SKYDIVE@f15.n233.z1.FIDONET.ORG (SKYDIVE) (05/24/91)
Reply-to: Mike.Johnston@p0.f2.n265.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Johnston) Fido-To: tom neale That was a good answer you gave to the guy asking about where he could jump from a friends stunt plane. But there is one common misconception that you stated. Skydivers do not get waivers to the FARs to make jumps. Waivers are issued to pilots for airshows and for other purposes when they want to do something prohibited by the regs. Skydiving demos frequently require a certificate of authorization, which uses the same application form as for a waiver, hence the confusion. So what's the difference? The FARs say we CAN jump into a congested area, if we get a certificate of authorization. The certificate allows the FAA to put additional requirements and conditions on the jump, but does not waive any regulatory requirements. Why make such a fine line distinction? FAA field inspectors have a tendency to be more cooperative when they realize you are not asking them to sign their name to a waiver; and when you explain that FAR 105 says you can jump over or into a congested area. Blue Skies! --- --- eecp 1.45 LM2 * Origin: Skydive Orange BBS : WOCin' on Air (Opus 1:265/2) -- SKYDIVE - via FidoNet node 1:233/13 (ehsnet.fidonet.org)
tneale@aeras.uucp (Tom Neale) (05/31/91)
In article <2968.283E7157@ehsnet.fidonet.org> SKYDIVE@f15.n233.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Johnston) writes that demo jumps require a certificate of authorization, not a waiver to the FARs. I stand (sit?) corrected. Mike is absolutely correct. I re-read FAR 105 last night and, indeed, the wording is quite clear. Specifically, FAR 105.15 (a) states: No person shall make a parachute jump, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute jump to be made from that aircraft, over or into a congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or an open air assembly of person (sic) unless a certificate of authorization for that jump has been issued under this section. However, a parachutist may drift over that congested area or open air assembly with a fully deployed and properly functioning parachute if he is at a sufficient altitude to avoid creating a hazard to persons and property on the ground. Paragraphs (b) and (c) talk about how to get such a certificate and inspections. I'm just not sure what "an open air assembly of person" is :-) Must be a typo in my copy of the FARs. Thanks, Mike, for pointing out that common (common to me, too) misconception. -- Blue skies, | ...sun!aeras!tneale | | in flight: N2103Q | Entropy isn't what it used Tom Neale | in freefall: D8049 | to be. | via the ether: WA1YUB |
robie@umbc1.umbc.edu (Mr. William Robie; POSI (GRAD)) (06/01/91)
In article <1991May31.164014.27267@aeras.uucp>, tneale@aeras.uucp (Tom Neale) writes... > >I'm just not sure what "an open air assembly of person" is :-) Must >be a typo in my copy of the FARs. > It used to be printed as personS, but what it is, by FAA definition, is even more interesting than the typo. This came up in an issue with ultralights once in my past and I asked a friend (read: someone who will speak clearly, but unofficially) in the FAA to give me an exact definition of who, where, how many, etc., constitutes an "open air assembly of persons." His answer was approximately this. Basically, if there are two people and one bitc**s to the FAA, then it is an "open air assembly." By the same token, there can be 4,000 people, and it nobody bitc**s to us, it was not. The law is not intended to be so specific that we can convict someone with a violation, but vague enough that we can CHARGE someone with a violation if we have to. (This particular guy was not "into" violating flyers of any kind unless they went out of their way to be stupid, or unless there was a serious safety issue that came to the attention of the public)