JoeWeber

And you haven't?

So I have a different view. You have hammered Brent on the EV topic and more nonstop. I think his question is fair and you are being unfair to avoid the answer.

Actually, I've been told, oddball uncles drive 2009 F-150's with crack windshields and engines that rattle.

Not everyone, thankfully, aspires to stay a Type Zero Civilization. I doubt EV's are the next step to controlling all of the energy coming onto our planet or even a good option for just going to the store. But I'm pretty sure that the future won't be all of us happily tossing wood on a fire to stay warm because Brentonomics pointed out that there are hundreds of years of fire wood available for free and using it up before looking for the next option was smart.

Yep. God rigged the election and in a very mysterious way, too!

Ya, it's complicated. Back then if a parachute was used and there was "jumping" there was the idea that we were all in it together. Now we have speed flying and who knows what else and they aren't in the fold so maybe we're evolving.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Thanks for the replies.

Your DZ, your call. While I would never dumb down my operation to USPA standards, I am still a fan of the structure USPA puts up for we operators. I will say that if you are not willing to meet those basic standards for any business reason the last thing you should be doing is representing the organization as a National Director. And before you cork calling that out as a PA please note that I have said the same thing to the face of others in your position.

I repeat, putting a 100 jump whatever you'd like to call them on a Tandem is irresponsible. My comment on your personality is no more than an understanding that a tough minded DZO who is an accomplished pilot, USPA National Director, and who has long experience might get something out of their staff thay the DZO at the odd small, underfunded, DZ in the middle of nowhere might not. No PA, just fact. The bigger question, Mike, is what are you trying to prove? Is it that we don't need a National Organization to make guidelines that you can show are too restrictive?

Unlax, Mike. You aren't alone in having other businesses that support your DZ habit. My apologies, I'll reconfirm the USPA 200 jump minimum recommendation on flying a camera. But the big bitch I have with your response is that you give this horseshit response: "Love how you know my business and how I evidently "need to put a newbie with a camera in front of a Tandem to keep the doors open". In my post I put myself in that position, not you. If you are sensitive about it that's your problem not mine. I wouldn't do it. You apparently think it's wise. I will tell you straight up that I think putting 100 jump wonders with a camera in the air to film Tandems is irresponsible no matter how many times to date it has worked. But here's the real issue: you are a powerful personality and demand control. Would you recommend that a 182 Dropzone in the middle of nowhere do what you do?

So you're not a big fan of USPA recommendations, fair enough. Personally, if I needed to put a newbie with a camera in front of a Tandem to keep the doors open, regardless of the BSR's, I would take down the sign. But then I'm a safety outlier I'm beginning to see.

How many jumps experience with a helmet mounted camera before they can practice filming Tandems?

New Speaker Mike Johnson had these cheery words to console us all: “I don’t believe there are any coincidences in a manner like this. I believe that Scripture, the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raises up those in authority. He raised up each of you, all of us. And I believe that God has ordained and allowed each one of us to be brought here for this specific moment in this time. This is my belief. I believe that each one of us has a huge responsibility today, to use the gifts that God has given us to serve the extraordinary people of this great country, and they deserve it.” Good deal, more Jesus.

I wouldn't want to see a similiar ban, either. In my experience there was a difference, however. When base first caught on at my DZ my jumpers were dying at night, well away from the DZ, at the base of low cliffs or antennas.

Doe the student do their own hand cam?

I'm surprised this didn't catch on.

Fair enough, I guess. I would offer that an individual jumpers opinion on the relative safety of any activity will, by necessity, be subordinate to the opinion of those who live on the sharp end of the stick. And for those, to each their own. In terms of up jumper injury frequency at home I can only report on my sample of one which shows a precipitous drop since the ban. Please also know that I am not petitioning USPA or Chuck to ban swooping only to fully recognize that CP Competitions and youngun's learning are different paradigms.

Not exactly. If non swooping fatalities were happening once every 15 years, sure, I'd consider that acceptable. After all, we know they're going to happen somewhere on a fairly regular basis. That much I signed up for. Now if fatalities were happening every other year I'd likely consider myself not up to the job and quit. That holds an important point. I think DZO's, and this is not a widely held opinion amongst DZO's, are responsible parties to the accident rates at their DZ's. Too many DZO's see themselves as just the "guy who sold the ticket" to quote Bill Dause. That does not mean that when someone goes in it's all on us or our fault but that does not mean we are just along for the ride. We can control the environment and allow or disallow things that might increase safety and reduce accidents. To be blunt, with respect to swooping fatalities and injuries, I think Chuck and by extension USPA somewhat fit that model and are willing to look past the unreported swooping injuries that we all know happen in pursuit of a spectator friendly aspect of skydiving. With that I am in disagreement.

I'd also want an agreement that he would never again in any forum claim the election was stolen and never in any way, shape, or form have any contact with any representative of a foreign government, and never again discuss anything he learned in his capacity as President with anyone on pain of jail.

Even an unintentional joke can be funny.

Yes. Filling in the pond and disallowing greater than 180° turns in the high performance area stopped the problem. It certainly made a number of folks unhappy but so does strongly enforcing no off DZ landings (even wingsuiters) and demanding that everyone on the load land in the same direction even if the first person down screws it up and other safety issues. I wouldn't say one was too many. After the Pro hooked it in short of the pond I tried to keep some level of perspective. The final straw was when someone did it right. That is he hooked it in such a way that he if he misjudged he would hit the water. The problem was he did not per the rules make it known he was going "pond side" so someone could watch for safety. He hit the water so hard he was knocked unconscious and were it not for an aware packer who sprinted down and pulled him out he would have drowned. After thinking about that for a while I realized there would be only one way to stop swooping injuries and fatalities and took appropriate action.

All in conformance with my earlier post. The stolen gear fatality happened in my year two, the suicide some months later. Those were 32 years ago. Were that the case every two years and I carried on you might have a point. In the case of swooping, I built that 60' X 200' by 4' deep pond to keep swoopers safe as they learned the skill not to be the attractive nuisance it became. When it became apparent that my support was causing more injuries not preventing them I changed course.

No, they are not and thank you for the questions. We had a suicide, not much you can do there unless the person is exhibiting self destructive behavior. We had a no canopy out fatality where the visiting jumper took a piece of gear from our gear room without permission when no one was looking, didn't turn on the AAD and met the turn aircraft while staff were helping a tandem land. We relocated things and added procedures to reduce the chance of that happening again. We had a pro swooper who we brought in to help raise our swoopers skill level hit 3 feet short of the pond and kill himself. Another hit the water and nearly drowned. Several more were hurt bad, a few permanently. Filling on the pond and banning turns above 90° in the main landing area and above 180° in the "high performance" area several years ago seems to have ended those injuries and fatalities. They were definitely not worth it to me.

Aircraft, zero. Swoop, zero. Post skydive canopy issues, I know it’s possible. Suicides, they can happen.

Do you believe there is an under reporting of swooping injuries at most Dropzones, USPA or not?