Any USPA DZs require AADs?

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

I personally won't defer that decision to my DZO. I think the 1000 jump exemption is a step in the right direction though.

Since it is the DZO's drop zone/business it is his decision not yours. You can go along with his decisions/rules or move on. That decision is up to you.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

I personally won't defer that decision to my DZO. I think the 1000 jump exemption is a step in the right direction though.

Since it is the DZO's drop zone/business it is his decision not yours. You can go along with his decisions/rules or move on. That decision is up to you.

I agree. He gets to choose whether he wants to usurp my decision, I get to choose whether I let him. That's what prompted my entry into the thread.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Now don't you wish you had logged jumps?

No, I don't. Long ago I decided that was a waste of time, and still feel that way. If I have be arrogant to an "authority figure" along the way, I will. And I'm most certainly going to have fun taking that path, if I have to.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Sorry, not buying that.


So, dont' buy it.

We are all engines of karma

[btucker 0]

Quote

Mine is getting ready to expire. Since I spent alot of money for it, and never used it, I'm thinking of not getting another one.

Some other things to think about:
You might have trouble selling your rig without an AAD. You might want to loan your rig to someone who wants an AAD.

I picked up a very cheap 2nd hand CYPRES1.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

Since it is the DZO's drop zone/business it is his decision not yours. You can go along with his decisions/rules or move on. That decision is up to you.

I do have problem with a group member dz refusing to let a uspa member jump at that drop zone since the part of uspa dues skydivers pay goes into the group member program.

[skypuppy 1]

Unfortunately several teams (some of which had trained hard for a few years) were unable to participate at the Canadian Nationals this year because of the fact that the dropzone required AAD's for all participants.

It is at this point when I have to wonder why CSPA as an organization would accept a bid from a dz that requires aad's when it is not a CSPA requirement and only the Quebec dz's have made it a dz requirement..... What if USPA accepted a bid for the nationals from a aad-required dz?

Sure, the really top teams can still go, they're also the teams that get sponsorship money available, and national association assistance with travel and competition, but it's the intermediate teams that get shafted.

And, as I pointed out, like many of my friends I have different rigs for different disciplines. A CRW rig, an accuracy rig, a freefall rig (Style, maybe, or FS). So all of a sudden I need 3 aad's?

Not to mention they swooping over a pond. And should swoopers wear aad's anyways, since Adrian's death points out relative dangers there?

AAd's are a tool. They may be something someone wants to have, but they shouldn't be forced on anyone. Many CSPA members did indeed have to vote with their feet this year. Unfortunately, it cost them their right to participate at a high level competition, and any chance to attend next year's world meet.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

I do have problem with a group member dz refusing to let a uspa member jump at that drop zone since the part of uspa dues skydivers pay goes into the group member program.

I don't see why a DZ shouldn't be allowed to make whatever rules they wish. What you point out is the basic conflict of interest the USPA has, having both the customers and the businesses as members of the organization. Unfortunatly those memberships are not equal.

Now, as the next poster related the situation about the Canadian nationals, well that's just wrong. IMO if the DZ accepts the contrat, the accept ALL of the organization's jumpers, provided the are using airworthy gear as spelled out but that countries requirements.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[billvon 3,107]

>You might have trouble selling your rig without an AAD.

This is not a valid concern. AAD's are easily removed from rigs. I have a new jumper here who is looking for a harness/reserve; he already has a cypres so he specifically does not want that. A great many people sell their rigs but hold on to their cypreses; the people who buy the rig put _their_ old cypres in the rig when they get it.

[billvon 3,107]

>I do have problem with a group member dz refusing to let a uspa member jump at that drop zone . . .

Happens all the time. And if a dangerous jumper showed up at your DZ, and your DZO grounded him based on his grounding at another DZ, I bet you would support it. Heck, I bet you'd even support your DZO refusing to let a licensed skydiver jump perfectly legal gear - if the license was an A and the legal gear was a Velocity 96.

[Gravitymaster 0]

I wonder what the legal consequences would be for a DZ that requires an AAD and someone is injured or dies as a result. I could understand their would be some protection if it was a USPA or FAA requirement but I'm not sure the same protection would exist if it was an individual DZ policy.

[billvon 3,107]

>I wonder what the legal consequences would be for a DZ that
>requires an AAD and someone is injured or dies as a result.

Same as the consequences for a DZ that has limitations on canopy loading, landing directions and landing areas. Not much new there.

[skypuppy 1]

Quote

>I wonder what the legal consequences would be for a DZ that
>requires an AAD and someone is injured or dies as a result.

Same as the consequences for a DZ that has limitations on canopy loading, landing directions and landing areas. Not much new there.

It might depend on whether the injured party had to specifically get new gear/an aad to comply with said policy, as in perhaps, they borrowed gear from somewhere there (or the dz) so they could make a jump, and THEN it went wrong.

If the jumper already used an aad anyways, well, then, it's all good.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>I wonder what the legal consequences would be for a DZ that
>requires an AAD and someone is injured or dies as a result.

Same as the consequences for a DZ that has limitations on canopy loading, landing directions and landing areas. Not much new there.

I'm not sure it's that simple. Suppose someone had jumped without an AAD for 20+ years without a major incident and the DZ policy change required he go out and buy one. As a result of a misfire, the person is seriously injured or killed.

The difference I see with a maximum WL requirement based on experience is it would be hard to argue that a DZ policy like this caused an incident that wouldn't have happened otherwise. Not so, I think, with the requirement of an AAD that then misfired. Similiarly, suppose a DZ had a policy that no other reserve canopy was acceptable except an ABC brand. If that particular canopy cause an incident because it malfunctioned, I wonder if the DZ would have any liability?

-

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

Quote

AADs are much cheaper than funerals.

I fear some DZs aren't looking at the big picture by requiring everyone to have one. Ultimately it is the jumper who's responsible for saving their own life. Since when did this ever change? AADs are just a great insurance policy for freefall collisions.

Maybe DZOs are looking at a picture you don't even see? On some public airports a skydiving fatality might be the last straw and cause the DZ to be forced off. Some DZOs have looked at the "big picture" and decided that requiring digital (as opposed to Cypres, big pictuer is that Cypres isn't the only modern AAD) AADs as one step in reducing the chances of a fatality on their DZ. Other DZOs may just be soft hearted, and think that requiring AADs might cause them to attend one less funeral of a friend.

I know of a DZO that has instituted digital AAD requirement, won't allow you to jump a rig that is out of date, or over tso on either the reserve or harness (maybe this DZO is also concerned about the pilots rating as well?), and has instituted a wing loading restriction. This has had the affect of driving a lot of fun jumpers away form this DZ, and you might argue has cost the DZ revenue. Maybe others would do the same, but fear loosing business more than they fear loosing friends? I think that DZOs that put safety above dollars should be commended!

BTW, I'm a DZO and I have no such policies. Infer whatever you like about that!

Martin
AC DZ
Wichita Kansas

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

AC DZ

[Gravitymaster 0]

I would be interested in your reasons for not requiring an AAD.

-

[skydived19006 4]

The political answer would be that I'm a Libertarian. I think that your rights extend even to the point of what I or society might consider dangerous. As long as you don't expect me or society to pick up the pieces resulting form your decisions! And obviously as long as your freedom doesn't intrude on someone else's freedom.
That and the fact that I'm an Ass Hole! (hey I thought it was funny!)

Martin

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

AC DZ

[billvon 3,107]

>Suppose someone had jumped without an AAD for 20+ years without
> a major incident and the DZ policy change required he go out and
> buy one. As a result of a misfire, the person is seriously injured or
> killed.

Suppose someone has been jumping a 2:1 Stiletto 97 for 10 years. He goes to a DZ that has a WL limit, and he is forced to jump a Triathalon 190, because that's all they have. He gets out downwind, can't make it back because he's not penetrating, lands in a powerline and dies. If he had been allowed to use the canopy he had been jumping for 10 years, it wouldn't have happened.

>The difference I see with a maximum WL requirement based on
> experience is it would be hard to argue that a DZ policy like this
> caused an incident that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

See above.

[Gravitymaster 0]

The difference I see is he wasn't forced to buy a Tri-190 to meet the WL requirements. Many DZs specify a Cypres brand AAD though. I'm not a lawyer, but it would be interesting to hear what their perspective would be.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

The difference I see is he wasn't forced to buy a Tri-190 to meet the WL requirements. Many DZs specify a Cypres brand AAD though. I'm not a lawyer, but it would be interesting to hear what their perspective would be.

What constitutes many?

My DZ requires an AAD, not a cypres specifically.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Unfortunately several teams (some of which had trained hard for a few years) were unable to participate at the Canadian Nationals this year because of the fact that the dropzone required AAD's for all participants.

Quote

No, you could not participate at the Nationals because you made the decision not to jump with an AAD.

So all of a sudden I need 3 aad's?

Quote

How long before the Nationals did you know that the meet would be held and that DZ?

AAd's are a tool. They may be something someone wants to have, but they shouldn't be forced on anyone.

Quote

They were not forcing any anyone to jump with an AAD. But if you wanted to jump at that DZ you had to follow that DZ’s rules. That is probably just one of many rules that you must follow at that DZ.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

The difference I see is he wasn't forced to buy a Tri-190 to meet the WL requirements. Many DZs specify a Cypres brand AAD though. I'm not a lawyer, but it would be interesting to hear what their perspective would be.

What constitutes many?

My DZ requires an AAD, not a cypres specifically.

Thats right, they changed that rule to allow a Vigil too.

[skypuppy 1]

Unfortunately several teams (some of which had trained hard for a few years) were unable to participate at the Canadian Nationals this year because of the fact that the dropzone required AAD's for all participants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No, you could not participate at the Nationals because you made the decision not to jump with an AAD.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So all of a sudden I need 3 aad's?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



How long before the Nationals did you know that the meet would be held and that DZ?

Actually, the rumor for several months before the nationals was that you would be able to get a waiver to jump without one in style and accuracy (and, I inferred, crw), it was only about a month before the competition that we found out no waivers would be issued....

I stress, this was not just me. Several individuals and teams did not attend because of this, several of which could have medalled.

I'm not arguing that a dz doesn't have rights to require things, I'm saying CSPA never should have awarded a competition to a dz where all its members are not welcome.... AADs are not a CSPA policy (yet).

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[billvon 3,107]

> The difference I see is he wasn't forced to buy a Tri-190 to meet the
>WL requirements. Many DZs specify a Cypres brand AAD though.

I've only heard of one that does that - Otay. And they are careful to say they allow any approved AAD; they just only approve the cypres currently.

[MarkM 0]

Quote

The difference I see is he wasn't forced to buy a Tri-190 to meet the WL requirements. Many DZs specify a Cypres brand AAD though. I'm not a lawyer, but it would be interesting to hear what their perspective would be.

You're not forced to jump at a particular DZ either.

If you signed the waivers, understood and followed the rules then the risks associated with that are your own. If you felt there was a safety issue you could have the ST&A sign off on you not needing an AAD or you could go to another DZ.