Tandem Instructor Requirements (by request)

[Ron 10]

  Quote

>And yet an AFF rating has no medical requirement.

True. And in a program where a tandem student is trained to the level of an AFF student, and has the same level of control (toggle extensions, chicken handles etc) then I'd agree that you would not need a medical to do tandems.

And yet to do hang gliding tandems, paragliding tandems, light sport flight training and commercial balloon flights no medical is required either.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

  Quote

Well I hope all you guys bitching about the stupid fucking class 3 medical requirement, have been or are planing to voice your concerns and thoughts to the full USPA BOD before the next meeting, because maybe we can get a change or something like the DOT medical cards approved, speak up or shut up already.

Well I will, but expect to be ignored. It has been proven time after time that the USPA BOD will side with the PIA, DZO, or manufactor over the general membership.

UPT and Strong basically begged the USPA to take over tandem certifications, the one major sticking point was that they wanted the USPA to continue to require a 3rd class medical.

So your chance of getting the USPA to change that? Zero. I would however be interested in seeing if a lawsuit against the USPA if they fail to act would work.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[matthewcline 0]

You will also need the Manufacturers on your side for this to happen, and they just pushed USPA to act on the age thing.

It is simple, do like Mike Mullins, he doesn't follow the US Manufacturers rules since he doesn't use their gear.

He doesn't follow the USPA GM Policies, as he is not a USPA GM DZ.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[ufk22 33]

  Quote

>And yet an AFF rating has no medical requirement.

True. And in a program where a tandem student is trained to the level of an AFF student, and has the same level of control (toggle extensions, chicken handles etc) then I'd agree that you would not need a medical to do tandems.

And this is the heart of the issue.
If tandems were truly about training rather than generating revenue, I would also agree about not needing a medical.

This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

[skydived19006 4]

  Quote

So far you've come up with a bunch of non comparative comparisons, but I have not seen a solid reason to remove a requirement that has been in place since the inventors of Tandem skydiving put it there more than 20 years ago.

How is having the medical requirement in place hurting tandem skydiving?

The USPA wants to keep the medical requirement in order to keep those who have lost their medical for alcohol, or drugs to not be allowed to do tandems. Obviously, this does not keep many instructors from drinking and smoking pot, ect, only those who've had enforcement action by a law enforcement agency. That shit is really more well placed on the DZO's back. I as DZO can and will keep my instructors from being "dirty" and jumping. They don't have to be saints, but damn sure better not show up to work hung over, etc.

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

AC DZ

[skydived19006 4]

Not in reply to anyone specific, and I didn't read through every post (half maybe).

I've been a Tandem IE for a couple of years now. A bit of a paradox I ran into is when I certify someone who I wouldn't personally allow to work at my DZ. I know, many of you have an immediate reaction that I'm remiss in signing them off in the first place. The training is pretty specific, the candidates are required to have specific experience, and the ability to complete specific tasks. There's no blank for me to sign off that I know this person well enough to say that I trust his judgement, etc. And judgement and/or attitude is generally my primary issue, not jump numbers or skill level.

For instance, I had a TI pass through the area who I allowed to do tandems on a few weekday evenings. I noticed that he was deploying below 5,000', I'd estimate more like 4,000'. I told him matter of fact that I wanted him to deploy at 5,500 for consistency among TIs on my DZ. I didn't need to argue beyond that, my house, my rules. He didn't have issue with it at all, said "Ok, no problem.". On the next jump I exited after him and was under a main canopy at 5,000' with him once again way below me. That was the last tandem he ever did, or ever will do on my DZ. I'd have had more respect for him if he'd have refused to my face to abide by my request, the outcome would have been the same, other than he'd have one less jump at ACDZ.

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

AC DZ

[Ron 10]

  Quote

And this is the heart of the issue.
If tandems were truly about training rather than generating revenue, I would also agree about not needing a medical.

And yet hang gliding tandems, paragliding tandems, and commercial balloon flights no medical is required either.

Fact is the FAA does not require a medical for the above or skydiving tandems. It is simply the USPA following the orders of their masters... The PIA and the manufacturers. The USPA has long ago stopped being the organization representing jumpers.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[cloudtramp 0]

  Quote

And judgement and/or attitude is generally my primary issue, not jump numbers or skill level.

No Doubt. The problem is that a lot of I/E's teaching people from other DZ's have no sense of who people are and when they r done with the course they are done with the student.