Hooknswoop

Hot tip: Don't post anything negative about any DZ if you want to continue skydiving (whether it is true or not). Derek

Here's mine. Derek

OK, I get it. If the seal thread would break by sliding the pin up so that the thicker part is off the grommet, then it was seated too far when it was packed and sealed. Good catch on the part of the rigger. Derek

Ah, you mean the seal thread. You do not want the thicker part of the pin against the grommet. Having the thicker part of the pin against the grommet could bend the pin. Sounds like your pin is fine. Derek

It used to be mine and is completely legal. Why would you think it isn't? Because he has more than the resommended minimum jumps to do an intentional cutaway and is not violating and FAR's. How ironic. Holding others to a higher standard than yourself? Derek

Not sure what threads you are talking about, but it sort of sounds like the thicker part of the pin is against the grommet from the pin being pushed in too far. It is no big deal to reposition the pin. Derek

I got hungry living on passion. Derek

Too bad it is mis spelled Derek

Maybe not a union, but that might work too, but a association of Skydiving Instructors would be a good idea. Benifits for full-time Instrcutors, beter pay, pay increases based onperformance and experience, etc. You would make more money if you did. Too bad. If a full time, experienced Instructor could make enough money, they might be more of them around, which would be good for students and up and coming Instructors alike. Instead a lot of them bail, taking their experience with them. Instead, USPA lowers the standards to create a larger pool to keep pay low. Too bad really. Derek

Ya, that'll show them. "Remember that JP guy that quit jumping here last year because of the DZ rivalry crap?" "Who?" Derek

Exactly why AFFI's should; 1) Be paid more 2) Not get their rating if they cannot catch a student, always 3) lose their rating if their student bounces or the student's AAD fires 4) Be paid more as their experience and performance level increases. Electricions work on life-critical equipment/systems and poor electrical work has cost lives. Would you be willing to pay more for a better, more experience electricion to work on a system your life will depend on? I would. Derek

An electrician that has been doing electrical work for 20 years shoud, and does, get paid more than an electrician with 1-year experience, and not in the form of a tip. Derek

True, there are exceptions, just not many. What is wrong with getting more pay for doing a better job? Derek

So can we agree that if he lands on a slope, he can get into ground effect then slowly ease it down to contact and have almost zero impact? He will still be sliding, but that is survivable without injury. Sounds very possible to me. Derek

Remember that USPA backed down from making the ISP mandatory from pressure from DZO's. The DZ's here in CO all use old school AFF, as do a lot of DZ's across the country. Ask yourself, why would a DZO continue to use old school AFF when there is a proven, better program out there? Derek

Simple answer: He wouldn't. DZO's don't care about quality, only quanity. That is why the AFFCC standards were lowered. Look at all the AFF students that have Cypres fires these days. That is the other part of the course they changed, you can just keep doing eval dives until you pass. Look at how the pass rate skyrocketed up to over 80% from 50% +/-. Skills didn't go up, the standard went down. This is an example of how when USPA must choose between it's members and DZO's, DZO's win every time. A highly experienced and capable AFFI doesn't make any more per jump than a fresh out of the box, barely passed the new course AFFI does. I think that is a contributing factor to why experienced AFFI's give it up. It's a shame. Derek

The new course requires you to pass 3 of 4 dives. The old course required you to get 12 points on a maximum of 6 dives with a possible score of 0 to 4 on each dive. For example, a candidate fails the first dive. That would be an 'unsat' with the new course and a '0' with the old course. For the second dive, he does "OK" which gives him a 'pass' at the new course and a '2' at the old course. For the third dive, he again does "OK", which gives him another 'pass at the new course and a '2' at the old course. Same score(s) for the fourth dive. At the new course, he is now an AFFI. At the old course, he has 6 points out of the 12 he needs and only 2 jumps left. The pressure is own. He must perform better than "OK" and score 2 '3's' or a '4' and a '2' to pass the course. So instead of having his rating, he is under the gun to demonstrate that not only can he pass the eval jumps, but must perform very well in order to get his rating. The added pressure makes the eval dives that much harder, similar to last few accuracy jumps for the PRO rating. Because of how the course was changed, it is easier to pass, less qualified candidates are passing the new course. At the course I went to (in 1999), I never had to roll the evaluator back over. Every time he tried to roll over, I grabbed him, kept him stable, gave him the arch signal and relax until he did and let go again. The new course I witnessed, the candidate could not catch the evaulator on his back, but still eventually passed the course. Derek

Did my posts answer your questions regarding specifics of how the AFFCC was made easier to pass by USPA? Derek

Open the reserve flap, slide it on, close reserve flap. Anything can happen, but it is very unlikely for anything to snag on it during a stable reserve deployment. I think the bad point is that in the event of a cutaway after stowing the main slider (entanglement, brake problem, etc), the slider has to come out of the tarp tie down or the whole thing has to slide off the the rewerve flap before you are free of your main canopy. A better design incorporates Velcro to hold the slider and release from the rig in the event of a cutaway. Tarp tiedowns are a bad idea for slider keepers. Derek

People don't like hearing bad things about their home DZ, even if they are true. A lot of jumpers will defend their home DZ without question, even if they know they are wrong. Excerpts from a thread about a King Air crash at SSMI “Though new to skydiving I'm not unaware of what constitutes a safe dropzone. SSM is very safety conscious and I have complete confidence in our DZO and pilot.” “Just letting you know that I am bringing another gang of jumpers from Westex out to your SAFE and FRIENDLY dropzone next weekend.” ” If you are worried about the plane you jump out of go some place else or quit all together no one makes you jump you do it because you want to.” From the NTSB report: “Review of the engine logbook revealed the engine was being operated in excess of 1,000 hours beyond the manufacturer's recommended time between overhauls of 3,600 hours.” The aircraft should have been able to climb on the remaining engine, but crashed. The jumpers that call that DZ “home” defended the DZ, then were quiet once it was revealed that the engine was over 1,000 hours past it’s TBO. This is just one example of the blind loyalty that a lot of jumpers show towards their "home DZ". Derek

Tarp holder used as a slider keeper. Derek

Because there are enough AFFI's that will work for the same +/- as tandems. If there was less AFFI's or they refused to work for peanuts, then they would be paid more. Derek

Hand signals require the student, in a very stressful enviroment, to see them, then convert them into what they mean )"Arch", "Relax", etc.) then do it. To hear a calm soothing voice say "Relax" would cut out some of the sensory input, reducing overload. Radios would be invaluable on jump run for spotting, climb out, etc. A reliable Instructor to student, 1-wat free fall comm system would reduce sensory overload, reassure the student, and steepen the learning curve. Derek

They kept rotating through 3 different scenarios, one of which was the back to earth. The candidate could not catch the back to earth evaulator, so he would pass 2 out of 3, eventually he had enough passes and got his rating. That is the current system. Exactly, the new course is easier to pass than the old course. USPA lowered the standards so that DZO's wouldn't have to pay AFFI's more and keep a large pool of AFFI's that they can draw from. Supply and demand to keep costs low. Derek

If you pass the other 3 dives, you can fail the dive where the evaluator presents the student back to earth scenario and get your rating. Seen it happen. So you can barely pass 3 of 4 dives and fail one and get your rating. In the old course if you failed a dive and barely passed the others (one 'zero' and 5 'two's'), you don't get your rating. The new course is easier to pass and candidates that would not have passed the old course are passing the new course. Derek