kallend 1,890 #1 August 13, 2004 If I hadn't seen it yesterday I might not believe it. I expect it had been done before, does anyone know?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vdschoor 0 #2 August 13, 2004 Who did it? Was it at WFFC? I heard John King (the packer) and McBain talking about doing it at LP, but it didn't happen there, and they are both in Rantoul right now.. Was it them? Iwan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #3 August 13, 2004 It happened at WFFC, the FAA, S&TA and a few other people went to talk to the parties about possible FAR violations. Interesting concept, breaking a FAR by landing a Mr. Bill because you were not jumping a tandem rig...Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
towerrat 0 #4 August 13, 2004 wow! balls of steel. who's got the video?Play stupid games, win stupid prizes! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FrogNog 1 #5 August 13, 2004 QuoteIt happened at WFFC, the FAA, S&TA and a few other people went to talk to the parties about possible FAR violations. Interesting concept, breaking a FAR by landing a Mr. Bill because you were not jumping a tandem rig... It sounds ironic because Tandem Rigs are kind of "extra-FAR status", aren't they? That is, aren't they still in an "experimental" exception to the regular rules? Thinking about some FARs that could be in question, it seems the jumpers here would be OK because they presumably each had an FAA-certified-rigger-packed reserve on their back that they didn't intend to use except in case of emergency. However, maybe we are required by the FARs to remain within the operational limits of our reserve canopy/harness container as specified by the manufacturer. Of course, many of us regularly exceed the max deployment speed while in freefall - just not at opening time. I wonder how fine-tooth the comb would have to be to allow freeflying but not allow landing (or deploying?) a Mr. Bill. -=-=-=-=- Pull. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johnny1488 1 #6 August 13, 2004 One jumoer got kicked off the ranch a number of years ago for landing a mr bill. He is now back but hasnt done it again. Johnny --"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!" Mike Rome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #7 August 13, 2004 Tandems are now covered under Part 105. If both jumpers left the plane with a legal single harness dual parachute system on they should be legal. Now where in the FAR's can I remember it saying you had to open either one of the canopies. jmo Sparky PS: a real dumb thing to do.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WFFC 1 #8 August 14, 2004 Quotewow! balls of steel. who's got the video? I've got the video. I'll post it when I get home when I've got a bit more time. Bottom line, this was the best display of stupid human tricks so far at the WFFC. Hopefully, this is the last.----- ~~~Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WFFC 1 #9 August 14, 2004 real technicality here. The rule reads: one person, single harness, dual parachute (main/reserve) system or two people, dual harness, dual parachute (one main/one reserve) system. the literal reading, these two violated the FARs.----- ~~~Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 4 #10 August 14, 2004 Quotereal technicality here. The rule reads: one person, single harness, dual parachute (main/reserve) system or two people, dual harness, dual parachute (one main/one reserve) system. the literal reading, these two violated the FARs. The rule reads: § 105.43 Use of single-harness, dual-parachute systems.No person may conduct a parachute operation using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, unless that system has at least one main parachute, one approved reserve parachute, and one approved single person harness and container that are packed as follows: § 105.45 Use of tandem parachute systems. (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation using a tandem parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a tandem parachute system, unless—(1) One of the parachutists using the tandem parachute system is the parachutist in command, and meets the following requirements:(i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist—(ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute, and§ 105.45 Use of tandem parachute systems. (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation using a tandem parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a tandem parachute system, unless—(1) One of the parachutists using the tandem parachute system is the parachutist in command, and meets the following requirements:(i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist—(ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute, and...... No where does it say anything about one person, single harness........ or two people, dual harness..... In any case, when they left the aircraft they were both wearing a legal rig. And no where does it say a jumper wearing a single harness, dual parachute system or a dual harness, dual parachute system must deploy either one.My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
darkwing 4 #11 August 14, 2004 Ultimately it would be one for the lawyers, but MY reading of the FARs is that there is no violation. They each did have the required equipment. I wouldn't recommend it though. -- Jeff My Skydiving History Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,890 #12 August 14, 2004 QuoteQuotereal technicality here. The rule reads: one person, single harness, dual parachute (main/reserve) system or two people, dual harness, dual parachute (one main/one reserve) system. the literal reading, these two violated the FARs. The rule reads: § 105.43 Use of single-harness, dual-parachute systems.No person may conduct a parachute operation using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, unless that system has at least one main parachute, one approved reserve parachute, and one approved single person harness and container that are packed as follows: § 105.45 Use of tandem parachute systems. (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation using a tandem parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a tandem parachute system, unless—(1) One of the parachutists using the tandem parachute system is the parachutist in command, and meets the following requirements:(i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist—(ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute, and§ 105.45 Use of tandem parachute systems. (a) No person may conduct a parachute operation using a tandem parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a tandem parachute system, unless—(1) One of the parachutists using the tandem parachute system is the parachutist in command, and meets the following requirements:(i) Has a minimum of 3 years of experience in parachuting, and must provide documentation that the parachutist—(ii) Has completed a minimum of 500 freefall parachute jumps using a ram-air parachute, and...... No where does it say anything about one person, single harness........ or two people, dual harness..... In any case, when they left the aircraft they were both wearing a legal rig. And no where does it say a jumper wearing a single harness, dual parachute system or a dual harness, dual parachute system must deploy either one. I'm not a lawyer not do I play one on TV, but I agree. 105.43 seems to be the applicable rule, and it was not violated. I don't see that 105.45 applies to this case. The FARs say nothing about minimum opening altitudes, opening at all, or landings. If this was illegal operation, then ANY Mr. Bill at any altitude is equally illegal.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WFFC 1 #13 August 14, 2004 Chatted with a lawyer in the internet cafe while he was here. It will depend on whose opinion on the reading you follow. In any case, the 2004 WFFC Stupid Human Trick award goes to...----- ~~~Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #14 August 14, 2004 QuoteI expect it had been done before, does anyone know? *** Saw it once in Illinois in the late 70's, into a lake... With the flight characteristics of the canopies then... and the size of the guys doing it... If it HADN'T been into water, they probably wouldn't have 'walked away'! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,890 #15 August 14, 2004 QuoteChatted with a lawyer in the internet cafe while he was here. It will depend on whose opinion on the reading you follow. In any case, the 2004 WFFC Stupid Human Trick award goes to... 105.5 is a catch-all "Sec. 105.5 General. No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted from an aircraft, if that operation creates a hazard to air traffic or to persons or property on the surface." FAA regularly uses these general clauses to screw anyone they're pissed at.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #16 August 14, 2004 Quote ...and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow.. Quote I don't know how it is now... especially with the Homeland Security Act, But back in my wise ass bandit days, that was really the only part of 105 with any teeth. Following an "unscheduled" jump into a parking lot gathering near a sizable but 'not busy' airport, an 'admirer' was asking some pointed questions... I asked him to identify himself in regard to which organization he was affiliated with... To which he responded; "The FAA"... displayed credentials and continued, "You need to come with me and answer some questions" I told him that as a private citizen not operating an aircraft or having a license issued BY the FAA... I would be declining his request. And since he held no 'Power of Arrest', any attempt to detain me would be a violation of my Constitutional Rights... I left before someone WITH power of arrest came along, and before he could consult with any colleagues as to the validity of my argument- ...and never heard anything else about it. But again...That was THEN! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balls 0 #17 August 14, 2004 Kind of new here. What is "Landing a Mr. Bill"?---------------------------------------- ....so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #18 August 14, 2004 Do a search on "Mr. Bill" then picture the person not jumping off and landing it.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #19 August 14, 2004 I saw it and couldn't believe it! That was, by far, the stupidest thing I've ever seen in my 18 years of skydiving. I asked around and nobody had ever heard of anyone doing that before. I was waiting to test jump a Crossfire 109 at the Icarus tent, looked up, and saw what I originally thought was a guy with some kind of stuffed doll on his shoulders (until it moved ). Incredible! You just never know at the Convention! Damn!!! Had to come back yesterday. I'm depressed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #20 August 15, 2004 Hey bro, Do a search on "McBain". I think that is the person involved here. I have stated my opinion previously, and if it's the persons involved I think it is, then I am seriously justified. Argh. McB? If it's not you, I apologize. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mathias 0 #21 August 15, 2004 McDeath McDivot McCrater McIdiot McDumb McNottalkingtoMathias cool trick thoughIngen minns en fegis! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
larsrulz 0 #22 August 15, 2004 It was....after witnessing him and his Bill during the RWS/PD auction, it's quite obvious that they don't even have one brain between the two of them. I got a strong urge to fly, but I got no where to fly to. -PF Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyinchicken 0 #23 August 16, 2004 So where's the video? "Diligent observation leads to pure abstraction". Lari Pittman Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cpoxon 0 #24 August 16, 2004 What size and model of canopy and how much was to total suspended weight?Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sunnydee123 0 #25 August 16, 2004 I saw it as well and not sure I'd consider it "balls of steel"..........pretty frigin stupid IMHO, especially at such a high profile event. What if it had not gone "according to plan"...thank goodness it ended ok but I just think it was DUMB! Who knows............skydivers are definitely a different breed Dreams become reality, one choice at a time... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
