Private pilots flying jumpers

[BillyMongilly 0]

It's a violation of FAR's. Anyone want to explain to me why it's OK to violate FAR's?

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[DougH 270]

"Becase he is a really good pilot" but he is too lazy or cheap or unhealthy to get the commerical cert.

No?

Maybe Jan said it was ok!

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[NWFlyer 2]

Maybe the theory is that skydivers see other FARs get broken/bent on a regular basis ("industrial haze", pencil packing and/or not bothering with repacks), so they figure that one's perfectly defensible if they like the guy/trust the guy/want the plane in the air/don't want to rock the boat. Maybe on a day-to-day basis it's no big deal. Maybe it is.

But like all laws that get broken, it's when the shit hits the fan that it comes back to bite you in the ass.

I think I mixed too many metaphors. My head hurts.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[JohnDeere 0]

You got it all wrong he did not get it cause Jan did not tell him to personally.

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!

[ficus 0]

If you are actually interested in having a productive thread, maybe a less loaded OP would help.

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

I don't get people who think like this... what does the qualification of the pilot have to do with the jumpers actions?! If the pilot was a freaking NASA astronaut it seems clear the result would have been the same - the guy still would have jumped.

That is correct, however if Robert Rawlins would have been abiding by FAR's he would have either not flown the guy to altitude, in which case it would have been some other bozo in the hot seat, or he would have a commercial certificate and it would have been the difference of not being able to prevent the tragedy or being able to have prevented the tragedy at least with him in the seat. This he will have to live with for the rest of his life.

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[gdmusumeci 0]

Quote

It's a violation of FAR's. Anyone want to explain to me why it's OK to violate FAR's?

Aside from 91.3(b)?

I will point out that some FARs are busted pretty frequently (written logs of GPS navigational database updates... properly placarding deferred maintenance...).

Skydiving operations tend to play fast and loose with the rules, perhaps in keeping with its historical perception as a "lunatic fringe" sport. After all -- how many skydivers have punched an IMC layer in freefall? don't fasten their seatbelt before taxiing? jumped with a reserve that's a day out of date? It's bogus, but there is a culture of tolerance -- and there you go....

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

Quote

It's a violation of FAR's. Anyone want to explain to me why it's OK to violate FAR's?

Aside from 91.3(b)?

I will point out that some FARs are busted pretty frequently (written logs of GPS navigational database updates... properly placarding deferred maintenance...).

Skydiving operations tend to play fast and loose with the rules, perhaps in keeping with its historical perception as a "lunatic fringe" sport. After all -- how many skydivers have punched an IMC layer in freefall? don't fasten their seatbelt before taxiing? jumped with a reserve that's a day out of date? It's bogus, but there is a culture of tolerance -- and there you go....

Well you know, banks are robbed pretty frequently, cars are stolen every day, about every seven seconds someone is murdered here in the USA, Parachutist has a special section on "stolen gear," Roger Nelson financed the ferry fee on a 727 from South Africa to the World Skydiving Convention by dealing some powder, but hey, I had a lot of fun jumping out of that bird! So maybe he shouldn't have gone to prison since a lot of people had a lot of fun. But you know, he did break the law, but where exactly do you draw the line?

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

You got it all wrong he did not get it cause Jan did not tell him to personally.

No, no.... Jan's under a gag order - she COULDN'T have told him ANYTHING... therefore, it's USPA's fault!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[jsaxton 0]

I believe that it's OK under (not a FAR violation) under some conditions (Private Club,...). Can anyone clarify this?

[SimonBones 1]

Quote

That is correct, however if Robert Rawlins would have been abiding by FAR's he would have either not flown the guy to altitude, in which case it would have been some other bozo in the hot seat, or he would have a commercial certificate and it would have been the difference of not being able to prevent the tragedy or being able to have prevented the tragedy at least with him in the seat.

I think, as mentioned in the other thread, if he was abiding by the FAR's, the other alternative would be that he flew the suicide jumper who opened the door and jumped without having a paying skydiver onboard. You don't need a commercial to take a guy on a ride for pictures right? So what's different? The title of your thread is about a private pilot flying jumpers. Do you mean paying skydivers or suicude jumpers? I think you mean to discuss paying skydivers, but are citing the suicide jumper for your argument. Irrelevant and silly.

Quote

Well you know, banks are robbed pretty frequently, cars are stolen every day, about every seven seconds someone is murdered here in the USA, Parachutist has a special section on "stolen gear," Roger Nelson financed the ferry fee on a 727 from South Africa to the World Skydiving Convention by dealing some powder, but hey, I had a lot of fun jumping out of that bird! So maybe he shouldn't have gone to prison since a lot of people had a lot of fun. But you know, he did break the law, but where exactly do you draw the line?

I'll be honest here. I'm the bank robbing car thief murderer who fell through a fluffy cloud a few weekends ago. And I have to admit it, I liked it. Come lock me up for my crimes against innocent victems.

108 way head down world record!!!
http://www.simonbones.com
Hit me up on Facebook

[gdmusumeci 0]

Quote

Well you know, banks are robbed pretty frequently, cars are stolen every day, about every seven seconds someone is murdered here in the USA, Parachutist has a special section on "stolen gear," Roger Nelson financed the ferry fee on a 727 from South Africa to the World Skydiving Convention by dealing some powder, but hey, I had a lot of fun jumping out of that bird! So maybe he shouldn't have gone to prison since a lot of people had a lot of fun. But you know, he did break the law, but where exactly do you draw the line?

My point was merely that it is very difficult to comply with the letter of every regulation, especially with regard to maintenance (note that both of my examples involved maintenance).

I think there is a fundamental difference between "trivial" violations, like failing to make the proper logbook entry for swapping out a burned out landing light and "serious" violations, like exercising privileges you don't hold the certificate for, regardless of whether you can do it safely.

Drawing that line is sometimes hard, and I don't know that most people in this sport have the background (or inclination) to make a safe determination. That is what the FSDO is nominally for, right? To serve as an arbiter of the rules and to protect the ignorant from the malicious?

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Drawing that line is sometimes hard, and I don't know that most people in this sport have the background (or inclination) to make a safe determination. That is what the FSDO is nominally for, right?

We all know the difference between right and wrong. The DZO/pilot that flies jumpers without the proper ratings is a liar and cheat. He is lying about his abilities and cheating you every time he charges you for his service. Expecting the local FISDO to protect you is like believing USPA will monitor GM DZ’s. Be responsible for yourself, ask questions.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

Quote

Well you know, banks are robbed pretty frequently, cars are stolen every day, about every seven seconds someone is murdered here in the USA, Parachutist has a special section on "stolen gear," Roger Nelson financed the ferry fee on a 727 from South Africa to the World Skydiving Convention by dealing some powder, but hey, I had a lot of fun jumping out of that bird! So maybe he shouldn't have gone to prison since a lot of people had a lot of fun. But you know, he did break the law, but where exactly do you draw the line?

My point was merely that it is very difficult to comply with the letter of every regulation, especially with regard to maintenance (note that both of my examples involved maintenance).

I think there is a fundamental difference between "trivial" violations, like failing to make the proper logbook entry for swapping out a burned out landing light and "serious" violations, like exercising privileges you don't hold the certificate for, regardless of whether you can do it safely.

Drawing that line is sometimes hard, and I don't know that most people in this sport have the background (or inclination) to make a safe determination. That is what the FSDO is nominally for, right? To serve as an arbiter of the rules and to protect the ignorant from the malicious?

How about drawing the line at "willful" vs. "inavertant" I think this is where most judges and juries draw the line.

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[gdmusumeci 0]

Quote

You don't need a commercial to take a guy on a ride for pictures right?

This turns out to be sort of a complicated deal.

FAR 61.113 says that a private pilot cannot act as pilot in command for compensation or hire, and then defines some exceptions: glider towing, aircraft sales demonstrations, search & rescue operations, charitable events, etc. 61.113(c) further says that a private pilot must pay their pro-rata share of the operating expenses for the flight. For example, a private pilot decides to fly some friends to a boogie. The pilot contributes his flying talents, and everyone else covers the cost of the plane, fuel, and oil. This is against the rules: the pilot must not pay less than their pro-rata share.

Also, you can only do the cost-splitting measure if the pilot and passengers share a "common purpose." This is not defined in the FARs -- it is established administrative case law. For example, if the passengers on a trip just want to get from San Francisco to Los Angeles, and the pilot is just driving the bus, then there is no common purpose. If the pilot derives any economic benefit, then they are in violation of 61.113(c).

So as long as you do it for no economic benefit whatsoever, then yes, this is okay.

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

I believe that it's OK under (not a FAR violation) under some conditions (Private Club,...). Can anyone clarify this?

I have never heard of the "private club" clause. Please cite the FAR that pertains to this "private club" theory.

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

I think, as mentioned in the other thread, if he was abiding by the FAR's, the other alternative would be that he flew the suicide jumper who opened the door and jumped without having a paying skydiver onboard. You don't need a commercial to take a guy on a ride for pictures right? So what's different?

The difference is the private pilot had just dropped a load of jumpers when the suicide jumper went out the door. Nice try of evading the facts at hand though. As for your quetion of whether a pilot needs a commercial to take a guy for a photo flight: Is the guy paying the operating costs of the airplane aka tach time? If so, yes he needs a commercial. A private pilot can share the operating costs of a flight with his passenger, but the FAA has defined "sharing" as each paying one-half the costs. A pilot can no longer pay a penny.

Quote

The title of your thread is about a private pilot flying jumpers. Do you mean paying skydivers or suicude jumpers? I think you mean to discuss paying skydivers, but are citing the suicide jumper for your argument. Irrelevant and silly.

The silly part is that you are attempting to eliminate the skydivers to justify your argument. You are also sarcastically treating this thread as a new thread when in fact (and you know it) it is a continuation of a thread that has been ordered to be moved by the mod.

Now please cut the sarcasm and debate logically.

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[riggerpaul 1]

Private club means members only, as opposed to taking unsuspecting non-member customers off the street.

The pilot must be a member, must not benefit financially, and, in fact, must pay his share of the expenses.

[riggerpaul 1]

Sorry, you wanted FAR references.

As GP said, 61.113 says not for compensation or hire.

I don't know of a specific regulation that ALLOWs clubs, but rather, the club is proof that you have a group that is sharing a common purpose.

Private pilots have always been able to take friends on rides, and even share expenses, so long as you can demonstrate a common purpose and no financial gain.

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

Private club means members only, as opposed to taking unsuspecting non-member customers off the street.

The pilot must be a member, must not benefit financially, and, in fact, must pay his share of the expenses.

Ah, so this would seem to cut out students and tandems (and observers) and the pilot has to pay for a lift ticket each load he flies.

Well that sucks!

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[BillyMongilly 0]

Quote

Sorry, you wanted FAR references.

As GP said, 61.113 says not for compensation or hire.

If a pilot is flying for free in order to build hours for a higher rating, even though the pilot is not being paid, this is considered "compensation". I believe that is specifically mentioned in the FAR's.

Quote

I don't know of a specific regulation that ALLOWs clubs, but rather, the club is proof that you have a group that is sharing a common purpose.

And by "members" of the club, that might be seen as USPA members.

Quote

Private pilots have always been able to take friends on rides, and even share expenses, so long as you can demonstrate a common purpose and no financial gain.

And that may go back to the "flying for free" deal.

How high are we going? Oh about 9000. Oh Mr. Pilot! How high are we going? Oh about 12000! That's the ticket!

[diverdriver 5]

Greater Kansas City Skydiving Club wasn't a club. It had no dues. It advertised to the public to come learn to jump. We were required to have a Commercial License and at least a Class 2 medical.

Did Duanesburg advertise to the public to come jump? Did the pilot pay to fly each load at least in part? Then it was a commercial operation and thus required the PIC to have a Commercial License and a Class 1 or 2 medical. This has been ruled on long ago by the NTSB Administrative Law Judge (I think I got that title right). It has been talked about in Parachutist. I have a section on it on my website DiverDriver.com. That any jumper says now that they "didn't know it wasn't right" just isn't listening or doesn't want to listen.

It sucks this came out with a suicide. It does not diminish the severity of the violation. And, that the observer was not wearing a bailout rig with the door open in flight seems to go against every modification paperwork I've ever heard of on a 182. As far as I know they all state that EVERY occupant must wear an approved parachute if the door comes open in flight. Would it have prevented this suicide? Doubtful. But when do we get to pick which FARs we will follow and which ones we can just ignore? If I'm a great conversationalist around the bonfire and give extra altitude to my friends then it's not so bad?

It doesn't work that way.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[jsaxton 0]

Quote

Quote

Private club means members only, as opposed to taking unsuspecting non-member customers off the street.

The pilot must be a member, must not benefit financially, and, in fact, must pay his share of the expenses.

Ah, so this would seem to cut out students and tandems (and observers) and the pilot has to pay for a lift ticket each load he flies.

Well that sucks!

It _may_ not cut out an unpaid observer, or even Tandems and Students.

If the observer is not paying (not contributing to the pilot financially) this excemption _may_ still apply.

If the Students are "members" this _may_ still apply.

It the club does Tandems as a "fundraiser" for the club this _may_ still apply.

The requirement I believe is that the PILOT dose not benefit financially, not the "club".

Can anyone clarify?

[diverdriver 5]

While not under Part 135 operations I believe a deciding factor can be whether the operation was "holding out to the public". Meaning, did they advertise to support their operation and offer services for hire? If they did it doesn't matter if the pilot was financially compensated or not. That is my understanding of the FAA/NTSB Law Judge.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[peckerhead 0]

Playing devils advocate here but let me ask you this;

Would you rather jump from a plane with a pilot who has over 10,000 hours flying jumpers and a private license...(who may also have thousands of skydives as well)

Or some green horn rookie with a commercial rating who has never flown a jump pane before?

Seems like a no brainer to me.

I know this is not a real popular thing to admit to but I have made over 1000 jumps with a private pilot at the controls without incident and have been scared shitless by some hotshot with a commercial rating.

I am just dumbfounded how our once tight knit community is so fucking quick to judge and hang one of our own out to dry just because some knit-wit decided to kill himself and take us with him.

If our standards are you will never jump anywhere that someone has broke a rule or made a mistake then we should all sell our gear and take up bowling because EVERYBODY has fucked up at least once.

Ever punch a cloud? You broke the law! Turn the pilot in. Call the fucking FAA!

Instead of asking what USPA should do TO this guy why is no one asking what we should do for this guy?

Lets just give him a trial here on this kangaroo court called DZ.COM where everyone is presumed guilty until proven innocent. Who fucking cares how many people he has brought into the sport or how many contributions he has made.

He is a witch....Burn the witch!

Sparky you know I agree with you most of the time but please tell me when did turning on each other ever benefit the sport of skydiving?