Dec 21, 2010, 11:40 AM
Post #102 of 277
(1748 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
A few points:
1.people know you are not supposed to drive on an expired license. So it is not similar there either.
Pilots know they aren't supposed to fly a plane unless they are fully qualified to do so. It is exactly the same.
2.I no longer smoke the silly stuff but I probably would if I wouldnt get fired for it.
Nothing in that statement indicates I ever used illegal drugs. I do not admit to having smoked illegal drugs. (especially not on a public forum)
3.I agree - go with Don't ask Don't Tell.
I was advising not going to the authorities and asking if what happened qualified as an incident. In my mind it wasn't, so I suggested not bringing it up. I also provided a reference to what the FAA definition of an 'incident' is in case the original poster thought differently. I was not advocating lying by omission.
I never claimed to be a safe pilot (or skydiver). I personally don't think there is such a thing. We all take calculated risks which are often less safe. IMHO any skydiver who uses less than a NAV 280 and performs any turns below 300 feet isn't safe. Your opinion may vary.
I was disagreeing with someone who thought actions I considered unsafe were safe. Not following the regulations is one measure of not being safe.
Dec 21, 2010, 12:13 PM
Post #103 of 277
(1727 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DiverMike] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
Pilots know they aren't supposed to fly a plane unless they are fully qualified to do so. It is exactly the same.
Ah, except that many (incorrectly) think a higher rating qualifies you for a lower rating when it comes to the FAA. And in many Countries it is true. Nowhere is driving on an expired license OK. It is clearly not the same.
Quote:
Nothing in that statement indicates I ever used illegal drugs. I do not admit to having smoked illegal drugs. (especially not on a public forum)
Really?!?!?!?!?
Quote:
I no longer smoke the silly stuff but I probably would if I wouldnt get fired for it.
"No longer" means you did at one time.
Quote:
I was not advocating lying by omission
Quote:
go with Don't ask Don't Tell, I was advising not going to the authorities
You are telling him to not find out, and not to mention it. That is exactly 'advocating lying by omission'.
Quote:
I was disagreeing with someone who thought actions I considered unsafe were safe.
OK, all I did was disagree with your analogy.
Quote:
I never claimed to be a safe pilot (or skydiver). I personally don't think there is such a thing. We all take calculated risks which are often less safe. IMHO any skydiver who uses less than a NAV 280 and performs any turns below 300 feet isn't safe. Your opinion may vary.
You seem more than willing to pass judgment here.
Give an example of how a properly rated twin commercial pilot is unsafe flying a single engine airplane that he is current on?
(This post was edited by Ron on Dec 21, 2010, 12:32 PM)
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 21, 2010, 1:48 PM
Post #104 of 277
(1681 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DiverMike] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
>For the non-pilots out there, it is similiar to driving with an expired license.
Well, it's more like a professional race car driver with a regular driver's license driving a three wheeler - then realizing you need a separate license for that.
Dec 21, 2010, 1:54 PM
Post #106 of 277
(1686 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
1. I no longer smoke the silly stuff - it is your interpretation 'silly stuff' is marijuana or some other illegal drug. Again, I do not admit to ever consuming any illegal drug.
2. You are telling him to not find out, and not to mention it. That is exactly 'advocating lying by omission'. Wrong. 'lying by omission' is knowingly withholding information you believe to be true. If you do not know it to be true, you are not omitting.
3.Give an example of how a properly rated twin commercial pilot is unsafe flying a single engine airplane that he is current on? Don't ask me to justify a bullshit FAA regulation. It exists. Call someone at the FAA. I am not going to defend it. I will defend the statement that all FAA regulations should be followed, not just the non-bullshit ones.
4. This isn't fun anymore. I give up - you win, I quit. FAA regulations and maintenance schedules are just recommendations and we should only choose to follow the ones we like. I smoke heroin laced pot on a daily basis and I recommend that all pilots lie to the FAA as often as they can. Does that about cover it?
Dec 22, 2010, 12:07 PM
Post #109 of 277
(1452 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cpoxon] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
First I am a Ranch hand and love it. No place like it. I have been reading this thread for weeks and think most of it is just retarded. My policy is believe little of what you hear. Most people don't know what they are talking about.
With that said, I'm sure both TK and Billy have their faults and who I'm I to judge either of them. I take the stance that the courts should work this out. Name calling on here is just childish. Just remember what both parties are saying are for their best interest. So I would be careful what you believe.
I have nothing to gain from posting here or from this situation. I just hope people move past this so we can get back in the air where we should be
Shawanga!
(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Dec 22, 2010, 12:11 PM)
Dec 22, 2010, 4:12 PM
Post #110 of 277
(1385 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I too am a Ranch hand and while I am more than happy jumping other places as well, the Ranch will always be home.
That being said, I was unaware of any of this until recently. And when I was told that z-hills was an unfriendly place for we proud Ranch folk, the first thing out of my mouth was, 'What the hell does this have to do with any of us?'.
Personally, I find the fact that so many 'uninvolved' skydivers are taking aggressive sides here completely contrary to what I've always thought this sport to be about. It is a virtual certainty that within any group of skydivers, each will have very different opinions on any given subject (some actually have two or more themselves to entertain the multiple personalities bouncing around in their heads). But at the end of the day, acceptance is given. Regardless if they continue to disagree for the next several decades.
As far as I'm concerned, all parties involved should shut their mouths and handle this amongst themselves. I for one won't waste my time on this thread again.
Dec 22, 2010, 5:21 PM
Post #111 of 277
(1346 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MadOtter] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
...when I was told that z-hills was an unfriendly place for we proud Ranch folk, the first thing out of my mouth was, 'What the hell does this have to do with any of us?'.
Bingo. It's sad to see jumpers create an "US vs Them" over this. In spite of a couple of indications otherwise, I find it hard to believe, and I certainly hope I am right, that jumpers from either DZ would snub visitors from the other.
This is a political problem, not a safety issue.
The Ranch is almost like our sister DZ and my original home DZ was Z-hills. I feel for you both.
Dec 22, 2010, 5:27 PM
Post #113 of 277
(1338 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MadOtter] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, all parties involved should shut their mouths and handle this amongst themselves. I for one won't waste my time on this thread again
See post 54, there's an 'official' opinion from a BSR (Blue Sky Ranch, I'm guessing) newsletter outlining their view of the situation. If they didn't want it to be made public, putting it in writing and distributing it through a newsletter is probably not the best idea. Seeing as they did just that, it should be no surprise that other, sometimes contrary, opinions will also surface.
Quote:
I was told that z-hills was an unfriendly place for we proud Ranch folk, the first thing out of my mouth was, 'What the hell does this have to do with any of us?'.
I would like to know the source of that information. I find it hard to believe that a jumper would be turned away, or even treated with anything but respect, at Z-Hills simply because they jump at the Ranch. If the jumper is in good standing with the USPA, and are for the sole purpose of skydiving and having fun, I'l willing to bet that they will sell you tickets, and treat you like everyone else.
Dec 22, 2010, 7:15 PM
Post #114 of 277
(1294 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
Quote:
I was told that z-hills was an unfriendly place for we proud Ranch folk, the first thing out of my mouth was, 'What the hell does this have to do with any of us?'.
I would like to know the source of that information. I find it hard to believe that a jumper would be turned away, or even treated with anything but respect, at Z-Hills simply because they jump at the Ranch. If the jumper is in good standing with the USPA, and are for the sole purpose of skydiving and having fun, I'l willing to bet that they will sell you tickets, and treat you like everyone else.
I would like to know as well. I also think it's unlikely that Ranch folks would have any issues at Z-Hills, assuming they just show up, buy tickets, skydive and have a good time. Hell, it's unlikely they would even be recognized as from the Ranch unless it's Billy R or one of several other "high profile" ranch hands. I've jumped at the Hills many times over the years (including being there the week the FFE Otters disappeared...) and I don't remember anyone ever asking where my home DZ is or caring...
Dec 22, 2010, 9:02 PM
Post #115 of 277
(1255 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pms07] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I think we all know that nothing of substance is going to be reveled here regarding this matter. Rather than people throwing rocking all around and getting their feathers all ruffled this would be a good time for the moderators to lock this one down.
Dec 22, 2010, 9:12 PM
Post #116 of 277
(1251 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
No way, we're getting to the good part where we're all fun loving skyjumpers who won't let bad business relations ruin the sport.
I fully agree that jumpers from any dropzone are (as they should be) welcome at any dropzone they visit. Barring any previous incidents they may have had that would cause them to be unwelcome of course.
Dec 23, 2010, 6:20 AM
Post #119 of 277
(1149 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Andy put it well... I remember when I first started exploring other dropzones after starting my skydiving life at an Atlanta dz that wasn't well like in the ATL area...
but no one (Andy included) derided me for it... they just invited me to jump and have fun... I miss the ATL crowd...
Dec 23, 2010, 6:54 AM
Post #120 of 277
(1131 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
No way, we're getting to the good part where we're all fun loving skyjumpers who won't let bad business relations ruin the sport.
I fully agree that jumpers from any dropzone are (as they should be) welcome at any dropzone they visit. Barring any previous incidents they may have had that would cause them to be unwelcome of course.
Oy Vey...When I first started, I had "issues" with Don Muma...(owned the Otay DZ) "personal issues...not safety related at all, well that fucker contacted all the DZ's in the Dago area, and had me grounded...I had been jumping at Perris for 3 weeks before they caught wind of it.."Instantly grounded" (stopped from boarding a plane)...If it hadn't been for Jim Wallace steppng up, and telling the DZO it was bullshit, I'd probably stopped skydiving for good , due to that embarrassment....
Personal shit has no business , in the "Business" of skydivng!
Dec 23, 2010, 11:33 AM
Post #124 of 277
(1031 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Airgump] "Possibility of 2nd sky-diving company in DeLand creates turbulence "
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Thanks for sharing "the truth" - or at least their perspective of it.
I say again, if those details were even minutely accurate, the outcome of the legal proceedings would surely have been much different. There HAS to be a reason Skydive City has won REPEATEDLY and EVERY court hearing.
Billy.B.Bad.pdf
