Deland Police Change Story About Gus Wing

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

Quote

Ron, you haven't spent enough time in DeLand to know what the situation is between the town and the dropzone. Given that, your comments are without a specific (to DeLand) factual basis.

Really?

I have been jumping in Deland since 1996 on a regular basis. Was on a team FROM there for three years.

My ex-wife was a manifestor there, I met her there and got married to her there.

I guess almost 10 years of jumping there does not count

I'm not talking about spending time at the dropzone. I'm talking about spending time in the community.

I lived and worked on the dz (manifestor, just like your ex) for two years (1999-2002, but I don't think we've ever met), and I knew almost nothing about the town, its history, it's culture in that time.

Now I never go to the dropzone, but DeLand is my home, and I have learned quite a bit about it in the past few years.

Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I've posted John Wing's letter to the editor. Take issue with him. You've gone from "don't be too hard on the cops" to "Bill is guilty" and I can't take it.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[Ron 7]

Quote

I'm not talking about spending time at the dropzone. I'm talking about spending time in the community.

I spent enough time in the community to meet someone, fall in love, and get married there. (We got Divorced in Dade City)

Quote

I lived and worked on the dz (manifestor, just like your ex) for two years (1999-2002, but I don't think we've ever met), and I knew almost nothing about the town, its history, it's culture in that time.

But now you are an expert on the town and its politics? And just because you never met me means I was not there?

Quote

Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I've posted John Wing's letter to the editor. Take issue with him. You've gone from "don't be too hard on the cops" to "Bill is guilty" and I can't take it.

Not even close to correct. Bill did in fact hit Gus. Thats a fact. So he is guilty of hitting Gus. You may not like that fact, but it is a fact and your emotions on the subject do not change anything.

Being guilty of an accident and being guilty of a crime is not the same thing. And being guilty of a crime is what we are talking about.

You normally are more rational than this. But you are letting your emotions control your thinking.

My point is simply that your emotional outbursts bashing the police will not help matters at all. While I can understand your anger, and understand your desire to protect Bill....You are doing more harm than good.

When I opposed your view, you attacked my position. Claiming I didn't know enough to make an educated oppinion.

Well, you can bicker all day about if my 10 years jumping there and being there enough to marry a local is enough time spent there for you, I frankly don't care what you think.

Even if I knew NOTHING about DeLand (which is BS), this same situation is played out at DZ's all over the country. "Crazy" skydivers do "stupid" shit and the local pilots (who normally have money since they can own a plane) hate the "meat bombs". They use their power and position in the community to try and exploit any problems.

And here you are playing right into their expectations by calling the police "stupid". You think that HELPS this situation?

You are normally more logical than this, so I can only assume you are working on emotion, not logic.

So I'll drop it since you are not acting like yourself.

But you are not helping matters with your emotional outbursts.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

But you are not helping matters with your emotional outbursts.

You can characterize my opinion, John Wing's opinion and the opinion of two people who have lived in this town for longer than your lifetime as an "emotional outburst." That does not make it so.

You know nothing (or at least you've offered no facts) about the DeLand Police Department. I, on the other hand, read the local paper every day, and a good part of my day--every day--is spent listening to an oral history of the town and the county from someone deeply involved in the local community and its politics for fifty years.

This started as my disputing the contention that it was "Florida police." I'm not inclined to brand all LEOs in this state as being bad, because I don't know that to be the case. But I do know about the town where I live and work.

You've spent time here, perhaps, but I don't hear you saying that you lived here.

I don't much appreciate your trying to make this about me, but that's how you argue with everyone, so I accept it as what you do. It's still fallacious.

For your edification, "guilt" is defined as:

"The fact of being responsible for the commission of an offense."

In law, it is defined as:

"Culpability for a crime or lesser breach of regulations that carries a legal penalty."

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[toronto_bill 0]

The way I see it ....

I feel he shouldn't be charged ,...but I understand why he was.....and I agree I guess.

What we can do about it....? Fix the courts?

Make pilots under canopy as responsible as the planes and other aircraft.
Was Gus 50% responsible? Division of blame is not possible. To add some type of added responsibility to jumpers does seem fair.
Students are exempt...but future infractions by licensed jumpers should have standard ized penalties. If we dont do it then the cops will...
A swooper with a 2.0 wingloading, can probably beat a plane to the ground. So with that relative control...should come relative responsibility.

Make patterns mandatory. Land accordingly i.e. Vx vs A license. We spend 30 secs tweaking load order so that landing is considered. Generally we have the faster smaller high loaded canopies landing first. Avoiding the problem in the first place.
Anyway.

First trip to Deland I had 150 jmps. Jumped and at around 6000 I look and there is a plane rolling down the runway below me. So I tracked a bit and pulled. But no one ever told me the line was that grey. Another time I have a cessna coming at me wheels up on take off, Im under canopy and he is coming right for me......then finally banks and turns. The visual is the worst aspect...

I am now quite calm with it. Busy airport means BUSY airport. Deland is not the worst place either. Others can be even more fun.

There is more than just flying a pattern. So, we're doing stuff, in some cases quite radical. Like aerobatics on landing. Most airports dont allow this. We should be grateful for the leniency we enjoy i guess.

I think I'm a nazi no fun Safety advisor in training...lol

Jump safe, Hook angry ?

00Billy

[Ron 7]

Quote

You know nothing (or at least you've offered no facts) about the DeLand Police Department. I, on the other hand, read the local paper every day, and a good part of my day--every day--is spent listening to an oral history of the town and the county from someone deeply involved in the local community and its politics for fifty years.

I thought you were done with this?

Quote

You've spent time here, perhaps, but I don't hear you saying that you lived here.

You yourself calimed you lived there for two years and knew nothing about the city

Quote

"I lived and worked on the dz (manifestor, just like your ex) for two years (1999-2002, but I don't think we've ever met), and I knew almost nothing about the town, its history, it's culture in that time."-- RLK

Your emotions are still getting the better of you. Your out bursts are still doing more harm than good.

You want to claim you know more about this than me? Fine. You what to claim you know more about DeLand than me? Fine. You want to claim I have no clue about skydiving and city relationships? Fine.

But your emotional out bursts and calling the police stupid just shows you are using your emotion, not your logic.

You are hurting this case, the relationship between the DZ and the city and the image of skydivers everywhere when you act out.

Quote

I don't much appreciate your trying to make this about me, but that's how you argue with everyone, so I accept it as what you do. It's still fallacious.

Its not about you, its about your emotional out bursts doing more damage than helping.

Now this part is about you. You won't let this die since you can't seem to think anything past your emotions. You attack anyone that tries to help unless they agree to see it 100% your way. That is reacting with emotion, not logic. Pretty common for you.

Im sorry you seem to need to be correct about this and refuse to see you are doing more harm than good with your emotions.

For the benefit of everyone, I'm gonna stop this pissing contest you seem hell bent on starting and let you continue to think that only you are right, and I don't know shit about anything.

BTW you wanna play definitions...OK

I said he was GUILTY:

Responsible for or chargeable with a reprehensible act; deserving of blame; culpable: guilty of cheating; the guilty party.

And he is.

Now try to have a good day.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[pash 0]

I agree with you Ron. Bashing the cops is not the best way to make this or anything go away.

I lived in FL for 10yrs and as a dumb kid I thought the cops were asses for "harassing" me for my broken windshield, or parking on campus without a permit, or making an illegal u-turn on my motorcycle.

10yrs later I moved to NJ and found out exactly what will happen when you actually TELL a cop EXACTLY how you feel. Jail really wasn't all that fun. I was wrong and I learned my lesson.

My lesson was to show respect for the police because, even when they are wrong, they are right. When pressed, most people will not give up on a position because people are stubborn. I mean, you can rebut every fact down to the detail and when you give someone no place to run, they still think they are right. Now try the same thing with a cop (try giving them no graceful out to save face) and you're really just adding fuel to the fire.

Good points Ron. My heart goes out to Gus' family and Bill.

Jason

[RhondaLea 3]

Please address John Wing's letter, Ron, instead of accusing me of an "emotional outburst."

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[divnswoop 0]

Please argue somewhere else.... We are loosing site of what actually happened here...

....especially since this website is being qouted in the media AND in law suits...

[tso-d_chris 0]

Quote

The waiver is the point. Doesn't matter if they did agree to race the waiver is the point.. Doesn't matter if the pilot fucked up "which I think he did" the waiver is the point..

Not in criminal law.

[artistcalledian 0]

what is people opinions on why this happened? not on who was to blame, but on simply what happened and why it happened?

and try and keep all your emotions under control, you never see me getting emotional

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[billvon 2,400]

Ron and Rhonda, please stop with the thinly veiled PA's.

[Ron 7]

Quote

Please address John Wing's letter

Sure if you promise to keep professional.

Quote

Letter to the Editor
The Daytona Beach News-Journal
October 30, 2005

I am responding to recent articles in the media about the tragic death of my brother, who was struck by an aircraft at Skydive DeLand in April.

Knowing the particulars of the case, my contention is that there was incomplete police work by investigators inexperienced in aviation accidents, with hasty and self-serving media reporting, creating additional and totally unnecessary heartache for the family.

Ok, here he is saying that the police investigation was INCOMPLETE, meaning they were not done or it was not through enough. Also he is saying they were inexperienced in Aviation issues.

But it is not the police's job to be an expert on everything. They did their job to the best they could and gave a recomendation to the DA. The DA's job is to take all the evidence and decide if charges should be brought. The DA in this case will look at OTHER people who have evidence (NTSB and FAA) and will make a choice. This is not Judge Dread where the cops arrest, charge and sentance a perp.

He also says that the MEDIA took a report from the police and used it to sell the news....Thats normal, but not the cops fault. The police were told that Bill and Gus raced. So they said they had been told that.

Quote

How can they get it so wrong? My brother and Bill Buchmann have been convicted through the media, apparently in response to information released by the DeLand police. I do know I was never contacted, even though I told the DeLand police I might have some insight into the accident.

Police never use the family of a party they are investigating...Thats smart. In this case John is on Bill's side (which is not normal), but an impartal perosn is the best, not someone with a dog in the fight.

Quote

I am currently an FAA Aviation Medical Examiner and have some knowledge of the pilot community, and I have been the medical officer on numerous investigation boards involving military aircraft fatalities.

Again the police would be stupid to use a family member for evidence.

Quote

The animus that exists between Skydive DeLand and some in the local community is apparently a motive in what must be viewed as a dubious investigation. My brother's death was tragic and accidental, and should not be used for activist purposes.

This is a known and a given....But you claim I don't know about the fighting since I don't live there....But John lives in PA. So while he does not live there either, he however knows?

And for the record, I never said that some people are not trying to use this against Bill or SDD....My point was that you are using this against the DeLand PD just like you claim they are using it against you.

Quote

My brother's death was tragic and accidental, and should not be used for activist purposes.

And that includes your activist purposes against the DeLand PD.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 7]

Quote

what is people opinions on why this happened? not on who was to blame, but on simply what happened and why it happened?

A good pilot who was in the most difficult phase of flight (landing). Over took a good skydiver under canopy that was in the pilots blind spot. The skydiver was in a position that would make it very hard to see in a high wing plane. And the skydiver was in an area that was in a standard approach to the runway.

A canopy has a fwd speed of about 20 MPH. Thats almost nothing when you are in a plane that is doing 80-90 in the pattern. Canopies look like they are going straight down when you are in a plane. It is easy for a pilot to understand how this could happen.

The pilot and the skydiver were good, but both were in an area that increased the chance of a collision.

To avoid it:

Pilots stay away from the DZ on the way down and try to approach from the far side of the runway. Try to keep a count of all the canopies.

Skydivers stay the hell away from the runway to include the pattern.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[artistcalledian 0]

thanks for that Ron, i change my opinion now... i just think its a terrible accident, neither party more to blame than the other

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[billvon 2,400]

Last warning.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I said he was GUILTY:

Responsible for or chargeable with a reprehensible act; deserving of blame; culpable: guilty of cheating; the guilty party.

And he is.

And when was this established, Ron? Power aircraft is supposed to yield to unpowered, but if a pedestrian jumps out in front of moving traffic, the driver isn't guilty of anything. And you can have accidents that are 50/50. It's a fact that the two collided.

And sorry, cops can be called idiots when they're acting that way. Maybe they have thicker skins in California. Or know the law a bit better?

[pash 0]

Kelp,

Ron, if I'm reading his posts correctly, does not dispute that this was an accident. The fact remains the piloted aircraft collided with a jumper under canopy. That's all.

Again, if I'm reading things correctly, all he is saying is that calling the cops idiots in this specific instance is not helping. It will fuel them and add to their "vendetta" to bring someone to "justice."

California, in my opinion is a fairly liberal state. Calling a cop a name there may not cause a problem but in some states it will get you maced, cuffed, and put in jail. We do not live in a black and white world or in a bubble when it comes to authority.

Keeping a cool head and avoiding name calling will only help keep things from escalating. Embarrass law enforcement and give them no out or opportunity to save face? This will only create a battle of egos. Ego has no place in this time and place. This is a dead horse and it seems like everyone knows what happened. Inviting everyone to kick it cannot help keep someone out of jail. FYI - I do not think you are inviting anyone to do this by the way - I think folks are overreacting to the factual nature of what he is saying. I know I did when it hit close to home.

jason

[RhondaLea 3]

This is pretty much out of the hands of the police and in the hands of the State Attorney's office now. My experience with that office (dating back a couple of years when I worked in a criminal practice with a former ASA) is that the lawyers and their staff are competent professionals.

The police have already had to suffer the humilation of backing down off the "racing to the ground" and "playing chicken" allegations.

Given the FAA outcome, my take is that Bill has a good lawyer who will deal with the State Attorney's office in a competent way.

If I really believed that calling the local police names would affect the outcome, I'd not have made any of these posts, but at this juncture, they're not especially relevant except as an example of bad attitude and poor police work. I'm quite sure, though, that if I ever get stopped again for a traffic violation, I'll be getting more than one ticket.

That'll be fine with me.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[propilot 0]

Quote

I realize that I am in the minority on this one, but I believe the pilot should face manslaughter charges. I want the laws changed.

Skydivers who are in freefall and under canopy should have “right of way”. I know the laws are currently written to say that neither party can lay claim to a specified airspace. This is foolish because skydivers don’t have wings. We fall straight down at high speeds and can’t always “spot” an aircraft if it decides to fly over our dropzone unexpectedly. There have been a lot of close calls at smaller dropzones where pilots don’t seem to acknowledge the dz’s existence.

Now the inevitable has finally happened and it’s as if the skydiving community has no idea how to feel about it. Why are we so eager to let this pilot walk away from a fatality?

Why shouldn’t he be held accountable for his actions or at the very least, heavily scrutinized? I’m sick of that “one big happy family” excuse. We are not a big happy family. We all have our own lives and skydiving is just a fraction that I am not willing to die for due to someone else’s negligence.

Could someone please explain to me why Gus's family is supporting the pilots actions?

UntamedDOG

Only his family can do that, but I would like to respond to the rest of your post.

The law is foolish because skydivers cant always spot an aircraft? How the hell do you think an pilot is going to spot your tiny body falling straight down at 150 mph?

Second, umm your dropzone? Excuse me? Skydivers contribute next to nothing to the national airspace system. How is it your airspace?

Let the pilot walk away from a fatality? Are you serious? Jesus I wish I could slap you.

Thats like me saying "I cant believe they arent suiing gusses family for letting him jump through my airspace and putting planes at risk."

Do you realize how assinine you sound?

I am a Twin Otter jump pilot and a skydiver. You should count your lucky stars that the FAA allows you to make a skydive. You pay for nothing in the national airspace system and you cause risk for every plane nearby.

Jesus Christ. Im moving to Canada.

[Speer 0]

Allen,

Shouldn't feed the trolls... even if they do jump...

Russ

Generally, it is your choice; will your life serve as an example... or a warning?

[propilot 0]

arg, I know. Usually I can exhibit self control, laugh, and just move along. ...that post just hit a nerve though.

[Ron 7]

Quote

And when was this established, Ron? Power aircraft is supposed to yield to unpowered, but if a pedestrian jumps out in front of moving traffic, the driver isn't guilty of anything.

Sure the driver is. He may not be CRIMINALLY liable, but the driver is guilty of hitting someone.

The more manuverable craft is supposed to yield. A pilot is responsable to "See and Avoid". While this is an accident, and while I think Bill is not Criminaly guilty of anything....He did in fact fly a plane in such a way as to hit a slower moving "craft". That means he is guilty of hitting Gus. Not guilty of a crime, but still guilty of hitting Gus.

You can choose to debate "definitions" all day, but he flew a faster more manuverable craft into another.

Reference FAR§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.

Quote

(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

Kind of a catch all. I say that while I 100% understand how it happen the PIC is 100% responsible for the Aircraft and what he does with it.

FAR § 91.111 Operating near other aircraft.

Quote

(a) No person may operate an aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard.

Self explanitory

FAR § 91.113 Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

Quote

(a) Inapplicability. This section does not apply to the operation of an aircraft on water.

(b) General. When weather conditions permit, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under instrument flight rules or visual flight rules, vigilance shall be maintained by each person operating an aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft. When a rule of this section gives another aircraft the right-of-way, the pilot shall give way to that aircraft and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear.

(c) In distress. An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic.

(d) Converging. When aircraft of the same category are converging at approximately the same altitude (except head-on, or nearly so), the aircraft to the other's right has the right-of-way. If the aircraft are of different categories—

(1) A balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft;

(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.

(3) An airship has the right-of-way over a powered parachute, weight-shift-control aircraft, airplane, or rotorcraft.

However, an aircraft towing or refueling other aircraft has the right-of-way over all other engine-driven aircraft.

(e) Approaching head-on. When aircraft are approaching each other head-on, or nearly so, each pilot of each aircraft shall alter course to the right.

(f) Overtaking. Each aircraft that is being overtaken has the right-of-way and each pilot of an overtaking aircraft shall alter course to the right to pass well clear.

(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 2,400]

>Do you realize how assinine you sound?

It is not against the rules to sound asinine or foolish here, but it is against the rules to attack other posters.

[Herckydude 0]

Hello people. As a pilot and a skydiver I regret to say that reading these posts is a sometimes a waste of time. Collisions happen, and people are at fault when this happens but only kamikazes do this on purpose. Avoiding a collision is everybody's responsibility. Pilots and jumpers. If you are up there, only trust yourself. Never assume the other person or aircraft has seen you. It's your life, your family and friends that will miss you. Look out, use your eyes.Look out! It's hard for me to believe that somebody under canopy can not hear an airplane approaching. At least,if I can hear them so should you. Avoid to fly in the aircrafts pattern. Pilots are constantly looking out to avoid hitting you while they are flying the aircraft, selecting flaps, talking to control, talking to manifest, talking to other aircraft in the pattern, or aircraft performing airdrops, to provide separation for your safety. There is a lot of work in that little office. But they look out as much as they can, but they also have work inside the cockpit while flying, so they also have to look INSIDE. Hey, and they might be looking at you, turn away to avoid hitting you and hit somebody else, because he was distracted by looking at YOU!!
So, avoid the pattern.
Look out.
Be safe.
And jump as much as you can.
Don't forget, it's a nice sport but safety is everybody's responsibility.

[akarunway 1]

I said he was GUILTY:

Responsible for or chargeable with a reprehensible act; deserving of blame; culpable: guilty of cheating; the guilty party. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ACCIDENT: 1 something which happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, and which often damages something or injures someone
2 by accident without intending to, or without being intended:

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.