Thoughts on No flaps or No cuts for H&P ??

[stayhigh 2]

I've seen many dropzones that does it. The super cheap H&P place that everyone talks about specially.

Any real danger for a tail strike??

Take the number of skydivers in US, A, multiply by the probable rate of tail strike, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one???

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[potatoman 0]

I am not making sense of your post. What do you mean by no flaps or no Cuts.

You have the right to your opinion, and I have the right to tell you how Fu***** stupid it is.
Davelepka - "This isn't an x-box, or a Chevy truck forum"
Whatever you do, don't listen to ChrisD.

[babz 0]

Personally, not a fan of the idea. Whilst the possibility for a tail strike may not be 100% it's a lot higher - esp if you're in an aircraft which has a tail which is low and close (thinking C208B or PAC 750)

[nigel99 143]

potatoman

I am not making sense of your post. What do you mean by no flaps or no Cuts.

Allowing hop and pops to exit without cutting back the power and slowing the aircraft.

I don't know the economics of it, but it costs the dz some money to do a hop and pop run on the way to altitude and the more they cam continue to climb the cheaper it is for them.

I don't know what the typical flap settings are for a jump run, it would be interesting to know for a 182 and caravan.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[potatoman 0]

I can see time being a factor, but cutting the power should end up using less fuel, and possibly a tad drop of altitude.

Normally this would be 1 or 2 jumpers, so the jump run should be fairly quick.

It would make much more sense having a competent pilot that does not start the jump run 10nm from the DZ.

Economical, it must be, cause they are doing it. Safe....prefer safety over a couple of bucks.

You have the right to your opinion, and I have the right to tell you how Fu***** stupid it is.
Davelepka - "This isn't an x-box, or a Chevy truck forum"
Whatever you do, don't listen to ChrisD.

[dthames 0]

potatoman

I can see time being a factor, but cutting the power should end up using less fuel, and possibly a tad drop of altitude.

Normally this would be 1 or 2 jumpers, so the jump run should be fairly quick.

It would make much more sense having a competent pilot that does not start the jump run 10nm from the DZ.

Economical, it must be, cause they are doing it. Safe....prefer safety over a couple of bucks.

10 nanometers is not "that" far out.

Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Any real danger for a tail strike??

Yes. There was the one in Lodi a few years back that put the kid in a wheelchair. There was the one that ended in a Cypres fire and a landing in a parking lot somewhere. There was a recent tail strike in Hawaii, and while I haven't heard that it was a low pass with no cut, I did hear it was a Caravan, and it's tough to catch the tail on a properly configured Caravan.

There are planes where it's a confirmed risk of a tail strike with no cut or level-off for jumprun. With those planes, there is simply no reason not to take the 20 or 30 seconds you need to configure the plane, wait for the exit(s), and then resume the climb. The fact is, the more weight you shed on the low pass, the quicker you'll get to altitude with the rest of the load. Even if it's a even trade, you get the safety of the full cut jumprun with zero penalty to the turnaround time. Even if you didn't get the time back, it's a 30 second penalty for a huge safety margin.

If an improper exit by a jumper could cause a tail strike with no cut, the solution cannot be to tell the jumper to 'do it right'. The jumper is human, possibly low time, and apt to make mistakes.

The pilot and aircraft, on the other hand, is another story. The pilot is a higher time, commercial pilot (all of the planes in question are turbines), and the plane is a machine with reliable gauges and published performance specifications. If you tell a pilot to fly level at 85 knots, they can do that with a very high degree of reliability.

Given that the proper configuration of the AC can limit or eliminate the possibility of a tail strike, the solution is simply to properly configure the plane. End of story.

[cube 0]

Wouldn't want to jump out a caravan that's still climbing.. And wouldn't.

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

10 nanometers is not "that" far out.

Nautical miles would be...

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[dthames 0]

sundevil777

Quote

10 nanometers is not "that" far out.

Nautical miles would be...

Sorry.

Instructor quote, “What's weird is that you're older than my dad!”

[hackish 8]

I can really only comment on a PA-31. It has a somewhat low tail. Jumprun is about 100 (blue line) with 15 flaps. Climb is at 125. This changes the pitch significantly. Every jumper consumes 12.5l of fuel or about 4ga to get to 13.5. So in theory letting a H+P out saves about 2.5ga on the subsequent climb. Total amount of time to config the AC for a H+P is about 2min from pulling power to resuming climb.

In the case of our DZ the efficiency gains are more in engine management (cooling some TIO-540s properly takes care) and efficiently planning the ascent and descent. The aim is to achieve the jump altitude just in time to config for jumprun right over the spot. Some simple tasks and speed management at the top can get the engines well into a controlled cooldown so we can achieve 3500-4000fpm descent.

If the DZO is that concerned about every last cent then make sure they're out washing and waxing the AC every week, not putting jumpers safety at risk.

-Michael

[slotperfect 7]

What type of aircraft?

Arrive Safely

John

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

nigel99

...I don't know what the typical flap settings are for a jump run, it would be interesting to know for a 182 and caravan.

I don't know about a Caravan, but I never used any flaps for jumprun in a 182. The jumpers would biff their heads on it. Not a tailstrike kind of "biff", just that the flaps would get in the way.
Think about where the door, step and strut are in relation to the flaps and I think you will understand.

"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

[Ron 7]

Quote

Any real danger for a tail strike??

Depends on the plane

But basically it is not a good idea to not configure the plane for exit for each pass.

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

[DocPop 1]

One of the reasons to consider not using flaps for HnP's is that it is another cycle on the flap motors etc.

Planes aren't designed to be undergoing 20 flaps cycles in a day, and if there are HnP's on every load that doubles the wear and tear.

Having said that I think the risk of no flaps/no cut exits is too great. There are just so many jumpers who don't have much of a clue what they are doing on anything other than a simple belly zoo jump and don't think about how introducing different variable affects what they need to do.

I'd be perfectly happy exiting in that configuration, but it wouldn't be a poised exit. I'd probably roll out and then bang into an arch when I was clear (a la wingsuits).

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[fcajump 153]

Would depend greatly on the plane.

generally speaking I would want a cut and whatever the normal jump run configuration is.

IF I am the only jumper getting out on the way up in a Twin Otter, and the pilot knows me, I'll take a green light without any other changes and dive out/down exit just fine.

Beyond that, no... not really.

JW

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[billvon 2,379]

>Any real danger for a tail strike?

Yes. Happens with some regularity. You can exit safely without a cut, but the odds of an incident go way down with a cut given your average skydiver.

[michaelmullins 77]

stayhigh

I've seen many dropzones that does it. The super cheap H&P place that everyone talks about specially.

Any real danger for a tail strike??

Take the number of skydivers in US, A, multiply by the probable rate of tail strike, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one???

Skydivers will continue to be killed or injured as long as they are given the opportunity to exit before the aircraft is in a safe jump configuration. In most cases, that means level with reduced power with whatever flap setting is used for normal exits for that particular aircraft.

I do not let jumpers even open the door before the aircraft is in exit configuration and safe for exit. Then they are allowed to open the door, check the spot, and look for traffic, all which should not take more than about 5 seconds.

If DZOs and/or pilots keep allowing skydivers to exit while in a climb configuration we will still keep having the same results time and again.

There is no amount of fuel or cycles saved to compensate for this totally preventable loss of life and injuries.

Sure, you can just blame the jumper. "I told him not to get big, I told him to dive out, I briefed him, etc". Fact is, jumpers get excited (especially low timers) and do not do what they should do or what they were briefed to do. Should there be a death penalty for this? Should we just say we are culling the skydiving herd of the inattentive or just plain stupid?

I really don't want to hear how many "successful" exits have been made from non-configured climbing aircraft. The convenience to the DZO/pilot and the few dollars saved in no way equal the carnage that results.

Mike Mullins
(Door Police)

[hackish 8]

DocPop

Planes aren't designed to be undergoing 20 flaps cycles in a day, and if there are HnP's on every load that doubles the wear and tear.

A good point, and the same could be made about running a retractable gear airplane as well. The maintenance procedure of the aircraft needs to be adjusted for the use. The gear on ours gets inspected and lubed significantly more frequently than the standard guidelines.

Mental image of the NTSB investigator looking at the wreckage saying well at least the flap motors were not worn out.

-Michael

[DocPop 1]

hackish

***Planes aren't designed to be undergoing 20 flaps cycles in a day, and if there are HnP's on every load that doubles the wear and tear.

A good point, and the same could be made about running a retractable gear airplane as well. The maintenance procedure of the aircraft needs to be adjusted for the use. The gear on ours gets inspected and lubed significantly more frequently than the standard guidelines.

Mental image of the NTSB investigator looking at the wreckage saying well at least the flap motors were not worn out.

-Michael

The same problem absolutely exists with retractable gear, although of course that is not affected by an additional H&P jump run.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[hackish 8]

I guess you'd have to choose between the extra maintenance of dealing the a high number of gear cycles or the extra fuel required to fly the entire time with the gear down!

There are many SOP items that can be adjusted to minimize the wear on components without impacting safety.

Why drop your flaps at 1 knot below Vfe? Wear per cycle goes up exponentially with the speed you're travelling. 1 extra cycle of the flaps on jump run adds wear. Deploying flaps for landing well below Vfe subtracts some wear so a flapless H+P may not be the best place to try and save a buck, especially since lives, tails and airframes are more expensive than grease and flap parts.

Obviously these examples don't apply to a 182 :)

-Michael

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

Why drop your flaps at 1 knot below Vfe?

Are you saying jump run speed is that near Vfe? If true, then I would expect flaps to not at all be desired. I don't know how that speed compares for various jump planes.

Quote

Deploying flaps for landing well below Vfe subtracts some wear

You mean adds some wear, correct?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[billvon 2,379]

>Are you saying jump run speed is that near Vfe? If true, then I would expect flaps to not at all be desired.

One of the main purposes of extending flaps is not to allow slower flight, but to cause a nose-down moment that must be counteracted with the horizontal stabilizer. This has the effect of moving the horizontal stabilizer upwards, away from a potential exiting jumper.

Allowing slower flight is another reason, but keep in mind that slow flight without flaps puts the tail lower, which is bad.

[hackish 8]

I'm not talking about jump run at all. I'm talking about the operating procedures that can be implemented to save wear on the aircraft that unlike H+P do not have an impact on safety.

The faster you're travelling, the more wear per cycle on the flaps, and the stress goes up exponentially. I'll use the Navajo since I know it: vf1 is at 180 vfe is at 160. Jump run is at 100. We climb at 120.

1) set 15 for takeoff (0mph).
2) set 0 for climb (120mph)
3) set 15 for h+p run (100mph)
4) set 0 of climb (100mph)
5) set 15 for altitude jump run (100mph)
6) set 0 for descent
7) set 40 for landing (starting at 160mph)
8) set 0 for taxi

Looking to save wear, do items 3&4 save that much? How about adjusting the SOP for item 7 so the pilot plans the approach to slow the plane to 120 before dropping flaps? Remove 8 and replace it with 1. I'm willing to bet the wear savings of adjusting 7 and 8 would exceed the added wear of item 3&4.

There are better ways to save a buck.

-Michael

[jumpwally 0]

See post # 18. A highly experienced, jumper, pilot and DZO renders his expert opinion,,,,including " little cost "

time to move on.....

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083