spaceman Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 God damn!!! How did that happen? Did the guy in the chute land right in front of the plane on takeoff roll or something? Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk
BFM this Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) Glad they are both ok. Didn't appear to drag a wing, so the spar should still be good. Hopefully that 140 didn't take more damage than a bent firewall, and can be repaired. Edited March 9, 2014 by BFM this
ARIs 'R' Us Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Glad they both ended up on the ground, and safe. On the other hand, successfully parasailing behind a Cessna would have been a better story for the bar.
HU&W Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 If I was either one of those guys, I would have extremely large copies of every one of those photos framed in my bar.
guineapigfury Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) Damn, he almost got salad-shootered. Edited March 9, 2014 by guineapigfury
brabus Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Damn, how does that happen? Shouldn't have been in red's block without SA. I saw this nearly happen years ago when the pilot of the 210 did a "low pass" just to fuck around and show off...turns out he had miscounted how many jumpers were on the ground (he thought all). Luckily they didn't hit, but you can imagine the words that were exchanged after that one.
Toro Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Damn, how does that happen? The news article said the pilot was 87 years old. I'm just sayin... 1
Toro Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 Okay - everybody is okay and I'm bored, so time to speculate on what the NTSB might find. This happened at South Lakeland airport, an uncontrolled grass strip with CTAF and home to Sky Dive Tampa. Not being a skydiver, it wouldn't seem smart to conduct operations to land on an uncontrolled strip, and the CFRs are pretty clear on how it needs to be accomplished. § 105.23 Parachute operations over or onto airports. 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, over or onto any airport unless— (a) For airports with an operating control tower: (1) Prior approval has been obtained from the management of the airport to conduct parachute operations over or on that airport. (2) Approval has been obtained from the control tower to conduct parachute operations over or onto that airport. (3) Two-way radio communications are maintained between the pilot of the aircraft involved in the parachute operation and the control tower of the airport over or onto which the parachute operation is being conducted.(b) For airports without an operating control tower, prior approval has been obtained from the management of the airport to conduct parachute operations over or on that airport. © A parachutist may drift over that airport with a fully deployed and properly functioning parachute if the parachutist is at least 2,000 feet above that airport's traffic pattern, and avoids creating a hazard to air traffic or to persons and property on the ground. So it seems like the only question is - was the skydiving authorized (and the pilot was either not made aware or not clearing), or not authorized (in which case the skydiver would seem to be at fault).
Apollo Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 As a former skydiver who has jumped at various dropzones around the country (including a different one in Florida), my overall impression is that the community is pretty lax with FAA rules. With that said, a DZ at these small airfields is generally recognized by the local community as a jumper field which keeps a lot of the local VFR traffic away. If a group of jumpers go through the trouble to start a business, from my experience they get permission to drop jumpers from whoever controls the airport (especially since they usually pay for a hangar to run their business out of). However, I've experienced VFR traffic unfamiliar that a field was a populated dropzone, and cruise in for their $100 hamburger while jump ops are going on. Once I even experienced this at a private uncontrolled field. Wahoo lands at a grass strip where the jump Cessna's launch from, and was subsequently told to turn around and GTFO by the DZ operators. I had just landed under canopy off the side of the strip when this guy landed unannounced. The point I'm driving at is, skydiving dropzones are usually in the middle of no where with tiny landing strips. Your average VFR traffic is often unaware about what's going on in those places since it's so unregulated and the people that land there are the types who don't check NOTAMs anyway.
Bender Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 ...the people that land there are the types who don't check NOTAMs anyway. Or they let their co-pilots check them...rookie mistake. Bendy
Tonka Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 Who can blame them when they fill up NOTAMs with pages of: temporary 3 foot towers, wet runways, and stupid abbreviations that save little print space but are unpossible to figure out. 4
brabus Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 Who can blame them when they fill up NOTAMs with pages of: temporary 3 foot towers, wet runways, and stupid abbreviations that save little print space but are unpossible to figure out. Luckily for those who can't sift through all those meaningless NOTAMs, the Japanese kindly repeat them all on ATIS. Which is now why I never listen to ATIS either.
Toro Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 Who can blame them when they fill up NOTAMs with pages of: temporary 3 foot towers, wet runways, and stupid abbreviations that save little print space but are unpossible to figure out. I actually looked at the NOTAMS for the field - not much there. Somebody in a different forum had mentioned that there was a "permanent NOTAM" for skydiver activity which isn't valid, but even if it was, that doesn't seem it would be beneficial to pilots or skydivers ("always be on the lookout" as opposed to watching out for specific time periods).
brabus Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 At least every place I've jumped the pilot has made several calls on CTAF before anyone exits the A/C. Those combined with the parachute symbol on VFR sectionals and NOTAMs are about all you can do. The problem is the zero SA pilots flying around these airports who either don't give a shit/hate skydivers or are unfamiliar with the field, but didn't do even 6-9 sec of flight planning to realize there's a potential for skydivers in the area.
sky_king Posted March 10, 2014 Posted March 10, 2014 Who can blame them when they fill up NOTAMs with pages of: temporary 3 foot towers, wet runways, and stupid abbreviations that save little print space but are unpossible to figure out. ... and then on page 7: RWY XX CLSD WIE UNTIL UFN
mach2m3 Posted March 11, 2014 Posted March 11, 2014 These guys are both incredibly lucky. At the fields I have flown into and out of with lots of jump ops both sides generally mesh just fine when the DZ is well defined and with good de-confliction to the normal fixed wing patterns (north traffic only etc..). However I have flown into many many fields where the DZ's are not as well defined, barely de-conflicted, and both sides believe they own the airspace (notable is Eloy, AZ). NOTAMS, temporary or permanent do not solve nor do they even abate the conflict issues. I always check NOTAMS before I fly and but just knowing that jumpers are up hasn't always helped. Jumpers aren't always where they should be and airplanes aren't either for that matter. I have had jump planes release jumpers in and directly over the traffic pattern. I have had jumpers cut across my runway while I was on final at 50'. I have had them land in front of me while rolling out the runway. I even had a kid run across the runway, chute in hand while I was just above the flare. I went around, and as I flew over him my (very light btw) prop wash caught part of his cute knocking him over on the active. This led to 3 more other airplanes to go-around or break off while he got his shit together.The DZ was centrally located on the field (Marana, AZ for those of you familiar) and in general there should have no reason for them to stray across the active runway but they did anyway, having jumped early. Rather than land off DZ and wait for a ride they pushed to make it. Totally disregarding the powered flight traffic pattern. I figured 3 instances at a field where jumpers are up all the time isn't bad and most of the time no issue but still. Same time I have watched aircraft cruise right over the DZ after multiple calls from the drop plane. Even heard more than a few pilots express the view that jumpers should just avoid them where ever they fly. Fact is, the airfield is the domain of landing and departing AIRCRAFT. The DZ is the domain for JUMPERS and they need to be well separated and defined. No matter what you NOTAM or publish in an AFD someone will miss/ignore it. If you want to be safe, separate and mark clearly. I've always thought that pattern restrictions printed on the sectional where the best way to go. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now