Instructor Professionalism

[Allen-1]

I'm not even sure if there's national standard for Parachuting. I've heard three days ground school, six days, etc. Mine was a week but the days were pretty short. It was a static line jump but my tumble tangled me up in it so it didn't pull the canopy out right away. The aircraft was a little bitty tired old Cessna 172. Three jumpers, the Jump master and the Pilot don't leave a lot of room to move around in. I fell off of the step. I banged against the underside of the fuselage one time before unraveling but at least I missed the tail feathers.

When the static line yanked the canopy out, my one side arm and leg were stuck out as far as I could stretch them to offset my spin. My lines were only spun a few times and they straightened themselves out on the way down. I have stated in the past that training has saved my live several times. In all honestly, I think this time was beginners luck. Twisted lines can still be a safe descent but tangled ones are really bad.

Even so, I was way off course and landed in a ditch. My left knee blew up some more cartilage. I knew they'd never find me at the bottom of the drainage ditch so I daisy chained my shroud lines and canopy and hobbled back to the field. After I healed, I went back and did more jumps until I landed on the bullseye. Then I quit and haven't jumped since. The plane is going to be on fire, the wings falling off and the pilots all gone before I jump out of an aircraft again!

Referring to your first sentence, which I bolded above -

 

[heftysmurf]

Not my experience. I graduated from three US Navy officer training schools in the early 1980s.
Officer Candidate School, Surface Warfare Officer School and Basic Diving/Salvage Officer school and a variety of different week-two week long schools such as COMSEC, Ships Self Defense Force leader school.....and more.

The instructors at all of these schools were professional. They never demeaned any of us, they never swore at us, they never disrespected us. They DID kick our collective asses, forced PT and LONG runs - like 14 miles at a time.

Using tactics as described above has no place in an educational format. It is ineffective and counter-productive.

I mean...OCS! Us enlisted at Great Lakes...wooo doggie! Chief Hill. I'll never forget him!

I agree with never disrespected but he did kind of swear and demeaned. Which, sometimes isn't all that bad. Regardless, that was what was needed for my enlistment in the military! If I am PAYING someone to teach me something, I can take some harshness in order for a point to stick or to keep me safe if I totally goof up, but I wouldn't take being bullied or anything. I'd totally report them, if you can't get money back, dispute with your CC, or heck, just walk away and take the hit on the money.

 

[tursiops]

Failure training is common in cave diving. I use it all the time, the only drills I always announce are the very first backup light deployment (on the first dive), air share WITH lights out drills, and lost line drills. We discuss all of the other scenarios (lights out, air shares, valve failures, lost buddy, etc) and I continually quiz my students throughout the course ("what would you do if you lost your buddy?") to make sure they know how to handle them, but they won't know the drill is coming until I pull out my wet-notes that say "I have lost my buddy!"

Having said that, there's a difference between reasonable use of failure drills and hazing. What the OP described is not what I would consider reasonable.

What you describe is fine. It's been done to me and I've done it to others while training them. Using cue cards or taking lights or a mask is not the same as secretly turning off gas.

 

[tursiops]

I would hate to teach a cave or tech course without unannounced failures. Poor quality, low level training generally consists of pre-announced drills that are done for a finite amount of time. A better and more effective training method is scenario-based, where the team goes diving and has to deal with realistic, unannounced failures that require some thought. Failure responses would obviously have to be learnt and drilled in a controlled environment first.

This can be done in a safe, effective and intelligent way. For example, by use of a bubble gun to simulate gas failures, so that the student will shut down the failed valve and start gas sharing. Use of a bubble gun has to be planned ahead by the instructor, and training protocol is for the instructor to turn any isolated valve back on for real life safety, although it would remain unusable for the purposes of the exercise.

Regarding shouty and abusive debriefs - they are completely ineffective and just causes the student to shut down. This style is equated with the military mainly by people who have seen some war movies but not received any complex training within a military environment. Although all students are different, a calm and fact based debrief, with some guidance on improvement is far better. The DEBRIEF format from the Human Diver is pretty good for this: DEBrIEFing - Capturing the experience and improving learning.

If any instructor is struggling for something positive to say, I find that "I really liked how all your bubbles went in an upwards direction to the surface" helps. Not applicable to CCR classes, obviously.

A bubble gun is fine. Slicing a hose to get bubbles is not. If you don't know the difference, you should not be instructing.

 

[Waterwulf]

Referring to your first sentence, which I bolded above -

View attachment 835900

I didn't know about them, probably because I didn't stay in it long enough. Do they have any authority or is it just a club to join with "guidelines"? Do you have to show your card before they'll let you on the aircraft with your parachute rig?

 

[Allen-1]

I didn't know about them, probably because I didn't stay in it long enough. Do they have any authority or is it just a club to join with "guidelines"? Do you have to show your card before they'll let you on the aircraft with your parachute rig?

They're somewhat like PADI, (which is the only scuba "licensing" agent that I've had any exposure to).

Skydiving clubs are voluntary dues paying members of USPA. If you show up at a USPA affiliated club, you'll dive under USPA's rules/regulations/guidelines. Part of that is a tiered licensing scheme which determines what you can do with or without supervision. Sort of like student/OW/AOW.

So, yes, you need to show your card, and perhaps your log when you show up at a field you haven't jumped from previously - if that field is USPA affiliated - every field I ever jumped at was affiliated.

 

[Capt Jim Wyatt]

there's a difference between reasonable use of failure drills and hazing. What the OP described is not what I would consider reasonable.

Yes.

 

[nadwidny]

I didn't know about them, probably because I didn't stay in it long enough. Do they have any authority or is it just a club to join with "guidelines"? Do you have to show your card before they'll let you on the aircraft with your parachute rig?

This is a Scuba forum. If you want to talk about skydiving then find another place.

C'mon mods. Do better.

 

[KevinNM]

Referring to your first sentence, which I bolded above -

View attachment 835900

There are some generally agreed rules, but I’m pretty sure things like no gopros until after 100 jumps are not followed by all jump zones and are not really regulations in the sense of being a FAA reg.

 

[Waterwulf]

This is a Scuba forum. If you want to talk about skydiving then find another place.

C'mon mods. Do better.

Yup, it sure is a SCUBA Forum but this particular thread was about quality of training for a potentially hazardous sport. I thought it was pertinent but if you don't, don't read the post.