St. Marys votes to kick off The Jumping place.

[airsport 0]

Quote

I don't like posting too much on here, but this made me laugh so I had to reply

"If these jumpers had simply landed off in more neutral territory - as happens all over the country every weekend - I doubt it would be an issue."

I landed off in a park yesterday and was written a warning for "reckless conduct" because it was city property. St. Mary's city property. 2 or more months ago, anyone could've landed anywhere in St. Mary's city property and not had the police looking for them to give them little yellow slips of paper...

Actually 2 weeks ago all was well! We had 2 civilian jumpers land on the EDGE of the base, as far as you could get from P-50 prohibited area and still be on the base... When the military that jump here screw up and land on the base you don't see it making the papers!

For all the onlookers that have never been front row at the DZ when they decide that all the time, efforts and money that you've invested in your nearly 7 year business is now a waste, should save their opinions on how Cathy is proceeding. Clear rational decision making isn't what is coming from the Airport Authority Board... Safety isn't the issue, nor is collecting money from the DZ. They want to eliminate all the business from the airport. Except for the FBO who's son is the chairman of the Airport Authority Board!
The city attorney was collecting his hourly rate all day last saturday. $300 or so an hour to stand around and put up no trespass signs. The city of St. Mary's has spent more than they will ever collect from The jumping Place... And will be spending more when they will be repaying the grant money.

[chuckakers 370]

Quote

Quote

As far as I can see, these jumpers did not cause a danger to traffic at the airport or airport users on the ground.

That's not the way the FAA is going to look at.

Sparky

---

105.5 General.

No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted from an aircraft, if that operation creates a hazard to air traffic or to persons or property on the surface.

---

Since when does landing in an open, unoccupied area create a hazard to anyone on the ground?

Besides, I'm not talking about whether or not landing off creates a hazard, I'm saying I question the city's authority to use a perceived hazard away from the airport to restrict a DZ's on-airport activities. Remember, the only justifiable reason to restrict jumping on a federally-funded airport is for the safety of airport users and traffic at that airport. Landing at a property several miles away from the airport that has nothing to do with aviation simply isn't in the city's jurisdiction.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[chuckakers 370]

Quote

I don't like posting too much on here, but this made me laugh so I had to reply

"If these jumpers had simply landed off in more neutral territory - as happens all over the country every weekend - I doubt it would be an issue."

I landed off in a park yesterday and was written a warning for "reckless conduct" because it was city property. St. Mary's city property. 2 or more months ago, anyone could've landed anywhere in St. Mary's city property and not had the police looking for them to give them little yellow slips of paper...

Clearly the city just wants you guys gone, but I'll bet you could beat that charge. An aviator is allowed to do just about anything necessary in the interest of safety, so if a jumper can see that making it to the airport won't be possible, landing in an open area - including a city park - would not be considered reckless conduct from an aviation point of view.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

The city attorney was collecting his hourly rate all day last saturday. $300 or so an hour to stand around and put up no trespass signs. The city of St. Mary's has spent more than they will ever collect from The jumping Place... And will be spending more when they will be repaying the grant money.

You know this for fact....or is it SWAG?

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

I don't like posting too much on here, but this made me laugh so I had to reply

"If these jumpers had simply landed off in more neutral territory - as happens all over the country every weekend - I doubt it would be an issue."

I landed off in a park yesterday and was written a warning for "reckless conduct" because it was city property. St. Mary's city property. 2 or more months ago, anyone could've landed anywhere in St. Mary's city property and not had the police looking for them to give them little yellow slips of paper...

I see a problem that you all are having trouble getting 4 people spotted on the airport out of a 182.

[excuse 0]

Their plan was to land on property owned by Cathy. The property has the airport on one side, and a park on the other.

[normiss 620]

They keep thumbing their noses at the military and a trespass may be the least of their worries.
I think Patriot missiles are a tad bit faster than an old Cessna.

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

I don't like posting too much on here, but this made me laugh so I had to reply

"If these jumpers had simply landed off in more neutral territory - as happens all over the country every weekend - I doubt it would be an issue."

I landed off in a park yesterday and was written a warning for "reckless conduct" because it was city property. St. Mary's city property. 2 or more months ago, anyone could've landed anywhere in St. Mary's city property and not had the police looking for them to give them little yellow slips of paper...

Do you think that maybe the yellow slip of paper you got has more to do with the City being "defied" at the moment? Maybe the paper isn't issued if the City's order was respected till it was sorted out in the courts?

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[jamjumps 0]

For the record nobody is thumbing their nose at the Navy....The issue is the Airport Commission not going through the proper channels to to revoke the permit. The Navy is actually being used as a pawn by the Airport Commission in order to achieve a different goal. There is a lot of back door dirty southeast Georgia politics going on that if you have never experienced is quite different than how things work in the rest of the world.

Just remember that there are two sided to every story and somewhere in the middle lies the truth. THe spin form the paper is that the Navy is upset, and they are perturbed, but they also have supported the drop zone and it's presence at the airport in the past.

[normiss 620]

Someday you folks will understand the way things work.

You've got yourselves backed into a tight corner with two very large and very powerful government agencies.
The city isn't happy either.
The security of the submarine base is of a national security threat and interest.
If hammerheads like the ones on the video can infiltrate a top secret nuke base......odds are you're not going to be allowed to continue jumping in the vicinity.

But youtube videos and standing up to local LEO's by getting in their faces should do wonders for you.

Carry on.

[airsport 0]

Quote

Quote

The city attorney was collecting his hourly rate all day last saturday. $300 or so an hour to stand around and put up no trespass signs. The city of St. Mary's has spent more than they will ever collect from The jumping Place... And will be spending more when they will be repaying the grant money.

You know this for fact....or is it SWAG?

Sparky

I have a criminal trespass ticket and some interesting video of the days events...

[jamjumps 0]

Quote

Someday you folks will understand the way things work.

You've got yourselves backed into a tight corner with two very large and very powerful government agencies.
The city isn't happy either.
The security of the submarine base is of a national security threat and interest.
If hammerheads like the ones on the video can infiltrate a top secret nuke base......odds are you're not going to be allowed to continue jumping in the vicinity.

But youtube videos and standing up to local LEO's by getting in their faces should do wonders for you.

Carry on.

Where did you get the idea that King's Bay is Top Secret? As stated many times in this thread the jumpers landed on a field next to the cafeteria....not a threat to national security, just to the afternoon snack.

[obelixtim 100]

Quote

Quote

Someday you folks will understand the way things work.

You've got yourselves backed into a tight corner with two very large and very powerful government agencies.
The city isn't happy either.
The security of the submarine base is of a national security threat and interest.
If hammerheads like the ones on the video can infiltrate a top secret nuke base......odds are you're not going to be allowed to continue jumping in the vicinity.

But youtube videos and standing up to local LEO's by getting in their faces should do wonders for you.

Carry on.

Where did you get the idea that King's Bay is Top Secret? As stated many times in this thread the jumpers landed on a field next to the cafeteria....not a threat to national security, just to the afternoon snack.

Inside the wire means you are on the base without permission. At a nuclear base, every square inch is theirs to declare whatever they like. Whether you land on the baseball diamond, or on top of a submarine, the navy security have a job to do.

They could fill you full of bullet holes if they so chose, and walk away fully justified.

I'm sure a determined terrorist would have no trouble learnig to skydive somewhere, come to a DZ and arrange an "accidental" landing inside a base. There would be hell to pay if security let them actually destroy or damage something.

Everyone knows how rigid airport security is. Why would you think a nuclear naval base would be less stringent....

If the other side is playing dirty pool, if you want to fight them, you have to be clean. Raising the middle finger to their faces just because they aren't playing fair, totally compromises any chance you have of winning anything.

Maybe it would have been an idea if the naval base was a potential alternate LZ, an approach to the base commander 7 years ago might have been beneficial......he might have even said yes!!!. And if not at least not objected strongly.

I wonder how many times people have landed on the base in the past?. If its happened and been no hassle, the navy could have been an ally, or at least neutral. But not if they see you giving the finger to the city. I'm sure they aren't happy to be drawn into a shitfight, so its easy for them just to say no.

It sounds to me like spotting isn't a DZ strongpoint....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[matthewcline 0]

http://www.cnic.navy.mil/kingsbay/InstallationGuide/GateHours/CNICD_A134717

The Base itself is controlled access, not Top Secret exactly, just the Subs themselves and some facilities. But, it is just arguing over mute point.

The PAO told the ABA not to let the off landings happen again, so the ABA added that, to what ever is motivating them, to kick you all out.

I hope you all get to stay, but some of those "actions", isn't helping the efforts.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[Fast 0]

I'm not a fan of what you guys are doing because it's gonna make a mess for the rest of us.

"Those damn skydiving centers, they are full of people who just want to buck the system." I mean, I understand that being unjustly persecuted by the local government sucks, but full on "fuck you" on youtube is really really bad.

Also, to put it in perspective, I wouldn't put it past the military to be mucking around in the personal life of your jumpers at this point. Looking for someone who might be a threat. That means digging into personal information, tracking your whereabouts, etc. Military bases and national security is one place you just want to stay as far away from as you can. Patriot act and all.....

Mostly though - I think on the outside most of us support the fact that it sucks that you might lose your dropzone and know that there are ways to make it reasonable for you to stay there, but man - how can we support how you're going about things at this point. It's way too in your face "fuck you" to the government.

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Someday you folks will understand the way things work.

You've got yourselves backed into a tight corner with two very large and very powerful government agencies.
The city isn't happy either.
The security of the submarine base is of a national security threat and interest.
If hammerheads like the ones on the video can infiltrate a top secret nuke base......odds are you're not going to be allowed to continue jumping in the vicinity.

But youtube videos and standing up to local LEO's by getting in their faces should do wonders for you.

Carry on.

Where did you get the idea that King's Bay is Top Secret? As stated many times in this thread the jumpers landed on a field next to the cafeteria....not a threat to national security, just to the afternoon snack.

Inside the wire means you are on the base without permission. At a nuclear base, every square inch is theirs to declare whatever they like. Whether you land on the baseball diamond ,or on top of a submarine, the navy security have a job to do.

They could fill you full of bullet holesif they so chose, and walk away fully justified.

I'm sure a determined terrorist would have no trouble learnig to skydive somewhere, come to a DZ and arrange an "accidental" landing inside a base. There would be hell to pay if security let them actually destroy or damage something.

Everyone knows how rigid airport security is. Why would you think a nuclear naval base would be less stringent....

If the other side is playing dirty pool, if you want to fight them, you have to be clean. Raising the middle finger to their faces just because they aren't playing fair, totally compromises any chance you have of winning anything.

Maybe it would have been an idea if the naval base was a potential alternate LZ, and approach to the base commander 7 years ago might have been beneficial......he might have even said yes!!!. And if not at least not objected strongly.

I wonder how many times people have landed on the base in the past?. If its happened and been no hassle, the navy could have been an ally, or at least neutral. But not if they see you giving the finger to the city. I'm sure they aren't happy to be drawn into a shitfight, so its easy for them just to say no.

It sounds to me like spotting isn't a DZ strongpoint....

Good points. One other thing to consider, As soon as this hit the news and the Navy was drawn into the spot light they had no choice but to take a stance and make a statement. Not surprising the stance that they chose. I wouldn't expect them to come out and say,"Ah, so a couple skydivers landed on our secure base. It's ok. No harm no foul. Y'all stop by any time."

[normiss 620]

It ain't gonna happen.

[DaVincisEnvy 0]

This whole situation has been characterized by bad behavior on both sides. The DZ management is not handling the situation with the mature, carefully considered, and legally rigorous strategy that would be most effective (yeah, I know that’s an understatement), and the airport authority board and city of St. Marys have been throwing out red herrings and engaging in legally-questionable actions.

Security isn’t the real issue here, though. Base security personnel were annoyed and inconvenienced by the skydivers that landed on base. It meant additional paperwork. But a couple of guys “dropping in” to a residential area of base in the middle of the day looking like a couple of Power Rangers dressed up to crash Rainbow Brite’s birthday party don’t represent a genuine security risk.

Air traffic overflies (the non-P50 portion of) Kings Bay daily. Jacksonville International Airport is located less than 30 miles south of the base, and traffic is regularly directed northward toward the St. Marys Municipal Airport and Kings Bay Naval Base. Any of those planes could “drop” something onto the base. A skydiver could infiltrate the base by exiting an aircraft that originally departed from any airport within several hundred miles of the base.

All that shutting down the DZ and/or moving the St. Marys airport will do is reduce the chances of a very apologetic fun jumper landing on the wrong side of the unmarked fence. It won’t significantly reduce the risk of someone with true nefarious intent entering the base by air (fortunately, very well-trained and well-armed Marines are there to greet anyone who "drops by" in such a fashion).

All this is to say: the skydivers landing on base recently was bad for Navy-drop zone relations and bad for PR, but security concerns are not the real reason that St. Marys is trying to shut down the drop zone.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Inside the wire means you are on the base without permission. At a nuclear base, every square inch is theirs to declare whatever they like. Whether you land on the baseball diamond, or on top of a submarine, the navy security have a job to do.

They could fill you full of bullet holes if they so chose, and walk away fully justified...

Um, no.

[PhreeZone 14]

http://onlineathens.com/local-news/2012-08-27/navy-wants-st-marys-airport-moved

To anyone that thinks that national security does not play into GA airports they should do some research on Meigs Field and see how in the interest of security they were able to destroy an airfield that had been in operation for 65+ years.



Navy wants St. Marys airport moved
By Terry DicksonMorris News Service – published Monday, August 27, 2012

The Aug. 12 landing of two skydivers inside Kings Naval Submarine Base’s perimeter has heightened the Navy’s security concern to the point that the base commander on Monday called for the relocation of the St. Marys Airport from which a skydiving business operates.

The St. Marys Airport Authority last week revoked The Jumping Place’s operating permit, but in spite of posted trespass warnings the business carried dozens of skydivers aloft Saturday, three of whom landed in a city park. Four skydivers received warnings and five were cited.

That action was apparently not sufficient to allay the Navy’s concerns.

In a letter citing the landing on a base softball field, Kings Bay commander Capt. Harvey Guffey Jr. reminded St. Marys Mayor Bill DeLoughy of the city’s failure to “eliminate parachutists encroaching on the base despite multiple letters of concern from several base commanding officers...’’

Rear Adm. John C. Scorby Jr., commander of the Navy’s Southeast Region in Jacksonville, reinforced Guffey’s letter with one of his own.

“Repeated exposure to these security threats in this era of terrorism creates significant disruption for the [submarine base’s] mission, and raises the specter of needlessly dangerous reactive responses. We can no longer accept this state of affairs,’’ Scorby wrote.

The Navy “must heighten and reemphasize’’ it’s desire for that moving the airport be made a priority, Guffey wrote.

“Let me be clear,’’ he said, “parachutist intrusions on the base must be eliminated.”

The Navy said as much Wednesday at the meeting in which the Airport Authority revoked The Jumping Place’s permit. The vote came after owner Cathy Kloess said she could not guarantee that parachutists who jumped from her plane’s would not again land on Kings Bay. Those Aug. 12 landings were the sixth and seventh in three years on the base that has some highly restricted areas.

Although things got off to a late start Saturday, Kloess said it would be business as usual.

By the end of the day, however, the St. Marys police had issued four criminal trespass warnings, two criminal trespass citations to skydiving instructors and three reckless conduct citations to three jumpers who landed in the city’s Sweetwater Park, authority lawyer Jim Stein said.

With no clear end to the jumps, Stein said authority members Frank Frasca and Frank Drane will ask the FAA what steps it should take next to provide better assurance no more skydivers from the airport will land on the base.

Stein said the Navy’s strong letters will help him make his case to the city and the FAA.

“It’s my advice nobody be allowed to operate at that airport as a skydiving business,’’ Stein said.

Kloess’ son, Casey Kloess-Finley, who owns the business with her, called the arrests a “gross misuse of power by the city and the Airport Authority board.”

The latter three jumpers had intended to land on a two-acre piece of property off the south side of the airport’s runway, he said.

Kloess and Kloess-Finley told the Times-Union Saturday morning that they own the property and the authority could not stop them from using it as a drop zone.

“Their intent was not to land in the park. They didn’t feel they could land there safely,’’ Kloess-Finley said of the two-acre landing spot. “They found a safe landing spot in the park.”

Kloess-Finley said The Jumping Place believes police were clearly wrong in citing the two instructors for criminal trespass after telling all the jumpers that officers would issue only warnings.

“They were singled out as our instructors,’’ Kloess-Finley said.

The two were cited after completing tandem jumps and as agents of The Jumping Place clearly knew they could be charged with criminal trespass, Stein said.

Stein also said that shifting the landing zone Saturday to the plot closer to base only increased the risk that a skydiver could again land on King’s Bay.

Kloess-Finley disagreed saying the spot is only 0.6 miles closer meaning it’s still more than a mile from the base, which provides plenty of buffer for an experienced jumper.

He also said any assertion that The Jumping Place doesn’t take Kings Bay’s security seriously is wrong.

“The Jumping Place policy is to never land on the base. Never,’’ he said.

But when a skydiver leaves the plane, he becomes his own pilot and in charge of his own landing, Kloess-Finley said.

Individual skydivers must make decisions for their own safety, he said.

Kloess has said that skydivers blown off course by “acts of God’’ chose the base to ensure they could land safely, most recently on a softball field that they thought was in a city park.

As part of its pre-jump education, The Jumping Place tells skydivers not to land on the base even as a last resort and shows them aerial photos, Kloess-Finley said.

“But we’re not going to tell them to hit a tree to avoid landing on the base,’’ he said.

Asked if The Jumping Place will take skydivers up again Saturday, Kloess-Finley said “Our plan right now is we’re looking for other fields to jump in.’’

The two-acre field off the airport is not suitable for student landings, he said.

“We’re looking at anything to keep our business open,’’ Kloess-Finley said.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[obelixtim 100]

Quote

Inside the wire means you are on the base without permission. At a nuclear base, every square inch is theirs to declare whatever they like. Whether you land on the baseball diamond, or on top of a submarine, the navy security have a job to do.

They could fill you full of bullet holes if they so chose, and walk away fully justified...

Um, no.

Do you really think a military security detail would be charged with anything if they put a bullet into an unauthorised, unannounced trespasser, using the "I thought he was a terrorist" defence?.

I doubt if the military would pay any penalty, at all.

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[hillson 0]

Does anyone at that place actually land ON the DZ? Granted, I suppose technically TJP is not allowed to land on the airport property at the moment but every news article seems to be about the jumpers landing all over the greater St. Mary's area every weekend they jump.

[normiss 620]

No kidding.

Based on the Navy's most recent comments, this fight is over.

[Scrumpot 1]

Quote

Based on the Navy's most recent comments, this fight is over.

Right. The Navy has said (and I quote); "The airport must be moved" due to these "security threats". The security threats have been further quantified as the skydivers inability to GUARANTEE that they will not land there. Game over (now) no matter how you look at it/slice it. Everything is "trumped" by national security today in this country - when it is invoked - which looks like it has / is being.

This one is now blown. No matter how better it could have been (previously) handled probably at one point, or not.

The airport is now in its OWN self-preservation mode too, on top of it. Their ONLY CHOICE really, now - is to show that THEY are doing what is necessary to ELIMINATE the (stated) National Security threat! - They asked the DZ/DZO if they could guarantee, unequivocally - that skydivers would never land on the base - or could be absolutely prevented - and they replied "no", that they could not GUARANTEE that.

Game over.

coitus non circum - Moab Stone

[CSpenceFLY 1]

St. Marys actually just got what they wanted, although a few year late. They were trying to sell the airport to developers about 5 yrs ago. I doubt there are any buyers now though.

What a huge cluster fuck.