Another article re: Skydive Chicago

[diverdriver 5]

Paul, SDC is NOT in Class A,B,C,or D airspace. Just wanted to make that clear if anyone was wondering.

Chris

[wildblue 4]

Quote

Secondly, no DZ is any safer than any other

I couldn't disagree more.

Quote

Uh huh....... try running 99 loads a day during peak season and have someone taking pictures of clouds or no clouds...........I doubt that will happen

One of things my boss likes to say "With enough time and money, we can do anything"
I wouldn't be that hard if a DZ really wanted to do that - time lapse security camera looking at the landing zone would be good enough. Not that any DZ is actually going to do that, especially when they jump through clouds on a fairly regular basis. I also don't think any DZ should have to do that. Skydive Indiana was fighting to stay on their airport and trying to prove they weren't breaking rules.

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

[skydiverbrian 0]

Quote

I couldn't disagree more.

Why?

In a world full of people, only some want to fly... isn't that crazy! --Seal

[skydiverbrian 0]

Quote

.......but common sense isn't common!!!!

Exactly. So if someone doesn't have enough sense to carry an umbrella in the rain, how is it anyone else's fault that they get wet?

In a world full of people, only some want to fly... isn't that crazy! --Seal

[bbarnhouse 0]

Brian.......glad that we can agree.
Cheers

[sunshine 2]

Quote

So if someone doesn't have enough sense to carry an umbrella in the rain, how is it anyone else's fault that they get wet?

Hehe, that's a good one....i might have to make that my new sig line.

___________________________________________
meow

I get a Mike hug! I get a Mike hug!

[bananna 0]

Okay, I have tried to stay out of this post, but in response to...
Vallerina's
(record winds, time, take pictures prior to exiting to show clouds weren't an issue, etc etc).

and
diverdriver's
Name another DZ that does that. I rest my case.....probably won't happen.

I have to say that if a DZ is under pressure to prove they are safe & they really care about their jumpers and the sport...THEY WILL GO to lenghts to show that they are safe & don't jump through clouds. FOR EXAMPLE, Skydive Indiana was being accused of jumping through clouds and was threatened to be kicked off the airport, so they made the extra effort. And, we took a picture from outside the door prior to every jump. I understand that it is unreasonable and time consuming for every DZ to start keeping records, BUT if your DZ is under scrutinty & the home to all your jumpers is being threatened, who wouldn't take the time to 'prove' their case?

[wildblue 4]

Quote

Why?

I will agree that you are as safe as you make yourself. However, part of that is choosing your DZ. How can one DZ be better than another in safety?
There's a ton of ways - aircraft maintenence, landing areas, attitude in general. Things out of your control. Do they have a landing pattern (left-hand, right-hand) do people follow it, does anything get said if someone doesn't follow it. Do people spirl into the pattern, are there always "high-performance landings" right in the middle of the pattern/landing are. Does the DZ have good education in place for visiting and home jumpers? Do I have to worry about the guy next to me in the plane (and later next to me under canopy) being stoned/drunk out of his mind? Has someone at the dz spotting the visiting jumper who came from a cessna dz and has no idea what kind of exit seperation to give, and hasn't asked anyone? Are there a bunch of "experienced" jumpers there under mains they can't handle because they're not cool if they're under something big? Can everyone there handle an aircraft emergency (side note: I thought it was really cool last year when SDC had a 'simulated aircraft emergency' - good idea)
The list could go on forever...

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

[kallend 1,683]

Paul - I'm not disagreeing with you over the regulations. However, the NASA ASRS report in question concerns a MD80 reporting being too close to 6 jump planes climbing in formation. That formation flight had been pre-cleared with ATC and had clearance to enter the class A when it got up there. Some of the ATC specialists had even visited the DZ to talk over the logistics and timing of the attempts. I think a formation of 6 Twin Otters is clearly visible on ATC radar. One wonders why ATC had the MD80 there at all...

SDC is not under class B or class C, incidentally.

[quade 3]

Quote

Paul, SDC is NOT in Class A,B,C,or D airspace. Just wanted to make that clear if anyone was wondering.

Ok, you're going to make me go and look it up aren't you?

Mode C, 30 mile veil?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

Well, ALL airports in the U.S. are under Class A aren't they?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[diverdriver 5]

LOL.....Touche!

Chris

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Contacting ATC prior to the jump run may help with the IFR and VFR Flight Following traffic, but it won't help with the VFR traffic which is not listening to a particular airport frequency. So one would like to hope that ATC, pilots and drop zones work together to educate each other in our needs to make everyone as safe as possible.
I am a licensed private pilot and a student skydiver and now that I have started skydiving I have a new respect towards making sure I'm as safe as possible while flying near airports with drop zones.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[diverdriver 5]

And thus......out of all this mess......someone speaks up and says that he learned something. It was all worth while then. Even though the intent of the original post was for something different.

Ok......I think I'm done with this thread. You can only kick a dead horse so many times before your foot gets sore.

Chris

[kallend 1,683]

Quote

Contacting ATC prior to the jump run may help with the IFR and VFR Flight
Following traffic, but it won't help with the VFR traffic which is not listening
to a particular airport frequency. So one would like to hope that ATC, pilots
and drop zones work together to educate each other in our needs to make
everyone as safe as possible.

The incidents that made the newspaper article concerned commercial airline flights, which would have been IFR. It's not a secret that skydiving takes place at an airport called "Skydive Chicago", and the jump plane pilots are in radio contact with ATC. I don't know if they have allocated transponder codes (Chris?) but they should be clearly visible on ATC radar, and they fly a very predictable route onto jump run. I see no reason there should ever be an incident.

[diverdriver 5]

We have standard "squak" codes (codes in the transponders) that we've used at SDC since 1993 when it opened. We fly a box pattern out to the west to about 4 or 6k then south then east then into the airport on jumprun or circle around for a south run. When we have to do a south run we limit how far north we go by about 1.5 miles unless ATC says "there's no one out there". Which they do often.

We call out of 3 grand and then call 2 minutes and jumpers away. The controllers that have ridden along with me said they appreciated the standard pattern we flew so they always knew where we were going. The DZ is marked on their radar screen. And they are all briefed on how busy we can be. Normally we have 2 super otters running but during special events we've had 4 or 5 turbines going with a helicopter doing low loads.

It's like a ski lift. The chair lift goes up the same side of the mountain all the time.

Chris


ok....i think i'm really done with this thread this time.

[kallend 1,683]

ok....i think i'm really done with this thread this time.

Quote

Not letting you off that easy. I know you read the ASRS on the MD80 "incident" with the 6 planes in formation in August 2000 (which was obviously part of the 300 way). Do you have any comments on that? I'm sure you recall the ATC procedures were pretty well arranged, so what happened?

[wildblue 4]

Chris -

Have you thought about calling that reporter (or one of them that worked on it) ask if they're going to do any sort of follow up, and ask if they'd like to hear a pilot's side of the story - basically, point out everything you did here: you fly a standard pattern, SDC has been there for a number of years, controllers have ridden along with you before, the co-ordination involved in the 300-way attempts that happened.... make sure they understand (and convey in the article) that you're not a bunch of hooligans with no regard to the safety of themselves or others.

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

[diverdriver 5]

Putting 12 planes in a formation for dropping is a difficult task at best. (one comment: I was not a pilot on this camp. I was a jumper. I was chief pilot on the record in 1998. So I am drawing from what we did in 98 to explain what I think happened.)

We would take off in waves. Slow climbers first. Then the Super Otters. ATC said that they did not want transponders on each aircraft because it would clutter up their screen and they would get all kinds of warnings. They said that we should have one xpndr per group once we were within on mile of each other and 1,000 feet vertically. I imagine that is what they did. Their TCAS saw the group leader. ATC was aware that othe planes would be in the proximate area of that leader. We also briefed that we would be flying wider patterns than usually since it is harder to make a bunch of turns with 12 airplanes or get groups together with a million turns.

The briefings with ATC started months before the camp took place. Why this seemed to be a surprise for the individual ATC specialist I don't know. There were no less than 3 controllers from Center here at the DZ during the event. I never heard one bad word.

In 98 they put a "stale ring" around us of 15 miles. That's wider than the nuke plants got after 9/11. Why this controller let this aircraft come that close or not tell the formation group to turn I don't know. In 98 I heard several jets get vectored away from us and the pilots asked to be vectored over so they could see it. The controllers refused. I don't have an explanation why this happened this time. It wasn't anything new.

Chris

[diverdriver 5]

Quote

Chris -

Have you thought about calling that reporter (or one of them that worked on it) ask if they're going to do any sort of follow up, and ask if they'd like to hear a pilot's side of the story - basically, point out everything you did here: you fly a standard pattern, SDC has been there for a number of years, controllers have ridden along with you before, the co-ordination involved in the 300-way attempts that happened.... make sure they understand (and convey in the article) that you're not a bunch of hooligans with no regard to the safety of themselves or others.

I would if I thought the Chicago Tribune was going to do it right this time. But....as it has been pointed out....this article was after Roger DID talk to them to straighten some things out. They are on a mission and I don't think I care to add to their fuel. I post here so that you all know what I know. That seems more important to me. Roger will have to deal with the paper on his own terms. He is the buisness owner. He is also a pilot and can explain all these things to them himself. The Tribune seems to disregard what is being said though.

But, yes...I have thought about it.

Chris

[MarkM 0]

When you talk to a reporter you have to think about what you're saying right at that moment. They ask questions and you have to formulate an immediate answer and give it.

The reporter has both the luxery of time to look over everything you said in full detail and in turn gets to edit what you said when it finally comes out in print.

No matter what you say to a reporter, you're going to say what the reporter wants you to say.

[quade 3]

Quote

But, yes...I have thought about it.

Hmmm, I kind of surprized that Roger (or ANY DZO for that matter) wouldn't have a policy of employees and contractors not talking to the media about the company as a condition of employment.

For the folks that don't know, this would not violate any First Amendment right and is actually pretty common for most larger corporations. For instance, it's part of my 5-day-a-week company's employment policy.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 1,683]

Well, the plot thickens. I've been informed that all the 2000 300-way attempt flights were conducted under IFR clearances. No excuse for the MD80 to have "encountered" the formation.

[quade 3]

And with that information it becomes a "DEAL" with ATC.

If standard separation wasn't maintained, then somebody should have gotten in serious trouble over at ATC.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[diverdriver 5]

In defense of the controllers...yes....it was probably a "deal" as they say in the biz. But the Chicago Center controllers who work our sector are probably my favorite controllers in the country. I've flown at DZs from one coast to the other so I've gotten to experience first hand different operations.

We just had one that sent an airliner off the arrival and put him across the DZ when we were about to drop. The jump pilot recognized the developing conflict and held the jumpers. The controller felt so bad that he drove out the DZ to personally apologize. So we made him stay for the barbecue that night and I bought him a beer. This whole system is set up with human beings. We all have to be vigilant because WE (as humans) are the weakest link in the whole thing. So we weren't angry at the controller. Our jump pilot did his job and backed up the controller who cut it a bit close.

Professionals back each other up. They don't expect the other to cover the other. We normally didn't pick up our IFR flight plan until we had all 12 together in 1998 so I can't say if they were on that plan at the time of the incident. BUT.....they didn't just pop up on the scene at 15,000. It still should not have happened. That's for sure.

Chris