Suppose that....

MakeItHappen · February 28, 2004

Suppose that you have one of those USPA logos stamped on your forehead.

By that I mean you are an officially recognized USPA Coach, or Instructor or S&TA, BOD member or a Group Member DZO that pledges to abide by USPA BSRs. In other words, you are someone that is expected to know and follow the BSRs.

Let's suppose that you are on some jump or on the aircraft involved in a jump or know about a jump taking place.

Let's suppose that there is a BSR violation by one of the jumpers on this aircraft. [It doesn't really matter for this discussion what the violation is - just that one exists.]

Assume further that the BSR violation is one that can be determined before the jump takes place. [IOW - this is not a punching clouds or low pull question.]

I have two questions:

1. The jump takes place and everyone lands safely. However, upon landing, someone brings the BSR violation to your attention. It turns out that the BSR violation was something you 'should' have noticed before the jump, but did not. Should you be held accountable?

2. The jump takes place, but there is an accident and someone dies. Upon landing, someone brings the BSR violation to your attention. It turns out that the BSR violation was something you 'should' have noticed before the jump, and did notice, but did nothing to remedy the situation. The BSR violation has nothing to do with the accident. Should you be held accountable?

Do your answers depend upon what USPA logo is stamped on your head??

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

TimDave · February 28, 2004

This is obviously a HYPOTHETICAL question

So here is my personal non-hypothetical answer. A few things to note. The USPA is a self policing organization. And the BSRs are that organizations "rules". By being self policing, the responsibility to enforce rules are up to its members. So that means that essentially you have to take matters into your own hands. But as a rating holder you agreed to get your rating by those rules and are more responsible to enforce them. There are dilemmas involved by ratting out friends. This is hard but remember your responsibility. If you did not notice, that is not your fault and you may or may not be accountable for that oversight. If it was your job to make sure that did or did not happen then maybe you should be accountable. If you should have seen it and did not that also implies a bit of accountability. But if you looked the other way and claimed to not see it, that is another story. The punchline is: If it is wrong and you can intervene, you should. If you missed something you should have seen because you are a rating holder, you may feel embarrassed or guilty and that is good. This is because you care. That is also good. If you were negligent and missed something, that is bad. Always take the high road, you can't go wrong. You may get people mad but you may save their life, prevent and injury, or even prevent someone (like a pilot) from losing their rating. I had intervened late last year by forcing them to ride down on a load that ended up going on jump run after dark when they were not qualified to jump in that condition. I rode down with them to show that it was the right thing to do even though I had 7 or so night jumps and was qualified to make it. It sounds like you are struggling with a decision (hypothetically). It feels good to be praised for doing the right thing much more than it hurts to get scolded for it by yahoos that don't care about the rules when it means they can't do some bling bling thing. I have been called a tight ass by some but I also have not been hurt in this sport more seriously than a bruised ego after a bad landing.

MakeItHappen · February 28, 2004

Quote
This is obviously a HYPOTHETICAL question

I will assure you that this is NOT a hypothetical question. There are at least FOUR events that where brought to my attention at the BOD mtg that fit the scenarios I describe above.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

TimDave · February 28, 2004

I was hoping the sarcasm would have come through (sorry).

quade · February 28, 2004

Quote

It turns out that the BSR violation was something you 'should' have noticed before the jump, but did not. Should you be held accountable?

I'm trying to figure out a BSR that might apply.

2-1 B -- FAR violation. Mmmm....seatbelts during surface movement, takeoff or landing. Pilot responsible. USPA Official . . . I don't see how unless the person was directly in view and flagrant violation.

2-1 D Age Requirements. Hmmm, pretty hard to determine that, but I guess if it is a 5-year-old tandem then that's pretty obvious.

2-1 K 2 Student Equipment Requirements. Hmmm . . . I guess if you see them without an altimeter?

2-1 L Supplimentary Oxygen. Well, I have to assume that the USPA Official would also be in violation.

Really there just aren't that many items that could be a serious issue that wouldn't be amazingly obvious to all the skydivers on-board.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

TimDave · February 28, 2004

The impression I got was that they planned on doing something intentinal. I could imagine things like a group of non-licensed and not current jumpers doing something together. I saw that once and a cypress fire, 2 out happened. When you are at a C 182 DZ that can get overlooked with small groups of people there during the off season.

quade · February 28, 2004

Well, I guess that's my "big" dz mind set showing through.

Here's the kinda scenario I was ruling out.

S&TA is doing a tandem seated in the front of the twin otter. Newbie 4-way group enters the plane near the tail -- how would he know what the group had intended on doing. He can't -- really. So, if one of them is uncurrent (an unobservable situation) or if one of them is a visiting non-licensed jumper (also something the S&TA can't really check on at that point) then how can he possibly be held accountable.

Jan said this is something he should have been able to observe and "catch", so I assume all things like currency, rigs being in date and stuff like that doesn't really apply.

So, anyway, I think it would depend greatly on whether the violation was something that a reasonable person could be expected to notice and recognize as a violation. On one far end of the scale would be a jumper entering the plane without a rig (pretty obvious and yes a BSR violation via FAR violation), on the other end of the scale would be something like maybe a non-licensed jumper's RSL not being hooked up correctly.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

MakeItHappen · February 28, 2004

Quote
The impression I got was that they planned on doing something intentinal. I could imagine things like a group of non-licensed and not current jumpers doing something together. I saw that once and a cypress fire, 2 out happened. When you are at a C 182 DZ that can get overlooked with small groups of people there during the off season.

I'm gonna do a bit of steering here.

Paul - it's great that you and maybe others are re-reading the BSRs to try & figure out WTF I'm alluding too. BTW - your list is incomplete.

The particular BSR violation it NOT the point here.
[but keep reading anyway]

The question is when someone is accountable and under what conditions.

I do not want to give details of any of the events. They have been posted here [dz.com] - with incomplete information. The rest of the info will be in the meeting minutes (in about a month) or various other places.

I am just asking generalized questions to see if people place higher or lower standards upon various people at the DZ.

I am asking at a conceptual level. For those that have to have specific details on xyz incident my questions will be lost.

Quote
Really there just aren't that many items that could be a serious issue that wouldn't be amazingly obvious to all the skydivers on-board.

I never made mention that the BSR violation would be obvious to all the skydivers on-board
Paul - since you have never been any of the mentioned USPA stamp-heads - I think your perspective might be limited somewhat.
But since you are or were one of those VIP inspectors - there are things that ought to just jump right out at you on this.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

GravityGirl · February 28, 2004

Quote
2-1 L Supplimentary Oxygen. Well, I have to assume that the USPA Official would also be in violation.

This one is of concern. Happens all the time. Extra altitude.

There are too many what ifs in your question. It's hard to understand what you are asking....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

pilotdave · February 28, 2004

Is this BSR violation a safety hazard to all on board the plane, or just those people knowingly violating the BSR? That makes a big difference, in my opinion. And I don't see how having a USPA rating makes anyone more responsible, unless they're an S&TA.

Dave

MakeItHappen · February 28, 2004

Quote

There are too many what ifs in your question. It's hard to understand what you are asking....

Suppose that you saw a jumper violating xyz BSR and you knew it before they jumped, but you did nothing to correct the situation.
They go in on the next jump. The fatality had nothing to do with the BSR violated.
Should you be punished or reprimanded for the jumper violating a BSR and not doing anything about it?

Suppose you did not notice a BSR violation. After a successful jump, someone points out the BSR violation to you. Should you be held accountable after all you as a USPA Instructor should have noticed this beforehand?

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

quade · February 28, 2004

Quote

It turns out that the BSR violation was something you 'should' have noticed before the jump, but did not. Should you be held accountable?

Ever hold a CFI rating?

There have been cases of CFIs that just happen to be in an aircraft as a passenger being held partially responsible for accidents and incidents -- even if they were back seaters.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

pilotdave · February 28, 2004

Well, the FAA has its head up its ass. Does the USPA?

Dave

quade · February 28, 2004

I would never be as afraid of the USPA as survivor's lawyers.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

billvon · February 28, 2004

If you hold a USPA rating and your student does something in violation of the BSR's, or you miss something on his rig, or you take him through clouds etc you are responsible.

If someone else makes you aware of the problem before the jump and you do nothing about it you are responsible.

If it is something you simply overlook and are not involved with, and you have a position of authority within USPA (i.e. S+TA, I/E whatever) you are not responsible. You cannot be held responsible for overseeing the conduct of 20+ people on every jump you make.

My take on it anyway.

flyangel2 · February 28, 2004

Jan,
Great post. Thanks for making people think.

If I was involved in witnessing a violation of a BSR, and I'm not either a STA or a BOD member, I sure would bring it to their attention. Afterall; these people asked to be voted into that position, so they need to stand by their pledge to abide by the USPA BSRs. I also would back what ever they had decided to do to the person breaking the BSRs. They are there for a reason.

Paul, one that you might want to think about is the use of a base rig from an aircraft.

am I getting warm?

May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey

mjosparky · February 28, 2004

Quote
Paul, one that you might want to think about is the use of a base rig from an aircraft.

Mar,
That is an issue being discussed on the PIA rigger forum now. The new version of Part 105, May 9, 2001 has some possible problems with changes in the language.

"§ 105.43 Use of single-harness, dual-parachute systems.No person may conduct a parachute operation using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, unless that system has at least one main parachute, one approved reserve parachute, and one approved single person harness and container that are packed as follows"

It say if you are using bla, bla harness it must meet bla, bla. It does not say you must use a single-harness, dual-parachute system or any system at all.
USPA's BSR's just say you must follow all Federal Regulations.
It will be interesting to see how this all works out.
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

kallend · February 28, 2004

Quote

.

I believe it depends on what the rating holder has stamped on his/her head.

If it's BOD, GM-DZO, S&TA or PILOT then I think they have a reponsibility to all on board.

If is anything else, then I think they have a responsibility only to those under their supervision (students).

However, if a written code of ethics for rating holders exists, then that would certainly override my opinion.

As would any contractual agreement between the GM-DZO and the rating holder (is the rating holder the agent of the DZO?)

...

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

WrongWay · February 28, 2004

Quote
The fatality had nothing to do with the BSR violated.
.

That statement right there should say it all. Sure, perhaps it could have or even should have been noticed, but if the BSR violation had NOTHING to do with the fatality, then why worry about it?

That situation could be compared to someone pounding in after a low turn, then the rigger being sued because his rig was out of date, or wasn't freefly friendly. While it's a safety issue in other situations, it's completely irrelevent to the one at hand. Therefore, blame the mistakes made, not the BSR's violated.

Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.

EDYDO · February 28, 2004

A CFI is under laws and regulations that hold the weight of law.

EDIT: (The CFI is a trained professional and USPA officials are from varied backgrounds, elected and may not be expected to know everything.)

USPA people are not. USPA "supposedly" (that is another thread) operates under self policeing, so the two should not be comparable.

That's one side. On the moral side, I believe you as a USPA type should make a statement such as. "I have no legal authority, but I am a USPA official and I would be remiss in my duties if I didn't at least mention that you should not be................"

Many of the "so called" violations may not be violations at all, so you have to be careful. For example, many believe it is illegal to jump from a 2 place ultralight and there is wording that could be interpreted in that way (for instruction only). However the law (regulation) does not specifically say that parachuting is prohibited or that parachuting may not be of some instructional benefit. That item has never been ruled on by a court. (I am a CFI and Ultralight Instructor)

I strongly believe that where there is doubt, USPA should not be interpreting and allow the most liberal interpretation until a court says otherwise.

Ed

Ever hold a CFI rating?

There have been cases of CFIs that just happen to be in an aircraft as a passenger being held partially responsible for accidents and incidents -- even if they were back seaters.

winsor · February 28, 2004

Most of the things that come to mind regarding safety issues are FAR related, rather than BSR.

Many of the BSRs are effectively self-serving union rules, pushed through by someone with a vested interest.

An unlicensed non-USPA member with 312 jumps required to jump with a 217-jump Coach instead of a 3,600 jump up jumper without a rating? Be real.

I can think of rather a few children of DZOs who were world-class skydivers before they could legally drive a car. There's a BSR thas says they can't? Maybe it would apply if they were USPA members, but I doubt that they are/were.

I've been jumping with an FAA employee, where at one point or another they said "I think I'll go into town and get lunch." Whatever happened after that point couldn't be held against them, and they really didn't want to know firsthand.

I'm not sure what BSRs are under consideration here. We are assured that they are specific ones, yet they are left vague, so it's hard to evaluate. What should be one's action is very much dependent on quite what the hell we're talking about, and that's a big secret.

In general, if it is your direct responsibility you are directly responsible.

If, however, you simply observe these actions on the part of others, bring it to their attention. If they change their ways, great, but if they tell you to fuck off, then fuck off.

Blue skies,

Winsor

AirCav · February 28, 2004

***I can think of rather a few children of DZOs who were world-class skydivers before they could legally drive a car. There's a BSR thas says they can't? Maybe it would apply if they were USPA members, but I doubt that they are/were.
------------------------------------------------------------

USPA member in 67 or 68, C5052, Age 14 or 15 Can't remember for sure.

GW685,D3888,C5052,SCS843

TomAiello · February 28, 2004

Quote
2. The jump takes place, but there is an accident and someone dies. Upon landing, someone brings the BSR violation to your attention. It turns out that the BSR violation was something you 'should' have noticed before the jump, and did notice, but did nothing to remedy the situation. The BSR violation has nothing to do with the accident. Should you be held accountable?

Can I extend your hypothetical a little?

What if the BSR violation made the jump safer?

In fact, let's hypothesize that the jump would be extremely unsafe if made in accordance with the BSR, but reasonably survivable if made in the BSR-violating method used.

Does the relative safety of the jump, and appropriateness of the dive plan and equipment for jumpers safety factor in at all? Or must the BSR's be followed in all cases, even if following them reduces the safety of the jumpers? Which is more important, performing the jump as safely as possible, or performing the jump within the BSR guidelines?

Edit to add: An even scarier hypothetical. What if, say, there are two jumpers on the plane, intending to make their jump in what they feel is the safest manner possible (for that particular dive plan). They are real, recognized experts in this sort of jumping (and both of them are far more expert than "you", the theoretical USPA stamphead observer). You advise them that BSR's mandate they do their jump in a different manner. One of them agrees with you, and switches his plan to the less safe, but BSR approved plan you recommend. The jump occurs, and the BSR following jumper is seriously injured or killed as the result of the configuration changes he made following your BSR-founded advice. The non-BSR following jumper lands safely. How do you feel?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

AndyMan · February 28, 2004

Quote
Should you be held accountable?

Answer to either question: Absolutely not. That is not what I signed up for. If you want me to play cop, you can have your ratings back, thank you very much. I got my rating so that I could teach newbies, not so that I would be enforcer to the skygods.

I am NOT a hall monitor.

THe only responsibility I take is to my student.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

gmanpilot · February 28, 2004

Not only no, but hell no.

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

Sign In

Sign In

Suppose that....

Recommended Posts

MakeItHappen 15

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

TimDave 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

MakeItHappen 15

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

TimDave 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

quade 4

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

TimDave 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

quade 4

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

MakeItHappen 15

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

GravityGirl 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

pilotdave 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

MakeItHappen 15

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

quade 4

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

pilotdave 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

quade 4

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

billvon 3,090

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

flyangel2 2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

mjosparky 4

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

kallend 2,117

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

WrongWay 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites