VisionAir 0 #51 September 22, 2002 Quoteinstead of aircraft why not use airostat type balloons (the radar ballons on the coast) with ski resort quad chairs to go to 10 to 13 k and get off at the top?? Just make them bigger. Just an idea. Now that's "out-of-the-box" thinkin.... I like it Huh?!? What cloud?!? Oh that!!! That's just Industrial Haze Alex M. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingnut 0 #52 September 22, 2002 QuoteThe small DZ turbine would be the Cessna Turbine U206. 410 SHP (shaft horse power). You can run 6 jumpers to 13 grand and not outrun the packing ability. they have one of these at the dz in saarlouisberg, germany/ i got to jump it once aftr i picked up my rig from the riggers there, it took 5 of us to 13,000 at 1200ft. min....it was wierd to hearit start up since it was still just a small cessna.....the normal jump plane at my club was a 206(piston) and we would only get 500ft. min. outa it.....and only went to 11k.... ______________________________________ "i have no reader's digest version" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skreamer 1 #53 September 22, 2002 Have you considered the SuperLet? The TurboLet has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but the SuperLet might be the plane you are looking for. It takes 25 jumpers, climbs friggin' quick and has a retractable undercarriage. It is similar in design to the TurboLet but has a 5 blade prop (Turbo has 3), wider fuselage and (naturally) bigger engine. I don't know the specs but I do know that in Sweden that thing had all 25 of us clinging on while it was climbing! Will Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FliegendeWolf 0 #54 September 22, 2002 QuoteHell if I know. But they do make engineers to figure out that kind of thing. I would imagine that they could speed it up quite a bit and have some kind of shock absorber mechanaism in the chair assembly that would slow you down until you were up to speed. like the old T-bar ski lifts wit the springs in them. Once your going you could theoredicaly get out at any altitude or ride it back down if you puss out. Then it would be up to the JM to through your ass off the ride.Hmm... Interesting idea. But the chairlift could function like the newer high-speed quads rather than the T-Bar. Simply, when loading the chair, it is not on the cable, but rolling around above the cable very slowly. Once it gets to a certain point, it rolls down an incline, onto the cable, and a mechanism with wheels clamps the chair on. This could work the same way... If nothing else, it'd be a freaky ride up with no poles or anything! LOLA One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
konradptr 0 #55 September 23, 2002 What exactly is the reason that the L410 TurboLet isn't allowed to fly in the US for commercial ops? Seems like if the USPA cared, they could try to get it approved, and allow the US DZs to have a cheap, efficient, twin-turbine... ------------------------------------------ Getting banned isn't that bad...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nws01 0 #56 September 23, 2002 Chromeboys UFO = My Dream Jumpship! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
seedy 0 #57 September 23, 2002 But with any winds at all, wouldn't you be way downwind with no hope of getting back when the balloon got to altitude? I intend to live forever -- so far, so good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viking 0 #58 September 23, 2002 QuoteChromeboys UFO = My Dream Jumpship! you mean this oversized mirror?I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver My God has a bigger dick than your god -George Carlin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #59 September 23, 2002 QuoteWhat exactly is the reason that the L410 TurboLet isn't allowed to fly in the US for commercial ops? Seems like if the USPA cared, they could try to get it approved, and allow the US DZs to have a cheap, efficient, twin-turbine... I don't have any idea about this particular plane, but a plane generally wouldn't be allowed by not being FAA certified. It may not be certified because the company never planned to sell them in the US so they didn't bother with the time and expense, or maybe it doesn't meet an FAA requirement. Could be anything from stall speed to the number of emergency exits. But the FAA sets a whole bunch of rules and nobody, especially a tiny little organization like the USPA is gonna get them changed, especially for commercial ops. Also keep in mind the planes need to be maintained. I dunno what kind of engines they use, but are there any mechanics familiar with them in the US? I seriously doubt it would be any cheaper to operate than the planes we already have. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #60 September 23, 2002 QuoteI dunno what kind of engines they use, but are there any mechanics familiar with them in the US? Sort of like a Porter, cheap to run, not hard to fly, just expensive when you have to order parts?--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FliegendeWolf 0 #61 September 23, 2002 QuoteBut with any winds at all, wouldn't you be way downwind with no hope of getting back when the balloon got to altitude? Good point. Perhaps if the balloon is tethered twice, not including the chairlift. Therefore, regardless of the wind, the balloon can be held anywhere you want it as the top of an isosceles prism.A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #62 September 23, 2002 QuoteSeems like if the USPA cared, they could try to get it approved, and allow the US DZs to have a cheap, efficient, twin-turbine... You have the answer to your question right there. "Cheap" does not always mean safe. The FAA has to approve any aircraft for normal passenger carrying ops in the US. In order to pass there has to be a series of inspections and tests. It has to "conform" to US regulations. It ain't easy and it can be very expensive to get an aircraft certified in the US. We had a chance at getting a DHC-5 Buffalo for "cheap" but getting it approved to fly civilian passengers in the US was going to be way too expensive. Remember the "Super Arava" that was supposed to be online this past spring? Where is it? Getting something through FAA scrutiny is not as easy as getting an acronym group to back you. It's a lot of time. A lot of frustration with the paperwork. And it can be a lot of money. So "cheap" doesn't turn out to be "cheap" in the end. Also, I don't want my membership dues going to support a particular operation so they can have a cheap jumpship. There are better things USPA can do for its' members. I would tell USPA to leave the issues of aircraft acquisition to the individual operator. Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kopelen 0 #63 September 23, 2002 THAT PICTURE WAS TAKEN I BELIEVE FROM THE DOVER AFB FLIGHT LINE OF HISTORICAL AIRCRAFT THE PLANE YOU CAN BARELY SEE TO THE RIGHT OF IT IS THE VERY FIRST C-141A AND NEXT TO HERE IS A C-141B MODEL NUMBER 5 OR SUCH THE DHC-4 IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE C-7 CARIBOU BY THE US ARMY. IT FLEW DURING THE 60 AND 70S. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kopelen 0 #64 September 23, 2002 if you have the money there are two DHC-5 for sale in Maine Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hagar 0 #65 September 23, 2002 How about an An-72/74? It takes 58 passengers, about 80 skydivers(how many skydivers can you fit in a 2m*2m*10m cargohold?). It is designed to take off from short dirt/snow strips is Siberia, so it does not use much runway, about 600 meters I read somewhere. Since it is designed as a STOL aircraft it has powerful jet engines and low stall speed. It has a huge rear ramp perfect for bigways. What more could you ask for?--- PCSS #10 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildblue 4 #66 September 23, 2002 QuoteI'd go with trap doors in the floor. They could be connected to the GPS and just drop everyone right from their seats when the spot is right. That's genius, Dave, pure genius. Exit seperation? No longer a problem. Aircraft emergency, jettison the cargo. Notorious wind-breaker on the plane? Gone. First group takes too long in the door? Too bad, you're gone, deal with it. Scared student? Oops, sorry, wrong button, good luck. QuoteThen build it out of macaroni! I'm not real sure I'm ok with this part. Someone is bound to get hungry. Or if it gets wet, well, that's no good.it's like incest - you're substituting convenience for quality Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JumpHog 0 #67 January 31, 2003 Upon looking through NASA's website, I came across what I would have to call the ultimate jumpship. It is a DHC-5 Buffalo that the folks at NASA decided to strap four big-ass jet engines on. It was designed to be able to take off from aircraft carriers. With a ballistic climb rate, a roomy cabin, and a large tailgate, I think that about fits my bill. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #68 January 31, 2003 Holy Shyte! I think I have to go change my shorts now. BRB. Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #69 January 31, 2003 Here in Ontario, if the plane is Airworthy, it's Airworthy. You could import a large "cheap" passenger plane and providing it qualifies, they will give you the C or A. It's the C of R that restrict the number of passengers you can carry in foreign planes. The Canadian Gov't does this so that small North American charter companies buy North-American planes. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #70 January 31, 2003 That thing looks Kick-Ass! My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kevin922 0 #71 January 31, 2003 QuoteQuoteTail wheel would be possible, but then you'd have a higher rate of taxi/landing problems, I would think. Yes, obviously a tail wheel is going to be a much bigger deal for taxi, takeoff and landings. Narrow mains on a tricycle arrangement, however, aren't going to be the answer. Ya really, really want to have wide and beefy mains for a skydive operation just to make it a land-o-matic and ensure they hold up with repeated over use. I'll tell ya, DeHavilland got it right when they built the landing gear for the Twin Otter -- build 'em like you're going to use 'em on dirt strips. I've often sat in the front section of a Twin Otter and thought how cool it would be to bail out of the middle emergency exits just under the wing. However, looking out and seeing those huge wheels sitting there has quickly squashed that idea. Maybe you could design a slide that would attach to the emergency exit.. just hop on and slide right over the wheels :) Kevin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #72 January 31, 2003 Betcha it's a little noisy. Looks like it's designed for 14, which means you could probably fit 30 jumpers in it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #73 January 31, 2003 QuoteBetcha it's a little noisy. Looks like it's designed for 14, which means you could probably fit 30 jumpers in it. Oh you can fit more than 30 in there. It will dwarf a Casa. The tail gate is almost as wide as a C-130. I believe when we were looking at actually getting one we figured on many more than that. 50-60 comes to mind but that might be a high estimate. But they are really friggin big. And with the jets on it.....oh BABY!Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #74 January 31, 2003 Ok....I was searching for the exact measurements on the Buffalo tailgate width and can't find it. So I can't say that it really is almost as wide as a C-130. But having seen them up close they are like really, really big. Yah, that's a scientific unit of measurement right? Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dex 0 #75 January 31, 2003 If anyone buys one I volunteer to live in the thing to guard it.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)