0
PolinaVin

Lodi Aff

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

Crappy maint. and crappy pilot, you sure are helping the Lodi side of this.



The plane crashed in Canada, not at Lodi.

And, how many planes have crashed at Lodi?



If not a "Lodi" pilot then my bad. Was the pilot an employee of Bill D.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Crappy maint. and crappy pilot, you sure are helping the Lodi side of this.



The plane crashed in Canada, not at Lodi.

And, how many planes have crashed at Lodi?



Was the plane not "maintained" (or not) at Lodi before it crashed in Canada?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


Quote

Just to show how "old" the gear at the parachute center is.
This Dropzone has the best, newest, most maintain, top of the line gear possible.



I always wondered what they did with that money they saved on... you know, stuff. :)




some apache in lodi ones told me !
in lodi we never lost customer ,because they always find the body !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Crappy maint. and crappy pilot, you sure are helping the Lodi side of this.



The plane crashed in Canada, not at Lodi.

And, how many planes have crashed at Lodi?



Was the plane not "maintained" (or not) at Lodi before it crashed in Canada?



I guess we have our answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Rent a rig. Main lines snap because they are worn. You don't cutaway but ride the mal into the ground. Who is to blame for your broken legs?

p.s. my tschuhs..my tschus are untied.



The person who rented you the rig would be at fault for not maintaining the gear. You would be at fault for not cutting away.

Dause is at fault for not doing the maintenance. The pilot is at fault for making a mistake. The pilot made a mistake in heat of the moment (this is not an excuse, he still made a mistake). Dause made a CHOICE to not do the proper maintenance. And that choice set up a situation where the pilot screwed up.

You can blame the pilot.... I do as well. But to ignore the lack of maintenance is nothing but being an apologist.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

if you wanna deal with ton hypocrite apaches and mental case
like bill dause ,650 for block 50 tickets
you cant beat that
i invite you to do 100 jumps this summer ,
:ph34r:Bring your full cover insurance and psychiatrist , you are going to need them !



Doesn't matter what happens on a DZ so long as their jumps are cheap right? Gotta get it while the gettin is good! :S
Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:)
I'm actually going to answere the original posters question?

That person was Polina Vinogradova!

Lodi is a great drop zone. It is close to San Francisco, relativly, and close to our states' capital! It is a great place to visit, or live!

It is also a skydivers dropzone which means the owner has decided to run at a loss to provide the skydiving public with the best value possible.

Lodi (Skydive Alcampo) has the most student gear and rental gear of any dropzone in the United States! Bar none, I ask if your going to respond to this fact then please spare us your speculation on this subject, you may want to prove your claim otherwise. Lodi has shown you the gear available on numeroous occasions! You might want to include some proof or a list of your dropzones gear before you make this comparison!
Their gear is basically new and under the constant care of many licensed riggers...

You haven't heard from local jumpers because quite frankly, I'm not a Lodi local, but I have spoken to many, they really want jumpers that want to be there, if you have jumped here, and I have, then you know what a wonderfull place this is! ;) This is why the constant haranging and wild speculation from a few local competing cyberdicks is for the most part: ignored, laughed at, and viewed with a certian amount of sympathy. No one likes poking fun at the small percentage of small minded people that think that by making unsubstantiated claims that the Lodi community is going to switch to a competing dropzone!

For christ sake, do you really belive that managment of any DZ intentionally ignores these aircraft issues?? Use your head people, you have brains??? Think about what these people are saying and the hidden reason that they are doing this....

Some of them are showing the wonderfull diferences in aircraft reporting reports that exsist between Canada and the USA, and for showing these reports I thank them, but on the other hand showing them here to support this wild conjecture and speculation is intentionally misleading and continues to support a rumor that is not based upon any facts. Sometimes rumors take on a life of their own and I feel for the wonderfull people at Lodi that this has apparently happened here in cyberspace, just visit the DZ and you will see that in reality, the multitudes jumping every jumpable day that Lodi is a happining place full of very experienced people!


The very damming and conclusive evidence dosen't exsist, this is why a few fanatics continue to reach out to other Countries reports in their attempt to continue to slur a fine Dropzone,...

I want to make this peerfectly clear:

OUR FAA HAS AN OPEN DOOR POLICY ALL REPORTS AND EVEDIENCE ARE FREELY AVAILABLE TO ANYONE!

BUT YET NO ONE HERE HAS BOTHERED TO PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR WILD ACCUSATIONS,...

Even when faced with the truth most mudslingers will continue to spout shit from their piehole rather than take the time to confront their own lies and take the time to apologize or admit they are wrong!

I want to say something like this whole issue could be resolved by the few fanatics to actually take the time to post some reports or provide "their" evidence, I want to say that the fine folks at Lodi care, but they don't. They are off jumping!

So feel free to post some evedience, I won't be holding my breath in anticipation,...

Because such evidence dosen't exsist in the muckraking form that so many of you want to belive in!

Must be the relative proximity to San Simeoneee, now there's a real wako, albit very rich, but nevertheless just another dead lier...can anyone say "Rosebud."

C
:)

You guys should start another thread, this "allegation" is just that,... it's an allegation
Here is the "Flight Safety" news link: http://news.aviation-safety.net/2010/10/13/faa-proposes-664000-civil-penalty-against-parachute-center/

Now for a complete understanding go back and show me that the aircraft operator/owner did not perform a "visual" inspection. Do you understand what a "visual inspection" is?? IT means look at it and then write a notation in the aircraft maint logbook, which they did!

IT MEANS LOOK AT THE PART.

It does not mean that the part was corroded or damaged!

IT MEANS LOOK AT THE PART.

Which they did!

Now feel free to post the 30 day response, which the aircraft owner did, and now you know why there has been no closing of the dropzone, because there wasen't any incident nor was there any corrective action required. Nothing but a bunch of Jim Jones wannabys runnjing around spreading rumors about nothing!

And again anyone is free to post the actual FAA documents, well they don't really exsist do they????

But the powers to be sure can post working notes of an FAA inspector/ office clerk in the Gerado Flores case and everyone runs with that as if it's gospel don't they???

Here's the question everyone should be asking?

Why are you persecuting this dropzone?

They did what the AD asked of them, they looked at the part, it was fine,...this should have been the end of the story,...but for some reason it's not??

Why???
But what do I know, "I only have one tandem jump."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

OUR FAA HAS AN OPEN DOOR POLICY ALL REPORTS AND EVEDIENCE ARE FREELY AVAILABLE TO ANYONE!

BUT YET NO ONE HERE HAS BOTHERED TO PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR WILD ACCUSATIONS,...




Are you taking the piss or being serious? The reports and allegations filed against Lodi regarding the acft mx has been posted quite a few times in a few different threads over the years. Are you trying to say no such reports exist because nobody posted them in this thread?

As I stated earlier when posters were alluding to a "misunderstanding," by the FAA-- where is the report saying the charges are dropped and everything checks out fine? I bet you can't find that. Last I heard everything is still being heard by the courts and it's gone on past local level now. Why would the FAA continue to hear this case if they found out there was nothing wrong to begin with and they made a mistake?

You do a good job at looking down your nose, talking with disdain, and passively insulting people who dare question what happens at Lodi. I'm sorry, but even if I wasn't a local jumper, I think somebody would be stupid to not have questions about a place that is so infamously known for these problems. And this isn't infamously known because of what is said on this website or said by other fun jumpers-- these people can look up FAA REPORTS that you speak of; and those speak for themselves.

I'm still waiting on the FAA report saying this was all a misunderstanding and everything in fact is in tip top shape and fines/charges have been dropped. Can you link me to that? Seems like you know the FAA reports pretty well..... or maybe you can do a FOIA request on it since it's available to the public like you say. Let me know what you find. I won't be holding my breath in anticipation.....


ETA: Theoretical situation here, but if you were thinking about having lasik done, you'd look up a doc and reviews, right? What if there was an article out from an optometry board alleging this doctor did something neglectful that could have maybe resulted in somebody loosing their vision but they didn't..... would you be wrong to question if you should go to this doc? Or would you be wrong to be the slightest bit hesitant to go see this doc, even if it's just in the back of your mind? Or wrong to have the slightest bit of skepticism? Of course not! So, why would you criticize somebody for being weary of something after they heard there is something screwy going on? And in this case with Lodi, you hear something screwy is going on from an official governing agency like the FAA. I'm sorry, but if you're going to bash people for having even the slightest bit of skepticism when there is reason to have it, you've got to be crazy.
Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>OUR FAA HAS AN OPEN DOOR POLICY ALL REPORTS AND EVEDIENCE ARE FREELY >AVAILABLE TO ANYONE!

Yep.

=================
Aviation Safety Network
ASN News » FAA proposes $664,000 civil penalty against Parachute Center
13 October 2010

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a $664,000 civil penalty against William C. Dause, doing business as The Parachute Center of Acampo, Calif., for allegedly failing to perform required aircraft parts replacements and failing to comply with safety directives.

The FAA alleges that The Parachute Center operated a de Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter when critical parts were well past their life limits and without inspecting portions of the wings for corrosion.

In all, the FAA alleges that The Parachute Center operated the aircraft on approximately 2,121 flights between March 21, 2008 and Nov. 4, 2009 with elevator control cables that were overdue for replacement and when the plane was not in compliance with Airworthiness Directives requiring visual inspections of the wing main spar, lower spar cap extensions and wing support strut for possible corrosion.

The FAA also alleges that the company operated the aircraft on at least 500 flights between April 16, 2009 and Nov. 4, 2009 with aileron control cables that were overdue for replacement.

The Parachute Center has 30 days from receipt of the FAA’s enforcement letter to respond to the agency.
==================

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Crappy maint. and crappy pilot, you sure are helping the Lodi side of this.



The plane crashed in Canada, not at Lodi.

And, how many planes have crashed at Lodi?



At a minimum, 3.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Crappy maint. and crappy pilot, you sure are helping the Lodi side of this.



The plane crashed in Canada, not at Lodi.

And, how many planes have crashed at Lodi?



At a minimum, 3.



Might help to elaborate on that. The one i know of for sure was the KA 200 that had a nose gear failure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just saw that instead of typing a separate reply, you added to your original post above mine:

Quote

They did what the AD asked of them, they looked at the part, it was fine,...this should have been the end of the story,...but for some reason it's not??

Why???



Is that really all that was alleged? Seems like a quick fix to me and don't know why there would be so much hooplah still. I seem to remember there being something about not inspecting/replacing certain parts too.... or am I not remembering all of that correctly?

So, is that really what happened? Just a misunderstanding that they missed a simple looksie? Again, is there an official statement or release about this, or just what you've heard from people at Lodi? And again, just as in my hypothetical situation I posted about in my last post, why would it be bad for somebody to approach this place with a little bit of skepticism after the allegations with no follow up stating case closed it has all been cleared up?

I would not confuse healthy (and warranted) skepticism with persecution. Please reply to my hypothetical situation above--

Quote

Theoretical situation here, but if you were thinking about having lasik done, you'd look up a doc and reviews, right? What if there was an article out from an optometry board alleging this doctor did something neglectful that could have maybe resulted in somebody loosing their vision but they didn't..... would you be wrong to question if you should go to this doc? Or would you be wrong to be the slightest bit hesitant to go see this doc, even if it's just in the back of your mind? Or wrong to have the slightest bit of skepticism? Of course not! So, why would you criticize somebody for being weary of something after they heard there is something screwy going on? And in this case with Lodi, you hear something screwy is going on from an official governing agency like the FAA. I'm sorry, but if you're going to bash people for having even the slightest bit of skepticism when there is reason to have it, you've got to be crazy.




Listen, I can guarantee you that people who sit on the fence and have a little bit of skepticism or doubt because of the allegations, would be soothed over if there was any kind of follow up regarding this incident(s); as in any status involving the case, IE: charges dropped because it was a misunderstanding, charges/allegations still stand, still in appeal, hearing, etc, etc. You speak of this open door policy for FAA and ease of getting the real low down from them, so surely you would have no problem producing something official on this-- as in something that is just not what you heard from somebody at Lodi. Let me know what you hear when you knock on the open door at the FAA. Until then, I damn well reserve the right to be skeptical (without persecution) of this place.
Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok as much as people from Lodi will hate me for this (nothing against them) I am going to post my story about Lodi.

"AFF" was with only one instructor. I weigh 135lbs and I started on a 210, 3rd jump on Spectre? (I think, i'll check my log book) 190, and then from 4 to 7 on a Sabre 170. At 15 jumps I was given the ok the jump a Sabre 150 and land in the main area. I was never told about jump run, I never even saw the SIM, and my A license proficiency card never even came into play. I was jumping with other people with less then 25 jumps immedietaly after AFF. I did all of these things with complete confidence this was ok. I didn't know to track away from people, (figured that one out quick a 5 way at about 20 jumps)
I did AFF there with an australian guy "Keith". He was extremely unfriendly, never smiled, never laughed. I kept feeling like I was doing something wrong, or I was annoying him. After AFF I would ask him questions because I was unsure of things. His attitude was that he was too busy or acted like my questions were stupid. A month later he dissapeared and I never saw him. After that I learned by random jumpers yelling at me. I would always try to find someone to jump with, or answer questions so I could find out what I was doing wrong. I felt like an outcast there when trying to be friendly. It made me feel like new skydivers weren't welcome, or I was doing everything wrong. Luckily I found Ed, and he was extremely helpful with getting my A license things done. He taught me the stuff on my proficiency card. The rigger (forgot his name) was really helpful with the gear aspects on the A license card. He also signed stuff off for me.

Do I think everyone will have this experience? Definitely not. I've now come to understand this was a rare and unfortunate experience. There are tons of great instructors there. But it happened to me. And sometimes friends I would bring would have great Tandem experiences, other times their instructor would cuss at them or other people in front of them, be extremely rude or pushy, and ruin the whole experience. So this is why I think Lodi, although can be cheap and fun if you have experience and friends to bring with, is not good for tandems or AFF. It's a hit and miss with that.

Again I mean no harm to most of the Lodi regulars. I'm not dissing anyone or anything in general, just posting my experience there. Tons of you guys come to my dz and jump and we are cool.

I didn't know how much I loved skydiving until I left and found jumpers who were excited to teach me and watch me learn, and treat me like family. I finally found myself a skyfamily to jump with, and now at 230 jumps, it feels good to show up at the dropzone with smiles and high fives, not frowns and insults :S I wish I could of had that from jump 1 man, I really do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0