new kc dz not opening?

[mattjw916 2]

Quote

The adjacent properties surrounding the proposed drop zone have no interest in hosting skydiving entertainment.

I have no interest in hosting the local bowling alley either, but somehow I don't think I could block one being built or being operated.

Quote

In addition, it does not reflect the complications associated with interacting with the Harrisonville traffic pattern and unicom is yet to be explained...... unpowered flight versus the helicopter

I'm glad you brought that up... the nearest dropzone to me is an order of magnitude busier than your tiny airstrip of little consequence. Don't believe me? Here are the stats.

Yours: Lawrence Smith Memorial Airport
Harrisonville, Missouri, USA KLRY (OA6)

Aircraft based on the field: 58
Single engine airplanes: 48
Multi engine airplanes: 9
Helicopters: 1

Aircraft operations: avg 33/day
55% local general aviation
44% transient general aviation
<1% air taxi
<1% military

Our "big" local DZ: Vance Brand 2V2

Aircraft based on the field: 339
Single engine airplanes: 274
Multi engine airplanes: 42
Helicopters: 7
Ultralights: 16

Aircraft operations: avg 274/day
70% local general aviation
30% transient general aviation
<1% military

We have a helo _school_ to deal with and have never had a problem that I am aware of. I've seen them off in the distance, that's about it. I'm more worried about the jackass GA pilots that can't fathom why it's not a good idea to fly in the vicinity of our landing area.

It's a shame those in your community are so short-sighted. Dropzones, esp turbine ones, bring positive revenue growth to the airport and the surrounding community. Hell, cities like Eloy, AZ wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for DZOs with an eye for growth.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[bch7773 0]

Quote

if the DZO can provide an insurance certificate for the required coverage of 1,000,000 per occurance for the city of Harrisonville life would be much easier. As a local aviator I'm anxiously awaiting their ability to provide this insurance certificate.

that insurance does not exist!!!!

imagine if the city suddenly told the general aviation people that you all needed a 10 Billion Dollar insurance policy because of 9/11.

No such insurance exists. I'm sure you would put your plane in storage and never fly again right? oh and you wouldn't complain about the city's new law right?

MB 3528, RB 1182

[gemini 0]

Obviously all we have to go on at this time is the word of the dz organizers versus yours. Yes, you do appear to be firmly in the opposition on this issue.

You insist that the dzo committed to $1M liability insurance, but offer no proof. The DZO said that was not a committment that he made, but was added at the urging of another dzo and is willing to furnish copies of the lease drafts as evidence of the changes.

Obviously you are unfamiliar with current airport operations that include dropzones who have operated their businesses in a cooperative, successful manner for many years.

In fact, a successful dropzone can greatly enhance the federal funding of a small airport because of the volume of flights that the dropzone will generate each month. As you are aware federal funding for airports is based partly on the number of takeoffs and landings at the airport. Major dropzones can generate 30 or more takeoffs and landings per jump aircraft per day. That means you could see as many as 10,950 flights per year per aircraft or 21,900 takeoffs and landings. That would definitely help any funding request the city airport commission might make.

Now in reality, a dz in the KC area may not be able to generate 30 loads per day, but it will probably be able to average at least 25 per week or 2,600 takeoffs and landings which would not hurt either.

I take great offense to your comment that skydivers do not know how to communicate with other aircraft or TAC. Many, many skydivers are commercial pilots and many more are private pilots.

Please provide some facts to back up your statements or back off. You have very clearly stated your opinion and we heard you loud and clear. You are opposed to the dz, but want to hide the real reason(s).

If other businesses at the airport are not required to have $1M insurance that covers their customers while on airport property or "during all aspects of their business/operations", the FAA has clearly held the airport in violation of it's rules. If you are not aware of the changes (Section 16) that basically allow a dz to claim discrimination by airport management and escalate the complaint to FAA HQ, then you should get those rules immediately.

A June 2006 finding by the FAA ruled in favor of a dz with some similar facts to those you have stated.

As far as the insurance goes, there has to be a valid business reason for the requirement. I could give you a contract stating that you are required to provide me with $1M hull insurance on your aircraft prior to flight operations. Want to try to find a carrier that is going to insure your airplance for 5X or 10X its true value? Good luck.

Bet you'de be pissed too!

Blue skies,

Jim

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I have every right to ask these questions.

along with that right is a responsibility to listen to the answers.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

In fact, a successful dropzone can greatly enhance the federal funding of a small airport because of the volume of flights that the dropzone will generate each month.

Yeah and then after they get their airport improved you can kick the skydiver off.

.

[Andy9o8 0]

I often write wordy posts, but I don't think I need to now.
Lets cut the facade and talk about TRUE agendas, OK? People are being selfish. Like children, they simply don't want to share.
The other DZ operators don't want to share their market, so they're whoring themselves by fear-mongering to the locals and cannibalizing their sport by shamelessly trying to sabotage the new DZ.
And you, sir, are being selfish, too. I'll bet you love flying your aircraft. You want your airspace and your airport all to yourself, but you don't want to share with "the other element". After all, you've got yours.
Shame on you.

[flynabeech 0]

The current stats of the airport are accurate as I've done the same research......again and however.

Those referencing what insurance coverage I should obtain for my personal aircraft are missing the point. I'm not offering 14,000 feet for skydiving over the local community. I'm also not the proposed business of this operation. Perhaps the city of indenpendence and Teledyne continental (engine manufacturer) can offer their stats when they lost over 20 million dollars due to skydivers families taking legal action after an accident. The dependents sued everyone involved. The associated legal issues with skydiving have been generated by the familys of skydivers in the past 10 years. Noone on this thread seems to care if the operation should have insurance until its needed.

In addition, if the bowling alley were literally going to be your next door neighbor then you would have rights to lobby against it. At least in Cass County. If the bowling nalley couldn't meet the local requirements to operate within your city again the city has every right to stop the activity.

With reference to take offs and landings and the philonthropic contributions of a skydiving operation. The city of Harrisonville didn't see things in favor of the skydiving benefit. Back to the original point the city voted no.

Skydiving communication........ unless I'm mistaken skydivers under canopy are not equipped to communicate or comply with a structured traffic pttern. I understand many are trained pilots however under non powered flight this does not happen.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

The dependents sued everyone involved

That happens in every lawsuit.Lets not cloud the issues here.If you crash your plane into someones house that homeowner will do the same thing.And you know I'm telling the truth.


.

[mnealtx 0]

I think you're forgetting the fact that the DZ is a "done deal"... what the city council was considering (according to the thread on it) was leasing the hangar space to the DZ. The fact that the city hasn't done this doesn't mean that the dz won't be opening.

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

[Farmermacnasty 0]

I have been to all the meetings and have spoken with the airport manager several times. Lets get some things clear here folks.

1. This insurance requirement is manditory for all commercial tennants on the field has been and always will be! (Sorry no Chapter 16 violation)

2. Even the airport staff stated that this was the first issue discussed from day one with this proposed operator and they assured the city it would not be a problem. Keep in mind the former center that operated here for 7years was required this same policy and guess what they are out of business. (No help from the FAA nor MODOT or USPA)

3.MODOT which came out and did an airport survey stated in its findings that the airport property was not suitable for jumping due to its OBA "object free zone" requirements. Thus MODOT told the city that this activity would not be safe for the airport enviornment and the city agreed. (MODOT is in charge of the funding folks so good luck getting them or the FFA's ADO departement to budge) You all need to read FAA 5190.6A you will quit your bitching once you do!

4.The proposed tenants have planned to buy a postage stamp size plot that will be flanked with obsticles, land locked, and ZONING it will never happen. You will need proper zoning people to conduct a business and this county is a hard county to get zoning passed!!!

5.The insurance was in the original lease i have viewed a copy and it states the policy from day one. This perticular city requires this of all functions ran on city property hell even the log cabin event, carnivals, and the 4h booster clubs have to have it. Do you think we will look the other way for skydiving?
Finally, The bottom line is this in not a safe airport for this activity MODOT has stated it the City has denied the lease the community does not want it and the landowners don't want it. I would strongly suggest finding a new airport. You are spending your time in a community that will never change how it feels please find a new location!!!!

[wmw999 2,148]

The thing is that once someone (and there appear to be a couple of someones) has roused the neighbors against the DZ, then they're going to have problems consistently. Their neighbors will be difficult about cutaway canopies, about possible fence damage, they'll hassle about damage to crops (which is, in fact, possible).

All of these things will cost time or money of the DZ, and will sap their energy. It's stupid. But, well, the DZ really ought to see how they can work with the landowners -- go to them, listen to their concerns. Maybe offer to pay for stiles over the fence, and have very clear signs at the DZ that only stiles are to be used to cross fences. Make it clear that they'll take neighbors' concerns into account.

It's surprising how much good respecting others' perceived needs goes towards having a good working relationship.

Good luck. They can, in fact, use the "we have the right and we're going to be here" technique, but it'll be a whole lot more expensive in the long run, and a whole lot less fun.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Farmermacnasty 0]

The local land owners are furious!!! Im telling you folks you are messing with a bunch of old boys out here and we mean business. A website has been launched we have looked into the tresspassing laws for the state and we intend to prosecute all violations to the fullest extent. Please take this as friendly advice we are not going away find a new home. I think eveyone will be best suited including your business success!

www.stoptheparachuters.com

[wmw999 2,148]

Why are you so against this? Besides just that you're against it, that is. Are there underlying reasons, or is it just that change is inherently bad?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[IanHarrop 37]

It sounds to me that the locals have worked themselves up into a lather and the facts be damned.

This is now an emotional issue for them and they no longer have the ability to look at this situation objectively.

Too bad they are so narrow minded.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Damn I wish I lived closer so I could take part in all of this.You people beat almost all I have ever seen.


.

[flynabeech 0]

Again let me reiterate one thing......the insurance, zoning and permits within the county of Cass are yet to be obtained. These requirements due to the city vote and local feedback will not be met. Again, Aquila is suffering from this very issue and not going to win. It will be tied up in court for years and in the meantime a powerplant is shutdown.

In light of this fact the proposed operation will not be allowed to operate legally on April 1. It will get shut down. The idea that they are an existing operation and "its a go" is simply wrong. They haven't dropped one skydiver yet. In order to conduct business for commerce....... permitting, zoning, insurance upto and including filing taxes and compliant with the IRS must happen. Otherwise the local authorities, more specifically the sheriff will shut it down. Repeatedly, I'm not opposed to skydiving but I am opposed to illegal business and poor business ethics. This isn't my kids lemonade stand we're talking about but I'll make sure they get a permit too. Afterall, I want them educated and informed in proper business ethics and requirements.

This is business law 101 guys........ just the facts.

If the requirements can be met in the local community....drop away! Lawsuits in this local area from a previous skydiving accident have proved these requirements are established for a reason.

[Thanatos340 1]

You allude to several Points in you posts.

1) A Requirement for Insurance that doesn’t exist. Plain and simple, If the City does not make the same exact requirement for ALL business at the airport, It is Discriminatory and the FAA will have no choice but to withhold funding from the airport for discriminatory practices. The city will lose on this one. The FAA has ruled on similar case in the past. And still doesnt stop them from opening, Just means that they cant lease hangar space untill the FAA steps in (and they will).

2) Life Flight Operations. Several other Airports host both Life Flight and Skydiving operations. Cullman Alabama is the first example that comes to mind. They have operated for many years without a single problem. The heli-pad is VERY close to the Landing area just like the proposed area. No big deal.

3) Traffic Pattern Concerns. From the stats posted, This is not a very busy airport at all. There are 100`s of Dropzones operating every single day through out the US on much busier airports. It is a BIG sky. There is plenty of room for everyone. Every Jumper knows that before exiting the Plane, You stick your head out and look for traffic. If you can see a Plane, Dont get out. From 14000 feet you can see a long way. In a Skydiver-Aircraft collision... The Skydiver always Looses!!
The Jump pilot notifies the tower when Jumpers are about to exit and then again when Jumpers are in the air. Again.. This is not a problem at other much busier Airports, Why do you feel that it will be such a problem at your Airport? It is no big deal.

4) Trespassing. No Skydiver wants to land off. It sucks. However it does rarely happen. Nothing we can do about that.
If the Jumper does any damage at all to crops, fences or other property, they must pay for it. USPA provides insurance to cover each and every Jumper for this. Skydiver will do everything they can to avoid landing off.

5) Small Landing Area. Yes, 10 Acres is a little tight but there are many much smaller landing areas. One of the Busiest DZ`s is the US (At least in number of Tandems per day – ASC) is Less than 5 Acres of usable landing area I would guess, the rest is totally surrounded by Tress and other obstacles. 100`s of jumps are made there every weekend.

How would you feel if the area residents got tired of all the Noise that those airplanes created and were trying to shut down the airport??

Your plane could crash on take off or landing. It would do alot more damage than a Skydiver landing off.

How do you react now if there is other aircraft in the pattern when you are trying to take off or land?? Do those other aircraft have the same right to be in the Sky as you do??

I cant see why people are so up in arms about this. It is such a trivial thing. It is not like anyone is trying to take anything away from anyone here. Big Sky, Lots of Room and we all have the same rights to it.

[tdog 0]

Mr. MacNasty...

I love your username... I will buy it for $10... Every DZ, including DZ.com, needs one, it appears...

It is too bad the locals are so against this... I jump in a DZ in a highly populated area... I did the math last year...

I paid $340 to a local woman who makes sandwiches out of her hot dog cart at the DZ on weekends.

I paid $125 to the city, as the city charges $.50 per parachute landing.

I tend to poorly plan, so I always buy gas when I am tired after a day of jumping - enough for all week... Somewhere around $1500 of revenue to the local gas stations, which brings jobs to the community, and helps support property taxes.

I am just one of many people who drive to put cashflow into this city...

I hear that the DZ has to pay "use tax" on parts and maintenance for the planes... They have provided $$$ to the city.

I also care about where I jump, so I am likely to pick up garbage flying around the ground - and the one time I landed out this year, I made sure to leave no trace.

I think most skydivers are very respective of where they jump. They don't want to die, and they prefer not to land "out"... When they do, they try hard to not hurt anyone else's property.

It appears however, that this DZ will never get the support from it's neighbors, so it will face an uphill battle, like the one real farmermacnasty I know who will park his tractor on chopped canopies....


I love how the propaganda website against the jumpers uses fatalities and night jumps to scare people away... Here is something that just made me laugh from that website....

Quote

a generator to run the big-screen TV

It is so sad when grown ups act like children...

[flynabeech 0]

1) A Requirement for Insurance that doesn’t exist. Plain and simple, If the City does not make the same exact requirement for ALL business at the airport, It is Discriminatory and the FAA will have no choice but to withhold funding from the airport for discriminatory practices. The city will lose on this one. The FAA has ruled on similar case in the past. And still doesnt stop them from opening, Just means that they cant lease hangar space untill the FAA steps in (and they will).

In reference to the aforementioned statement.......the city is consistent on this requirement. All commercial operations aircraft or otherwise are required to provide this policy and list the city as additional insured. You'll find the lifeflight operation has twice the required limit.

In addition, the lifeflight operation has issued a letter that they are strongly opposed to this operation. It's irrevelant if such operations co-exist in other citys as this city does not want to disrupt the existing helicopters operations. The lifeflight operators in Harrisonville have commited in writing they will leave if this operation impacts their operating area. The city of Harrisonville does not want to lose their lifeflight ops for the purpose of skydiving. Thats been made very clear as well........

It's evident we can dispute others position and logic on the issue. However, there's several requirements that structure the ability to do business. This includes insurance, zoning, permitting and approvals in a community. If they can be met........drop away! I assure you they can't in Harrisonville! Another operation was shutdown for this very reason 10 years ago..........

[diverds 0]

Quote

Skydiving communication........ unless I'm mistaken skydivers under canopy are not equipped to communicate or comply with a structured traffic pttern.

Pull out your trusty FAR/AIM and take a look at 105.13. When you fly to or transition through an active dropzone all you need to do is monitor the overlying atc and/or unicom freqs and you will know in advance if jumpers are going to be in the air.

Skydive Radio

[beowulf 1]

I think you are blowing the effects of having a dropzone in your community way out of proportions. If it were as bad as you make it out to be then there would not be any skydiving anywhere at all.

[Farmermacnasty 0]

Are you people braindead?? Does falling from the sky kill brain cells?? Its real simple folks we had a center here before it went away and we were happy it did. The community does not want another skydiving experience in this town. Im amazed at the comments and replies to this thread it makes me wonder what you people do for a living. Im not opposed to what you do for pleasure and excitement but this community will never be excited or welcome this type of business. Your previous jumping lads have left bad tastes in landowners & pilots mouths. Sorry but that is the way it is your industry your mess. Why not find another airport that has not been negatively affected and start out fresh?? Is Harrisonville the only airport in this state you can feast on?? I bet not!!!

[velvetjo 0]

Quote

As a local aviator I'm anxiously awaiting their ability to provide this insurance certificate.

You ought to be anxious. Your livelihood or hobby may be next on the block.

It's sad to see this whole affair, but it's all too typical in less enlightened communities. Just look around at the number of airports with grass strips remaining and you'll see what I mean.

Lance

[mattjw916 2]

Quote

Im amazed at the comments and replies to this thread it makes me wonder what you people do for a living.

Let's see: IT consultants, business owners, commercial pilots, dropzone managers, engineers, professional skydivers, etc. In other words, people with a much wider view of the world around them than a bunch of farmermcnasties in some armpit rural town.

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

It's evident we can dispute others position and logic on the issue.

Logic??

I have yet to see a Logical reason why people would be so upset about a Dropzone opening here.

I do see alot of people getting worked about nothing.

No one is trying to do anything to harm or take away anything from anyone.

The is no good reason the Life -Flight should be opposed to a Dropzone on the same airport. It has been proven not to be a problem at other Airports. There is no logical reason they should be opposed.

There in no logical reason to fear Skydivers. Dropzones have been proven to be able to exist on Hundreds of Airports without problems. Why do you feel this one will be different??
I realize that this is an emotional issue for some neighbors but I can’t understand any of the Logic behind their concerns.

You have a Not very Busy Airport and some people would like to utilize it. They just want to go flying (same as GA pilots) They just prefer to get out of the plane and Fly. Big Sky, Plenty of room for all of us.

Insurance, Zoning and other matters are for lawyers to handle.

Life-Flight moving because of Skydivers?? Crazy and based of false assumptions that can be corrected if they just look around at other Airports where Life-Flight operates. There simply are NO PROBLEMS with this. Years of Dropzone/Life-Flight co-existence have proven this.

Trespassing?? - Who gets hurt if someone happens to land out (Providing they are respectful of the Property??). This backasswards hick mentality of "You is on my Propety so Im a Gonna Shoot you" is just plain stupid. In the very RARE vent that a jumper doesn’t make it back to the dz and is forced to land somewhere other than the designated landing area.. How does that effect anyone?? What damage is done??

I do truly feel sorry for the people that have gotten all worked up about this. What a sad and pathetic life they must be leading to worry so much about something that will have no effect on them at all.

It is a Big Sky. We all have the same rights to it.

But since the locals are so worked up.. I think they should consider how much damage one of those GA Planes like a Beech could do if it crashed on their property. You know those GA Planes crash all the time right?? They should also make sure that EVERY single plane that comes into or out of that Airport have a $1,000,000 insurance policy that also names the City as insured. And all those planes coming in and Out might hamper Life-Flight too. I hope they can ban together to stop this horrible threat too. Actually the only reasonable thing to do is to stop all use of the airport (except Life-Flight of course)!