Skydiving Dispute Could Close Ore. Airfield
Feb 10, 2012 1:22 p.m.

CRESWELL, Ore.—A seven-year dispute over skydivers using a Lane County airfield has led the City Council in Creswell to consider closing it.

The city says skydiving isn't safe at Hobby Field south of Eugene, but the Federal Aviation Administration has agreed with a local skydiving company that it is.

Now, the city administrator says, the city faces big expenses defending against a discrimination complaint the skydiving company has filed with the FAA.

The Eugene Register-Guard reported Friday (http://bit.ly/wEz3IH) the airfield tends to lose money annually, and the City Council agenda next week calls for it to "review its commitment to maintaining airport services."

The city says Hobby Field is one of the busiest general aviation airports in the state. The paper reports the possibility it might close has upset users.

___

Information from: The Register-Guard, http://www.registerguard.com

Mark Shrives, the city manager of Cresswell, was driven out of Hamilton, MT, in after a long string of incompetent boobery. A year after he rescued his career by jumping over to Cresswell, members of the City council in Cresswell called members of the city council in Hamilton and asked, "Just what the F&*^%* did you guys do to us? This guy is a loser!"

The answer I heard one of the Hamilton councilman give to the Cresswell folks was something along the lines of, "We weren't going to look a gift horse in the mouth. Thank you for helping us get rid of him. Good luck!"

He left behind a string of crossed incompetent train wrecks in his wake that kept surfacing for years before they finally got sorted out. He is not missed in the Bitterroot valley except by his personal friends. If you ask around, you are sure to find many who remember him- just not fondly.

It does not surprise me that his name surfaced in the midst of all this. As soon as I read his name, I knew exactly what was to follow in the news articles.

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Those who do know history are doomed to see it coming.

From the Register Guard
The airport and the skydivers used to coexist just fine.”

Then the skydivers began “abusing the situation,” walking across the runway when airplanes were on take-off runs, Severns said.

Sounds to me like the city got caught with their pants down and one hand in the federal cookie jar! Also sounds like there would be any number of ways to resolve this other than a simple ban on skydiving.
I wonder how many times the abuse is actually documented with time, date, N number of the airplane on takeoff, and the name of the abuser?
If you have it set up where people are crossing the runway after every load you will have the occasional head-up-ass from some newby all excited on adrenaline about some personal accomplishment he just achieved in freefall with his ears still plugged from the rapid descent, big deal. There are runway incursions all the time with aircraft, we don't ban flying.
Now if that is NOT the real reason for the ban then they'll need to come clean and then you get into the current issue about discrimination of a legitimate aeronautical use and the federal grant assurance rules.
I've been a part of many different jumping operations where jumpers had to cross a runway all with very few issues even at a 100,000 jump a year operation. I doubt that the Eugene Skydivers does anywhere near that volume so I see it as a manageable issue.
It's all back to a non-controlled airport see and avoid. Airplanes, cars, deer, jumpers in the air, jumpers on the ground, birds, etc.
Looking at Google this is how I see it, if that complaint is the real issue and not just masking small town BS.
1. Land all of the tandems, professionals, and "checked out" experienced jumpers on the west side between the highway and the hangars. That's about 750' x 200', plenty for a modern canopy with a competent pilot.
2. Buy an old pickup for $500 and build benches in the back bed, spray paint it yellow, put a yellow light on the top, and install a VHF radio tuned to unicom. Being careful to train the driver that not all airplanes have radios and some can break or that transient pilots can have their head-up-ass and be on the wrong freq. Then specific drivers with airport ground movement operations training could be used to operate the vehicle to pick up the students and less experienced jumpers from the east side of the runway and bring them back in a more visible, organized fashion at a designated point on the runway.
3. As part of the waiver process any visiting jumpers or students could be instructed to use the same designated crossing point or go around the ends no matter where they landed along the east side in the event that the truck was gone for some unforseen reason.
4. A small presentation could be presented to the local pilots one evening to advise them of the new procedures for the jumpers and to also just make them more aware to be on the look out for crossing jumpers.
5. A small note could be put at the bottom of a noise abatement sign at the runup area for transient pilots to do the same.
6. The operation could also train the jump pilots to increase their awareness and to assist in preventing crossing issues by making radio calls to other aircraft they may see pulling out on the runway while jumpers have just landed and are crossing (in the event of no truck) as soon as they come off of center and are entering the downwind making pattern calls anyway. If the jump pilot has his head on it would be really easy to see it all as he checks the windsock and scans the end of the runway for traffic entering the downwind.

I'll bet there might still be the occasional violator as there is in anything but I'd bet my career on the fact that the number of incidents per volume flown there would be next to none with those procedures in place. If a DZ that does 100,000 jumps a year can keep it to like two issues per year I think a small Cessna DZ in the fog and overcast of the Northwest could keep it to like .25 issues a year and that's pretty much just having to share the planet with other humans.

Now if this is some other small town politics crap under the guise of a runway incursion issue then I hope the FAA nails the city's ass to the wall and the city should be ashamed of even considering wasting tax payer money to stifle a legitimate aeronautical use over some personal fear. One that due to its nature of going point A to point A provides more cycles to justify an airports federal funding than any of the $400 weekend hamburger getter's and coffee crowd landing judges ever will.
I would think that in the time of increased fuel prices, aging pilot pool, high cost of learning, and the fenced out, video game young generation seemingly less interested to do something that doesn't include a couch and air conditioning a full service facility like that would really want an operation that was going to pull out one or two 182's on a sunny weekend and put 40 cycles of use on the FAA board for future funding justification and burn $1,250 worth of fuel. Not to mention providing possible maintenance work to the local shop, flight hours to the local struggling flight instructor or weekend pilot that doesn't have the disposable income due to the economy to put the fuel in his own airplane, and the fact that the jumpers will buy chips, sandwiches, and hotel rooms from the local businesses. But what do I know.

Well said G.....Being in the jump world for so long it does not really surprise me to here this garbage.Skydiving seems to be looked at as the Bastard child of aviation.People are just flat out afraid of things they deem crazy.......its too bad some folks in the position of management or in their own minds ,authority, can spray bad info and get people on the bandwagon for or against something.Sure ,Skydivers can be a bunch of nitwits.Most pilots I see come and go on a weekend are far worse,making me wonder how they even ended up with a license in the first place.........Anyway these are just my thoughts.Its Saturday, Im now going to finish my Coffee, go to the Drop Zone, fire up the King Air and let it rain bodies.

lowrider,low flying G3,

Are you sure you guys don't want to run for president. Such simple solutions to such minor problems of greedy people. "what about ME?"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk because I'm still working and can't get my damned aircard connected.

Expand on that thought wtx..........

I'm not sure they want to draw too much attention to their airport, appears they may have a little through the fence action at the south end.........A federal funding no-no these days.

Seems like too many folks these days could give a shit less about their neighbors. It has to benefit "me" at any expense. Now if tomorrow they device skydiving or whatever else sounds like fun then to hell with my new found friends.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk because I'm still working and can't get my damned aircard connected.

Pilots should expect a runway incursion once in a while, it's good for you. On the other hand, how in the he!! do these jump outfits get away with only carrying enough gas to get to altitude? I've had a couple go arounds due to the fact that the jump plane had to release jumpers because that was the safest thing to do considering the plane was out of gas.

I don't know what sort of special certificate or operating limitations they have to have but maybe they have some sort of waiver on the 1/2 hour reserve thing?
I would be surprised if Creswell airport has never taken any state/fedeeral grant money. If so they are obligated to keep her open for a certain period of time. If they wouldn't behave in defiance of the reg's, then they wouldn't be facing a lawsuit.
We had a similar deal here at my home airport years ago where the airport operator told a jump outfit they couldn't use the airport as a drop zone. To my surprise the majority of members in our little local pilot asociation were in agreement with that, despite the fact that it is a legitimate aviation use. The jump outfit decided to load up & take off here, then jump at the leader's farm about 10 miles south of the airport. The airport & members were all OK with that, but IMHO it was less safe than using the airport for a DZ-- who would think to be looking for jumpers out in the middle of nowhere like that, NOTAM's or not?

wtx, still going right past me, what do you mean "device" skydiving?

Nose, Actually you should expect a runway incursion ALL the time just as you should expect an engine failure on every takeoff and electrical failure every time you go play hard IMC, etc., etc. It's what makes you better able to handle adversity.
As far as your interface with fuel exhausted jump planes, that sounds to me like poor pilot planning, which is not a situation unique to jump planes. I can say that personally I have flown around 3,500 hours of loads in everything from a 182 to a Shorts Skyvan and never flamed one out. Sorry you are having to deal with a less professional crowd but I am sure they appreciate your ability to be flexible to sudden changes in traffic pattern needs.

My point is not that their imperfection is ok. It is that when you get different types of legitimate aeronautical uses in the same space you are going to have the occasional conflict but that does not mean that it is alright to ban one type because of a small rectifiable issue.
I have had the RC crowd in my way at one of my facilities but I didn't go trying to get them banned. I went and talked, as a group, about how we could refine the procedures so as to keep us all safe and having fun.
I have had to fly around launching balloons at times but I didn't go freaking out at the city wanting to ban balloon launches at the airport. I went and talked, as a group, to see how we could all accommodate each others needs.
I have had ultralights with no radios and much slower traffic pattern speeds cause me to have to bail out of the pattern with out expecting it as I came plowing in at 150 but I didn't go yelling to the manager to ban all ultralights. I went, as a group, and worked out how our traffic patterns could cohabitate the airport area.

I don't do all of this because I have nothing better to do. I do all of this because as this thing begins to dwindle as it gets more expensive and we have more regulators trying to slap this fee on us or outlaw that fuel or put another tax on us or close another airport we need numbers. ALL of us as users, RC, Balloons, aerobatics, floatplanes, jets, ultralights, gyrocopters, twins, agricultural aviation, and yes even skydiving will be needed to work together to fight our real enemies. Not fight against ourselves. Again, if this is the legitimate problem then it should be easily fixed amongst the users, no city council needed, and certainly no BS bans on a legitimate use.

As far as FAA nailing anybody to the wall, please observe a moment of silence for the airport, I've forgotten it's name, in Chicago near the waterfront that was bulldozed in the middle of the night by a Mr Richard Daly jr and his henchmen after having received a federal court order not to do it. There is now a park, or meeting place for panhandlers, pederasts, and rapists in its place. This Richard Daly jr is the brother of the recently ousted chief of staff for our current President.

hot, they have no special waiver, they need to comply with day vfr fuel minimums like everyone else. They just have head up ass as so many others flying wings level at one altitude have had over the years.

Truth be known if it was a Cessna there was enough fuel to get them to the ground running they just didn't know how to get that last few "unusable" gallons.

For those that care; Reduce power to about 15 inches mp, switch to the left tank, slight slip to the right slightly nose high, you'll get about 20 minutes on that one and if she flames out again switch to the right and slip left for roughly another 20 minutes at that power setting. Then you'll really be out.

Emory,
EXACTLY local government using false, dreamt up ideas and tactics to break us apart to do as they will outside the law. It is not ok for local government to do that kind of thing.

lowflyin'G3 wrote:hot, they have no special waiver, they need to comply with day vfr fuel minimums like everyone else. They just have head up ass as so many others flying wings level at one altitude have had over the years.

Truth be known if it was a Cessna there was enough fuel to get them to the ground running they just didn't know how to get that last few "unusable" gallons.

For those that care; Reduce power to about 15 inches mp, switch to the left tank, slight slip to the right slightly nose high, you'll get about 20 minutes on that one and if she flames out again switch to the right and slip left for roughly another 20 minutes at that power setting. Then you'll really be out.

I could have used that trick a few years ago near Wells, NV Does it really work, sounds like that trick would get the fuel over the wrinkles in the bladder. At 15 inches, 20 minuts is about 1 1/2 to 2 gallons in my 182B (I think).

Tim

qmdv wrote:

lowflyin'G3 wrote:hot, they have no special waiver, they need to comply with day vfr fuel minimums like everyone else. They just have head up ass as so many others flying wings level at one altitude have had over the years.

Truth be known if it was a Cessna there was enough fuel to get them to the ground running they just didn't know how to get that last few "unusable" gallons.

For those that care; Reduce power to about 15 inches mp, switch to the left tank, slight slip to the right slightly nose high, you'll get about 20 minutes on that one and if she flames out again switch to the right and slip left for roughly another 20 minutes at that power setting. Then you'll really be out.

I could have used that trick a few years ago near Wells, NV Does it really work, sounds like that trick would get the fuel over the wrinkles in the bladder. At 15 inches, 20 minuts is about 1 1/2 to 2 gallons in my 182B (I think).

Tim

If it was me, I would have stopped in Wendover

It works Tim, and yes you are right about the burn.

Basically you are getting the last bit of fuel all to the aft, uphill, pickup tube and by selecting that tank only you are preventing it from just running across.

I didn't say WHY I never flamed one out! Taught to me by a 17,000 hour DC-3 check pilot/jump pilot when I was 16.

qmdv wrote:

lowflyin'G3 wrote:hot, they have no special waiver, they need to comply with day vfr fuel minimums like everyone else. They just have head up ass as so many others flying wings level at one altitude have had over the years.

Truth be known if it was a Cessna there was enough fuel to get them to the ground running they just didn't know how to get that last few "unusable" gallons.

For those that care; Reduce power to about 15 inches mp, switch to the left tank, slight slip to the right slightly nose high, you'll get about 20 minutes on that one and if she flames out again switch to the right and slip left for roughly another 20 minutes at that power setting. Then you'll really be out.

I could have used that trick a few years ago near Wells, NV Does it really work, sounds like that trick would get the fuel over the wrinkles in the bladder. At 15 inches, 20 minuts is about 1 1/2 to 2 gallons in my 182B (I think).

Tim

Sounds like a good trick. The wrinkles in my own bladder usually give me opportunity to fuel often though, usually about 3 hours is my range.

lowflyin'G3

I just got back and saw your reply.
That was supposed to be "decide skydiving would be fun" . Texting while getting the plane ready to fly.