0
AndyMan

Dirty Laundry aired in z-hills

Recommended Posts

Quote

It says he does not have a Commercial rating for his single Cessna, but does have one for twin engines.



I do recall his post when he finally got his twin engine comm rating, and was flying loads in the Otter. I would have to imagine that he had more than enough time in a single engine Cessna to qualify for a single engine comm rating by the time he had earned a twin engine pilot, and twin engine comm rating, and amassed enough twin time to check out in an otter, and make an insurance company happy enough to allow him to fly jumpers for money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Joanie and the other owner didn't like the cut they were giving to Billy for use of the aircraft, so they decided to lower it without consulting him. As 2/3 ownership beats his 1/3, that's what happened.



Is it just me, or does that make no sense at all?

For starters, why would you drop one vendor without having another vendor offering you an equal or better deal already lined up? From a business point of view, that doesn't add up.

If the idea is that they thought Billy would just lie down and take the reduced rate for the aircraft use, that doesn't make sense either, as that move is essentially increasing the profit share of the other two partners, and decreasing Billy's share.

Let's say they were paying him $18 a slot, and let's say that everyone is making 50% profit on income. Billy would make $9 off the slot through FE, and $2 a slot through Skydive City (assuming a $24 ticket price, $6 profit x 1/3), for a total of $11 per.

If Skydive City wanted to pay $17, Billy loses a buck through FE, and only gains .17 (.50 profit x 1/3) through Skydive City for a net loss of .83 per slot. Why would he ever agree to that, and why would the other partners ever think that he would?

It just doesn't add up. The other two partners are taking a loss by having to deal with a more expensive vendor, and I can't see why they would want to do that just based on the fact that they weren't happy with the slot price. Let's face it, if the only problem was that the slot price was too much, going to a more expensive vendor certainly doesn't solve that problem, it makes it worse.

There's more to this that the general public is not privy to. I'm not sure what it is, but just basic business sense dictates that it's more than just a money issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It says he does not have a Commercial rating for his single Cessna, but does have one for twin engines.



I do recall his post when he finally got his twin engine comm rating, and was flying loads in the Otter. I would have to imagine that he had more than enough time in a single engine Cessna to qualify for a single engine comm rating by the time he had earned a twin engine pilot, and twin engine comm rating, and amassed enough twin time to check out in an otter, and make an insurance company happy enough to allow him to fly jumpers for money.




This is confusing me.

The Airman Certificate is the Private or Commercial.

The Class Rating is single or multi engine (land in this case, sea is also available in single or multi)
There's also category, but that's airplane, rotorcraft, glider, balloon and airship so it doesn't apply in this case.

I don't see anywhere in FAR 61 that someone can have a commercial and private certificate at the same time. Nor do I understand how someone could have a more restrictive certificate (private) in a lesser class (single) than the commercial in the multi.

This would be the rough equivalent of being a senior rigger for back type parachutes and a master rigger for chest.

It doesn't make sense to me.

If someone could point out where this is possible I would be very grateful.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm not yet organizing the mob for TK because of the FAA bust, only because the article is a little unclear. It says he does not have a Commercial rating for his single Cessna, but does have one for twin engines. That sounds to me like a type-rating issue. If he's commercial rated in a Twin-Otter, I can't imagine he's all that unsafe in a 182. I'm not a pilot so I don't know the legalities, but it does seem not as bad as your joe-average private pilot with 50 hours.



Understood and agreed. But apparently he had insufficient time in the new aircraft to be commercially rated yet. Which means the FAA considers him to be inadequately adapted to the new aircraft to be taking on the responsibility of passengers just yet. The new aircraft would have different handling characteristics, different stall speeds, different power settings, different take-off speed, and so on. A pilot needs to get used to all those variables before taking paid passengers who depend upon his experience. Apparently TK jumped the gun on that process, and according to the news story, admits doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I'm not yet organizing the mob for TK because of the FAA bust, only because the article is a little unclear. It says he does not have a Commercial rating for his single Cessna, but does have one for twin engines. That sounds to me like a type-rating issue. If he's commercial rated in a Twin-Otter, I can't imagine he's all that unsafe in a 182. I'm not a pilot so I don't know the legalities, but it does seem not as bad as your joe-average private pilot with 50 hours.



Understood and agreed. But apparently he had insufficient time in the new aircraft to be commercially rated yet. Which means the FAA considers him to be inadequately adapted to the new aircraft to be taking on the responsibility of passengers just yet. The new aircraft would have different handling characteristics, different stall speeds, different power settings, different take-off speed, and so on. A pilot needs to get used to all those variables before taking paid passengers who depend upon his experience. Apparently TK jumped the gun on that process, and according to the news story, admits doing so.


Apparently lots of apparentlys in there, not too many of which are all that apparent
You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They probably didn't like the cut they were getting. Having never met Richards I have heard nothing but negative things about him being most difficult to work with, to put it nicely.
The rumor is that after a year of stealing from the manifest girl the accountant finally brought the books to the owners. There being a totally silent partner involved that finally showed their face and things started rolling. Apparently Richards had taken a loan out against his AC business but also used not just his share of Zhills as collateral but the other partners shares also. As you can imagine this is not legal. So I think with all these things happening within a year or so the owners are trying to make some badly needed changes.

If only they would get rid of the manager and some of the other staff there that make the place so negative it could be a fun dropzone. "The most friendly dropzone"...I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hey I have an idea.

How about starting another dropzone next door.;)

We will put guards at the fence to berate whom ever is going back and forth jumping with thier friends.:o

Again History repeats itselfB|

We never learn!!!!!!!



Whatever would we call that Dropzone? :D
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Hey I have an idea.

How about starting another dropzone next door.;)

We will put guards at the fence to berate whom ever is going back and forth jumping with thier friends.:o

Again History repeats itselfB|

We never learn!!!!!!!



Whatever would we call that Dropzone? :D


Perhaps something will rise from the ashes of this mess?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>He put profit over safety.

Or the desires of jumpers over legality. One or the other.



Which raises a good point, IMHO.

How many of those jumpers knew of his ratings and still got on his plane?

Shame on those guys.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


He put profit over safety. There's a reason for that FAA rule, because you shouldn't be flying passengers in a type of aircraft until you have sufficient experience in that aircraft to know how to provide for their safety. TK put all those jumpers at risk by flying them with insufficient experience in that type of aircraft. We put our faith in him to do the right things to keep us safe, and he violated that trust. Maybe some people think it's just a technicality, but it's also the law, and the law is there for a good reason.



John,
While I tend to try to stay out of these type of discussions, I must make a couple of points here.

EVERY DZ out there at sometime or another will violate a FAA rule blantley because:

1.The packers are not supervised as required by law.
This is at about every DZ out there.

2. The 100 hour.."we just did not have the time..."

3. Fuel..."I believe we have enough to make it...""
You actually need 30 minutes more fuel to be legal than it takes for the planned flight in day VFR.

4. Dropping jumpers through clouds and thunder storms. This just happened last Friday with hail damage to the jumpers as in bleeding in exposed areas.
...Talk about safety violations...

5. Student equipment maintenance..well we do not have enough time FCOL.

The bottom line is TK did what about every DZO out does or would have done. Yes there are a few exceptions.
And yes, he should not have done what he did, but if you want to hang him, you might want to round up the others also!

MEL
Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Perhaps something will rise from the ashes of this mess?



With the demise of the Florida Skydiving Center in Lake Wales (don't kid yourself, it's dead), this situation at SDC, and the promise to revisit the tower issue in Deland in a couple of years, this might be a good time to make a small fortune* by opening a new dropzone in central FLA.




*Yes, we all know how to make a small fortune in skydiving, so don't be puerile and feel the need to add it.
Shit happens. And it usually happens because of physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

A little bird tells me the embezzler was not an accountant, but rather a manifest employee who managed to steal $140,000 in small increments over time. Amazing.

_Am



Think on-site ATM that got refilled once a week.


@davelepka:
I imagine 20 years would put a strain on any 3-way relationships. Hell, I can't even get the same 3-way twice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


If only they would get rid of the manager and some of the other staff there that make the place so negative it could be a fun dropzone. "The most friendly dropzone"...I don't think so.



It's really hard to imagine anyone who has jumped at ZHills very much making a statement like this. Would you care to expand on the things that you think, "make the place so negative" ?

Speaking for myself, I have had nothing but favorable experiences with the management and staff at SDC.

Kevin Keenan
_____________________________________
Dude, you are so awesome...
Can I be on your ash jump ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


This is confusing me.

The Airman Certificate is the Private or Commercial.

The Class Rating is single or multi engine (land in this case, sea is also available in single or multi)
There's also category, but that's airplane, rotorcraft, glider, balloon and airship so it doesn't apply in this case.

I don't see anywhere in FAR 61 that someone can have a commercial and private certificate at the same time. Nor do I understand how someone could have a more restrictive certificate (private) in a lesser class (single) than the commercial in the multi.



First, the single engine airplane isn't a "lesser class" than a multi-engine. It's a different class. Consider a military pilot who has been flying C-5's and then tries to fly a Cessna 152. It's a very different animal, and requires a different certificate for good reason.

The FAA requires the commercial check ride to be taken in category and class (airplane, single engine, land) to exercise the privileges of that certificate. See 61.5 as follows:

Quote

§ 61.5 Certificates and ratings issued under this part.
top

(a) The following certificates are issued under this part to an applicant who satisfactorily accomplishes the training and certification requirements for the certificate sought:

(1) Pilot certificates—

(i) Student pilot.

(ii) Sport pilot.

(iii) Recreational pilot.

(iv) Private pilot.

(v) Commercial pilot.


(vi) Airline transport pilot.

(2) Flight instructor certificates.

(3) Ground instructor certificates.

(b) The following ratings are placed on a pilot certificate (other than student pilot) when an applicant satisfactorily accomplishes the training and certification requirements for the rating sought:

(1) Aircraft category ratings—

(i) Airplane.

(ii) Rotorcraft.

(iii) Glider.

(iv) Lighter-than-air.

(v) Powered-lift.

(vi) Powered parachute.

(vii) Weight-shift-control aircraft.

(2) Airplane class ratings—

(i) Single-engine land.

(ii) Multiengine land.


(iii) Single-engine sea.

(iv) Multiengine sea.
...



As an example, I have a commercial with instruments in single and multi-engine airplanes (two check rides, both with instrument performance examined), and a private in gliders (I tested to the private standards without instruments, and then didn't upgrade with a second check ride when I got my commercial in single-engine airplanes).

The front of my certificate says "Commercial Pilot." The back says:

Commercial Pilot
Airplane Single & Multiengine Land; Instrument Airplane

Private Privileges
Glider

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with you Squeak. There are a lot of gossips on this thread while there is a lawsuit in process and we do not know all of the facts. If people acted this way back in the late 50's and 60's, skydiving would have died in it's infancy. All I can tell you is that people travel from all over the world to jump at Z-hills - they love the dropzone and trust TK. If these people think that he can fly a Twin Otter and not a 182 then I have a nice bridge to sell them in Brooklyn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, I knew about category (Private privilges in Glider, commercial in Airplanes), but I didn't realize that translated to class too.

I went the standard route, Private (Single), then instrument, then commercial, then CFI, then multi (which included instrument and commercial standards).

Very few people learn to fly multi without first learning in a single. I guess I thought that a commercial multi automatically included commercial single privilges.

I've never seen someone have a commercial multi without commercial single privilges.

Thanks for the explanation.
"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I agree with you Squeak. There are a lot of gossips on this thread while there is a lawsuit in process and we do not know all of the facts. If people acted this way back in the late 50's and 60's, skydiving would have died in it's infancy. All I can tell you is that people travel from all over the world to jump at Z-hills - they love the dropzone and trust TK. If these people think that he can fly a Twin Otter and not a 182 then I have a nice bridge to sell them in Brooklyn.


+1000 both from a pilot's perspective and a Zhills jumper's perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There are a lot of gossips on this thread while there is a lawsuit in process and we do not know all of the facts. If people acted this way back in the late 50's and 60's, skydiving would have died in it's infancy.



That may be true, but the 50's are long in the past. We have higher standards now, and those higher standards are a big reason why our accident rate is a small fraction of what it used to be.

I certainly do not give any DZ carte blanche to run their ops are they choose. I expect DZ's to be run in a professional manner, following the spirit and the word of every FAR, but also best practices of the industry.

It's true that there's a lot we don't know - but I have to say, what's described in the news article gives me great reason to be concerned.

But, this issue is way bigger than any of us. I don't know how hard the FAA will be, but I do know that having your DZ tied up in lawsuits and media battles will help nobody but the lawyers and the reporters. It certainly will be bad for the DZ and bad for the sport.


_Am
__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If these people think that he (TK) can fly a Twin Otter and not a 182 then I have a nice bridge to sell them in Brooklyn.



Aircraft are different. Just because you can fly one, doesn't mean that you're going to be good flying another, from the get-go.

As an extreme example, if you put an FA-18 jet pilot who is used to 36,000 lbs. of thrust in a C-182 piston prop with 230 horsepower, you would have cause to be concerned. He might understand all the aerodynamics, but he's used to far more power and different procedures, and may not be able to handle properly the slow airspeeds and lesser power capabilities.

The change that TK made wasn't that dramatic, of course, but the principle is the same. He needed time in-type to get used to it, in order to be competent to take passengers for hire, who could trust him with their lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion, Just a lot of DRAMA and a waste of skydivers time!

It is a business that, like all businesses, has a problem now and then, but it really is none of my (as a skydivers) business.

These so called violations are not a big deal and those who try to make them so are splitting hairs and just stirring the pot. Get a life and get on to YOUR business.

Granted, this is my home DZ and I'm probably a little bit swayed, I just don't understand why skydivers have to be so DRAMA induced.
Dano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John, You have no idea how much experience or how many hours TK may or may not have in a C-182. While I agree he should not have done what he did, it is far from the worst thing that has ever happened on a DZ. You are blowing this Waaaaay out of proportion. An Otter flys just like a big 182.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0