diverdriver

PM not necessary. Now that I know it's not your run of the mill Vector II that's good enough for me. Hey, I've seen the best rigs open up due to bumps on exits. Glad to hear it's modified. You might post what was done to the rig so others thinking of FreeFlying with a Vector II might see what needs to be done to make things better. Chris

Ahhh, now I see what you're saying. Interesting point about the low accident rate for training aircraft compared to low time pilots. I guess that making sure your Jump Pilot was properly rated, trained and regularly checked would decrease the accident rate. But I know that commercially rated pilots are not adhering to max gross weight and minimum fuel requirements. They are flying into IFR conditions without being rated and current or with a plane that is not rated and current. And I know these issues are tested for on the Commercial Pilot Practical test. Chris

Dave, I just had a friend by a used Vector II. Before she bought it I said "You aren't planning on doing ANY freeflying with it are you?" She asked "Is it bad?" I said, "You will not do ANY freeflying with a Vector II. It was never designed for this stuff. The riser covers and main pin cover were never meant to be subjected to this type flying." I just wish someone had the courtesy to tell you the same before you went up. No problems in 30 FF with that rig huh? Dave, it only takes one to ruin your whole day. NO velcro riser covers. NO main pin cover that can easily be popped in a sit. NO reserve pin cover than can easily be popped in a sit or head down. NO exposed bridle (meaning NO Rear Of Leg ROL pilot chute pouch) NO sweat shirt that can cover your handles in a sit. NO colored clothing that is the same color as your cutaway pillow. That's what I tell new jumpers when they ask what they need to know first about free flying safety. Then we start in with the other stuff. Chris Schindler

So I don't misunderstand your position, you are saying that flying in a jump plane is safer than in a flight training aircraft? Well, that 3.5 million jumps is an estimate like the flight time of all jump aircraft in the US. And a lot of these DZs that use turbine aircraft do more jumps in a week of flying than a lot of Cessna DZs do in a whole year. My point is that I have 12 accident reports involving Jump Planes for the year 2001. USPA estimates (at this time) that there is roughly 100,000 hours of flying per year by the fleet. That is a rate of 12 accidents per 100K hours of flying. That is DOUBLE the rate of GA flying. I'm not even comparing jump plane flying to airline flying. I gave the statistics for people to reference. So, to compare ourselves to GA (of which flight training is totalled into) we are doing a very poor job. Look at the reports I have listed. Many are from a "loss of power during descent." So the fact that it happened during the "landing phase" doesn't make it less important just because that's a risky time of flight and a large number of accidents happen during that time. Well, no kidding. But if the operator or pilot had bothered to put enough fuel on board to begin with then maybe landing wouldn't be so risky for jump planes. Just a thought. Chris Schindler ATP/CFII D-19012 www.DiverDriver.com

People aren't told to not get in a Pitts S2 High Performance acrobatic plane. But they do get instruction. They set personal limits. Some set wider limits than others. Education and currency are key. Just as in jumping high performance canopies. Banning people from buying and flying Pitts Specials won't work. Neither will banning Velocities. I also happen to think our greatest problem is not hook turns but people who make low turns for no reason or poor decisions. For the number of those fatalities, there are many many more we don't hear about unless you're local that just got critically injured and changed for life. We must teach students basic canopy skills right from the start. We must coach them on canopy flight for more than just 7 levels of AFF. We must catch up to what is going on in the industry. Otherwise, people will just keep on buying canopies beyond their ability and drilling themselves into the ground. I saw two people (low timers: 50 and 60 jumps) land down wind yesterday. I walked up, asked how they were, and after a response of I'm ok I just slid it in I asked "Tell me about your canopy ride." Both answered about the same "Oh man, I thought I was doing everything right and then I realised I was low and going down wind so I didn't want to turn anymore so I just went straight and gave it a normal flare. Didn't even try to stand it up." I pat them on the back. Thank them for not making me watch them get busted up. And then help them dust off the mud and grass. We happily walked back to the hangar. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of visiting jumpers on "safe" F-111 canopies drill themselves into the ground trying to turn back into the wind. One did it when he saw his buddy roll on the ground after doing a down winder (unintentionally) on a Stilleto. First guy down walked away. Second guy on the Falcon 235 turned at about 75 feet with a 180 and met the ground about the same time his canopy did. That was a mess. And he lived. Amazingly. We need better, more consitant canopy skills training in our programs. Everyone is so worried about this ISP transition where S/L JMs and IAD JMs were grandfathered in as Instructors without showing freefall skills. More people should be outraged that NONE of our instructional ratings require you to teach canopy control on any sort of useful level. My .02 for the morning on canopy flight. Chris Schindler D-19012 IAD JM expired TM not complete

Actually, I find that certain profiles I send to get the message while others do not. Not sure if there's something in the Old Profile / New Profile that causes this. Not sure if the problem has been looked at in this direction before either. Maybe it's just in my head......like the other voices I hear......SSSHHHHH!.....I'm doing something important HERE! Chris

Very good points Bill. Chris

Well, Ed just told me that they are working on redoing the computation for number of hours flown by US jump planes. They sent out a questionaire to DZs (not sure if it's just GM DZs) and are getting many of them back. He thinks it will be over 100K. Now, I'm hoping that it will be closer to 200K. If it isn't then I still think we have a serious problem. Chris

Also, USPA is not including the non-fatal prop strike at Skydive Chicago in their tally. I see why they do it that way. They only include it as a "jump plane" accident if the plane was engaged in skydiving ops at the time of that particular flight. Call it: strict constructionists. I am trying to paint a broader picture for all jumpers and jump pilots. If it has to do with a jump plane and jump pilot (whether it's on a skydiving mission at that moment or not) I include it. I don't want to mislead anyone in my statistics. I just believe a broader picture is necessary to tell the whole story for jump planes. Oh, what is the legal limit on responding to your own posts in a row? Chris Schindler ATP/CFII D-19012 www.DiverDriver.com

Oh Clay. That is sooooo mean. Tell me you really didn't do that. oh,,,,oh,,,, I think I feel a repressed memory coming on! Chris

Got an email from Ed Scott at USPA saying they were not including the Salt Lake City King Air crash in their tally since it did not happen during any jump operations. I told him I disagreed with this since it was a jump plane, carrying jumpers, with a jump pilot coming home from a boogie. I feel Skydivers need to be more aware of these dangers since it surrounds their skydiving activity. Chris Schindler ATP/CFII D-19012 www.DiverDriver.com

More Bandwith [BANG] More Bandwith [BANG] [high pitched cackle]I want that in real time! Can I get that in real time?[/high pitched kackle] He sprinkles in the ferry dust, and it makes more bandwidth. ROFLMFAO!!!!!! I crack up every time I see that commercial. LOL.....Bahhahhahahahh......Oh Hewwwwwww...........

It's a law problem. The legal age of concent is 18. Period. No one under the age of 18 can sign away their right to sue. No parent can sign away the right for their child to sue. And that is the only thing keeping our sport going. Hold Harmless Waivers. Sorry. You might find a place to accept him at age 16 since USPA has an age 16 recommendation. But more and more I see DZs only letting 18 and up jump. Chris

I believe it is totally possible. We all talk about how we don't want the FAA to mandate Part 135. I agree. But if we were to adopt the rules of Part 135 we would improve. We could adopt these rules all on our own. If we followed the pilot duty time and rest requirements. If we followed the initial training and recurrent training requirements we would improve. And if operators were really checked to see if they were complying with a regular maintenance schedule we would improve. But another thing I see is pilots' attitudes. They know the regulations on maintenance yet accept what is being done. They allow themselves to be pressured into some of these situations. We need to give these pilots the confidence to stand up for what is right. I see it often enough to know that it is not isolated. Chris

Unfortunately, this can be true. But then, we as jumpers, can demand more. Well, not more. Just what should be done according to the regs anyway. Does your (not you specificly, just anyone) DZ have a new mechanic every few months? Why? Are they refusing to work on the plane again because they aren't getting paid? Because the maintenance they are deaming as necessary not being approved by the owner/operator? Keep an eye out folks. As questions. Be proactive. Let your money do the talking if you think maintenance isn't being done. Go some place else. It's funny when I see people walk in the hanger and say "Hey, how come your plain is always being worked on? Is it always broken?" Nope, it's being paid attention to. This is a good thing. But, what about the pilot maintenance? Pilot training that is. And recurrent training. Each DZ should have a written plan as to how they are going to train and recheck their pilots every year. Chris Chris

That is one theory. But running out of gas and landing off the airport seems to be a reoccuring trend. We are not following the basic requirements of Part 91 regulations. Fuel reserves. The reports are there for all to read. You can see them on my site and see for yourself what is going on and where. Chris

There's a reason why the NTSB gives out the statistics in the form that they do and not in a "percentage" like you have shown. Statistics have to be shown in a way that is meaningful. Having an accident rate that is double the rate of all of general aviation is pitiful and it's time this industry start demanding a better record. The reports are there for you to read. Be aware. Chris

This is the type of fatalistic view that I am working to get rid of. We are part of all aviation and just accepting this accident rate is unacceptable. We are failing as an industry and I am trying to show where and how. Most accidents were from fuel starvation and landing off the airport. How is skydiving making carrying enough fuel more dangerous? Come on. Chris

Thought I would post this in both forums. After looking at the statistics for aircraft accidents and comparing them to Jump Plane accidents it doesn't look good for 2001. These statistics are reported by Accidents per 100,000 hours of flying. Talking with USPA it is estimated that skydiving does about 100,000 hours of flying per year. General Aviation (which skydiving is a part of) is the real comparison. Airlines: 0.2 accidents per 100,000 hours of flying Charter Part 135: 2.1 per 100k General Aviation: 6.56 per 100k Number of Jump Plane accidents I have on my site: 13 One is a report of a smoke jumper plane so that is not tallied in the over all total for civilian sport jumping. So, I have 12 accident reports for an estimated 100,000 hours of flying. That is almost DOUBLE the rate of all of general aviation. Fatal accidents: General Avaition: 1.22 per 100,000 hours of flying Jump Planes: 2 per 100,000 hours of flying Now, one of those fatal reports is the fatal mid-air of a jumper hitting another jump plane. Some may argue this inclusion because the aircraft was not substantially damaged (according to NTSB rules) but there was a death involving an aircraft so I do include it. If you care to see the reports I have listed on my site click HERE Chris Schindler ATP/CFII D-19012 www.DiverDriver.com

After looking at the statistics for aircraft accidents and comparing them to Jump Plane accidents it doesn't look good for 2001. These statistics are reported by Accidents per 100,000 hours of flying. Talking with USPA it is estimated that skydiving does about 100,000 hours of flying per year. General Aviation (which skydiving is a part of) is the real comparison. Airlines: 0.2 accidents per 100,000 hours of flying Charter Part 135: 2.1 per 100k General Aviation: 6.56 per 100k Number of Jump Plane accidents I have on my site: 13 One is a report of a smoke jumper plane so that is not tallied in the over all total for civilian sport jumping. So, I have 12 accident reports for an estimated 100,000 hours of flying. That is almost DOUBLE the rate of all of general aviation. Fatal accidents: General Avaition: 1.22 per 100,000 hours of flying Jump Planes: 2 per 100,000 hours of flying Now, one of those fatal reports is the fatal mid-air of a jumper hitting another jump plane. Some may argue this inclusion because the aircraft was not substantially damaged (according to NTSB rules) but there was a death involving an aircraft so I do include it. If you care to see the reports I have listed on my site click HERE Chris Schindler ATP/CFII D-19012 www.DiverDriver.com

The thread can be viewed at:Forum Link Well, even with the best intentions I have to correct some misinformation about the recent crash of a Caravan on a Cargo run. The pilot was a jump pilot from the Ohio area. Originally, it was reported that the Caravan was a jump plane for Aerohio. THIS IS COMPLETELY INCORRECT. I spoke with Tim Butcher, owner of Aerohio, and he informed me that he sold his jump plane Caravan over a year ago. The Caravan that crashed was a plane bought for sole use at Priority Air. My point to make to skydivers and jump pilots about going cross country to boogies through weather that they are not rated for is still valid. The pilot of this Caravan was rated for IFR and the aircraft was rated for known icing and the conditions still overpowered the flight. Do you think your VFR only jump plane and IFR uncurrent pilot can do better through ice or thunderstorms? We don't need anymore crashes of jump planes being ferried to and from boogies with jumpers on board thinking that nothing can hurt them. Again, my apologies and condolences to Tim Butcher and the pilots and jumpers of Aerohio. Chris Schindler D-19012 ATP/CFII www.DiverDriver.com

so why are we opening "notepad". I'm lost. Didn't find the file you listed. I'm on Windows ME. Probably why. See ya all later. Chris [george thorogood sp?]I drink alone. With nobody else....[/george thurogood]

Sounds like too much work.

Hey, I've had three people saved from guaranteed death jumping out of my plane. That's three friends I could go up to and say "What the hell happened and why did you do that?" One, I told to quit skydiving. I just wish I could have been able to talk to Jerry Loftus again. Cypres on board. Not turned on. He taught me to do my first board jump. Sandy Wambach. Wish I could talk to her again too. Caz. Cypres on board. Not turned on. Wish I could talk to him again. Cypres is a back up. Just like autofeather on an airplane. It's not fool proof. It can't be depended on. It's meerly another layer of safety that we are technologically able to add. Glad to hear you are adding a cypres. Make sure it's on. Chris

skymedic, I won't hug you but I'll give you an ol' gender nuetral slap on the ass. Buck up little camper! Ewww, it giggled. Hey, what are friends for? Hey, and you know if you need anything give me a call. I'm just down the road. Chris