tombuch

That's assuming the pilot sees you in time, and is able to do a power-up go around without any problem. Keep in mind that landing is the most difficult and dangerous phase of flight. Not all pilots are experienced professionals. Just as we have jumpers who can barely land under the best of conditions, there are pilots who will have a hard time dealing with anything new or unexpected. A pilot is often task focused and may not see you. He will also be flying at a very slow airspeed, and if he is not ready for a go around, that low airspeed could put him into a stall or loss of control. If you do find yourself landing on the runway, move away from it very quickly. Landing on or near the runway might not be such a big deal at a small private airport with only skydiving operations, but at a larger public use airport with lots of pilots who are not jumpers it can be a big problem. Landing on or near a runway is dangerous and has very negative political consequences within the general aviation community. Land away from the runway if possible. Make your decision far enough in advance that you have multiple options and can pick a better landing area. If you have no other choice but to land on the runway, then do it, move away quickly, then reevaluate why you were ever in that position in the first place. A better spot or improved advance strategic canopy flying should prevent jumpers from ever needing to land on an active runway. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

but group membership does not have ANY insurance. It makes no sense. Sure it does. Imagine for a moment that you are the owner of an airport, or on the board of a public airport. One of your concerns is that you be protected from liability if something goes wrong. For example, if a jumper crashes into a neighbors car you will want to be sure the jumper has insurance so the neighbor collects from the jumper, and does not feel compelled to sue your airport. A USPA group member makes a pledge to only allow USPA members to jump at that airport, and all members will have insurance. Thus, requiring USPA group membership assures the airport commission that at least property damage liability insurance is available. The bigger issue for many property owners/managers is protection in the case of a serious injury or death. Again, assume you are the owner of an airport. You will be concerned that if a participant is seriously injured or killed making a jump the survivors will sue the drop zone, the airplane owner, and the property owner (that's YOU!). As the owner of the airport you will also want the skydiving business to have general liability insurance to cover such an event, and that is NOT included in the USPA group membership. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

There was a very brief limitation on member to member coverage many years ago. The restriction didn't last long, but the memory of it did. We had a visitor to The Ranch slam into a parked airplane owned by a USPA member just a couple of years ago. I remembered the restriction and told the aircraft owner that the damage would probably not be covered, but offered to contact USPA on his behalf anyway. The damage was covered. USPA does NOT provide coverage to aircraft or property involved in a jump, so damage to a jump plane being used for jump operation is not covered, but damage to a parked jump plane should be. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

As a student you should always have an instructor on board to help you make those decisions. Once you have a license, you wil be on your own, but there may well be a more experienced jumper willing to help you through the decision. You are correct that in a real aircraft emergency each DZ has specific bail out altitudes with specific responses, and the numbers you mention sound pretty common. However, not all aircraft emergencies are the same. In some cases it may be that an engine is running rough (or a twin engine aircraft lost one engine) and the pilot doesn't want to go all the way to altitude, so he stops the climb at 1,500 and gives jumpers the option of getting out, but will be willing to land with you if you like. In another case, you may be at 4,000 feet and weather moves in, so the pilot gives everybody the option of getting out on the edge of a storm. As an experienced jumper you will need to evaluate the specific situation, and the options that are available, and then make a decision. Part of that evaluation is determining how serious the emergency is and what the pilot is offering, requesting, or demanding that you do. You do not always need to get out. As an experienced jumper with more than 4,500 jumps, I'll almost always jump if given the option, mostly because that's what I'm there to do, and the low ones are very fun. As an instructor I'll evaluate the situation on behalf of my student. In the case of a rough engine at 1,500 feet, or even and engine out, I'll probably look at where we are, and if the airport is nearby, or a big field is available for a forced landing, I may ask the pilot if we can stay with the airplane. That may be as simple as saying "John, I have a student, can we both ride it down with you..." and look for a quick head nod." My decision will be based on his decision and the specific situation. In the case of a storm moving in, I won't get out at any altitude, even if the pilot insists. In that case we need to land the airplane away from the storm. The really big deal situation is a damaged airplane or a pilot struggling with an engine out and not able to listen to me at all. In that case I need to make my best decision, favoring an emergency exit, then just do it. If you have a chance on a rainy day, sit down and talk through some of these issues with your pilot. Simple yes or no decisions that you make as a student become a bit more complicated when you have experience. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Good points. We are all sometimes pressured, and it is tough to say no, especially for a newbie. When you see another jumper make a good safety decision offer a quick smile of recognition and perhaps a word of encouragement. Positive feedback rules! . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Contact the Relative Workshop directly. They have a small publication on the topic that will help. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0071410686/104-2935820-1567117 Try that. It's a link to the Amazon.com page for my book, "JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy." Click on the type that says "Search inside this book" or simply click on the cover art. You will find the table of contents, then the first chapter. The chapter begins with a review of my first jump, then details what skydiving is about. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Interesting way to ask the question…you make a lot more sense when you are sober. There is a theory called “Risk Homeostasis Theory” that essentially says each person has an ideal or desired level of risk exposure, and we will alter our behavior to achieve that level. The level of risk that we find desirable will vary from person to person, and may be biologically determined. Additional research sort of moves around the issue, confirming and refuting parts of the original theory. RHT was developed for road safety and suggested that improvements in roadways or traffic management devices would cause drivers to increase speed or take other chances to maintain their ideal level of risk while driving. Another example is that ski and snowboarders have been measured riding faster when they wear helmets, and RHT suggests this is because the helmet makes them feel like they are exposed to less risk, so they ramp up the speed to maintain their own ideal risk level. This phenomenon does a great job of explaining why some jumpers downsize so quickly, or become very aggressive under canopy after a few jumps. One of the interesting things about risk is that our behavior is determined not by the actual risk, but by our perception of that risk. Thus, if we tell people a task or activity is very risky they may tend to modify their behavior to reduce the perceived risk. If we tell people a task or activity is not very risky they may tend to increase their exposure by pushing limits even further. So, I think you may be right about the way we discuss risk in skydiving. That’s why I make a point of covering accident statistics at our safety day each year, and pounce so aggressively on folks who file posts that suggest skydiving is “safe.” . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

From my understanding of EMS billing, at least in the urban areas of the Northeast, $750.00 is pretty close to standard for an average ambulance call by a paid service. The last time I needed an ambulance for a car wreck (BLS only) in a rural area the charge to my insurance was just over $600.00. Check with your local EMS provider and see what their common charges are for BLS or ALS services with transport. The issue here isn't so much the actual charge, as the decision to apply that cost to a specific class of users, or a specific location. That seems discriminatory to me. Keep in mind too that we really only have a single perspective, as written by a reporter covering a local government meeting. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Nice disclaimer! Skydiving isn't "safe." Risk is partially that of a fatality, and partially that of an injury. Much of the actual risk is determined by the actions of the jumper and the decisions he/she makes, so we each have the ability to control, to some degree, our own risk exposure. I wrote a quick feature about the specific risk for the S&TA area of The Ranch web site called "Skydiving Risk" available as article 7 at http://ranchskydive.com/safety/index.htm. The article is actually a modified version of some of the material that is in my book, "JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy." Here's a quote from the feature on The Ranch site: . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I think this case is very different than a sport rig. With a sport rig I would just refuse to pack it and send the jumper away to shop for another rigger. With a tandem, you are dealing with a rig used by a student who is not capable of making any value judgment about gear. While under the law your responsibility is the same, I think you have a much greater moral responsibility with the tandem. My first suggestion is to contact the DZ directly and let them know what you found. Eight patches is OUTRAGEOUS, plus the rest of what you are detailing is beyond crazy! If the DZ doesn't immediately ground the rig and say thank you, then I would be a prick call the local FAA office. Suggest that the FAA inspectors check all the gear, airplanes, and general operation. Generally, if the gear is poorly maintained there are other problems too. You may have just exposed the tip of the iceberg. The students who jump there need your support in this kind of case. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It the United States it is a Safety and Training Advisor, a volunteer that serves as a bridge between USPA and the local jumpers. I cover the topic with regard to S&TA's at The Ranch in article 3 "What is an S&TA" available at http://ranchskydive.com/safety/index.htm. You may find a few other articles there of interest, but keep in mind everything on the site is written for jumpers at The Ranch. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I disagree with your assessment. This is a basic meeting story that details what happened at the Board of Commissioners meeting. All the comments came from that meeting. It would not be appropriate to seek comments from people or organizations that were not in attendance, and to then include them in this specific story. It is appropriate for the newspaper to do a follow-up story about this specific action, and that story (if done) should include comments from the skydiving operator. With that said, the concept of a charge for a specific activity seems discriminatory. It may be that other activities or locations are "off the grid" and charged extra fees, but that isn't mentioned in this coverage. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I'm not a lawyer, but I can think of a few differences. My sense is that in today's climate of litigation the waiver of liability you sign for those other activities has just as little value as a skydiving waiver. The difference, I suppose, is that those other activities have used waivers for a long period of time, and 'back in the day, those waivers were given more value by the courts. Skydiving never got on that bandwagon, and now, as the courts restrict the ability of an adult to sign away rights of a child, skydiving is in the vanguard. One of the other differences is that many of those businesses/activities have insurance with liability coverage to protect them if a minor is injured and the waiver/release is not recognized in court. Skydiving businesses generally do not have liability insurance, and on that basis must decide what level of risk and exposure they are willing to accept. Ski areas, by the way, are sometimes protected by state law that limits liability, and the statement you sign, or read on the back of your ticket, is an added layer of protection, not primary. I work at a ski resort, and we have been reevaluating the entire waiver/release of liability process. Management now recognizes that a release signed by a parent may not have value in court, so we are looking for other ways of defining intent, and we are involving minors in the process. It isn't perfect, but it helps. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It takes more muscle to pull the toggles, especially as the parachute moves through a steep turn. It wasn't a problem 'back in the day, but by current standards it has heavy toggle pressure. The original Sabre also has heavy riser pressure as compared with more contemporary parachutes. The Sabre-2 has lighter pressures. Think of it as the difference between manual and power steering. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Hard openings and heavy toggle pressure are the two biggest complaints. The original Sabre also lacks an elliptical shape, so it turns differently than a Sabre-2. I actually have two original Sabre 120's and don't have trouble with hard openings. I still enjoy the older Sabre. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

This is a general reply for EXPERIENCED jumpers, and not for the student who started the thread. I was always suspicious about handling a dual deployment and landing a side by side or a biplane. I assumed the descent rate would be fast, and the mess would be hard to control. I was wrong. A while back I did some CRW training and became quite comfortable with many two canopy situations. A downplane is a horrible thing to land, but other than that, two parachutes flying together are easy to control, and the descent rate is pretty slow. It's tough to describe how every possibility will fly, but it's easy to get experience. If you have a chance this summer, try some CRW with a competent canopy flyer. It will give you great confidence flying in crowded airspace, and will help you to better understand how to fly a side by side or biplane. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Well, our services are actually not free, and that's an important point. The general public benefits from the national airspace system, just as they benefit from our highways. The overhead costs should be covered with general federal revenue, and the costs specific to a user should be covered by that user. Right now, the user component is paid for with fuel taxes (GA) and passenger ticket taxes (commercial aviation). We are paying for the services we use, but that tax is mostly invisible to us. Changing the way we are taxed by adding direct user fees for specific services will make the costs of those services more obvious, but will also discourage the use of safety critical services. I don't mind paying for the services I use, and the fuel tax seems like a simple way to do that. The aviation tax system is however, a huge political issue that pits big corporate users like airlines against small users like skydivers. We need to keep on top of this issue as individuals, and as a national group (USPA). We also need to be educated throughout so that we can contact our representatives in Congress/Senate to support our current fuel tax system, and avoid the direct user fees you are complaining about in Europe. Umm, Buck Buchanan, eh? I was a little Buck way, way, way back in the day. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Interesting question, but the use of the word "rush" is probably a bit over the edge. And, I think some of the hostile reply comments are a bit off too. My hunch is that you feel fatalities are a part of the sport, and you just want to experience all parts of skydiving. I doubt you are "wishing" for a fatality, but probably just wonder how the emotions cycle through from the moment of a death until all seems to be back to normal. And I suspect you wonder if being part of a fatality as a witness will bring you closer to the "brotherhood" of skydiving. Back in the day we would have laughed about your question, and just said something like "Blue sky, black death." Back then, we embraced the whole "death culture," but today we try to pretend it doesn't happen, or that it is something to be dissected as a technical failure. Look, fatalities suck. There is nothing good about them, and that whole BSBD thing was over rated. The emotions of a fatalitiy suck major bad, and they really don't bring a DZ closer together. Be very happy you haven't witnessed a fatality yet. You are part of the brotherhood, and the lack of direct experience with "sport death" death doesn't hold you apart from the rest of us at all. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Some of you may not be aware of it, but there is a move afoot within the federal government to change the way aviation is taxed, and to pass more of the actual expenses directly to the users. Currently, general aviation (including skydiving operators) pay a federal tax for each gallon of fuel we burn. The tax rate is listed as 21.8 cents per gallon for jet fuel (turbine airplanes like a Twin Otter) and 19.3 cents per gallon for avgas (piston airplanes like Cessna 182’s). As skydivers we probably take advantage of fewer services than most airspace users. At The Ranch, my home drop zone north of NY City, we rely on radar reports from NY Approach and Boston Center for every flight, and use flight service for some basic weather functions. We also rely on FAA inspectors to keep the aircraft and pilot parts of the industry safe, and FAA cartography to produce the charts that other GA pilots use when flying near our depicted drop zone. When our aircraft are not actually flying jumpers, they move between drop zones in all sorts of weather, generally under the watchful eyes of controllers. Our airport is a small private use facility that has never received FAA funding, or improvements paid for with federal taxes. Overall, the skydiving industry doesn’t use much in the way of FAA services, but we would be hard pressed to jump safely without federal oversight and ATC support. So, what does that actually cost us? Using a fuel burn of 24 gallons per Otter load (estimated 22-25 gallons per load, a jet fuel tax rate of 21.8 cents per gallon, and an average load of 20 jumpers) we pay a total of $5.32 in federal fuel taxes for each load. That’s 26 cents per person, per load. At The Ranch, our average club member makes about 60 jumps per year, paying an annual federal fuel tax of about $15.60. A more hard-core skydiver who averages 300 turbine jumps a year pays about $78.00 in federal fuel taxes for his use of the FAA services. So I guess my sense is that the fuel tax is a workable means of taxing GA users, and given how little it actually costs us, I think skydivers get a pretty good bargain. I can’t imagine that a system based on user fees would generate enough in taxes to even cover the expense of collection, unless of course the costs to the user were increased dramatically! Let’s all keep alert for rumblings within the political system regarding discussion of “user fees” for general aviation. It’s a bad idea. The United States probably has the most efficient aviation infrastructure, and it’s provided to us as citizen-owners of the airspace. Let’s hope we can keep our direct costs as low as they now are, and avoid the administrative nightmare of user fees. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Tandem should have the right of way for any landing pattern on final aproach, as they are LESS manuverable then any other canopy in the pattern. In theory, a tandem should be given the right of way, but when a tandem instructor and a student are conflicting, the tandem instructor should fly defensively and yield to the student. Remember, the tandem instructor knows what he is doing, and can actually maneuver very easily. The student is a huge unknown, and at least while the conflict is happening, shouldn't be expected to do anything to avoid the problem. In this case it looks like the student didn't know what to do, so the instructor altered his course. They chatted about it later, and the student learned. Good work on the part of both! For a bit more discussion about right of way and avoidance, see Article 12 "Landing Direction Defined" at http://ranchskydive.com/safety/index.htm. Some of it is specific to The Ranch, but there is a good deal that applies to any drop zone. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

The only FAA rule for skydivers that I know of is 105.7 as follows: The rule about passengers that applies to pilots is 91.17 as follows: For a quick review of FAA regulations see: http://www.diverdriver.com/Regulations/regulations.htm . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Another great book is "Parachuting: The Skydivers Handbook by Turoff and Poynter." It offer great information for students and experienced jumpers alike. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Each drop zone has their own standard for when a student can pack for himself. Generally an instructor will watch a few pack jobs and when he is satisfied that the student knows how to pack, will give authorization in the logbook or student record. Packing seems complicated at first, but it's really pretty simple stuff. There are a few key points that a good instructor/rigger will focus on, and it's important to know that you can (and should) ask questions anytime you are unsure of anything. Most students can master the basic process after a half dozen pack jobs. The first few will be with assistance, then unassisted. As for packing other peoples parachutes....Technically you need to be an FAA certificated rigger, or under the supervision of a rigger to pack for anybody but yourself. Enforcement is weak at some drop zones. For a more detailed discussion, see Article 11 "Who can Pack a Main Parachute" at http://ranchskydive.com/safety/index.htm. This is a feature I wrote for Parachutist magazine, published in June 2002. I'm the S&TA at The Ranch Parachute Club in New York, and write the features to address common questions. I'll often list a specific article when answering a question here on Dropzone.com. You may find many of the other articles of interest. . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Cloud clearance requirements are not pointless, but they are not the 'whole' story. Remember we are also charged with not creating a hazard. You are correct that it is possible to jump through a 4,000 foot hole and be legal according to 105.17, but the jump might still violate 105.5. While 105.5 might be somewhat nebulous, it is the more serious violation from a legal standpoint, and from a moral standpoint. It really is our responsibility to avoid creating a hazard. Way back on the first page of this thread I suggested a few articles I had written on The Ranch web site. Clouds were not an issue in this case of glider/jumper near miss, so I didn't reference article 19 "Jumping Near Clouds." It does a pretty good job of discussing 105.17 and 105.5 with regard to cloud jumps. See http://ranchskydive.com/safety/index.htm . Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy