Hooknswoop

“And by reducing the number of IEs they reduced the number of courses toget ratings” I don’t see how less courses affects the quality (up or down) of the AFFI’s that pass the course. The issue is the course standards. The course standards were lowered because of the instructor shortage. Instead of allowing the market to self correct, USPA put their thumb on the scale. A quick review of how things have changed; Old course vs. new course. Old course you had 6 jumps to get 12 points. You could from 0-4 points on each jumps. New course, you pass 3 of 4 and you’re an affi. Lets look at how this works at the old vs. new course; Jump 1, you have a bad jump. 0 points / Fail jump 2, you have an OK jump. 2 points / Pass jump 3, you have an OK jump. 2 points / Pass jump 4, you have an OK jump. 2 points = Pass. For the old course, you are in real trouble. You have 2 more jumps to get 6 points. You could do OK on the next 2 jumps and come up 2 points short. For the new course, you are now an AFFI. There is a reason the pass rate went up dramatically overnight. Derek V

What is USPA doing to address this? Derek V

That is not what I agreed to. I was suggesting that even one child's life was not worth your freedom to fly around in your Mooney. Would you be OK with applying those restrictions to the Freedom of Speech? Of course you wouldn't. The 2nd Amendment is just as important as the 1st. Derek V

Right and we could do more, but we don't. The result is 42,000+ fatalities. Society has accepted the current level of freedom (and cost). The current per year firearm fatalities and level of freedom balance is at the point where it will take extreme restrictions for decrease in the fatalities per year rate. One side loses nothing if there are more extreme restrictions to the current level of freedom and the other loses a lot. Imagine if someone was proposing the same types of requirements and restrictions on freedom of speech as you describe for vehicle ownership and driving? It would be a non-starter. Derek V

Yep. I respect that. Derek V

Not what I’m saying at all. Firearm fatalities are a problem. Vehicle fatalities are a problem. We must balance freedom and cost. This is the basis of the 2 sides of the argument. One side says the freedom is not worth the cost and other side says it is. One side says 42,000+ fatalities in a year is worth it for the standard of living cheap privately owned vehicles provide. Is the freedom to own and fly an airplane worth even one child’s life? Freedom of speech comes at a cost. People are slow to say hateful, hurtful, and even untrue things. This is the price of the freedom of speech. Is allowing hateful, hurtful untrue speech worth everyone having the freedom of speech? Or do we remove that freedom to stop the speech we don’t like? Derek V

https://people.com/human-interest/4-year-old-boy-identified-as-among-those-killed-after-plane-crashed-into-car/ How many more kids have to die so you can continue fly around in your Mooney pretending to Maverick? Derek V

You alluded to what I believe is the meat of the issue. How many deaths is acceptable for the freedom? “According to the Gun Violence Archive, a total of at least 19,223 people lost their lives due to gun violence in 2020.” ”according to a report from the National Safety Council (NSC). More than 42,000 people are estimated to have died on U.S. roadways last year” We accept 42,000+ because we want our western standard of living; “No western industrial nation has shown itself able to function without motor vehicles.” If you didn’t need or want a car and didn’t own a car, it would be very easy to say we should ban all cars. Or require breathalyzer ignition systems, gps speed governors, airbags, etc. in all vehicles. And no vehicles older than 10 years. We could get that 42,000+ number to less than half. But we feel the cost is worth it. So we don’t. That is the gun argument. Is the cost (19,223 last year) worth the freedom? Some believe it is, some believe it isn’t. Both sides have valid points to justify why they believe they way they do. I do not believe increasing restrictions will have much, if any impact on the cost. If we require vehicle tires to be no older than 6 years and minimum 1/8” tread (and enforced this requirement), yes, some lives would be saved. But we do not do that. Because it is a relatively large restriction for a relatively small reduction in fatalities. For example, the universal background check and magazine limit laws from July of 2013 in Colorado have done nothing. Derek V

I guess nothing can be done then, just thoughts and prayers. thanks to people like me? What did I do/not do? Derek V

The cost to get a German driver’s license is $2300-$3700. In the US, it is $20-$1000. ”strong” is relative. I do not agree that the government’s reaction is strong. Imagine if auto braking, lane assist, GPS speed limiting, etc. were required. As long as the government’s reaction is ‘strong’, then you are happy with the numbers. 42,000+ fatalities is fine. If the government had a “strong” (in your opinion) reaction to gun violence, you would ok with 19,233/year firearm related fatalities? Derek V

“According to the Gun Violence Archive, a total of at least 19,223 people lost their lives due to gun violence in 2020.” ”according to a report from the National Safety Council (NSC). More than 42,000 people are estimated to have died on U.S. roadways last year” I’m not seeing the same response (in terms of number of threads and number of replies) to vehicle fatalities as firearms fatalities. Derek V

“My home tunnel is an iFly 14 Footer. 2 Fan Recirculating design.” That’s not a thing. Derek V

Anyone have an XL G2 and need a L G2? Derek V

“ 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

“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