Why Static Line???

[grue 1]

Quote

Quote

You gonna launch a student and two instructors out of a 182 or a 206?

Can be done and is done on a regular basis. I did a mix of SL/AFF and did some 2-JM jumps out of a Cessna. My regular DZ has no turbine in the winter yet AFF is still offered.

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's a lot more appropriate for an Otter or a Skyvan or something than a small Cessna.

cavete terrae.

[riggerrob 643]

Take it from an instructor who is current on tandem, S/L, IAD and PFF ... no single training method is perfect.
They all have their strong points and weak points.
Tandem may be the safest method for first-timers, but its training value quickly diminishes.
S/L and IAD are great for teaching basic canopy skills.
AFF may be the best way to teach freefall skills, but trying to teach large blocks of freefall and canopy skills - on the same day - is more than many students can grasp.
Hint: I enjoy first-jump AFF so much that I told my boss he would have to pay me $100 extra per jump to do it.
Once students have 2 or 3 (tandem, S.L or IAD) jumps, they can focus on learning freefall skills in a wind tunnel.
With tandem, S/L, IAD and tunnel time behind them, students can start to combine all those skills with PFF instructors.

[MrBrant 0]

General question for all.

Why Staic line vs IAD?

I learn't via IAD, and am under the impression that it is the 'newer' and 'better' form of staic line.

Is it infact 'better'?
If it is 'better' why are jumps still done S/L instead of IAD?
Is there some pro's of s/l that get lost in IAD?


Thanks,

Brant

[velvetjo 0]

I've seen a very effective teaching program that uses this sequence:

- 2 x tandem
- 3 x IAD
- AFF until cleared for solo
- solo & coached jumps until licensed

IAD is very similar to static line, and it does a nice job of letting the student focus on exit stability & canopy skills before complicating things with freefall skills. Static line could be used in a similar application.

I started on the dope rope, and still think that both SL and IAD can be great methods depending on preferences, equipment, and weather. With that said, it seems that IAD is simpler from a rigging standpoint for student gear transitions and prep than SL.

I agree that you should try one of these methods to see what they're about. Can't hurt. Might be interesting.

Lance

[John4455 0]

Quote

Gee Grandpa, did they have planes back then ?

Yessiree sonny boy!

If you completed the AFF course and the Static line course, (provided you didn't repeat a jump) you would spend about the same. An AFF graduate would have 7 jumps and a static line student would have nearly 20.

How do ya like it Johnny?

[adamjenner 0]

Quote

Is it infact 'better'?
If it is 'better' why are jumps still done S/L instead of IAD?
Is there some pro's of s/l that get lost in IAD?

i learnt through the IAD system as well and was JUST about to ask the same question as you
hopefully someone can answer it

[NickDG 23]

Totally, a student learns survival skills by wholly concentrating on counting, checking the parachute, canopy control and landings before anything else. What's the foremost thing in the mind of an AFF first jump student when in the door? The dive flow. I've even heard some AFF JM's say don’t worry about the canopy part, that comes later . . .

Also, about small airplanes. Students generally learn more skills in a Cessna than in larger planes. Two JMs and a student in a Cessna spend more time going over things on the way up than in a larger aircraft. In an cabin class aircraft sometimes the JMs spend more time joshing with their friends than working with the student. Also in a Cessna it's easier to teach spotting and you can even do practice jump runs on the way up. (If anyone thinks learning to spot isn't a necessary skill you've drunk the cool aid.) The student also on later jumps can operate the door. I see up-jumpers now who don’t know when to open the door, and some who are clueless without the "green" light.

Plus, while Cessnas aren't on the top of the fun list for up-jumpers (it's slow and uncomfortable for Instructors too, but it's not about us, right) climbing out on the strut is a challenge and after the first or second time, it's a neat and fun thing for students to do.

The biggest obstacle in the S/L program is when students start doing twenty second delays and have spin problems. Any AFF JM can stop a student spin in freefall by grabbing them, it takes a real Instructor to correct this problem with words.

The real benefit of S/L is it produces people who are very altitude aware because before they reach 30 second delays, when a JM may dock on them for the first time, they have already done a lot of jumps concentrating on altitude and not much else. I'm pretty sure most AFF students don’t reach that level of concern because they know there are two pros (or later at least one) along that won’t let them blow through pull altitude. Static line students have no one to depend on but themselves at this point.

Sure, I'm old school, but if my sister came to me and said she wanted to start skydiving (it'll never happen) I'd think seriously of putting her through a full blown S/L program. Not one of the modified programs where it's five static line jumps then on to single jumpmaster AFF (I think that just combines the worst parts of both programs) and if she couldn't hack the static line program from start to finish then no more skydiving for her

In the end, and who cares how long it takes, she would eventually learn how to fly. But, in the meantime I could be confident she already knew how to save herself . . .

NickD BASE 194

[Ron 10]

Quote

As an AFF instructor, I am ignorant to the process, but I think it's proven that the AFF progression is a better learning method.

I would suggest that you learn more about the SL program before you make such an opinion.

Both methods *if taught correctly* teach well. The problem I see is that AFF is so fast that many students "graduate" without some much needed basics.

On average I would venture that most SL grads can spot better than AFF grads. I have meet AFF "I's" that can't spot a Cessna.

On average SL students have better canopy control than the AFF student of the same jump number. Being that most deaths in this sport are with open canopies....I think thats a good thing. Now AFF grads are better in freefall. But the focus is almost always about turning points or getting the spock. So in many cases SL students get equal in freefall, but some AFF grads never do get better under canopy.

Take an otter load of AFF grads with 20 jumps and an otter load of SL grads with 20 jumps. Pull the power out at 2,500 feet and tell both planes to get out...Which plane will empty first?

Find out how many SL grads graduate and can't pack, compare that to AFF grads.

Places that have marginal weather can still jump SL. If there are clouds at 7 grand the SL guy can still jump, the AFF guy is grounded.

SL is cheaper than AFF.

A DZ in my area that teaches SL charges 150.00 for both the class and the first jump. Additional jumps are 75.00 (When I learned it was 140.00 for the JFC and 40 for the rest of the jumps).

Another DZ in my area offering AFF has the lowest priced AFF FJC as 309.00

So you could get 3 SL jumps for just the cost of the AFF program.

Also additional jumps I think are 175.00 so thats two more SL jumps per jump.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's a lot more appropriate for an Otter or a Skyvan or something than a small Cessna.

It makes no difference. Any AFF I that can't do AFF out of a Cessna should not be doing AFF.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[wmw999 2,439]

AFF seems to favor the natural; the student who just kind of intuitively understands and figures things out and doesn't have to repeat them a lot.

Static line (and I would include IAD in that) is better for people who would rather focus on one thing at a time (and that one thing could include their budget).

Back when we learned off dirigibles, there wasn't no steekin' AFF . Good thing for me, too -- I wasn't the kind of student who kind of naturally figured everything out.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[grue 1]

Quote

Quote

I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's a lot more appropriate for an Otter or a Skyvan or something than a small Cessna.

It makes no difference. Any AFF I that can't do AFF out of a Cessna should not be doing AFF.

That's probably true, but there's somethign to be said for simplicity and convenience. I know at my DZ, where we don't have the 'crew of midgets' thing going on like seems to be the norm (what the hell IS with that, anyway? I swear to god the average height in this sport is 4-5" lower than in any other group of people), it'd be interesting. I'm trying to imagine three 6'3" or so guys, one of whom has never jumped, going out of a 182 at the same time....

Anyway, yes, I know it's done, but I'm just saying that IN MY NEWBIE OPINION, it would SEEM that AFF would be much easier out of something with a big door and nothing to smack body parts on, like an Otter, or a Skyvan, or whathaveyou.

cavete terrae.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I'm trying to imagine three 6'3" or so guys, one of whom has never jumped, going out of a 182 at the same time....

And I am trying to tell you that one 5'6" (me) and two 6'3" guys jumping a Cessna is easy. The student is already outside the plane and facing the relative wind.

Quote

Anyway, yes, I know it's done, but I'm just saying that IN MY NEWBIE OPINION, it would SEEM that AFF would be much easier out of something with a big door and nothing to smack body parts on, like an Otter, or a Skyvan, or whathaveyou.

I understand your opinion, I'm just telling you it does not matter.

The ONLY thing better about doing AFF out of an Otter is it takes half as long to get to altitude and you get on average 3 thousand more feet to do the same jump. The Cessna exit might even be easier.

But to be honest doing AFF from a Cessna lets you teach the student to spot...REALLY teach them to spot, not just look down at the ground.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[cocheese 0]

That's it I'm locking the thread.
Oh yea, i'm not a greenie.

[gmittar 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm trying to imagine three 6'3" or so guys, one of whom has never jumped, going out of a 182 at the same time....

And I am trying to tell you that one 5'6" (me) and two 6'3" guys jumping a Cessna is easy. The student is already outside the plane and facing the relative wind.

Quote

Anyway, yes, I know it's done, but I'm just saying that IN MY NEWBIE OPINION, it would SEEM that AFF would be much easier out of something with a big door and nothing to smack body parts on, like an Otter, or a Skyvan, or whathaveyou.

I understand your opinion, I'm just telling you it does not matter.

The ONLY thing better about doing AFF out of an Otter is it takes half as long to get to altitude and you get on average 3 thousand more feet to do the same jump. The Cessna exit might even be easier.

But to be honest doing AFF from a Cessna lets you teach the student to spot...REALLY teach them to spot, not just look down at the ground.

Skydive NM just started offering AFF, and the instructors have had to learn how to launch it out of a 182, but that was part of their training. It's not a problem.

It may be a little easier out of a turbine, but any instructor worth his meager pay should have no problem doing it out of a 182.

|>.<|
Seriously, W.T.F. mate?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Take an otter load of AFF grads with 20 jumps and an otter load of SL grads with 20 jumps. Pull the power out at 2,500 feet and tell both planes to get out...Which plane will empty first?

I've many times seen AFF grads moving to get their 'clear and pull' requirements signed off be totally and unreasonably scared at having to exit at 5K. In Ron's scenario, the plane of AFF grads might not empty completely with a couple who would elect to ride down with the pilot - this is a problem. When we required clear and pulls for AFF grads in my old DZ it also only counted at a lower altitude (3000 max) and no one would flinch at that at all.

I've known AAF grads that think waving off at 5K+ is reasonable (I think it's a bit high for belly flying).

Recently, most AFF grads I know are very uncomfortable or will even refuse to spot.

But static line students do smell funny (I'm kidding, please don't ban me). here -

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[brycew 0]

I recently graduated off S/L progression and if AFF was available around here I probably would have elected for that option at the time. However looking back I'm glad that I did do S/L. From my unscientific observations it seems that students that went through S/L generally have better canopy control and landing skills than AFF students.

I'm surprised at the number of posts I see where people talk about difficulties in standing up their landings even well after obtaining their A license. To date, I've stood up all of my landings (yes I know I don't have all that many jumps though) and know of other recent grads at my dropzone that have done the same.

I think AFF dropzones could turn out students that are on equal footing with S/L dropzones for canopy control and landings if they made a point of emphasizing that part of the curriculum. But, I think the nature of the AFF training ends up putting more of an emphasis on the freefall portion of the jump.

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

I'm surprised at the number of posts I see where people talk about difficulties in standing up their landings even well after obtaining their A license. To date, I've stood up all of my landings (yes I know I don't have all that many jumps though) and know of other recent grads at my dropzone that have done the same.

I think AFF dropzones could turn out students that are on equal footing with S/L dropzones for canopy control and landings if they made a point of emphasizing that part of the curriculum.

I agree here completely. It pisses me off no end when I see people with up to 100 jumps talking about getting nearer to being able to stand up a landing, some of them laughing it off as no big deal. Somewhere along the line something must be lacking if they haven't recieved serious remedial training by that point.

Thing is I don't see why AFF students should not be able to recieve just the same amount of canopy control ground school and debriefing as S/L. Certainly where I learned (AFF) my instructors were always around to haul me up if I did something dumb.

However despite my pro AFF stance I think Ron has made some very good points about the S/L system that have really made me think. Cheers

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[FlyboySMB 0]

Quote

As an AFF instructor, I am ignorant to the process, but I think it's proven that the AFF progression is a better learning method.

I would suggest that you learn more about the SL program before you make such an opinion.

[skydivermom 0]

***static line also teaches you reeeeal early about line twists and kicking out of them....

__________________________________________________
Amen to that! I've had two lovely line twists so far. The first time I also had a malfunctioning radio so I got to land without instruction. Talk about a confidence builder!

Anyway, I don't think I would have done that well with AFF and definatley don't think I could have made it work financially. Also, going out of the plane by yourself and hanging off of the strut is another awesome way to develop confidence.

BTW, I'm supposed to graduate from SL tomorrow. Hope the weather's good

Mrs. WaltAppel

All things work together for good to them that love God...Romans 8:28

[bodypilot1 0]

2 Instructors for an AFF progression isn't needed, should you choose not to do static line.
The private TAF program I teach works great!
I take them on 2 "working tandems", then do single Instructor AFF jumps with video for the rest of their student jumps.


Be safe
Ed

www.WestCoastWingsuits.com
www.PrecisionSkydiving.com

[bodypilot1 0]

Quote

BTW, I'm supposed to graduate from SL tomorrow. Hope the weather's good

Push off at 45 and watch your nose!
Good luck!

Be safe
Ed

www.WestCoastWingsuits.com
www.PrecisionSkydiving.com

[Croc 0]

SL students learn to spot, fly and land. Every skydive ends with a landing. I learned via AFF and then jumped regularly at a Cessna DZ. From what I can see from my limited perspective, there is no advantage of taking AFF--and perhaps some disadvantages, i.e., spotting, canopy control, and landing. At most small DZs "coach" jumps are free; picking up the freefall skills comes naturally. By contrast, AFF is often overwhelming.

"Here's a good specimen of my own wisdom. Something is so, except when it isn't so."

Charles Fort, commenting on the many contradictions of astronomy

[Johnsisland 0]

Exactly why I choose S/L.

I am, err was, know as someone scared of heights. I didn't know if it would require someone pushing me out the door on my first jump (although when asked about this, they said they had a cattle prod, grin!)

I had video of the first jump, just in case I made the first jump, and chickened out after that.

And yes, I thought I would only do a few, but I think I will at least get my A, and some pictures of Mt. Raineer behind me, from 13k.

I also jumped because my Dad wound up in a body cast after about 12 jumps, back in WW2, and my Uncle tried to better my Dad, and broke his leg. So, I wanted to jump like they did, without anyone else attached or holding me. I can say I broke the family chain, but I did have a good chute, compared to Dad and Uncle's round POS.

J

Arch? I can arch just fine with my back to the ground.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Just an FYI, that was meant to be taken as a question, not an opinion.

No problem, Im sorry if you thought I was jumping on you. I was just trying to say that maybe you should learn about the SL system a little more before you make that call.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

Thing is I don't see why AFF students should not be able to recieve just the same amount of canopy control ground school and debriefing as S/L. Certainly where I learned (AFF) my instructors were always around to haul me up if I did something dumb.

IT *could* happen, but it does not. Some off the top of my head reasons:

1. SL students the major focus is exit and canopy control. For AFF its body position and pulling.

2. SL student get a bunch more jumps under supervision. The complete program with no repeats is like 15-17 jumps....AFF is 7-8. Thats almost 10 more jumps with direct supervision.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334