Recommended Posts
QuoteSo you feel the solution is for every jumper to ask lots and lots of questions at an establishment? How far would you go out of your way to be bothered by every jumper to drag out the airplanes logbooks and show proof that your operation and pilots are decent ones? I have been to MRVS I was impressed by the "looks" of it, but if we are to become that armed with knowledge, my point is, on a busy day are you really going to have that kind of time when you are also trying to run and oversee operations?
I have had few persons ever request to see my logs or ask questions about my operation over the years. This is unfortunate! I pride myself and my operation for adhearing to the standards, and receiving the perverbial "Gold Star" after a FAA survailance inspection.
If ask I will gladly produce the documents if requested. Could it be a possible burden at times? Maybe, But realisticly how many "new people" arrive at the DZ every week?, that may need this info? You could incorperate this info and verification into your initial training process for every student, and require new Experienced jumpers to set through this section for verification before they chose to do paperwork and make their jumps?, another thing that would occur is that after a short time the word would spread through the jumping community and through the networking customer base that you are a serious player and keep your staff and equipment up to speed which would in time minimize this effort.
The people whom come to me and ask questions are a refreshing breath to the dailey grind, and I will go out of my way to address their concerns. The people whom in reality scare the living shit out of me, are the assuming masses whom arrive with the attitude that everything is taken care of for them (FAA and or USPA) and they have no responsibility to what may happen!
The amusement park mentality! These are the people who will sue your ass into obivion if they are not happy with the outcome of activities at your location, and their attorneys will sell to the jury that they were not informed by you, that the FAA and USPA dropped the ball, and had they (the customer) had no reason to believe that anything was other than perfect!
Quote
I think it would be great if the bar of knowledge was raised but how do we do it short of including airplane/pilot dynamics in a safety day discussion perhaps or... ???
I do this and have for some time! By doing this I also apply another layer of responsibility as the jumpers whom now have knowledge as to the inner workings of the operation, help keep me in check, and are much more appreciative when they find out a plane is down for an inspection or maintainance!
Quote
Just talk to other people about it so they are more aware too? Do we just go up to manifest when we sign our waivers at a new DZ and start asking questions? And then to really arm ourselves with the necessary knowledge to know whether or not we are getting bullshitted or not it seems like to make a skydive I need to gain the education of an A&P, FAA Inspector, pilot training expert, OK. I guess that is what I have to do... It will take me a long time to get there so I guess I won't skydive until I do if that is what is necessary. In theory, I think your idea is a good one but I think it would fail in practice.
It would be very simple to spend a short time with any local FAA maintainance inspector or IA, A&P tech in the field and ask for them to show you a log book, and discribe the entries, it is very simple and straight forward, with dates, and entries, that must correspond and tack times that are available by viewing the instrument panel of the aircraft. also you would want to see the pilots current medical certificate, License, and log. No majic just basic facts of activities.
Quote
The reason I don't think it would be successful is because I think the majority of skydivers may take these things for granted like I used to, they can be apathetic and ignorant. If they don't read their 20 page manual for their rig then how can we expect to see a huge change from them now becoming airplane mechanical wizards? How many people are going to get a free education on all of those things? How many people are truly qualified or have the time to teach such things? Some people might and it would be nice if information regarding aircraft and pilots was more readily available. I do agree that skydivers need to be more knowledgeable about these things but realistically I don't see it happening.***
Unfortunately I agree with you! I don't see people taking the time to assume some control over their activities, This in my opinion is a bad thing! The perverbial "Nanny State" that you hear so often. Ultimately we will all be punished (the DZs whom operate by the numbers and also the ones whom could care less) with increased inspections, increased costs, and ultimatley reduction of the sport.
I would love to see a solution like this one work and some do get weeded out by that process but I don't think it happens quickly enough and it seems like a step in by the FAA would help to raise that bar a little quicker. I don't know how the FAA works or their timelines. If they are just a slow government agency with a lot of beaurocratic BS or they are like hawks in the way the oversee things. I know there are a lot of problems right now in the airline industry and I am not sure where skydiving plays in the list of importance.***
Well I can say that the call for more survailance has been made through all FSDO offices that I have had contact with. Some positive and some negative things can come from this! First the FAA is like any government entity, and march to their own drum beat, Lucky for us they march "Slowly" They are not currently being allowed extra funding to pay for inspectors to work on the weekends to perform these inspections, this could change, or they could split the work weeks and have alternate weekend activities? Who knows?
Every FAA FSDO is its own individual entity, with the ability to entertepate rules and regulations as they see fit. They could be hard asses (if they have had incidents like here in Missouri) or they could conduct business as usual, (with a few more inspections) if they have had no problem in their areas for some time. But again I believe that if we the end user require DZs to meet the standards, and enforce this belief by not supporting the offenders we can and would be much more effective at controlling and addressing this problem than increased FAA intervention. Money Talks! Bullshit Walks!
.
Fair enough Tom, thanks for your response. Another perspective and possible door opened in my book. I really can't imagine though going into a DZ like Perris for instance and asking those things. I did try once and the lady looked at me like Didn't I know where I was? And yeah, I did, but that didn't mean I actually knew the nuts and bolts of the place... You would think it would be easy to judge but I just don't take things for granted anymore. Who is the best person to ask questions to and don't you think they will be offended that we are suspecting customers of them by asking for proof? It kind of starts things off not on the best foot?
Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
When I was at your place you went out of your way to visit with me and answered each and every question I had about you & your DZ OP's, So I know your telling the truth in your post here.
The only problem I found with your DZ op's was...
1. the back brace in the 182 student slot, is way to far aft for us fat ass oldfarts comfort, you need to move that back a tad.
2. You didn't have any cool t-shirts or bumper stickers to add to my collection.
3. the swoop pond water is dirty and stinks too as well as it's too long of a walk back to the hanger in its current location, you need to get a pick up with cold AC to drive us back.
With all the money you horde under your bed you should be able to get fresh water in your swoop pond to say the least.
you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo
kallend 1,935
QuoteFair enough Tom, thanks for your response. Another perspective and possible door opened in my book. I really can't imagine though going into a DZ like Perris for instance and asking those things. I did try once and the lady looked at me like Didn't I know where I was? And yeah, I did, but that didn't mean I actually knew the nuts and bolts of the place... You would think it would be easy to judge but I just don't take things for granted anymore. Who is the best person to ask questions to and don't you think they will be offended that we are suspecting customers of them by asking for proof? It kind of starts things off not on the best foot?
The logistics of doing it at a Cessna DZ are way way different than doing it somewhere like ZHills, Perris or Chicago. No possible way a multi turbine DZ can go through this with everyone who turns up.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
[
This is where I would excercise the common probability issue, High profile high turn DZs (Perris, Eloy, Deland, SDC, ETC.) are scrutinized more than most from the attention they get and the fact that they perform so many jump operations in their season, DZs like this are doing thousand upon thousands of lifts per season, most of these lifts are hauling AFF and or Tandems which create a profit margin that would easily allow for a exceptable maintainance program to ge supported. They also have a very big vested interest, in cooperating with the FAA in their district, and other Government agencies, to continue operations at this location. It would prove very detrimental to loss crediability with the purchasing public and jumpers if your fixed operating profits are that high. Also consider the length of time the DZ has been in operation, most of these locations are the old boys on the block! You don't get to stay and play if you are breaking the rules, with the high number of operations lack of maintanance would catch up with you very fast!
But a new guy in town with a leased turbine aircraft, borrowed equipment and a business plan to take over all the jumping in the state would cause me great concern! Like any form of aviation, when you start out new, you have a bag full of luck and a empty bag of experience, many fail to realize that the point is to fill the bag of experience long before you empty the bag of luck!
.
.
QuoteFair enough Tom, thanks for your response. Another perspective and possible door opened in my book. I really can't imagine though going into a DZ like Perris for instance and asking those things. I did try once and the lady looked at me like Didn't I know where I was? And yeah, I did, but that didn't mean I actually knew the nuts and bolts of the place... You would think it would be easy to judge but I just don't take things for granted anymore. Who is the best person to ask questions to and don't you think they will be offended that we are suspecting customers of them by asking for proof? It kind of starts things off not on the best foot
This is where I would excercise the common probability issue, High profile high turn DZs (Perris, Eloy, Deland, SDC, ETC.) are scrutinized more than most from the attention they get and the fact that they perform so many jump operations in their season, DZs like this are doing thousand upon thousands of lifts per season, most of these lifts are hauling AFF and or Tandems which create a profit margin that would easily allow for a exceptable maintainance program to ge supported. They also have a very big vested interest, in cooperating with the FAA in their district, and other Government agencies, to continue operations at this location. It would prove very detrimental to loss crediability with the purchasing public and jumpers if your fixed operating profits are that high. Also consider the length of time the DZ has been in operation, most of these locations are the old boys on the block! You don't get to stay and play if you are breaking the rules, with the high number of operations lack of maintanance would catch up with you very fast!
But a new guy in town with a leased turbine aircraft, borrowed equipment and a business plan to take over all the jumping in the state would cause me great concern! Like any form of aviation, when you start out new, you have a bag full of luck and a empty bag of experience, many fail to realize that the point is to fill the bag of experience long before you empty the bag of luck!
.
.
QuoteWhen I was at your place you went out of your way to visit with me and answered each and every question I had about you & your DZ OP's, So I know your telling the truth in your post here.
The only problem I found with your DZ op's was...
Quote1. the back brace in the 182 student slot, is way to far aft for us fat ass oldfarts comfort, you need to move that back a tad.
I'll build a new one for quick installation when you come back!
Quote2. You didn't have any cool t-shirts or bumper stickers to add to my collection.
I used all of the money to buy Beer, Food, and Strippers when I heard you where stopping by!
Quote3. the swoop pond water is dirty and stinks too as well as it's too long of a walk back to the hanger in its current location, you need to get a pick up with cold AC to drive us back.
The water was normal, and you are confused! That isn't a swoop pond it is the MIssouri River! and I sent the pickup out to haul back the Beer, Food, and Strippers I ordered when I heard you were stopping by!
QuoteWith all the money you horde under your bed you should be able to get fresh water in your swoop pond to say the least.
In the midwest we call replacement of water in the swoop pond "Rain" Let me know when you are stopping by again and I'll put in a request for rain before you arrive! so it will be fresh! Also we have made a new overhead photo of the DZ so you can tell the difference between the swoop pond and the river! The river has Barges and boats on it! and the swoop pond is much closer to the DZ!
I stopped hoarding my money under my bed (much to lumpy!) so now during the week while I am setting around sunbathing and drinking Pina Colatas I bury the money on my property, but it has become appearent that I have been drinking to much as I have forgotten exactly where I buried the money that I hoard?
Sorry you left early last time! but it turned out OK! I drank all the Beer!, ate all the Food!, and entertained all of the Strippers myself! (Took me about a week to recover!!!)
.
Quote
The logistics of doing it at a Cessna DZ are way way different than doing it somewhere like ZHills, Perris or Chicago. No possible way a multi turbine DZ can go through this with everyone who turns up.
Agreed! We need to start at some place and find a reasonable venue to offer the information if it is requested!
.
This may be a way out there suggestion in all this jump plane safety stuff but I would propose a DZO certificate/rating from USPA. A course of instruction could be set up to make sure a prospective DZO or current DZO could demonstrate to a certain level of knowledge. It would be tough as they would have to demonstrate knowledge of instruction courses, rigging, FARs for skydiving, FARs for aircraft operations, fuel tank regulations and other subjects that a DZO must have working knowledge of in order to then train his staff and supervise his operation. It is a top down approach. I have been approaching jump plane safety from a bottom up approach for a long time now having my website as a resource for those that went looking. But someone has to want to look. What if the one constant at a DZ (the DZO) had a working knowledge of most things and could point people in the right direction to get expanded training/knowledge.
Discuss.
Discuss.
Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125
airdvr 206
When you visit a business (non-skydiving) you are supposed to see certificates proving payment of Worker's Comp premiums, minimum wage info etc...
Seems like it would be fairly easy to have some sort of posting format that shows compliance.
Seems like it would be fairly easy to have some sort of posting format that shows compliance.
Please don't dent the planet.
Destinations by Roxanne
Destinations by Roxanne
JohnRich 4
QuoteWhen you visit a business (non-skydiving) you are supposed to see certificates proving payment of Worker's Comp premiums, minimum wage info etc... Seems like it would be fairly easy to have some sort of posting format that shows compliance.
My thinking was going the same direction on this. All a DZ needs is a 3-ring binder with copies of all the official certifications in it, for pilots, aircraft maintenance, jumpmaster ratings, whatever. Anytime a jumper asks to see their qualifications, manifest can just hand them the binder for their review.
You could even put a line in the waiver to inform them that they can request to see such documents.
NickDG 23
>>All a DZ needs is a 3-ring binder with copies of all the official certifications in it
But I could fab one of those up in a half hour that would fool any skydiver. A cheap and shady operator will remain cheap and shady until they go to parachute prison. Being old school it's funny to me some of you are just now getting all wadded up over this issue. I'm out of fingers on one hand counting how many times cheap ass DZOs have almost killed me.
The only way it will get better is if the FAA actually creates a skydiving division with inspectors and riggers who actually know the sport inside and out. I'm not suggesting myself, only guys like me; I'm an FAA licensed Rigger and A&P Mechanic and also have 25 years of skydiving Instructor experience. Give me, and others like me, a FAA badge and I already know of several operations that should not just be shut down, they should be nuclear bombed out of existence.
As for the rest, most of the DZs are fine and some just need a little guidance. That's not something they'll get from FAA surveillance run by FAA inspectors trying enforce regulations by the book with little or no skydiving knowledge. All you're going get is written up for having your pilot's seat re-upholstered with none approved fabric.
And I've seen plenty of FAA Inspectors fooled by glib operators before. I've done it myself when I knew it wasn't a big deal and believe me it's not that hard. What we need is caring inspectors, and by that I mean FAA Inspectors who care about the sport of skydiving. They can be sympathetic to the plight of DZOs and temper their enforcement by knowing what the true go no go items for skydiving really are. If regular FAA inspectors descend on the sport they are going to nickel and dime a lot of DZs right out of existence.
We should either do something real about the problem or just take our chances like we always did before and shut up about it. We should shit or get off the pot . . .
Edited to Add: And the FAA wouldn't kill off skydiving on purpose as they would not do anything that will decrease their budget authority. But they will hurt skydiving through their own ham handed ignorance and accomplish the same thing. It's like they could completely automate the air traffic control system with equipment already sitting on the shelf.
But they will fight that forever as losing tens of thousands of controllers would shrink and kill off all their clout . . .
NickD
htrammel 0
Quote>>What we need is caring inspectors, and by that I mean FAA Inspectors who care about the sport of skydiving.
NickD
You rang???
I am attempting to make myself available to the folks in DC who will have to answer the NTSB recommendations. Don't know if I'll have any luck, but I feel that we should have ASI's who know the sport involved in the regulatory and surveillance process.
Anyone should feel free to PM me with input/ comments/ concerns. If it's too long to type just give me a phone number and I'll call you.
I'm with the FAA and I'm here to help
DISCLAIMER: The above is my own opinion and not that of the FAA or any other US Government agency.
NickDG 23
Good on you! I'm sure there are more like you too.
But I suppose it would be to much to expect for the FAA to put out the call for all employees with skydiving experience to step up. That would make too much sense. Instead they'll re-invent the wheel and the wheels will come off . . .
NickD
kallend 1,935
QuoteWhen you visit a business (non-skydiving) you are supposed to see certificates proving payment of Worker's Comp premiums, minimum wage info etc...
Seems like it would be fairly easy to have some sort of posting format that shows compliance.
Paperwork can be made to appear perfect - it's the plane and pilot that count.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
I have a few questions after reading many of these posts again. First, can someone please explain what "ground effect" is and what it means to come out of it...
Next, with regard to the Torque and performance that Totter was talking about.
There are two times I have landed in that otter due to engine problems. The first was after a climb to 7K. One of the engines just seized up. I am almost positive it was the left engine that seized but I may be wrong. Scott was flying and I was doing an AFF with a student. I remembered wondering whether we should get out at 7K or stay. When I asked Scott what he wanted us to do, he said "it was up to me". I interpreted that to mean that things were OK either way and it was my decision to exit or land with the plane. I chose to land with the plane on that day and it was without incident. We were over the DZ and we came in for a smooth landing.
I think if faced with the same choice today, I would definitely go. If you are an instructor or even if you aren't, one thing I learned from that experience is to think about your exit strategy ahead of time and have some clear decisions of when you will go or stay. Nowadays, I think I will always GO if given the choice.
Then there was another time when another pilot was flying. This load was much more full. I remember we took off and started to climb but we were forced to land. I don't remember how high we got but I remember it being much lower. I think it was around 3,500 feet and I know it wasn't more than 5,000 feet. I questioned both Scott and the pilot flying that day why we needed to land and I was told there was something wrong with a "torque gauge" and was led to believe that it was just a little gauge problem and not a big deal. Now after reading Totter's post, I am beginning to wonder if there was more to it than that. 
Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Also can someone please explain what a "rolling start" is in comparison with how you are "supposed" to take off and what it means to "feather an engine" vs. shut it down? Thanks ahead of time...
Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Ground effect has to do with how the aircraft flies when it is close to the ground. I believe the positive pressure below the wings is increased, because it has nowhere to go when it hits the ground and thus gives the plane extra lift. This allows the airplane to take off at a lower speed than what would be required to maintain level flight at a higher altitude. I think ground effect is only when you are within 5-10ft of the ground, being different for size and types of airplanes.
Rolling start refers to the pilot rolling onto the runway without stopping, and accelerating for takeoff. A normal takeoff would be with the aircraft stopped, the engine's power increased, and then letting go of the brakes.
On lots of modern propeller driven airplanes, they have propeller blades which can be rotated, so that the pitch is changed. This is called a "constant speed" prop. Some propellers can change the pitch so far, that the blades are perfectly aligned with the wind stream, to decrease drag. This is good when the engine quits because that side of the plane will already need correcting due to the other engine's thrust.
I'm probably wrong about most of this though, I'll let a pilot give exact details.
Rolling start refers to the pilot rolling onto the runway without stopping, and accelerating for takeoff. A normal takeoff would be with the aircraft stopped, the engine's power increased, and then letting go of the brakes.
On lots of modern propeller driven airplanes, they have propeller blades which can be rotated, so that the pitch is changed. This is called a "constant speed" prop. Some propellers can change the pitch so far, that the blades are perfectly aligned with the wind stream, to decrease drag. This is good when the engine quits because that side of the plane will already need correcting due to the other engine's thrust.
I'm probably wrong about most of this though, I'll let a pilot give exact details.
wolfriverjoe 1,495
QuoteGround effect has to do with how the aircraft flies when it is close to the ground. I believe the positive pressure below the wings is increased, because it has nowhere to go when it hits the ground and thus gives the plane extra lift. This allows the airplane to take off at a lower speed than what would be required to maintain level flight at a higher altitude. I think ground effect is only when you are within 5-10ft of the ground, being different for size and types of airplanes.
I'm probably wrong about most of this though, I'll let a pilot give exact details.
For "not a pilot" you were pretty close. Ground effect is usually within 1/2 the wing length (1/4 total wingspan). You can feel it as the "cushion" as the airplane flares for landing (if you are still in the plane), or on a "soft field" takeoff when the pilot lifts just off the ground as early as possible and then stays in ground effect to get to normal takeoff speed.
Feathering is very important for twin engined planes because the drag from a rotating prop is the same as the area of the prop arc- think of a huge plywood disc the size of the prop diameter. It isn't the drag from the blades, its from forcing the engine to turn. If one engine quits, getting the drag as low as possible is critical. Single engine planes with constant-speed props usually can't feather.
I may have some of the stats a little off, but hey, gound school was 20 years ago"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
Question for Totter, Chris or anyone else who has knowledge on this: If there was a "problem" with the torque gauge earlier that year that did not seem to be that big of a deal at the time, it seemed like there was a problem with the gauge rather than a problem with the torque... Again sorry to sound like a dumbass but can someone please explain what the torque is related to and how it is measured?
Would that have anything to do with what Totter was talking about with regard to there not being enough engine torque? I can't recall everything you said off the top of my head but I do recall you mentioning an issue with torque and I am trying to figure out the possibility of the two being connected. I wish I remember exactly what the problem was but I got that it had to do with a torque gauge and the pilot who was flying did not feel comfortable and brought the plane down to land.
Also edited to add: Thank you very much to WolfRiverJoe and LongWayToFall for the explanations, you guys are helping me to understand better
Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
I think it would be great if the bar of knowledge was raised but how do we do it short of including airplane/pilot dynamics in a safety day discussion perhaps or... ??? Just talk to other people about it so they are more aware too? Do we just go up to manifest when we sign our waivers at a new DZ and start asking questions? And then to really arm ourselves with the necessary knowledge to know whether or not we are getting bullshitted or not it seems like to make a skydive I need to gain the education of an A&P, FAA Inspector, pilot training expert, OK. I guess that is what I have to do... It will take me a long time to get there so I guess I won't skydive until I do if that is what is necessary. In theory, I think your idea is a good one but I think it would fail in practice.
The reason I don't think it would be successful is because I think the majority of skydivers may take these things for granted like I used to, they can be apathetic and ignorant. If they don't read their 20 page manual for their rig then how can we expect to see a huge change from them now becoming airplane mechanical wizards? How many people are going to get a free education on all of those things? How many people are truly qualified or have the time to teach such things? Some people might and it would be nice if information regarding aircraft and pilots was more readily available. I do agree that skydivers need to be more knowledgeable about these things but realistically I don't see it happening.
I would love to see a solution like this one work and some do get weeded out by that process but I don't think it happens quickly enough and it seems like a step in by the FAA would help to raise that bar a little quicker. I don't know how the FAA works or their timelines. If they are just a slow government agency with a lot of beaurocratic BS or they are like hawks in the way the oversee things. I know there are a lot of problems right now in the airline industry and I am not sure where skydiving plays in the list of importance.
Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites