Actual SL progression

[VincentVL. 0]

I searched, but did not find, a topic about what the actual progression of the SL course looks like. Let me explain.

AFF is pretty clear: 1000$ (aprox), you make 7 jumps after which you can practice solo untill you're ready to get your A. (or you take a course to prepare you for your A)

You never get that for SL. Not on Dropzone.com and not on websites of the actual dropzones It's always described pretty vague. 500$ gets you 8 SL jumps, you'll slowly get more freefall time after 6 Sl jumps, and then you progress "some more" over an undefined period of time.

What I want to know is, what did your SL progression look like from your first jump to where you were off student status (in AFF terms 7 jumps and 1000$ later) and were allowed to practice for your A (or take the A-course)

How many jumps did you do?
What were they like (delay etc)?
What did you end up paying to get off student status?

Thx a lot!

[Yossarian 0]

it seemed to vary from DZ to DZ but mine was;

2xgood S/L
3xgood (consecutive) dummy pulls
1x3sec delay
1x5sec
2x10sec
2x15sec
1x20sec with alti
1x20sec with turns
1xunstable exit
1xdive exit with backloops
1xdive exit with backloop and tracking
1xhalf series (360 right, 360 left, 1xbackloop, 5sec track, 5sec track with a track turn)

that was the minimum anyway, took me 27 jumps as i did 3 s/ls, 7 dps, 5 10secs and had to repeat some if i went to different dropzones, mostly down to inter-dz politics. after landing from the last jump, i had my A certificate. next jump was a mandatory solo to convert to throw-away but that was it. this was before the whole CH1 thing though, but thats just the UK

edit to add - cost was £175 for FJC, £35 per jump after that, so cost of jumps was £1085 give or take

[L.O. 0]

A standard progression rarely applies to anything in this sport.

My progression was:

2 S/L
3 Practice pulls
1 H/P
1 5sec
1 10sec
all the rest from full alt. on 2/3/4-ways
I think I did a few from 3-4000 on bad weather days.

This all cost me almost nothing. I was the primary pilot for the DZ. They gave me a break.

With the new ISP, progression becomes even more dependent on the DZ and the student.

AFF tends to be a bit more rigid and very dependent on the students ability.

HPDBs, I hate those guys.
AFB, charter member.

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

A standard progression rarely applies to anything in this sport.

My progression was:

2 S/L
3 Practice pulls
1 H/P
1 5sec
1 10sec
all the rest from full alt. on 2/3/4-ways
I think I did a few from 3-4000 on bad weather days.

This all cost me almost nothing. I was the primary pilot for the DZ. They gave me a break.

With the new ISP, progression becomes even more dependent on the DZ and the student.

AFF tends to be a bit more rigid and very dependent on the students ability.

It's been a while since I did my S/L progression but it was pretty much the same except my first freefall went to full altitude. Jumps were $35-$40 each at the time.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[peek 21]

Quote

What I want to know is, what did your SL progression look like from your first jump to where you were off student status..

Well, unfortunately it is not that simple, and I suppose that is why a lot of drop zones are vague about it.

Once you are no longer with a static line instructor and using a static line to initiate your deployment, you are simply a freefall student, and progressively jumping at higher altitudes and longer delays.

Once you no longer have an AFF instructor with you in freefall you are just a freefall student, although probably jumping at full altitude.

With either of these, maybe the drop zone refers to it as a "coach" jump or something similar.

For the "static line" progression it takes a bit of time with a price list and calculator to figure out what it will probably cost. You might just need to do this yourself.

[riggerrob 643]

DZs are deliberately vague about quoting prices - or numbers of jumps - because every student learns at a different rate.
Good instructors only push students as fast as students can absorb information.
For example, I tell our students that our Progressive Freefall Program includes five LEVELS. I also emphasize the point that while a few students might complete the program in five jumps, most require six or seven jumps. Then I ramble about how it is more important to complete the "list of skills" than amassing a specific number of jumps.

Part of the reason I emphasis the "list of skills" is to reduce anxiety if a student "fails" a level.
Students are too hard on themselves to begin with, no point to adding unrealistic expectations.
Note: only one student completed the "list of skills" in five jumps last year. All the other students required six or eight jumps to graduate.

[skydave238 0]

I agree with riggerrob and peek. Ever DZ has a SL progression program that they follow. At the end of the day they are all designed to get a student from point A to point B. They all might differ slightly, but the basics are all the same. I really like robs "list of skills" theory! Most students, including myself, tried to rush their progression, and miss out on important things they might need later.

Just for interest sake, here's the progression you would follow if you jumped in Namibia. (Its seems slightly longer than what ive read here so far)

3 x no work S/L jumps
5 x DRCP S/L jumps
1 x 3 sec delay
1 x 5 sec delay
2 x 10 sec deley
1 x 15 sec delay, box position
1 x 15 sec delay with alti
1 x 20 sec delay poised exit
1 x 20 sec delay unpoised exit
1 x 180 degree turns both directions
1 x 360 degree turns both directions
1 x backloops
1 x full series L360 R360 BL L360 R360 BL
1 x delta in both direction
1 x track in both direction
1 x track and turns
1 x throw out pilot chute conversion
1 x 2 way "check out" dive

These would be the minimum number of jumps. ie everything passed first time.

Dave

Ready...Set...Go..!

SkydiveSwakop

[mnskydiver688 0]

I ended up taking 36 jumps to get licensed due to the fact that I took a year off and I needed to do some jumps over because I didn't quite get the skills required of that jump. I got to full altitude ~12k on my 14th jump. That was where the break started. When I came back I did a DRP, H&P, and then back to full altitude. The thing that I liked about S/L is that if I didn't quite get it right on a jump it only cost me $40 to try it again instead of redoing an AFF level. Also I was able to get instructor input throughout the whole licensing process because I always jumped with one. We would go over canopy skills to try on each jump and also spotting procedures during later jumps. Mine being a C182 DZ I spotted for many of my jumps right before getting licensed. Like people have been saying it is vague because the program is so flexible. Mine ended up being $1720. This includes all jumps and a refresher course. If I would've stuck with it and got it in 25 jumps it would have cost $1140 total.

Sky Canyon Wingsuiters

[BIGUN 1,314]

Quote

Once you are no longer with a static line instructor and using a static line to initiate your deployment, you are simply a freefall student, and progressively jumping at higher altitudes and longer delays.

Once you no longer have an AFF instructor with you in freefall you are just a freefall student, although probably jumping at full altitude.

This implies an AFF Instructor is needed/required once the S/L student becomes a freefall student.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[riggerrob 643]

This implies an AFF Instructor is needed/required once the S/L student becomes a freefall student.

[peek 21]

Quote

This implies an AFF Instructor is needed/required once the S/L student becomes a freefall student.

If I did I certainly didn't mean to. I was trying to parallel the two instructional method progressions.

[BIGUN 1,314]

No worries, mate. Explanation or correction by Rob. I envision that someday one will go to a week long course and get IAD, S/L and AFF and the title will become "Instructor" with the only differentiator being Tandem Instructor as an additonal skill identifier on the USPA Card.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[jurgencamps 0]

Why don't you pay us (PCV Zwartberg aka Black Mountain) a visit. I can give you a "progression list" with the different levels or jumps you have to make before you can go to the next level.

Gr

Jurgen

[VincentVL. 0]

Alright sounds like a plan.

[paulagc 0]

Just bored tonight and reading some of the threads. A couple of quick comments. First, thanks for the clarification about prices..every student has a different pace and needs, so it is really impossible to say 7 jumps and then solos and then you're done. Or, x number of jumps in the S/L progression, etc.

I own a small dz and we tried flat fees for a while, in all of the progression methods. What I found was that there was a strong financial motive to consider "passing" a student with questionable performance, whatever method. We went back to per jump pricing, with discounts for purchasing groups of jumps, and never again "sold" the whole program. I've had students fly through and students who needed many jumps at each level. I just don't think you can fairly price any program on a flat fee basis because of the tremendous potential for variability.

I do tell students that the S/L progression is generally more cost-effective. But ultimately, if you follow all the levels of USPA's ISP, and don't go 7 jumps and then solos, the prices don't come out too different any more.

Oh yeah, second point, S/L rated instructors can touch students once they reach the coach levels and are working on group flying skills, just so there is no confusion.

Blue Skies (and no winds, hopefully)

[riggerrob 643]

I envision that someday one will go to a week long course and get IAD, S/L and AFF and the title will become "Instructor"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Again, I disagree.

First: IAD, S/L and AFF is far more information that any one person can be expected to absorb in one week. Most candidates would need an entire month to absorb that much information.

Secondly, not all DZs use all three - or even two - of those training methods, so instructor candidates would waste considerable amounts of time learning methods that they never expect to use again.

Finally, you cannot learn how to become an instructor in one week. A far better method is to stretch out the process over several months. This starts with observing several classes at your home DZ, then assisting with parts of the course, going away for formal classroom instruction (instructor certification course), dropping a few simulated students (usually other instructor candidates or evaluators pretending to be students) during the instructor certification course, then returning to your home DZ to drop a few hundred real students (supervision by your chief instructor).

Only after training a few hundred real students can you consider yourself to be a fully-fledged instructor.

[BIGUN 1,314]

You and I could have some good long conversations about this. First point is, we're talking about the difference between a Instructor Training Program versus and Instructor evaluation program (the current process). I "suspect" that you and I are of the same school where it should be an Instructor Training Program, not an evaluation program. If that is true, then I agree with your disagreement. But, from the evaluation courses i went to, there's no reason that one could not get evaluated on their abilities to perform in an FJC ground school, then be evaluated on the practicum of S/L IAD and AFF in a week. And, you and I have a similiar philosophy except my line is, "You're not an Instructor until you've been scared by several student's creativity."

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[riggerrob 643]

WoW Bigun!

We actually agree on something.
We agree that USPA should quit calling the AFF Certification Course, a "course."
Instead they would be better off calling it a "selection process."

The primary reason that hold a Canadian PFF Instructor rating, but not an American AFF rating is the difference between the two organizations' methods for training/screening new instructors.