Forums: Skydiving: General Skydiving Discussions:
C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012

 


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 26, 2012, 12:08 PM
Post #1 of 23 (4181 views)
Shortcut
C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 Can't Post

IDENTIFICATION Regis#: 5795B Make/Model: C182 Description: 182, Skylane Date: 11/25/2012 Time: 2100

Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N Damage: None

LOCATION City: ZEPHYRHILLS State: FL Country: US

DESCRIPTION AIRCRAFT FORCE LANDED IN A FIELD, NEAR ZEPHYRHILLS, FL

INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0 # Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: # Pass: 2 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk: # Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

OTHER DATA Activity: Unknown Phase: Landing Operation: OTHER

FAA FSDO: TAMPA, FL (SO35) Entry date: 11/26/2012


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Nov 26, 2012, 12:17 PM
Post #2 of 23 (4132 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

BTW, it was not a skydiving flight.


CarpeDiem3  (D License)

Nov 26, 2012, 12:35 PM
Post #3 of 23 (4088 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

But it WAS a Skydive City aircraft.
http://registry.faa.gov/...spx?NNumbertxt=5795B

So, TK, tell us what happened.


(This post was edited by CarpeDiem3 on Nov 26, 2012, 12:36 PM)


theonlyski  (D License)

Nov 26, 2012, 1:00 PM
Post #4 of 23 (4025 views)
Shortcut
Re: [CarpeDiem3] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
But it WAS a Skydive City aircraft.
http://registry.faa.gov/...spx?NNumbertxt=5795B

So, TK, tell us what happened.

Sounds like it landed in a field without incident.

TK said it had nothing to do with skydiving, so it really is irrelevant here.


normiss  (D 28356)

Nov 26, 2012, 1:21 PM
Post #5 of 23 (3984 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm reminded of standing on the taxiway with you, waiting for a certain someone to return with the Cessna....and your cussing that he was going to run out of fuel!
Angelic



Is this thread STILL here???
Laugh


CarpeDiem3  (D License)

Nov 26, 2012, 2:45 PM
Post #6 of 23 (3890 views)
Shortcut
Re: [theonlyski] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Sounds like it landed in a field without incident.

Aren't you curious to know WHY it landed in a field?

In reply to:
TK said it had nothing to do with skydiving, so it really is irrelevant here.

Um, not exactly. He said it wasn't a skydiving flight, which I take to mean that there were no jumpers aboard. Thank goodness for that.

However, that doesn't mean that it has no ramifications for the jump operations. It might be a plane that is used to carry jumpers at other times. And depending upon the cause of the forced landing, it may have a bearing upon aircraft maintenance or pilot judgement.

For example, if a pilot runs out of fuel in-flight due to forgetting to fill-up, wouldn't that make you less comfortable with riding that pilot's plane to altitude again in the future?

So, the jumpers who ride in that plane deserve to know what happened.


(This post was edited by CarpeDiem3 on Nov 26, 2012, 2:49 PM)


normiss  (D 28356)

Nov 26, 2012, 3:29 PM
Post #7 of 23 (3807 views)
Shortcut
Re: [CarpeDiem3] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.


roostnureye  (D 32166)

Nov 26, 2012, 3:32 PM
Post #8 of 23 (3797 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.

yes but this plane is used for skydiving activities, specifically swooping.


Squeak  (E 1313)

Nov 26, 2012, 5:13 PM
Post #9 of 23 (3655 views)
Shortcut
Re: [roostnureye] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.

yes but this plane is used for skydiving activities, specifically swooping.
Ive seen a couple of planes swoop the pond, it's pretty coolCoolCoolCoolCool


AggieDave  (D License)

Nov 26, 2012, 5:35 PM
Post #10 of 23 (3631 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.

When a jump plane has a malfunction, even when not being used to drop jumpers, it matters because it could have been a random happenstance that the problem occurred while not dropping jumpers. Or it was significant pilot error, which means a lot if it was a jump pilot. Or it was random, which doesn't matter much to us. Two out of three matter to the skydiving community.


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 26, 2012, 6:03 PM
Post #11 of 23 (3584 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.

Owned by a DZ. Operated by employees of the DZ? Then it's skydiving related. It's the true risk management and threat to a jump pilot. I'm surprised this was moved. This type accident/report has always been left in Incidents. Phreezone? Billvon? Any info? Is this a shift in policy?


normiss  (D 28356)

Nov 26, 2012, 6:46 PM
Post #12 of 23 (3521 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

I understand the perspective, but haven't we moved or removed threads in the past that weren't deemed as an actual skydiving related incident?


wolfriverjoe  (A 50013)

Nov 26, 2012, 6:57 PM
Post #13 of 23 (3501 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I understand the perspective, but haven't we moved or removed threads in the past that weren't deemed as an actual skydiving related incident?

Maybe, but there are non-jump related Incidents that jump planes were involved in that stayed in incidents.

THIS is one. There are a lot of others.


normiss  (D 28356)

Nov 26, 2012, 7:20 PM
Post #14 of 23 (3462 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wolfriverjoe] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

I sit corrected.
Cool


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 27, 2012, 5:42 AM
Post #15 of 23 (3199 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I sit corrected.
Cool

Ok if the plane was loaned to non DZ pilot for personal flight this could or could not be skydiving related.

The aircraft is a 182. Straight 182 from 1956. These older planes have a much higher unusable fuel per tank than most pilots are used to. An uninformed pilot "just hopping in" could very well think they have enough for a short hop when they don't. Was this to go up and look for cutaway gear? TK?


Southern_Man  (C License)

Nov 27, 2012, 7:29 AM
Post #16 of 23 (3117 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

The aircraft is a 182. Straight 182 from 1956. These older planes have a much higher unusable fuel per tank than most pilots are used to.

How much is that? 5 gal per side?


diverdriver  (D 19012)

Nov 27, 2012, 8:15 AM
Post #17 of 23 (3061 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Southern_Man] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:

The aircraft is a 182. Straight 182 from 1956. These older planes have a much higher unusable fuel per tank than most pilots are used to.

How much is that? 5 gal per side?

That's correct. And that's assuming the old rubber bladder type tanks don't have wrinkles in them.


drjump  (D 2785)

Nov 27, 2012, 8:18 AM
Post #18 of 23 (3057 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Southern_Man] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

5 gallons/side unusable in manauvering flight. 3 gallons/side in straight and level flight. This from a 1957 Cessna manual.


Ron

Nov 27, 2012, 8:26 AM
Post #19 of 23 (3043 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.

It had a problem, there are three major possible causes:

1. Pilot error
2. Lack of MX
3. Something random and uncontrollable.

Since it IS a jump plane that is being used to fly jumpers, one that you might fly in some day or with that pilot..... Wouldn't it be nice to know if it was pilot error or lack of MX?


normiss  (D 28356)

Nov 27, 2012, 9:47 AM
Post #20 of 23 (2956 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

It most certainly would, if any of those prerequisites existed.
I am unaware if any do at this time.


Someone even asked me about the timing of this A/C 'incident' with the timing of the Lake Wales A/C 'incident'.
Unsure
I can only hope not....jebus people.


(This post was edited by normiss on Nov 27, 2012, 12:55 PM)


kallend  (D 23151)

Nov 27, 2012, 12:48 PM
Post #21 of 23 (2805 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
There were no jumpers aboard.
NOT a skydiving incident.

It had a problem, there are three major possible causes:

1. Pilot error
2. Lack of MX
3. Something random and uncontrollable.

Since it IS a jump plane that is being used to fly jumpers, one that you might fly in some day or with that pilot..... Wouldn't it be nice to know if it was pilot error or lack of MX?

Indeed it would.


WGore  (D 3379)

Dec 10, 2012, 8:55 AM
Post #22 of 23 (2155 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diverdriver] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:

The aircraft is a 182. Straight 182 from 1956. These older planes have a much higher unusable fuel per tank than most pilots are used to.

How much is that? 5 gal per side?

That's correct. And that's assuming the old rubber bladder type tanks don't have wrinkles in them.

I believe the 56' model unusable is 2.5 gal. It went to 5 in 57'.


fly4jumps  (C License)

Dec 10, 2012, 5:34 PM
Post #23 of 23 (1954 views)
Shortcut
Re: [normiss] C-182 Non-Fatal Zephyrhills, FL 11-25-2012 [In reply to] Can't Post

Incident - An occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft that affects or could affect the safety of operations.

So yes, both were "incidents" as long as this plane wasn't damaged. In this case, shouldn't we be applauding the pilot for surviving?? Crazy we don't actually do anything but gossip here unproductively, do we? All you commenters are "experienced" pilots and skydivers, no? Then you want to know that it wasn't pilot error so what, you won't fly with that pilot anymore? Lets be real, how many jumpers actually go and interview pilots before getting aboard for a jump?

Even after we determine that if this was pilot error (NTSB says all 2/3 incidents are pilot error), then what? Anyone want to suggest piloting or maintenance techniques that pilots mechanics or jumpers want to try to prevent this from happening with jumpers aboard?

Seems we pilots can do a few things...

-know the weather and how its changing, stick fuel tanks, know the a/c systems better, good non-rushed preflights, stay calm when stuff does go wrong, know what to do when something goes wrong, PRACTICE power OFF approaches, never give up power off glide distance to somewhere which allows for a full stop landing or successful crash, learn from fu*k ups so you don't do that again!

Ok girls, resume non-productive, narcissistic gossiping procedures Laugh



Forums : Skydiving : General Skydiving Discussions

 


Search for (options)