The International Cessna^® 170 Association

There are also cases of the pilot being prosecuted and suffering certificate actions when the parachutists screwed up and got killed, etc etc.
I understand the reluctance of knowlegeable pilots to fly skydivers. (besides the airplanes are usually pure junk, and that's another opportunity to suffer certificate action.) IMHO
Without extensive personal knowlege of the airplane, it's documentation and mx history, and the reputation of the jumpmaster and club... I'd advise against a casual agreement to "fly skydivers".

i didn't do it!
the risk/benefit ratio was to high
iowa

thammer wrote:I've never flown jumpers but I've jumped 352 times. Most of then are out of 182's but include Baby Great Lakes, ....

Isn't a Baby Great Lakes a one-seater? Was that its last flight?

gahorn wrote:There are also cases of the pilot being prosecuted and suffering certificate actions when the parachutists screwed up and got killed, etc etc.
I understand the reluctance of knowlegeable pilots to fly skydivers. (besides the airplanes are usually pure junk, and that's another opportunity to suffer certificate action.) IMHO
Without extensive personal knowlege of the airplane, it's documentation and mx history, and the reputation of the jumpmaster and club... I'd advise against a casual agreement to "fly skydivers".

All good advice. Pilots have a lot of responsibility not to be treated lightly. If the fellow's comments on flying jumpers were in response to an opportunity with a particular club of which he had knowledge of their operations and he felt they were lacking, then he might be on the money. If he's generalizing, I wouldn't agree. Generalizing is a bad thing. As George says the operation should be reviewed prior to accepting the job.

jrenwick wrote:

thammer wrote:I've never flown jumpers but I've jumped 352 times. Most of then are out of 182's but include Baby Great Lakes, ....

Isn't a Baby Great Lakes a one-seater? Was that its last flight?

I could have the name wrong, It was a two seater and I dropped off the front cockpit after the pilot inverted. Maybe it wasn't a 'Baby' but just a "Great Lakes". I do recall for certain the name had "Great Lakes" in it. Coincidentally, it was the last flight of the day.

tye

I recall a case wherein the parachutists were going to do a group jump, along with another guy who was going to video it on the way down. On an earlier jump, the guy with the camera got so involved with his objective he almost left the plane without his parachute.
That didn't deter anyone tho', and on the subsequent photo-shoot jump... he successfully left the plane with only a camera and no chute.
The pilot ended up being prosecuted, because in accordance with FAR91 he was the "final responsibility" for the safety of operation.

The pilot in command's responsibility is to ensure that parachutists are using approved chutes (you need to know packing/rigging rules) and that the operation conforms to weather minimums and locations allowed for the sport (See FAR 105 and US Parachute Association). The PIC is responsible for ensuring a NOTAM if the jump is in controlled airspace. If it is a demo jump over spectators, an FAA authorization is needed. It is very unfair to generalize that a/c used for parachuting are "junk". Some may be, but responsible operators take good care of equipment that is used much like a building elevator. Most aircraft are modified and the PIC should insist on seeing STCs/337s to verify approvals. The mods themselves are usually not pretty. This sport has its share of accidents and anyone who jumps out of a perfectly good a/c is well aware of the risks. The PIC has little liability or risk of FAA "prosecution" (another misnomer) if they know and follow the rules.

I didn't say I thought the PIC (in the previous warstory) was treated fairly. I only wanted to point out that the operation is inherently with pitfalls not ordinary to those others generally accepted in flying.
I stand by my opinion that the vast majority of jump planes are junk. I've seen many more of them than the average pilot and none of the ones I've seen would I operate with my family onboard...even if they all wore parachutes. Jump planes are not "perfectly good" airplanes. They are a necessary conveyance to the sport and are considered as such. It's been my experience they are not maintained with safety-of-flight in mind as their primary function.

gahorn wrote: I stand by my opinion that the vast majority of jump planes are junk.

Having flown many jump planes from C182s to DC3s, I have to agree. However, I haven't flown jumpers in a long time so maybe things have changed.

I've never jumped and don't intend to but I have many friends and relatives who have and still do jump. When I've questioned them about the airworthiness of their aircraft, the most common response has been, "We're going to jump out anyway". That's good enough for me, I'll never set foot inside a jump plane.

Im gonna try to be nice an proper here so my stories will be believable

I've been asked and have ferried many planes over the years - both tail wheel and classic. An Ercoup from Minneapolis to a doggy Citabria from Sylvania Georgia. Every one has been a hoot and one or two a real challenge,

The Ercoupe was a former show winner at Oskosh and every stop drew an admiring crowd to oooh and ahh over the highly polished little gem. It didn't have a radio installed in the panel so comm was handled by a King handheld, velcroed to the side wall of the cockpit. It wasn't till we landed for an over night in Ft. Dodge, IA and proceeded to remove the radio, to foil any sticky fingered thieves, that I finally found the trim adjusting lever! Unfamiliar to the idios of that little bird, the line boy put one gas cap on backward and I failed to catch that on pre-flight. Once airborne and climbing to altitude my sweetie notified me that I was losing fuel out the right tank fuel cap! OOPS! Back to the airport where the strong crosswind threw all my sideslip techniques out the window as we learned what the knuckles of the cross-wind gear sounded like when they snapped out! A poor taildragger pilot gets goose bumps with out any rudder pedals to mash on. Re-oriented the gas cap and off we went.

A young CFI from a school (that shall go un-named) near Many Louisiana, cam to me with a curious request. He wanted to know if we had a hangar that he could keep an airplane in if he bought one. We didn't but then he sorta asked me if I would go with him to Southern Arkansas to look at a plane he might buy. I said OK so we went up in the school's C172 . Come to find out he had already made the purchchase of a Citabria Scout and wanted confirmation he had made an OK deal. And it was. Next he asked me to fly it back home. I said well you fly itand I will fly the 172 back. Nope he didn't want anything to do with that so I flew it to Many. I flew safety pilot with him for several hours. He was having lots of difficulty with all aspects of the plane and I told him he needed to get in the plane and learn to really handle it. His insurance Co. made him get a CFI that had logged tailwheel instructon before they would insure him.

One of the last times I ferried someone elses purchase was another Citabria . This one had O-200 with a prop that had been twiddled several times. When we picked it up at the Sylvania GA airport they didn't have fuel so we were to fly about 20 miles to another place to fuel up. Not enough time to get very familiar with the plane but topped off the tanks and soon found out a very nasty feature about this particular junker. It didn't like two people and full fuel! Even at 200# under gross it took all of the 6000' of runway to get any altitude. It was out of rig, short on power and slow as molasses in Alaska. It took two whole days to fly from Georgia to Louisiana! I advised the new owner to be very careful of flying anywhere near gross. BTW He didn't keep it very long. When he sold it he asked me if I wanted to ferry it to Florida for the new owner and I said not "no" but "HELL NO!"

All in all though I love to fly and, ruling out long over water flights, I would do it again. "At the drop of a chart"!

Hauling Jumpers. I have done this as well, and have done five jumps for training myself in case I should ever have to jump out to save my life. I doubt that any pilot would be able to ascertain whether the equipment used by jumpers is safe, adequate or certified. Most jump schools have a jump-master who controls activities and schedules equipment checks. The pilot is responsible for the air-space regulations and notification.
The only "mods" I did to my 170 was wrap and secure a piece of canvas cloth around the polished lift strut and remove the seats and right side door. Got lots of stories about this too but gotta go eat a burger now!

If you ever fly a fabric airplane that seems to run so slow and use so much runway that it just doesn't make sense..... Then get someone else to fly it while you observe it from above. You might be surprised to find that the fabric on top of the wings is not staying put! If it's not stitched to the ribs correctly and "billows" up and destroys the orginal shape of the airfoil (and thereby creates a lot of drag...)
I've seen a Stinson that could barely get out of it's own way and we noticed that in flight it's upper wing surfaces resembled a parachute. Top speed in that airplane was slightly above 80 indicated.

Another good reason to fly metal airplanes!

and silly me,
wanting to build an L-4
iowa

iowa

We fabric flying pilots and pilot-want-a-be's just seem to have something extra than those pilots that will only fly SPAN CANS.