Another article re: Skydive Chicago

[rgoper 0]

Quote

He's pushing for the almighty dollar," said Murray, who now drives a truck. "He puts students up in unsafe conditions--jumping through solid and low layers of clouds, in high winds. You can't see what's below. There were times when jumpers went out at 13,000 feet and didn't see the ground until at 900 feet."

Murray recalled a time several years ago when he and Nelson jumped in tandem with two students into heavy clouds and because of winds and poor visibility wound up more than 12 miles from the drop zone. "We hitchhiked back to the airport," Murray said.
I don't understand if Terry Murray (one of the nasty ones on rec.dot) is a tandem master and had such a problem jumping through clouds, why didn't he just refuse? Did Roger force him and his student to put gear on, and push him out of the airplane?

"IF" terry murry did in fact jump through the clouds in which he "allegeally" jumped through, he is admitting committing an offense, (subject to fines and/or ratings suspension) as a "ratings holder" perhaps his rating should be reviewed by the U.S.P.A. or the F.A.A. "IF" he did as he said he did, knowingly and intentionally. we ALL know were NOT supposed to jump through clouds, or cloud cover.

i take the rest of the article with a "grain of salt" it's most dissapointing that a "brother" sky diver would betray his own sport, no matter who they are trying to back stab.

in the end, everyone is going to have their own opinions on this whole incident, but given enough time, this topic will fade into obscurity.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[jfields 0]

Quote

given enough time, this topic will fade into obscurity.

True, but the question is what people/companies/dropzones are forced into oblivion and obscurity with it. The answer may be "none" or it may be "a whole lot". I don't have an opinion one way or the other, because I'm not knowledgeable about the operations/people in question. The entire thing is sad.

[wildblue 4]

Quote

Go there, hang out, get to know the people, enjoy the place. Then decide if it's worth the longer drive. But don't refuse to go there just because somebody said they're dangerous. They're not.

Damn Andy... I was going to say this exact same thing! I hate when people bad-mouth a DZ, or pass on 'what they heard' - I hate it even more when someone uses that opinion as a basis for visiting a DZ or not.

Believe none of what you read and less of what you hear. Go check the place out yourself, make your own decision.

it's like incest - you're substituting convenience for quality

[ADRNALN 0]

Maybe it was a fair article if you have an aviation(skydiving-and can see thru the BS) background but for whuffos I think that article was very bias, ie anti-SDC. I have had 3 people come up to me today at work and say "I hope thats not where you jump".
I feel very safe at SDC, in fact, so safe that I have driven to other DZs and decided not to jump just because I didn't feel the same sense of safety (given that was right after I got my A). Not that they are unsafe, I just felt better at SDC. And I am planning on visiting the other Chicago area DZs soon, but this time I will actually jump.

[quade 3]

Quote

I feel very safe at SDC, in fact, so safe that I have driven to other DZs and decided not to jump just because I didn't feel the same sense of safety (given that was right after I got my A). Not that they are unsafe, I just felt better at SDC. And I am planning on visiting the other Chicago area DZs soon, but this time I will actually jump.

Please don't take this as a knock, but do you really think you're qualified to judge the safety of a dropzone based on your A license?

People have a tendancy to focus on the very visible things in a dropzone and make their assumptions about that. Although outward physical appearances may be an indication, that's probably not where you'd want to look if you really wanted to know if a dropzone was "safe" or not.

I know for a fact the things I'd look for, but I seriously doubt that any DZO would allow the average fun jumper to inspect them at that level.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[scottbre 0]

Quote

Please don't take this as a knock, but do you really think you're qualified to judge the safety of a dropzone based on your A license?

He didn't say it was safe or not safe. He said he felt safer, and mentioned a sense of safety.

That is his subjective opinion, which is probably even influenced by not being as comfortable with new DZ's.

What you read(interpretted) in his comment and what he actually wrote are different.

"Your mother's full of stupidjuice!"
My Art Project

[Vallerina 2]

Although skydivers are quick to deny allegations of what goes on at a dz, none are so quick at providing proof to discredit it or trying to understand why these claims were made. Obviously sdc gets scrutinized and watched over more. No surprise there. I just can't understand why they don't have more proof to back up statements such as "we don't jump through clouds", "we don't put tandems up in unsafe conditions" blah blah blah. When you know that occurrences at the dz will get higher publicity, why not go out of the way to keep detailed records of student jumps (record winds, time, take pictures prior to exiting to show clouds weren't an issue, etc etc). It won't solve all problems, and sure records can be changed, but it's better than nothing.

Also, if a person questions their safety at a dz, it seems many look the other way and say "Well, I feel safe there" instead of saying, "What happened to make you feel unsafe, and what can we do to change it?" Not sure why people get so defensive and are quick to claim their dz (not just sdc) is perfect.

There's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning

[ADRNALN 0]

Actually I feel I am the best person to decide whether or not a DZ is safe for me or not. By the way my aviation experience is more than just jumping out of airplanes and has been a life long interest.
But I think you missed my point, I felt safe and that is what is important to me. And some where in my training at SDC I learned that I am the final decision-maker in my skydiving career because I must live with the results.

[PhreeZone 15]

> I didn't feel the same sense of safety

What gave you that sense of saftey at SDC and not the other places. If you look past the adminidities that SDC offers that other places don't (air conditioned hanger, padded packing areas, the pond, etc) I'm wondering what made the other places unsafe.

The major things that are of concern to me are do the planes appear to be in good condition? Are the student/tandem rigs in good condtion (doest'nt have to be the newest thing on the market)? If so that tells me the DZ spends the money to make sure their equipment and staff training are up to date. Resources availble to use for free for safety training (Hanging harness, copy of the SIM's at manifest, etc) Someone watching the landings and seeing if someone opened too close to some one else, poor pattern flying, poor landing techique, etc. Another thing that is becoming a bigger issue for me is a seperate marked area AWAY from the main landing zone for HP canopy flyers.

The adminities don't make a DZ safer then another DZ, they make it plusher.... but that in no way relates to safety. The safety is something completley different.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[quade 3]

Quote

By the way my aviation experience is more than just jumping out of airplanes and has been a life long interest.

Well, you didn't mention any of that in your post and unfortunately, there's not a little box for that in the profiles, so I was just asking based on what I saw in your post.

But, I think you missed my point in that feeling safe and being relatively safe are two completely different things.

For instance, right now there is a panic of sorts going on in Southern California about child abductions. People are telling children to run away screaming if ANY stranger talks to them at all. People for some reason, feel less safe because of all the hype surrounding the case. In fact, however, their children were exactly as safe as the day before the abduction took place as they were before the perp was caught and now are only slightly more safe because he has been caught. Most child abductions do not involve strangers at all.

In my experience, people are usually worried about the wrong things.

BTW, if at any point in your skydiving career you actually feel safe, you might want to rethink your position.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 1,649]

Quote

Please don't take this as a knock, but do you really think you're qualified to
judge the safety of a dropzone based on your A license?

What makes a safe DZ, Paul, and how can an average jumper assess it?

Planes (are non-pilots/A&P mechanics competent to judge)?
Good pilots?
Large, obstacle free landing area?
Properly maintained student and rental equipment?
Appropriately rated instructors?
Pattern and landing discipline from the up-jumpers?
?????

I believe that SDC is average or above average in all of the above, and way above average with respect to student equipment and landing area. Yet there were still 6 deaths of experienced skydivers in 12 months, with no obvious common factor except for the location. In only one case (the canopy collision) did any of the factors mentioned above have any relevance at all to the fatality. It's very hard to see how a low cutaway or a main/reserve entanglement or a guy who hooks it into a fishing pond can be blamed on the DZO or the facility.

[quade 3]

Quote

What makes a safe DZ, Paul, and how can an average jumper assess it?

They can't!

The average jumper does not have the background nor the access to inspect a dropzone and determine if much of what that dropzone is doing is in violation of FARs.

There was a small step forward in the concept of safety inspections a couple of years back with the introduction of the Voluntary Courtesy Inspection Program by the USPA. The qualifications included more than a minimal amount of experience in skydiving and piloting (as I recall something like D license and commercial certificate) so I thought that was a pretty fair way of dealing with credibility. I attended the first VCIP inspector training course held at Raeford and we went through a complete mock inspection of the facility there.

To my knowledge and to date there has not been a single VCIP ever requested by a dropzone.

Even complete compliance with FARs and SIM would be no guarantee of safety, just complance with federally mandated and standard practices. However, not a bad place to start.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[christoofar 0]

Quote

Please don't take this as a knock, but do you really think you're qualified to judge the safety of a dropzone based on your A license?

Oh this is rich. Skydiving fatalities in the past several years have been lopsided towards the experienced end of the spectrum (Parachutist, 2002) whereas student fatalities have remained fairly constant.

I don't think it's that difficult for students to realize the difference between reality and regulation when they read the SIM and the FARs and compare what's listed to how things really operate at their DZ. Skydivers also have to realize that most DZs are tandem factories; they have to pay the bills. It's just a matter of personal judgement, not skill, to tell which DZs are more interested in your wallet vs. your life.

Some of these interests surface themselves very glaringly... like overloading the jumpship, or DZs who jump junk, lots of NTSB reports, etc.

I really don't believe a D license holder has any better skill than a A license holder in assessing the "safety" of a DZ unless the D-holder holds some has a job that involves general aviation, as opposed to say... arranging flowers.

We are all human, and as such... subject to malfunction!

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[quade 3]

Quote

Yet there were still 6 deaths of experienced skydivers in 12 months, with no obvious common factor except for the location.

And as I think you'd agree the sample size is so low that statiscally this seemingly unsafe series of events is actually meaningless.

I'm not a SDC detractor, so please don't think that my comments are in any way going in that direction. However, to outsiders, it has to look like something worth investigating.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rapper4mpi 0]

Here's in interesting inside scoop on this second article. Roger invited the newspaper to his DZ after the first article surfaced last week. He met witha reporter, showed them around and gave them the facts, about his DZ, about his past (which the first article had many inaccuracies in), and about the accidents. What happens, the paper screws him again. Roger tried acknowledging the first story with facts and understanding (which in the PR world is the right thing to do) but the reporters put another spin on it and could ahve possible suceeded in damaging his business. I would not be surprised to see a lawsuit for slander, which could of course be very hard to win, but this is pretty bad. I feel bad for Roger, and I'm sure he was totallu unprepared for this, but should seek expert help at this point in dealing with the media. I wish him luck.
-Rap

[quade 3]

Quote

I don't think it's that difficult for students to realize the difference between reality and regulation when they read the SIM and the FARs and compare what's listed to how things really operate at their DZ.

Let's get a couple of things straight about safety;

Just because something is legal doesn't make it safe.

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's going to cause a fatality.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[PhreeZone 15]

>I really don't believe a D license holder has any better skill than a A license holder in assessing the "safety" of a DZ

No.. no one can ever tell you the safety of a DZ just by a quick walk around... but the more experienced you get, the more you start to look for things that a lower experienced jumper might not look for. Like snag hazards on the door of a plane, hanging harness out in the middle of the building vs tucked in a closet, or if there is a slope to the landing area. Things like that most people don't think to look for, but everyone of the little things adds up to the safety level of the DZ. If you walk on a DZ and get critizied for making a straight in approach vs a hook when the pattern would have allowed for a hook... that might be a bad thing that some low timers are'nt aware of. If the DZ spends more time debriefing a first time student then they do a student jump... that might be teaching bad habits in the beginning. More experienced jumpers can look back and shake thier head at this type of thing at DZ's because they know more what to look for then a fresh A licence holder does.

Also Parachutist considers an A licence as experienced....

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[wildblue 4]

Quote

Maybe it was a fair article if you have an aviation(skydiving-and can see thru the BS) background but for whuffos I think that article was very bias, ie anti-SDC.

The article does not have that much of a slant to it. They could have easily made it very anti-sdc (maybe like that other reporter did - bring up Roger's past and try to make a connection) What BS is there? It says negative things about SDC, it puts SDC in a negative light... ok... is it unfairly doing so? Is it making shit up?

Professor Kallend -
You said

Quote

"An uninformed reader will be left with the very distinct impression that a "near miss" (stupid expression) took place over SDC when it actually occurred elsewhere"

So there has never been jumpers/jump planes too close to commercial traffic over SDC? Of the three "close call" reports they quoted, one specifically mentioned "Ottawa Airport" the other two weren't clear. But before that section, the article stated "Commercial pilots have reported near misses with skydivers in freefall and jump planes over the four drop zones that ring Chicago. Skydiving groups also are based in Kankakee, Hinckley and Morris"

I also don't see how it implied that SDC was intentionally placed under an approach path.

If the article was trying to blame Roger, why did they give him the last word?
""But I cannot control human error," he said. "Once they leave that airplane, there is nothing that I can do to stop them or save them."


I'm not trying to bash SDC here, I actually think it's a pretty nice place as far as facilities, aircraft, etc go. I guess what I'm trying to do is get some real answers from people directly involved - Is this article total BS?
I think I'm in the same boat with Quade - I'm not a "SDC Hater" or a "Terry Supporter" (would that make me a jock-strap?) but these events/articles/incidents/people/etc do affect me
--
wheew.... that was long... sorry.

it's like incest - you're substituting convenience for quality

[christoofar 0]

Quote

Just because something is legal doesn't make it safe.

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it's going to cause a fatality.

I didn't imply that if the playing field is green that there isn't going to be a brown spot in the lawn. What I said was that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to identify an environment where safety is more precocious than the norm.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[freeflir29 0]

Flock!!! Somebody turn that fan off. The shit is slinging everywhere.....

[n2skdvn 0]

if my calculations are correct SLINKY + ESCULATOR = EVERLASTING FUN
my site

[kallend 1,649]

Quote

In
August 1993, a pilot reported being forced into a quick descent to avoid
a plane "involved in parachute jumping at Ottawa Airport," according to
a copy of the report obtained by the Tribune. At the time, Nelson's
operations were based at that airport, but it is unclear if the incident
involved his plane.

Two years ago, a commercial jet pilot who took evasive action to avoid
a collision stated in his report: "Why do parachute jumpers have to ply
their trade [in a path] to the busiest airport in the world?"

OK - the juxtaposition suggests the second event was also at Ottawa, but I believe (and Chris will correct me if I'm wrong)that it was elsewhere.

Quote

Last September, a Boeing 737 pilot reported a near miss, saying, "It was
very close ... I estimate less than 100 feet vertical and 500 feet
horizontal"--just seconds away from a collision, aviation officials say.

"Jumpers from Skydive Chicago are in the absolute worst place to be,"
said Bryan Zilonis, a veteran air-traffic controller at the FAA's Chicago
Center facility in Aurora.

Again - juxtaposition suggests something that, AFAIK, happened elsewhere. They didn't outright lie, but paragraph structure leads the reader to a false conclusion.

And how can SDC be "the absolute worst place to be" when it is NOT on a published approach path? The Morris DZ is closer to a published route. If airliners are going over SDC it's only because ATC sent them there. Also, as Chris wrote already, all jump planes are required to be in radio contact with ATC, so why is ATC sending airliners that way anyway? ATC's job is to provide traffic separation.

[faulknerwn 37]

What makes a safe DZ, Paul, and how can an average jumper assess?
Planes (are non-pilots/A&P mechanics competent to judge)?
Good pilots?
Large, obstacle free landing area?
Properly maintained student and rental equipment?
Appropriately rated instructors?
Pattern and landing discipline from the up-jumpers?

---

In all honesty, I know that I don't have the knowledge to judge the condition of an airplane other than a good paint job, So at most dzs I visit (other than my home dz) I normally do just have to put faith in the pilots and the aircraft.

The above stuff is certainly important. But above all else, I look at the attitude of the dzo (or in some cases manager of bigger dzs). I know of at least a couple of dzos who I've seen crash in and see do stupid shit under canopy. I know of managers who show incredibly poor judgement in canopy sizing and canopy control. Every dz I've ever been to has a unique attitude - some good, some bad, some about money, others about friendship. I've been to really friendly big dzs and I've been to ones where its purely a business. But the ones I like to frequent are not just the ones who preach safety, but the ones who live it. When I see the dzo hooking it and having to pull his ass out on toggles on a canopy that seems to be too small from him - I can usually trust that attitude gets passed down to other jumpers. When I see dzos which preach safety over profit, recommending a Spectre 190 to someone instead of their own Spectre 170 they have for sale, I feel better.

It seems that the attitude and character of dzs seem to grow largely from the top for better or for worse. I've seen a dz's whole culture change when management switched.

I've never been to Skydive Chicago so I can't make any judgement on what kind of attitude is displayed there. But its the attitude of the jumpers and the attitude of the dzo more than anything which tell me how safe a dz will be.

W

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

ATC's job is to provide traffic separation

and whine like little bitches apparently.....If they don't want the job QUIT

[PhillyKev 0]

Too hot for me...I just have one question. What the hell is an "adminidities"??