peek

Aha! Trust no one, (but mainly keep checking the URL line on your browser no matter what you are doing). If something doesn't seem right it's not.

it happens by clicking links like that... My dear, why did you do that?!!! (Serious question.) For the life of me I can't figure out why so many people just click on links that they are sent via email. Is it being in a hurry? Inattention? Trust? Just quit clicking on things if you don't know what they are.

Yesterday a group came out to do AFF jumps. One of them had done 2 AFF jumps previously at another DZ, one 2 years ago, one 1 year ago. They sat through the first jump course as many DZs would require I'm sure. So this guy asks about his student progression and asked if he could do the things that a person did on subsequent AFF jumps. (I told him some things were possible but that we would need to discuss it before the jump.) He was asked by someone else, "Honestly now, do you plan to do this often enough to stay current and progress, or are you just going to do a jump every year or so?" He said he planned to jump once a year and that he would like to do the "normal" progression. (In other words, he did not consider the long period of time between jumps to be an issue at all.) Now before we all start thinking that this guy is crazy, we should ask ourselves, "Is there some other sport that people like him have gotten information about that would lead them to believe that skydiving is like that?" Can anyone think of some activities ("high risk") or otherwise that could accommodate that type of training progression?

It's always heartening to find a never jumper that thinks about these things instead of just following what they are told about packing. You are correct, the lines do move during all that tail rolling. If you want to learn something and have some time, try laying the canopy down without all that tail rolling and watch where the lines go. You can move them to the center and then hold them there while you do the cocooning with the tail. Perhaps not practical if you want to pack quickly, but you will know exactly where your lines are. If you locate some packing instructions for reserves that are flaked while standing, you will see how this is done. (The PD document I believe says "Pro Pack", but it is much more careful than that.) Jump Shack specified this method for the Racer reserve many years ago, and Flight Concepts reserve packing instructions show method now.

I would be interested in what the BPA thought as far as the progression that was trialed in the US, because a number of them were used at various DZ's from what I recalled. In other words, what the progression consisted of as far as the jumps and what the student was to perform on them. Strong Enterprises published one of their design, and a number of us created our own. (This is going to be an interesting thread.)

This thread I started is a good place to start: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2651648;search_string=decline;#2651648

"David Lee Roth to rejoin Van Halen for reunion tour" Can you say, "Jump"? It cracks me up. I can remember when it came out. We thought they wrote it just for us didn't we?

A friend got a Kruger balloon suit with some gear she bought, and gave the suit to me. It was one of those "lucky fit" things. It was like it was built custom for me, (no small feat.) The last time I jumped one was about 20 years ago when I borrowed my friend's, who used it for his regular suit, since all jumpsuits were all rather large back then. I couldn't fly it worth a damn because I had about 200 jumps or so and it was so different, having inflatable arms and legs. After the jump he said, "you wouldn't come down to us!" Well, I couldn't. It takes some practice to fly one of these. So I follow out 2 experienced jumpers/instructors doing a Tandem and stayed out of the way, just close enough to get a reference point. It inflated very smoothly, and practice touches did not feel too unusual, although I pulled high anyway just to be sure. It created enough extra burble to cause a slight hesitation in deployment. The first thing I noticed was that I was not feeling the wind. It was interesting. And the amount of drag was amazing. It actually flies smoothly enough for video. But I have no idea how anyone ever did any good RW in one. I had to make it deflate to get anywhere near the drogue fall rate. Then I let it all hang out, and went zooming up. Not the usual repertoire for a big guy. The next jump I followed 3 guys doing RW, and 2 were novices, so they were funneling things and I didn't get anywhere near them. I did a "gainer" exit and it inflated well again. I tried vigorous tracking which deflated the wings and vibrated my arms in an uncomfortable way. A "delta" position works OK. I think it will be useful once in a while for following Tandems or the very lightweight students, since my other jumpsuits are not enough. If anyone else is thinking of trying one: 1. Get some experience with a non-inflatable large wing jumpsuit first. 2. I'd be scared to jump a canopy known to line twist and spin, because of that burble. 3. Practice touches and pull high of course. 4, Throw the pilot chute vigorously. 5. Get the arm and leg latching mechanisms secure because not having everything inflated symmetrically would suck.

That is such a cool idea! I must remember that.

I don't think tandem jumps are doing damage to the sport. I just think they can be much more than what many DZs and instructors are making them. I have none! I only have what I hope you will believe, and that is that many tandem students I have instructed have at first assumed their skydive was about letting me do it all, and after having trained them and done the jump, seeing the expression on their face and hearing the tone of their voice that tells me that they now understand that it was a skydive where they got to learn a skill and use it. What I also have (that I cannot prove, but I hope you will believe) is comments from tandem students that have done tandem jumps before or who know someone who has done one with less training. For example, here is an excerpt from an email I got: "Gary, ... I especially appreciated how you tried to instruct and inform throughout the process. My husband expressed how he wished his experience had been as informative. Thanks, xxx" (What she meant by her reference to her husband was that he had done a tandem jump with much less instruction, and was watching as I trained her. He was amazed to find out what a tandem jump could be with the instruction.) Another student did a tandem jump with me 3 years ago, did her second one with another instructor a year later, then the third one with me a few weeks ago. She commented that she preferred my instruction over the other instructor's lack of much instruction. OK, enough of that! (But you asked...) Other reasons I provide as much instruction as I do is: 1. It makes my jump safer. I tell them what to expect and what to do about it. Less apprehension, less likelihood of a student doing something "unusual". 2. It makes my jump easier. I just lay back and watch them utilize the skills they have learned. It's like I'm the one along for the ride. (I'm kind of a "do the work up front" kind of guy.) Money! (In many cases.) Oh, wait, we had better make that another thread. We've hijacked this one about as far as we could have!

I suggest that it is not necessarily how a DZ treats their (tandem) students, but how the instructor treats them. I'm quite sure that many commercial DZs don't give a damn about whether they are trained as students or not, but the instructor can take it upon themselves to go just a bit further with the training and make a big difference.

I can't imagine doing it any other way. The video used shows the student in a skydiving body position and I place them on a horizontal trainer and have them practice the same. I teach them just like I would an AFF student for the initial body position training. (I wince every time I hear a TI tell their student to do that.) If they ever jump again I think the answer would be yes.

BUMP and reminder: Alan Silver, who has done a great deal of work getting this change to this point so far, has dedicated much of the main page of his web site to information about how you can add your comments. http://www.silverparachutes.com/ Alan encourages everyone to read the instructions first to save time, because to do not need to register to provide comments.

It seems to be more outdated among those who think they must use the "latest" gear or among those who do not like closing the rigs. Spring loaded pilot chutes work despite their problems, (which are few as far as safety and reliability go).

And there might be a number of students that, (if taught how to skydive on a tandem jump), would continue instead of just thinking of it as a one time thing. There are also some students that at first act like they do not want to learn these things, but once you teach them, they enjoy it very much. Of all the students that I have done this with, only about 2 have been ho-hum about having learned what I taught them. The rest were quite happy they did, with some of them being very happy. As you might be able to tell, I am a rather fervent promoter of tandem instruction right from the first jump. The effort I put out has always repaid me with having a great time watching my student's accomplishments and their delight in having done them. (I told you all it was a thread hijack.)

Warning: Partial thread hijack. Understood. It seems like in many places around the world this is the case. But why? I think it is because skydivers and DZs get into the habit of treating them like that, then the students experience it as that, then a downward spiral occurs into a carnival. But what if the original poster began doing some serious instruction on his tandem jumps. And what if his students showed their video to others and they came to the DZ expecting to learn to skydive! Then you could be saying, "In SA we treat all tandem jumps as skydiving instruction, not like carnival rides." Wouldn't that be cool? That's why I was suggesting to the original poster the aspects of training mentioned.

You are going to get a lot of catchall answers for a lot of questions because most skydivers do not care enough to get educated on a lot of the technical and rigging aspects of the sport (that can perhaps even save their ass some day.) It's going to be up to you to be a pest and keep asking questions until you get the right answers from educated people. Good luck and keep working hard to educate yourself, because it will make you a safer skydiver.

Unlike some of the critics I can understand your feeling of success with unstable exits. I have always felt that tandem students are going to be tense at exit time and then relax after a few seconds of freefall. It is possible that they relax about the time you get stable and throw the drogue, so this perhaps makes things feel good to you. However! Training your student to do stable exits after having explained the relative wind and how it all works can teach them a lot more about skydiving than doing flips. And if you can train your students to do a _truly_ good arch along with you, I am quite sure that you will feel stable and ready to throw the drogue even sooner. (I always have.) It doesn't mean you will always be able to do this, but it is a very worthy goal.

Told by who? Michael, you have more than enough jumps to challenge something like this. Questions you can ask: Are these people assuming a particular type of canopy. Are they assuming the deployment process is starting from terminal velocity. I'm sure there are others.

Update: For a few weeks before the incident the weather station had not been fully working because maintenance personnel had not yet been called on it. When they came out they fixed everything.

What I don't understand is why skydivers think they have to use fast paced music with their video. And why they feel like it must be loud. And why many of them feel like they need to make an entire video production of it and put text leaders and trailers on it that most people don't even care about. "Just show me the video!"

Why do students need to use their own judgment at times? To keep things from happening like in the picture. Afterwards the student said, "I was just following directions." And this FJC training definitely includes telling them that they may need to take matters into their own hands when it comes to avoiding obstacles when landing (because they have a better view than the person on the radio.) Just a reminder that no matter what we tell them that there is still a chance that things can go wrong. (Sure, it would have been better if the person on the radio had been standing out in the landing area, but that's not the purpose of the posting.)

There are a lot of points to the GM program (too numerous to mention here) but most of them are to the advantage of the DZ, (otherwise what DZ would want to join?) There is a list of things they promise to do, but does not include using the ISP. There was an attempt to require using the ISP at GM DZs when it first came out, but it was so poorly written at that time that there was a rebellion. USPA serves so many types of members and group members that it is difficult to _make_ anyone do anything. It may not even be a good idea to do this with many things. [edited to correct spelling]

CB: Conversely, I have seen more than a few examples of very-busy schools which still use what I consider to be obsolete AFF. JP: Bingo! Yet they are still USPA group members alot of them. GP: I'm not saying whether this is good or bad, but the ISP is still optional. All a GM DZ needs to do is follow the BSR's. How to keep the quality of training high? I don't know. The interesting thing about all of this is that I felt that when AFF was taught in a "traditional" way by most DZs that offered AFF, that it was very standardized, (though inferior to the way many of us train now, including much more than freefall training.) An AFF student in the middle of their AFF "levels" used to be able to go to multiple DZ's and take up where they left off. (Didn't they?) Something tells me you guys are going to say, "hell no!" This is a pretty good thread, I hope we get some more opinions here.

That would disappoint me too. Fortunately I don't see too much of that. What I see most is people getting close to their "A" license and are familiar with those things, but have not been required to work on them enough to keep caught up with their actual jumps. As far as I have been told that's the case around these parts more or less (except for that one place and time we talked about a few years ago). [edited to explain things better]