3AW reporting parachuting plane down Barwon Heads 20/10/2023

[thunderbird five]

Does anyone remember from years ago the parachutists VS ASIC card (when operating at a security controlled airport) farce?
The CASA ruling came in at - parachutists were regarded as passengers when boarding, so no ASIC required.
Then when they bailed out and landed back at the same airport, someone had to run out and issue them each a VISITOR ASIC card and escort them back in.
They weren't eligible for their own ASIC cards because they were not flight crew.

[Eaglerocker]

Originally Posted by Squawk7700

Is a pilot more likely to overload an aircraft because they are being paid less?

Found a DZ manager/owner

[kingRB]

Originally Posted by Lead Balloon

CASA pretending that commercial parachute operations are private is one of the more blatant, longstanding examples of corruption in the aviation sector.

while ongoing "private" regulation of what clearly are commercial operations is grossly negligent by CASA - not sure about corruption being the cause. Who are you claiming is financially incentivising CASA not to regulate it under commercial standards?

[Lead Balloon]

Your definition of 'corruption' is narrower than mine. Mine goes way beyond financial incentives.

[megan]

Spend any time in the skydive world you'll see death and severe injury all the time......your first post sounded like the usual mental gymnastics jumpers use to rationalise the risk.

You should contact the Federation and tell about all those deaths and injuries that are occurring that they don't know about, up to the end of 2022 the ten year rolling average has been two deaths per year, for the year 2022 there were 68 injuries.

All activities involve risk of one sort or another, there are cowboys every where that shun procedures, I wish that pilots were as conscious of training and safety as the majority of the skydiving community. When the sport started in Oz the training was very militaristic, a result of it beginning by ex SAS and Commando personnel.

Jumping from the start was seen as a club activity and you had to be a member of the Federation to be involved, could even fly the aircraft on a PPL, with regulatory approval. Tandem passengers have to be members of the Federation prior to jumping, membership sign up taking place prior to the jump and cost is included in the jump price.

Who are you claiming is financially incentivising CASA not to regulate it under commercial standards?

The APF is the regulator of the industry, CASA may make regulatory decisions such as aircraft restraints but it is up to the APF to sign off on the design for the particular aircraft type. CASA used to have a jumping expert on staff but I'm of the impression they no longer do. Like gliding jumping is self regulated, is there such a thing as a commercial gliding license where a bystander can be taken for a joyride?

[Lookleft]

I did my first parachute jump in 1982. It was with a static line round canopy and prior to that I was instructed on how to land and had to practise by jumping off any slightly elevated platform. The jump site was a tin shed at Collector and the jump plane was a C-182. To consider it a "commercial" operation was a bit of stretch. It was no more commercial than gliding and as I was accepting a significant part of the risk by jumping out of a perfectly serviceable aircraft the CAA didn't consider that it needed any more oversight than any other private operation.

Then of course came the tandem parachute. An innovation that really does deserve the appellation of "gamechanger". Along with the increase in young backpackers parachuting was available to anyone, disabled, centenarians, just show up and pay your money. Now the line between private and commercial ops was being blurred but the Regulator continued to allow the APF to oversight it. The people paying for the thrill of being intimately strapped to someone think that the operation is to the same standard as a commercial operation but (You will like this LB) caveat emptor!

The parachute operators are now operating fleets of sophisticated aircraft but still under the existing system. If CASA are corrupt in line with kingRBs definition then surely there would be evidence. If CASA are inept (more likely) then the parachuting industry has simply overtaken the regulations in the same way that AI and social media has.overtaken their respective legislative controls. I can't see CASA in the near or long term future regulating parachute ops to the same standard as regular passenger carrying operations.

[triathlon]

Originally Posted by megan

The jumpers do need to be restrained, but the restraint doesn't comply with the crash requirement protection provided by a seat designed to comply with the FAR. They use generally a single point anchored to the floor, the APF authorise/approve each individual aircraft type system.

https://libraryonline.erau.edu/onlin...ts/AM98-11.pdf

you are wrong . The jumpers must be restrained for takeoff

[kingRB]

Originally Posted by megan

You should contact the Federation and tell about all those deaths and injuries that are occurring that they don't know about, up to the end of 2022 the ten year rolling average has been two deaths per year, for the year 2022 there were 68 injuries.

All activities involve risk of one sort or another, there are cowboys every where that shun procedures, I wish that pilots were as conscious of training and safety as the majority of the skydiving community. When the sport started in Oz the training was very militaristic, a result of it beginning by ex SAS and Commando personnel.

absurd you'd even try and compare death and injury rates of skydiving to death and injury caused in the aircraft ride to height. I'm well aware of where the sport started in Australia, and understand that it has precisely zero to do with the current standards and training in the APF world. I've flown the military, SAS and civilians in parachuting operations and I can guarantee you the way civilian DZ's are run these days is about as far from a military standard as you could possibly get. You're regurgitating the same mental gymnastics i've heard hundreds of times from skydivers, so it seems you're just as incapable of looking at the industry with any objectivity and seeing what a complete clownshow it is. Which only gets worse the longer CASA keeps ignoring the aircraft operation as being commercial.

Jumping from the start was seen as a club activity and you had to be a member of the Federation to be involved, could even fly the aircraft on a PPL, with regulatory approval. Tandem passengers have to be members of the Federation prior to jumping, membership sign up taking place prior to the jump and cost is included in the jump price.

Thanks for stating how obviously farcical the entire process is to circumvent the reality that the general public are paying to fly in an aircraft being operated privately.

The APF is the regulator of the industry, CASA may make regulatory decisions such as aircraft restraints but it is up to the APF to sign off on the design for the particular aircraft type. CASA used to have a jumping expert on staff but I'm of the impression they no longer do. Like gliding jumping is self regulated, is there such a thing as a commercial gliding license where a bystander can be taken for a joyride?

What has any of that got to do with the regulation and limitations imposed on a pilot operating a Caravan or 750XL in a fully commercial skydiving environment? The APF has got nothing to do with the regulation, licensing and limitations in which the pilot is held accountable to. That's entirely the problem. Private licensing standards, commercial operation.

[tail wheel]

Thought this aircraft had a Garrett not PT6

You're right. Probably the cause of the crash.

Engine manufacturer: HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.
Engine type: Turboprop
Number of engines: 1
Engine model: TPE331-12JR-704TT

[Lookleft]

You're right. Probably the cause of the crash.

On ABC Melbourne ye3sterday they interviewed a State MLA who was onboard the aircraft. He described passing through about 800' when the noise stopped. He also said that he heard the stall warning. His recollection was that the pilot put the nose down to gain airspeed. If they had landed in the water then he thinks there would have been a lot of deceased parachutists.

[megan]

you are wrong . The jumpers must be restrained for takeoff

What part of The jumpers do need to be restrained did you not understand?

[cooperplace]

Originally Posted by Lookleft

a State MLA who was onboard the aircraft... described passing through about 800' when the noise stopped. He also said that he heard the stall warning. His recollection was that the pilot put the nose down to gain airspeed.

Well you would, wouldn't you? Engine failure: stick forward!

[cncpc]

Originally Posted by PiperCameron

Since the last thing the pilot wants (in unfortunate cases sadly it's his/her last thing ever) is for the load to shift on takeoff, rest assured the meat bombs certainly ARE all strapped in firmly,
.. but you don't need seats to do that.

Used to jump. Used to drop jumpers. I've never seen anyone "strapped in" on a jump load. There are reasons for that.

I and any other pilots I've caught the ride up with do call for everyone to sardine forward for takeoff.

[cncpc]

To the pilot...great job, Sir or Ms..

[bloated goat]

Originally Posted by cncpc

To the pilot...great job, Sir or Ms..

or non-binary please……

[DARKMAIZE]

Originally Posted by Lookleft

If they had landed in the water then he thinks there would have been a lot of deceased parachutists.

Maybe, but turns out that lake is mostly under 1m depth. They probably could have walked out.. :P.

Lools like the wheels have turned up based on some new photos today (I'm still short 8 posts dammit)

[Deaf]

Originally Posted by DARKMAIZE

Maybe, but turns out that lake is mostly under 1m depth. They probably could have walked out..

Aveerage may be under 1m but from sailing in the river and lake many years ago in a Mirror dinghy there is no real average. It's about 1 foot deep (keel up) and or channels 10ft deep (keel down) with the channels shifting position.

[Chairmans Lounge]

History just repeats, fortunately with no loss of life this time around. Well done Captain! Life membership at the club with full open bar benefits.

All this talk of CASA surveillance levels, restraining one way human cargo, APF etc was tragically raised way back in 2014


https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...ir/ao-2014-053

[Fark'n'ell]

You do need one to go skydiving twice.
no you don't

You Tube

[megan]

Private licensing standards, commercial operation

At the end of the day the pilot is not called the PIC for nothing, s/he is the one that accepts the job, or rejects the job, and sets the standards by which s/he operates, if s/he is not satisfied with the standards being asked of them then grow some and say no, or move on. It's the PIC's license that's up for grabs by the judge, and CASA will be the ones that lead the charge to throw the PIC under the bus. The world ain't fair, business is built upon the ethic of screwing the little guy for as much as it's possible to get away with.

Here's an idea, organise an association dedicated to the interests of jump pilots and get some standards that you all agree upon set. There are times when you have to take charge and not sit back whinging that someone ought to do something. We had occasion that the AFAP implied violence against our company negotiators, result? We dumped the AFAP and formed our own union.

I speak from experience of 27 years flying a fleet of ten aircraft, twelve pax, in quasi scheduled private airline operations in Oz, ops manual or regulatory requirements ignored totally. You put your big girl/boy pants on, not happy, move on, CASA in this case was cognizant but couldn't care less.

Little more skill on display here Fark?

You Tube