Hacker News Reader

Comment by lazide | Hacker News Reader

Very little of skydiving is actually regulated. There are some basic FAA regs (reserves need to be packed by certified riggers, for instance, and no jumping through clouds, and a handful of other rules), but USPA is a voluntary ‘regulatory’ organization and they do the rest.

The rules are written in blood, and lack of compliance tends to be self regulating.

They provide insurance in exchange for following the rules, which generally does what it needs to do.

But anyone crazy enough could pay a pilot to let them jump out and not follow any of the licensing rules, and there isn’t much that would happen until something goes wrong and lawsuits start flying.

View on HN

That is not entierely true.

1. Pilot still follow FAA, and there are chapters about skydiving operations in FAA for pilots.

2. USPA Members have to follow USPA rules even if they jump not in USPA DropZones.

3. The gear manufactures (especially Sigma) have their own set of rules for using their gear.

Other than skydivers who want to be YouTube famous, there are not that many that do stupid shit.

The pilot is likely the only one in this list that might face some consequences prior to an incident. The rest would only come out after the lawsuits start.

I feel like both will have the same kind of consequences. Pilots will lose their pilot license, skydivers can lose USPA member license (and could FAA certifications if they have any, like drone piloting, rigging, etc). But I am not sure, I have only 14 hours of piloting lessons.

My guess both will be pursued only if there is a lawsuit.

It would be easy for a pilot to follow the rules for their license, while no one is following USPAs rules.

Ways they could lose their license for recklessness I guess, or if they were doing something dumb and someone landed on someone in the ground.

But USPA’s rules get followed because they’re a good idea and it’s easier that way, not because someone is going to jail or losing an FAA license if they don’t.

Eh, read the CFR and tell me I’m wrong [https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/...]

Remember ‘recommends’ != ‘required’, and ‘should’ != ‘must’. If it’s not required or a must, it’s not a rule. It’s a suggestion.

In these cases an exceptionally good one, but caveat emptor. Hard to find a clearer example of ‘obvious inherent risk’, after all, and regulations tend to focus on protecting those that had no idea, or innocent bystanders.

Even training for pilots on how to drop skydivers is a should, not a must. Which considering how much someone hanging off the side of the plane changes aerodynamics, and how unusual it is to suddenly lose hundreds of lbs of weight on a GA aircraft in flight, is actually pretty amazing. You’d have to be really crazy to do it without it, but eh.

I have yet to meet anyone who didn’t have any idea once the jump plane door opened.

Something about that roar of the crisp air at altitude clarifies the mind. Or shuts it down entirely, depending on how one is wired. I’ve never seen someone go out the door ignorant, either way.

Notably one of the musts for pilots is that anything dropped from a plane won’t strike something it isn’t supposed to. Even if the thing dropped is a human. And the odds of someone hitting an innocent bystander on the ground without trying are pretty low.

I’m not current now, but I did hold a USPA C license for a long time, and had my share of close calls.

And let’s not forget about BASE jumping….

FAR Part 105 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...

In USPA there are a lot of "recommended", but most of the larger dropzones enforcing recommended to required, for a long time. But yes, if we are taking about Lodi, they aren't USPA dropzone. So the only thing they follow are FAR Part 105 and manufacture requirements for Sigma rigs (tandems), which are pretty strict. There is another question why they don't follow those requirements, and why the government is not stricter about it.

> I’m not current now, but I did hold a USPA C license for a long time

It is nice that you have experience, and some understanding. I am with 1,500 jumps. I feel like new in a sport, still learning from people with 10,000+ jumps. Unfortunately, all of those licenses don't really matter much, the same as pilot instructors are usually private pilots with only 200 hours of flight, considering that you can get your license after 40 hours.

> and had my share of close calls

Definitely, I have seen with my eyes not once close calls, not once I have seen people being injured, and unfortunately witnessed a few fatalities. But I see that also while I am getting outside the house.

And BASE jumping is not a skydiving related sport. Those are two different sports. There is also paragliding, speed flying, and a lot more, and yes, they use fabric over the head, but those are not the same sports.

You clearly did not read part 105 even after you linked to it - none of it disagrees with what I said.

The FAA only cares about parachute types for reserves.

They only regulate actual jumping in a handful of situations all involving controlled airspace and large crowds or near/in clouds. Solo jumpers are not interesting for them as long as no one on the ground gets killed and property not destroyed.

No special training or certification is required by the FAA for skydivers (except tandem instructors), and for pilots.

Training types are extremely thinly regulated (really just a couple of gotchas to keep aircraft from crashing).

And base jumpers started as skydivers originally, and the original equipment was skydiving equipment.

Different sport now? Yes.

You should read it, it’s pretty short. The CFR I linked summed it up pretty good.

If there is a specific area you think I’m wrong, please do point it out.

I am just trying to correct you in places, where from my point of view you are wrong. I am pretty familiar with FAR 61,65,105 and USPA SIM and IRM.

You said - it is not regulated: I corrected, that there are FAR chapters about parachuting in the USA, actually SIM has all of them highlighted https://www.uspa.org/sim/9 and USPA exists with a set of rules and recommendations. Ah, and FAR mentions TSO, which are the requirements for the gear to be used for skydiving (TSO approved rigs and reserve canopies). I do believe this is more than enough for us skydivers.

Do you want more regulations? But why Skydiving? Why not skiing, kite surfing, surfing, mountain biking? Have you looked at the "regulations" about water sports? Why are those not regulated? Those other sports don't have injuries? How many people are getting hurt by other skiers on the mountain?