skydivers in the air at any time, it's normal to know where the other three folks are, so less of an issue. So, we've done it for a long time, just not really in an official way.

Martin, you make an excellent point re: the landing pattern separation. IIRC, the GM pledge specifically allows for separation by time.

Yet for some reason, I continually say 'separation of landing areas', when actually I mean 'separation of patterns'. I need to remind myself to make that more clear when discussing the issue. (I wonder if others do the same, and therefore questions like the one at the DZO conference might get skewed results?)

That being said, I've jumped at about 11-12 DZs over the past year, and it seems to be about half-and-half. The Cessna DZs I've been to have ALL mentioned 'separation by time' when going over the DZ rules after I signed the waiver. Oddly, it seems like the DZs with multiple turbine aircraft - the ones that seem more dangerous, in my mind - are the ones who are ignoring it.

I'm not one in favor of more regulation (and I've got my issues with the USPA)...but I definitely hope the USPA can/will actually do something here. So long as they don't step on the toes of people like you, who seem to be doing the right thing.

Signatures are the new black.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

...
Yet I can't imagine the USPA turning safety-challenged dropzones over to the FAA, either.

I understand how this is a political hot button! I've talked with one or two folks here (PMs and emails) who in the past reported flagrant violations to USPA and also gave the information to the FAA. The individual was to large extent black-balled. Ironic that potentially saving the lives of skydivers can be so politically incorrect.

It's very easy to look at an incident after the fact, people are dead, and say "somebody should have done something!", "somebody should have said something!" But to "do something", or "say something" preemptive is culturally unacceptable.

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[CSpenceFLY 1]

I think another side of that is something is usually done by a disgruntled person.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

I think another side of that is something is usually done by a disgruntled person.

Sometimes true. Regardless of motivation, that would be the accusation thrown in response. Especially if the accused were providing turbine lift in a Cessna market, etc. Seen it!

I also know that multiple people saw the GKCSD crash on the horizon. Nothing was said/done, people died.

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

I think another side of that is something is usually done by a disgruntled person.

Sometimes true. Regardless of motivation, that would be the accusation thrown in response. Especially if the accused were providing turbine lift in a Cessna market, etc. Seen it!

I also know that multiple people saw the GKCSD crash on the horizon. Nothing was said/done, people died.

I'm aware of another crash that was clearly waiting to happen. I wasn't a skydiver at the time, but I belonged to the gliding club at the same airport and nothing on this Earth would have got me on that plane.

However, we also had a case of a disgruntled jumper who made repeated complaints to the FAA about a DZ that were simply untrue, just in order to harrass the DZO.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[tombuch 0]

Quote

I've talked with one or two folks here (PMs and emails) who in the past reported flagrant violations to USPA and also gave the information to the FAA. The individual was to large extent black-balled.

I've taken a couple of issues to USPA and FAA, and haven't been blackballed at all. Of course the people at the DZ's involved weren't happy, but the folks I jump with recognized that bad operators are not good for the sport.

I spent the first part of my career afraid to say anything, but along the way I lost too many friends, and saw too many whuffos subjected to extraordinary risk. Now, I'm afraid NOT to say anything. I never again want to be in the position of saying "somebody should have done something" only to realize after the fact that I am a somebody.

Safety is a shared responsibility. My first inclination is to work with the individuals and if that doesn't result in change (or a more favorable understanding on my part) I'll take the issue to USPA. If USPA is unwilling or unable to address the issue, then I'll follow-up with the FAA seeking a friendly and supportive call to the offending person/DZ. Generally, the first thing the FAA will do is an informal contact, and if that isn't successful they'll take official action. It's almost always better if the issue can be handled early in the process, rather than late, but late is certainly better than never.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[chuckakers 426]

The group member pledge is a joke and has been since the inception of the GM program - as is the program itself. USPA is supposed to be an organization with the following purpose (from uspa.org):

The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.

I don't see a damn thing in there about supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's.

The GM program should be scrapped where it stands.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[CSpenceFLY 1]

That will never happen cause that is how they force everyone to join USPA.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

The group member pledge is a joke and has been since the inception of the GM program - as is the program itself. USPA is supposed to be an organization with the following purpose (from uspa.org):

The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.

I don't see a damn thing in there about supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's.

The GM program should be scrapped where it stands.

Gee I thought it was this:

The purposes for which USPA is formed are as
follows:
To encourage unity among all persons interested in skydiving;
to promote safety in all skydiving activities in the United States,
to sanction skydiving competitions;
to document officially all national and world skydiving records set by citizens of the U.S.,
to promote and encourage the study and knowledge of skydiving among the membership and the public at large;
to cooperate with all government agencies connected with aeronautics or aeronautical activities;
to compile information regarding the science of skydiving and to edit, publish, and disseminate the same;
to select and train the United States Parachute Team for world competition.

from http://uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Man_GovMan_2008_07.pdf

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

That will never happen cause that is how they force everyone to join USPA.

Not sure that's true. I'm pretty sure I remember there were "USPA affiliated centers" or some such designation before there was a GM program, and to be one DZ's had to promise to make everyone that jumped there become a member - by the first freefall or before level 2 AFF I think it was. They used the third party liability insurance provided to individual members, a listing in parachutist, and who knows what else as the motivators to play. I believe affiliated DZ's also had to use only USPA rated instructional staff as well.

So if memory is serving me correctly, that means USPA was getting DZs to force membership upon jumpers before there was a GM program, so scrapping the program wouldn't necessarily remove the incentive.

Back then, the incentive was the affiliation itself.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

The group member pledge is a joke and has been since the inception of the GM program - as is the program itself. USPA is supposed to be an organization with the following purpose (from uspa.org):

The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.

I don't see a damn thing in there about supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's.

The GM program should be scrapped where it stands.

Gee I thought it was this:

The purposes for which USPA is formed are as
follows:
To encourage unity among all persons interested in skydiving;
to promote safety in all skydiving activities in the United States,
to sanction skydiving competitions;
to document officially all national and world skydiving records set by citizens of the U.S.,
to promote and encourage the study and knowledge of skydiving among the membership and the public at large;
to cooperate with all government agencies connected with aeronautics or aeronautical activities;
to compile information regarding the science of skydiving and to edit, publish, and disseminate the same;
to select and train the United States Parachute Team for world competition.

from http://uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Man_GovMan_2008_07.pdf

.

That's pretty much the details of what I quoted. And none of that says a damn thing about USPA supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's either.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The group member pledge is a joke and has been since the inception of the GM program - as is the program itself. USPA is supposed to be an organization with the following purpose (from uspa.org):

The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.

I don't see a damn thing in there about supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's.

The GM program should be scrapped where it stands.

Gee I thought it was this:

The purposes for which USPA is formed are as
follows:
To encourage unity among all persons interested in skydiving;
to promote safety in all skydiving activities in the United States,
to sanction skydiving competitions;
to document officially all national and world skydiving records set by citizens of the U.S.,
to promote and encourage the study and knowledge of skydiving among the membership and the public at large;
to cooperate with all government agencies connected with aeronautics or aeronautical activities;
to compile information regarding the science of skydiving and to edit, publish, and disseminate the same;
to select and train the United States Parachute Team for world competition.

from http://uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Man_GovMan_2008_07.pdf

.

That's pretty much the details of what I quoted. And none of that says a damn thing about USPA supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's either.

...,to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system"

What are you, some kind of constitutionalist? Enumerated Powers, right.

That would be the equivalent to the Commerce Clause in the US Constitution. It can be interpreted to the point that the BOD can do virtually anything they like and point to the "ensure skydiving's rightful place..."

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The group member pledge is a joke and has been since the inception of the GM program - as is the program itself. USPA is supposed to be an organization with the following purpose (from uspa.org):

The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.

I don't see a damn thing in there about supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's.

The GM program should be scrapped where it stands.

Gee I thought it was this:

The purposes for which USPA is formed are as
follows:
To encourage unity among all persons interested in skydiving;
to promote safety in all skydiving activities in the United States,
to sanction skydiving competitions;
to document officially all national and world skydiving records set by citizens of the U.S.,
to promote and encourage the study and knowledge of skydiving among the membership and the public at large;
to cooperate with all government agencies connected with aeronautics or aeronautical activities;
to compile information regarding the science of skydiving and to edit, publish, and disseminate the same;
to select and train the United States Parachute Team for world competition.

from http://uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/Man_GovMan_2008_07.pdf

.

That's pretty much the details of what I quoted. And none of that says a damn thing about USPA supporting, regulating, guiding or otherwise getting into the business of DZ's either.

...,to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system"

What are you, some kind of constitutionalist? Enumerated Powers, right.

That would be the equivalent to the Commerce Clause in the US Constitution. It can be interpreted to the point that the BOD can do virtually anything they like and point to the "ensure skydiving's rightful place..."

Martin

Using that logic, the BOD can do anything they want to achieve any or all of the stuff on that list. Maybe I don't get your point. MY point is that there is no need for a GM program for USPA to perform the functions of its' own stated purposes.

USPA was founded to support the sport and the individual members. Getting involved in the business side of skydiving is not necessary to perform the functions needed to achieve its stated purposes, and doing so creates a direct conflict of interest. The fact that GM's routinely ignore any part of the pledge they want to without consequences clearly demonstrates that.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

USPA was founded to support the sport and the individual members. Getting involved in the business side of skydiving is not necessary to perform the functions needed to achieve its stated purposes, and doing so creates a direct conflict of interest. The fact that GM's routinely ignore any part of the pledge they want to without consequences clearly demonstrates that.

Chuck,
I agree that the GM program is a conflict of interest. It corrupts the origination into a trade organization. I've written more than a few words against the GM program. I am aware that Larry Hill thinks that the GM program is valuable, and helps him to keep his airplanes hauling skydivers, for what that's worth. In the end, I'm apathetic about the GM program, but I do keep sending in my check every year. Oh, and initialing those pledges.

SECTION 1: GROUP MEMBERSHIP PROGRAM
1-2 PURPOSE
A. It is to the advantage of skydiving schools, centers
and clubs as well as the USPA membership to
encourage unity within the sport.
B. More importantly, the chances of the success and
survival of the sport are much greater if all facets of
skydiving present an image of solidarity when dealing
with the general public and especially with all levels
of government.
C. By accepting skydiving schools, centers and clubs as
members, both USPA and those businesses will
benefit through improved communications with the
skydiving public and within the skydiving industry.
D. Such membership will aid in the prompt channeling
of information about local problems, regional
attitudes, and trends to USPA. This will assist USPA
in promoting and defending the sport.
E. USPA will be able to more effectively represent
skydiving, provide improved member services and
assist the members to speak with a stronger and more
unified voice.
F. The purpose of Group Membership, therefore, is to
establish a business and professional relationship that
strengthens the bonds of unity within the skydiving
community and enhances the growth of the sport.

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[Gary73 10]

I was okay with the GM program right up until the BOD caved to Skyride. Then I got to really thinking about it and realized that as much as I despise Skyride, they were right about one thing: USPA has no business running a GM program at all. The proper response should have been to simply disband the program, but instead, the Executive Committee decided and give Skyride everything they wanted, without even advising, much less getting the approval of the rest of the BOD. Now I'm forced to pay dues to an organization which publicly states that all its Group Members follow a code of ethics, when we all know that that's a lie.

Do the right thing, BOD: End the GM Program!

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan