stratostar

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250967188510 Not mine, but I saw this ad hidden in the military stuff and not the skydiving stuff, so if anyone is looking for a PC class canopy to jump, this looks like a nice one... I know now & then people post looking for one to jump or buy. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Yes, currently pending for 4 years now. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

It would seem some people have gotten bent out of shape about my personal thoughts on this comment I posted, so I would like to clear up for everyone what I'm trying to say. Is 9 grand a great deal of money? Yes it is , did help the dzo, yes it did! But in the over all deal, it was most likely a drop in the bucket of what it cost this guy to fight for 4 or more years. Based on what I have read he had to buy property to land on in order to run his business on top of legal fees. I personally have no idea how much he spent, nor do I care. I assume it was a hell of a lot and the USPA award was just a drop in the bucket of his total expense. Am I saying the USPA AAD fund is a joke or not helpful to dz's who are awarded the help.... NO I'm not, I think it is a good deal for all USPA members, I think it is an important function of our group, the biggest point I was trying to make is many people think the fund is the save all for anyone who is seeking airport access or getting kick off an airport. I'm not an expert in the matter, I'm learning as best I can how all this works, I have an interest in how other cases work out, I believe it effects all skydivers on a national level. I don't represent the USPA, I don't represent the FAA, I speak for none of those people working there! I speak for myself in a forum, like ,many others here I sometimes get it wrong or my post are not made clear enough for some people to understand, that is why we talk about it in a civil manner. If anyone has a problem with my posts or what I have to say about any topic on dropzone.com then take it up with me, my PM's are not blocked like some users. Hope that clears up it for everyone who has a problem with my statements, good day. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Eugene Skydivers- Airport Access Fight has now moved to the part 16 formal complaint level. This battle has been going on for a very long time and the city of Creswell has taken the next step to reuse to comply with it's federal grant assurances, it's consultant, like others in other cases try to make the claim there is no safe place to land a parachute on the airport property. (I'm not speaking for USPA, the FAA or any other person in the industry, I'm posting my personal thoughts on the matter. I could be wrong, no one appointed me the guru of airport access issues!) As it stands now, the FAA will not enforce the current guidance in any complaints that are a part 13, This could be why Mr. Moore is now moving forward with his part 16 filing?, to force the FAA to issue a ruling in the required 120 days. (part 13 cases have no time frame for rulings, they can go on for ever) http://www.thecreswellchronicle.com/news/story.cfm?story_no=10042 In other business on Monday, the council voted to authorize Shrives to spend up to $25,000 to hire an attorney who specializes in aviation law to provide counsel concerning a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Part 16 complaint filed on Dec. 27, 2011 by Urban Moore and Eugene Skydivers, L.L.C. That formal complaint is based on FAA rules "prohibiting establishment of exclusive rights at an airport, unjust discrimination against a commercial aeronautical activity seeking airport access and the establishment of arbitrary, unattainable and discriminatory standards for a commercial aeronautical activity seeking airport access," according to page two of the complaint filed. The City of Creswell is currently awaiting notice from the FAA that the complaint has been placed on the administrative docket, which the FAA is required to decide within 20 days of receiving the complaint. Once that decision is made, the city will then have 20 days to respond to the complaint by providing documentation concerning skydiving at the Creswell Airport. Moore filed a Part 13 (informal) complaint in 2006 with the FAA regional office in Renton, which remains unresolved. City Administrator Shrives said that the city's last response to the Part 13 complaint was February 2010, when they sent the FAA a study pertaining to the safety of skydivers landing at the airport. The FAA has yet to respond to the Feb. 2010 information and is under no time constraints to do so. The City of Creswell maintains that safety issues are the reason for prohibiting skydivers from landing at Hobby Field. The primary landing site for the skydivers had always been on land adjacent to the airport which was owned by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). In 2005, ODOT requested that the city provide liability insurance coverage for the permitted use of the land for the first time. The city asked the skydiving companies to provide insurance to cover their operation. The city asserts that skydiving companies' refusal to provide insurance resulted in ODOT's denial of the permitted use of the ODOT property. The city also hired an investigator, Tim Phillips of Critical Path, Inc. who concluded that there was no safe place to land at the airport. While Moore chose not to disclose the amount he has spent on attorney fees, he said that his business is off approximately 80 percent since August of 2006, which is the last time his company was able to land at Hobby Field at the Creswell Airport. "I've sold aircraft. Eventually, I'm going to run out of assets to sell. I went from flying three aircraft for a total of 1080 hours to two aircraft a total of 200 hours," Moore said, noting that his preferred outcome would be that the "City let us use the drop zone that we've used safely for 14 years. "I want my life back; I want my business back that I spent years building. It was a good business. I'd like not to lose my home," Moore said. Moore's complaint cites letters from numerous official sources indicating that skydivers are able to safely land at Creswell Airport. "A subsequent inspection by FAA Headquarters' Flight Service personnel found skydiving could safely be accommodated at Hobby Field," stated Christina Fortarotto, Associate Administrator for Airports, in a letter dated May 13, 2011. in a letter addressed to then-U.S. Senator Gordon Smith, James Ballough, FAA Director of Flight Standards Service, stated: "The final assessment determined that skydiving at the airport would be a low risk operation if certain mitigating procedures were followed." The Part 16 (formal) complaint will likely take six months to resolve as Moore, the City of Creswell and the FAA respond to each other within 20-day periods, and then 10-day periods as the process progresses. At the conclusion of that process, the FAA has 120 days to weigh all information and issue a decision. *** you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

http://www.uspa.org/AboutUSPA/Donations/tabid/316/Default.aspx you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

She can't delete a Goggle ranking, if you Goggle the keywords I'm talking about in post 41, the dz.com post ranks on page one, #7 slot you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Who said anything about privacy. It's all about choosing your words wisely for an internet searching asshole, to be found or be ranked on page 25. Did you Google Ms. Gibbs? In that case I wanted posts found on page one for her and her buddies to see or anyone else when researching her bullshit. So I choose to not use the dropzone's name in this thread, so when people in that area are searching for a place to go skydive this thread or my post are not on page one in regards to that operation that might make it look bad to unknowing public.... that was the point, along with if your an instructor or staff on a dz that is involved in pending legal action, so your posts and video don't come back to bite you or your friends in the ass, kind of like posting IMC violation videos when a door flies off an airplane at a well known dz and AC. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

In the past dz.com posts have been used in court. With that said, when I posted this link last night, I used a title for the post, however after about 3 minutes, I decided to edit it to the current title..... Why? For one thing I wanted to help the dz by keeping the Google ranking low via the keywords I used. I also choose my words very carefully when posting in some topics, such as this one, for that same reason as well as because we all know some scumbag dirt ball lawyer's flunky will be searching for any little bullshit they can find to drag into court. I would always advise other posters to think carefully about how and what they say, here, on facebook, posting videos on utube, and other places where ones words and video can be used by those forces who seek to harm our industry. For an example of what I mean, Google Kimberly Gibbs Citizens for Quiet Skies..... Page one #7 took less then a week to land there. Like I said, I word my posts very carefully for many reasons. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Sky-diving-firm-sued-in-student-s-death-2452138.php Another case of not opening a parachute before impact is going to cost Mr. Boyd time & legal fees to defend the waver. I'm pretty sure he will win in the long run. One interesting note in the story is they (family & lawyer) are blaming an instructor as well for failing the student by not "saving him"..... Best of luck guys, sorry to see this story. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Not a problem, a lot of people don't understand how the AAD fund works. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

First of all, USPA don't hand out money to dz's fighting access issues. In order of a case to be awarded AAD funds from USPA, the case has to meet some rules, the biggest is "national impact". The last case to get funding is a good example. This case has now changed the way airports can no longer bully around an operator with huge insurance requirements you can not get in order to operate on the airport, it changed the playing field on a national level. If your case can't meet this kind of national impact then you'll get no money form USPA. As a side note, the owner of Skydive Sacramento, spent a small fortune of his own money to win this and the 9K from USPA was like walking down the street and finding a five dollar bill, in other words a drop in the bucket. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Love the wrap and cut away shots! you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

and Well that is great to hear, for once someone is not getting hassled and the locals are at least willing to be cordial and talk with you. When this came up on a Google search, and I read the story, it had the feel of "here we go again". Thanks for filling us in, and I wish you & Mary all the best in your building this dz. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Have you ever tried to start a dropzone? Do you think your 24 dollar jump ticket is going to pay for the hanger space to pack your pretty little parachute in, or fund the MX on the airplane or the marketing, or student rigs, or all the other over head that goes into operations? The answer is no it will not! So anyone who wishes to get started must start with a large pile of money or start small and build it up to a thriving business that can afford to allow you to jump for 24 bucks. Did you notice the future dzo asking the crowd if there would be anyone having an issue with a larger AC? A larger AC would mean future plans for up jumpers, most likely. Besides that, this is a USA issue and has no effect on your country. In this country we have many ongoing airport access issues at play, a victory for one operator is a victory for all skydivers! Type of student training has noting to do with it. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Looks like Tom Noonan might have the next airport access fight, brewing....? Kind of hard to tell from the story, but based on a few quotes it sounds like the usual bullshit about safety used to try to keep out skydivers in almost every access case before and currently pending. (12) In the photo of the story, the look on the face of Ron Mahan, owner of Aerial Skyvertising Inc., looks a little unwelcoming IMHO and if I had to take a guess I bet he telling Tom & Mary all about how the DZ will hurt his business if it's allowed on the Taunton Municipal Airport. It will be interesting see how this moves forward, I hope Tom & Mary will not have the usual harassment to deal with and be welcomed to the Taunton Municipal Airport. Maybe Tom can/will chime in here and let us know how the meeting really went. Best of luck to you Tom & Mary in this process. http://www.tauntongazette.com/news/x735289335/Baystate-Skydiving-center-hoping-to-establish-a-location-at-Taunton-Municipal-Airport you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

When I posted my comment is the other thread, 500 and below is pretty much what I had in mind when I posted..... you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Well in the end, all that really matters is your ok, you got your gear and your here to share your "no shit" story and video for others to learn from and that sure as hell beats reading about you in another forum! you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

I went and checked my log book it helps none much.... it's logged as the MFG being Guardian, the model and SN were not able to be read. I remember looking for more info in that rig in question, and I did find an old advert with that rig in it.. my mind was thinking the ad was from GQ, but I can't say for sure and if you Google the FXC, you get the modern square system they make http://www.fxcguardian.com/ I have not gone to look in Poynters yet and I don't have access to a Beckmon manual anymore or old mag's. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Wow.... Here is your happy ending and thanks for sharing the video. Bet that was a long walk back with a load in your shorts.... you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

I could swear the label said GQ Security MFG "Guardian" on as the model, but that was 2004 or so? I remember looking up info in it... but then again it a memory thing....LOL you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

That is why I said "if"..... Also I no longer have easy access to the rig I'm thinking about to look at it.... I would have to go look in my rigger logbook to make sure.... http://www.dropzone.com/photos/Detailed/Personal/Picture_006_106361.html It's the all yellow one in the front of the row.... you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

GQ security, if I remember right, ,we had one in the Richmond In. collection. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Cool, just wanted to make you & others (who might not know) knew the deal. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

And You need to understand something here about this.... First and foremost it is not a violation to fly over the dropzone regardless of any NOTAM's, Radio calls, sectional map markers or even GPS markers.... A pilot can fly through class E or G airspace freely without any radio use, GPS, sectionals, or even calling in for NOTAM's that are filed in the area they are flying. So in other words "you have to assume a pilot will be exactly where he shouldn't be, because sometimes, they are" that is a false statement, because VFR- Visual Flight Rules are just that..... VISUAL! And in airspace where dz's are located (normally) in class E airspace, any type, kind and class of user can and will found there operating. You are required to make sure via "visual" methods to make sure your airspace is clear before leaving the AC green light or no green light or pilot yelling to get the fuck out..... the same as the T-6 guy is required to maintain VFR flight as he buzz's right over the top of the DZ/airport and it all legal to do...... safe, is a whole other topic. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

Well yea, we've all seen that happen, so what makes you think a guy flying IFR on VFR day with a hood on is paying any more attention to the radio calls then the guy who is flying VFR on a VFR day with no hood on and buzzs through the dz airspace while a jump is being called out on the radio and notam filed. you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo