I'm with the NTSB on this one all the way. It in nice for jump tickets to be cheap, but not at the expense of the safety of the jump.
I have seen issues with jump aircraft that caused my to decline to fly the aircraft, and as such I declined to jump it as well until the issues were resolved. In the meantime the aircraft continued to fly jumpers.
Would you really want to get on an aircraft that might not be able to, based on a knolwledgeable opinion, get you to altitue? The problem is that most skydivers don't have the aviation knowledge and or of course don't preflight the aircraft to understand when there is something terminally wrong with the aircraft. More regulation helps everyone to ensure aircraft are fundamentally safe.
As far as I'm concerned skydiving is a pasenger carrying operation and pilots should be trained to part 135 standards. Yes, this would cost more money, but Part 135 exists for a reason, so that charter customers get what they pay for. They pay for transportation from point A to B, not a crash and burn. Same with jump tickets. The customer pays for transport to 13K feet.
Accidents that we see with jump aircraft are typically unexcusable (spinning in from full altitude, running out of fuel), and sometimes it takes increased regulation and scrutinity to correct these issues.
A ture, catestrophic, mechanical engine failure, may result in deaths (though it doesn't have too). This is a fact of aviation. But how would you feel you found out that you pilot had never trained for the engine out procedure in the aircraft that you were riding in. Training at least gives you a flighting chance. Most jump pilots will never see engine out procedures unless they get sim-training.
Your life and the lives of your friends is worth it.
