USPA and FAA role in parachuting accident investigation and reporting

[DJL 235]

Could I get some help in thinking through the roles of these two groups in skydiving/parachuting accident investigation and reporting.

This is how I understand it:

The USPA only gathers information from outside sources, they don't have a role in determining cause but they state a representative's opinion in their monthly publication (From within the USPA or from the dropzone S&TA?). They can then only state what is factually known, not possible scenarios.

The FAA doesn't investigate any further than determining that correct flight ops were followed for skydiving operations. Do they file a report if there is no association between flight ops and the accident? Take a low turn, for example.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[riggerrob 643]

Normally, a USPA instructor starts the investigation process. Then he/she usually reports to the local USPA Safety & Training Advisor, who shares his findings with the USPA Regional Director, who shares the report with USPA Headquarters. USPA's goal is to learn from mistakes and modify training methods to prevent similar accidents in the future.

Sometimes the Federal Aviation Administration gets involved in investigations, but more likely the National Transportation Safety Board will investigate aircraft crashes. The NTSB usually ignores accidents only involving parachutes.

Parachute manufacturers often get involved in investigations if it looks like their equipment was to blame. For example, Ted Strong flew up to Cross Keys the day after their most recent tandem fatality because a tandem rig built by Strong Enterprises was involved.

Sometimes federal investigators call in neutral, third party riggers to examine failed parachutes. For example, a few years back, the Vernon RCMP detachment asked me to inspect a parachute that was involved in a fatality. While I am an FAA Master Parachute Rigger, I have done very little business with the skydiving school in Vernon, so could be trusted to report impartially.
I also did a similar inspection for a law suit involving Dan Poynter.

[NickDG 23]

This is a big ball floating around that no one really wants to catch. While there are experienced jumpers who work for the FAA there's no "Go Team" like is dispatched to airplane accident scenes. They will, mostly, defer to the DPRE, a local master rigger examiner who gives the parachute rigger's test, if they have questions.

If you look through the older FAA accident databases they did include "fatals" that were otherwise run of the mill but didn’t involve the aircraft. They seemed to have stopped doing that now.

In their defense the USPA has done a pretty good job of clueing people into how to die while skydiving. Paul Sitter's 20-odd years of annual fatality reports should be bound into a handout students read before bothering with the SIMs.

But, in some areas, USPA pulls their punches. Some of it they did wrong in the first place and the second is a reflection on the times. When I started the BASE Fatality List I printed the name of the deceased jumper because I thought personality was an accident factor - for good or bad. It's a tough pill to swallow, sometimes, but viewing the accident sans the person is missing a big chunk of information.

The legal ramifications are another stifling effect. The old saying that only the good die young is very true for the most part. But, from time to time, people do die because they are almost asking for it. Sometimes they are in over their heads, too dim-witted, or even misled. One accident conclusion the USPA never cites is their instructional program failed somebody. Surely, in more than a few cases, this must be true.

So to answer your question, no, there is no independent "expert" investigation of almost any skydiving fatality. It's all very conveniently "in-house."

NickD BASE 194

[mjosparky 4]

If there is a fatality at a USPA affiliated DZ the S&TA is charged with filling out and submitting an “Accident Report” form to USPA. (see link) USPA takes the form and “sanitizes” it and publishes that version in Parachutist. The Accident Report in its original form is not available to anyone.

If there is a fatality at a non USPA DZ or other venue, there is very little chance of there being an “official” report made by anyone other then local law enforcement and the coroner’s office.

To the best of my knowledge the FAA does not make an official report on skydiving fatalities that do not involve an AC incident or major violations of FAR’s.

Accident Report

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[grue 1]

I could be wrong on this, and probably am, but someone had said before that the FAA comes into play if there's an accident involving possible failure of reserve canopies.

cavete terrae.

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

I could be wrong on this, and probably am, but someone had said before that the FAA comes into play if there's an accident involving possible failure of reserve canopies.

You may be right, but I have never seen a report generated by the FAA on a skydiving fatality that did not involve AC operations.

If you can remember who said or posted that see if they have a link to more information.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[tombuch 0]

Quote

If there is a fatality at a non USPA DZ or other venue, there is very little chance of there being an “official” report made by anyone other then local law enforcement and the coroner’s office.

Actually a non-USPA drop zone can still have an S&TA, as well as USPA instructors and everything else. The S&TA is really the bridge between USPA and the jumper, and that's true no matter where the jumpers are making their skydives.

Non-member DZ's often do have S&TA's that make fatality reports.
.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[fcajump 164]

Quote

Could I get some help in thinking through the roles of these two groups in skydiving/parachuting accident investigation and reporting.

This is how I understand it:

The USPA only gathers information from outside sources, they don't have a role in determining cause but they state a representative's opinion in their monthly publication (From within the USPA or from the dropzone S&TA?). They can then only state what is factually known, not possible scenarios.

The FAA doesn't investigate any further than determining that correct flight ops were followed for skydiving operations. Do they file a report if there is no association between flight ops and the accident? Take a low turn, for example.

(I orginally composed this as a PM to someone else concerning a different forum... since you ask the question here, I thought I might paste it in... for what its worth... JW)

I do not work for or represent USPA... NOR am I arguing one side of the other... just relating MY understanding of their policy...

IF reports are released with all their detail, they would inevitably be used in court. As such, contributions to the reports would be non-existant. No one would be quoted in a report that would cause them to be called into court, even as a witness (a friend had over $10k of expenses as a witness).

Therefore, while the COMPLETE/public report based on voluntary information would be more useful, it would never actually happen.

So, to get the most complete report to the skydiving community, the information is collected with the assurance of annonymity and that all public disclosure will be made with the information "scrubbed" to the most non-biased that it can be. This way, everyone involved gets to say what they saw without being part of the law suits based on what they contributed to the report, and the community gets a report that (hopefully) contains the best conclusion as to what happened and how to avoid it. This public report is published in the interest of safety.

I understand that their position on this has been upheald in court several times.

In the (unfortunate) real world, I would have to agree that a scrubbed report is better than everyone clamming up and us learning nothing...

Best we can due as long as we have money hungry lawyers ...

JW

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...