Letter from the Head of the FAA (May Parachutist)

[catfishhunter 1]

Yep pretty much what my between-the-lines-o-meter said too..

MAKE EVERY DAY COUNT
Life is Short and we never know how long we are going to have. We must live life to the fullest EVERY DAY. Everything we do should have a greater purpose.

[GLIDEANGLE 1]

Quote

On Saturday the FAA sent 4 field reps. to Elsinore. Two national, one regional and one local. They were there for several hours and the word I got was they went to Perris immediately afterwards. Raise your hand if you think it can’t happen.

Sparky

Fascinating. Makes me wonder if perhaps that was a "training" event where the national and regional guys got to see two large, reputable DZs in one day.... So that they were prepared for other visits elsewhere

The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

[Marisan 0]

So, given this, what are you guys going to do?
As I said earlier, best save up to buy a BIG SAFE SOFT CANOPY.
Because, unless you sort out the fatality rate under an open canopy, that's what you are going to have to do.

It's either that or buy shares in a Tunnel Manufacturer.

Thanks for screwing a sport that I once loved. (and still do from a distance)

[davelepka 4]

Just to throw a monkey wrench in the 'the FAA is coming to get us' machine, there's an interesting piece about this very same FAA admin the lastest issue of Flying magazine (page 27).

The title is "FAA Administrator Unveils Safety Plan", with the byline of, "Initiative aims at gradual general aviation safety improvement"

Some excerpts -

"Babbit has announced a 10 year plan to reduce general aviation accidents substantially and incrementaly, with a 10% improvement as the target"

"The plan calls for the safety of flight to be improved through programs aimed at indentifying the nature of the risks. To home in on what those risks are the FAA kicked off nearly 100 countrywide 'Safety Standdown' meetings where pilots and the FAA worked together to come up with ways to improve the record."

"Babbit expressed a general desire to move the FAA away from enforcement actions against pilots and more toward education and remediation."

Some here are suggesting that this letter from the 'feds' isn't coming coincidentaly after one of the worst months in the history of skydiving for open canopy collisions and single jumper incidents, but as it turns out, it may be just that, a coincidence.

It appears that the FAA is looking at all of GA to step it up, and become safer overall. This, of course, doesn't mean that we should 'relax' and not worry about it, it's a matter of us literally saving us from ourselves. What it does mean is that the FAA might not be poised to give us an old-fashioned 'smack down', and start throwing regulations our way.

Maybe we take a lesson from them, and pick a day (weekend) when every group member DZ holds a 'Safety Standdown' and brainstorms some ideas for their own DZs and skydiving in general in terms of improving the saftey of those already under good canopies. If they then reported their ideas to their RDs, who could then organize them in to managable form and present them at the big daddy of all 'Safety Standdowns' where the RD report to the BOD what everyone has come up with, and see what sticks.

There are bound to be come commonalities among the ideas, and these might be the more favorable and feasable ideas. If anything, it would be a way to really wring some ideas out of the membership (aka, the concerned party) and make sure that every idea that should be on the table, is.

Of course, that would make sense, and this is the USPA, so just forget I said anything. I'm pretty sure the ISP be needs to be gone over with a fine toothed comb. Again.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Of course, that would make sense, and this is the USPA, so just forget I said anything. I'm pretty sure the ISP be needs to be gone over with a fine toothed comb. Again.

I am glad you said and saved me the trouble.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Of course, that would make sense, and this is the USPA, so just forget I said anything. I'm pretty sure the ISP be needs to be gone over with a fine toothed comb. Again.

It's not the ISP that needs to be evaluated. That doesn't mean shit if the instructors meant to implement it can't tell their ass from a hole in the wall.

I'll go on sounding like a broken record. The the standards instructional rating holders has slid right into the gutter, and 70% of the BOD not only doesn't have the guts to slam their feet down and say STOP, but many don't have the motivation to as they a) don't see the problem because they are way too far from the "trenches", and b)have a financial conflict where by they would cut off their own supply of cheap instructors.

The USPA staff knows about the problems and keeps pointing them out to the BOD, but it falls mostly on deaf ears.

Poor Jim Crouch. He's been telling them what's wrong for years. I don't know how the man has the patience.......

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[jumpwally 0]

Any intell on what they talked about ? Someone should know by now......

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[DiverMike 5]

I stand corrected.

It is conceivable an AC could be issued that limits wing loading or low turns based on the FAR 105.5:

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.

The AC would have to indicate that a high wing loading or low turns are hazardous to air traffic or to persons or property on the surface.

For the same reason I jump off a perfectly good diving board.

[MarkBolton 0]

I don't think the FAA as a whole cares that much about us. But...
Between 1982 and 1992, we managed to kill 96 jumpers in aircraft crashes. That was, stunningly enough, about one out of every four skydiving fatalities during that time period.
I seem to remember all were overloaded or out of balance. That resulted in the feds putting their boots on some people's necks.
I don't doubt some in the government may see canopy fatalities over the past 10 years as have reached the same epidemic proportions. So, Airtwardo's analysis may be very spot on.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Any intell on what they talked about ? Someone should know by now......

Haven’t heard a word and I’m almost to the point where I don’t care anymore. i quit jumping because of the this issue so I don't why I bother. It seems you have a few self centered canopy pilots who feel their rights are paramount holding the majority at bay. Until the majority has the balls to step up and demand change nothing will have from with in. And that leaves a vacuum in enforcement which is like an open invitation to the FAA.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Bolas 5]

Quote

So, given this, what are you guys going to do?
As I said earlier, best save up to buy a BIG SAFE SOFT CANOPY.
Because, unless you sort out the fatality rate under an open canopy, that's what you are going to have to do.

It's either that or buy shares in a Tunnel Manufacturer.

Thanks for screwing a sport that I once loved. (and still do from a distance)

Maybe the issue is our overuse of the word safe, as in trying to convince people it's safe to do. I think we're better off from a regulatory standpoint if people think we all just have death wishes.

I always cringe when I hear someone use that word to describe this sport or why they can do something beyond what's generally done for their skill level. Or say it's safer than driving. It's utter bullshit. What we do is risky,but we all take varying steps to mitigate to either our comfort level or what we feel is appropriate for a student/novice jumper.

Let's stop bullshitting others and ourselves, because apparently some are starting to believe it.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[billvon 2,400]

>What we do is risky,but we all take varying steps to mitigate to either our
>comfort level or what we feel is appropriate for a student/novice jumper.

Agreed.

However, one thing has changed over the past 5 years or so. Previously, we did the best we could to protect ourselves from our own mistakes through making good decisions on gear, getting good education, and showing good judgment both in the air and on the ground. This worked for most people because if they did get hurt, it was generally because they screwed up.

Now that's changing. Now, one of those steps to mitigate our risk is to make sure someone else doesn't kill us. It would be great if the solution could be to tell other people "be more careful." That doesn't work. So now we're looking at solutions like hard separations of over-90-degree-turners from people flying a standard pattern. It's no longer sufficient to watch our own behavior to keep us safe; now it's become important to watch the behavior of others.

Which, I think, is part of what that letter is about.

I'd hate to see big canopies mandated, or swooping banned. But we're gradually heading in that direction. The best way to make sure that _doesn't_ happen is to stop killing people by running into them.

[DSE 3]

Quote

Any intell on what they talked about ? Someone should know by now......

A lot more than just canopy patterns...

They are armed with information, they know the obvious problems, and the problems they are "addressing" go much deeper than just canopy patterns/control.

[DocPop 1]

Quote

Quote

Any intell on what they talked about ? Someone should know by now......

A lot more than just canopy patterns...

They are armed with information, they know the obvious problems, and the problems they are "addressing" go much deeper than just canopy patterns/control.

So what was said?

You are implying that you know a lot more than you're saying. Why are you keeping it to yourself?

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

Quote

Any intell on what they talked about ? Someone should know by now......

A lot more than just canopy patterns...

They are armed with information, they know the obvious problems, and the problems they are "addressing" go much deeper than just canopy patterns/control.

Put it out there now DSE. If you know what was talked about let us know. Then we can all start to fix things before the FAA tries too.

Matt

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

[diablopilot 2]

If one want's those answers one only has to ask our own USPA FAA liason, Mr. Randy Ottinger.

Randy has been forthcoming about his dealings with the FAA on our behalf as the Director of Government Relations.

As one point, Randy has mentioned to the BOD and those in attendance of the meetings how the FAA has access to online media sources line YouTube, and they watch. When they see a violation of the FAR's or even the BSR's (yeah they know our rules), they tend to say something.

They may not come right out an smack someone down with a violation, but you'd better believe then next time rule making happens (a new AC, or rewrite of the FAR's) it has an effect, that is worse than simply creating a one time violation.

Wingsuiters flying through clouds, jumpers exiting helos with non TSO'd single parachute systems, aircraft exceeding maneuvering limitations, they see it all.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[piisfish 135]

we should kill Youtube

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[stratostar 5]

I don't think he is keeping it to himself. There are a number of people in the industry who know the FAA has been looking at skydiving on a number of different levels.

You would have to be living under a rock to not know about some actions in the last two years or less in CA towards an operator.

Let us also not forget the NTSB report a while back.

Currently there is a national FAA study under way, (based on my personal contacts with FAA in DC) regarding skydiving operations on airports and airport compliance (federal funded) skydiving operations over all. (airspace, FAR's, Landing areas, ATC, etc)

I alluded to this information in my earlier post.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[DocPop 1]

@diablopilot & stratostar

You are both talking in general terms about the current climate with the FAA.

DSE implied that he knew more about what happened at this specific meeting/visit - that's what I wanted to know.

If you can point me towards some online minutes of the meeting or suchlike that would be fine too. I searched online but could not find anything (I am not au fait with the inner workings of the FAA)

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[DSE 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Any intell on what they talked about ? Someone should know by now......

A lot more than just canopy patterns...

They are armed with information, they know the obvious problems, and the problems they are "addressing" go much deeper than just canopy patterns/control.

Put it out there now DSE. If you know what was talked about let us know. Then we can all start to fix things before the FAA tries too.

Matt

My personal and student logbooks were examined. I was asked to explain wingsuit flight patterns, was asked about why we have a printed flight pattern for WS (apparently we're the only DZ with one that they've seen), asked about wingsuit practices in general.
I would submit Randy Ottinger is gonna have the most knowledge about what the FAA is poking into and why..but it was apparent that wingsuiting is one of their focuses. When I asked what they were specifically looking into, the reply was something along the lines of "if it flies, we want to understand it more."

[GLIDEANGLE 1]

So perhaps my earlier comment about "training" wasn't so far off base. It sounds to me like their interaction with you was about their learning, rather than exclusively enforcement.

The choices we make have consequences, for us & for others!

[stratostar 5]

I'm not really talking in general terms of the FAA, in fact, based on recent past history as I just noted in my last post, I have a pretty good idea what they were asking about (if I took a guess), looking at and talking about, I also wouldn't be surprised if they (the FAA guys) didn't spend a lot of time talking to be over heard by the public or those not directly being questioned.

But it's not real hard to have a good idea at was being looked at, asked about, inspected and documented.

Kind of like a ramp check/proctology exam x 4.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[DocPop 1]

Thanks DSE.

It sounds like they were talking to you for "best practices", at least in wingsuiting.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[airdvr 197]

I don't think it's conincidence at all. Was Babbitt the admin when the hearing on jump plane safety were done?

I figure if he spent some time dropping jumpers then he spent some time around the bonfires in the evening and is fairly well aquainted with the more 'colorful' participants.

He doesn't appear to be the type to look the other way.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[gzimmermann 0]

"if it flies, we want to understand it more."

Sadly it may just be a matter of time until the radar will include wingsuiting in addition to incidents potentially related to HP landings. Being rather new to this sport I already took two lessons: I want to do downwind-base-final landings in the future and a solid education after the required basics PLUS maintaining discipline in wingsuit patterns and flocking are crucial. I have seen and been in some "interesting" situations with not even 100 WS jumps already. I think self discipline is important now among all of us, around the world. If not, the authorities will step in and make the wild thing a tame thing rather sooner than later.

P.S. thanks for the transcript in RED to airtwardo, Jim