tombuch

I think you are correct, although I hate that position. Last summer at my drop zone several D licensed jumpers were asked to supervise students with about 9 jumps while they were in the airplane. The licensed jumpers didn't want to provide that supervision, and instead suggested that the students should be supervised by at least a coach in the airplane so somebody with a rating was there to supervise and actually teach gear checks, spotting, aircraft emergencies, exit separation, etc. They asked for my interpretation as an S&TA. As I read it, the BSR's do suggest that once a student has done two disorienting maneuvers they require overall supervision by an instructor, but no supervision in the airplane or freefall. I thought that was odd, and asked for clarification from Jim Crouch and others at USPA. The answer I was given was that yes, after recovering from disorienting maneuvers a student no longer needed an instructor in the airplane, at least under a very technical reading of the regulation. However, a DZO should still require an instructor or coach in the airplane as a means of liability protection, and to provide the student with the actual training needed to meet the A license requirements. It seemed to strike several USPA officials as odd that a DZO might try to squirm out of using rating holders in the airplane. At my request, Jim asked to have the topic of supervision on the Safety and Training docket at the February meeting. Last summer I had a lengthy discussion with BOD member Max Coen, and just prior to the meeting I had a long talk with BOD member Gary Peek about the topic. Gary actually called me because he saw the topic of supervision on his agenda with my name attached to it, and wondered what it was about. After hearing my concern Gary tried to bring it up, but the meeting apparently skipped the topic. Thus, we are left with a BSR that doesn't define what level of supervision is needed in the airplane, and is still being used by cheap DZO's to cut costs and quality of training. I had a chat with board member Mike Perry a few hours ago about the topic and he has promised to review it, and may have some definitions added to an S&TA newsletter at some later point. In the meantime, it really is a free for all, at least as per the BSR's. It's my understanding that the Safety and Training Committee of the Board of Directors feels that the regulations must be designed so that the smallest Cessna DZ can say they provide all the training required, even if there is but one instructor and no coach on staff. It seems to me to be a dumbing down of the regulations. The USPA BOD response seems to be that drop zones can provide higher levels of supervision if they choose, but that the supervision required by the BSR's is just a minimum, and that it seems to be working in the field. I think I have come to an agreement with Mike Perry to disagree with him on this point. Allowing D licensed jumpers to supervise students is a bad policy that in my opinion, gives strength to the worst DZ's, offers cause to reduce instructional supervision, and harms students. As a S&TA at a big DZ I see lots of our graduates, and plenty of graduates from other schools. I've got to say that training is better than when I started 25 years ago, but that is is absolutely not adequate for the current jumping environment or equipment. We should be increasing requirements and supervision, not decreasing them. I guess I really disagree with the BOD on this point. I am especially annoyed because several jumpers took the initiative to bring this concern to me as an S&TA. I in turn brought that issue to USPA, and the BOD, yet the concern wasn't addressed. I let the jumpers down, and USPA in turn let me down. Then, on page two of this thread I was lambasted (well, maybe that's too harsh of a word) about not attending the BOD meeting, or discussing these issues with the BOD in advance. Jeeeze it's frustrating. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I think what he meant to say was...Go to the Wall Street Journal home page at http://online.wsj.com/public/us to see the following tease about an article in the Monday edition: The full article is available only to subscribers on the Internet, or through a single copy newsstand sale. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Correct. But keep in mind that chem lights are NOT visible for three miles, and neither is a flashlight. The function of the light is to alert pilots so they can identify the canopy, and the pilot must be able to see the light in all directions for three miles. A strobe light is the most common approach to meeting this requirement, although a few jumpers have used camera lights that flood a wide area of the sky. Chem lights are NOT an effective or legal solution. As for the original point of discussion...I tend to look at regulation as an indicator of safety and risk management. I can easily see regulatory violations, and in most cases a DZ that violates obvious FAR's and BSR's is also pushing safety ilmits in other areas I can not see. So for me, the approach to night jump lighting is one of many important elements in evaluating a DZ. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I gotta disagree with that position of the board. In a perfect world DZO's and supervising instructors would care about safety and supervision, and a D license holder would face a tough check out before being cleared to fly with or teach students. Likewise, the term "self-supervision" would really mean that the student was ready to gear up, spot, and handle any freefall, canopy, or traffic pattern problem alone. But in the real world there are at least a few DZO's that will gladly throw a warm body into the mix and just not care, as long as the cost is low and it's easy to push the non-rating holder into doing whatever the DZO wants. There are far too many DZ's where supervision doesn't exist at all, and USPA seems unwilling to deal with the problem at that level. The lack of DZ oversight is at least as serious as the lack of instructor oversight. Back in the day (...and I mean last week) an S&TA could approve any experienced jumper to fly with a student who had been cleared for self supervision, and there was at least a process in place to drive some level of oversight. Now, it's a free for all. Any D licensed jumper is as good as any coach as far as USPA is concerned. No real approval or oversight is required, and no single person actually takes responsibility for making the approval of a D license holder to fly with a student. I don't think I would have a problem with the change if USPA actually enforced some standard of supervision, responsibility, or professionalism at the drop zone level, but at this point USPA has become close to worthless as a means of protecting students from poor drop zones or dangerous practices. I'm really disappointed by the change, but really, it's just more of the same, and what I have come to expect from a BOD that manages safety in support of the interests of DZO's and not students. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I think the two elements are designed to work together. The DVD explains the "complicated" message with a "catch phrase" title. The DVD plays at Safety Day when jumpers are paying attention, and the poster hangs at the DZ to reinforce the message every day. The DVD is of course also available for replay through the season, or as part of a regular student program to be used late in the progression. It sounds like a good combination to me. The idea of making the DVD available on the USPA web site is a good one, and hopefully after the Safety Day premier USPA will do that, or, I suspect, somebody will rip it and post the file anyway. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It sounds like a local pilot get together, probably near your home drop zone in Vermont. There aren't many jumpers in that (umm, this) region, so unless you want to import a team from the Boston or New York areas, you will be somewhat limited. Since it is on an airport with lots of outs, it probably isn't a very tough jump technically, but there are some big stress issues for jumpers, so experience is important. I'd suggest you check in with the folks at Vermont Skydiving (listed as your home DZ on the profile) and let them know where and when the demo is. They should be able to tell you what kind of airspace is involved, and what authorizations or notifications are required. They should also be able to hook you up with willing and qualified jumpers, and probably an airplane. You should do some research first. The SIM, mentioned in an earlier post, is a good place to begin. Check the section on exhibition jumping, and also the FAR's and AC's in the back of the SIM. The other thing to think about is that your local sport flying club is made up of pilots who fly...sometimes directly over active drop zones. It would be super good if you could put together a seminar or evening program for them about drop zones and how to both identify and avoid DZ's when flying (hint: they are not included in GPS). It's an interesting seminar topic, and if you are in or near the Southern Vermont area I'll be happy to assist. . . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Seriously? A wind limit of 28 knots is 32 mph. The "or more" part could be anything above that? Your example of 16 knots (18.42 mph), gusting to 25 knots (29 mph) gives you a gust factor of 9 knots, or 10.36 mph. That 9 knots is 56% of your steady wind speed. You might as well not have any limits. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I answered your question directly a few posts ago, but as the thread developed it was looking like some people are trying to figure out when it's ok to jump, and when its not. A wind hold is an easy way to answer that question for everybody, but many DZ's expect jumpers to make their own decisions and thus don't institute a hold. One of the management based concerns about using wind holds is that if the winds are significant enough to generate a hold today and we call the hold for everybody, but tomorrow they are just a bit lower (or higher) and we don't call a hold then we may open ourselves up to liability if somebody is hurt. It's a funny concept that suggests management either needs to take the initiative every time, or leave the responsibility on the jumpers every time. In any event, if you are wondering how to decide or evaluate the winds, check out article 6 "Evaluating Wind and Turbulence" on The Ranch S&TA page at http://theblueskyranch.com/STA.php. It was written specifically for The Ranch, but the concepts apply to any any drop zone. You might also want to read article 2, "Checking The Weather." That one is very-very specific to The Ranch but will give you an idea where to locate weather resources that cover your home DZ. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Nope. If the jumpers want to jump and the pilot wants to fly, then the load goes. Sometimes a senior jumper will step up to the microphone and suggest that everybody evaluate the winds, and it's common for most experienced jumpers to stand down and encourage the less experienced to stay on the ground. Generally most of the junior jumpers listen, so we don't have a whole lot of "fun" jumpers leaping into dangerous wind conditions. For the most part the folks who jump under any conditions are the tandem instructors with their students, and even in that department there isn't a fixed point for a wind hold. If enough tandem instructors are willing to go, and the load can be sort of filled with tandems, then the load goes. Tandem instructors can say no and stand down, and a few do, but as a group they have a much higher tolerance for wind and risk. So, no we don't have official wind holds. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I gotta add something here... In the United States it's not just the pilot and jumper that face FAA enforcement action. The DZ, airplane owner, manifestor, and anybody else connected to the jump or drop zone can also become involved in an enforcement action. Before stepping out of the airplane consider if it is really worth placing responsibility on all those people. See http://theblueskyranch.com/STA.php, and read article 13 "FAA Regulations Applied, and article 19 "Jumping Near Clouds." . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I've been jumping for more than 25 years, with about 22 years of instructing, and never needed a lawyer for any skydiving related accident. You should relax. If the need ever comes up, a good basic lawyer should be fine. If you want an aviation lawyer you could check with your local DZ's to see who they use. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Ya know, I’ve been besieged on this forum by over zealous do-gooders a few times myself for the same “infraction.” It’s a bunch of B.S. Writing books is a time consuming pain in the ass. It doesn’t pay nearly enough money to make it worthwhile, and marking sucks. Authors of trade books like Brian’s (or mine) do it because there is a demand for information. The process of writing is an added bonus because it requires research that brings the topic into sharp focus and increases the information to be shared. I’m super proud of my book, and especially pleased by all the folks who have shared their positive comments about JUMP!. Brian should be equally proud, and we should all be extra happy that we have a new resource to share within our sport. Brian has put a great deal of time and energy into his latest project on fear, and I know there is tremendous interest among dropzone.com regulars, and future visitors to this site. Many of us have known about Brian’s efforts and have been waiting for the formal release of his book. An announcement on this site certainly seems reasonable. Instead of bitching and complaining, let’s offer Brian a thank you for his research and effort, and his willingness to share that information with us. Sure, he charges for the book, but he gives away plenty of material and has long been an important fixture in our sport, recognized and respected for his knowledge, passion, and commitment to the safety of others. The release of his latest book is news, and we should be pleased that he took a moment to share that with us. I hope the detail in the book becomes the topic of a few threads over the coming months, and I hope everybody has the ‘courage’ to offer attribution when they cite specific information. It would be a shame if we became fearful of mentioning the name of an important product because the advertising police might complain. Skydiving is a tiny sport that offers authors very little profit potential. We should appreciate it when our peers step up and produce quality books or videos. Without folks like Brian our sport would be poorer. Without just a bit of marketing, his words and knowledge would be trapped in isolation. That would be a shame. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I'd love to have the IE rating and even jumped through all the hoops and sent in my application with payment, then looked at the exam and decided it just wasn't material worth studying. So, my application sits someplace within USPA, and the rating fee remains in an account someplace. I'll never bother with that final hoop. The rating is valuable, and you should be proud of it, but at some point I didn't think it was worth earning anymore. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I think part of his assessment of your AFF status was based on an incomplete profile. Up, down, go (arch) works. Explosive movements are not the objective, at least according to my instructional outlines. The idea is to get the student to lead an organized exit. We can teach it with limited movement on the ground, but once in the airplane anything goes as the student will sometimes make no movement, and sometimes get "explosive." As you noted, there are some airplanes where the exit commands need to be modified (perhaps in-out-go), and some where the instructors need to be very aware of handle position. Good instructors will modify the exit command when aircraft safety dictates. Likewise, an over-assertive count needs to be discussed in the AFF debrief, but as an instructor, I think we are all safer with a more pronounced count, than a student count with no movement at all. You are probably correct that some students carry an explosive count with them for years, but that's where we as a community of experienced jumpers need to coach them to calm it down. It's much easier to control an exit count when you have dozens (or hundreds, or thousands) of jumps than when you are a student dealing with high stress emotions. So, when you see more experienced jumpers using the power count, work with them so they can better understand the "vibe" of a calmer count. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Your last question is one I can't completely answer. I'd suggest you contact your regional director and seek an optional subscription with a modest dues reduction. My hunch is that reducing circulation wouldn't significantly reduce the costs of producing the magazine, and the lower circulation would probably lower ad rates. So I'd guess it's a budgeting and balance issue that needs to be addressed by USPA. So why does USPA exist? Well, first is to represent us before government. It's a critical function that has proven its value year after year. USPA also develops and maintains instructional programs that have allowed the sport to grow while reducing fatalities and injuries, a point that really matters to the federal government and local communities that host drop zones (as well as individual members). The organization also serves as the bridge to our group insurance program, a critical piece of institutional infrastructure that we need to maintain access to airports around the country. USPA also serves as the sanctioning body for national and international competition. Beyond all that, USPA serves as the clearing house for information about skydiving technical and social issues, and that too keeps us safer while bringing us together as a community. I know there are some folks who don't like some of the USPA functions, or feel the organization could do a better job in some areas. Likewise, I know some folks think the various missions should be balanced differently. Keep in mind that USPA represents more than 32,000 very individual skydivers. I think they do a pretty good job of serving the interests of the membership as a whole. As for your question about why USPA represents skydivers and DZO's, I think there is some overlap in needs, and USPA should represent the DZ's where jumper and business interests are the same, but my feeling is that the organization sometimes places the interest of drop zones above those of individual members, and certainly they place the interests of drop zones above the needs of students. We have the power to change that by electing directors who have no connection to the business side of the sport, but so far the majority of the membership has failed to exercise that option. By the way, AOPA does represent both airports and pilots. Like USPA representing jumpers, the primary mission of AOPA is to represent pilots, but they understand that pilots need airports and FBO's, and they work to help those parts of the industry where the business interests do not conflict with the interests of pilots. In my opinion, AOPA does a better job of separating these user classes than USPA, but it's important to understand that airport owners have their own organization while drop zone owners do not. That's an economic issue probably driven by market size. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It gets a bit more complicated than just staying the required number of feet away from a cloud as required by one of the regulations. You have made it pretty clear you are too lazy to look up a regulation, but how about spending a few minutes looking up a briefing about how that regulation fits into safety, and why hoping there isn't a 747 nearby isn't enough. See Article 19 "Jumping Near Clouds" at http://theblueskyranch.com/STA.php . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Please see BSR 2-1(j)(1) that says "Night, water, and demonstration jumps are to be performed only with the advice of the local S&TA, Instructor Examiner, or Regional Director." The S&TA will not approve an intentional water jump without training. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It is my understanding that the Sentinel was removed from the market many, many years ago and is no longer supported at all. It did have a maintenance requirement, but that service is no longer available. Based on that, it won't comply with 105.43 (c). As for the FXC 1200 vs. a computer issue, I'd go for the Cypres. The Cypres has an algorithm that calulates altitude, descent rate, and speed, and won't fire the unit even unless within all parameters. the FXC just looks for altitude and descent rate, so it's possible to be in a burble at a higher altitude and generate a fire when it shouldn't happen. That threat really bothers me. With that said, I'm very comfortable trusting the FXC 12000 to protect a student who doesn't do RW with people that might be above him, as long as it meets the manufacturers test and maintenance cycles. Sadly, at least some DZ's never chamber test, and some don't even meet the inspection requirement. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Not everyplace, and not by all instructors. I've seen far too many tandem instructors slip the belt on and off through the back of the student harness without even telling the student. I've even watched a few clip the student harness to the instructor harness and then use one belt for the instructor and none for the student. That approach is not legal or safe. I know she was using the seatbelt thing as an example of how things are already done, and that toggles etc. could be handled the same way. I just wanted to point out that not every DZ is even mentioning seatbelts, and it's something we should take seriously. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

The seatbelt briefing is already required for every airplane flight, including skydiving flights with tandems. See 91.107. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title14/14tab_02.tpl It requires that the pilot ensure that each passenger is briefed on how to fasten and unfasten their seat belt, when to fasten and unfasten the seatbelt, and that each passenger actually use their seatbelt for taxi, take off and landing. The pilot can delegate this responsibility, as is done on commercial flights, but the pilot remains responsible for ensuring each passenger is briefed and uses the seatbelts. Often we ignore this requirement in the skydiving world. The seatbelt briefing IS a requirement. It's easy, but as with so many other things, it requires that the tandem instructor actually talk to the student. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

You were half way to finding your answer when you looked on the SSK web page. Finish your own research by looking near the bottom of that home page in an area marked "contact information" for their telephone number (here's an assist...it's listed as 513-934-3201) then call SSK directly. The best source of information is the manufacturer, and that's especially true when a question begins with "I've heard that" and ends with "is it true?" . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Can a student actually get the toggles from the riser on a tandem jump? It probably depends on the type of tandem system and how the two harnesses have been positioned. I've been able to do it from the front maybe once, but it's a super tough reach even for an experienced tandem instructor. IMO, suggesting that the student reach back and get the toggles from the riser isn't practical, or as some have suggested, not even safe because they may grab the cutaway handle. With that said, I think they should be taught to steer when handed the toggles. In the case discussed here, we don't know what condition the TI was in. He may have had a stroke or heart attack, and it may have been sudden onset. It's also possible that there was a gradual disability. I know I've been super sick or tired on a few tandems and was very happy I had taught the student to steer. Once the parachute is open it takes only a few seconds to do a controllability check and hand the toggles off to the student. Likewise, I like them to know where the main ripcord is and have access to it. It's great for teaching, but there is always a very slight chance that the student just might need to save the instructors life. It can happen. So, I like teaching the student mostly because it improves retention, but as an aside, it makes the jump safer for the instructor too. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Sorry to nitpick, but those numbers don't quite add up. More like "just over one per two weeks." A shame either way. Very true, my mistake. It's been corrected in the original post. Thanks for the point out. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Probably yes, sort of no. In the United States we can usually expect about 30 fatalities per year, that's just over one every two weeks. In fact over the last 10 years (1995-2004) there have been 315 domestic US fatalities, that's 31.5 per year. In terms of USPA membership, that comes to 1 fatality for every 1,045 members per year. Fatalities tend to cluster around points of high activity, and points where non-current jumpers return to the sport. January closes out the Christmas boogie season, and many northern jumpers who have been idle travel south for a few jumps, so we may see a slight bump. There will be another bump at the beginning of the northern season, and another bump as the summer boogie season heats up. What you are seeing reported here on dropzone.com is a worldwide fatality listing, so there will be more than what we have in any one country. The other thing that is happening is that as dropzone.com becomes more popular, we see more fatalities reported here. So, yes, there are lots of fatalities, and yes, the reports of fatalities are increasing, but actual fatality rates (domestically and worldwide) are pretty stable or decreasing slightly. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Ski helmets are tested for a direct impact of about 15mph, but may provide some protection with higher speed glancing blows. The composit skydiving helmets aren't tested at all. You can read about the testing of snowsports helmets in the FAQ on the R.E.D. (Burton) site at http://www.redprotection.com/misc/faq.asp. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy