USPA Rating Renewal Extensions?

i'm watching a recap of it now.  that is some good information to put out BEFORE the live q&a in the future, just fyi.  i would have loved to have had a chance to watch it live.  no big deal, just maybe an email or notification on a forum or something.

So Mike Wadkins (who I trust with my life) and Ron Bell say that they don't see an issue with ratings expiring - yet. This is of course dependent on how long the lockdown goes. Not sure I agree. My issue is the renewal requirements after you expire and significant. A 60 day extension would allow plenty of time to get current. Wondering what others are thinking... 

5 hours ago, Deisel said:

 Wondering what others are thinking... 

That extensions should not be granted. The reason for currency requirements is related to safety which is not positively influenced just because it happens to not be your fault you're uncurrent. A licensed skydiver going off and doing an uncurrent jump is one thing but when an instructor literally has the life of another person in his or her hands, there should be firmly no exceptions.

I could argue that I got hit by a drunk driver while sitting in a park and so I couldn’t jump for six months, but the USPA is not going to grant me an extension. Why? Because cause of fault is not a relevant factor in currency. The outcomes of a risk do not change just because the circumstances leading to it do.

@ 20kN

You opinion on the rules is valid. However, it isn't the possible valid one, and I don't buy into the background reasoning.

The 'no exceptions because of safety' is just BS, because rules are to some degree arbitrary. A jump after 59 days isn't perfectly safe while a jump after 61 days is criminally unsafe. If some country had a 90 day rule instead, is their entire skydiving system 'unsafe'? Some countries may not have any specific rules, and leave it up to the DZO to decide whether an instructor is current or not.

Because "the instructor literally has the life of another person in his or her hands" is pretty much crying, "Won't somebody think of the children!" (i.e, hysterical woman from The Simpsons)

The drunk driver argument doesn't hold either, because the idea is that nearly everyone's car has crashed, and it is a problem for the whole industry to get current again. Small compromises can be made to ease the process.

But I'll leave the USPA people to argue out the specifics of what best applies to the USPA situation.

On 4/24/2020 at 9:59 AM, pchapman said:

The 'no exceptions because of safety' is just BS, because rules are to some degree arbitrary. A jump after 59 days isn't perfectly safe while a jump after 61 days is criminally unsafe. If some country had a 90 day rule instead, is their entire skydiving system 'unsafe'? Some countries may not have any specific rules, and leave it up to the DZO to decide whether an instructor is current or not.

Because "the instructor literally has the life of another person in his or her hands" is pretty much crying, "Won't somebody think of the children!" (i.e, hysterical woman from The Simpsons)

The drunk driver argument doesn't hold either, because the idea is that nearly everyone's car has crashed, and it is a problem for the whole industry to get current again. Small compromises can be made to ease the process.

 

this is where you are wrong.  there should be no exceptions to the currency issue.  the number of days may be arbitrary, but they are very real.  it may not mean that exactly at 61 days you are unsafe, but since there is no possible way to tell for each individual, this is the way we calculate.  it is a very real hazard going out of currency and it would be stupid to invite the government in to mandate rules because we couldn't keep the ones we make ourselves.  it would also be stupid to risk death of even one person because of a little inconvenience.  i could give a rat's ass what you do with your life, but i damned well care what you do with another's.  it has to do with time, not the cause such as your drunk driver's analogy, as all of these skills are perishable.  since we cannot determine to the day which ones go, we draw a limit based on acceptable safety margins.  we do not adjust those margins when they are inconvenient, otherwise why have them at all? 

This really isn't about safety. EVERYONE will have to get current when this is over - not really up for discussion IMO. This is about how we administer the process. The FAA and ICAO are currently allowing commercial flights to be flown by pilots with expired medical exams. A 'no exceptions' style policy could potentially cripple the industry and is wisely being avoided. To me, this is a show of flexibility under very unique circumstances. And if the people who regulate the safety of the worldwide aviation industry can do this, why can't USPA? 

And actually USPA will grant extensions and waivers if you get hit by a drunk driver. RDs, Ron Bell, the S&T committee and the BOD regularly work with individuals who find themselves in unique situations and figure out ways to get them back in the game. It's just not publicized but ask your RD and I'm sure they can provide recent examples. 

it absolutely IS about safety.  if we allow an exception the currency, THEN it isn't about safety and we need to just go ahead and scrap the whole system in favor of making money.  like i said before, if it's just you, go ahead and jump, i don't give a rat's ass what you do with your life as long as it doesn't bother me.  if you decide to burn in and get my dz closed, then you just bothered me.  if you are a ti or an affi and you go out of currency and get someone else killed, that is very much an issue and will probably also affect me, most likely with the faa stepping in and saying that we can't even be trusted to hold our own rules so here's some for you. 

i was just informed of the currency requirements for affi's and i really don't see how anyone would be worried about not getting 15 jumps in a year unless the dz's stay closed nationwide until sep.  even then you would be hard pressed not to get 15 jumps in by the end of the year.  as for the waivers, it sounds very much like they are given on an individual basis.  that would mean that there is a process in place for the waiver, and it probably includes some sort of evaluation.  this also means that without just granting a blanket waiver there is a process in place for anyone who can't meet the currency requirements for whatever reason, and i would hope that would also include some sort of actual jump rather than just letting someone put a student out just because it was hard to get current again and seeing another preventable death or injury.  again, if it were just the individual affected, by all means, go jump and hope you don't die.  if you are in control of another person in whatever capacity, you need to be current.

On 4/24/2020 at 9:59 AM, pchapman said:

@ 20kN

You opinion on the rules is valid. However, it isn't the possible valid one, and I don't buy into the background reasoning.

The 'no exceptions because of safety' is just BS, because rules are to some degree arbitrary. A jump after 59 days isn't perfectly safe while a jump after 61 days is criminally unsafe. If some country had a 90 day rule instead, is their entire skydiving system 'unsafe'? Some countries may not have any specific rules, and leave it up to the DZO to decide whether an instructor is current or not.

Because "the instructor literally has the life of another person in his or her hands" is pretty much crying, "Won't somebody think of the children!" (i.e, hysterical woman from The Simpsons)

The drunk driver argument doesn't hold either, because the idea is that nearly everyone's car has crashed, and it is a problem for the whole industry to get current again. Small compromises can be made to ease the process.

But I'll leave the USPA people to argue out the specifics of what best applies to the USPA situation.

Of course we know that it's not a hard and fast rule that once you hit day 91 you're suddenly a walking dead man if you make a jump. But we cannot measure accurately something that is variable in nature and dependent on the individual. There needs to be a specific number that is easy to judge. That's why speed limits are not 'drive somewhat safely slow'. There is a specific number. Yea, one dude may be able to drive safer at 70 MPH than others can at 45 MPH, but we cant make rules that do not apply equally to everyone. Same with skydiving instruction. The problem with bending the rules is how far is too far? You say 20 days over is fine. Maybe I say 40 is over. Maybe the guy next to me says 90 is fine. Maybe another says no limit is fine for him. If we bend the rules then we basically have no rules at all because I can always make the argument that  'ah, it's just a few more days longer, we can just push out the requirement again'.

Also your understanding that everyone in the sport is wildly uncurrent is highly inaccurate. I've made around 100 jumps this year alone before Covid closed things down. Almost all of the skydivers I know have made at least some jumps in the last three months. Many major DZs are open year around so a lot of skydivers, particularly in the south, will not become that uncurrent. There are even some DZs as far north as Washington that are open in the winter weather dependent. So really it's a regional thing. Some regions are affected by the winter and others are not.

Quote

The problem with bending the rules is how far is too far?

Well, that's what's up for debate.  It can be for governing organizations to agree on. If there are new rules, technically none are being bent. :-)

Quote

Also your understanding that everyone in the sport is wildly uncurrent is highly inaccurate.

I wasn't implying that. Fair enough, I wrote something about "the whole industry" for convenience, when it really is a 'significant part of the industry, that can only be solved on an industry-wide level'. Unless affected DZO's just ignore USPA rules. It doesn't help some small northern DZ if a bunch of people at some big southern DZ were still jumping regularly in early March, unless all of their instructors vacationed at the southern DZ too. 

 In some places, most might not have jumped since October. Although I have jumped a bunch in snow in winter, it isn't uncommon for some northern DZ's (eg, in Canada) to be closed end of October until some time in April. Not having jumped for 150+ days, in a regular non-pandemic season, is not seen as a big deal here in Canada. (Although some refresher jumps might be done, tandem recurrency jumps, Safety Day, that type of stuff.)

For what it's worth, I'm in Wisconsin. 
The two DZs I jump at have been closed since the end of October. 

While some folks are 'gypsy' jumpers and travel south to work in the winter, some aren't.
Some fun jumpers will take winter vacations to places where they can jump.
There are a few hardy souls who will jump in the winter. Skyknights in East Troy puts up Cessna loads on nice winter weekends. Seven Hills does a 'land on the frozen lake' demo in Madison in February. And will put up a load or two on nice winter weekends.

But many of us up here haven't jumped since fall. Same as every winter. 
Getting current in the spring is a normal routine. 
It's just going to be a bit longer this year. It is possible that it won't be at all this year, and will wait until next year (I really hope not, but it's possible).

16 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

But many of us up here haven't jumped since fall. Same as every winter. 
Getting current in the spring is a normal routine. 
It's just going to be a bit longer this year. It is possible that it won't be at all this year, and will wait until next year (I really hope not, but it's possible).

this is my thought on it and always was.  no big deal unless everyone goes uncurrent at the same time.  anyone who goes past 180 days can just go south and jump, then come back and do the 15 or however many they need and if they miss that, there are exceptions and ways to get current i presume, or have been told anyway.  after looking at the requirements, it needs changed though.  this was one of the things i had on my list for when i was hired as exectuive director, but alas, they didn't even decide to interview the best candidate for the job.  oh well, their loss.  i am going to attend some bod meetings and continue on with my plans, just on my own dime now and from the bottom up.

To anyone who says, "No exceptions because it's about SAFETY! ":

The FAA is in the process of publishing a list of temporary exemptions for pilots -- especially commercial pilots -- who haven't been able to get flight tests to confirm their proficiency, haven't had enough current experience, etc.  Over time, more and more pilots 'time out' from their requirements.

Therefore, for those who condemn ANY possible change to USPA requirements, the USA's entire aviation system must now be declared UNSAFE.  Oh, the humanity!

From some FAA news bulletin:

Quote

The FAA has published a Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) that provides regulatory relief to a wide range of people and operations affected by the COVID-19 public health emergency. The relief applies to pilots, crew members and other FAA certificate holders including some drone pilots who have been unable to comply with certain training, recency- of-experience, testing, and checking requirements due to the outbreak. It also provides relief to certain people and pilot schools who are unable to meet duration and renewal requirements, including extending the validity period of FAA medical certificates.

(Canada has already implemented many similar measures. "Blame Canada.")

And now, back to a more reasonable discussion of what changes might or might not be appropriate in the USA for skydivers....

1 hour ago, pchapman said:

To anyone who says, "No exceptions because it's about SAFETY! ":

The FAA is in the process of publishing a list of temporary exemptions for pilots -- especially commercial pilots -- who haven't been able to get flight tests to confirm their proficiency, haven't had enough current experience, etc.  Over time, more and more pilots 'time out' from their requirements.

Therefore, for those who condemn ANY possible change to USPA requirements, the USA's entire aviation system must now be declared UNSAFE.  Oh, the humanity!

From some FAA news bulletin:

(Canada has already implemented many similar measures. "Blame Canada.")

And now, back to a more reasonable discussion of what changes might or might not be appropriate in the USA for skydivers....

that's just whataboutism.  just because one organization compromises their safety does not mean we have to do the same.  when you start ignoring safety rules, people start dying.  strange how that seems to work out.  sometimes they get away with it, but it usually catches up. 

“anyone who goes past 180 days can just go south and jump, then come back and do the 15 or however many they need and if they miss that, there are exceptions and ways to get current i presume, or have been told anyway.”
 

You don’t even know what the currency requirements are for different license and ratings holders are.

Derek V

7 hours ago, Hooknswoop said:

“anyone who goes past 180 days can just go south and jump, then come back and do the 15 or however many they need and if they miss that, there are exceptions and ways to get current i presume, or have been told anyway.”
 

You don’t even know what the currency requirements are for different license and ratings holders are.

Derek V

i don't have to as i don't hold any.  mine is 60 days, and i am good til tomorrow.  b license is 90, and that is all i need until i get a c, then possibly a coach rating just to help others learn.  i presume i will look them up as i need to know them.  didn't you and i have a series of pms where you enlightened me?  i didn't pay a lot of attention as you were trying to convince me that safety isn't necessarily safe since the standards don't really enforce safety.  from what you said, they aren't that great, but as i said, that's what they are and we should change them to make them safe, not ignore the ones we have. 

i have seen people die when ignoring safety procedures.  have you ever seen a man after a 15'x30' concrete form falls on him?  it ain't pretty, but he insisted he had done the job 1000 times like that.  1001 was the one that got him.  now, if you think the rules are no good, what is your suggestion to replace them?  or are you just complaining?  show me an actual alternative and if it makes sense, i will help get it adopted. 

“  i didn't pay a lot of attention as you were trying to convince me that safety isn't necessarily safe since the standards don't really enforce safety.  from what you said, they aren't that great, but as i said, that's what they are and we should change them to make them safe, not ignore the ones we have. ”

I can tell you did not pay attention. I never said safety isn’t necessarily safe. I don’t even know what that means.  If you are going to argue a point, you should educate yourself beforehand. 
 

the annual AFFI renewal requirements are 15 aff jumps and some ground requirements. The problem is there are no performance standards for these15 aff jumps. The affi could exit with the student and never see them again until after they land and that counts towards the 15. So you could have sub standard (unsafe) affi’s meeting the minimum requirements that you argue must be enforced. Currency does not equal safety. Currency + performance standards = safety. 
 

I have always advocated for a annual or biannual check dive. This is what pilots do. I recently spoke with an awesome RD that is putting a program together for beta testing. 
 

Derek V

it was a little contrived, i was in a hurry to get to the dz yesterday, i am doing some work there next weekend in anticipation of sometime getting in the air again.  i stopped paying attention when you went on repeat as if you were trying to explain something to me or convince me to change my mind.  what it boils down to is that we have a safety rule.  it should not be altered because some folks can't jump.  that means it was just an inconvenience and not a safety rule.  it sounds like it was not a very well thought out rule in the first place but that is irrelevant.  i applaud your efforts to get the rules updated and wish you success.  that in no way excuses anyone from waiving a safety rule, however.  that is a slippery slope we do not want to start down.  next thing you know, you're gonna say i have to wear a helmet and an aad when i jump.  then you'll say i need an rsl, skyhook, or mard.  then you'll say my reserve is too old to jump because it was made in '95, or my container is too old from '94. 

9 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

  next thing you know, you're gonna say i have to wear a helmet and an aad when i jump.  then you'll say i need an rsl, skyhook, or mard.  then you'll say my reserve is too old to jump because it was made in '95, or my container is too old from '94. 

Well those are all real things. Most reputable DZs require you have an AAD. Eventually it will become a BSR at some point. Most riggers wont pack a reserve more than 20 years old. Some wont work on a container that old. Some DZs require an RSL for less experienced jumpers. So yea, people already say all of those things..

14 hours ago, 20kN said:

Well those are all real things. Most reputable DZs require you have an AAD. Eventually it will become a BSR at some point. Most riggers wont pack a reserve more than 20 years old. Some wont work on a container that old. Some DZs require an RSL for less experienced jumpers. So yea, people already say all of those things..

you don't yet say them so i'm fine.  not that i am opposed to any of them, as up until october i was required all of them (maybe not the rsl but our student rigs have them).  i even jumped with them until my last two jumps when i jumped without a helmet twice and it was great.  i like wearing a helmet on 182 jumps because the door has hit mine once. 

i would like to know your take on this.  i think i can deduce that you are in favor of the ones i quoted.  how do you feel about waiving the currency requirements referred to in this thread? 

Dear sfzombie13,

If you survived more than a thousand jumps before gadget "A" was invented, you should be allowed to jump without it.

For example, I made my 1,000th jump (1990) before the first modern, electronic AAD (Cypres 1) was invented ... ergo I should be allowed to jump without an electronic AAD.

OTOH, when I work as an instructor, I am expected to provide a good role model for students, so I wear an AAD. Most of my last 5,000 jumps were with students.

On the third hand, some one dying really disrupts DZ operations, so if some one suffers a heart attack, them landing under - an AAD deployed - reserve is the least outcome. As long as we see them descending under an inflated reserve, we don't worry much.

Yes, I am old enough to have watched two people bleed-out on DZs. I was amazed at how upset some people got even though they were hundreds of yards from the deceased. I walked up to him as he took his last breath.

I also have watched an empty harness descend under a fully-inflated Manta. When I saw that empty harness, I walked my student towards the Twin Otter waiting on the taxi-way.

On the fourth hand, I survived a thousand jumps before seat-belts became fashionable for skydivers. I wore seat-belts for a few years after that. The last time I flew in a jump-plane - that suffered a shortage of seat-belts - I suffered multiple injuries. I no longer care what regulations ... or pilots ... or DZOs ... say about seat-belts because I now refuse to fly without belts.

those are all valid points.  i notice you didn't mention helmets.  i don't have any problem with any safety equipment.  what i have a problem with is folks telling me that i have to wear it or i can't jump.  if it's a rule, then i'll do it, if not, i will make the choice for myself based on personal data and experience.  i have hated the airplane ride since larry got killed in hawaii.  ever since that, i have worn a nomex jumpsuit just in case (except for two jumps in cali when i had to pack light for the plane ride out).  i don't know if it will do any good, but it makes me feel better.  statistically, i am much more likely to get taken out with a hard opening than a plane crash though, since i am 50 now.  i am not opposed to the idea of using an aad, i just don't like being told i have to have one to jump.  it is either a rule or it isn't.  if it's a rule,  write it down and apply it to everyone.  if not, leave me the hell alone when i choose to do something different (not you, just people in general).

the point i have made is that it is currently a safety regulation in the uspa that requires currency for tandem masters and aff instructors.  we should not waive that rule.  if it is not a valid currency requirement, we should change it so that it is, and i am told that is being worked on.  until it is changed, we should obey it.  i would think that would be obvious after seeing how much flak i usually catch when i tell folks i don't use an aad or that i like to jump with no helmet.  they think i am going to burn in every time, yet they are very vocal about waiving an actual written bsr because it is inconvenient or whatever the reason is now.  safety is the one place where i can allow an all or nothing attitude.  i hate zero tolerance as every rule has an exception, but safety always applies to us all equally.  i have beat this horse way beyond what i should have and will not mention it again.  sorry for taking up so much time on bullshit.  not that it is a bullshit discussion, it is bullshit that i have repeated too many times.  my bad.