parajumping with only a ppl?

Freddy_Francis · Post by **Freddy_Francis** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:28 am

Hey everyone

Been reading the forum since i started my training and i finally decided to register. Question of curiosity ive heard you can fly para jumpers with only a ppl is this true? or is it another guy on the ramp making up stories? any help would be appreciated

fougapilot · Post by **fougapilot** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:44 am

It was true back in the old ANO days. The Air Navigation Order (ANO) were the predecessors to the CARs. They simply had no rules what so ever on SkyDiving which basically left each SkyDiving center on its own. Many pilots flew with nothing more then a private. Plus the airplanes were all privately registered anyways.

With the arrival of the CARs, in the mid 90s, things have changed. I think you now need a commercial, but am not 100% certain.

F

Cap'n P8 · Post by **Cap'n P8** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:52 am

No you don't need a CPL...if it is a volunteer club. A lot of parachuting schools and gliding clubs are volunteer. Get out there and look into it, cause it's a great way to build pic time.

TG · Post by TG » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:52 am

Like fougapilot said.

Since last century you need a commercial licence to fly there and any skydiving center need an AOC as they fall under CARs 702, aerial work.
I believe the trick that TC find to consider paradrop as aerial work is to call any jumpers on board the aircraft as essential crew and not passengers.

After all you just have to yell "Bail Out" and they'll be away before you even finish your sentence--->Contrary to your 250lbs tourists full of beer heading towards the toundra.

Ref Plus 10 · Post by **Ref Plus 10** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:57 am

I believe the only reason you would need a CPL is if the operation were just that, a commercial operation. There is no mention of any special requirements for parachute descent in un-controlled airspace in the CARs, only in controlled airspace or on an air route do you need to acquire a Special Flight Operations Certificate..

My 2 cents worth, anyway

TG · Post by TG » Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:07 am

You have a point Ref Plus 10.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/publi ... -1.htm#4-8
4.8 Parachute jumping

CAR 602.26 states, “Except where permitted in accordance with section 603.37, no pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall permit, and no person shall conduct, a parachute descent from the aircraft

(a) in or into controlled airspace or an air route; or

(b) over or into a built-up area or an open-air assembly of persons.”

CAR 603.37 states, “A pilot-in-command may permit and a person may conduct a parachute descent under this Division if the person complies with the provisions of a special flight operations certificate—parachuting issued by the Minister pursuant to Section 603.38.”

Division III of the Special Flight Operations Standards contains the information required to obtain a Special Flight Operations Certificate—Parachuting and the associated standards by which the parachute descents shall be conducted.

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:38 pm

I recently discussed this issue with the Transport superindendent in my region. He asserted that all parachuting was considered "aerial work" and thus required a 702 OC.

Coincidentally, I know some guys in another region who are currently being fined $50,000 for jumper dumping without an OC. They had a private club, you had to join to be a member, etc. Transport said they didn't care, as far as they were concerned all jumper dumping was a "commercial operation" and since they didn't have a 702 OC, they had to cough up a nice round $50,000.

Personally, I do not agree that all jumper dumping is a commercial operation. I am sure that Transport would like to assert that all flight training is a commercial operation (and thus require all instructors to work at an FTU with an OC) but that's patently absurd. So is their assertion that all jumper dumping is commercial. Just as I can flight instruct members of my family, if someone in my family wants to jump out of one of our airplanes, I can't imagine why on earth that could possibly be construed as a "commercial air service" (ie holding out to the public) but I'm not really in the mood for a $50,000 fine.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 4:49 pm

Coincidentally, I know some guys in another region who are currently being fined $50,000 for jumper dumping without an OC.

Does TC have the power to seize your private property to pay one of these fines?

I recently discussed this issue with the Transport superindendent in my region. He asserted that all parachuting was considered "aerial work" and thus required a 702 OC.

Are these decisions arbitraryily made by mandarins, or are these desisions approved by parliament?

185/310 · Post by **185/310** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:00 pm

Okay.... I gotta question. Are you planning to build hrs on your resume, and then at some point get your commercial and apply for a paying job, or is this just for recreational use?

Freddy_Francis · Post by **Freddy_Francis** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:39 pm

Im in the middle of my cpl training now. The question came about because I was watching the sky divers across the field and a guy started up about how a private is all you really need. Im just looking into different options. Ive been doing some research with the instructor route, traffic watch, banner towing (which according to a recent post makes a root canal look like fun) glider towing and getting on with a skydive operation. Flying for a living is the ultimate goal, Speaking of instructors anyone recommend a good FTU to get it done in the lower mainland?

Thanks for the replies!

Lommer · Post by **Lommer** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:11 pm

For FTUs in the lower mainland search the forums (especially the flight training one); Its been discussed a lot on here and there's no need to re-hash it in this thread.

Lever · Post by **Lever** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:31 pm

Tow Gliders... no need for the CPL either.

Most glider outfits don't have insurance for a rear-seat passenger and with your 'passengers' being in a seperate sky vehicle, your all good with the PPL.

Kinda a grey area that im sure can be argued either way.

If your after time building and dont have any other ideas, towing gliders is a blast and will teach you a lot.

Expat · Post by **Expat** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 3:00 am

I flew a couple of years for my friend.
I needed a cpl, I was alsop the CP of the 702 operation. He was the manager, and had to write the Ops Manual.
The whole operation was kosher.
Plane was comm registered but the hull was not insured...so I was very careful, especially when landing with the engine out after running out of gaz...

niwre · Post by **niwre** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:31 am

Freddy_Francis wrote:Im in the middle of my cpl training now. The question came about because I was watching the sky divers across the field and a guy started up about how a private is all you really need. Im just looking into different options. Ive been doing some research with the instructor route, traffic watch, banner towing (which according to a recent post makes a root canal look like fun) glider towing and getting on with a skydive operation. Flying for a living is the ultimate goal, Speaking of instructors anyone recommend a good FTU to get it done in the lower mainland?

Thanks for the replies!

All I have to say is be careful. Ive heard of one or two people in my region that either had a fine or suspension brought against them for flying for reward or hire. You can even be given "free hours" outside of the towing/dumping because that was considered a reward. Also one guy got a talking to for advertising on a company board (this company had 1000+ workers) because he was told he cannot "advertise" his services until he had his CPL signed off.

By all means its a wonderful way to ear pic time and get over that 100hrs pic time hump. If these people are looking for someone "cheap and easy" :p go for it. But be careful that you dont set a precedent that they will expect you to fly for free after you get you CPL. Cause we all know those pilots who fly for free where other pilots in the country would be making KD money with go to a special part of hell.

tesox · Post by **tesox** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:53 am

Plane was comm registered but the hull was not insured...so I was very careful, especially when landing with the engine out after running out of gaz...

Thats lunatic...how did you get a commercial registration without proof of insurance?

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:59 am

Thats lunatic...how did you get a commercial registration without proof of insurance

Hull insurance is not manditory...only liability is manditory.

CD · Post by CD » Sun Jun 17, 2007 10:01 am

Here is a little bit more background and history, as the issue of regulating the parachute industry was the subject of a couple of working groups over the years:

General Operating and Flight Rules Technical Committee (Part VI) - Terms of Reference: Working Group on Regulations Respecting Parachuting Activities
General Operating and Flight Rules Technical Committee (Part VI) - Final Report: Regulations Respecting Parachuting Activities

The more interesting one, based on some of the discussion in this thread, was the Part VII working group as it dealt with the commercial aspects of the industry.

Background

Except for a brief period around 1981, when some operators engaged in parachute-jumping services held a domestic licence and an operating certificate, parachute-jumping operations have been largely unregulated. At that time, the Canadian Transport Commission (now the Canadian Transportation Agency) routinely exempted operators engaged in parachute-jumping services from the requirement to hold a domestic licence. Transport Canada officials believed that since these operators no longer required a domestic licence they no longer required an operating certificate.

In 1988, the Aeronautics Act and the National Transportation Act underwent major revisions. The greatest consequence to operators engaged in parachute-jumping services was that they were formally exempted under the National Transportation Act from the requirement to hold a domestic licence.

In July of 1990, the Director General, Aviation Regulation, in recognition of the inconsistent application of the regulations and the need for some form of control of the parachute industry, issued to operators conducting parachute-jumping services a Ministerial exemption, with conditions, exempting them from the requirement to hold an operating certificate. The conditions of the exemption required operators to use commercially-registered aircraft, commercially licensed pilots, have their aircraft maintained in accordance with an approved maintenance control manual. Under the exemption, operators were exempt from some of the insurance requirements. It is worth noting that this exemption also applied to other commercial air operations, exempting them from the requirement to hold an operating certificate but requiring them to adhere to certain conditions. Furthermore, this exemption was intended to serve as a temporary means of controlling parachute-jumping operations and other forms of commercial air services until an amendment could be made to the regulations. Unfortunately, due primarily to the wording used in the exemption, the conditions were misinterpreted by many operators and Transport Canada officials, resulting in inconsistent application across the country.

In 1994 Transport Canada attempted to rectify the situation by issuing an exemption specifically addressing parachute-jumping operations. At the same time, however, the process of drafting the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) had begun and preliminary discussions within Transport Canada indicated that all aerial work operations involving the carriage of passengers would require an air operator certificate. Consequently, work on the new exemption was halted in anticipation of the implementation of the CARs. The Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council (CARAC), which is composed of Transport Canada representatives and industry stakeholders, confirmed that, in the interest of aviation safety, all aerial work activities involving the transportation of passengers should be conducted only by operators who possess an air operator certificate. On October 10, 1996, the CARs came into force as law and air operators conducting parachute-jumping aerial work operations became subject to the requirements set out in subpart 702 of the CARs.

Following the introduction of the CARs, Transport Canada was contacted by the Canadian Sport Parachute Association who expressed concern that some members would be unable to comply with the requirements of Subpart 702. Transport Canada responded by issuing three temporary Ministerial exemptions modifying the conditions for a company operations manual, operational control system and operations manager qualification requirements. In addition, Transport Canada agreed to establish a working group to review Subpart 702 and related provisions of the CARs with a view to ensuring that they accurately reflect the current realities of the operation of aircraft in parachute-jumping aerial work operations.

Commercial Air Service Operations Technical Committee (Part VII) - Terms of Reference: Working Group on Parachute-Jumping Aerial Work Operations

The final report for this Part VII working group is "reported" to have been presented at the December 1998 Commercial Air Service Operations Technical Committee meeting. However, no record of this meeting appears on the TC website:

Commercial Air Service Operations Technical Committee (Part VII) - Decision Records: Archives

If anyone does happen to have a copy of that final report, or what happened to any recommendations that it contained, it would be interesting to see what the outcome was.

(sheesh... what a waste of my 1000th post... )

185/310 · Post by **185/310** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 2:57 pm

Well if you dont have a commercial, and your towing banners, gliders, and flying for a skydive operation, this means your not getting paid, which means your flying for free which is BS. Dosent anybody else see this problem?

Freddy_Francis · Post by **Freddy_Francis** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:35 pm

[quote]Well if you dont have a commercial, and your towing banners, gliders, and flying for a skydive operation, this means your not getting paid, which means your flying for free which is BS. Dosent anybody else see this problem?

185/310 no offense but it sorta seems like your on a witch hunt

. I just asked a simple question and everyone on the forum has been of great help. You asked me a question and I answered it. At no time did I say I was gonna work for free, if I wanted to work for free id volunteer at an animal shelter or something...Im not even very far off from 100pic. Just a little bit of curiosity. Like I said previously im looking at options. I will be getting my MIFR after the CPL and going on from there incase you were wondering. Anyways not trying to start fight. Like to thank everyone for their help!

Thank for the replies

Fly Safe
F2

app flap · Post by **app flap** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:09 pm

i towed gliders with a PPL, granted i was doing my CPL... but that doesn't matter. built up maybe 40 hours doing in part time when i was sober enough to take the drive out there early on saturday or sunday morning! had some fun, flew some gliders, id do it again.

Freddy_Francis · Post by **Freddy_Francis** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:52 am

Is towing gliders striclty a cadet thing? I see notams for it out of pitt meadows sometimes and i believe there is a school of some sort in pemberton? Is it a matter of being checked out on a tail dragger and just getting picked or is there anything im missing?

Expat · Post by **Expat** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:09 am

One reason to operate according to the CARs is that there are additional risks associated with jump operations, which may cause injuries and lawsuits.
Jumpers are a special breed, and walk all over the apron and may get injured on the ground, as well as when they land.
Student jumpers land all over the place, in trees, lakes, power lines, etc
With a good layer, they can sue the operator, and the pilot, whoever has money.
In addition, diving back to the runway, there is always a chance to mid-air with a jumper.
You also need to control the plane, when you are in a stall, with an open door, with a two-hundred pound guy hanging to the strut.

Plus the fact that you always fly with minimum gaz, and the jumpmaster, with his back to the intrument panel, will often cut the power when you need it most...

Have fun...

Cap'n P8 · Post by **Cap'n P8** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:33 am

Wow, I stand corrected. Had no idea that transport dropped the hammer on this one. I've known a few guys who dropped jumpers at private clubs who never had a commercial. Didn't realize they were breaking the law.

Okay, but I would still recommend to anyone looking to build PIC time to try getting on towing gliders. I 100% know that you don't need a commercial for that!!!

Freddy_Francis · Post by **Freddy_Francis** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:06 pm

Thanks for all the replies! It sure got more complicated than first said, then again thats a common thing in this industry i've learned! The glider towing thing seems to be the best option...however if you dont have a cpl is this basically free work? and last i heard from the posts on this forum thats what we call a "no no"

Thanks For your help!

Fly Safe
F2

Lommer · Post by **Lommer** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 2:34 pm

You can tow gliders for the air cadets and get paid for it while only holding a PPL. Some loophole about they're not paying you to tow gliders, they're paying you to be involved in air cadets and you happen to tow gliders as part of that. I still think the only reason they get away with it is because they're associated with the DND.