Forums: Archive: 2005-2006 USPA BOD Elections:
4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks.

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

EDYDO  (D 1521)

Nov 9, 2004, 1:00 PM
Post #26 of 62 (2197 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Chris, You have the experience and the energy to write a pamplet or book on "How to be a Jump Pilot". It would be a benefit to our sport.

Wendy, Good logic.

Ed


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 9, 2004, 1:10 PM
Post #27 of 62 (2191 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EDYDO] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks Ed. I feel I need more support though. I could write a book about flying skydivers but would anyone buy it? I feel that I would be preaching to the choir so to speak. Not totally. But we need a way to reach each and every jump pilot. I think that's the next level.

That's partly why I do my website and don't charge for people to read it. I want free disemination of information. A website was the easiest way to get to many people. As it is, I've had many foreign (outside the US) pilots respond to it which completely blew me away.

A book may be the next level though.


chriswelker  (D 19678)

Nov 10, 2004, 5:07 AM
Post #28 of 62 (2166 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Try to enforce our association's guidelines. Most of what people have mentioned in this forum has already be put in place or acted on.

Some DZO's need to be more diligent in the maintenance of their aircraft.If they can't afford the 100 hour maintenance then they shouldn't be in the business of flying jumpers if they are going to put DOLLARS before LIVES!

Common sense should prevail.

Chris Welker


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Nov 10, 2004, 5:12 AM
Post #29 of 62 (2165 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chriswelker] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Common sense should prevail. But as long as there are pilots who shave the requirements, and skydivers who follow the cheap jumps (or any jumps -- sometimes it's the only local operation), there will be aircraft with dodgy maintenance.

Just consider all the times you hear about automobile inspectors who are "cooperative" when people don't want to bring their cars up to spec.

Wendy W.


kallend  (D 23151)

Nov 10, 2004, 7:00 PM
Post #30 of 62 (2137 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
And unless I'm mistaken, the FAA is the regulating body for airplane pilots, correct? If so, the FAA is correct regulating body to deal with those kinds of issues.

You're a pilot. What are your suggestions for fixing the issues?


Ok, here is what I want.

I want the FAA to come up with a mandatory sign-off for pilots to become "jump pilot" qualified. I want the FAA to mandate and enforce the commercial pilot license requirement on all jump planes. I want DZs to actually DO 100 hour maintenance on their planes. I want DZs that have crashes where their plane ran out of gas to lose their GM. I want mandatory yearly recurrent training for jump pilots after the sign off.

That's a bit of a start.

Well, I don't know about you, but when I got my "Private" certificate I learned how to do a W&B, how to set the trim for takeoff, and how to determine if I have enough fuel for a flight. I fail to see how any more training will help someone that won't do it. It's not that they don't know how, it's that they just don't do it.

I have been flying since 1964 and although I only have a private certificate I still manage to do all those chores on every flight.

You can't train complacency out of people.


MakeItHappen

Nov 11, 2004, 6:19 PM
Post #31 of 62 (2108 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
What do YOU plan to do about it?

Your subject line of "4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks" reminded me of this post

Skydiving is seasonal in most of the world. Accidents would tend to cluster in the busy season because the rate of jumping is highest then.

Running out of fuel is already an FAR violation. I do not know if the FAA issues citations in these cases. About the only thing I can think of that has not already been mentioned is to ask jumpers to ask the pilot when boarding "Hey, got time in your tanks?" This might come across as antagonistic to some pilots. The pilot can then retort "Hey, will you climb in and exit without your parachute(s) opening accidentally?"

One of the crashes that I believe you are referring to was the Hartwood crash. Even though the plane used to be a jump plane and the pilot was a jump pilot, he took off without an OK by the mechanic, as stated in the preliminary report. That would be comparable to a jumper jumping a relined canopy with out the bar tacks in. The work is not done, so do not put it in the air. That is self-evident. The Hartwood crash is not a crash involving skydiving.

The JAX crash reminded me of the Paso Robles crash that was attributed to a pilot not properly setting the trim tab before takeoff. Pilot error - just like we have jumper error. People do make mistakes.

The penalty of pulling the GM from a DZ who hires a pilot that violates an FAR, substantiated by the final report or other means, may not work as intended and may rubbing salt into the wound. Cops do not cite drunk drivers that die in a crash for DUI and ask the deceased's estate to pay up. USPA does not cite the DZO when a jumper pulls at 50 feet or fails to execute proper emergency procedures. The FAA does not cite the aircraft owner (assuming they were not the pilot) or DZO when a pilot commits an FAA violation. These accidents are driver, jumper or pilot error. You cannot penalize the DZO when someone else makes a poor decision or skips checklists and protocols and the DZO is unaware of the skipped procedures. What I hear you saying is "There was a BIG mistake - people died - someone HAS to pay!"

There is a (poorly written) book by a mother of a jumper that went in on his first jump called Jumping Through Clouds. The mother had the same "There was a BIG mistake - people died - someone HAS to pay!" view. She wanted a lot of regulations and penalties put in place.

USPA cannot do anything to a pilot. That is the domain of the FAA.

In another accident the pilot crash landed off the airport (no fatalities or injuries but a totaled plane, no jumpers on board). The DZ kept the pilot on staff because they wanted the insurance to pay off. If the DZ had fired the pilot, it would 'look like' the pilot was at 'fault'.

Education is the key (no news there). Articles in Parachutist may not reach the jump pilots. How many jump pilots read Parachutist?

The jump pilot rating is something I would ask around about. Specifically, ask Larry Hill, Jess Rodriguez, Jesse Farrington, and Mike Mullins. I think these DZO/jumpers/jump pilots have a lot of experience that can balance your call for diligence against the handful that screw up.

We already have jumpers out there on the ramp to pester pilots about trim tabs and time in tanks.

Jumpers have to trust the pilots to do their job and pilots will trust jumpers to do their job.

Keep reminding everyone to do their job and speak up if you think that is not happening.

.


(This post was edited by MakeItHappen on Nov 11, 2004, 6:23 PM)


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 12, 2004, 10:44 AM
Post #32 of 62 (2082 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
What do YOU plan to do about it?

One of the crashes that I believe you are referring to was the Hartwood crash. Even though the plane used to be a jump plane and the pilot was a jump pilot, he took off without an OK by the mechanic, as stated in the preliminary report. That would be comparable to a jumper jumping a relined canopy with out the bar tacks in. The work is not done, so do not put it in the air. That is self-evident. The Hartwood crash is not a crash involving skydiving.



This is where I disagree strongly. This had EVERYTHING to do with skydiving. That aircraft was under repairs because it was used as a jump plane. To ignore it as a jump plane accident sugar coats the statistic that USPA uses to show that we are doing a good job in this industry.

This whole sport has a bad attitude towards the inherently dangerous activity we are all involved in (aviation). Complacency kills and that complacency towards sound aviation practices (it wasn't until the 90s we convinced skydivers to wear seatbelts even though the rest of the population knew it could save lives) continues because USPA fails to set a standard, get the word out about that standard, and enforce that standard. Why the hell do they put in the Group Member pledge that the DZ has to follow FARs if nothing will come of it if they do knowingly break FARs? USPA is pissing up a rope.

What are YOU going to do about it? Lead? Follow? Or get out of the way? Make it happen.

You say pilots and planes are the purview of the FAA? Well, maybe I should start petitioning them to do more inspections on a regular basis? Do you want that? I thought skydivers liked self regulating. That's what I'm trying to get out of you all. Are you willing to put the peer pressure on to make things better? I'm tired of the status quo.


AggieDave  (D License)

Nov 12, 2004, 10:47 AM
Post #33 of 62 (2080 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
That aircraft was under repairs because it was used as a jump plane.

So if it hadn't been a jump plane but had sat that 5 years, it wouldn't have happened?


airtwardo  (D License)

Nov 12, 2004, 12:38 PM
Post #34 of 62 (2071 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

You make some excellent points Chris~

I don't know if your posting in this forum was a
question focused toward candidates or the jumper
membership in general...

Either way, there is something we all can do, in
my humble opinion anyway.

Politically the board can work toward some enforceable
guidelines regarding the pilots and aircraft we use.
True enough, it's not their "job"...but if we want to remain
as a 'self-policing' organization, and enjoy the freedom that
entails, steps need to be taken.

As jumpers, we should become more aware of the
platforms we use and the people that fly them...
again, it's true this isn't an 'easy' proposition...
but most of us have at one time or another
had an uneasy feeling about the pilots qualifications
or the condition of the aircraft.

Those aviation savvy jumpers know when the pilot
isn't following recommended procedures,
and how often do we make a comment?

How many of us even know the pilot's name or background...

I know in the 'old' days driving a jump ship was an easy
way for a rookie pilot to build free hours. Many had little if any knowledge of the sport and the additional strains
put on the pilot and aircraft.

I believe there is a more professional attitude these
days, but clearly more is needed.


I personally have offered your website as a tool to
help several 'newer' jump pilots wanting to become
more proficient, and recommend it to ALL jumpers
as enlightening and informative reading.

http://www.diverdriver.com

(And link it to FBO's that I may contract an aircraft
with for use during a demo...many times actual jump planes
and pilots are not available for us to use.)


As a jumper, ask questions, voice concerns...
we can effect any operation monetarily if we refuse
to accept sub standard equipment and personnel.

As a skydiver...
~dying in a plane crash that could have been
prevented is ludicrous!


tspillers  (D 21601)

Nov 12, 2004, 2:25 PM
Post #35 of 62 (2061 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Chris,

Sorry I haven't been on here much lately. I have been skydiving, revamping Instructors courses (working on putting them back on powerpoint, etc.), and seeing to it our airplane maintenance gets done. No excuses, just been busy.

So....good points here by many. As far as USPA, they don't have any autority to do much. I do think it is worthy of discussion and trying to find a resolution that promotes better maintnance and training.

I agree with you that many DZ's don't give adequate pilot training. USPA really isn't in the business of training pilots either, but they do have material for sale ($5 I think) on flying jump planes. Have you read that? That would be a good start before writing your own material.

The insurance companies have set requirements (minimums) for jump pilots. Ours in a 182 is Comm SEL with 300 TT, 25 in type, and 25 jump flights. We make all of this happen. I would not begin to think that some don't just pencil this, but it is very important they have this experience.

Maintenance - Pay now or PAY LATER. It is usually much more later. That is my opinion. DZO's you must do your maintenance. I am not a mechanic and don't want to be. This means we pay for all of our maintenance. The pilot does the oil changes between the 100 hour inspections.

Jumpers, if you have concerns about the plane, start asking questions. If you don't like the answers, find another DZ.

As far as USPA, I have spoken with Jim Crouch (Director of Safety and Training) and he is very concerned, upset, and many other adjectives. I am sure everyone at USPA has noticed this. As far as action, it may take time and I hope we can come up with a possitive solution.

Give me a call sometime. If elected, I would like to have more ideas and your input to try to formulate a strategy.

Todd


gravityizsexy  (D 209095)

Nov 13, 2004, 5:40 AM
Post #36 of 62 (2044 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

I would just like to put in my $0.02 as a airplane mech,
I have a relativly experienced background working on
various types of aircraft engines. One thing that I did not
see mentioned in the solution was the busniess aspect
of A&P maintainence. Granted, the diver sign-off idea
is a start to correcting this, however... I believe it is only
temporary. The worst thing on the DZ is to have a down
plane. the mechs know this, the DZO knows this, hell
the jumpers make it worse. Point being, there are rules
and regulations differenciating what is considered an
up or down plane depending on the seriousness of
the problem. And my friends, it is here where-in lies
the flaw. You can be downed from anything such as a
50hr inspection (an oil change) to a pitch-lock or misfire.
They're are many many factors surrounding my theory
that Im really too lazy to get into, such as time/season/
lacsidasical mechanic/ jumper volume/ time windows/etc...
what it all comes down to is having that plane up in the
air during busniess hours whether it be held together by
duct tape or having the proper patch applied. The maintainence
logs specify that the fix has been applied or an inspection
has been done. If you run into a down gripe, then its
a down bird, nothing you can do about it... except
shortcut the fix and have the bird up in 5-10minutes.
which by any DZO is better than a 1-12hr job. An up
gripe still has the plane flying... which initiates the
priority factor. k, now Im just rambling, anywho.. planes
will always break... mechanics will always quick fix...
The final word whether or not the plane is ready for flight
is left to the operating pilot. It may not seem it, but the
process is structered. I've jumped the cessna they had
at jacksonville, my first tandem actually.. I don't really
want to say anything about it, but you can more than
likely tell the condition of an aircraft. Especially if your
the pilot. All I can suggest is the USPA do their rounds
because it's when they come aboard that keeps the
maintainence team on their toes and makes sure
everything is perfect and the aircraft are keep in good
condition. (even when their not). A bi-annual inspection
would most definitly help, very time-consuming and
costly, but would reduce the number of plane crashes.
Now Im treading onto unfamiliar territory so that's
all I can add for now. I think it's great that you all
take safety and all it's magnitude into consideration.
This is such a lovely sport. I would hate to see it
banned. Anyway, Im on the forum if ya need me...
laters..

-Tony


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 14, 2004, 5:22 PM
Post #37 of 62 (2019 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tspillers] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Todd, you can contact me any time through my website or here. I'll send you my cell any time.

Tony, you are absolutely right that I have not focused directly on maintenance. It is up the PIC to determine if the plane is up or down. He's the final athourity according to the FAA and they need the education to determine what is a hard down or an easy down. If they just refused to get in the plane then more DZs would get better maintenance. No doubt. That's why I try to provide a place where pilots can come and ask questions to get support for how they see things.


AggieDave  (D License)

Nov 15, 2004, 4:50 AM
Post #38 of 62 (2007 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If they just refused to get in the plane then more DZs would get better maintenance.

What I consider "problem" DZs aren't really the turbine DZs overall, its the smaller DZs. Do you know how easy it is to replace a pilot that refuses to get into a jump plane at a non-turbine DZ? Literally just about once a week some pilot with a few hundred hours and 182 time contact my DZ looking for a job.

Maybe it would be possible to have someone like yourself create a document/manual for education purposes for the S&TA. The S&TA is basically the final say on the DZ, if done right and the S&TA cares, then it would be and could be another check in the sequence to help the jumpers.


chriswelker  (D 19678)

Nov 15, 2004, 5:29 AM
Post #39 of 62 (2003 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AggieDave] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Maybe it would be possible to have someone like yourself create a document/manual for education purposes for the S&TA. The S&TA is basically the final say on the DZ, if done right and the S&TA cares, then it would be and could be another check in the sequence to help the jumpers.
Quote:

Jump Pilot Operation Video

This 35-minute video (VHS) should be used as part of the initial training process for new jump pilots or as refresher training for experienced jump pilots. It covers the Federal Aviation Regulations that apply to skydiving flights, along with the most common air traffic control procedures and radio phraseology. Finally, it shows many of the various emergency scenarios that a jump pilot must be prepared for. Single-engine Cessna and turbine operations are shown. Jointly produced by USPA, the FAA, and Jeppesen.


Price: $10.00

Dave what you want is available at uspa.org.

Chris Welker


P.S. The Owner of the business is the final say not the S&TA.


AggieDave  (D License)

Nov 15, 2004, 5:40 AM
Post #40 of 62 (2001 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chriswelker] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Dave what you want is available at uspa.org.

Chris Welker


P.S. The Owner of the business is the final say not the S&TA.

Ok, didn't realise that the USPA had something like that.




Alright, this is my take on things:

Sure, the owner of the business is, but the he/she should obviously listen to the S&TA, if the DZO doesn't, then the S&TA can report to the USPA. The USPA is *supposed* to inforce the BSRs and general safety through the GM program, so if unsafe practices are occuring at a DZ, the USPA is supposed to do what they can about it, which is the GM program. They can pull the GM from the DZ which can effect the DZ's ability to get insurance on their planes. However, since the USPA would loose money by actually enforcing its policies, it has never happened. So much for the USPA being in place for the jumpers, not the businesses.

The USPA is supposed to look out for the jumpers and the S&TA is supposed to be the there to help you in person USPA rep. If unsafe practices are being conducted, including not stepping in when its an obviously unsafe aircraft, the S&TA has failed in their job.

That's the way I see it, but I understand in practice its different. The S&TA is on staff at the DZ, if the S&TA disagrees with the DZO and puts his/her foot down about an issue, then the S&TA could loose his/her job at the DZ...etc.


MakeItHappen

Nov 15, 2004, 8:02 PM
Post #41 of 62 (1972 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The Hartwood crash is not a crash involving skydiving.

This is where I disagree strongly. This had EVERYTHING to do with skydiving. That aircraft was under repairs because it was used as a jump plane. To ignore it as a jump plane accident sugar coats the statistic that USPA uses to show that we are doing a good job in this industry.

Yes, the plane was a jump plane. In fact, I think I jumped out of it when it was in Muskogee during Nationals in the 80s.

The operation where the plane crashed was not a parachute or skydiving operation.

The FAA will back me up on this too.

Part 105ŚParachute Operations
SEC. 105.3 DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of this partŚ
PARACHUTE DROP means the descent of an object to the
surface from an aircraft in flight when a parachute is used or
intended to be used during all or part of that descent.
PARACHUTE JUMP means a parachute operation that
involves the descent of one or more persons to the surface
from an aircraft in flight when a [sic] aircraft is used or intended
to be used during all or part of that descent.
PARACHUTE OPERATION means the performance of all
activity for the purpose of, or in support of, a parachute jump
or a parachute drop. This parachute operation can involve, but
is not limited to, the following persons: parachutist, parachutist
in command and passenger in tandem parachute operations,
drop zone or owner or operator, jump master, certificated parachute
rigger, or pilot.
PARACHUTIST means a person who intends to exit an aircraft
while in flight using a single-harness, dual parachute system
to descend to the surface.

There was no one on that plane that was a parachutist or intended to make a parachute jump.

In reply to:
This whole sport has a bad attitude towards the inherently dangerous activity we are all involved in (aviation). Complacency kills and that complacency towards sound aviation practices (it wasn't until the 90s we convinced skydivers to wear seatbelts even though the rest of the population knew it could save lives) continues because USPA fails to set a standard, get the word out about that standard, and enforce that standard. Why the hell do they put in the Group Member pledge that the DZ has to follow FARs if nothing will come of it if they do knowingly break FARs? USPA is pissing up a rope.

I would not say the 'whole' sport has a bad attitude towards safety, only a small minority. The other thing to realize is that USPA is NOT an enforcement agency. USPA does not have a security force out giving citations to members.

The only thing USPA can do when someone does not follow the FARs or BSRs is to rescind membership or ratings. This does not necessarily change actions.

The FARs do not say you have to be a USPA member. The FARS say nothing about qualifications of people putting out students in SL, IAD or AFF programs, only tandem students.

USPA had a program called the Voluntary Inspection Program (VIP). It failed miserably. Its intent was to "clean up the act of the 'undesirables'". The major reasons the VIP program failed were because it was implemented by USPA, not a neutral AAA-type company, and that the 'desirables' did not partake in the program. IOW, the DZs doing everything by the book did not want to pay USPA a few hundred dollars, plus travel expenses for the inspector, to say that their DZ was doing everything right. The DZO already knew he was doing everything right. He did not need USPA to pat him on the back and say 'Atta Boy". I know one inspector that was 'certified by USPA'. He did not know jack about student programs and the differences between them. I asked him how he thought he could go down to Acme Skydiving School and say whether or not it was good, bad or indifferent. He said all the 'inspection' was, was to see that the gear was in date - stuff like that.

Look at some hypothetical test cases to see what you are asking:

Case 1:
DZO hires a pilot and an Instructor. Both have all the proper papers and certifications. The pilot 'forgets' to set the trim tab properly before TO or does not have enough fuel for the flight or crashes into a tree on TO. The I 'forgets' to set the student's AAD. On two different jump operations these issues result in an injury or fatality. Do you want to penalize the DZO or the person directly responsible? If the pilot is not a USPA member, how does USPA penalize the pilot?

Case 2:
DZO hires a pilot and an Instructor. Neither have the proper paperwork, but the DZO never checks on it. The pilot 'forgets' to set the trim tab properly before TO or does not have enough fuel for the flight or crashes into a tree on TO. The I 'forgets' to set the student's AAD. On two different jump operations these issues result in an injury or fatality. Do you want to penalize the DZO or the person directly responsible? If the pilot is not a USPA member, how does USPA penalize the pilot?

In Case 2, there is evidence to say the DZO is negligent. He did not verify all paperwork. In Case 1, there is no evidence that the DZO was directly responsible for the accident.

What you seem to be asking is that DZOs pay a penalty even if they did everything they are supposed to do. It is kind of like saying a H&C or parachute MFG is responsible when a jumper does not execute proper emergency procedures. That line of thought is on the same level as whuffos blaming DZOs for an anomalous spike in skydiving fatalities - even though the fatalities were all 'jumper-screwed-up' accidents.

In reply to:
What are YOU going to do about it? Lead? Follow? Or get out of the way? Make it happen.

You say pilots and planes are the purview of the FAA? Well, maybe I should start petitioning them to do more inspections on a regular basis? Do you want that? I thought skydivers liked self regulating. That's what I'm trying to get out of you all. Are you willing to put the peer pressure on to make things better? I'm tired of the status quo.

I'll remind you that I asked you about a month ago about a procedure that I thought was unsafe. I told you I contacted the DZO about it. It turned out there was no technical FAR violation, but the DZ cleaned up its procedures anyway. That is 'self-regulation'. I am most definitely willing to say something about a procedure I think is not safe.

.


gravityizsexy  (D 209095)

Nov 16, 2004, 7:32 AM
Post #42 of 62 (1956 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AggieDave] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Yep, that would be the reason alot of pilots are somewhat forced
to get in the plane whether they feel uncomfortable or not. Because
they're pretty much signing their pink slip if they don't. Granted,
it is THEIR life, and there SHOULD not be any dispute if the
pilot doesn't feel safe, but alas... the DZO gets pissed cause
monies are being lost, then shouting..., busniess morale is down.
The way I see this being taken care of is if the USPA & FAA granting or
forming somewhat of a Jump Pilot Alliance or Union if you will. It
would set the bar for minimun requirements necessary for a properly
trained "jump pilot". Once again, I'd have to do research to detail
this idea, but it's plausible. Guidelines would of course need to be
put in place to keep the jump pilots in line and other defactos for
a balance of power. A good debate would weed out alot of kinks.

-Tony


chriswelker  (D 19678)

Nov 16, 2004, 10:10 AM
Post #43 of 62 (1946 views)
Shortcut
Re: [gravityizsexy] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

The way I see this being taken care of is if the USPA & FAA granting or
forming somewhat of a Jump Pilot Alliance or Union if you will. It
would set the bar for minimun requirements necessary for a properly
trained "jump pilot".
Quote:

We don't need MORE RULES. If the rules or guidelines are not being followed right now, how is making more rules going to serve us?

Chris Welker
S&TA


airtwardo  (D License)

Nov 16, 2004, 10:19 AM
Post #44 of 62 (1944 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chriswelker] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
We don't need MORE RULES. If the rules or guidelines are not being followed right now, how is making more rules going to serve us?

Quote:

What are your thoughts on beter enforsement?


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 16, 2004, 10:49 AM
Post #45 of 62 (1941 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chriswelker] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
We don't need MORE RULES. If the rules or guidelines are not being followed right now, how is making more rules going to serve us?

Chris Welker
S&TA

I think that is partly right. Do you propose people start calling the local FSDOs when they see things that are violations? Since the USPA "can't do anything about pilots and planes" this seems to be the only course of action for making change. Should we encourage more visits from our FAA ASIs?


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 16, 2004, 11:21 AM
Post #46 of 62 (1937 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Look at some hypothetical test cases to see what you are asking:

Case 1:
DZO hires a pilot and an Instructor. Both have all the proper papers and certifications. The pilot 'forgets' to set the trim tab properly before TO or does not have enough fuel for the flight or crashes into a tree on TO. The I 'forgets' to set the student's AAD. On two different jump operations these issues result in an injury or fatality. Do you want to penalize the DZO or the person directly responsible? If the pilot is not a USPA member, how does USPA penalize the pilot?

What you seem to be asking is that DZOs pay a penalty even if they did everything they are supposed to do. It is kind of like saying a H&C or parachute MFG is responsible when a jumper does not execute proper emergency procedures. That line of thought is on the same level as whuffos blaming DZOs for an anomalous spike in skydiving fatalities - even though the fatalities were all 'jumper-screwed-up' accidents.

Jan, look at Value Jet in Florida. The FAA came down on that airline like a ton of bricks after that crash. They blamed the management for lack of oversight. The FAA EXPECTS the owner to have some control on his employees! Yes, you can be fined for one of your pilots making a mistake. And I'm not talking about USPA fining a pilot AFTER a crash. Why can't we do something BEFORE the crash. Why not put pressure on DZs to make sure they are doing the proper training and recurrent training?

Quote:
I'll remind you that I asked you about a month ago about a procedure that I thought was unsafe. I told you I contacted the DZO about it. It turned out there was no technical FAR violation, but the DZ cleaned up its procedures anyway. That is 'self-regulation'. I am most definitely willing to say something about a procedure I think is not safe.


When I first started to read your post I was left feeling "same old stuff from the old guard". They don't think there is a problem and will argue against any change proposed.

Then you bring up your message to me about a month ago. You did go and talk to the DZO and things changed. So YOU HAVE JUST ANSWERED MY ORIGINAL QUESTION. You will DO something when you see a problem whether you have enforcement rights or not. THAT'S something! That's DOING something. Man, all this wrangling to finally have you answer my question with your last paragraph. Sheeesh.

As for your quoting FARs about jump planes it doesn't support you. A "jump plane" has only one definition. It's any aircraft used to jump out of period. That Twin Bo was under repair because of it's operation as a jump plane. The fact they had to do work on it is a direct result of it's being used as a jump plane. I don't know how better to define this too you. But to use your quote of the FARs:

Quote:
PARACHUTE OPERATION means the performance of all
activity
for the purpose of, or in support of, a parachute jump
or a parachute drop
. This parachute operation can involve, but
is not limited to,
the following persons: parachutist, parachutist
in command and passenger in tandem parachute operations,
drop zone or owner or operator, jump master, certificated parachute
rigger, or pilot.

It doesn't say it has to be "in the act" of dropping jumpers. Maintenance flights and ferry flights "ARE IN SUPPORT OF" skydiving activities. Thus it proves my definition. Skydiving had EVERYTHING to do with that plane and pilot. That's why I include it on my website and that's why FAA inspectors are aware that we had 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks and not 3. According to Dennis Anderson at the DuPage FSDO they are "well aware" of them. It didn't take me saying their were four crashes. They are on to this and I'm trying to get you all to admit we have a problem too. 12 accidents a year in skydiving is a HORRIBLE accident record. And many years we have been above that. But fine, take out the ferry and maintenance flights from the list. We STILL have more accidents per 100K hours of flying than GA. THAT is still horrible.

All I get from people who say "it's a plane and pilot issue and USPA can't do anything about it" are just asking for more people to start calling the FSDO to tell on them. Jan, give people a choice. You personally have done what needed to be done by calling instead of dismissing it as "FAA work". That's what I want to see from ALL NDs and RDs. They have to make contact and they have to put the peer pressure on for improvement. If we have that. We will achieve a better record without increase FAA regulation.


gravityizsexy  (D 209095)

Nov 17, 2004, 5:56 AM
Post #47 of 62 (1909 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chriswelker] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Quote:
We don't need MORE RULES. If the rules or guidelines are not being followed right now, how is making more rules going to serve us?

Chris Welker
S&TA

No, no... not more rules, more or less the same as they
are now, whatever they may be. Im talking about a
structure put in place ensuring the reliability of aircraft.
Am I wrong in this? Will a jump pilot down a aircraft
without the fear of backlash? As far as breaking rules,
I hand a checklist to an assistant on ALL of my turns,
Im not sure of the procedures in the air up there, but
I think it's safe to say that it's upto the pilot's discretion
how (s)he flies. Furthermore, when you couple that
with any number of lives entrusted to you, there is
definitly more space, and more time, for MORE rules.
I do hear where your comming from, it's just that
the vibe Im getting from this thread is that something
in "the way things work" is just not working. If correcting
it (not saying my ideas will) means taking an exam or
qualifying for something you could do with your eyes closed, would that not be worth it? I mean people,
planes running out of gas in flight, ON Takeoff!!..
this is unacceptable, more sooner than later it will be
robots trafficing the airways. Is this what you want?
My proposal would not affect pilots in casual flight,
hell, the only thing it would do is seperate a pilot
from a jump pilot. The difference being, a jump pilot
could not get fired. The reason I say rules need to be
put in place for this is so that the jump pilot doesn't
run around thinking (s)he is indispensible. and also,
this is just a thought.

-Tony


Scrumpot  (D License)

Nov 19, 2004, 8:55 PM
Post #48 of 62 (1858 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry, I am not replying to technically the "correct" (linear) post, but for some reason either my browser or the server won't let me! But here is the correct quote from the post (one below the one I am replying to) in which you are debating with Jan (Makeithappen) Meyer:
Quote:
Then you bring up your message to me about a month ago. You did go and talk to the DZO and things changed. So YOU HAVE JUST ANSWERED MY ORIGINAL QUESTION. You will DO something when you see a problem whether you have enforcement rights or not. THAT'S something! That's DOING something. Man, all this wrangling to finally have you answer my question with your last paragraph. Sheeesh.

I would not "sheesh" that Chris. As you point out yourself, here is a board member who HAS done something, does "do SOMETHING", and you were aware of it! The one thing that I have noticed in my observation over the past few years of the BOD and the operations of the USPA is that Jan has indeed NOT been afraid to "do something"; ...not always just either falling in line, or taking the easier path. She also "does something" quite often Chris, just for the sheer reason that it was RIGHT (or in her opinion right ...agree or disagree), not just as "lip service" either, or to merely gain some sort of public accolade. Instead of publically "sheeshing" this, shouldn't you rather be RECOGNIZING this, and ENCOURAGING it, ...especially in keeping with the spirit of what it is I think you are trying to accomplish here? You have just discouraged and torn down your very self what it is you purport to actually want by this reply. -Sheesh! Wink
Think about it.

Should she have just come right out and tooted her own horn? Maybe. But that is not necessarily Jan's "style". I still think the debate leading up to this disclosure was quite valid, and appreciated, on BOTH your parts. A part of her earlier responses as such was to no doubt actually STIMULATE that debate. In of itself of value, was it not? I also was not surprised at all to see when it came right down to it that Jan was ALSO already knowledgable, well advised, active and involved in just the subject matter and concerns you raise. Noteworthy in actuality, wouldn't you agree?

-Grant


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 21, 2004, 4:41 PM
Post #49 of 62 (1825 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Scrumpot] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

My "sheesh" is exacerbation with the conversation. A lot of gyrations to get to the answer. It was a simple question and it became a whole blown out thread on how it "is" or "is not" a jump plane crash. Man... the guy is still dead and the plane is still destroyed. I have issue with USPA not counting such crashes as "jump plane" crashes. But that's a phylisophical debate that will rage forever I guess. I state what I believe and they state what they believe.

But I find Jan very knowledgable in many areas of this industry/sport. Some times when I read her posts I think "get to the point". (sorry to talk like you're not here Jan. Just responding.) We all have our faults. Mine is that I'm fairly intense about these accidents. It's a fine line between "passionate" and "zealous".

And I wouldn't say that I've torn myself down. Maybe in your eyes. However, from this thread alone I've had 3 phone calls with current/candidate members for the BOD. That has been VERY productive I think.


(This post was edited by diverdriver on Nov 21, 2004, 4:42 PM)


Scrumpot  (D License)

Nov 21, 2004, 4:51 PM
Post #50 of 62 (1819 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] 4 fatal jump plane crashes in 2 weeks. [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
However, from this thread alone I've had 3 phone calls with current/candidate members for the BOD. That has been VERY productive I think.

Then the length, bredth and the depth of this thread was indeed worthwhile! My point exactly. We are on the same page. Wink

Blue skies,
-Grant


First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Archive : 2005-2006 USPA BOD Elections

 


Search for (options)