Logging jumps after licensed

[Hvance 0]

Got a newb question: After I'm off of student status, how are logged jumps recorded/verified? Obviously, at present, my instructors complete the log and sign it. How does this work after I complete my A requirements?

Thanks

I wish Google Maps had an "Avoid Ghetto" routing option.

[NWFlyer 2]

You log the jumps and have another licensed skydiver sign them.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[kallend 2,032]

Quote

You log the jumps and have another licensed skydiver sign them.

Or the pilot.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

You log the jumps and have another licensed skydiver sign them.

Or the pilot.

Or God. She's presumed to be unimpeachable.

[Hvance 0]

Thanks. Makes sense.

I wish Google Maps had an "Avoid Ghetto" routing option.

[theonlyski 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You log the jumps and have another licensed skydiver sign them.

Or the pilot.

Or God. She's presumed to be unimpeachable.

Going with the Dogma approach?

"I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly
DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890
I'm an asshole, and I approve this message

[Heatmiser 0]

Alanis Morissette made a cute god

What you say is reflective of your knowledge...HOW ya say it is reflective of your experience. Airtwardo

Someone's going to be spanked! Hopefully, it will be me. Skymama

[burtonjm 0]

It's important to keep logging so you can meet the requirements for ratings and other licenses. Any licensed jumper who was on the plane or the pilot can sign it.

This shit, right here, is OK

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

It's important to keep logging so you can meet the requirements for ratings and other licenses. Any licensed jumper who was on the plane or the pilot can sign it.

It only needs to be "another licensed skydiver, a pilot, or a USPA National or FAI Judge who witnessed the jump." (SIM Section 3-1. C. 2.) (The signer does not have to have been on the plane with you.)

[DiverMike 5]

I read the section and it appears I can witness my own jumps since I am a licensed pilot? I guess USPA National and FAI judges can also witness their own jumps?

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Zlew 0]

If you don't jump often, or travel around, I would get another jumper/instructor/etc. to sign. If you are working on your awards/licenses I would also make sure to do the same. Many DZ's won't let you jump or trust your currency if the jumps are not signed by another person. Some will even call the DZ that you last jumped at to make sure you are current.

When I was full time, jumping at one DZ, and making 100 jumps or more per month in the summer... I only got my book signed every few weeks (and logged a full days jumps on one page). For me it didn't matter... the DZ I jumped at knew I was current, and could verify numbers for awards and such via the manifest program. Start traveling around to other DZ's, or not jump very often...and it is much better to have a jumper's sig. on your logbook.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

I read the section and it appears I can witness my own jumps since I am a licensed pilot? I guess USPA National and FAI judges can also witness their own jumps?

No. The word "another" makes it clear that it must be someone other than you.
(Even if the word "another" was not in there - which it is - the concept, and context, of "witnessed" clearly means "witnessed by someone else".)

[DiverMike 5]

It may be clear to you, but it is clear to me otherwise. The definition of witness does not in any way imply someone else: wit·ness (wtns) n.
1. a. One who can give a firsthand account of something seen, heard, or experienced: a witness to the accident.

In the context of the regulation, the word "another" refers specifically and only to "skydiver". The word "another" would refer to the other subjects if and only if the other subjects did not have their own determinant article. For the word "another" to refer to the other subjects, the sentence would have to read:

"Jumps for license and rating qualifications must be signed by another licensed skydiver, pilot, or USPA National or FAI Judge who witnessed the jump. "

The regulation as stands is:

Jumps for license and rating qualifications must be signed by another licensed skydiver, a pilot, or a USPA National or FAI Judge who witnessed the jump.

Grammatically it is without question the only way to interpret the regulation. The way to decide if the determinant article refers to multiple subjects is to remove the first subject. You would never say"... must be signed by another a pilot" so "another" does not apply to "pilot". It has its own determinant article ("a").

I will agree that this is probably not the interpretation that USPA intended, but it is the only one that grammatically makes sense. The regulation as currently written allows any skydiver who is a pilot to witness their own jumps.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[beowulf 1]

I think you are stretching it a little. It's this kind of lawyer type bullshit that I really don't like.


The single "another" should be enough to signify that someone else needs to sign your log book and not you. That is the common interpretation.

An S&TA is unlikely to support you signing your own log book as a pilot.

[DiverMike 5]

Yes I am stretching it a lot and I will never sign my own log book. I am not arguing that I should be able to. I am arguing that the current regulation should be worded correctly.

As it is currently written, the only grammatically correct interpretation is that a skydiver who is a pilot can witness his own jumps.

Everybodys "knows" this is not USPA's intent. If I went to my S&TA self-witnessing my jumps I would probably get a boot up my ass.

On the other hand, I could pencil whip 159 more jumps and jump a GoPro.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[billvon 3,009]

>The regulation as stands is:

>Jumps for license and rating qualifications must be signed by another
>licensed skydiver, a pilot, or a USPA National or FAI Judge who witnessed
>the jump.

I don't think to. To expand the contracted syntax in the original would read:

"Jumps for license qualifications and jumps for rating qualifications must be signed by another licensed skydiver, another licensed pilot, or another licensed USPA National or FAI Judge who witnessed the jump."

To expand such a contraction you have to apply the same prefix to all the clauses of the contraction. If you said "your job is to identify any burning liquids or solids" you would not assume that you had to identify all solids whether burning or not.

In addition it's pretty clear that an unlicensed pilot (i.e. some guy who flies his R/C helicopter at the DZ) is not eligible to sign.

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

To expand such a contraction you have to apply the same prefix to all the clauses of the contraction. If you said "your job is to identify any burning liquids or solids" you would not assume that you had to identify all solids whether burning or not.

You are actually arguing my point. Your subject "solids" is not preceded by its own determinant article, so the adjective "burning" would correctly be expanded to "solids". If you said, ""your job is to identify any burning liquids, solids, or a klingon" the adjective "burning" would not expand to "klingon" because it has its own determinant article. You would be looking for all klingons whether they are burning or not.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[DiverMike 5]

To further beat this dead horse, if you said "I would like to make love to a sexy waitress,flight attendant, manifest girl, or a rich woman". You are indicating that the rich woman does not have to be sexy but the others do.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

To further beat this dead horse, if you said "I would like to make love to a sexy waitress,flight attendant, manifest girl, or a rich woman". You are indicating that the rich woman does not have to be sexy but the others do.

How rich?

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

As it is currently written, the only grammatically correct interpretation is that a skydiver who is a pilot can witness his own jumps.

Look, I like brain-twisters as much as the next guy, and I'm an insufferable pedant myself; but with all due respect, Mike, I'll bet if we picked 500 objective, experienced, law school-trained judges completely at random from all over the country, about 498 would flatly disagree with you. I stand by my post. Now go forth and do good.

[Throttlebender 0]

It's interesting to me that as a pilot, I can log all of my own time myself on the honor system, yet skydivers have to be signed off. Strange.

Life expands or contracts in proportion to one's courage. ~Anais Nin

[Zlew 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

[DiverMike 5]

Hey, if I can't be pedantic on an internet forum, where can I be
My persona on the internet is that of an insufferable ass. If you saw me at the dropzone though, you would wonder who the guy passed out in his own vomit is.

So you are saying the judges would only make love to the rich woman if she were sexy?

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[DiverMike 5]

Quote

It's interesting to me that as a pilot, I can log all of my own time myself on the honor system, yet skydivers have to be signed off. Strange.

Not really. If you get caught lying about logging flight hours they will definitely pull your ticket and you can't fly anymore.

There is no penalty for lying about skydiving jumps so they make it a little harder. You have to get another person to witness your lie.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[Throttlebender 0]

Good point Mike

Life expands or contracts in proportion to one's courage. ~Anais Nin