Narrative:

I was acting as CFI for a landing lesson for a pre-solo student. We approached the airport from the southeast. We requested airport advisories, but received no response on the CTAF. We then overflew the runway (16/34) on a heading of 340 degrees to read the wind tee. Our altitude was 2000 ft MSL (and AGL) which is 900 ft above traffic pattern. We determined that the wind was favoring landing on runway 34, so after overflying the length of the runway we turned west to descend and return on a 45 degree entry for downwind to runway 34. About 1/8 mi west of the runway we saw 3 skydivers with parachutes open, at 10, 12, and 2 O'clock, slightly above our altitude. The left and middle jumpers were 500-1000 ft away. I took over control of the aircraft from the student and passed between the left and center jumpers. The left jumper, in attempting to avoid us, made a tight left spiral and was turning back towards our path when we passed him/her. We continued west, waited a few mins to make sure all the jumpers were down. Then continued our landing approach. I notified the jump plane of the incident when he entered the pattern. Causes: the published drop zone is east of the runway, thus, the jumpers should not have been where they were -- in the published traffic pattern, west of the runway. Afterwards, my student, who is an experienced skydiver, advised that jumpers often pull their ripcords at 2000 ft AGL. Although it was legal to conduct our overflt of the runway at 2000 ft AGL/MSL, perhaps 1600 ft would have been better because both the aircraft and the jumpers would have had more time to see and avoid. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was not able to show in the AFD that it says jumpers would remain east of the airport. This is known to the local pilots and jumpers. However, the parachute symbol on the sectional chart happens to be placed northwest of the airport, just about where the near midair collision occurred. The reporter stated she was instructing in a C150. The jump planes used at this facility are a king air and a twin otter. The reporter had no suggestions for making the operation more safe. She is acquainted with one of the jump plane pilots and knows them to be very concerned about the possibility of a jumper colliding with an airplane.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT FLEW AT 2000 FT DOWN RWY 34 AND TURNED W TO ACCOMPLISH A 45 DEG PATTERN ENTRY. ABOUT ONE EIGHTH MI W OF THE RWY 34, SKY DIVERS WITH PARACHUTES OPEN SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE RPTR AND AT THE 10, 12, AND 2 O'CLOCK POSITIONS. THE L AND MIDDLE JUMPERS WERE 500-1000 FT AWAY. THE RPTR TOOK CTL OF THE ACFT AND PASSED BTWN THE L AND CTR JUMPER. THE L JUMPER MADE A TIGHT TURN TO MISS THE RPTR.

Narrative: I WAS ACTING AS CFI FOR A LNDG LESSON FOR A PRE-SOLO STUDENT. WE APCHED THE ARPT FROM THE SE. WE REQUESTED ARPT ADVISORIES, BUT RECEIVED NO RESPONSE ON THE CTAF. WE THEN OVERFLEW THE RWY (16/34) ON A HDG OF 340 DEGS TO READ THE WIND TEE. OUR ALT WAS 2000 FT MSL (AND AGL) WHICH IS 900 FT ABOVE TFC PATTERN. WE DETERMINED THAT THE WIND WAS FAVORING LNDG ON RWY 34, SO AFTER OVERFLYING THE LENGTH OF THE RWY WE TURNED W TO DSND AND RETURN ON A 45 DEG ENTRY FOR DOWNWIND TO RWY 34. ABOUT 1/8 MI W OF THE RWY WE SAW 3 SKYDIVERS WITH PARACHUTES OPEN, AT 10, 12, AND 2 O'CLOCK, SLIGHTLY ABOVE OUR ALT. THE L AND MIDDLE JUMPERS WERE 500-1000 FT AWAY. I TOOK OVER CTL OF THE ACFT FROM THE STUDENT AND PASSED BTWN THE L AND CTR JUMPERS. THE L JUMPER, IN ATTEMPTING TO AVOID US, MADE A TIGHT L SPIRAL AND WAS TURNING BACK TOWARDS OUR PATH WHEN WE PASSED HIM/HER. WE CONTINUED W, WAITED A FEW MINS TO MAKE SURE ALL THE JUMPERS WERE DOWN. THEN CONTINUED OUR LNDG APCH. I NOTIFIED THE JUMP PLANE OF THE INCIDENT WHEN HE ENTERED THE PATTERN. CAUSES: THE PUBLISHED DROP ZONE IS E OF THE RWY, THUS, THE JUMPERS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN WHERE THEY WERE -- IN THE PUBLISHED TFC PATTERN, W OF THE RWY. AFTERWARDS, MY STUDENT, WHO IS AN EXPERIENCED SKYDIVER, ADVISED THAT JUMPERS OFTEN PULL THEIR RIPCORDS AT 2000 FT AGL. ALTHOUGH IT WAS LEGAL TO CONDUCT OUR OVERFLT OF THE RWY AT 2000 FT AGL/MSL, PERHAPS 1600 FT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER BECAUSE BOTH THE ACFT AND THE JUMPERS WOULD HAVE HAD MORE TIME TO SEE AND AVOID. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS NOT ABLE TO SHOW IN THE AFD THAT IT SAYS JUMPERS WOULD REMAIN E OF THE ARPT. THIS IS KNOWN TO THE LCL PLTS AND JUMPERS. HOWEVER, THE PARACHUTE SYMBOL ON THE SECTIONAL CHART HAPPENS TO BE PLACED NW OF THE ARPT, JUST ABOUT WHERE THE NMAC OCCURRED. THE RPTR STATED SHE WAS INSTRUCTING IN A C150. THE JUMP PLANES USED AT THIS FACILITY ARE A KING AIR AND A TWIN OTTER. THE RPTR HAD NO SUGGESTIONS FOR MAKING THE OP MORE SAFE. SHE IS ACQUAINTED WITH ONE OF THE JUMP PLANE PLTS AND KNOWS THEM TO BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A JUMPER COLLIDING WITH AN AIRPLANE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.