pete_b Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 SNIP Once this is in production there will be a training programme at Whitehorse club for instructors wishing to use tandem in training. Francis So Which instructors is this "Training program" fore as The BHPA dont recognise Tandem PPG??? And who are the other pilots that may be able to partake (depending on the outcomes for the instructors)? Or am I missing some thing here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Pete, The only way to move forward to a place where tandem is viable in the UK IMO is to have a training programme in place for pilots and a purpose for it and an insurance scheme that covers third party risks as a minimum and second party risks to some degree. To make that happen someone has to do the paperwork. The way the BHPA works is that someone (who wants it to happen) takes on the work and persuades the rest it is a good idea to allow it. There is no real reason why tandem PPG should not be "approved", if you base it on accident statistics, since PG tandem is far more dangerous, statistically, yet it is approved. It is just that no-one has yet done the paperwork for PPG and proposed it to the FSC of the BHPA. Not having it approved (and so uninsured) means that there is no validated tandem class in the UK comp and we are unable to compete in international arena. We also cannot use it for training. We also cannot use it in the way tandem PG used it to get people into the sport in the first place. My suggestion, the one I referred to, is to first get it approved for instructors. With a recognised licence for instructors and the insurance that follows is the first step and permits "Air Experience" and training flights. It may be that it can be extended to Dual Pilots not instructors as is the case with PG at present (to answer your question). We seem to have got stuck into a mindset that tandem PPG is "very dangerous" or impossible to learn. I do not think it is. There are currently several instructors using it for both air experience and training and they are managing very credible systems. Their data (logs) are building a statistic to back this point of view. My post was an attempt to analyse the current situation for Simon. It is certainly perfectly legal to fly tandem PPG and with no insurance. It is not legal to charge for pleasure flights but is legal to charge for air experience flights if they are conducted in a particular way. The thing stopping many but not all is the lack of insurance. As to my own ability in this area both Simon W and Colin are witness to it and could comment on the manner of its conduct and execution. The other witness to it is a video from Geof of Graham and I rehearsing at Alconbury for the 2008 nationals on a Macro that subsequently proved to be faulty. This is the ignorant source of Neil's reference to "7 failed attempts to launch" which were actually several rehearsals of technique and included launch and abort runs with two experienced pilots learning to work together and rehearsing various "eventualities". 2008 at Northrepps was the last time tandem (PF2 class) was entered in the UK Nats but not validated with only one entrant (myself and Graham). In fact one flight in that comp we experienced an open maillon and that was a preflight failure on my part so I can be criticised for that if anyone is determined to look for reasons to rubbish everything I do. Alan, yes it is bits of junk cobbled together as is most PPG. It uses Climbers slings with certification, Peguet maillons and main strops manufactured by Flylight but includes, like all PPG, some parts engineered without certification. I am glad to see you confirm the difficulty with waivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatix Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 There is no real reason why tandem PPG should not be "approved", if you base it on accident statistics, since PG tandem is far more dangerous, statistically, yet it is approved. Exactly what statistics are you referring to ? Please post a link to the data source. I've witnessed hundreds of PG tandem flights (and assisted in quite a few) and only ever seen a couple of minor injuries. Of the much fewer number of PPG tandem flights I've seen, half resulted in failure or injury (thankfully minor). Statistically PPG seems more dangerouis. Would you not consider some trikes (those with substantial frames and side protection) to be safer for a passenger ? Alan, yes it is bits of junk cobbled together as is most PPG. That doesn't exactly sound like the best pitch to be putting to the FSC of the BHPA, or any other authority ..... Many will agree that some changes are necessary to improve the future of the sport, but surely this is not solely your mission or 'agenda' ?? Who are you working with on these proposed changes (is it a BHPA led committee or are they involved in the process) ? Is there an open consultation process so other pilots can have a say in any proposed changes, or is it a 'behind closed doors' affair to further the interests of a minority, disregarding other views ?? Not having a go at you personally Francis but clearly there is opposition to some of your ideas / proposals / agenda, so it would help to have some clarity on what is actually being put forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 There is no real reason why tandem PPG should not be "approved", if you base it on accident statistics, since PG tandem is far more dangerous, statistically, yet it is approved. Exactly what statistics are you referring to ? Please post a link to the data source. I've witnessed hundreds of PG tandem flights (and assisted in quite a few) and only ever seen a couple of minor injuries. Of the much fewer number of PPG tandem flights I've seen, half resulted in failure or injury (thankfully minor). Statistically PPG seems more dangerouis. Would you not consider some trikes (those with substantial frames and side protection) to be safer for a passenger ? I have engaged as P1 in hundreds of tandem launches in many varied conditions in many locations. I do not share your experience personally. My claim can be verified at Butterfly Paragliding, CFI David Botha if you want objective assessment. A telephone call to BHPA (Dave Thompson is the best person to ask) asking for verification of my qualification will settle any doubt as to my licences, examinations or training. Like you my data source is a personal perception but as afar as UK claims is converned there have been several in PG and two were big money claims that lost instructors and Dual pilots their 2 million 2nd party cover (reduced to 25000 now increased to 50000). In PPG the main high profile (big money) case was successfully defended. There is a datasbase of incidents for PG but the incidents for PPG go mainly unreported? If you have witnessed some it would be helpful if you or the pilot were to report them for inclusion then the picture would be clearer. Alan, yes it is bits of junk cobbled together as is most PPG. That doesn't exactly sound like the best pitch to be putting to the FSC of the BHPA, or any other authority ..... I do not propose to use the phrase in the "pitch". That is my ironic view of the lack of written standards; the current state of play. My rig is at least no worse than the best efforts in their absence and part of the "pitch" and subsequent review of proposal will include an assessment of the equipment and minimum standards criteria. Many will agree that some changes are necessary to improve the future of the sport, but surely this is not solely your mission or 'agenda' ?? Who are you working with on these proposed changes (is it a BHPA led committee or are they involved in the process) ? Is there an open consultation process so other pilots can have a say in any proposed changes, or is it a 'behind closed doors' affair to further the interests of a minority, disregarding other views ?? Not having a go at you personally Francis but clearly there is opposition to some of your ideas / proposals / agenda, so it would help to have some clarity on what is actually being put forward. I have involved the chief technical officer and he has reported on my work to the FSC (the PPG rep for this is Paul Mahony if you want to check). Once a proposal is tabled the FSC (appointed officers of the Executive, themselves the elected represenatives of the members) will consider the proposal and make a decision. Individual members' involvement is at the AGM with their vote. This is normal practice in most organisations unless you follow the model where everyone gets the vote where the outcome is usually "JedWard" in some form. I have an agenda, as always, and have partially set it out here in answer to Simon's question about formal qualifications in tandem PPG, training for its pilots and the current state of the "Can of Worms" (his phrase). As a rational man, Alan, and a seeker after facts, you might take the time to follow up on the contacts in this post and even get involved in taking things forward rather than follow the mob with pitch forks on the tail of every post I make? How would you bring tandem PPG into the UK scene? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatix Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 OK, incident wise more should be reported to allow a clearer picture. Statistics are skewed because there are relatively few active PPG tandem flyers in the UK. Several of the PG tandem incidents I witnessed were outside UK. Of the UK PPG incidents, they were minor and generally pilot error on launch. Not worth the hassle of reporting on a friend since nobody was hurt other than the odd scratch or bruise .... Yes, I know of the relevant people and personally know various others in the BHPA committees. As a BHPA member I am happy for them to take a proactive stance in representing my interests (not necessarily with my vote, but proposed changes should at least be open and published in Skywings or wherever). I don't follow any mob but there are a large proportion of paramotorists who aren't members or are anti-BHPA for whatever reason and that creates a big problem. I will probably get more involved at some stage and tandem is certainly of interest to me, but I don't have enough personal experience in this area to propose sweeping changes ... I just don't want to see things changed only for the interests of the 'priviledged few' or made impossible or too expensive for others. Anyway, off out flying now ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 I just don't want to see things changed only for the interests of the 'priviledged few' or made impossible or too expensive for others. Not sure what your concern is here exactly. I am suggesting a route to training and qualification for this branch of the sport through similar means to current qualifications. The cost to the trainee would be whatever it is from the training school (similar to current training costs for various qualifications?). I would limit it to instructors in the first instance to see how it went rather than open it to all immediately. It has to start somewhere. If not through the BHPA it might happen through the IAA who already have a system of sorts that permits tandem PPG for instructors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatix Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 I would limit it to instructors in the first instance to see how it went rather than open it to all immediately. So just a priviledged few then ..... Whilst stricter measures for those operating for commercial gain is not a bad thing, this all seems to be placing it beyond the reach of the average pilot who only wants to take their girlfriend on an occasional summer evening flight .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilzy Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 BHPA dont recognise any tandam rating who in fact does, so there is NO rating only a made up rating, NO senoir instructor rating as claimed. And to be fair a extreme low skill level too which is why i find the whole mess unbelievably why would you claim superior ratings when its so obvious its just so untrue. Where is the proof of such ratings i ask???? This is such a dangerous claim and this excactly what we dont want in this sport..... If this was a real rating in a real world it would be struck off such as a teacher/doctor and legal proccedings taken having seen the Video evidence of such imcompetancies i really fear that this is a disaster waiting to happen. "Im all over this and not going to let it drop" I have the mission and the agenda and im not going away Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_b Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 SNIP "Im all over this and not going to let it drop" I have the mission and the agenda and im not going away I will start N | | o| /|\ /\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 BHPA dont recognise any tandam rating The Bhpa having two tandem licences in Pg tandem; a "Dual" and an "Air Experience instructor". who in fact does, so there is NO rating only a made up rating, NO senoir instructor rating as claimed. The BHPA have instructor licences as follows: trainee, instructor, senior instructor. A senior instructor is one who is licenced by the BHPA to train other instructors and may be appointed CFI of a BHPA registered school. The register is open to all to inspect (thats what it is for, so you can check yup on the credentials and the insurance of anyone claiming to be a BHPA instructor).. And to be fair a extreme low skill level too which is why i find the whole mess unbelievably why would you claim superior ratings when its so obvious its just so untrue. Where is the proof of such ratings i ask???? answer given in previous post to Alan. Ring the BHPA office and ask for the qualification list of any of its instructors. That is the purpose of the register, to check up on. This is such a dangerous claim and this excactly what we dont want in this sport..... If this was a real rating in a real world it would be struck off such as a teacher/doctor and legal proccedings taken having seen the Video evidence of such imcompetancies i really fear that this is a disaster waiting to happen. "Im all over this and not going to let it drop" I have the mission and the agenda and im not going away the responsible thing to do in such a case is to bring your concerns to the FSC with your evidence. Otherwise it just looks like "trolling" and you start to look foolish. Again just ring the BHPA office and ask for the complaints procedure Let us know what they say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyfreefly Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 BMAA instructors are endorsed, licensed and insured to teach. The BMAA route (with some exceptions) usually involves the use of a tandem paramotor to get the student used to flying and manoeuvring the wing. This system of training is much like learning to drive. The instructor is sitting right there behind you giving you instructions and demonstrating what you should do and what you should be aware of. Training takes around 7 days depending on ability, agility and weather conditions - BMAA instructors go through a very rigorous training program that includes a first aid certificate and a tandem rating. Equipment is normally supplied and rates vary form £100-150 per day. After successfully demonstrating your ability to fly and passing the exam a BMAA FLPA rating maybe awarded. I Do miss the good old BMAA system things were so much better in the old days still they do control all trike flying so all is not lost yet ps Im in Im in .... ....is there a R in it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilzy Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) Would you tandam with this man, note leg straps are undone for all attempts and flight very proffesional....... http://vimeo.com/4869122 I rest my case!!!! Edited August 5, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyfreefly Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 WELL I’ve face death in the face before and survived so yes I would go up with him perhaps I might even be able to help with the finer points of the procedure we’ve all got to start somewhere ehh Somebody who is obviously just having a go at it should not be discouraged but encouraged so they perhaps get it right one day I notice that the video is a couple of years ago so I would expect there would be some improvement by now......do you know who . ..it is/was Neilzy If I can guess do I win ...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilzy Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Na no improvement im told, sadly none at all!!!! just dillusions of granduar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 I would limit it to instructors in the first instance to see how it went rather than open it to all immediately. So just a priviledged few then ..... Whilst stricter measures for those operating for commercial gain is not a bad thing, this all seems to be placing it beyond the reach of the average pilot who only wants to take their girlfriend on an occasional summer evening flight .... Alan, the original question asked who on this forum had any qualifications in tandem and in ppg and asked if the whole subject is a "can of worms". I responded with my own position and experience of the issue and what I am doing about it. If others gain from that or want to do something themselves then they may. There is, surely, nothing "privileged" in setting about gaining qualifications in a particular field and then setting up a business in that field, it is open to anyone? I note your (wry?) smiley. Wouldn't enabling it for instructors in the first instance make it more likely for the sort of flying you describe not less? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jock Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 qualifications in a particular field and then setting up a business , Is there someone who can teach me to fly without leg straps. is there an i< in it//////////// Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilzy Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 i imcompetent i irresponsible i idiotic Thats it need spell check for more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 BHPA dont recognise any tandam rating who in fact does, so there is NO rating only a made up rating, NO senoir instructor rating as claimed. Where is the proof of such ratings i ask???? The proof you ask for is published here, Section 4. http://www.bhpa.co.uk/pdf/BHPA_Tech_Manual.pdf The register of schools you need to check is here: http://www.bhpa.co.uk/bhpa/schools/scho ... ?region=uk and the licence holders can be checked by ringing BHPA office 0116 289 4316 Just give the name of the individual you are unsure about. (Please report anyone claiming licences they don't hold and the BHPA will deal with any misrepresentation through the courts). The system works really well and helps "newbies" check the credentials of potential trainers rather than rely on internet forums where anyone can make any unsubstantiated claim they like depending on their mental state or vindictive nature. Hope that helps. Do let us know what you find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trm8620 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Would you tandam with this man, note leg straps are undone for all attempts and flight very proffesional.......http://vimeo.com/4869122 I rest my case!!!! Jesus whoever that was on the tadem was lucky the guy didn't drop right out the bottom!! That would put me off for life! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 To be fair Francis he clearly means PPG tandem rating Lets not confuse the matter with PG. SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Would you tandam with this man, note leg straps are undone for all attempts and flight very proffesional.......http://vimeo.com/4869122 I rest my case!!!! Jesus whoever that was on the tadem was lucky the guy didn't drop right out the bottom!! That would put me off for life! Unless they were only doing ground runs to practice techniques ? The P2 was Graham, an experienced pilot (GA and paramotor) and the two were preparing for a competition never having flown together previously. Sounds like a sensible course of action before trying to take off? Or do you think they should have just "gone for broke" on the first run? The video only showed seven of the many runs that day. Obtaining facts before blurting often reduces subsequent embarrassment as does thinking for oneself rather than just running with the pack. {Is there a correlation between the membership of that pack and the grammar and spelling of posts}. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyfreefly Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Am I missing something here The way I see it/understand it is that you don’t need a licence to teach or to fly tandem legally in this Country (the good old UK ) so the fact that some organisation decides with its own agenda says that they will issue licences whether it be for a single or dual footlaunch means to me that because it’s not a legal requirement it’s a made up requirement let’s say it’s a pretend requirement so in a court of law surely it wouldn’t hold water or am I wrong I stand to be corrected ps (on one leg) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Francis, you are actually starting to annoy me now when you say things like " rely on internet forums where anyone can make any unsubstantiated claim they like depending on their mental state or vindictive nature." You are touting your wares on 'an internet forum' hoping to attract attention for your many causes, I wonder if you would get the same audience through the BHPA system? If the answer is yes... then GO THERE! but we both know its a no. It is a very outdated way of life NOT to use the internet to comunicate with members of a membership organisation. You clearly identify this and exploit it to the max. Its just a shame your 'membership organisation' does not give the same support. So if you dont like internet forums or realise the value of this one, I will concur with the many other members here and ask you to go and play somewhere else. I have sat reading, I have tried to be nice, I have removed offensive posts, but you just dont know when to stop. You cant help people that dont want to be helped. SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Member: Francis_Rich has been removed by admin. Bring back the good old days where the PMC was a fun place SW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilzy Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Thank you Simon for finally removing Francis he has been removed fom other forums for the same reason as you well know, I must for my part apologise for not letting it go and maybe going over the top i for one enjoy this forum and its community, and will try not to be such a antogonist in the future.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.