Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Here is some 'good news' during a time when it seems all we see on here is bad!!! It seemed initially it was much worse, but the pilot did an excellent job!! Well done!!!
http://www.energeticcity.ca/fortstjohn/ ... lane-crash
http://www.energeticcity.ca/fortstjohn/ ... lane-crash
Nature is a Mother.
-
North Shore
- Rank Moderator

- Posts: 5627
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:47 pm
- Location: Straight outta Dundarave...
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?
Happiness is V1 at Thompson!
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.
Happiness is V1 at Thompson!
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
5 parachutists and a pilot in a 182?
- Prairie Chicken
- Rank 7

- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 12:12 pm
- Location: Gone sailing...
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
To the pilot: Good work on the forced landing!
Prairie Chicken
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
As said above.. 5 parachutists and a pilot in a 182 !?!!?
-
ScudRunner
- Rank 11

- Posts: 3239
- Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:58 am
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
dcabrown wrote:As said above.. 5 parachutists and a pilot in a 182 !?!!?
Actually it looks like a Cessna 205 or its proper name a C210-5 might just be staring at it though beer goggles.
-
into the blue
- Rank 4

- Posts: 239
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:54 pm
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Beer goggles - OFF
No, that's actually a C182, either an E or F model (one of the earlier ones). Six people in that?!
No, that's actually a C182, either an E or F model (one of the earlier ones). Six people in that?!
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
I jumped many years ago from a 206. No seats except for the pilot and only enough fuel for a few jump runs. Six stacked in there. Jump master with back to control panel (no second yoke) and the four students sitting on the floor as far forward as we could.
- The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)

- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
That's absoultely nothing at all, ... a measely six people in a 182? ... I fart downwind in the general direction of those wimps. How's a jump operator supposed to make any money hauling a light load like that?into the blue wrote:Beer goggles - OFF
No, that's actually a C182, either an E or F model (one of the earlier ones). Six people in that?!
Now here's the kind of loader they need at that jump school...
http://www.pascocountyfair.com/pascobugjam.htm
The Old (jam 'em in) Fogducker
-
into the blue
- Rank 4

- Posts: 239
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:54 pm
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Oh yeah, they've all got parachutes. What in the world can possibly happen to them?!
OFD, here's a better utilization of available space...er, surface area:

OFD, here's a better utilization of available space...er, surface area:

Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Jump airplanes are only required to be within weight/balance and each jumper requires a seat belt to hang on to. Not problem to have 5 jumpers in a C182.CFR wrote:5 parachutists and a pilot in a 182?
Re: Skydiving Plane Engine Failure YXJ...no injuries!!!
Five jumpers in a 182 isn't that unusual, although won't legally work in all 182's.
In the old days it was a matter of how many could cram in based on the pilot's judgment.
But I've been in ones from the late 60's that were already wide bodied (quite important to fitting 5 in!), had a reasonably low empty weight (less than some later models), and had the Wing X wing extensions with spar reinforcements (which bumps the gross from 2800 to 2950 lb, same as some later models). That way, with a light fuel load typical of skydiving ops, one could have jumpers of 165-170lb average (plus gear) and be legal. If we had a couple big guys on board, we'd be down to 4 jumpers.
In the old days it was a matter of how many could cram in based on the pilot's judgment.
But I've been in ones from the late 60's that were already wide bodied (quite important to fitting 5 in!), had a reasonably low empty weight (less than some later models), and had the Wing X wing extensions with spar reinforcements (which bumps the gross from 2800 to 2950 lb, same as some later models). That way, with a light fuel load typical of skydiving ops, one could have jumpers of 165-170lb average (plus gear) and be legal. If we had a couple big guys on board, we'd be down to 4 jumpers.



