labrys

Thing is, you gave no context. Think it through. Would you approach a group of strangers at a bonfire and say "Apple iShelf" And then walk away without giving them any indication why you've said it? Owned by Remi #?

I've wondered more than once if the questions you've asked were intended to help someone like me who's just beginning to teach consider some new approach or idea. If that's what's happening I really am missing it. That's a frustrating thought. The basics about the differences that have been stated so far and / or appear to be documented so far are: A coach can teach non method specific material to a student in the first jump course. An AFFI can teach AFF specific material. A coach is not required to try to make an unstable student more stable. An AFFI is. A coach is not required to try to deploy a student. An AFFI is. A coach is not permitted to sign off license requirements on a students proficiency card, an AFFI is. Owned by Remi #?

You post some of the best, most insightful stuff that appears on this site. This post sounds like a drunken rant. What's up? Owned by Remi #?

Here's the post that provided the link: Note that the link is clearly identified as an incomplete, abridged version of the IRM. Owned by Remi #?

Sorry, I didn't mean to lump everyone together in the "conspiracy" idea. What you say makes a lot of sense. Owned by Remi #?

Maybe I'm missing something. The IRM is jam-packed with very detailed, very specific instructions about how each and every category of jump should be conducted and what the student, coach, and / or instructors responsibilites are on that jump. It also includes very detailed information about what to do if things go wrong, including when it's applicable exactly which instructor should respond and what they should do. What more do you guys want? Where's the conspiracy with the USPA? Owned by Remi #?

Well, the IRM does list specific criteria that will result in a mandatory unsat for the candidate including failure to simulate deploying for the student by 3500 (I think that counts as requiring the candidate instructor to pull for the student) and inability to assist simulated unstable student (ie, roll them over if they're on their back) I haven't read the AFF section yet so I don't know if it says anywhere in there that an AFFI is required to deploy a student by 3500 feet, but I'd bet it is. The Coach section is really specific about what procedures should be followed regarding gear checks, briefing, debriefing, canopy control, freefall, break-off, etc. Edit having browsed more of the AFF section. Yes, there are specific methods listed as the individual reserve or main side instructor's responsibilites during each category of jump. For example, on a Cat A jump the main is required to pull for the student at 4500. If that hasn't happened for some reason, the reserve side deploys the student by 4000. The reserve side is also required to deploy the students reserve by 2500 if nothing is out by then. It's all mapped out and very specific about who's job is who's and what they should be doing. There are also specific instructions about who should be responding to different kinds of instability and detailed explainations of how to correct them. Owned by Remi #?

Well, good luck with that. The Coach section is 27 pages and AFF is 28 pages. Information about what the candidate is responsible to understand and how they are expected perform to earn each rating and maintain it is in those pages. Owned by Remi #?

You've been referred to the IRM, which has lots and lots of information in it about what skills are required and what the responsibilites are. Did you want someone to type the manual out for you and post it here? Owned by Remi #?

Yes, as stated above, it's in the IRM. For example from section 10.B. c & d (2006 IRM): Owned by Remi #?

Is there a reason that you posted this here? Do you have an opinion or a point or anything? Owned by Remi #?

How did you spend 40K on 160 jumps, even with gear and training? Owned by Remi #?

Hey AK, thanks for sharing your thoughts. This might sound a little harsh too, but if you jumped in winds at 25mph and you were aware (stated in your OP) that the wind was blowing across or through trees, and you didn't expect turbulence, then you really, really need to find an instructor to review where / when to expect turbulence. The situation you described in your post is ripe for turbulence and you should have known it. Knowing where turbulence is likely to occur is required for your A license and planning your landing point accordingly (or standing down) should also be a part of your plan. Owned by Remi #?

When you set up your "wide" pattern did that cause you to plan a landing in a area where there was likely to be more turbulence than where the other people were landing or was there likely to be turbulence no matter where you landed? If you were (or should have been) expecting turbulence no matter where you landed, it very, very possible that choosing to jump in 25mph winds was a bad choice whether or not you've gotten away with it before. It's possible that jumping in those wind conditions was a bad choice regardless of the likelyhood of turbulence. Were any more experienced jumpers standing down because of the wind? Not meaning to beat up on you, just asking what I think are honest questions about your choice and the consequences. I hope you heal up well Edit because I can't read and asked a stupid question Owned by Remi #?

Eddie Izzard is like Robin Williams on Ritalin. Stream of consiousness without the hysteria. He's awesome. Owned by Remi #?

Awesome... thanks for the laugh, that was great. Cake or Tray of death Owned by Remi #?

It's not that complicated. People visit a web site voluntarily and interact with it voluntarily. Cookies are a part of that interaction and you either agree to them or you don't visit the web site... or you miss some of it's content. This isn't even about cookies. Owned by Remi #?

I'm not afraid a little bitty javascript. This is what IE is blocking (for me at least). "728.js" Owned by Remi #?

Funny. I had the same visual. Owned by Remi #?

Owned by Remi #?

Mike, I was trying to make it clear in as pointed (pun intended) a way as possible that the position of the safety is an unknown. This is an Internet forum, not a range. If those guys really want to suspend disbeleif to the extent that they think they have an actual weapon aimed at them and not a literary one, there's nothing I can do. Owned by Remi #?

You sound really cool and in control until you stop taking my posts out of context. This is exactly what I said: What part of that quote is unacceptable, Rush? Owned by Remi #?

So by that standard it's okay to teach a kid that a weapon is guaranteed not to discharge if the safety is engaged? Go ahead dude... teach your kids that a safety never fails. I'll go with teaching mine that nothing is certain. Let's get the kids together for a little russian roulette. i'll buy the beer. Owned by Remi #?

Gawain, I am 100% willing to accept that this weapon was mishandled and that the pilot is responsible for the discharge. I am also 100% willing to wait for all the facts to come out before condeming hin. Owned by Remi #?

In other words.... when all else fails.... Forget that shit. I really don't care what's acceptable to you, Rush. If warped wants to assert that a firearm with the safety engaged is "guaranteed" not to fire, he should have no problem having that firearm pointed at him. I've made my point that the position of the safety is not an issue in any circumstance and IS NOT KNOWN in this one in particular. If you want to keep backing up Warped in his position feel free. I've got plenty of rounds. But that's not an issue... cause my safety is on Owned by Remi #?