Winnipesaukee Forum - View Single Post

TheNoonans · 05-19-2009, 11:50 AM

Hi Resident 2B,

Thank you for your response. If I can offer you my thoughts, they are that:

- In the last ten years, there were two skydiver/aircraft collisions midair. Both instances they were the skydiving aircraft and the skydiver that left the aircraft. That is over the course of approximately 20,000,000 skydives made over the last decade. According to NTSB statistics, there is an aircraft to aircraft collision mid air every ten days. (There was one just the other day in Long Beach, CA.)

Statistically you are far more likely to ever see an aircraft to aircraft collision over the airport than see an aircraft collide with a skydiver. Mr. Hemmel posted a pretty interesting video of a "near miss", so sure, it can happen, but statically it's beyond the realm of reasonable expectation to occur. (Although Mr. Hemmel would sincerely like you to believe otherwise.)

- As for landing off the airfield, industry experts, including those at the FAA consider landing on the airport to be safer than landing off of it. The reason is that if we are landing off of it, we are far more likely to be in somones pattern outside the airport. The safest place for us to get out is above the airport and land on the airfield.

- As far as it being a fatal accident waiting to happen, statistically speaking, you will be waiting a very very very long time for it to happen, if it happens ever at all. But what is also a statistical truth is that while we all wait for it to happen, numerous fatal midair aircraft to aircraft collisions will continue to occur over the skies that the FAA governs.

- When the federal government (the FAA) sets up a clearly defined process and expectation that leaves no ambiguity to it's purpose and an airport sponsor (in whole or in part) chooses to disregard their role and responsibility and act out of personal agenda or lack of investigation/education, then I would say that yes, that truly is a suppression of freedom. I am not inferring that has occured here. The LAA has yet to render any decision. If they render a refusal, then yes, that will be a clear case of discrimination and denial of a protected right to pursue an aeronautical activity on a federally funded airport.

Where this goes is entirely up to the LAA. It is our sincere hope that they have done their due diligence, gotten guidance from the NHDOT and Portland FSDO, and had a cite evaluation of LCI done as required by the FAA. If all of that has been done, then the acceptance of Skydive Laconia onto the airfield is the only just decision.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

05-19-2009, 11:50 AM	#86
TheNoonans Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Daytona Beach, FL - Bedford, NH Posts: 136 Thanks: 0 Thanked 219 Times in 57 Posts	Skydive Laconia Hi Resident 2B, Thank you for your response. If I can offer you my thoughts, they are that: - In the last ten years, there were two skydiver/aircraft collisions midair. Both instances they were the skydiving aircraft and the skydiver that left the aircraft. That is over the course of approximately 20,000,000 skydives made over the last decade. According to NTSB statistics, there is an aircraft to aircraft collision mid air every ten days. (There was one just the other day in Long Beach, CA.) Statistically you are far more likely to ever see an aircraft to aircraft collision over the airport than see an aircraft collide with a skydiver. Mr. Hemmel posted a pretty interesting video of a "near miss", so sure, it can happen, but statically it's beyond the realm of reasonable expectation to occur. (Although Mr. Hemmel would sincerely like you to believe otherwise.) - As for landing off the airfield, industry experts, including those at the FAA consider landing on the airport to be safer than landing off of it. The reason is that if we are landing off of it, we are far more likely to be in somones pattern outside the airport. The safest place for us to get out is above the airport and land on the airfield. - As far as it being a fatal accident waiting to happen, statistically speaking, you will be waiting a very very very long time for it to happen, if it happens ever at all. But what is also a statistical truth is that while we all wait for it to happen, numerous fatal midair aircraft to aircraft collisions will continue to occur over the skies that the FAA governs. - When the federal government (the FAA) sets up a clearly defined process and expectation that leaves no ambiguity to it's purpose and an airport sponsor (in whole or in part) chooses to disregard their role and responsibility and act out of personal agenda or lack of investigation/education, then I would say that yes, that truly is a suppression of freedom. I am not inferring that has occured here. The LAA has yet to render any decision. If they render a refusal, then yes, that will be a clear case of discrimination and denial of a protected right to pursue an aeronautical activity on a federally funded airport. Where this goes is entirely up to the LAA. It is our sincere hope that they have done their due diligence, gotten guidance from the NHDOT and Portland FSDO, and had a cite evaluation of LCI done as required by the FAA. If all of that has been done, then the acceptance of Skydive Laconia onto the airfield is the only just decision. Blue skies to all and to all a good flight, Tom