Aircraft / wingsuit collision

[diverdriver 5]

I didn't read further in the thread so maybe this question will be answered but.....Should birdmen go out first? Last? Always? I know of an operation putting them out first and it seemed to work fine. Kind of like a CRW load where they are short of the field and then have to fly into the wind to the airport. Any thoughts on this? Has this already been hashed out on another forum? I would like to add a section to my website on the issues brought up here. I could use some help from Birdmen.
Chris Schindler
www.DiverDriver.com

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

would 3rd party insurance come into play?

This question was asked Sunday night. The DZ said they are not going this way. They'll take care of the repair themselves.
ltdiver
____________________________________________
LightDiverCam

[diverdriver 5]

SBS....that's the first I've seen someone post that he hit a tire first then the tail. How do we know that? Are there marks? A memory?
Chris Schindler

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

but still managed to keep his handles

Heheheehehee.....Buy that man a beer!!!!
"It's all about the BOOBIES!"

[ltdiver 3]

vivaheaddown wrote:

Quote

It's the black marks (from the heat tracks on the tail inline with the engine) on the back of his rig that help put him at the moment of impact,

sbs wrote:

Quote

Sounds like he hit a tire, and then the tail of the airplane.

At first it was rumored that it was a tire vs BirdMan hit (cause of the mark on the back of the rig), but then it came out it was blue paint instead of a rubber mark. Now, I didn't see the rig. Vivaheaddown....what did you get to inspect? Sounds like you have a bit more info than the rest of the group here.
ltdiver
____________________________________________
LightDiverCam

[SBS 0]

Chris,
That is why I tried to throw in so many words like "apparently". I would love to have more clear information, but I just don't know. I heard that there was a mark on his rig, but from what, I don't really know. It could have been fact or speculation that he had hit the tire, from the original investigation that night. Either way, they were pretty convinced that that was what happened. That was the point that I got most of my information...there has been very little added since then.
Steve

[diverdriver 5]

Ok. That's where it came from.
Chris

[CuriousGeorge 0]

My understanding was that black marks on the birdman's rig originally led folks to theorize that he'd hit the tire first but that subsequently folks decided that the black marks were from exhuast deposits on the stabilizer.

[ltdiver 3]

See post by Jack Gramley, DZ manager, in the Wing Suit forum.
Alot of questions answered.
ltdiver
____________________________________________
LightDiverCam

[JakGramley 2]

Here's my reply to this same thread in the Wingsuit Forum. At the end I will answer a few more questions that were posted here.
My apologies for taking so long to reply to this post. I was out of town and just got back late last night (Thursday 5/9). Yes, we did have contact between a wing suit jumper and one of our Super Otters. It was the last load of the day on Sunday, 5/5. The wing suit jumper is highly experienced and had normally been making contact with the pilot to let him know that he was on the load. Our standard procedure is to have the pilot continue on an extra mile after a wingsuit exit and then to do a long, sweeping turn to the west before descending. This time the communication was not complete. The pilot flew on for a few seconds, turned to the west and began a slow descent. About 15 to 20 seconds after the exit the pilot heard and felt a minor impact. He immediately radioed us and we began emergency procedures to determine if the impact had been with a jumper, if so to identify the jumper and then to prepare for any necessary medical attention. We also launched a second Super Otter to fly chase with the aircraft that had experienced the problem to determine any damage to the aircraft. From the ground we noticed a cutaway main and what appeared to be a fully inflated reserve canopy about 1 mile to the north of the DZ and arrived at that area shortly after the jumper did a standup landing. He was dazed and could not tell us what had happened. We did a visual inspection and found carbon residue on the left wing of the wing suit as well as some minor damage to the suit. At about the same time manifest was able to confirm that all other jumpers on that load were accounted for. We relayed the information to the pilots in the air that the jumper was okay. The aircraft then landed without incident. Ground inspection of the aircraft showed some sheet metal damage and the decision was made to replace the entire tail section. During the disassembly process no structural damage was noted.
The second question posed was the notification of the FAA. While I am not the one handling the communication on this one, we had another recent incident at Perris Valley Airport that did NOT involve our aircraft. In that case a twin engine general aviation aircraft had minimal contact with an ultralight aircraft. Both landed safely. When the local FAA FSDO office was contacted they said that a report was NOT necessary unless there was personal injury or major aircraft damage. While the circumstances of this incident are different, the same standard may apply. Once the communication with the FAA is complete I will try to post it on this forum.
Now the question of what we are doing about this situation. First off I can tell you that the jumper refused medical attention and has not seen a Dr. since then, despite our recommendation that he do so. Second, we have begun a re-evaluation of our operation as it pertains to wing suit jumps. No, we are not going to discourage wing suit jumps. However we will be imposing new guidelines for line of flight for both the aircraft and the jumpers to insure that nothing like this can happen again. Our goal is to keep up with the sport as it develops.
Last, anytime you have questions regarding Perris Valley Skydiving please feel free to contact me directly by email at [email protected] or by phone at the manifest office at (909) 657-3904. We try to be open and honest about everything we do here. I also try to respond to any postings on DropZone.com or rec.skydiving daily.
More answers:
"The question of contact with wheel or horizontal stabilizer." That one was my fault. We attempted to question the jumper in the field shortly after he landed. We observed black stripes across the wing suit (which is white and light grey). They appeared to match what would be tire tread marks from the aircraft. I mistakenly reported a tire strike. Further examination of the aircraft on the ground revealed the damaged aircraft skin on and around the tail. We now speculate that the marks on the wingsuit are carbon deposits off of the horizontal stabilizer.
"The direction of flight of both the jumper and the aircraft." This is purely speculation at this point. The aircraft pilot never saw the jumper. This was a sunset load, with fading light conditions. There was a definite haze in the air. The wingsuit is white and light grey. Had the pilot known EXACTLY where the jumper was, it would have been difficult to spot him in those conditions. We believe, from the accounts of the pilot and the jumper (the jumper remembers exiting the aircraft and his first few maneuvers in freefall), that the jumper exited the aircraft as the last jumper on a south to north jumprun. The jumper executed a left turn, turning him to the west, and then another left turn, causing him to parallel Goetz Road, about 1/2 mile or more west of the DZ. The aircraft did approximately the same thing. We speculate that the jumper and the aircraft were on the same heading, with a closing rate of about 40 mph (since they were both headed in the same direction). We think that the plane descended onto the jumper, which would explain how the jumper missed the wing and the right prop. The streaks on the back of the left wing of the wingsuit were only slightly angled, running primarily parallel to the jumpers body. The jumpers rig is black and shows little detail of the impact. The left wing of the wingsuit has some tears on it, the container appeared to be completely intact. The main canopy showed no damage and we have no idea why the jumper cutaway from it (he has no recollection of any of this). His main landed about 1/4 mile from the jumper under no-wind conditions. Interestingly enough, we were able to locate his reserve handle and reserve pilot chute and freebag the next morning. The jumper retained his cutaway handle.
"Wrinkled skin on the aircraft." Yes, there were minor skin wrinkles from the connecting point of the tail and up to near the top of the vertical stabilizer. There was also a minor dent to the bottom of the leading edge of the right horizontal stabilizer. Pat Conatser elected to replace the entire tail section, partly so that they could check for any structural problems. None have been found. Probably the aircraft could have continued in service without any repairs, but Pat and Melanie just doesn't operate that way.
"Could the jumper could have been trying to lurk the plane and got WAY too close?" No, this was not the case at all. The jumper is question is VERY conservative in his skydiving. This was never in question, nor was it ever seriously discussed. The jumper has complete recollection of his exit and the first 10 to 15 seconds of his flight and can recall in detail that experience. He also recalls that the plane flew away from him after his exit, but that he then lost sight of it as he made his first left turn.
"Should birdmen go out first?" We at Perris don't think so, for one main reason. Most times you need to make several passes to get all of the jumpers out of a twin Otter or Skyvan. Pilots do NOT want to have to try and locate the wingsuit jumper prior to initiating the next pass. Instead we are proposing that the wingsuits go out last, that they exit the aircraft, then turn to the east and fly out to the east of the jumprun. Our aircraft will continue on for approximately one mile and then make a turn to the west, beginning their descent further out than normal. This should allow us to continue to operate, even dropping jumpers from another aircraft, provided the next jumprun is offset to the west.
"AAD's" I do NOT want to start one of those nasty discussions about the use of AAD's, but the wingsuit jumper did NOT have an AAD installed on his rig. In several conversations with him after the event took place he said that he never considered that he would need one since he only jumped a wing suit and always jumped alone. In this case he did everything right once the contact took place. He deployed his main and had to release it due to some type of perceived malfunction. He deployed his reserve canopy without incident. Since this incident he has bought, and is now having installed, a Cypres AAD.
I hope that this helps shed more light on this unfortunate incident. I would gladly address further questions on this forum, or privately by email or phone.
Jack Gramley
General Manager
Perris Valley Skydiving

[Michele 1]

Thanks, Jack!
Good explanation; even I understood it! And you know what, I also appreciate you taking the time to post such a lengthy and complete discussion of the situation - I know how busy you can get, and your willingness to share this info, "from the horse's mouth", as it were, is just another reason Perris is where I choose to jump. (Well, that and the fact I am too scared to actually jump anywhere else...and you all put up with me...and there are cute guys there...).
Ciels and Pinks-
Michele
If you really want to, you can seize the day; if you really want to, you can fly away...
~enya~

[lummy 4]

Why do I get the impression that Michelle's reason's AREN'T in that order? ;)
One shot... HEY!!! Mas Tequila!!!!
Two Shots HEY HEY!!!!
Three Shots.......

[Michele 1]

Yes. Yes they are. I promise. Truly. For real. Honestly. (Why are you snickering?)Ciels and Pinks-
Michele
If you really want to, you can seize the day; if you really want to, you can fly away...
~enya~

[rgoper 0]

Jack:
i applaud you commentary, and even admitting you inadvertently initially reported a tire strike as being erouneous information, hats off bro. sounds like the dz is stepping up to the plate on this one, and handling it well, thanks in large parts to the DZO's, and managers. when a report from the DZ comes out, it puts the stop to a lot of erroneous speculation. accidents happen, we were fortunate no one was hurt, we can build another aircraft, but not another sky diver. in all my years of accident investigation, i have learned that the "initial link" in the "chain" is formed, then another link, leading to a "chain" of events. i always like to go back to the first link and investigate the whole chain, not for curiousity's sake, but so we can obtain data, and improvise ways to insure it never happens again. the sky diving community dodged a bullet, as well as the bird man, accidents are like rattle snakes, there's always two in the bush, now is no time for complacency, stay on your toes, be safe!
Richard
"Gravity Is My Friend"

[lummy 4]

Moi? snicker? Hey.. as long as you have the priorities straight and besides, you need to find that millionaire so you can jump a wing suit :)
One shot... HEY!!! Mas Tequila!!!!
Two Shots HEY HEY!!!!
Three Shots.......

[Michele 1]

And Lummy, that's about what it would take - a millionaire who supports my skydiving, so I can do coached jumps all the time, take Jim Slayton's class every day, and rack up about 500 hours in freefall. Then, see, I'll don a wingsuit. Until then, I remain, proudly, Airweenie....!
Ceils and Pinks-
Michele
If you really want to, you can seize the day; if you really want to, you can fly away...
~enya~

[diverdriver 5]

Jack,
Very nice post. Thank you for setting everything straight.
Chris Schindler
http://www.DiverDriver.com

[quade 3]

Again, Thanks Jack.
Nice descriptions. It now all makes sense to me. An amazing story.
Even if the local FSDO doesn't require an NTSB 8020 on this, Jim should at least file a NASA ASRS form to cover his butt just in case somebody does get pissy later on. It would also make the NASA boys day as far as reading material. BTW, I'm looking at NTSB 830 right now and it doesn't appear as if this incident meets the definition of "substantial damage", but if you look at 830.5(a)(5) I would think that somebody could make a case for a mid-air collision. It'll be interesting to see what the FSDO says.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[rhino 0]

Thanks for the info Jack.. Very informative..
Blue Skies .....

[bbarnhouse 0]

Jack~
Thank you for your candor. Most of all, please let the skydiver that was involved know how overjoyed we all are that he is alive and well.
Cheers!
BB
But 4000 windmills CAN'T be wrong!