Jump Pilot Training Course

[737driver 0]

I agree.

But there is a HUGE MX issue and lack of oversight of skydiving operations....

Fine if you want to keep the actual skydive under the remit of the USPA...

But as for the operation of the aircraft it is high time the FAA started getting touch before anymore innocent lives are lost.

[Colson 0]

Quote

How about just being more selective of pilots, and firing the horse's asses? I've seem pilots doing unsafe things deliberately, and being fired, then going off elsewhere to kill themselves and someone else in a perfectly good airplane. I don't think it's a maintenance issue; it's an attitude issue.

We need pilots who know to turn around in bad weather, get the nose down if the engine quits, and not run out of speed on jump run. We don't need arrogant pilots who will kill you trying to do you a favor or giving you an extra "thrill". With all that said, I've flown with some great jump pilots, and some that I will not get in a plane with again. Skydivers need to learn what is acceptable in a pilot, and what is not. Parachutist article, perhaps?

Best choice of words, I very much agree.....But when the plane is sitting and the dzo has customers and only the bonehead is available to fly....guess what happens.


737driver...this isnt all about maintenance issues, and maintenance issues are not confined to DZ's, airlines are some of the worst offenders ever.

[737driver 0]

I beg to differ.

In the last few years I can think of only one crash in America that was the result of MX... The Beech 1900.

The simple fact is jump prices need to at least double for there to be enough money to look after the airplanes and ensure proper pilot training.

To train a turbine jump pilot correctly I would say costs around 12-15k

The only way to really train them is in a simulator.

You just can't replicate the kind of training needed in the airplane.

I would also question at 250 hours if your ready to have people climbing all over the outside of your airplane.

Your very green at that stage... and you have people changing the CG of the aircraft... and effectively extending a huge speed brake on one side of the aircraft.

I would be curious if someone could inform me what steps if any the USPA has taken to address the problem of aircraft accidents in the sport of skydiving.

[deadbug 0]

Quote

Your having a laugh?

Aviation in the United States is regulated by the FAA... not the USPA.

We are talking about serious issues with the MX of jump planes.

It is about time the FAA started to prosecute.. and maybe bring about a change for the greater good.

I know who it's regulated by as I am a part 121 captain for a major carrier with close to 7000 hours of flight time and multiple type ratings. I also have flown around 1200 in jump operations and did my time in 135 ops too. My point is that there is nothing that says that a program taylored specifically towards jump ops cant be developed by the people that have the experience and expertise ie. jump pilots. There are many areas of aviation that require specialized training specifically to the type of operation outside of the scope of the FAA (AG, banner towing, bush flying). Of course there are regs in place that apply to these operations but most of these industries go above and beyond the requirements in the interest of safety and self preservation. We as a group can do the same without inviting the FAA in to stir the pot. A great example is the entire AFF program. Is there an FAA requirement for jump training in the US? The FAA recognises that the jump community is better suited to train jumpers and has taken a hands off approach. There is no reg that keeps my neighbor from buying a rig and jumping from his friends plane without seeking jump training. With the exception of some very basic regs that regulate all part 91 ops and the basic provisions of part 105 we have been allowed to develop our own training. We can do the same with jump pilot training.

Doug

[737driver 0]

But has the USPA done anything in relation to aircraft accidents in skydiving...

I could well be wrong i just cant think of anything!?

[deadbug 0]

Quote

But has the USPA done anything in relation to aircraft accidents in skydiving...

I could well be wrong i just cant think of anything!?

Nope,

They do in my opinion however have a very good AFF and tandem program in place. My suggestion is to mirror those programs drawing on our own pool of talent. Designate someone with vast amounts of experience to head up the program, then designate examiners in various regions of the country to take it to the field. Require initial training and at least annual training to maintain your USPA jump pilot card. It has always amazed me that we have such well developed programs in place for the jumping side but no real structure on the flying side. My main point is that we have the ability to handle this ourselves without looking outside to the FAA.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

I think they (FAA) would be better of spending their time bringing sky diving under some form of FAR 135 regulation.

I'm a DZO, and with one high time 182. When my A&P/IA says "You know, it would be a good idea to..." I say, let's do it. For instance we replaced all pulleys, and control cables last winter. I also comply with my insurance requirements with regard to pilot training.

The very same day that I'm required to comply with Part 135 is the day the shingle comes down. My guess is that only a very small handful of full time "large DZs" would remain. I could charge $50 per slot, and $500 per tandem, and it still wouldn't be a worthwhile venture for me.

Obviously I don't think that forcing skydiving ops to part 135 is the answer. That said, there are way to many aircraft accidents in this industry. I've also said, and will say again here that "I don't expect to die doing what I do, but if I do it'll more than likely be in an airplane crash, not the skydive."

In the end you have to draw a line in the sand. With regard to driving cars, if we reduced the maximum speed limit to 30 mph and forced compliance, the 40,000 + highway deaths each year in this country would all but be eliminated. This is not a compromise we're willing to make to save the lives of 40,000 people each year.

I guess my point is to be careful what you wish for, you just may get it.

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[737driver 0]

I guess your one of the good guys out there... It is really nice to hear that attitude from a DZO with regard to MX... Let me buy you a beer.

The problem arises that many DZO's are not thinking like that... thus we need the FAA to do something about it..

Because you hit the nail on the head.. your feel your going to die in the skydive aircraft not the skydive...

That is just an insane situation that we find ourselves in... and something needs to be done about it..

Admitting we have a problem, talking about it and putting ideas forward is a great start.

I would still like someone to tell me what if anything the USPA have done to try and keep aircraft blue side up.

[futuredivot 0]

I'm separating the training from the MX sid eof this discusson. What will NEW standards address that complying with EXISTING standards won't? This side of things isn't a DZ only issue. It's GA wide, but by and far, the vast majority of operators do what has to be done (trust me, I'm probably in more recip maint shops than anyone else you'll ever meet)

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[737driver 0]

I think the greatest thing they will bring is oversight.

So that regulations whatever part they are under are enforced and complied to.

Running a skydiving aircraft way beyond TBO is just silly.

It has a hard life, if it is a single engine... chances are your going to find out how far beyond TBO you can go when you apply full power... So your going to be close to the ground... with no motor.

So oversight, and regulations stating compliance with manufacturers recommendations.

Plus minimum standards and a training program requirement for jumpilots.

Of course there would need to be much work in drawing up the exact wording of such legislation.

[skydived19006 4]

Quote

I guess your one of the good guys out there... It is really nice to hear that attitude from a DZO with regard to MX... Let me buy you a beer.

A couple of points I've noticed. One DZO I know of was trying to survive from the revanue generated by his one Cessna Kansas DZ. When he had to choose between maintenance and eating, he chose food. He also crashed that airplane http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20010316X00591&key=1. I have a day job, the DZ does have to support itself, but not me and my family.

On the topic of TBO, what's the difference in a Texas Skyways carbureted 520 with a 2500 hour TBO, and an equally well built O-470 with a 1500 hour TBO, obviously other than the number on the paperwork? My 0-470 has 2300 hours on it right now, strong compressions, reasonable oil use, etc. That said, even if it's still "healthy" at the end of this season it'll be replaced. Maybe a bit off topic, but by your definition I may not be one of "the good guys" since I've chosen not to replace a healthy engine simply because the paper that came with it says 1,500 as opposed to 2,500.

On the topic of pilot training, I agree that the practice of having a "veteran skydiver pilot" ride for a couple of trips, and calling them "trained" is not sufficient.

Martin

Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

[737driver 0]

The trouble is... discretion is all well and good.

The problem is in skydiving it has been abused.

Because discretion is allowed to be used with regard to TBO in 91 operations... that translates to some DZO's as don't bother doing it save money (Which is a false economy)

[Colson 0]

The purpose of the overhaul isnt to get a new engine, it is for an inspection. After overhaul much of your engine may be the old parts provided they meet the tolerances in the overhaul manual, which will not be "new" tolerances, therefore the engine is not/cannot be zero timed at an "overhaul". Aside from the opportunity to inspect, there are other things that can be done like cleaning sludge, new rings, plain bearings, cylinders are sent out, etc.

That being said the overhaul period is in place to inspect the engine, and running over the TBO can be more complicated then just having good compressions, oil PSI, oil analysis, etc. I am not 100% against running over TBO, but is is hard to define how much over TBO is ok, and what exactly to look for to determine when it should no longer be operated.

The best thing a new engine owner can do is put themselves on a saving plan, meaning for each hour of engine operation X amount of $$ is put aside for the upcoming TBO. Many dont like this idea, but it can work well.

[diverdriver 5]

My turn.

Wow quite the discussion of jump plane ops. Reminds me of some posts I made on rec.skydiving back in 1998. Ten years ago. Since then, the number of jump plane accidents have gone up and then dropped back down. The only educational website for jump plane ops I know of is mine www.diverdriver.com. USPA always backs away from anything relating to training of pilots and oversight of aircraft maintenance.

What I thought would be a good idea would be an expansion of FAR Part 105. In there we could develop a training sylabus or PTS for a jump pilot. Each type of jump plane C-182/C-206/KA-90/DHC-6 etc would have a seperate sign off. How that sign off would happen would need to be developed. Would there be DEs or would it be like towing gliders? The person with a commercial license and a signoff can do the training. It recognizes the uniqueness of the activity yet does not overly complicate things driving businesses out of business needlessly.

Each DZ should have a yearly inspection or two from the FSDO. This is a commercial operation and there should be oversight. Checks and balance. Right now we do not have balance.

We should make sure our pilots have covered a minimum of subjects and training to flying jumpers. We can not hope that our pilots just pick up on the right conversations before something bad happens. We need to know they know what can happen before it happens. That is why I list all the jump plane accidents I can find. We need to learn from the past as we repeat the same accidents over and over.

Please, use my website to help train your pilots. Use it as a loose framework and tailor it to your operation. There is no reason for any jump pilot to say they didn't get much help as the DZO was not a pilot.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[livendive 8]

Quote

I think they (FAA) would be better of spending their time bringing sky diving under some form of FAR 135 regulation.

This would do far more to increase safety at drop zones... it would also close many... but what is better less drop zones or less incidents

Well you could do away with ALL incidents if you did away with all dropzones. It sounds like that's something you would endorse.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[737driver 0]

Do you advocate some drop zones continuing their operations in the current unregulated fashion?

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

But has the USPA done anything in relation to aircraft accidents in skydiving...

I could well be wrong i just cant think of anything!?

This was probably the 'closest' thing you'll find in that area.

USPA added questions about seatbelts to all exams, added seatbelt requirements directly to the BSRs.

No one (NTSB, FAA or USPA) did anything about the improper MX, no/low experience or training of jump pilots, improper W&B, aft cg. AC fueling ops (except for the PIA hot-refueling SOP) etc.

BTW, today is the anniversary of the Perris crash.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[737driver 0]

The FAA do have allot of regulations..

Lot's of what skydiving centers do is actually illegal... we just need for the FAA to start enforcing things more vigorously.

Classic example is taking the jump aircraft and jumpers to an event....

[livendive 8]

Quote

Do you advocate some drop zones continuing their operations in the current unregulated fashion?

I haven't gotten the impression they are unregulated. Rather, I've gotten the impression that *some* operate outside of the regulations. I advocate people deciding whether they want to support such dropzones...if they're unsafe and all the instructors leave as a result, the dropzone will shut down.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[737driver 0]

They should be brought to account and those responsible for violations of the FAR's should be prosecuted under existing legislation.

[livendive 8]

Quote

The FAA do have allot of regulations..

Lot's of what skydiving centers do is actually illegal... we just need for the FAA to start enforcing things more vigorously.

Classic example is taking the jump aircraft and jumpers to an event....

So jumpers flying in a jump plane is fine, and a jump plane ferrying to an event is fine, but by god, if those two things happen simultaneously, death and destruction are guaran-fucking-teed. Please explain how a normal cross country is made dramatically riskier when carrying jumpers. Let me guess, you'd prefer the jumpers be paying passengers in your 737. Pardon me if I'm not already reaching for my wallet.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[livendive 8]

Quote

They should be brought to account and those responsible for violations of the FAR's should be prosecuted under existing legislation.

Agreed.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[737driver 0]

because for a start there would be seats, a restraint system...

(On turbine aircraft their would be EGPWS, TCAS), Weather Radar, Operational Control, Training & Qualification of the crew, Certification, Flight Dispatchers, route & performance analysis, flight time and duty limitations, Minimum Equipment list + dispatch deviation procedures Air Carrier Certificate, POI's, FAA Surveillance.


And last but not least it would be ILLEGAL for a skydiving aircraft to do it unless it met the above

It is wrong to put the fair paying public in an unregulated, unauthorized and illegal form of transport.... Think of the C208 crash in WA

[Colson 0]

Quote

They should be brought to account and those responsible for violations of the FAR's should be prosecuted under existing legislation.

I like that wording.

[737driver 0]

I guess all I wanted to achieved in the main from FAR 135 is having the FAA down at the DZ more often... and forcing a working relationship between the two.