Hooknswoop

100-hour inspections are already required under Part 91 if the aircraft is used for hire, which includes parachute operations. I think it would be a huge improvement if all DZ's maintained their aircraft per Part 91 for starters. Too many don't and get away with it. I also think that if the FAA required DZ's to maintain their aircraft under Part 135, a lot simply wouldn't. Derek

Right, the search only shows FAA ratings. Of course if the person is a U.S citizen, lives in the U.S, and works on U.S. gear, then they need an FAA rating. Derek

You are absolutely correct, got me Derek

FWIW, here is my perceptions on recovery arcs and learning hook turns; A longer recovery arc means, for the optimum performance, the turn must be initiated at a higher altitude. Given say a 10% margin for error, the longer the recovery arc, the larger the 'window' for initiating the hook is. I don't think a canopy with a longer recovery arc takes more altitude to recover to level flight from the same airspeed/altitude/WL, etc as a canopy with a shorter recovery arc. The downside to the longer recovery arc is the higher speeds that things happen at. This gives the pilot less time to recongize there is a problem and react. So the speeds of a manta and the recovery arc of a x-braced canopy would be ideal for learning hook turns. Obviously this canopy doesn't exist, so a comprimise must be made between recovery arc and speed. The longer the recovery arc the better, the slower the speed the better. Derek

I scrolled down a bit and found this: "Public Availability of Airmen Records H.R.1000 SEC. 715. PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF AIRMEN RECORDS. Section 44703 is amended-- (1) by redesignating subsections (c) through (f) as subsections (d) through (g), respectively; and (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: (c) PUBLIC INFORMATION-- (1) IN GENERAL--Subject to paragraph (2) and notwithstanding any other provision of law, the information contained in the records of contents of any airman certificate issued under this section that is limited to an airman's name, address, and ratings held shall be made available to the public after the 120th day following the date of the enactment of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century. (2) OPPORTUNITY TO WITHHOLD INFORMATION--Before making any information concerning an airman available to the public under paragraph (1), the airman shall be given an opportunity to elect that the information not be made available to the public. (3) DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAM--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, the Administrator shall develop and implement, in cooperation with representatives of the aviation industry, a one-time written notification to airmen to set forth the implications of making information concerning an airman available to the public under paragraph (1) and to carry out paragraph (2). The Administrator shall also provide such written notification to each individual who becomes an airman after such date of enactment. For the complete official text of the entire Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, please click on this link. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Releasable Airmen Database Available for Download In accordance with Section 715 of the Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, the Airmen Certification Branch is releasing a database containing the addresses and pertinent certificate information for those airmen who have not requested that such information be withheld from public release. Click on this link to go to the download site for the Releasable Airmen Database. The CD-ROM version of this database is no longer available as of 18 January 2001. PLEASE NOTE: This information does NOT include certificate number data for any airmen." I'll have to read it a couple more times and try to translate the FAA-ese, but it looks like all information can be withheld. Derek

That gives the rating holder the option to not have their address listed, but they are still listed with their ratings even if you fill out the form; "Change Releasability Status of your Mailing Address The Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, in addition to other statutory requirements, requires us to make airmen certificate information available to the public. Airmen meeting the active criteria are sent a notification of these requirements, and are given the opportunity to withhold their address information from release. If your address appears in this data base and you would like to remove it, or if it does not appear and you would like to add it, you may write or email us your preference. You may provide us with your preference at any time." So there is no way not to be listed, only option is to not have your address listed. Derek

How can a pilot or rigger opt out of being listed? Not saying they can't, I just didn't know they could and don't know how they could. I am a pilot and rigger and I don't think I was ever given the option. Is there a box that I could have checked or something? Derek

From: http://registry.faa.gov/airmen.asp; "We are currently processing permanent Airmen Certificates with an approximate issue date of November 30th, 2003 ." Derek

I think people should be held accountable. If they falsely claim a Rigger's rating, Instructional rating, etc, they should be reveled. Care should be taken to make sure they really do not have the rating, and if possible, given the chance, privately, to correct their profile/claims. For example, hpalmer claims to be; Static Line: Instructor/Examiner IAD: Instructor/Examiner Tandem: Jumpmaster Rigging Qualifications Back: Master Rigger Chest: Master Rigger Seat: Master Rigger Lap: Master Rigger He isn't an Instructor/Examiner, nor Master Rigger, nor does he have seat, lap or chest ratings, only Senior Rigger for Back. He is the DZO of "High Sky Adventures" and was the pilot of this aircraft: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20030107X00026&key=1 Derek

This one's is 8 seconds. 3 seconds + .1*50 = 8 seconds. This one's is 9 seconds. 3 seconds + 1 second + .1*50 = 9 seconds. Correct, except it is 300 feet for 250 pounds or less and 1 foot for every pound over 250. Aside from the math, nicely done. Derek

Right, it used to be, but check the SIM's section 3-1. The licenses no longer have titles. A technicality to be sure. Derek

brewman- correct. Derek

Nope, only Master, "Holds a master parachute license issued by an organization recognized by the FAA". So, by the letter of the law, there are no 'legal' Tandem Instructors out there, since USPA does not issue a 'Master' license............. Nope, 350 ft, there are given an extra foot for each pound over 250 pounds. Not bad. Sparky: Have at it.

Going strictly by the FAR’s and disregarding the BSR’s; What are the FAA’s currency requirements for Parachutists in Command (Tandem Instructors)? If a Parachutist in Command fails to renew their instructional rating annually with the manufacturer, may they still legally act as a Parachutist in Command? What minimum equipment does the FAA require for a first skydive? What minimum instruction does the FAA require for a first skydive? How strong of winds may a first jump skydiver jump in according to the FAA? What minimum pull altitudes does the FAA require? Would a tandem harness system be legal if the passenger harness was certified to only 150 pounds and the Parachutists in Command’s harness was certified to 250 pounds, both at 175 knots (assuming the system passed all the other TSO requirements)? What is the maximum pull force on the cutaway handle to release the main canopy for TSO C23-D? For TSO C23-D, how many hours must the assembly be held at 200 or more degrees Fahrenheit, cooled to ambient temperature then test dropped? For a harness/container system rated to 300 pounds and a reserve rated to 300 pounds, what is the maximum time from pack opening to a fully functional parachute for TSO C23-D? For the same system as the previous question, how many seconds are allowed from pack opening to a fully functional parachute when the system is pack with 3 line twists? For the same system above, how many feet of altitude can be lost from pack opening to a fully functional canopy? What is the maximum rate of descent for a reserve canopy when loaded at not less than the maximum operating weight for TSO C23-D? May a skydiver legally jump in the U.S if they are under the influence of alcohol or drugs? May a pilot drop jumpers if they lose radio contact with Air Traffic Control? If exiting at or above 10,000 feet, what minimum size hole through any clouds must be present if the jumpers were to fall through the center of the hole? What license(s) does the FAA require a Parachutist in command to hold? Is it legal to make a tandem skydive with an AAD that is not turned on? Derek Edit, added the "d", thanks Canuck

I see, that makes a lot of sense. Combined with th WL BSR, they would compliement each other very well. It could remove a special jump where the S & TA watches and the S & TA could simply review the results from any competetion to grant waivers and/or check that profiency for the next wing loading has been achieved. Not a good idea, a great idea.

Here in Co they use Magnesium Chloride on the roads. Are you sure that the only chemical on the road was the salt? I think it is a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils, leaving crystalline salt in the canopy or fresh water rinse. I know PD recommends a fresh water rinse if the canopy has been submerged in salt water. Derek

True, but with more and more people getting the training and more and more courses being held, a lot of those people that are grand fathered will attend and get the training even if it isn't required. I don't think it would work if they weren't grand fathered anymore than taking away people's "D" licenses that didn't have 500 jumps when USPA changed it from 200 to 500. The sooner the change is made, the less people there will be that will be grand fathered in. Derek

The proposal does adress this through mandatory education and training for everyone. Derek

It is OK for a temp fix, but then the entire area that was taped must be patched instead of the small hole. That is the downside of using it as a temporary fix. I have torn fabric that had F-111 tape on it like tissue paper. I have seen several canopies blow up with the failure starting at the area that had been taped. If you have F-111 tape on your canopy, get the entire taped area patched. If you can avoid using it, don't use it. Derek

Which is what I see as the flaw in the idea. I think keeping people off canopies they shouldn't be on until they are ready for them and education/training is the fix. Derek

There is one, a DZO that lists lap, chest, seat and back Master and Examiner ratings. According to the FAA, he has a back senior rating. If they list any rating that they don't truely have, they should be PM'd with that information and given the chance to update their profile. If they choose not to, reveal the situation to the masses. Derek

Someone can show you how to adjust them, but a key safety point, put them OVER and gloves, altimeters, etc, so that you can remove them quickly and easily to get to your toggles. Derek

But what if they don't bother, get the too small canopy anyway and then crater? They can prove their skills on larger canopies before downsizing now, but they don't. They might think they did, but they didn't. They feel ready for the too small canopy and the only way to prove to them that they weren't is to described the curious angles their lower legs are making before the ambulence arrives. How do we prevent jumpers from downsizing too quickly and without the necessary training/education? I think offering a venue is a great idea, but if they choose not to participate it won;t affect them. Or even if they do, don't do well and decidie that it isn't their fault, but the wind, traffic, their canopy is too bug, etc? It will make a difference, but my target audience will be missed. Derek

I saw something on the FAA's web page last night that they are processing rating applications from 20 November, 2003 right now. When did your paperwork get sent in? Derek

Basically Bill Von's list. Current canopy. It hasn't been defined yet, but Bill's list is the starting point. Some people don't want to do HP landings, which is fine, so they won't vbe required to demonstrate them. Weather the low turn was intentional or not makes no difference, the turn that results in an injury has the same dynamics whether it was intentional or not. That would be a klarge part of the training, avoinding putting youself into a position where a low turn is necessary to avoid an obstacle, get into the wind, etc. Just like a good landing in an airplane starts on the downwind leg, a HP landing is all in the set up. We are still trying to gain acceptance for the idea, details would be next. Derek