brofromanomo

Actually it is you who seem to have reading comprehension problems, but I have found this tendency in your previous posts. You started your condemnation of my post by taking issue with my supposed mention of major fatalities. Look at my post a second time, but this time actually try reading the words appearing on your screen instead of the ones you imagine in your head. I never once mentioned fatalities in my post...where did you read that? So perhaps you should read a post twice before you start accusing other people of reading comprehension issues. Actually me thinks you doth protest too much, My guess is you actually know of the fatality issues they do have. Sooooo, since you seem to want to get into that issue, the Parachter Center has nearly a 1 death a year rate for the past 20 years. Not all fatalities have made it onto this site...I would be more than happy to post my info (I will admit that some were possible suicides/i.e. not necessarily related to safety measures). This is still a high number considering they although they are a very busy DZ, but it's not like they're as busy as Perris. As for the latest fine...do you really think the FAA casually hands down multiple six-figure fines in a year's time for anything other than good reason? If so you are as delusional as your post. As for your semantics with PROPOSED fines...it's just that, a clever word trick. You are too smart to act this stupid Mr. Heid. Plain and simple, last year the FAA gave/handed out/proposed (whatever you want to call it) the largest fine ever to a skydiving center and it was the Parachute Center that received it. That was the main point I was trying drive home, and you can't dodge that point no matter how hard you try. Just like you can't dodge the number of plane accidents that have occurred with aircraft under his control. Yes that $664k number might eventually be decreased, but to my knowledge it hasn't as of yet. Last time I spoke with my contact in the FAA (admittedly a few months ago) Bill was still dodging it and refusing to meet with the FAA's arbitrator. If he really didn't have anything to hide (Heid), he would face the charges head-on and declare his innocence. That the the USPA muckety-mucks tolerate what are obvious safety issues, does not negate the safety concerns, it merely impugns their impartiality. The fact of the matter is that many of the USPA staff-members are good friends with Bill and wouldn't do anything to him even if the wings of his plane fell off killing a plane-load of skydivers. It's funny how you complain about the old-boy network in the park service that prevents base jumpers from jumping off of El Cap and yet you refuse to acknowledge that the same problems exist in the USPA. Old friends refusing to say that their friends points of view are dead wrong. I am not the only one who complains about the safety measures at Lodi, I am just one of the few with balls enough to actually voice my concerns. That way at least when something catastrophic does happen I can at least begin to live with myself and say I tried to make the situation better and didn't bury my head in the sand. I can say I tried to point out and make a difference, despite all of the apologists like you who refuse to acknowledge the dangers and support Bill and his reckless ways. Thank you so very much for proving my point! You, and people like you are the problem! People who tolerate lack of safety maintenance in any degree or capacity! How can you with a straight face condone a repeated lack of Airplane MX? If you answer no other question answer that one, Mr. Apologist! ~~~Timmy~~~

Well for all those apologists out there, the Parachute Center has yet again been handed a hefty fine by the FAA. Last year Lodi was handed what had to be the largest fine ever to a skydiving center ($664,000). This year they have been handed another monstrous fine for $269,000 (see press release below). How many fines does the FAA have to levy against this place before we as skydivers stand up and say “We are not going to tolerate business models that place skydivers (and the general public) at risk!”. These and other issues have been rampant at Lodi for countless years. From hot fueling with passengers on board the aircraft, to ignoring passenger restraint requirements, to frequent cloud jumping, to single-instructor AFF Cat-1 jumps, to skydivers with less than 25 skydives being allowed (and in some cases encouraged) to jump with others (read non-coaches), and countless other issues, the Parachute Center has flaunted its disdain for all rules skydiving. In fact in some quarters, it seems as if its part of its marketing campaign. Come skydive at Lodi, we're the “Pirate DZ”! Those few who dare shout a word of protest on their blogs or elsewhere, like Brian Buckland, are apparently quickly shamed into silence. How many aircraft under the responsibility of Bill Dause have to have major incidents before people start to wake up (for those of you counting its at least 8 major aircraft incidents since the mid-80s). Moreover all of this done while under the supposedly “watchful” eye of the USPA. And what has the USPA's response been? Have they pulled the two S&TA's who call Lodi home? Have they chastised the BOD member who lists Lodi as their home DZ? Have they threatened to pull Bill (and the instructor's) USPA licenses? Of course not, in fact when there was a death at the Parachute Center about a year and half ago, there was an interview with the USPA President who was skydiving AT the Parachute Center, assuring the general public that skydiving and the center are both safe. When the general public hears about these fines and associates our USPA with that kind of conduct, how do you think that makes the USPA look? Until we as a group, stop tolerating this kind of behavior, and say to both the Parachute Center and the USPA that this is unacceptable, the Parachute Center will continue to ignore skydiver safety in favor of their laissez-faire attitude. Apparently skydivers, with their instant gratification mentality, are too concerned with getting their $15 jump tickets to make a stand. Until skydivers with clout like Jan Meyer, who claim they are overwhelmingly concerned about safety, stop supporting and backing up this reckless operation and make sure that their ACTIONS match their rhetoric, nothing will ever change. Since nobody in the USPA has the balls to step to the plate and declare it an unsafe operation, I am glad the FAA has fined the Parachute Center again. It's time someone took a stand against the kind of callousness that causes major fatalities! ~~ Timmy ~~ August 29, 2011 FAA Press Release LOS ANGELES – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a $269,000 civil penalty against The Parachute Center, of Acampo, Calif., for allegedly operating a DeHavilland Twin Otter on 41 flights when it was not in compliance with federal aviation regulations. The FAA alleges that The Parachute Center failed to comply with a 2009 Airworthiness Directive requiring repetitive inspections of the left and right front spar adapter assemblies to identify cracks that might threaten the structural integrity of the airplane. According to the FAA, the company operated the aircraft between November 2 and November 15, 2009, when it was out of compliance with the airworthiness directive. The Parachute Center has 30 days from the receipt of the FAA’s enforcement letter to respond to the Agency.

Well you must have gotten lucky because they usually only use one AFF instructor per student. Dont believe me, try searching youtube for Lodi AFF. All of the vids only show one instructor. Hard to dispute clear video proof to the contrary! Tim Campbell

Unfortunately sarcasm doesnt carry very well in text format. I agree now after further review that you and I are making the same point...but I think you will have to admit that your wording is a bit confusing. However without question there are apologists for Bill Dause on this site, which boggles my mind. Although I am heartily glad you are not one of them, I dare any person to defend Bill's maintenance record. So in order to answer the initial poster's question...the quality of teaching is substandard to the USPA training, you have to take a greyhound bus from SFO/OAK all the way up to Lodi (like an hour or two),and I think he charges like a grand for AFF training. Good luck...I hope you choose wisely. This sport can be amazing! Tim Campbell

Assigning excessive fines for maintenance violations on Otters the Parachute Center at Lodi - The FAA - Guilty -does that make you feel better? IMO the reason the fine is so large is twofold: 1) Bill Dause has been cited in the past by the FAA, as a recidivist the FAA has much less patience. 2) The NTSB in its special investigation into parachute operations specifically cited improper maintenance as one of the major recurring themes in jumpship crashes around the nation. As a result I would hazard to guess that the FAA is now ready to clamp down hard on aircraft maintenance. So they decided to send a message to all the DZOs out their. And who better to make an example of than a non-USPA drop zone with a history of maintenance issues? If thats what it takes to make operators like Bill Dause realize that aircraft maintenance is an important issue than the fine isn't too large...its fully justified. Tim Campbell

WRONG! Those fines should be of your utmost concern! First, it isn't an either or situation with cables/corrosion inspections, the FAA found that he failed to do both. Don't try to obfuscate the facts. The FAA has cited Bill Dause for MAJOR safety/maintenance issues. He has been cited previously for failing to provide adequate maintenance in the past and at that time used the excuse that his safety records were stolen by former employees. The FAA bought it one time but when he didn't have repair records again a year or two later the FAA wasn't buying shit. Instead they handed out the largest fine ever to a skydiver center and the Secretary of Transportation (a presidential cabinet member who is 14th in line for the presidency) had cause to take time from his busy schedule to specifically comment about the safety concerns at Lodi. You think he is going to do that if it is a small matter? Having recently spoken with the FAA, Bill Dause has repeatedly refused to schedule an FAA hearing to account for his FAA fines. Apparently the FAA's patience is at an end and an FAA hearing is likely no longer an option, they will be instead pursuing it in a court of law. If Bill Dause was innocent of these fines (or thought they should be reduced) he would not only have sued the FAA for slanderous statements he would taken the first chance possible to refute the FAA's claims and certainly would have chosen to do so in the more relaxed and accommodating venue of an FAA hearing. That he didn't and instead has chosen to delay until attorneys have to get involved, speaks volumes. Moreover, this isn't the first time a Bill Dause aircraft has been formally cited for major safety concerns. Go to this link: http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2008/a08p0242/a08p0242.asp This was another aircraft which Bill Dause failed to properly maintain and crashed as a result. If you look at the end, inspections were also done on another aircraft in his fleet and similar corrosion to the kind which caused this crash was found. Do you want to be in his next aircraft accident? He has now totalled several aircraft now – including 1) a P59 mustang where he couldn't control the landing and nosed in, 2) a Porter stall at low altitude due to pilot error, 3) a Beech 99 wrecked on takeoff when his dog ran onto the runway, 4) a Beech UC-45J where he lost power and clipped a power pole on landing, which the authorities suspected but werent able to prove was a result of running the plane out of fuel, 5) a Boeing e75 where he admitted to choosing an improper route over the mountains which resulted in a downdraft causing his aircraft to crash, 6) and of course that King Air T-Tail a year or two ago where the landing gear mysteriously failed), Don't believe me look in the FAA database (mot of them are right there).... However, Bill Dause's repeated failures to adequately maintain and fly his aircraft is but one of the items that should dissuade you from pursuing AFF at Lodi. There are at least two other HUGE reasons! First and foremost, Lodi is not a USPA dropzone and they do not use the USPA SIM to train students. Instead they use a training method created by Bill Dause (the same guy who doesn't seem to care enough about safety to maintain his aircraft) which to my knowledge has not been altered for over a decade. It unquestionably is not up to the standard of the USPA training program which sees constant revision by the Safety & Training Board of the USPA. Second, ALL of their AFF jumps use only one AFF instructor. I am not sure if any other DZs try to save money by only having one AFF instructor, but I know the overwhelming majority of DZs use two AFF instructors for at least the first few jumps. You are much safer having two AFF instructors to stabilize you in case you are one of those guys who really likes to move around the sky without realizing it. Lodi maybe cheap, but just remember that you always get what you pay for. Do you really want to go skydiving in a place that has a proven history of placing the dollar before safety? Tim Campell

WRONG! The fines weren't dropped. The FAA has been repeatedly attempting to have Bill come in for a hearing but so far he has REFUSED to account for his actions!