diablopilot

I think there is going to be a "Style" lost with the high speed tunnels. Don't get me wrong, they are a great thing, but learning to fly on "not enough wind" REALLY stretches the abilities.

I agree that there is no need for the change, and while I have come up with many negative scenarios (like approved design paperwork for mains, and the STC or 337 equivalent for altering them) the reality is, who ya gonna violate? Skydivers (riggers not included) don't require any FAA certifications. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

They get pretty smelly when they have a full coat, and be careful, they spit. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

I did. The most current version, directly from www.faa.gov The point is, I know that the requirement is silly, as does everyone else in the field. But if we follow the "letter of the law", hell we'd pretty much never get off the ground. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Wanna bet? ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Ready for a laugh? A Manufacturer does not have to have any certifications! Simply a TSO if it's a TSO's component. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

As an aside, there really is only one way to address this "skyride issue", and that's complete elimination of the Group Membership program. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Anytime you're feeling froggy, jump on over...... ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

If that new FAA manager did approve the removal of the word "alter" then they did the skydiving community a huge disservice. Who was consulted? How much experience does the manager have with skydiving? ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

And on an unrelated note, with the following in mind how many riggers do you know that are working outside the limitations of their certificate. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Oh boy, here we go again....I have to go dig up some files, but the gist of my interpretation of the FAR's suggest that without a rigging certification a person may do just about anything they wish to their own main, but a senior rigger cannot do work to a main. The argument can be made that a senior rigger may not do any patch work or line replacement, but I'm pretty sure this is absolutely NOT the intensions of the FAR's and is simply a mistake in wording since the latest revision. Edit: Oh and I'll take a guess who your source is, he's a guy I like and respect quite a bit, but we don't see eye to eye on this one. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Same point (i.e. nothing new under the sun), new attitude (more of a jerk about it). Shoulda seen me when Olav went around saying he "invented" freeflying and was going to trademark the term. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Yes. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Tickets booked, see you there. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

http://velocityrigs.com/products.php?product=infinity&sub=parts $95 for standard, $125 for Stainless. I'm your hero? Now that's scary! ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Yes I can and have e-mailed, and or called members of the BOD, but I also believe Mr. Peek about why the e-mail address was disabled and that is disturbing. Ignoring communication may be how some businesses operate, but I can choose not to do business with them. However when I pay dues and elect people to represent me, I DEMAND they communicate with me. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

This stuff?http://www.drinksmixer.com/drink1134.html WTF come up with foul swill like this?! ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

See now that right there pisses me off.. They are supposed to be representing THE MEMBERS...and that includes listening to WE THE MEMBERS. Same question as asked above. What evidence do you have that the email address was removed for the reason cited above? If it's true, it's wrong. But is it true? Cite the source. Directly quoted from Post#72 in this thread. The Post was created by a currently sitting USPA Regional Director. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

If they wanted to do a USPA ratings course, maybe. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Ron Paul? ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Dude, you know the first thing you've got to do is make eye contact with the Conductor! That way you can see if he's gonna fuck with you or not! ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

This is a "devil's advocate" response. Don't shoot the messenger. I offer this because there's a lot of lynch-mob type talk going on, and nobody seems to be considering what may be the other side of the argument. Let's say that Jan's public comments were the cause of USPA losing four counts on the Skyride lawsuit, which cost the organization (that's us) a lot of money (that's ours). So, what's wrong, then, with ousting the person that caused that loss? Wouldn't this be just like any other business getting rid of an executive whose poor performance has caused business problems? If you were the holder of Enron stock which became worthless because of executive malfeasance, then I'd bet that you would be ready to terminate and hold accountable those executives. So how come everyone here seems to want to do the opposite with Jan, and save the BOD member who caused the financial loss to USPA? Okay, I'm done being the devil's advocate now. Please don't shoot me. These are not my personal feelings. But I think the question needs to be asked. Devils advocate to your devils advocate. How are her public statements any different than anyone elses? Edit: My "Take Back the USPA" sentiments are not based on this incident, as we don't have any information about this incident. In fact they are based on several YEARS of ineffective representation by several long term members of the board, and extremely suspect behavior by the same members of the board to further their own gains, and protect their network. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Yeah, it does. ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

While I like your sentiment, I think it's time for a "Take Back the USPA" movement. Let those "in power" know where the power really lies (with the members) and those that refuse to answer to the members that we're watching. I'm making a list, and I'm checking it twice..... ---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.