tombuch

I'm the S&TA at The Ranch, and you will be welcomed like family. Just bring your stamped license, and if you feel like it, a log book. We have three Otters and tons of jumpers doing everything you could want to do. Freefly is a big deal at The Ranch, as it RW. We have the Generation Freefly school with Max Cohn and others, and a Skydive University campus for advanced RW training. We offer a great view in a classic skydiving environment...think little Cessna drop zone that got real big but never figured out it was supposed to get "professional." If your local friends want to try skydiving, we have one of the biggest schools in the East offering tandem and IAF training. Come on out and have a good time. Tom Buchanan S&TA Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I understand that position. It was hashed out by the FAA years ago, and they do think it is reasonable to require insurance that is not available. That's not, however, my point. Your post says that the city has a policy that covers most, but not all, users of the airport. So, as a grant recipient, the city has offered coverage to one group of users, but refused coverage for others. That seems like discrimination under the grant authority, and I have not seen it addressed in other cases. If the city requires a million dollars of insurance and leaves it up to each user to obtain that insurance, then they are not discriminating. If they require the insurance and offer it to some users but not others, that seems to be discrimination under the grant authority. This is a different issue than the requirement for insurance. This problem sounds like discrimination through the offer of insurance to some users but not all users. Have you worked that angle with the FAA? -tom buchanan Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Be very careful. You can share the expenses of the flight with your passenger, but he can not pay for the entire cost of the flight. You also need to be cautious of "holding out" to the public...if you take one friend once, that's probably OK, but if you offer your serves to many friends or classes of people it could be considered a "commercial operation." You also need to be sure you are not providing transportation for hire. Taking a friend on a trip as a private pilot is fine, as long as you were going flying anyway, and the specific transportation is incidental to the flight. If the reason for the flight was to transport your friend, you may be on the hook for a violation regardless of his or your participation in cost sharing. Private pilot privileges are very limited. It is wise to avoid looking for loopholes and making regulations fit your needs...the FAA doesn't look at a flight that way at all. I hate to say it, but if you get a commercial certificate you will be far better versed in regulatory authority, although you will still not be able to hold out to the public and provide transportation services to all passengers. Tom Buchanan FAA Commercial Pilot (IAMSEL,G) Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[Quote] This leaves the airport and directors open to any suit. They claim they aren't discriminating because the other activities are covered under their existing policy. I understand your concern, and understand that the FAA considers a million dollar policy reasonable, and that requiring an entity to have that policy is not discriminatory if all users are required to have the same coverage. What concerns me here is that you say the airport/city covers most users under an umbrella policy, but that skydiving is specifically excluded from that policy. If the city is going to provide coverage to some users, shouldn't they be required to provide coverage to all users? Isn't offering a city policy to airplane owners and not skydivers discrimination under the FAA grant authority? Why hasn't the FAA required the airport/city to provide equal insurance to all recognized user groups? I could understand the city position if they required each entity to have their own coverage, and skydiving coverage just isn't available, but in this case you say the city actually provides coverage to some users, but excludes others. Am I missing something here? Tom Buchanan Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Your airport almost certainly is federally funded. Just from my quick visit a couple of weeks ago it looked like a well managed and well funded airport operation, and that tends to suggest federal money. Further, you have n ILS on the field, and that is a big ticket item that almost always comes with federal dollars. Don't worry about your situation. An airport that takes federal money must be open to all users equally, including skydiving. A local airport that does NOT get federal money can pick and choose what operations to allow. So, federally funded airports offer better access to skydivers than non-federally funded public airpoprts. This case is about insurance, and as I understand it, the local airport in this case has insurance for all users except skydivers, and now expects the jump operation to provide the same coverage that the airport is providing for other users. The part I'm confused about is that according the the local poster, the airport agrees to provide insurance coverage for some user groups, but not others. That seems like discrimination to me. If they required ALL users to provide their own insurance, then it would seem reasonable. I'm wondering what the FAA position is regarding a funded airport providing some user groups with insurance, but not providing the same coverage to other groups. It is an interesting issue. In any event, we shouldn't all start sweating yet. The insurance issue is an old one that has been batted around for years. Yes, there are some isolated problems, and yes, it could get worse in time, but right now it's just one of many government issues that threaten skydiving. The best solution is to buy land of your own and get away from government airports. Short of that, a federally funded airport is better than a non-federally funded local-government managed airport. In the case of Goshen, maintain good relationships with the city and airport manager, rely on your USPA group member coverage and any other insurance you might have, and hope that the issue doesn't become too big of a thorn in the future. Tom Buchanan Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

In the United States it depends on the type of airspace. If it is controlled airspace (A, B, C, D) then the jump requires authorization from the FAA. If it is into class E or G airspace (rural communities without a major airport nearby) the jump only requires the notification of air traffic control, a much simpler process. It sounds like you are talking about a big farm, not near a city, and not near a major airport. So, if it is in the USA you probably only need to notify ATC. The rules are spelled out in part 105. Your pilot friend can look at an aviation sectional and tell you what kind of airspace is involved. As for your friend, the pilot...as long as no money is changing hands and no value is offered to the pilot, then he is welcome to drop you off. Keep in mind that there are some serious issues with regard to door removal, slow flight, and weight and balance that should be addressed, so your friend should have a detailed briefing from an experienced jump pilot. Check with your drop zone for specific local rules, and an evaluation of your skill and the pilot skills before you attempt the proposed jump. Tom Buchanan FAA Commercial Pilot (IAMSEL,G) Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It's not FAA approved, just recognized by the FAA. You might get an official looking letter from your rigger that mentions certification of the equipment under FAR part 65, 91, 105, and includes his assertion that he inspected the equipment and applied his FAA seal to the pack as per 14 CFR Part 65.133. He should sign the letter with his certificate number. Government people usually love regulations, and having specific regs to hang their decisions on. Good luck, Tom Buchanan Senior Parachute Rigger Author, JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Back in the day...I was an idiot. For my 700th jump I opened at 700 feet. For my 800th jump I opened at 800 feet. For my 900th jump I opened at 900 feet. For my 1,000th jump I made a BASE jump from a 279 foot cliff. After that I continued the established trend with until I passed 2,000 jumps. Now, I'm an S&TA and I have to "talk" to people who try foolish things like opening low. Keep in mind that back in the day we were all a bit crazier, and the fatality rate was much higher. The sport is better off now with more conservative flyers who open at reasonable altitudes. Tom Buchanan Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

File this answer in the "Fun With Cessnas" pile. Many years ago I figured out that if you are sitting on the doorsill of a Cessna 180/182 and the pilot flies a parabolic giving you zero-g, the jumper can push off the step, sending him up and back toward the tail. From that position the pilot can adjust the rudder to get the horizontal stabilizer in the jumpers hand for a brief instant. After that quick encounter the airplane begins a descent and the jumper is actually above the Cessna watching it drop away. It's a pretty cool visual, but NOT for beginners. Tom Buchanan Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

For a compilation of all tandem fatalities please see http://relativeworkshop.com/. From the main page click on the "Tandem" link on the top panel, then click on "General Tandem Information" then "Tandem Fatalities." There have been a few tandem fatalities that have been caused or aggravated by third party skydivers, so manufacturers and instructors have reason the be concerned about the skill level of the people flying with us. Tom Buchanan Instructor (AFF, SL, IAD, Tandem) Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

There is an annual review of safety data called "Injury Facts" published by the National Safety Council. The data you are looking for probably comes from that publication, but NSC doesn't offer the data on line directly. Hard copies of NSC publications can be purchased at http://www.nsc.org. Injury Facts is 178 page paper booklet that sells for about USD 49.00, and it is a fascinating read. You can find some good stats covering skydiving and a few other activities in "Parachuting-The Skydivers Handbook" by Dan Poynter and Mike Turoff. I believe that book is scheduled for a new edition later this summer. I have also included a chapter about risk that features many of the NSC stats in JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Both books are available at major retailers and on line vendors, and some of the larger DZ's probably have a copy you can look at for free. The long and the short of the skydiving Vs. driving argument is that driving is far, far safer. With that in mind I like to remain vigilant at all times, and I try to remember that the most dangerous thing a skydiver can do, is to forget that skydiving is dangerous. Tom Buchanan Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I had a conversation yesterday with a glider pilot about where to get a pilot emergency rig repacked. As we were talking it occurred to me that the glider community and their riggers may not be as plugged into contemporary rigging as skydiving community, and may not know about the pin inspection program. I quickly checked with the Soaring Society of America (SSA), and they had no idea of this issue. I have followed up by having conversations with EAA, AOPA, and the USHGA…none were aware of the Capewell bulletin, although all those national organizations are now researching the matter and will be communicating with their members as needed. With all that said, many pilot emergency rigs are included in CW03-01, and they should be inspected if manufactured between November 2001 and now, and using Capewell pins. Some GA pilots “occasionally” skip a 120 day repack, so it may be a while before their rigs are inspected by an FAA rigger. So…if you know of any pilots who have emergency rigs it would be super kind of you to mention the Capewell inspection. If you have a local glider club or an aerobatic club nearby, it would be very neighborly for you to give them a call as a quick heads up. Likewise, if you are a rigger who handles pilot emergency rigs, it would be nice if you check your book and call those non-skydiving general aviation customers who may have rigs included in CW03-01. The actual bulletin is available at http://www.capewell.com/PIAPIN.pdf Tom Buchanan Sr. Parachute Rigger Commercial Pilot (IAMSEL,G) Author, JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Don't panic...Sunpath has issued a product service bulletin that requires the inspection of adjustable Javelins. This is mostly student gear. The inspection is very simple and won't require bending or breaking anything. See the bulletin on the USPA site at: http://www.uspa.org/news/images/sunpath.pdf or at http://www.sunpath.com Tom Buchanan Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

It's also possible that the DZ you will be visiting doesn't know about the regulation, or has decided to pretend not to know about the specific interpretation. Call them first. Tom Buchanan Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Good answer. I'll add a bit of my own.... First, have a default plan. For me that is DO NOT WAIT TO GET STABLE. My plan is to pull the reserve rightaway UNLESS I know where I am and know I have enough time to flip over. For me, that magic altitude is 1,000 feet AGL, for those with less experience it may be 2,000 feet, or it could be every jump regardless of altitude. Too many cutaways happen at low altitude and the jumper has no clue he is there. Don't let yourself get into the trap of getting stable just before impact. Second, decide right now what your magic altitude is. Make the decision when you have time to think about it, then use that as your standard. Don't try to fudge a decision at 1,500 feet under a spinner. Tom Buchanan Instructor (AFF, SL, IAD, Tandem) Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I'm having a routine physical in a couple of hours from now. Do I just need a letter from my doctor giving me a go ahead to jump or is there some downloadable form he needs to fill out? The next option in that BSR (C)(1)(c) is "Have completed the USPA recommended medical statement." That is incorporated into most drop zone waivers. If your question is about jumping in the USA, don't worry about the medical exam unless you have some kind of special condition, or are getting on in age. If you have a heart or circulatory condition, or pressure in the sinuses, mention it to your doctor. Skydiving adds stress to the body and we tend to fly where the air offers a bit less oxygen. It's not a huge deal, but worth consideration, especially if you are older or otherwise out of shape. Tom Buchanan S&TA EMT-B Author, JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Why try to beat the system? It's pretty easy to comply with Part 105. As for what the FAA could do...certificate action against any certificate held by the pilot or jumper, fines, possible jail. What would they do?...probably a certificate action against the pilot if he had one, probably a fine against the jumper and pilot if there is no certificate, but that assumes you are caught. You probably wouldn't be caught, but seriously, dude, why not just comply with 105? -tom buchanan Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

I've spoken with the folks at Capewell three times over the past few weeks, and also checked in with several of the major rig manufacturers. As far as I can tell, the first 2 pin failures (broken pins) were on Mirage rigs in EARLY 2003. Mirage wanted Capewell to issue a recall ASAP, but Capewell stalled. There were two additional failures in about June 2003. When I first spoke with Bob Francis, VP and General Manager at Capewell on July 11, 2003, he said he had been looking for the cause for months, and was actively working on a test with PIA, hoping to have it available for field use by about July 14-15. The field test was issued July 15. According to Mr. Francis, the field test was developed by Sandy Reid, Committee Chairman of the PIA Technical Committee, and was applied under field conditions prior to release by Capewell. According to my most recent conversation with Mr. Francis on July 18 (last Friday), Capewell still doesn't know what the root cause of the brittle pins is, nor have they been able to identify a specific batch of pins. They know there have been several changes in the production process over the past two years, but they do not know if the problem is related to those changes, or to a metal issue. Thus, they have decided to be cautious and extend the inspection program to the period prior to recent manufacturing changes. According to Mr. Francis, Capewell did NOT know of any problem until two pins broke on Mirage rigs in early 2003. Capewell, as a company, has also undergone a few changes recently; Bob Francis joined the company as Vice President, General Manager in March 2003. (According to Capewell press releases). The Quality Control manager left the company sometime after the initial Mirage problem was discovered in April 2003. (According to Mr. Francis, and rig manufacturers). Sally Baumann joined Capewell as a new Engineering Director in June 2003. (According to Capewell press releases). I think the new management team at Capewell is probably a bit overwhelmed by this issue, and may be struggling to deal with it. The broken pin issue is both a manufacturing and public relations/marketing problem, and while the company has several decades of ripcord manufacturing experience, they have very limited experience dealing with end users in the civilian market. As we criticize Capewell for producing a test that at least some people in the industry feel is rushed and ineffective, lets also remember that just two weeks ago we were criticizing them for not doing anything. Let's also keep in mind that this test was developed with input from PIA, and although perhaps not the ideal solution, is at least a start. If nothing else, the test should give us (and Capewell) a better handle on how widespread the brittle steel problem is, and it should give end users a better understanding of their gear. It would be great if there was a handbook to tell a company how to deal with an emergency recall, but there isn't such a book...Capewell is learning the process as they go. Let's give them some credit for the things they have done well (being overly cautious and extending the inspection to November 2001), and let's continue to prompt them to seek a manufacturing cause and solution, and to improve the way they deal with end users of their products. Tom Buchanan S&TA The Ranch Senior Parachute Rigger Author JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Try using part 105. Specifically, start with 105.1 (Applicability) "...This part prescribes rules governing parachute operations conducted in the United States." Next check out 105.3 (Definitions) "...Parachute Operation mean the performance of all activity for the purpose of, or in support of, a parachute jump or parachute drop..." ""Parachute Jump means a parachute operation that involves the descent of one or more persons to the surface from an aircraft in flight when an aircraft is used or intended to be used during all or part of that descent." Now check out 1.1 (Definitions) "Aircraft means a device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air." -tom buchanan Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

That's the idea. I don't like the regulation, but not liking the regulation or ignorance of the regs is not an excuse to break the regs. It's pretty important for jumpers and drop zones to know what the regulations say and then decide at what level they will comply. In this case, the regulation is NOT new, and the USPA position has been on the record for quite a while. It just seemed to be hanging below the radar. So, I don't know how WFFC or any other specific drop zone will handle the detail or decision making. My intent was to get this knowledge out well before the winter travel season, and I didn't consider it was being published just weeks before the WFFC. I guess it will make their life a bit messy, and may be an issue for visiting jumpers too. Sorry about the timing. -tb Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

According to my conversations with Capewell, they have received ONE pin back and have had testing done by an outside lab. There was no metallurgical problem identified with the broken pin. -Tom Buchanan Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Did it BREAK or bend? A BROKEN pin is failure and needs to be reported to Capewell ASAP. A bent pin is just an issue that grounds the rig, but is not considered failure by Capewell, as I understand it. It sounds like you have a tough issue to deal with. The phone number for Capewell in the USA is 860-610-0700. Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Yes, if the harness/container AND the reserve are both TSO'd. That is the way the regulation reads. Some drop zones have not understood the regulation and may not be enforcing it, but that is how it was written. We had some questions about this regulation at The Ranch so I did some research and was able to establish what the regulation says. There is a great deal of misunderstanding in the field, and that's why I wrote the feature on the dropzone.com homepage. You may find the drop zones you visit don't care about the regulation and will not require the 120 day repack with a seal...that decision is up to them, but drop zone management should understand what the regulation actually says. Tom Buchanan S&TA, The Ranch Sr. Parachute Rigger Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

Please read the service bulletin carefully! The applicable ripcord pins are all angled pins; not the newer straight pins used by Sun Path Products. I have yet to see an oringinal Sun Path soft ripcord with an angled pin. Although it is possible that a "generic" ripcord could have been installed on a newer rig after a cutaway. Masterrigger1 I believe you may be incorrect. The problem seems to be related to brittle steel and there is no known cause. Capewell can not isolate the problem to a specific batch of pins, style of pin, or manufacturing defect. If you look at the PSB, on page 2 you will see both straight and angled pins depicted. You will not see a pin with blades like many used on Sun Path Javelins. I called Sun Path last Thursday and they too were confused, so they checked with Capewell. The word I received from Sun Path last Thursday, July 17, was to check all of their pins that are in the date range. This was specified again in a release from Sunpath on July 17, 2003. If there is any question, the rigger should call the manufacturer (Sun Path, Relative Workshop, Jump Shack, whatever). All the manufacturers are working on this issue and can either answer your questions, or get you answers. My hope is that a single source of information will be developed on the web by a reputable group (PIA, USPA, Capewell) and all these questions will be answered before the FAA steps in and issues an AD. Tom Buchanan Sr. Parachute Rigger S&TA, The Ranch Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

The .005 deformation is for test 2 only. The standard of deformation for test 1 is "if the pin is not straight, as visible without magnification, remove the pin/ripcord from service immediately." I agree with your other points. The PSB was well thought out as an initial document, but it required field testing in a standard drop zone environment. I don't think that was adequately handled. I actually addressed most of your concerns with Capewell last week, and even suggested that Bob Francis (Capewell Vice-President/General Manager) join us at The Ranch as the bulletin was implemented this weekend. The Ranch is about 2 hours from his office, and is by far the most active DZ in the region. He declined my offer. I think Capewell would have a much better handle on the matter if they actually saw how their product is used in the field, and how the testing takes place at a real drop zone. They seem to be dealing with this issue through their own manufacturing customers, but they need to take ownership at the consumer level and understand the issues in terms of the end user. Tom Buchanan S&TA, The Ranch Senior Parachute Rigger Tom Buchanan Instructor Emeritus Comm Pilot MSEL,G Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy