Well All And All....
 

we do know how very slow that things can happen when the rest of us just want to SkyDive, in Laconia that is!!
We are rooting for you Two!! Tom and Mary!!

Good Luck!!!!
 

All this should be all set and done so I can get my first and probably only jump for my milestone Birthday next year!!!

My Letter to the Airport Authority and the City of Laconia
 

I sent this today to the AA and the City Council of Laconia.

My perspective on the reality of skydiving operations at busy airports.

TK Hayes
Zephyrhills, FL
------------------------------------------------------------------------



July 23, 2009

Laconia Airport Authority

Ladies and Gentlemen;

My name is David 'TK' Hayes, and I manage one of the largest skydiving operations in the country, if not the world, here in Zephyrhills, Florida. *We operate several DeHavilland Twin Otters throughout the year and perform some 70,000-75,000 skydives and more than 3500 aircraft takeoffs and landings each year.

We operate EXACTLY 25nm from Tampa International airport, and 46nm from Orlando International Airport in some of the busiest airspace in the Southeast USA. *Zephyrhills airport is used by Skydivers, Glider pilots, recreational pilots a flight school, hosts the traffic for several maintenance facilities.

I would like to respond to the issues that you seems to be faced with a possible skydiving operation at your airport. *I would also like to assure you that what you are going through sounds like pretty normal feelings regarding skydiving operations all across the country.

1. Fear of the ‘unknown’
2. Danger of collisions with skydivers
3. Skydiving and the economy

Fear of the unknown.

A lot of the issues come from fear and mostly fear of the unknown. *I first and foremost encourage you all to take a trip to an airport where a regular, busy skydiving operation exists and see for yourselves how skydiving and (any) other operations co-exist on the same airport/property. *There are many dropzones that co-exist in the USA with other operations. *

Most of the general population does not understand what we do. *If you spent an afternoon at a skydiving center, you would see the types of things we do, the attention to detail, the safety standards and the types of activities that we participate in. *Basically, we are a pretty normal bunch of people trying to make a living by offering an aviation service that few other people offer.

We follow the same Federal Aviation Regulations as everyone else, and go beyond that as members of the United States Parachute Association, who offers our training and licensing standards to our sport.

Danger of collision with skydivers.

A typical flight school may only operate 5-15 flights a day. *Many of those flights do not stay in the pattern of the airport. *Each flight might spend 10-20 minutes in the traffic pattern. *That is a total amount of time of only an hour or two in the sky at the airport out of a 10-12 hour day of possible flight activity. *That is a lot of down time when NOTHING is going on at the airport.

A fairly busy skydiving operation with a Cessna 182 or even a Caravan might do 20 flights in a day. *Each operation takes 30 minutes to climb to altitude, perhaps a 5 minute window when skydivers are actually in the air and then it is over and everyone is on the ground.

Certainly while the skydivers are in the airplane and the airplane is flying a 'normal' climbing pattern around the airport, with a pilot who is communicating with the other traffic in the area and even perhaps the nearest ATC center, I would state that 'danger' is non-existent.

Even if the skydivers jump and take 8 minutes from drop to actually being on the ground, in a day with 20 loads, that would be a total of 160 minutes, 2 1/2 hours of total of possible exposure time with skydivers in the air.

What I am trying to say is that even with a busy skydiving center, at any given time during a long day, when you look upward, there is NOTHING going on. *Short bursts of activity followed by relatively long waits between loads.

As well, Skydivers generally jump OVER an airport. *Traffic arriving and leaving an airport is generally flying in or out at a very shallow angle over a long flight path. *A skydiver at 1000' directly over the airport does not pose ANY hazard to an airplane that is on a 2 mile final approach at 1000'.

Skydiving pilots are more than used to being vigilant about radio communications when they operate. *They announce their intentions prior to launch, during the climb, prior to jumprun, after jumpers away and descending and jumpers on the ground. *If some airplane is in the area and NOT talking on a radio - well shame on them. *I realize that the regulations allow this, but it is simply not smart.

The chance the an errant pilot should wander into an airspace is not justification for stopping activities that are law-abiding and following the rules. No more than we would stop driving cars just because we fear someone might speed or otherwise pose a danger to other traffic.

Our typical series of communications at Skydive City in Zephyrhills - from the time we pick up a load until we are back on the ground - goes like this
123.07 Unicom - "Zephyrhills Traffic, Twin Otter taxing for runway 36 for skydiving ops, Zephyrhills"
123.07 Unicom - "Zephyrhills traffic, Twin Otter departing runway 36, climbing out to the north"
in less than 2 minutes we are at 2000' and we call Tampa ATC, but we still monitor Unicom all the way to altitude
135.50 Tampa Approach - "Tampa, Freefall One is back up, climbing through 2000' for 13500', 3 miles north of Zephyrhills"
Tampa *- "Freefall One, radar contact 3 miles north of Zephyrhills, advise 2 minutes prior to jump"
We receive traffic advisories from them all the way to altitude, as well, we advise them of traffic we see. Some 10-12 minutes later at 11500';
135.50 Tampa - "Tampa Freefall One is two minutes to drop"
then we advise on Unicom
123.07 Unicom - "Zephyrhills traffic, skydiving over Zephyrhills airport in 2 minutes from 13500' and below over the Southeast corner of the field, Skydiving in 2 minutes over Zephyrhills"
in 2 minutes we drop all the skydivers unless we have traffic, in which we may hold and go around as needed.
135.50 Tampa - "Tampa, Freefall One is jumpers away and descending to the east"
123.07 Unicom - "Zephyrhills traffic, jumpers away SE of the field, Twin Otter descending to the east of the field"
As we pass through 5000' on the way down, Tampa releases us
Tampa - "Freefall One, radar service terminated, change to advisory frequency is approved, see you soon"
at 2000' ( less than*5 minutes after drop) we are entering our 'opposite' pattern at Zephyrhills Airport
123.07 Unicom - "Zephyrhills traffic, Twin Otter on high left midfield for runway 18, Zephyrhills"
and again
123.07 Unicom - "Zephyrhills traffic, Twin Otter on short final for runway 18, Zephyrhills"

Once we are on the ground we also notify Unicom when we are clear the runway 18/36.

Why is this important? *On a busy day during one of our larger events, say at Christmas time, I will have 3-4 Twin Otters flying and we will repeat that same routine up to 70 times in a day. *Each load will have up to 22 skydivers on board. *There is an airplane dropping skydivers every 8-10 minutes from 8am to 6pm.

And we have a glider club actively operating on the same runway, departing in between our loads and landing gliders right through our our parachute landing area. Again, for the majority of time, there is NOTHING in the air, even on a busy day.

Now if we can do this successfully at Zephyrhills airport for the past 4 decades, surely you can manage 20 loads a day of 4-14 skydivers on each load.

I have been jumping since 1981 and I have only heard of a handful (less than 3 or 4) skydiver/airplane collisions EVER in the sport of skydiving. *But aircraft collide about 30 times each year in the USA. *I would argue that the*danger of a collision lies not with the skydivers. And banning the skydivers will not and has not reduced or removed the risk of any other aircraft collision.

Bottom line, is that the risk is there, like any other risk - but it is so minimal, it is barely measurable in reality.




Skydiving and the Economy

A skydiving operation attracts a different kind of person to the location where the skydiving is taking place.

Take the example again of a flight school at an airport. The flight student may be local or may not be. They will come, perhaps 5-6 students in a day. They stay for a couple of hours or half a day and they go home. They might buy a meal. They might buy gas. But they are not in your town for the ‘long haul’

Skydivers will travel to a dropzone to jump for a weekend or more. Those people will stay in hotels, they will eat three squares a day in your restaurants, they will buy gas and they will stay from Friday night to Sunday night in your town because they want to skydive and that is the recreational activity that they have chosen.

The average first jump student coming to do a tandem jump will be at the dropzone for half a day. They have travelled perhaps two hours to get there. They will buy food and gas and spend money in your town. Students who come to learn how to skydive are like the regular skydiver population, they will be there for extended periods of time to finish their training and jump as much as they can.

A dropzone will hire pilots, packers, instructors and office staff to manage the dropzone. Those people pay income taxes and local taxes as well. The have to eat and they have to have a roof over their heads.

In 1998, the City of Zephyrhills did an impact study on skydiving in their community and realized a $10,000,000/year industry contributing to the community.

We are such an integral part of the community that the City includes a parachute on their logo.

Even the FAA recognizes skydiving and parachuting activities as part of ‘normal activities’ at an airport

So How Do We Make All This Work?

Meet with the skydiving operations and the flight schools and anyone else that flies out of the airport.

Develop working procedures as far as traffic patterns, communications and runway usage for everyone concerned. It is fairly easy to separate the ‘traffic’ on the airport, both with distance and time. Do not be afraid of stepping outside of the ‘norm’, especially when it comes to traffic patterns.

At Zephyrhills, we fly a completely opposite pattern to all other traffic, and it is published and charted. The FAA did not request that. We, as tenants of the airport, sorted that out with each other and told the FAA that this was what we worked out. It’s been working for decades.

File NOTAMs for the activities that are going on. Petition the FAA to update their charts and ‘Green Books’ to show the activities for anyone flying into the area.
Establish communication protocols that keep all the pilots informed of what is going on and when. Our radio communications (above) is a good example of what works well. Announcing ‘take-off’, ‘2 minutes to drop’, ‘jumpers away’ and ‘jumpers on the ground’ makes 4 separate announcements in the span of a 15-20 minute window, on top of all other normal traffic pattern conversation.

Surely that would suffice for radio communications at ANY airport.

And finally, come out and watch some skydiving, you might get the bug to try it yourself.....

David ‘TK’ Hayes
President/GM
Skydive City Inc.
4241 Sky Dive Ln
Zephyrhills, FL 33542
813-783-9399 wk
813-598-6981 mobile

Skydive Laconia
 

Greetings to all,

I just wanted to provide another update as we approach the August 2009 LAA meeting. I was informed earlier this week that our story has gone national and that the most recent article published in the Citizen was up on the AOPA website. We are obviously very happy to hear that our story is picking up national interest. Defending airport access rights is not just about skydiving, it's about defending equal and fair access to airports for all aeronautical activities.

I'm happy to say that I received this email from a pilot in Pennsylvania:

"I am a pilot at Donegal Springs airport in S. Central PA. Our airport is home to the Maytown Sport Parachute Club. I have been flying here since 1999. I am an aircraft owner & President of the York Travelers Flying Club. I also instruct student pilots here on a part-time basis.
In 10 years here, I am not aware of any difficulties regarding the parachutists and pilots or student pilots.
We all live together in harmony and co-exist peacefully."

There were also two supportive Letters To The Editor published on the Citizen website:

1) "Editor, The Citizen: I read the news story regarding the proposed skydiving operation at Laconia airport and the opposition by Ms Adams and Mr. McCulla.

As an experienced pilot with over 4000 hours of flight time, including hundreds of hours flying from an airport with an active skydiving operation, I feel qualified to comment. I have never had a close call with a skydiver; however, I have had several with other aircraft. Should I be advocating restricting other aircraft?

Expanding on Ms Adams and Mr. McCulla's logic, one could conclude that we should limit aircraft flights entirely. Or eliminate the risk by only letting one aircraft fly at a time. Perhaps we should just exclude Ms Adams and Mr. McCulla from flying.

Obviously I am being facetious and have nothing personable against these two fellow aviators. The point I am trying to make is that you shouldn't be excluding anyone from the enjoyment of flight; because you just might be next."

and

2) "Editor, The Citizen: Good reporting on the issue, without the usual anti-aviation bias. Thank you.

I am not a skydiver and don't aspire to be one either.

I am a general aviation pilot and I fly out of an airport with skydiving operations. I also regularly fly through airspace with another skydiving operation nearby. On most of my long distance flights I am aware of skydiving operation areas by their notations on aeronautical charts and through the issuance of Notices to Airmen (NOTAM).

Skydiving operations are very friendly to airport operations and they bring in much needed revenue as well. It is usually the pilots of small aircraft that create risks through their inattention to regulations regarding operating an aircraft in and around skydiving activities. Anyone who flies into or out of a skydiving airport has to remain vigilant.

The jump aircraft broadcasts on common-talk air frequencies (CTAF) which are the same frequency used by approaching and departing aircraft. They announce two minutes before jumpers are released, again as the jumpers are released and again when the jumpers are on the ground. The jump aircraft may also coordinate their communications with air traffic control agencies that manage the airspace in and around the specific airport. ATC then also broadcasts the information on the frequencies assigned to their sectors. For any aircraft using communication radios it is hard not to know that a jump is occurring at any given moment.

There still remains one other scenario and that is for aircraft without communication radios, which is perfectly legal and acceptable in most of the US airspace. The general aviation fleet is dominated by aircraft with communication radios but aircraft with no radios (NORDO) have to remain particularly vigilant when operating in a jump zone. We all share the airspace and it is up to each of us individually to apply the requisite jurisprudence to any given situation. Aircraft are no more correct in hitting a skydiver than a skydiver is in-the-right hitting an aircraft. There is no "right-of-way" rule. It is all about see and avoid procedures.

When I am approaching my home airport I monitor the Unicom frequency, well in advance of entering the pattern. If jumpers are nearing their departure from the jump aircraft I spend an extra minute or two checking out the scenery away from the airport. Once the jumpers are on the ground I then enter the pattern and make my landing. A jump, even from 12,000 feet is a fleeting event — only lasting from 2 to 5 minutes at most. I don't think it is too much to ask of pilots to spend a few more minutes doing the thing they love to do most — aviating.

Pilots, aircraft and skydivers can play nicely together. It is generally up to the pilots to not assume that they own the airspace just because they are bigger and have engines. Leave the ego at home and enjoy the airspace shared by us all."

Mary and I thank you all for your continued support.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Greetings all, I've read this thread with great interest over the last several months and thought perhaps it was time to comment..

I am a avid aviation enthusiast and an active skydiver who lives in New Hampshire. I am well acquainted with the Noonans, and I am also familiar with Laconia Airport, having flown in and out of there many times in general aviation aircraft.

I think most of the "safety" comments have already been covered. The chances of a plane-skydiver collision are relatively small, and if everybody is operating in a Visual Flight Rules (VFR) "see and avoid" mode like we all should be, the overall effects to the aviation community will be minimal, if not completely negligible. But its incumbent upon everybody (pilots, skydivers, jump pilots, DZ staff, etc) to be heads-up while operating. Its not like skydivers show up to an airport and think they "own" the place any more than the fliers who are based there "own" it. We all have to do our part to fly and land safely around each other. Skydivers need to be sure they understand the rules and the expectations (ie. "No flying over the runway at less than 1000 ft" or "If you land in the grass between the runway and the taxiway, and there is a plane taxiing by, stop, take a knee so the pilot knows you see him, and wait for the plane to pass".. these are just two examples I picked out of thin air, BTW, but they are illustrations of the kinds of rules and behaviors that the skydivers, too, may need to abide by) for that particular airport so that everybody can co-exist correctly. Its not terribly hard.

I think more subtle than the 900-lb gorilla of safety is the implications this kind of a business has for the local area.

In the 11 years I have lived in New Hampshire, I can count the number of times I have been to Laconia, as an actual destination for my travels, on the fingers on both hands. And that includes my trip to the airport in June to attend the Airport Authority meeting (which I, unfortunately, missed by mere minutes). So in 11 years, I've been to the Laconia area as a destination perhaps 7 or 8 times. And in those trips, I've actually spent money in the area perhaps 3 or 4 times (food, gas, went to the movies once with some friends).

Contrast that with the other places that I have made my "destination" while skydiving and have spent money in their local economy. In addition to jump tickets (paying for the ride to altitude), very often trips to a DZ entail overnight lodging, eating in restaurants, purchasing gas, snacks and other provisions nearby, and even some "sightseeing" in the local area. Some examples from my 14 years of jumping:

Richmond, IN ($2000 or more, jump tix, food & lodging); Chambersburg, PA ($350, jump tix, food); Skydive City, Zephyrhills, FL (about $3500, jump tix, food, lodging, gas, gear, t-shirts); Skydive Chicago, Ottawa, IL ($200, jump tix); Hinkley, IL ($200); Titusville, FL ($250, doesn't count the 3 days we spent in and around nearby Cocoa Beach with a shuttle launch); Marshall, MI ($200); and also the thousands of dollars I've spent over the last 11 years in and around my "home" DZ in Pepperell, MA (jump tix, food from the local eateries, trips into town for snacks or Dunkin Donuts, gas, etc.)

That's just one skydiver's example, too. If there are 10 or 12 skydivers visiting, you can easily do that kind of math.

While its true that the Noonans' business will center around tandem skydiving, mostly, the fact of the matter is that people who come out to make a tandem skydive bring friends and family with them, eat food, buy gas and may, in fact, spend time in the local area after their jumping experience is complete. Even as an experienced jumper, I would be inclined to visit the proposed "Skydive Laconia" if it were a successful, active operation due to its location in a very, very scenic part of the state and its proximity to other activities for my family. Its nice to go someplace different, see your friends, jump with other people and from different planes, etc. When the end of the jumping day comes, I'm going to be starving for some grub. Am I going to drive 30 minutes south to Concord, or get something close by?

In today's economy, something that might bring people to the Laconia / Gilford area as a "destination" where they can spend some of their hard-earned money is a benefit. Due to the expenses surrounding the sport, skydivers tend to be more financially secure and are not afraid to spend money when and where its needed. (the "crazed biker/daredevil" image of skydivers found in mainstream motion pictures notwithstanding..) And that might provide a nice boost to the economy around the airport.

Thanks for the time! Looking forward to doing some quality skydiving at LCI.

Darin
D-19617

What Mr. Hayes failed to mention...
 

What Mr. Hayes failed to mention in his nice endorsement letter is that the Zephyrhills Airport is SO big, it has it's own 18 hole golf course (with restaruant) and a 72 acre industrial park. Lots and lots and lots of space- something we're lacking in Laconia.

And, of course, he has not a clue about the local traffic or patterns.

Skydive Laconia
 

Good evening Mr. Hemmel, nice to have you back in the discussion.

I believe that Mr. Hayes (TK) stated that Zephyrhills does 75,000 annual skydives. By comparison, our operation, at best, will do around 7,000 annual skydives per year. That's a mere 10% of their volume.

Rest assured though, the LAA has finally requested that the FAA, the only authority on safety in this matter, come in and do a site evaluation. We are thrilled about that. (We asked for it in November 2008). I think I have been more than gratious in my responses to all of your questions and factless accusations, so I would ask that you do me a small favor and respond to one question: When the FAA comes back and says, yes, based on our expert opinion, the Laconia Municipal Airport can sustain a skydiving operation, will you accept their verdict? Surely the FAA has enough experience (they wrote the FARs after all) to make such a decision, don't you think?

If your interested in doing some research along those lines......google the Santa Monica Airport and "airport access" and see what you find. Seems the airport sponsor there decided to limit the size of jets landing for "safety concerns", and the FAA came back and ordered them to allow the planes (threatened to fine them if they didn't comply I think) and most definitely threatened to revoke their federal funding if they did not comply. The airport sponsor appealed the finding, and.......lost the appeal. Why? The FAA stated (again) that they are the ONLY authority in airport safety issues. The best part? They cited in their brief that not one, but two federally funded municipal airports tried to ban skydiving (sound familiar?) due to "safety concerns" and both times the FAA came back in those skydiving cases and ordered the airport sponsors to comply or lose thier federal funding. It's all out there for you to do the research. Facts Mr. Hemmel. Not smoke and mirrors.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Good evening to all....
 

Just curious, Where are you from and who is paying for the site evaluation? I'm sorry if these questions have been answered previously.

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Jonas Pilot,

We live in Kissimmee, FL. We moved here from Bedford, NH. I am originally from the Boston area, my wife is from the Syracuse area. (A more detailed background on ourselves and our proposal is in some of the above posts).

I cannot tell you how much, if anything, the site evaluation would cost, or who would pay for it. The FAA's Advisory Circular states that when an aeronautical activity approaches an airport sponsor to request utilizing the airport, that it is the airport sponsor's responsibility to contact the ADO to request a site evaluation if they have a question about allowing the aeronautical activity to operate. It's a condition of the federal funding grant assurances that the airport sponsor agrees to abide by when they want to receive federal funding.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

A Disclaimer....
 

I joined Winnipesaukee.com way back in 2002. I have supported Mr. Hammel, and still do. However, I am very disappointed with his attitude and total misunderstanding, "Hopefully", in the matter of, "Skidive Laconia".

Mr. Hammel has contributed some very awesome photos here and is an active sponsor and of this web-site now.

Dear Mr. Hammel, we all love you very much.
We are very looking forward to expanding the local economy here. (Today 2009). "not so easy".

Skydivers from over The Big Lake,.... Hey, I'm getting my camera ready!!

How high?
 

Tom,

Just out of curiosity at what altitude will the jumper be jumping from? In an earlier post I mentioned that I would be jumping with my son this summer as his 18th birthday present. We were hoping to jump with you but since he is leaving for college in just a couple short weeks we had to take our business over an hour SE of the Lakes Region to your future competition in ME. 11 of us, my oldest daughter included, had a great experience. We jumped from 14,000 feet, which they claim is the highest in New England. We did a free fall for about 9,000 feet in about 50 to 55 seconds. It seemed much shorter than that. Man, what a rush! We are planning another outing in the summer of 2011 when my youngest daughter turns 18. After seeing my son's video of the jump even my wife says she'll go this time. Hopefully we won't have to drive as far then and we'll have good look at Like Winni on the way down. Good luck.

I'm sure (actually I know) it's been mentioned before and I'm not reading over 130 posts to find it. :D Just curious why skydiving is not again persued at the Moultonborough airport. It has stopped there over the last couple years and I have no idea why.

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Gato Nero and dpg,

Re: Gato's question:

Our "exit altitude" will depend on the type of aircraft that we use. Typically the exit window for tandem skydiving is anywhere between 10,000ft and 14,000ft AGL If we start with a piston 206U, we will probably exit at 10,500ft. If we start with a turbine Grand Caravan we will probably exit at 13,500ft. I don't know the exit altitude numbers for all the other dropzones in New England, but I don't think that there are any out there that are going above 14,000ft, so if you got out at 14,000ft while skydiving in Maine, then yes, I would say you were given accurate information, you went as high as you can go in New England.

While we're disappointed that we weren't open this season and couldn't be a part of your skydiving experience, you were in very good hands down the road there in Maine. Mary and I know the owners of that dropzone as well as the owners of two other large dropzones in Massachusetts and we look forward to helping increase all their student training programs as our vacationing skydivers return home to their home states and continue in our sport with them. (We will actually have a display in our hangar with info for all the other New England dropzones to help promote the sport across New England).

Re: dpq's question:

There was a dropzone in Moultonborough airport a few years ago called Skydive Lake Winnipesaukee. It was owned and operated by a good friend of ours. I don't know the specifics of the decision to close, my guess would be that it was just too far off the beaten path to attract enough customers. The good news is that she and her husband have brought an amazing new experience to Nashua, NH called the Skyventure Wind Tunnel. They now offer indoor skydiving.

I'm not sure what question your asking, so I'll try to answer your question in two possible contexts:
1) From what I understand, there is nothing preventing anyone from bringing a skydiving operation to Moultonborough.
2) If your asking why we are not pursuing an operation there, the short answer is that LCI provides us the location, airspace, tourist traffic and facilities that we need and want to open and sustain operations. I'm sure Mr. Hemmel will share his "many many reasons" that he feels we shouldn't be there, but as far as the FAA is concerned, the FARs clearly state that we have a right to be there. And in the end, that's all we are really doing, pursuing our legally protected right to utilize a facility that our federal income tax dollars help to fund.

If your looking for more detailed explanations, despite the long read, there is quite a bit of good information contained in the above 130+ posts.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

As a corporate jet pilot for the last 15+ years and a part-time Winni resident I can tell you there is NO safety issue with the type of operation that Mr. Noonan hopes to set up.

Having flown jets into Laconia, and many other uncontrolled airports, I can assure you that I am far more concerned with the weekend warriors, sightseers, and photographers circling their Cessnas around the local area with their heads in their asses than I am with skydivers dropping down directly on the field. All are welcome, its just that some scare us pilots more than others...

We listen to the CTAF frequency for 25+ miles out and would arrive accordingly and announce our position routinely regardless if skydiving was underway or not. Its standards practice at uncontrolled airports.

This is America, we are blessed with relatively free airspace and an entrepreneurial spirit that is the backbone of this country. Mr Noonan seems like a complete professional, and I would have no problem operating in and out of Laconia with his operation in place, there's plenty of room in the sky. In fact, I thank him for bringing any business to the region.

The ignorance and fear of the unknown in this thread is downright bizarre.


Good Luck to you!

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Winnicandle,

Thank you for your support. We are very excited to finally reach a conclusion in this process. With any luck, we will find out next week at the August 2009 LAA meeting.

Mary and I will both be attending the meeting, so as always, if anyone wants to come out and meet us and ask us questions, we will be available both before and after the meeting.

While I am online, I thought I would share with the forum the first line of an article that we found that was published in the Union Leader back in September 2006:

"An $8 million project to improve safety at Laconia Airport was cleared for takeoff yesterday."

$8,000,000?

To "improve safety at Laconia Airport"?

Three years ago? Hmm......

That money came from the NHDOT Division of Aeronautics. It's federal funding dollars administered by the state in a pilot program. The FAA classifies New Hampshire is a "block grant state", which allows the state to determine where federal funding is allocated.

With all that said, it begs the question, if an airport is given $8,000,000 to improve safety and then attempts to deny a legal aeronautical activity due to "safety concerns", stating the airport cannot safely accomidate the activity, did the allocated money serve it's purpose?

To be fair, I would guess that making the airport accessible to skydiving operations, glider operations, float plane operations, powered paraglider operations and tow plane operations was probably not on the agenda of the board when it began it's allocations of the $8,000,000 to improve airport safety. It begs the question though, "should it have been?" There is verbiage within the FAA Advisory Circulars (150/5190-6 and/or 150/5190-7) that would suggest that it probably should have been. Don't quote me, but I believe the line reads something like "it is the responsibility of the airport sponsor to make the airport available for use for all aeronautical activities."

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Jet Jocks
 

FYI Winnicandle:

1. My license says "Airline Transport Pilot, MEL"- same as yours. (Of course it also says "Commercial Pilot, Rotorcraft" and a few other things yours probably doesn't.)

2. The $250,000 Garmin G-1000 equipped aircraft we fly has the same aural traffic advisory and glass panel your kerosene burner has (I hope).

3. I do not shoot and fly. My safety pilot flys and monitors terrain and traffic while I shoot.

Our biggest worry is the jet jocks bombing around at high speeds, flying right hand traffic patterns (instead of the proscribed left hand one), who seem to think they own the sky.

Geeeeeez! Does this sound familar or what!!?? If you go faster than me, you are not welcome.

Bombing around at high speeds?? what???

review your regs, and show me the one that says I have to enter on any kind of pattern. We prefer not to as we like to avoid the weekend warriors. We like prescribed Instrument approaches.

Believe me pops, we watch the cessna photo shooters VERY closely on the TCAS. You have every right to be there as we do (remember America?) but again we watch ya close...rest assured. We know you both have your head pasted to the ground for your target and are doing circles with the window open and cant hear anything that the rest of the world is doing. I have been on plenty of photo shoots!

An ATP?? oh come on now!...1500hrs in a cessna and a 5th grade level exam is all it takes, not very impressive. And if we HAVE to play your "whip it out and measure" game...lets do it...CFI, CFII, MEI, AGI, IGI, SE ATP, Rotorcraft, ASES, Designated Examiner, and 9 Type Ratings.

Also not impressed with the Garmin - hell my car has a garmin...my plane, it has EASy and Planeview.

latest ride:

http://i416.photobucket.com/albums/p...7X/cockpit.jpg

Now come on - Lets all support some local business, especially one that seems like it will be well run.

Be safe out there!!!!

:D

Déjà vu all over again
 

Let's see. Does the environment look blue, at least much of the time? Does it contain large "vehicles" and small ones? Are some fast, some slow, some louder than others? Do some leave more turbulence in their wake? Are there experienced, careful and courteous operators, as well as boneheads? Do the people with opposing viewpoints seem unlikely to be swayed by opposing arguments? Cool. We can debate that! :look:

Pretty picture!
 

Very cool- I am very impressed with the pretty picture.

You missed the point here- I am NOT a 1500 hr private pilot, we DO have similar traffic systems, and while my head may be "pasted to the ground", that of my safety pilot is not. We area as aware of you as you are of us. It's called "see and be seen".

We are not weekend warriors flying around with our "heads up our asses", as you put it.

On the other hand, I would never presume to tell everyone at Logan that I have a "federally guaranteed right" to circle over the center of the airport & take photos 10 times a day, while they all put their operations on hold.

Skydive Laconia
 

"On the other hand, I would never presume to tell everyone at Logan that I have a "federally guaranteed right" to circle over the center of the airport & take photos 10 times a day, while they all put their operations on hold."

Good morning Mr. Hemmel, nice to have you back again. Still waiting for your answer, when the FAA says LCI can safely sustain skydiving will you accept their expert opinion, or will presume to reject it and state that you know better because your a local pilot?

To be fair, I don't expect you to answer, and the reality is that your opinion carries little consequence, it's the LAA making the decision. Now.....if a member of the LAA were to share your position, if they were to reject the findings of the FAA and issue a contradictory decision........suffice to say, I have done my due diligence on the subject and know (from the FAA' s perspective) where that will end. All I will say is that I would not want to be the one that has to justify to the FAA why their decision was thrown out.

Anyone that has turned on a television in the last year has seen Congress hold the auto industry, the financial industry and the mortgage industry entirely accountable for living up to the standards and responsibiities of accepting federal money. Do you think the FAA will hold the LAA to the same standards? I do. I am 100% sure of it. The federal government doesn't have a sense of humor about things like this, nor should they. I believe the figure stated last night was $600,000+ of federal money allocated for last nights projects at LCI.

Going back to your statement of smoke and mirrors, if the FAA, in it's infinite wisdom, stated that you could safely circle Logan, I would say more power to you, go do it. It's legal and it's approved by the FAA. I wouldn't try to interject my own personal opinions on aerial photography safety because I am not an aerial photography safety expert. That's the difference between us, I respect the established process of the FAA.

For what it's worth though, your mocking comment isn't entirely accurate, on those busy Saturday and Sunday days you keep talking about (the ones that we have same rights and access to the sky as you), we may fly more like 15-20 loads a day. If we totally under estimated demand, then we may even bring in a second airplane and as one is climbing, have the other descending, or better a larger one, like a Cessna Grand Caravan that drops 17 skydivers at a time. All perfectly legal and "protected" by the FAA. As for the inconvenience you will be forced to endure, if your a competent pilot, then you will not be inconvenienced at all.

But that is besides the point really. You can scour the FARs all like, you won't find a single line item referring to "inconveniencing" other aircraft. We won't complain when we have to spin and wait for you to taxi and take off, and the FAA expects (demands really) the same courtesy from you in return. Don't believe me, then draft a letter of complaint to the Portland FSDO and cite in your complaint that you are being inconvenienced. See what you get in return as a response..........

We have already done our due diligence, we know the answer, write them and find out for yourself.

To the rest of the community that is interested in the facts, supporting a free economy and pursuing freedoms, we continue to appreciate your support. For all the pilots out there, from the beginning, we have stated that we want to work with you, not against you. We are 100% willing to listen to whatever concerns any pilot may have and work with you to reach a mutually agreed solution. We will even host "Pilot Night" once a month or so, so that local pilots can come down and talk to us and our pilots and learn everything there is to know about how our flights are planned and made. We want you all to have all the information we have, so we can all work and ultimately fly, together.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Editted to add: Does anyone find it even mildly ironic that the same guy (Mr. Hemmel) that points out above that Mr. Hayes is on a 72 acre industrial airpark, so you can't compare Zephyrhills and Laconia, yet he makes a subsequent statement comparing circling Laconia to um.......circling LOGAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT? Laconia may be a busy airport Mr. Hemmel, but I think Logan may be in a class all it's own sir. Nice analogy though..........

Your patience throughout this process has been amazing.

Clearly you'll run a first class, safe operation that will be a true benefit to the lakes region. It seems that the process is designed to just wear out anyone who doesn't have a high degree of motivation to get approval.

Its unfortunate a bit more common sense can't be inserted in the approval but you've clearly shown if they want you to jump through hoops, you'll simply ask "how many" and drive on.

Good luck to you, I'm certain you'll do well.

Skydive Laconia
 

Thank you Granitebox,

It's been a long year, but we have the patience, the resources and the time to see this through. We won't be going anywhere until this is resolved, even if it takes us to FAA headquarters in Washington, D.C. (where our 33,000 group member funded airport access defense fund and lobbyists are waiting).

What I think was taken for granted from the beginning by certain people involved with this process is how thorough our research was before this all started. When we walked in the terminal door August 2008, we had already "point/counter pointed" every possible scenario that could arise and had a solution. Anyone familiar with Sun Tzu and The Art of War, is familiar with the idea that every conflict is decided before it begins. A lesser known ,yet equally powerful verse is:

"So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself,
you can win a thousand battles without a single loss."

Over the last ten years, we have seen every "trick" so to speak that an airport sponsor can pull to try and circumvent their federal funding obligations, always to the same result. The parallel here is that the LAA knows nothing about us really, including our resolve, and as evidenced by the last year, has had a difficult time "knowing themselves" in terms of their role and obligation in this process.

A last Sun Tzu quote that I think is fitting to share is:

"Never will those who wage war tire of deception".

Anyone that has read Mr. Hemmel's posts would have a hard time disagreeing with that statement, he certainly hasn't tired of it. Personally I don't like the term "war" as from our perspective, this is simply a cordial exchange of ideas between two parties striving to reach a resolution. But I'd be lying if I said the word "war" didn't pop up from people in the community when describing how the LAA feels about us and our proposal. Their stance against us has been described as their "war" against us by multiple people in the community. Hence the fitting nature of Sun Tzu I think.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Not quite accurate, as usual
 

I trust the judgement of the FAA at least as much as I trust the judgement of the SEC, FDA, IRS, and certain other government agencies.

Huh??? Care to quote the exact sentence where this direct comparison was made?

Once more, Tom, you missed the point. Even though you can (or have a "federally guaranteed right" to do so) doesn't mean you should.

I have yet to hear anyone in the aviation community use that word, but I'm sure you have a purpose for introducing it into this discussion. However it does beg the question:"Why would you go where you are not wanted?"

Oops- I forgot. The Money. The same reason you state that you cannot accept the alternative that would keep everyone happy- landing off field.

Speaking of smoke and mirrors- I find the amount of time a and effort Tom expends to raise and encourage local public support astounding. On one hand he asks people to show up at meetings, write letters, etc., while on the other hand he insists (correctly) that our opinions do not matter. It is strictly a safety issue- economics and/or public opinion are not relevant. Remember that before you waste your time.

invitation...
 

OK you guys, I think it's time to set out some plastic chairs and a table on my lawn and invite the both of you over for beer. What brands should I stock?
:laugh::laugh::laugh:

sit down for a beer
 

Yeah, I'll second that.
How could this thread possibly have turned ugly?
Seriously.

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Phantom Gourmand and sa-meredith,

This hasn't turned ugly for us. We remain emotionally detached, this is just a business negotiation. We bear no ill will towards Mr. Hemmel, and we certainly don't take what he is saying or doing personally. He is doing what he believes he has to do. We still wish him well. As do we continue to wish every member of the LAA well in their efforts to understand the federal funding grant assurances that they are obligated to abide by. From the beginning we have always said that we recognized their would be some negative reactions to our proposal. Any time something new and different comes around, it is bound to create a stir as the potential for a change in the status quo comes into view. The irony is that we will have such a minimal impact on the airport that a year from now people will look back on this all and say "what was all the fuss over?".

Mary and I remain available to anyone and everyone that has a question or concern about our proposal. We continue to arrive early to the meetings and stay late, yet we haven't been approached by anyone with any concerns.

I would also be happy to have lunch with Mr. Hemmel at the Lobster Pound and listen to every one of his concerns. I've offered that before and am offering it again. Any time we are there, we will make time to meet with him. He hasn't taken us up on our offer.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

I agree this thread is getting quite old. Maybe it just should be locked till there's an answer,then the final word can be posted. :(

All for the skydiving, but I have some questions
 

First, I applaud anyone who has the gumption to launch a new business. Second, I think skydiving is cool, although I've never done it. Third, I wish the Noonan's all the best. Now, for my question. When I'm entering the pattern (or in it), how do I know that a skydiver has not been blown off course directly into my flight path? Since I fly a low wing, there's a chance I could see them I suppose, but I don't really know how visible they are. By the way, somewhere in this thread I saw someone mention that people fly the pattern mostly on the south side of the airport, or something to that effect. I don't know what was meant by that, but I spend plenty of time on the other side of the field while in the pattern (especially when entering the pattern from the north, or landing on runway 8). Anyway, back to my question — does it often happen that skydivers get blown off course? Are you able to make sure you stay toward the center of the field? How do I keep track of where skydivers are, since they're not communicating after jumping, right? Or, can you communicate after you're out of the plane? Do you have the ability to see me from above and steer clear? As I said, I'm all for your business, although I'll admit it does make me just a tad nervous. Given the fact that this is done all over the country I'm guessing there are reasonable answers to my questions. Good luck with your business.

Being A Gut Thread....
 

I don't think that it will be closed before fruition, no'r should it be!

class act
 

I would just like to say that Tom Noonan has been nothing but a class act in this thread. You won't see my arse jumping out of any airplanes, but I'll meet you and Mary at The Pound and buy you a beer, Tom.:)

Skydive Laconia
 

Greetings to all,

I just wanted to check in with everyone and let you know that I will be attending the September LAA meeting tomorrow night at the Main Terminal Building at 5:30pm.

As always, if anyone is interested in asking questions or presenting any concerns, I will be there a half an hour early and will stay after the meeting as well if anyone has any questions after the meeting. Followed shortly there after by having dinner at the Lobster Pound. Please feel free to stop by there if you can't make the meeting.

Regarding the status of things: the Portland FSDO finished their assessment and found no reason that skydiving could not occur at the airport. Typically, in this scenario, when the FSDO declares the airport suitable for skydiving, skydiving is approved and commences. In this case however, the airport sponsor has subsequently requested that the ADO send in specialists to review, among other things, the IFR electronics. While delaying things further, this is simply one final item to wait for. This analysis is in process and we have been told that the FAA wants to get this done as soon as possible. That's where things stand at the moment.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

Open Kimono
 

You sir, are a class act! I know it's good marketing to keep your message in front of potential customers, but I have never seen such an "open kimono" approach to one's business by inviting everyone to all meetings that you have no control over, and anything could happen.

BTW, my compliments to your wife. I didn't mean to leave her out of my compliments.

Changed my opinion
 

Tom,

Although I was opposed to your sky diving proposal in the past, with all the studies that have been completed with results supporting your application, I have completely changed my opinion.

I now fully support this proposal. Although I will never jump out of a perfectly good airplane, I respect the rights of those that want to do this, as long as it is safe. Based on the studies and opinions of the experts, this is safe. Therefore, I am now a supporter of your proposal.

As others have pointed out, you are a class act and I believe you and your operation will bring value to our area.

Good luck and best wishes for success!

R2B

Tom Noonan
 

Did he just invite all of us to the LP for dinner? What a guy!! What time? :D
Seriously, best of luck to you with your new venture. Though I don't plan to be a customer, I'm sure you will thrive at this location especially in the summer months. Kudos to you for your openness and willingness to keep us all informed and respond to even some of your more hardened opponents. I hope that they too will someday realize that the airspace is open for all to enjoy.
Best of Luck to you!

Thanks Tom,I'll have the twin lobster.

Skydive Laconia
 

Greetings to all,

As the October 2009 LAA meeting approaches, I wanted to provide an update.

As I mentioned in the last update, the Portland FSDO found no reason to deny or limit skydiving at LCI, and the airport subsequently asked the ADO to do an Obstruction Evaluation analysis (OE) on our 2 primary landing areas and 4 alternate landing areas that we submitted back in November 2008.

I spoke with the FAA office that is conducting that analysis and it will be done by the end of this week, in plenty of time for next week's LAA meeting on the 15th. As has been our position all along, we don't expect any surprises from this analysis and expect the report to reconfirm the Portland FSDOs findings, that there does not exist any hazards unique to LCI that would preclude it from accomidating a skydiving operation, to include landing parachutes on the airfield.

Once this report is issued, and assuming I am accurate in my prediction, there will be nothing left for the LAA to consider in it's decision making process, and we would like to think that they will render a favorable decision at the meeting, granting us permission to operate.

Unfortunately, Mary and I will not be in attendance at the meeting, as we are on a plane to Kathmandu in three hours. We have been asked to return to Nepal for the second Everest Skydive Expedition. We will be gone through the 25th of October. For anyone interested, this year we will be landing at Gorakshep, a landing area at 16,500ft MSL, the highest "dropzone" in the world. We will be exiting at 30,000ftMSL, opening our parachutes at 21,500ft MSL and landing at 16,500ft. We will have a friend at the meeting representing us, so if anyone wants to contact us with any questions, he will be there to take the questions and forward them to us.

We look forward to returning from Mount Everest to a favorable decision so that we may begin to make preparations to open in May 2010.

Namaste!

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom

P.S. - Speaking of "good flights", we are about to make a 14.5 hour flight to Qatar, followed by a 6 hour flight to Nepal. Long night ahead for sure...lol.

Thanks Tom, for the update.

I believe your salutation of "Namaste"!, is illustrated by my google search of the term.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...mast%C3%A9.jpg

Too bad Al Gore is the illustrator.

A question though comes to mind. As you have obviously been exposed to the "world" as far as sky diving, is the Laconia approval process a 10, it's in the bag. A 5, really tough but possible with a 50/50 chance. Or anything less than 5 where the prospects are zero to none?

The Lakes Region would be fortunate to get such professional folks to set up an operation here. The delays in the approval process are embarrassing.

Skydive Laconia
 

Hi Pineedles and Granitebox,

Thank you for your support/responses.

Regarding Pineedles question, while nothing is truly certain in aviation, thus far every pilot, skydiving professional and FAA rep that has experience in both industries (that's the key, being an expert/authority in both areas), that has conducted any informal or formal analysis on LCI has come back and said every time, that there does not exist any unique hazard, airport size issue, or traffic frequency issue, that would preclude skydiving at Laconia Municipal Airport.

As for the delay mentioned by Granitebox, all I can offer is that Mary and I requested that the LAA contact the Portland FSDO for a site evaluation back in November 2008, and cited where in the FAA regs that it stated that was the appropriate course of action for the airport board. Had that been done, as it was requested, then all FAA evals would have been completed well prior to May 2009, or intended start date. For whatever reason (draw your own conclusions), our request was rejected at that time, and instead, the LAA elected to create a "Safety Committee" to evaluate our request. By May of 2009, the Safety Committee conceded that it was unable to reach a safety based decision, and it was only then that the LAA contacted the FAA to request the site evaluation.

We continue to remain focused and optimistic that this process will finally reach it's logical conclusion at the October 2009 LAA meeting.

As a side note, after a 35 hour commute, Mary and I are in Kathmandu prepping our gear for our journey into the Himalayas on Tuesday. For any adventurous pilots out there, google and Youtube search "Lukla Airport". It's an amazing landing to experience.

Namaste.

Blue skies to all and to all a good flight,

Tom