Minimum Jump Numbers for Instructor Ratings

[riggingstuff 0]

I'm sorry, I'm trying to figure out how to work this stuff on the computer. OK, the part about L-1&2 after 5-10 second after exit doing fine. I don't know that other instructors will agree or not, yes the exit can be tricky, but my experience has been that you can have a perfect L-1 or 2 but at pull time they lose it, curling up in a ball. It seems I remember a story of a study done on the heart rates of skydivers and it always went really high at pull time. If ours is like that you can imagine a students, and what is a S/L doing on their 1st H&P as soon as they let go of the plane? Ididn,t read the other thread about the student exit until after what I wrote last night and I,m not in total disagreement about students in FF alone. Thats why we put the JMs w/students and moved the alt. up after 15sec. but the S/L program is different. You can ask most AFF instructors,(and where I was working last the students didn't do their H&P until at least the 10th jump sometimes their 20th and at 5k), about students still thinking they were really low and nervous on their H&Ps, and most some how unstable. Would you leave w/ a student on a H&P? Its to dangerous. My point is that S/L and AFF are 2 different courses and serve their purposes. I believe in the the distinction and the rules separating them. I've seen successful programs in both. I've seen accidents in both. Its in the teaching techniques, you can,t brow beat. A line I use when teaching a FJC full of skeptical students and believe completely, " Before we jump today you are going to feel confident and I need to feel confident that you will be able to handle any situation up there" and I wont jump with anyone unless this true. As for tandems and body position, you can't really tell if their knees are a little low, what their legs are doing all the time.

CB
Don't look for why it might work....look for why it might not.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Just throwing this out there, but what happens this September when the min. jump requirements for Licenses goes up? Will all the Instructor Requirements stay the same (ie - "D") or will they revert to a "C" to stay closer to the jump number requirements? I don't know, I'm asking.

I believe the jump numbers for a rating are expected to stay where the are right now and not go up with the license change. See the attached (below) from the S&TA Newsletter following the July BOD meeting:

"JULY BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
The Board Meeting wrapped up on Sunday, July 14 after several long days of work by Board members, USPA staff and Board advisors. Below are the motions that came out of Safety and Training:

• USPA Licenses will be aligned with the FAI requirements effective September 30, 2003. The jump number requirements will be the following:
 25 for a USPA A License
 50 for a USPA B License
 200 for a USPA C License
 500 for a USPA D License

Appropriate changes will also be incorporated into the competition and rating systems to allow for similar jump number requirements that already exist in order to obtain ratings or enter competition. Those who have obtained a license prior to September 30, 2003 will not be required to meet any additional jump numbers if they are below the FAI minimum when they receive their USPA License."

So for almost all purposes the change is cosmetic only - you get the same privileges with the same number of jumps as before**. Maybe not for some demos, though. Has that been clarified?

**In fact one could argue that the change makes things easier - to compete in open class at Nationals you used to need a "D". From September a "C" will do, and that does not require the same accuracy and flying skills demonstration as the "D".

...

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

[skyboyblue 0]

AHHH It's CB! they must let anyone in here....how ya been?

[Shark 0]

Yo CB,

Glad you are not lurking! Yeah, I need to get my rig to you....

[Shark 0]

Quote

I believe that there should be several changes to the AFFCC.

The name has been changed, too. I've been corrected by an AFF Course Director. It's now the AFFIRC.

[listo 0]

Ok, I understand your point as well as a few other people in here concerning the fact that a static line JM's main focus it to teach and observe. However I feel like this is a fallacy. Pretty much anyone with a lick of sense can teach a FJC and then go watch a whuffo jump from a plane.

What I am saying is that I personally feel that any free fall instructor, whether SL or AFF, should have to be able to chase, stabilize and pull an out of control student.

What happens when you have a 7 jump static line wonder that decides to go stupid on his 2nd 10 second delay jump and flip on his back and spin like crazy. How many SLIs would be able to chase and stabilize that student and then deploy them if need be?

This is my point here. I have seen plenty of students do just fine on the static line only to go out and flip like crazy as well as go into some wild spins on their first 5 second delay. What happens when this first time free faller gets tangled up in his suspension lines because he was on a low dive and by himself, although he had demonstrated a great body position and form on the static line. Do you just sit back and say........"well, the student screwed up!" BS!!!

In my opinion the 5 and 10 second delays need to be abolished, the free fall JMs need to be able to do things right and a first time free fall needs to be high enough that an instructor would have time to get in and fix a problem. Leaving it up to the student is as outdated as a round is for sport jumping.

These are just my opinions, but I feel very strongly about them!

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[billvon 3,085]

>What happens when you have a 7 jump static line wonder that
>decides to go stupid on his 2nd 10 second delay jump and flip on his
> back and spin like crazy.

He pulls or his AAD fires.

>How many SLIs would be able to chase and stabilize that student
>and then deploy them if need be?

Very few. Many AFF-JM's couldn't get to him either; a flat spin on your back is an incredibly slow falling position. I once watched as a student that I taught the FJC to kicked off his reserve side JM, then went on his back and started to spin. The main side JM got flung off as well after he started to wind up the spin. Neither could stay with him. On the video I saw him look around, count to three, then pull on his back. His main opened fine (as they usually do.)

This example emphasizes that it must always be the student and his training that's the primary safety factor in skydiving. Everything else, from AFF-JM's to AAD's, is secondary.

>What happens when this first time free faller gets tangled up in his
>suspension lines because he was on a low dive and by himself,

I've seen the same thing happen on release AFF's. No matter how fast you are, you can't redock and stabilize a student faster than they can go unstable at pull time.

>Do you just sit back and say........"well, the student screwed up!" BS!!!

Yes. Then you teach them how to not do it again. Students do screw up. A serious enough screwup (i.e. chopping at 100 feet) can kill them.

>In my opinion the 5 and 10 second delays need to be abolished . . .

That statement is essentially the same as "static line must be abolished" and I don't agree with that. The fundamental principle of static line is a slow progression from zero to short to long delays; removing the first delays means a student essentially does a few throwaway static lines and then switches to AFF.

> Leaving it up to the student is as outdated as a round is for sport jumping.

I hope, as an instructor, I never even consider that making a student personally responsible for his own safety is "outdated." If I do, I'll stop teaching before I get someone killed with that attitude.

[sducoach 0]

"Billy,

Ditto....................................

J.E.

James 4:8

[listo 0]

Well, the first thing that I totally agree with you on is that the student needs to be taught how to control themself in free fall as well as when and how to enact emergency procedures. There is no replacement or option in the world that is more important than that.

Quote

>How many SLIs would be able to chase and stabilize that student
>and then deploy them if need be?

Very few. Many AFF-JM's couldn't get to him either; a flat spin on your back is an incredibly slow falling position

Ok, this brings up my point that our instructors should have a more strict "in flight" evaluation process. Personally, I can accellerate to 200+ mph in a sustained and controlled dive. What you say about a student in a flat spin is quite correct, it isn't a very fast situation at all. One of the things that an AFF JM is taught to do is to catch a student, fly in and stop the spin and get them on their belly if need be. At least any practice AFF eval jump I have ever seen incorporated this. My point being is that our standards for instructors/JMs needs to be higher and not lowered for the sake of having more instructors.

Quote

Everything else, from AFF-JM's to AAD's, is secondary.

Please forgive me for picking apart your post on this, but I have a difference of opinion here as well. I believe that the main responsibilities of learning is the student's. It is up to the student to take in and enact the training that is done on the ground. There is no arguement there. The thing I slightly disagree with is that you put the instructor/JM and an AAD as the secondary means for life support. I think that the AAD should never be trusted to save a life. This is a huge fallacy in my opinion in the sport of skydiving as a whole. An AAD was developed as a "really good idea" for increasing a persons chance of survival. If you read the warnings on the owner's manual of any AAD you will find that it explicitly says that it is not to be used solely as a deployment device. This means that it could mess up and not work.

Personally, I am going to take my students high enough to have time to fix anything that might go wrong. I am going to pay attention to altitude along with my students performance and if my student becomes unstable at 5,000 feet, well they are going to have one hell of a long ride down to think about why I "pulled" them. It is NOT an option for me to have one of my students have an AAD fire. The only time one of my students is going to have an AAD fire is when I am unconcious and have one myself. I don't believe in taking a student out at a low altitude and trying to "beat the clock". Altitude is mine and your friend. Our airplanes go to double digit thousands or close to it and I think that we need to utilize this for training instead of hoping that our student learned everything and more importantly, hoping they are going to do it right. Letting an AAD be a secondary life saving device is poor instructorship in my opinion. However, as a last resort, it is a damn good idea. It is just my opinion that altitude along with a competent instructor should be the secondary means with the primary means being the students responsibility. After all, aren't three options always better than two.

Quote

>Do you just sit back and say........"well, the student screwed up!" BS!!!

Yes. Then you teach them how to not do it again.

I am really glad that my instructors didn't have this attitude. I might not be alive right now if they had. It is not an option for one of MY students to get hurt if I can help it. One student fatality is NOT an option for me. Altitude, flying in with my arms up protecting my head, a good helmet, and an AAD all in conjunction with a good flying ability will save any student from deploying while on his/her back. To say that it is ok for a student to deploy on their back is ludicrous. I have seen the broken bones and near death experiences that come from attitudes like that and I don't find it to be acceptable in the least.

Quote

I hope, as an instructor, I never even consider that making a student personally responsible for his own safety is "outdated." If I do, I'll stop teaching before I get someone killed with that attitude.

I couldn't agree more with that statement, however, I do disagree with an instructor using an AAD as a secondary means for stability.

This is just my opinion here, but I tend to follow these rules in my head on a student dive:

1st: teach a thorough and accurate ground school and make sure the student understands it thoroughly by repeated demonstration. (repeated demonstration also builds muscle memory)

2nd:Do everything in my power to assure that my student has a really good skydiving experience by keeping him/her safe on the dive. I do this by allowing enough altitude for recovery if things get out of control. I would much rather tell a student that they failed the dive because of instability than visit them in the hospital to tell them they failed and I am sorry that they have broken bones because I couldn't fly well enough to save them from themselves in conjunction that I didn't take them as high as we could have gone which would have made things easier. A deployment while on your back leads to a 50/50 chance of an entanglement of legs and suspension lines. This is going to break bones or kill most people and probably lead to the individual never skydiving again. I know that if I were on student status and had to land on my head because one of my instructors opted to let my AAD fire while I was on my back instead of him getting in to help me......well, I would never come back and I would end up bad mouthing skydiving for the rest of my life.....if I was even able to talk.

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[mark135 0]

4) I believe a new AFFI should not be signed off to do solo AFF until after being signed off by an AFF Mentor, and only after a minimum of 25, 2 Instructor dives with that AFF Mentor.

Quote

Thats right, lets make it so that only those that have plenty of disposable income can become aff instructors.

The only reason I dont have an aff rating is the fact that I am unwilling to take food off the table for a rating that will not create a return on the initial investment.

figure the cost of taking 2 weeks off work and the course fee and what you are paid per jump as an aff instructor.

Do it for the love of the sport? I would like to do that, however that is impossible, There are others such as myself and my wife that work in the sport for the sole purpose of being able to afford skydiving in the first place. It also is supplemental income to sustain us through the offseason when we rely on our pitiful small checks from our real jobs. the joy of teaching students is a great offshoot but without the income from doing it we wouldnt be able to teach in the first place.

_______________


"It seemed like a good idea at the time"

• Quote

[skybytch 273]

Quote

Thats right, lets make it so that only those that have plenty of disposable income can become aff instructors.

It's already that way, and has been for a long time. Skydiving is an expensive sport. Those of us who don't make lots of money or who have other financial responsibilities aren't going to be able to afford to go for an AFF rating (or tandem rating, or flying camera, or doing big ways, or doing hard core 4 way training, etc.) if we don't make it a priority for ourselves.

That used to bug me; now I've accepted the fact that until and unless I choose to sacrifice other things for it, I'll never have that AFF rating. I know quite a few AFF instructors who couldn't really afford to train and then take the course. But they wanted it badly, so they found a way. Personally, I have far more respect for those people than I do for the ones who can pull that money out of their wallet and just go do it.

[mark135 0]

thats true. but an investment in a camera setup will pay itself off rather quickly. i paid mine off in 2 months. a tandem rating isnt a large outlay of cash but will pay itself off in 1 month. i figure on getting mine this spring with income tax money.
speaking of taxes we are getting over 5,000 back just because we have a cash buisness (skydiving) the deductions are incredible. camera equip.,repacks,reserve rides with lost handles (oops :)),"training jumps", jumpsuits, the list is endless.

_______________


"It seemed like a good idea at the time"

[Shark 0]

It's for the love of the sport and educating new jumpers to become better jumpers. I don't know of too many instructors that do it for the money. Camera flyers probably make the most money on our dz. So if it's about the money, and you already have a camera, become a videographer.

[listo 0]

Quote

. a tandem rating isnt a large outlay of cash but will pay itself off in 1 month.

I don't know what dream world you are in pal, but a tandem rating cost more than my camera set up. It took me 2.5 months to work it off.

Honestly, I don't care if someone can afford a rating or not. If they really want it badly enough, they will find a way to make it happen. I know that I did. All I do is skydiving. I am poor as hell, but I am willing to get in, pack my butt off, shoot vids, do tandems, pick up trash, wash airplanes or whatever else I need to do to get where I want to be. I am not going to sit back and whine because rating is too expensive. It is expensive because the guys who are giving the course have paid their dues, worked their butts off and accomplished something rather than sitting back whining about it. They really care about what goes on in the sport and are willing to make the needed sacrifices to get it done.

I really wish that skydiving was free, we all do, but it isn't. In fact, it is expensive as hell. I have never been more poor in my life. I would love to go out to a nice dinner once a week or live in a 4 bedroom house and drive a sports car, but the fact is, I love skydiving more than all of that and my dedication to student training supercedes all else I do in my life. I skydive for fun maybe one out of every 10 jumps and then that is usually just a hop-n-hook so I can stay current on my little rocket.

I don't feel sorry for anyone that says they can't afford a rating these days. There are ways it can be attained, all you have to do is work for it.

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[PhreeZone 20]

>I don't know what dream world you are in pal, but a tandem rating cost more than my camera set up. It took me 2.5 months to work it off.

I was just speaking to some one thats a tandem evaluator and the class and jumps are only about $500. At about 20 per jump thats 25 jumps and its paid off. A few weekends at most DZ's max.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[listo 0]

ok, but then you have to figure in the cost of gear rental, most tandem candidates don't own their own tandem rigs and DZ's don't let people jump them for free. Then, lets figure in the cost of the Phase II jumps as well, but don't forget to figure in $40 for both slots and the usuall $25 for gear rental on the tandem. So lets see, that is $65 per jump......times at least 5 jumps.......so if my math is correct that is another $325 added to that $500 you paid just for the course and Phase I's. I believe that total comes to about $825.00.

My course alone was $350, I then had to pay gear rental and double slots for ten jumps, $650. That total comes up to $1,000.00 bub, get your facts on everything. A tandem rating isn't just a course and your slot man, it is a lot more than that.

For AFF, you can look to spend about a third more when you include all of your practice jumps and pre-course jumps and then your course and eval jumps. It aint cheap and further more, I ain't bitchin! I am just working hard to get it done!

Crybabies need to stay home if they can't handle it! This sport is for adults. I don't have a rich mommie or daddie to pay for my stuff, I work and earn it with a smile. I suggest that everyone else out there do the same.

Do I wish that skydiving wasn't so darn expensive.....Hell Yeah!, but it is and we have to deal with it. If someone has a problem with the cost of things, go out and talk to the insurance companies, fuel companies, aircraft owners and airport committees as well as hangar costs. Oh yeah, let raise hell with Ted Strong or Vector for their tandem rigs costing so much and see what they tell you. You might learn how much those guys have put into their R&D as well as insurance and manufacturing costs.

I agree that there are a lot of people out there that would make damn good instructors that can't afford the ratings and yes that disheartens me a little bit, but that is the price we have to pay. Things just aren't cheap in skydiving, if they were, then more people would be getting hurt because of faulty equipment and poor instruction. Tandem and AFF are both really demanding disciplines and I am personally really happy that their is a high price to pay because it keeps just any ole joe schmoe from going out and getting a rating. It helps restrict things to people who are really dedicated and who don't care about the cost of what it takes to get there.

On average, most DZ's spend a lot more to keep things open than they make in profit. There are a few dropzones out there that are making money, but for the most part it is for the love of the sport.

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

I know quite a few AFF instructors who couldn't really afford to train and then take the course. But they wanted it badly, so they found a way. Personally, I have far more respect for those people than I do for the ones who can pull that money out of their wallet and just go do it.

Why? I could easily afford to take the AFF course, but only because I've worked hard getting credentialled and experienced in my job so that my salary is now "very comfortable". Why should my effort in achieving a PhD and a well paying professional position count for less in your eyes?

...

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

[listo 0]

Quote

Why should my effort in achieving a PhD and a well paying professional position count for less in your eyes?

I am going to jump in and interject here for a second before this gets ugly. I think what skybytch is saying is that the cost of the course keeps a lot of people from just going out and getting a rating for the heck of it. I agree with her on this point as well. I really don't think that anyone is going to ever put you or anyone else down for working your butt off to get to where you are financially. I personally commend you on your achievments.

It is still a fact that Tandem and AFF ratings are pricie. For one, they are that way for the reasons I just stated above in my reply to phreezone. The other thing is that the cost of these things kind of helps to keep just anyone from going out and getting a rating because it is easily affordable. The last thing is this. There are a lot of people that skydive full time and are really poor because of it, like me for instance. I personally, like others have had to put in a lot of blood, sweat and tears to physically earn the money to get our ratings. I don't think in any way did Skybytch try to imply that she would respect you less because you are financially more stable than a lot of people who are skydiving.

Dang, all of a sudden I feel like a moderator I hope that I cleared things up before they went too far.

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[skybytch 273]

Quote

That total comes up to $1,000.00 bub, get your facts
on everything.

Wow, guess your dzo isn't as generous or helpful as mine was (and many others are). I don't recall exactly what my TI course cost, but IIRC the total for everything (first solo on the rig through last jump with an experienced jumper) was around $800. Our dzo let us use the rigs for free and we only had to pay for slots for our post-course/pre-live student jumps. Of course, he needed TI's pretty bad at the time...

[Flick 0]

Quote

Crybabies need to stay home if they can't handle it! This sport is for adults. I don't have a rich mommie or daddie to pay for my stuff, I work and earn it with a smile. I suggest that everyone else out there do the same.

Get off your high horse Listo. Aren't you still living with your mommy. Adults pay rent.

[billvon 3,085]

>One of the things that an AFF JM is taught to do is to catch a
> student, fly in and stop the spin and get them on their belly if need
> be. At least any practice AFF eval jump I have ever seen
> incorporated this. My point being is that our standards for
> instructors/JMs needs to be higher and not lowered for the sake of
> having more instructors.

I agree with having tight standards, but you can never guarantee that an AFF-JM will catch any given student. I've done evals for people, and if I try hard, I can always get away from them. So can most evaluators. Evaluators set up realistic but difficult situations to challenge candidates, such that they are ready for most situations they will encounter. In practice, this equates to 99% confidence that you can catch any given student.

>It is NOT an option for me to have one of my students have an AAD fire.

Well, OK, but remember that AFF-JM's have died when trying to make sure their student didn't have an AAD firing. No student has gotten away from me yet, but if one does, I'm going to pull before either one of our cypreses fires.

>It is not an option for one of MY students to get hurt if I can help it.

You can't always help it. I've had students flare at 50 feet, students fly downwind into fences (they were afraid of the brakes below 100 feet) and students just plain land wrong and break their ankles in a gopher hole. You can teach them to the best of your ability; sometimes people screw up.

>To say that it is ok for a student to deploy on their back is ludicrous.

It is no more OK than to have a student to flare at 50 feet. Yet sometimes it happens. On level 7's I give students enough room to screw up; better they flip on their back and deploy unstable at this level, where I can still get to them if they have a total and freak, than on their first solo jump.

>I have seen the broken bones and near death experiences that
> come from attitudes like that and I don't find it to be acceptable in
> the least.

Hmm. I'm not sure if you're making a distinction between 'acceptable' and 'possible.' Student injuries are possible no matter how good the instruction and the JM's flying; students must accept that possibility _before_ they get in the air. Good instruction is the best way to prevent injuries; good flying skills in the air cannot always make up for a lack of good instruction. Very rarely, even both are not sufficient to make up for plain lack of skill/awareness in a student.

>however, I do disagree with an instructor using an AAD as a
>secondary means for stability.

AAD's do nothing for stability. They simply keep more students alive when everything else fails.

>A deployment while on your back leads to a 50/50 chance of an
>entanglement of legs and suspension lines.

Definitely untrue. We have a blooper reel of bad student body positions at pull time; 95% of them lead to a good canopy. The most common problem is bad line twists. I would never teach a student to sacrifice altitude for stability primarily because student parachutes still deploy reliably when in a poor body position.

Go back through the incident reports. See how many students die from entanglements due to unstable pulls. You will find the number very, very low.

>2nd:Do everything in my power to assure that my student has a
>really good skydiving experience by keeping him/her safe on the
>dive.

Do you ever release them? If so, students can bend at the waist at pull time and front loop as they pull. And no matter how fast you are, you cannot redock and backloop them faster than the PC can pull the bag out of the container.

Being a student entails some risks. I make sure to tell students that - they can get hurt or even die if they screw up. I tell them that because it's true, not because I'm trying to scare them.

[billvon 3,085]

>Get off your high horse Listo (blah blah)

No personal attacks. Feel free to attack what posters say; do not attack the poster.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

4) I believe a new AFFI should not be signed off to do solo AFF until after being signed off by an AFF Mentor, and only after a minimum of 25, 2 Instructor dives with that AFF Mentor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Thats right, lets make it so that only those that have plenty of disposable income can become aff instructors.

The only reason I dont have an aff rating is the fact that I am unwilling to take food off the table for a rating that will not create a return on the initial investment.

figure the cost of taking 2 weeks off work and the course fee and what you are paid per jump as an aff instructor.

Do it for the love of the sport? I would like to do that, however that is impossible, There are others such as myself and my wife that work in the sport for the sole purpose of being able to afford skydiving in the first place. It also is supplemental income to sustain us through the offseason when we rely on our pitiful small checks from our real jobs. the joy of teaching students is a great offshoot but without the income from doing it we wouldnt be able to teach in the first place.

Flying isn't cheap either. Let's make it cheaper, less hours requirements, less instruction requirements, lower the performance standards to become a pilot, so that anyone making minimum wage can afford to be a pilot. Sound like a good idea? I disagree.

You are suggesting that lower standards of training is OK. I disagree. "Wanting to give back to sport" does not qualify someone to be an AFFI. It is expensive and I'm not rich. I had to sacrifice to pay for the course. If you want it bad enough, there is a way. Pack canopies, get your tandem rating and save the $$$. Buy a camera and learn to shoot video. Of course, this option is at least as expensive as an AFFI rating, and you make $0.00 for a while until you are good enough to charge for your services.

Are you suggesting that we offer AFFI rating to people for free if they can't afford the course? The standards for AFFI's must be high, or students will pay the price.

Quote

thats true. but an investment in a camera setup will pay itself off rather quickly. i paid mine off in 2 months. a tandem rating isnt a large outlay of cash but will pay itself off in 1 month. i figure on getting mine this spring with income tax money.
speaking of taxes we are getting over 5,000 back just because we have a cash buisness (skydiving) the deductions are incredible. camera equip.,repacks,reserve rides with lost handles (oops :)),"training jumps", jumpsuits, the list is endless.

Making good money as a full time Instructor is not easy. It is expensive to get to the level where you are paid to skydive, and then the work is hard, the days long, and the health insurance is non-existent, unless you pay for it yourself.

Hook

[listo 0]

I know you have to address this situation Bill, but I really don't mind this individual at all. In fact I find it incredibly hillarious. If you will go look at his/her profile, you will see that he/she only has one post to their credit. It was someone that obviously I have pissed off so they went and created a new "handle" just to come talk trash.

Imaturity at its finest, this person didn't even have the gumption to say it from a stand point of who they really are. I find this amazingly immature and a definite quality of someone that can't handle pressure in the least.

On another note, I agree with what you are saying about the AFFI ratings. I have just been getting tired of hearing a bunch of people saying that we need to lessen the standards, make it cheaper to get ratings all just so we can have more instructors. I have been the devil's advocate and chosen to take the extreme side of things.

I have worked really hard to attain all of my ratings and I don't plan on slowing down anytime soon. I believe that anything that a person wants bad enough is worth working towards. As for the difficulty of any rating program out there. Personally I think that they are pretty good, but to lessen them in any way would be a disservice not only to our sport as a whole, but to any new and upcoming students as well.

I am tired of posting on this thread anyway. I have stated my views and opinions. I have received knowledgable replies as well as varied opinions. When it comes down to the point that people start making personal attacks......well I know that I must have struck a nerve somewhere. I no longer wish to irritate anyone, nor did I ever have the intention of doing so in the first place. My personal goals are to make our sport stronger and safer for all invlolved, whether they are experienced or up and coming newbies.

Mr. J T Flick, whoever you are.....I am sorry that I offended you, but personal attacks are the wrong way to go man. Lets keep things on the ADULT level. .......and yes, by the way, I do pay rent. Thank your for you concern

Live today as tomorrow may not come

[listo 0]

dang, it does sound like I got hammered then. Well, he just bought two new rigs so I guess he was just trying to make sure they were paid off. I really don't mind though. This way I can say that I paid for everything from the slots to gear rental to the course without getting any favors. I honestly "own" my own rating and everything included in it. Actually, I take a little bit of pride in that fact because I am poor and that means that I had to work that much harder to get what I wanted to acheive.

The other thing is that I don't feel like I owe any favors in return if I decide to just up and move at my leasure either.

Live today as tomorrow may not come