Jump Pilot Training Course

[livendive 8]

Quote

Think of the C208 crash in WA

I had friends in three different crashes in the last year, two fatal to all aboard, including that one (and I had been asked to be on that flight several times). I've also ridden ferry planes to and from Boise, quite possibly in that exact plane. You are free to disagree with me, but don't think for a second that my opinion formed in a vacuum devoid of personal loss in such aircraft.

Blues,
Dave

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

[737driver 0]

Well.....

If the regulations had of been followed and the DZ was not doing something ILLEGAL then the loss of life would be at MOST 1.

[livendive 8]

Almost every skydiving fatality, aircraft related or not, could be prevented by the deceased having not gotten on the plane. Who are you to decide what risks other people should expose themselves to?

Blues,
Dave

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

[737driver 0]

Dave your views are not compatible with the NAS.

Lets not forget that these aircraft fly over peoples houses and operate in the NAS.

Who are you to say that a substandard aircraft can fly over property endangering life.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Dave your views are not compatible with the NAS.

Are we getting at the heart of the matter here? Because all I've expressed is the view of someone who wishes to continue skydiving, and you think that is not compatible with the NAS?

Quote

Who are you to say that a substandard aircraft can fly over property endangering life.

I have said no such thing. I think skydiving AC should meet the current standards. You think the standards should be increased to an unsustainable level.

Blues,
Dave

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

[futuredivot 0]

OK, let me preface by saying I am NOT a pilot. On the other hand, I've probably spent as many hours asleep in left seat of single engine recips as a bunch of CFI's I know have total time. I feel qualified to judge pilots and I'd rather trust my safety to nearly any jump plane pilot that I've flown with as opposed to a lot of the DCA/Flight Safety/etc grads that I've met that can't take a 172 from Sanford to Ocala without filing or at least flight following. At least on a ferry trip-I do think some situational specific training is warrented to skydiving operations but that can be addressed without additional expensive hard to maintain regulations. And definitely without sim time.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

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

Are FAR Part 91 and Part 105 suddenly devoid or all regualtions?

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

(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.

Do you really need WX radar, EGWPS and deviation procedures for 20 minute VFR fliights? What "FAA surveillance" do you want? What's "operational control"? What do you need a dispatcher for? Can't the amnifest desk do the job?

Quote

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

Well, bub, the C208 crash in Washington wasn't a DZ flying it. The DZ rented the plane to a group of jumpers and a pilot for the trip, a part 91 operation. He was IFR rated, the plane was IFR equipped. Tell me why they didn't get a wx briefing or file a flight plan, IFR or VFR. It's pilots' attitudes that kill, not the FAR part they are flying under.

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

Dave your views are not compatible with the NAS.

NAS does fine, whether the jump planes crash or not. It's hub and spoke scheduling that's screwing up the NAS.

I'm quite happy with the pilots that fly me under Part 91. I don't need to spend twice as much to feel no safer.

[billvon 2,990]

>Lets not forget that these aircraft fly over peoples houses and operate in the NAS.

Generally, the FAA doesn't care if we kill ourselves - and I can see the logic in that. They care very much if we kill people who didn't sign up for the risks of skydiving. The lack of FAA regulation so far is due to the fact that we're pretty good at avoiding deaths to people other than skydivers.

That's not to say that we're doing a great job, of course; we have a ways to go. But the "all the people who live near drop zones are at risk of being killed by falling aluminum!" doesn't really fly (no pun intended.)

[737driver 0]

Well, bub, the C208 crash in Washington wasn't a DZ flying it. The DZ rented the plane to a group of jumpers and a pilot for the trip, a part 91 operation. He was IFR rated, the plane was IFR equipped. Tell me why they didn't get a wx briefing or file a flight plan, IFR or VFR. It's pilots' attitudes that kill, not the FAR part they are flying under.

The FAA say other wise, they say it was illegal

[grimmie 186]

Our sport has a wealth of knowledge not being utilized. We have jump pilots out there, current and retired, that have a tremendous amount of experience. We have DZO's that have operated aircraft successfully for many years.
If you want to tow a banner, land on floats, etc. there is specialized training available.
My original post was to make people here think about ways to train our jump pilots in a common manner.
Maybe a large DZ (with access to a 182 and up) should start a training center. Gather some of the most experienced jump pilots, and new pilots that have just started flying jumpers, and come up with a sylabus.
Flying jumpers is way more than not crashing, as we all know. I have recently been with new pilots that couldn't even use a GPS to get us out over the DZ.
A helmet, AAD and 2 new canopies aren't doing us any good if we stall on jump run, crash on take off etc. IMHO we neglect training the most important person on the jump, the pilot.
Now on to the good. There are some amazingly talented jump pilots out there. Many have flown you and I on formation loads, daily jumps and demos. They are spread all across the world.
My original point is, it's time to put our thick headed skydiver brains to work and come up with some ideas to make it safer for all of us, including the first time jumpers with no clue how it all works.
Blue Skies!

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

The FAA say other wise, they say it was illegal

Do you have a link to that statement. I'm curious to read about it.

As to my other question, do you really think we need all the resources an airline has to fly jumpers safely to 13K? Seriously? TCAS would be nice, but EGPWS?

[737driver 0]

That was in response to another poster saying why is it wrong for jump aircraft to ferry jumpers across the country.

EGPWS could of easily save the 208 over WA

[livendive 8]

Quote

That was in response to another poster saying why is it wrong for jump aircraft to ferry jumpers across the country.

You still didn't answer the question. *You* say that the FAA says it was illegal, but you haven't provided a reference supporting that statement.

Blues,
Dave

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

[scdrnr 0]

The problem may not be lack of jump pilot training but a systemic problem in pilot training in general. A commercial pilot ticket should mean that a pilot is very competent at stall recovery from a variety of attitudes, configurations, at the full range of the weight and balance envelope. But many flight schools, especially the "Airline Academy" types only train their pilots to recover from the first sign of a stall, usually the horn, and they've never had more than two people and a couple of flight bags in the plane. And then they pass the in house checkride and go off into the world unprepared for anything other than riding around with a babysitter, making radio calls and working the gear lever.

Yup, there are a whole lot of pilots out there who have been trained by instructors whose only spin training consisted of a couple of recoveries from a 1 turn spin in a 172, who've never flown in a cloud, planned a flight longer than half their fuel endurance, operated at gross weight, etc, etc......

If the airlines have their way with user-fees and all that BS its only going to get worse. Imagine the situation when the only flight training available is airline style ab-initio programs whose curriculums are designed for lowest cost, lowest risk.

My two cents - avoid pilots who wore epaulets during their training.

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

EGPWS could of easily save the 208 over WA

No, you're wrong.It would not have. EGPWS prevents controlled flight into terrain, CFIT. It doesn't recover aircraft from uncontrolled flight. Better judgment on the pilot's part would have saved those people. It was an avoidable situation.

[riggerrob 643]

Good point Jan!

The next anniversary is Labor Day, when a Beech 18 crashed in Hinkley, Illinois.
Our challenge is to allow zero jump plane crashes between now and Labour Day.

The process started with Diver Driver's website.

The second step requires DZOs to hire compentent, cautious pilots. Numbers of hours are less important than attitude.

The third step occurrs during annual Safety Day. Skydivers should be reminded of competent pilots treat their airplanes: walk-arounds EVERY morning, dipping fuel tanks when in doubt, not "pushing" weather limits, etc.

[riggerrob 643]

The Australian Parachute Federation published a manual for jump pilots.
The British Parachute Association published a manual for jump pilots.
The Canadian Sports Parachuting Association published a manual for jump pilots.

[shaark 0]

I read the forums but seldom post as I feel frustrated by the poor understanding shown by most contributors. A "reply" would often need an essay to try and clarify/agree on basic (and not so basic) facts. And then so often individuals have their own agenda which may not allow valid, practical resolutions/solutions.
This topic is a very important one, and thankfully most of the bulls**t is missing.
Just on one element --- pilot quality. When a wannabe jump pilot arrives I expect that they can basically fly. They have a few hundred hours and a commercial, right? Trained by FAA qualified instructors and passed by FAA examiners. All the requirements met, all the i's dotted and the t's crossed. Regulations have been followed and the bureaucrats are happy.
In my real world I politely allow way more than half these aircraft drivers to try somewhere else. Generally: they have a vague understanding of aerodynamics, so I am concerned about their ability to remain in control of an aircraft, especially if shit happens, and especially in that they can be the cause of shit happening; almost no understanding of engines, so I cringe at the financial risk, and most especially the safety risk; and, skipping lots of other things, their attitudes, probably the most critical area. So many are bulletproof. Nothing bad can ever happen, so who needs to be aware, who needs to operate in a manner that minimizes risk? And those pretty terms such as situational awareness, resource management, decision making --- well, they are pretty terms, but to so many that is all they are, something in a book.
And so many know just about all there is to know about flying light aircraft, and not in a superior way, just that they have a commercial, and they have been trained. They do not know how much they do not know, and they really don't feel this in their gut.
I do.
So, while it might be possible to change their mindsets, I don't have the time. Happily there are enough others. They want to fly. They want to learn. They want to improve, to study, to practice, to ask, to listen, to THINK, to challenge themselves.
As an industry, how can we produce better pilots? At least start with pilots who have open, questioning minds.
More regulation? Well, the FAA is already doing a great job in supplying me with pilots I cannot in good conscience use.
'Nuff for now.

[itllclear 1]

Quote

the FAA is already doing a great job in supplying me with pilots I cannot in good conscience use.

As a CFI I get to do a number of aircraft check outs and flight reviews.

As far as I am concerned, all the licensing process does is weed out some of the incompetents.

Hope that makes you more comfortable next time you get into an airplane.

BSBD

harry

"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there."

"Your statement answered your question."

[shaark 0]

Itllclear,
I'm usually pretty comfortable in aircraft, though a fresh jump pilot can sometimes be interesting. After they are through a basic check-out and are flying loads, stuff not critical to safety on any particular flight means bite your tongue and wait to de-brief on the ground. I can get antsy, mostly trying to get into their heads, trying to figure them out, judging if they trying to learn and improve, and judging if they will handle situations if and when they occur.
Got to give them some room to be responsible.
When I'm flying myself, sure, I'm comfortable, but I also fly scared. (Not really the right word, but close. Healthy respect, yes, but that is probably not strong enough.) I put a lot of effort into covering my ass, with regard to as many negative scenarios as I can imagine for any particular flight. I like to be prepared. Minor example: I dislike anr headsets. I much prefer hearing my engine.
By the way, I love flying.
I've had my share of shit over the years. Couple of control issues --- ass pucker time. One engine failure. No sweat, 7,000' near the airport. 1,000hrs on the engine, internal failure --- lifter housing cracked off.
Electrical short --- smell of burnt wiring, real ass pucker time.
One crash, not skydiving related. Aircraft was demolished. Really, really demolished. Ended inverted in a gully with the cockpit crushed. I was the right seat, the owner/operator/week-end warrior was in the left. He tried his best to kill us, I managed a little corrective input, but still very fortunate to survive. Hell of a ride, though. I'd definitely go again if I had a survival guarantee.
It's been fun, and I still have a lot of flying to do.

Blue Skies

[itllclear 1]

Quote

a fresh jump pilot can sometimes be interesting

I just got a call from a recently certificated commercial pilot who knew me from a ground school course I taught at the local community college.

He answered an ad for a jump pilot and was leaving in a couple of days to start. He wanted to know someplace local where he could get a "high performance" endorsement.

So we're going to see a newly minted commercial pilot, with under 300 hrs., and a fresh high performance rating flying the 182 or 206 at someone's drop zone.

The best I could do was direct him to Diverdriver's website to get general info about flying jumpers. I also suggested he insist on practicing stalls and take offs and landings at gross weight and the aft c.g. often found in loaded jump planes. I suggested sand bags rather than people for the practice.

Finally, I pulled up NTSB reports of skydiver 182 & 206 crashes for the last few years and forwarded them to him.

With the info available to him, if he practices the gross weight maneuvers, even with his limited experience he'll probably be relatively safe.

I'm glad he called me so he could get some "mental prep" before starting.

BSBD

Harry

"Harry, why did you land all the way out there? Nobody else landed out there."

"Your statement answered your question."

[Beerlight 0]

Quote

So we're going to see a newly minted commercial pilot, with under 300 hrs., and a fresh high performance rating flying the 182 or 206 at someone's drop zone.

edit to delete and add: Re-reading my own post sometimes makes me wonder why I post at all! Nice job on you helping out that new guy. Wish someone would've helped me out when I started hauling meat.......

[JohnDeere 0]

That was very cool of you to give back to the sport that way. I wish DZO's would do things like that to prepair new pilots.

Nothing opens like a Deere!

You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers!