Anyone know how to rescend a Regional Director?

[bobsled92 0]

Quote

Quote

I must have misunderstood from my original Instructor who told me that a skydiver or a pilot can declare an emerengcy at any time and land where they fell is safe

Your instructor was wrong.

Legally, a skydiver is *not* an aircraft.
***if so, WHY does a Parachute have #1 right -of-way in the sky.
A skydiver does not have any of the legal protections a pilot does for landing in an open field.
**what legal proctions would that be?

The difference is obvious. A skydiver intentionally put themselves in the situation when they jumped from the airplane. A pilot with an aircraft emergency did not.
*I believe the pilot decided to fly that day (intentionally go in the air as well.)

_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/

• Quote

[mikieB 0]

the problem is there were people there, they all told the truth and she seems to think there is some huge conspiracy because what those who were there said doesnt match what her third hand sources say. Im wonder why rumors matter more than truth in this case

confucious say: he who stands on top of toilet gets high on pot.

[mikieB 0]

Your instructor was wrong.

Legally, a skydiver is *not* an aircraft.
***if so, WHY does a Parachute have #1 right -of-way in the sky.
A skydiver does not have any of the legal protections a pilot does for landing in an open field.
**what legal proctions would that be?

you are right, the farmer mcnasty issue, although big at our airport is not a huge concern. mostly it is students and out of town jumpers that land in his property. As of now i would love to have the farmer be our biggest problem

confucious say: he who stands on top of toilet gets high on pot.

[peterk 0]

Or maybe the reason why jumpers aren't lining up in droves to support the rumors is because they are completely not true? Just a guess.

Please see attached picture...

---------------
Peter
BASE - The Ultimate Victimless Crime

[gdmusumeci 0]

Quote

if so, WHY does a Parachute have #1 right -of-way in the sky.

Well, because they don't.

Right-of-way is governed by FAR Part 91 Section 91.113. That says, in part, that a balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft (even that of "gliders," which I assume a parachute would be considered as).

[billvon 2,996]

Peter, Mikie, I gotta tell you, you're screwing up.

A friend of yours did something really dumb, and it almost killed him and almost got a pilot in very serious trouble. You covered it up pretty well. To make a long story short, you're probably going to get away with it. Which is fine - everyone knows what they did wrong, and I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen again. All I cared about from the point of view of DZ.com is that it was reported in general terms so other people could learn from the incident.

But now you're risking that. You're going after a regional director for doing her job. You're keeping this can of worms open. Eventually someone is going to realize that your stories don't quite match, and if you make enough of a stink, the entire story is going to come out. I assume you don't want that.

So word to the wise - quit while you're ahead.

I deleted the original thread in Incidents because I didn't feel that anyone was helped by slamming a drop zone or specific people, and I felt that some things are best handled privately. You have responded by slandering a regional director publically, someone who has done a lot of good for skydiving in general (and for specific people.) So I no longer feel any obligation to keep things quiet. Hence this public reply.

Choose your next moves carefully. If you let it go, then it will likely fade away and people will forget about it. If you continue to push it into the open, it will eventually end up in the open - and I'm sure you don't want that, both for the sake of the jumpers involved and for the sake of the pilot. My advice would be to let it go.

[stratostar 5]

People need to step up, show some morals and some backbone and tell the correct people what they witness about the situation out at the DZ is question. But instead they sit in the corner all quiet and let the RD take the heat, cause if they speak up, they might not be able to jump at that DZ, or their friends aren't going to like them anymore. (quote)

You got that right sister! If your one of the few good for you
we need more like you in the sport!

~

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[op5e 0]

From someone who has way too little jumps to have sense and is not involved in the politics mentioned in this thread (thank god).

I just have to say as I followed this thread from its creation, from the sideline. I see mikieb stuffed up by the way he asked his question (ie not getting someone else to ask from a different region). He also stuffed up by taking the bait when people badgered him. However if that is really how he feels he has every right to express his greviences regardless how sound you believe these are.

More than likely a body like USPA would have a structure in place to take greviences. Unsound greviences would be filtered out early and hence would not be any sweat the the people involved. Yes raising greviences can adversely affect innocent people who are hard working. However if the director is doing a great job as you guys suggest, then it will blow over relatively quickly.

I do think just as we have processes in place to complain about jumpers doing things wrong, there should be places we can go to complain about the officials (which there are). Mikeb was simply asking for the appropriate way to have his greviences heard. Yes the rules say that they can be thrown out, but sometimes you may wish to enquire about your options that are not the exremes.

I do think that this thread was de-railed early not by mikieb and his friends but others trying to defend this RD. It is my interpretation of the thread that mikieb tried his hardest not to bring up the greviences in public but was backed into a corner by people attacking him, and who brought up the events.

To make this conversion short can we just answer the question in the thread and then delete all others. Or wouldnt the most appropriate response be to delete the thread all togeather. This would save the RD a bit of grief and probably for a few others involved.

Sometimes an unbias view can help a situation. But most time it does not, so I will put my flak jacket on. Let the flames begin.

[Tonto 1]

Thing is... Some of us:

KNOW what happened.
KNOW who is trying to cover their asses.
KNOW who is lying.

And it's not the RD.

So if I don't BASE, but have friends that do - and I know what happened in AFRICA - how long do you think it's going to take before the truth comes out?

We all screw up. Trick is not cutting other people off at the knees to make yourself look taller when you have screwed up.

We all have a short attention span, but the longer these threads stay at the top, the hotter they get, and the more personal they get, the more likely it is that they'll be resolved in such a way that people will regret.

One of Murphy's laws of combat states "Act unimportant. The enemy may be low on ammo."

That's good advice for some people right now.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[bobsled92 0]

Quote

Quote

if so, WHY does a Parachute have #1 right -of-way in the sky.

Well, because they don't.

Right-of-way is governed by FAR Part 91 Section 91.113. That says, in part, that a balloon has the right-of-way over any other category of aircraft (even that of "gliders," which I assume a parachute would be considered as).

GLIDERS? no, that not a good assumption. parachutes are in fact listed in right-of-way as parachutes. I used to be ground crew for a Balloon team (Lancaster Co. is LOADED w/ Balloons)
AND according to the FAA an "Airship" (see balloon) does have the right -of-way over a ***POWERED PARACHUTE***.
I'm not jumping with a gas powered fan on me just to possibly avoid Farmer mc Nasty and the FAA shows a balloon(controlable to altitude) in hieracrhy to a MOTORIZED vechilce with Parafoil wing not a parachute with constant descent only.
In Ballooning, we have to have an "A" lic/ FAA cert. When landing in someones property, we went up with the intent to land some where guessing on winds. Never landing on airport property. If any damage, we paid but, allowed to land free of "Criminal tresspass" not free of: sued for property damage.
Nothing seems fair from either stand point.
I "feel" we should be protected from landing out and getting shot. ... SOmething about the Constitution that makes me feel I have a right to live.

_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/

[pilotdave 0]

I don't know what you're talking about. A parachute (other than a powered parachute) is NOT an aircraft and does not factor into FAA right-of-way rules. And a balloon is NOT an airship. And where in the FARs or any other law book does it say that a balloon can land wherever it wants without regard to tresspassing laws?

Dave

[crazydiver 0]

Quote

And where in the FARs or any other law book does it say that a balloon can land wherever it wants without regard to tresspassing laws?

Dave

Well, I dont know about the parachute thing...but you are right on the balloon issue. Thats why a baloon pilot sets the balloon down and the ground crew gets permission from the landowner.

Cheers,
Travis

[bobsled92 0]

Quote

I don't know what you're talking about. A parachute (other than a powered parachute) is NOT an aircraft and does not factor into FAA right-of-way rules. And a balloon is NOT an airship. And where in the FARs or any other law book does it say that a balloon can land wherever it wants without regard to tresspassing laws?

Dave

I see where you are comming from.
I live in Pennsylvania and FAA states that "Local Practices are applied"
Where I am maybe very different "LOCAL than else where.
State of PA. Has a practice that (for some reason ie farm land/ fall into an OLD law of NON criminal tresspass for Ballooning that was written for "Fox Hunting")AC 90-66A -

RECOMMENDED STANDARD TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND PRACTICES FOR AERONAUTICAL OPERATIONS AT
AIRPORTS WITHOUT OPERATING CONTROL TOWERS

Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration

8/26/93

Initiated by: ATP-230

1. PURPOSE.
This advisory circular (AC) calls attention to regulatory requirements and
recommended procedures for aeronautical operations at airports without operating
control towers. It recommends traffic patterns and operational procedures for
aircraft, lighter than air, glider, parachute, rotorcraft, and ultralight vehicle
operations where such use is not in conflict with existing procedures in effect at
those airports.

2. CANCELLATION.
AC 90-66, Recommended Standard Traffic Patterns for Airplane Operations at
Uncontrolled Airports, dated February 27, 1975, is canceled.

3. PRINCIPAL CHANGES.
This AC has been updated to reflect current procedures at airports without
operating control towers. Principal changes include: adding on "Other Traffic
Pattern" section, amending appendix charts to remain consistent with the Airman's
Information Manual (AIM), expanding the "Related Reading Material" section from
"airplane" to "aeronautical" operations, adding definition and references to Common
Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF), acknowledging straight-in approaches are not
prohibited but may be operationally advantageous, and adding a paragraph on wake
turbulence.

4. DEFINITIONS.
a. Airports Without Operating Control Towers. Airports without control towers or
an airport with a control tower which is not operating. These airports are commonly
referred to as nontowered, uncontrolled, or part time towered airports.
b. Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF). A frequency designed for the purpose
of carrying out airport advisory practices while operating to or from an airport
without an operating control tower. The CTAF may be a UNICOM, MULTICOM, flight
service station, or tower frequency and is identified in appropriate aeronautical
publications.

5. RELATED READING MATERIAL.
a. Airport/Facility Directory (AFD).
b. Airman's Information Manual (AIM).
c. Fly Neighborly Guide, Helicopter Association International.
d. Aviation USA, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA).
e. State aviation publications.
f. Various pilot guides.
g. Pilot Operations at Nontowered Airports, AOPA Air Safety Foundation pamphlet.
h. Guidelines for the Operation of Ultralight Vehicles at Existing Airports,
United States Ultralight Association.
i. Facts for Pilots, United States Parachute Association.
j. The latest addition of the following ACs also contain information applicable
to operations at airports without operating control towers:
(1) AC 90-23, Aircraft Wake Turbulence.
(2) AC 90-42, Traffic Advisory Practices at Airports Without Operating Control
Towers.
(3) AC 90-48, Pilot's Role in Collision Avoidance.
(4) AC 91-32, Safety In and Around Helicopters.
(5) AC 103-6, Ultralight Vehicle Operations - Airports, Air Traffic Control,
and Weather.
(6) AC 105-2, Sport Parachute Jumping.

6. BACKGROUND AND SCOPE.
a. Regulatory provisions relating to traffic patterns are found in Parts 91, 93,
and 97 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR). The airport traffic patterns
contained in Part 93 relate primarily to those airports where there is a need for
unique traffic pattern procedures not provided for in Part 91. Part 97 addresses
instrument approach procedures. At airports without operating control towers, Part
91 requires only that pilots of airplanes approaching to land make all turns to the
left unless light signals or visual markings indicate that turns should be made to
the right.
b. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) believes that observance of a
standard traffic pattern and the use of CTAF procedures as detailed in AC 90-42 will
improve the safety and efficiency of aeronautical operations at airports without
operating control towers.

7. GENERAL OPERATING PRACTICES.
a. Use of standard traffic patterns for all aircraft and CTAF procedures by radio
equipped aircraft are recommended at all airports without operating control towers.
However, it is recognized that other traffic patterns may already be in common use
at some airports or that special circumstances or conditions exist that may prevent
use of the standard traffic pattern.
b. The use of any traffic pattern procedure does not alter the responsibility of
each pilot to see and avoid other aircraft. Pilots are encouraged to participate in
"Operation Lights On," which is a voluntary pilot safety program described in the
AIM designed to enhance the "see and avoid" requirement.
c. As part of the preflight familiarization with all available information
concerning a flight, each pilot should review all appropriate publications (AFD,
AIM, Notices to Airmen (NOTAM), etc.), for pertinent information on current traffic
patterns at the departure and arrival airports.
d. It is recommended that pilots utilize visual indicators, such as the segmented
circle, wind direction indicator, landing direction indicator, and traffic pattern
indicators which provide traffic pattern information.
e. The FAA encourages pilots to use the standard traffic pattern. However, for
those pilots who choose to execute a straight-in approach, maneuvering for and
execution of the approach should be completed so as not to disrupt the flow of
arriving and departing traffic. Therefore, pilots operating in the traffic pattern
should be alert at all times to aircraft executing straight-in approaches.
f. Pilots who wish to conduct instrument approaches should be particularly alert
for other aircraft in the pattern so as to avoid interrupting the flow of traffic.
Position reports on the CTAF should include distance and direction from the airport,
as well as the pilot's intentions upon completion of the approach.
g. Pilots of inbound nonradio equipped aircraft should determine the runway in
use prior to entering the traffic pattern by observing the landing direction
indicator or by other means. Pilots should be aware that procedures at airports
without operating control towers generally do not require the use of two-way radios;
therefore, pilots should be especially vigilant for other aircraft while operating
in the traffic pattern. h. Wake turbulence is generated by all aircraft. Therefore,
pilots should expect to encounter turbulence while operating in a traffic pattern
and in proximity to other aircraft. Aircraft components and equipment can be damaged
by wake turbulence. In flight, avoid the area below and behind the aircraft
generating turbulence especially at low altitude where even a momentary wake
encounter can be hazardous. All operators should be aware of the potential adverse
effects that their wake, rotor or propeller turbulence has on light aircraft and
ultralight vehicles,

8. RECOMMENDED STANDARD TRAFFIC PATTERN.
Airport owners and operators, in coordination with the FAA, are responsible for
establishing traffic patterns. However, the FAA encourages airport owners and
operators to establish traffic patterns as recommended in this AC. Further, left
traffic patterns should be established except where obstacles, terrain, and noise
sensitive areas dictate otherwise. Appendix 1 contains diagrams for recommended
standard traffic patterns.
a. Prior to entering the traffic pattern at an airport without an operating
control tower, aircraft should avoid the flow of traffic until established on the
entry leg. For example, wind and landing direction indicators can be checked while
at an altitude above the traffic pattern. When the proper traffic pattern direction
has been determined, the pilot should then proceed to a point well clear of the
pattern before descending to the pattern altitude.
b. Arriving aircraft should be at the appropriate traffic pattern altitude before
entering the traffic pattern. Entry to the downwind leg should be at a 45 degree
angle abeam the midpoint of the runway.
c. It is recommended that airplanes observe a 1000 foot above ground level (AGL)
traffic pattern altitude. Large and turbine powered airplanes should enter the
traffic pattern at an altitude of 1,500 feet AGL or 500 feet above the established
pattern altitude. A pilot may vary the size of the traffic pattern depending on the
aircraft's performance characteristics.
d. The traffic pattern altitude should be maintained until the aircraft is at
least abeam the approach end of the landing runway on the downwind leg.
e. The base leg turn should commence when the aircraft is at a point
approximately 45 degrees relative bearing from the runway threshold.
f. Landing and takeoff should be accomplished on the operating runway most nearly
aligned into the wind. However, if a secondary runway is used, pilots using the
secondary runway should avoid the flow of traffic to the runway most nearly aligned
into the wind.
g. Airplanes on takeoff should continue straight ahead until beyond the departure
end of the runway. Aircraft executing a go-around maneuver should continue straight
ahead, beyond the departure end of the runway, with the pilot maintaining awareness
of other traffic so as not to conflict with those established in the pattern. In
cases where a go-around was caused by an aircraft on the runway, maneuvering
parallel to the runway may be required to maintain visual contact with the
conflicting aircraft.
h. Airplanes remaining in the traffic pattern should not commence a turn to the
crosswind leg until beyond the departure end of the runway and within 300 feet below
traffic pattern altitude, with the pilot ensuring that the turn to downwind leg will
be made at the traffic pattern altitude.
i. When departing the traffic pattern, airplanes should continue straight out or
exit with a 45 left turn (right turn for right traffic pattern) beyond the
departure end of the runway after reaching pattern altitude. Pilots need to be aware
of any traffic entering the traffic pattern prior to commencing a turn.
j. Airplanes should not be operated in the traffic pattern at an indicated
airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).
k. Throughout the traffic pattern, right of way rules apply as stated in FAR Part
91.113. Any aircraft in distress has the right of way over all other aircraft. In
addition, when converging aircraft are of different categories, a balloon has the
right of way over any other category of aircraft; a glider has the right of way over
an airship, airplane, or rotorcraft; and an airship has the right of way over an
airplane or rotorcraft.

9. OTHER TRAFFIC PATTERNS.
Airport operators routinely establish local procedures for the operation of
gliders, parachutists, lighter than air aircraft, helicopters, and ultralight
vehicles. Appendices 2 and 3 illustrate these operations as they relate to
recommended standard traffic patterns.
a. Rotorcraft.
(1) In the case of a helicopter approaching to land, the pilot must avoid the
flow of fixed wing aircraft and land on a marked helipad or suitable clear area.
Pilots should be aware that at some airports, the only suitable landing area is the
runway.
(2) All pilots should be aware that rotorcraft may fly slower and approach at
steeper angles than airplanes. Air taxi is the preferred method for helicopter
ground movements which enables the pilot to proceed at an optimum airspeed, minimize
downwash effect, and conserve fuel. However, flight over aircraft, vehicles, and
personnel should be avoided.
(3) In the case of a gyrocopter approaching to land, the pilot should avoid
the flow of fixed wing aircraft until turning final for the active runway.
(4) A helicopter operating in the traffic pattern may fly a pattern similar to
the airplane pattern at a lower altitude (500 AGL) and closer to the airport. This
pattern may be on the opposite side of the runway with turns in the opposite
direction if local policy permits.
(5) Both classes of rotorcraft can be expected to practice power off landing
(autorotation) which will involve a very steep angle of approach and high rate of
descent (1,500 - 2,000 feet/minute).
b. Gliders.
(1) A glider, including the tow aircraft during towing operations, has the
right of way over powered aircraft.
(2) If the same runway is used by both airplanes and gliders, the glider
traffic pattern will be inside the pattern of engine driven aircraft. If a "Glider
Operating Area" is established to one side of a powered aircraft runway, the glider
pattern will normally be on the side of the airport closest to the "Glider Operating
Area." This will allow gliders to fly the same direction traffic pattern as powered
aircraft in one wind condition and necessitate a separate opposing direction traffic
pattern in the opposite wind condition. (See examples in Appendix 2, Glider
Operations).
(3) Typically, glider traffic patterns have entry points (initial points) from
600 to 1,000 feet AGL.
c. Ultralight Vehicles.
(1) In accordance with FAR Part 103, ultralight vehicles are required to yield
the right of way to all aircraft.
(2) Ultralight vehicles should fly the rectangular pattern as described in
Appendix 2. Pattern altitude should be 500 feet below and inside the standard
pattern altitude established for the airport. An ultralight pattern with its own
dedicated landing area will typically have a lower traffic pattern parallel to the
standard pattern with turns in the opposite direction.
(3) All pilots should be aware that ultralights will fly significantly slower
than airplanes. In addition, ultralights may also exhibit very steep takeoff and
approach angles. Turns may be executed near the end of the runway in order to clear
the area expediently.
d. Lighter Than Air Aircraft.
(1) A balloon has the right of way over any other category of aircraft and
does not follow a standard traffic pattern.
(2) Due to limited maneuverability, airships do not normally fly a standard
traffic pattern. However, if a standard traffic pattern is flown, it will be at an
airspeed below most other aircraft.
e. Parachute Operations.
(1) All activities are normally conducted under a NOTAM noting the location,
altitudes, and time or duration of jump operations. The Airport/Facility Directory
lists airports where permanent drop zones are located.
(2) Jumpers normally exit the aircraft either above, or well upwind of, the
airport and at altitudes well above traffic pattern altitude. Parachutes are
normally deployed between 2,000 feet and 5,000 feet AGL and can be expected to be
below 3,000 feet AGL within 2 miles of the airport.
(3) Pilots of jump aircraft are required by Part 105 to establish two-way
radio communications with the air traffic control facility or Flight Service Station
which has jurisdiction over the affected airspace prior to jump operations for the
purpose of receiving information in the aircraft about known air traffic in the
vicinity. In addition, when jump aircraft are operating at or in the vicinity of an
airport, pilots are also encouraged to provide advisory information on the CTAF,
i.e., "Chambersburg traffic, jumpers away over Chambersburg."
(4) When a drop zone has been established on an airport, parachutists are
expected to land within the drop zone. At airports that have not established drop
zones, parachutists should avoid landing on runways, taxiways, aprons, and their
associated safety areas. Pilots and parachutists should both be aware of the limited
flight performance of parachutes and take steps to avoid any potential conflicts
between aircraft and parachute operations.
(5) Appendix 3 diagrams operations conducted by parachutists.

/s/
Harold W. Becker
Acting Director, Air Traffic
Rules and Procedures Service

_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

FAA states that "Local Practices are applied"

Where is that stated?

Sounds like you're talking about some state tresspassing law, not anything that has to do with the FAA, which doesn't write any laws regarding tresspassing.

Dave

[bobsled92 0]

Where is that stated?

Quote

Quote

FAA states that "Local Practices are applied"

9. OTHER TRAFFIC PATTERNS.
Airport operators routinely establish local procedures for the operation of
gliders, parachutists, lighter than air aircraft, helicopters, and ultralight
vehicles. Appendices 2 and 3 illustrate these operations as they relate to
recommended standard traffic patterns.



>>>

Sounds like you're talking about some state tresspassing law, not anything that has to do with the FAA, which doesn't write any laws regarding tresspassing.

Dave

Pa. tresspass would be more correct in this matter.
(Like I said"OLD stuff but, still on the books and and used by Fox Hunt & "Lighter-than-air" you can still get sued for Damage just not hit with "Criminal tresspass")

_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/

[pilotdave 0]

Ok, they're referring to airport traffic pattern procedures. Like extending a leg of the pattern to avoid overflying neighborhoods, or different patterns for helicopters or jets. They aren't talking about differences in local laws.

Dave

[bobsled92 0]

Well, Honestly I think I got things stuck in my head from years gone by when I got my A lic in 1991.
I had still been ground crew for Channel 8 's Balloon team and was told parachutes have right of way. (I have yet to find what was told to me from way back when). Dick Hess was Captain of the U.S. Balloon team and I probably took his word for gospel.

_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/

[rustywardlow 0]

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty, In stead of guilty until proven innocent?

[flyangel2 2]

Quote

Mikeb was simply asking for the appropriate way to have his greviences heard. Yes the rules say that they can be thrown out, but sometimes you may wish to enquire about your options that are not the exremes

And a true professional would have contacted USPA and asked them what his options where, rather then posting on a public forum. It's pretty darn simple to figure out how to contact USPA or other RDs and ask them without doing it public.

Because he has throw mud publicly he also needs to make a public apology.

Quote

I do think that this thread was de-railed early not by mikieb and his friends but others trying to defend this RD. It is my interpretation of the thread that mikieb tried his hardest not to bring up the greviences in public but was backed into a corner by people attacking him, and who brought up the events.

mikieb tired his hardest not to bring up grievances Then why did he even begin the thread? It's easy to figure out who he was talking about, just click his profile.

Backed into a corner? Only because he posted without examples. If he's going to throw mud, then he needs to have all his information laid out and something to back it.

Quote

To make this conversion short can we just answer the question in the thread and then delete all others. Or wouldnt the most appropriate response be to delete the thread all togeather. This would save the RD a bit of grief and probably for a few others involved.

I plan on keeping this thread alive till a public apology is made. The RD is doing her job, and she gets bad mouth because of it? Damn, no win situation. I said it before, I’ll say it again, if the RD didn’t look into the rumors, she’s be in trouble for that.

May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey

[tombuch 0]

Quote

Well, Honestly I think I got things stuck in my head from years gone by when I got my A lic in 1991.
I had still been ground crew for Channel 8 's Balloon team and was told parachutes have right of way.

Parachutes are NOT mentioned in right of way rules. However, we are tasked with not creating a hazard to air traffic under 105.5. Thus, it is our responsibility to yield to other traffic BEFORE we jump so there is no confusion once the parachute is open. If you are in conflict with an airplane, glider, balloon, or whatever when under canopy, you probably failed the 105.5 test.

Quote

14 CFR Section 105.5 General
No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted from that aircraft, if that operation creates a hazard to air traffic or to persons or property on the surface.

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

[Hooknswoop 19]

Seems to me mikieb made some accusations “I was wondering how a USPA member like myself can hold a regional director responsible for unjust actions they have taken against individuals?”, but is unwilling to discuss those accusations. I even PM’d mikieb asking him what exactly the RD was doing and what the people in question were doing to deserve the attention of the RD. No response. I have it on good authority that jumpers have been jumping BASE rigs out of airplanes at Brush for a while. Now that there was an incident, people are trying to cover/hush it up and complain that the RD is being unfair by investigating this BSR/FAR violation. Seen that happen, in CO no less, before. Mikieb wants the RD to help with ‘Farmer McNasty’, but doesn’t want the RD to take action against those breaking BSR’s (which includes breaking FAR’s). Can’t have it both ways mikieb.

Edit: And yes, dropping off a tandem with a BASE rig is against the FAR's. If you get caught, don't wine about consequences.

Derek

[skr 1]

I've realized that I can't say some of the things I said
and it's too complicated to untangle it so I'm deleting
all but the last line of this post.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I will tackle the conspiracy theory and the unhappy farmer
in the next post.

Skr

[skr 1]

On the conspiracy theory:

The two owners of Brush are in a fight about who is
going to end up with the dropzone.

There seems to be a view that USPA is taking sides
with one owner and using this base rig and airplane
situation to hurt the other one.

But it's not true.

That fight has been going on for a year or two and
whatever stage it's at now is where it would have
been anyway.

I believe people are taking the juxtaposition of
two unrelated situations as proof of some kind of
cause and effect relationship.

----

On the farmer question:

>kelpdiver
>
>Is this farmer so intractable that the offer of a $20 every time
>someone screws up and lands there wouldn't do it?

Yes.

When Steve and Maria started the dropzone the Brush airport
was on the verge of being closed from lack of use. Brush was
glad to have the dropzone for the usual federal funding and
jumpers spending money at local businesses type reasons.

The farmer had fenced off a large part of the airport property
so his cattle could roam there. The fence went right through
what would become the landing area.

Shortly after opening Steve took the fence down and started
cleaning up the landing area, which had become a dumping area
full of old machinery, big chunks of concrete with the steel
sticking out, and other stuff.

The farmer didn't like that.

Over the next weeks and months both the police and some of
the other neighbors told Steve that this farmer had always
been an extremely difficult person and his going after the
jumpers was just how he was.

"Farmer" is probably not the right word as Brush has only
sagebrush and cattle.

Students are strongly trained not to go there and it's
practically the first thing any experienced jumper
is told about.



>flyangel2
>
>Have you contacted USPA and asked for assistance? What do you expect
>from USPA, to attend court with you for breaking the law?

I don't know what USPA could do anyway. I drove out once
and went to court with a student who had landed there.
I wasn't going to do anything, I was just moral support
for the student.

It was totally cut and dried. After a few hours watching
other cases scheduled that day it was her turn.

The judge said "Did you land there?", and she said "Yes,
I'm sorry, I'm just a student and didn't know any better."

And the judge said "Well, don't do it again, and I'm tired
of getting these cases. Case dismissed." Bang!


I'm trying to picture DJan like in Ghostbusters standing up
and saying to the judge "Back off man, I'm a Regional Director!",
but it's not working.

Skr

[flyangel2 2]

Quote

I'm trying to picture DJan like in Ghostbusters standing up
and saying to the judge "Back off man, I'm a Regional Director!",
but it's not working.

Damn you, now I got that stupid song in my head.

I could so picture it, and I'd be standing right by her side to make sure the people she was trying to protect didn't end up turning on her.

Flyangel is can now be found digging around her closet, garage, and crawl space; look for some cool costumes for DJan and her to wear to court.

May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey

[bobsled92 0]

Maybe you can help me... explain what this is:
2) Due to limited maneuverability, airships do not normally fly a standard
traffic pattern. However, if a standard traffic pattern is flown, it will be at an
airspeed below most other aircraft.
e. Parachute Operations.
>>>It seems to say parachute is listed (else where, not mentioning 105)

_______________________________
If I could be a Super Hero,
I chose to be: "GRANT-A-CLAUS". and work 365 days a Year.
http://www.hangout.no/speednews/