Night jumps

[stratostar 5]

Quote

Quote

I have no problem telling people how I feel about them.

Which is part of the problem, lack of tact as an S&TA.

Quote

If someone whines to much, I tell them, it is up to them to deal with it.

So you do not think that it is within your responsibility to help them and educate them but rather degrade them?

Quote

If you jumped here, you would probably not be one of the people who got invited on demo jumps just because of your attitude.

Why because my “attitude” is that in your capacity as an S&TA you should act more professionally as an S&TA?

Quote

and you are the first to accuse me of being unprofessional

That you know of. So you are saying that as an S&TA, that accusing skydivers of “whining” on a public forum is acting professionally? That this is the best way that you can deal with the issue? Please understand that if you had made those comments personally and not as representing yourself as an S&TA we would never have had this conversation, but the bottom line is that you did.

Quote

I believe you have taken my calling some people whiners a little too far.

Quote

This may be, but I have always looked up to S&TA’s as the cream of the crop and hold them, as I believe the USPA does to a higher level of conduct. Do you think that most people would want to go to a DZ where the top person talked about people like that?

I sure do, "back in the day" the "aso" now called s&ta used to have way more power then today
if your were a dumdass your reserve got pulled and you were grounded on the spot, but now days "we" have to pussy foot around with all this P.C. crap around, sometimes it just has to said and I would want someone like crutch or t-legs around to have the balls to say what needs to be said no matter how harsh it may seem, maybe we wouldn't have so many dead jumpers if the s&ta of today still had the powers they used to have.

Quote

If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. Don't drag the rest of us having a good time within the rules (very good rules, I might add) down because you don't like them.

This one I am confused about, as I have never questioned any USPA rule. In fact if you read any post that I have ever made you will see that I have staunchly supported all of the rules of the USPA and in fact, I said that if anyone did not like or agree with a rule then have it changed, but until it is changed learn how to abide with it.

Quote

One more thing, the beach jumps were done in conjunction of a festival at the beach. Due to the size of the landing area, the insurance waiver mandated D-licensed skydivers only. And yes, someone's comment of D-licensed people sometimes aren't capable. An AFF instructor almost hit a small child outside the landing area when she decided to be "cool" and do a swoop landing. Although she didn't whine when we told her she was done for the day.

All I said in my prior post in reply to the comments about a D-Lic. requirement for beach jumps was “As for the D-lic. requirement to make beach jumps, that is a individual DZ management requirement and not a USPA requirement. Talk to the S&TA and the DZ to get that changed.” This was said so as to direct the individules as to where to go to discuss it with. I do not have any problems with it myself.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[sar911 0]

Quote

I would want someone like crutch or t-legs around to have the balls to say what needs to be said no matter how harsh it may seem, maybe we wouldn't have so many dead jumpers if the s&ta of today still had the powers they used to have.

Well I guess that's where we differ. I prefer brains over balls!!! When I was a new jumper I made a bad landing and an instructor call me a "dumbass". I could have got into a pissing match with him but instead I asked him what I did wrong and would he help me correct it. His whole attitude changed, he helped me and I have never had the problem since. If I had left with being degraded (as some people would), I would have left with my pride hurt and none the wiser and still would have been making the same mistake. So which is better, degrading someone and they learn nothing except to not respect you or help them to be a better skydiver ???????????????????????? And which way do you think that we will have less "dead jumpers", by teaching them or calling them childish "harsh" names?

The S&TA or DZO still has the power to stop anyone from jumping and do. Skydiving is a privlage not a right !

[stratostar 5]

i didn't say that "they" should not have an explanation as to what "they" have done wrong.
I have seen way to many S&TA's, DZO's let people jump canopys they have no biz being under, and when many people spoke out about it nothing was done some are dead other will spend the rest of the life learning to wipe their ass and comb their hair.
I assume your "new school". sometimes people need to be told their a dumbass! "if your going to stupid, you better be tough"!

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[Deuce 1]

I'll do it! I'm night jumping!! Any of you guys with me!

You bet! At Davis, at their boogie, with the light trucks and generators and stuff! Otherwise!

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

wish I had a nickel for every AFF lv-1-2 & tandems I have videoed way into the twilight, dark on landing, and the dzo & the s&ta were the jm's, happens more then people want to admit!

How does the night jump requirement for a "D" have any bearing in this?

...

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

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Among the different things that a D License allows a person to do is participate in Open Field and Level 1 demos. Because demos can be held at various times, including night, it would be wise to require a certain level of night training and proficiency.

That's for sure, but 2 night jumps under optimum conditions hardly qualify as an appropriate level of training for a night demo.

...

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

[billvon 2,991]

>if night jumps are mandatory for a D, then there should be "currency
>night jumps" as well.

Why? You must go unstable and recover to pass AFF; there are no 'recurrency instabilities.' There are no recurrency style series, no recurrency accuracy requirements, no recurrency requirements for any other part of the licenses. Why should night jumps be special?

>and this b.s. notion of others seeming to think that those of us who
>do not have D's are not as safe as others that do have D's.

The D license is just a license, nothing more. It doesn't prove you're safe, just that you have a certain number of jumps and have demonstrated certain skills. It is, however, a good indication that you can jump at night.

[billvon 2,991]

>>If someone whines to much, I tell them, it is up to them to deal with it.

>So you do not think that it is within your responsibility to help them
> and educate them but rather degrade them?

I was an S+TA for two years. Occasionally I had to yell at people, tell them if they did X again they would be grounded. They would almost always have an excuse for X. I would listen to their excuse, and then tell them again that if they did X, they would be grounded, deal with it. How is that degrading? Would you rather S+TA's take sensitivity courses, so we never even make people think that we might be disagreeing with their judgement?

One of the purposes of an S+TA is to _have_ different judgement than newer jumpers. People don't like it when they get told they can't do X, but that's sometimes the job of an S+TA. We try to be nice about it, but in the end, it is up to them to deal with our judgement - and whining won't change anything.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

Why should night jumps be special?

this is why:

Quote

Since Night jumps are Mandatory to receive a d-license, many people who will never ever do them again, will go do one. Soon there after they will forget every thing about it.

The D license is just a license, nothing more. It doesn't prove you're safe, just that you have a certain number of jumps and have demonstrated certain skills.

Quote

it was suggested in this thread that jumpers who didn't have a D were likely not as safe as those who are in possession of a D.

It is, however, a good indication that you can jump at night.***

yeah, this is true, it is an indication you have jumped in night time conditions twice.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[pop 0]

I agree, using light is wussing out. If you are gonna do a night jump, do it right. Besides, lighting up the landing area can throw off your depth perception much more than landing into a dark area. The landings are much more challenging, but that's what makes them so much fun. In fact night jumps are fun just for that reason. They are a different, more challenging environment.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Why should night jumps be special?

this is why:

Quote

Since Night jumps are Mandatory to receive a d-license, many people who will never ever do them again, will go do one. Soon there after they will forget every thing about it.

The D license is just a license, nothing more. It doesn't prove you're safe, just that you have a certain number of jumps and have demonstrated certain skills.

Quote

it was suggested in this thread that jumpers who didn't have a D were likely not as safe as those who are in possession of a D.

It is, however, a good indication that you can jump at night.***

yeah, this is true, it is an indication you have jumped in night time conditions twice.

I take it this is sarcasm. The "D" night jump requirement says NOTHING about a successful outcome of the jump, except implicitly that the jumper lived to apply for the license. You could totally screw up each of the night jumps, break both femurs and your pelvis on landing, etc. and still satisfy the requirement.

...

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

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

.

The D license is just a license, nothing more. It doesn't prove you're safe, just that you have a certain number of jumps and have demonstrated certain skills. It is, however, a good indication that you can jump at night.

No - it indicates that you have jumped at night, with no performance criteria attached.

...

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

[quade 4]

Quote

That's for sure, but 2 night jumps under optimum conditions hardly qualify as an appropriate level of training for a night demo.

You are correct.

Again, that was simply one example of why the requirement is there.

Simply holding a D License doesn't doesn't mean the person is fully prepared for a night Open Field or Level 1 Demo. It is a minimum level of preparation that will allow the individual to make a somewhat informed go/no-go decision. And, it certainly -does- mean the person is ready to step up to the next level of preparation in order to make those jumps if he or she chooses to do so.

I used to have a friend years ago that used to say, "you don't know what you don't know."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

As an S&TA (and AFF/I, PRO and a few other things) I, too, am fed up with the whining. Well, maybe not "fed up", but I agree with the requirement for night jumps, since they need to be in there somewhere because demos can be at night. If you say, pu them in the Pro rating requirements, that means non-Pro D-license holders can't do night demos, no matter how big the landing area, and people will whine about that.

Peter

It's already taken care of elsewhere in the SIM. You can't justify night jumps for a "D" on those grounds.

1) SIM 2.1.J.1 takes care completely of the hypothetical situation of unqualified jumpers on a night demo.

2) SIM 3.1.F.4.(f) places no operational restrictions on demos by holders of restricted D licenses, and you can get a restricted "D" without night jumps.

3) SIM 7.1.B.4 says that all demo jumps must be evaluated on an individual basis - this is where unqualified jumpers on night demos are filtered out.

4) SIM 7.1.C.1(a) does not exclude restricted "D" license holders from any demos that unrestricted "D" holders can perform, and you can get a restricted "D" without night jumps.

5) SIM 7.1.D.2 states that you should not perform demos above yourlevel of expertise. Yet another place where the unqualified are excluded.


6) SIM 7.1.N.5.a requires the demo organizer to consult an S&TA or I/E about the demo.

7) SIM 7.1.N.5(g)1. requires the S&TA or I/E to advise concerning appropriate personnel for the demo, and

8) SIM 7.1.N.5(i) requires the S&TA or I/E to consider the safe outcome of the jump when making the above recommendations.

...

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

[TitaniumLegs 8]

Hey, that's great! So somebody can get a D-R, then once they've done a couple night demos, they can apply to have the R removed!

(>o|-<

If you don't believe me, ask me.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

I take it this is sarcasm.

Prof:

i was going to pm you, but your disabled, i was going to e-mail you, but your profile does not have an e-mail address, so forgive me for responding here in a public forum. no, i wasn't trying to be sarcastic. i apologize that you took it that way, it was not the spirit in which i intended it to be offered. i intentionally keep some of my posts/responses short and concise so they cannot be taken out of context, not that it ever happens!

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

I take it this is sarcasm.

Prof:

i was going to pm you, but your disabled, i was going to e-mail you, but your profile does not have an e-mail address, so forgive me for responding here in a public forum. no, i wasn't trying to be sarcastic. i apologize that you took it that way, it was not the spirit in which i intended it to be offered. i intentionally keep some of my posts/responses short and concise so they cannot be taken out of context, not that it ever happens!

Don't apologise to me, I appreciate well thought out sarcasm!

...

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

[billvon 2,991]

>The thought that 2 night jumps (with no requirement for a successful
> outcome other than that you lived) indicates anything at all is quite
> ridiculous.

That's true of every other requirement. If you do a successful style series and your pin pops out, resulting in a horseshoe and resulting near-fatality, you still get credit for the style series if you get it in time (if you go by the book of course.) The requirement is just that you complete it in time. If one of your required RW dives results in a serious injury on landing, you still get credit for the RW. Of course, the I or S+TA may decline to sign off on a jump like that, but that's true of night jumps as well.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

The thought that 2 night jumps (with no requirement for a successful outcome other than that you lived) indicates anything at all is quite ridiculous.

this is what i should've said at the outset, but i couldn't have said it any better. this is the very reason i base my thoughts on the night jump requirement for the D license to begin with.

Quote

Don't apologise to me, I appreciate well thought out sarcasm!

thanks...i guess. but your really giving me too much credit, generally when i'm being sarcastic it's not well thought out, it's just spontanious! you take care John.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[quade 4]

Quote

The thought that 2 night jumps (with no requirement for a successful outcome other than that you lived) indicates anything at all is quite ridiculous.

Then are you suggesting that more night jumps be required for the D License?

I'm trying to think about different things that people do only once or twice that does indicate a higher level of knowledge or skill level.

Neil Armstrong only landed on the Moon once, but I'm guessing he's far more prepared to do it again than any of the current crop of astronauts. Ok, bad example -- the current crop aren't training for that at all, but still, he only did that once.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[hookitt 1]

Damnit Quade...stop making sense
-

My grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

>The thought that 2 night jumps (with no requirement for a successful
> outcome other than that you lived) indicates anything at all is quite
> ridiculous.

That's true of every other requirement. If you do a successful style series and your pin pops out, resulting in a horseshoe and resulting near-fatality, you still get credit for the style series if you get it in time (if you go by the book of course.) The requirement is just that you complete it in time. If one of your required RW dives results in a serious injury on landing, you still get credit for the RW. Of course, the I or S+TA may decline to sign off on a jump like that, but that's true of night jumps as well.

Apples an oranges. If you complete the style series, you showed a skill that was asked of you. If you did the RW, you demonstrated a skill that was asked of you. If you did the night jump, you did what was asked of you, but what was the skill demonstrated? There is NO skill requirement on the night jump for the "D". What does it show? Only that you're prepared to jump out of a plane at night. A whuffo might argue that it's a demonstration of even more stupidity than average for a skydiver.

I know a guy who "landed" in a tree on his first night jump and had to be rescued, and another who broke a leg in an off-landing. I guess these were a learning experiences in their way, and they certainly logged the night jumps.

...

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

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

The thought that 2 night jumps (with no requirement for a successful outcome other than that you lived) indicates anything at all is quite ridiculous.

Then are you suggesting that more night jumps be required for the D License?

I'm trying to think about different things that people do only once or twice that does indicate a higher level of knowledge or skill level.

Neil Armstrong only landed on the Moon once, but I'm guessing he's far more prepared to do it again than any of the current crop of astronauts. Ok, bad example -- the current crop aren't training for that at all, but still, he only did that once.

But what would we say about Neil Armstrong if he messed up the landing approach, crashed the Lunar Lander, and disabled it? By USPA's criterion for success, we would applaud and say "Well done, here's your Master Astronaut's License".

...

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

[billvon 2,991]

>There is NO skill requirement on the night jump for the "D".

I would argue that successfully completing a night jump requires some skill, as does any extraordinary jump. Claiming that there is no skill required makes as much sense as claiming that doing a tandem takes no unusual skill, since it's "just another skydive." After all, it's just like a solo with video, right?

>A whuffo might argue that it's a demonstration of even more
> stupidity than average for a skydiver.

You are actually using a whuffo's argument to butress your opinion? In that case, my sister thinks night jumps are really cool, and thinks I'm a really advanced skydiver because I've done them. So there.

[billvon 2,991]

>But what would we say about Neil Armstrong if he messed up the
>landing approach, crashed the Lunar Lander, and disabled it?

Same thing we say now - he was the first man to land on the moon. And he would still have more experience than anyone else on the planet (or off it) at landing on another celestial body.

What do you call the guy who screws up all the time in medical school, and graduates last in his class? Doctor.