Sky diving pilot was reported by another aircraft pilot of dropping parachutists through clouds.

Attributes
ACN	334194
Time
Date	199604
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : m50
State Reference	MS
Altitude	msl bound lower : 14000 msl bound upper : 14000
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : mob
Operator	other
Make Model Name	King Air C90 E90
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	None
Aircraft 2
Operator	other
Make Model Name	Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	cruise other
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	other other : other pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 1780 flight time type : 240
ASRS Report	334194
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	other personnel other
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	inflight encounter : weather other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	faa : investigated
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Weather
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

As the pilot of the jump operations for the day apr/xx/96, I was made aware that another pilot flying in the area of the trent lott international airport in a C182 had taken it upon himself to report unsafe operations with the parachute jumping operations to the FAA. He states that I was allowing the skydivers to exit the aircraft in solid IFR conditions, and that we were unsafe to other aircraft. After I had landed the airplane I heard a call made over the radio to mobile approach control stating this. From his perception flying under the clouds, it is impossible to look up and see if there are any holes or breaks in the clouds in a small area that he was able to see. From an altitude of 14000 ft AGL and the visibility being unrestr you can see for mi, and looking down you can see holes or breaks in the clouds. In absolutely no way would I allow skydivers to exit the aircraft in IFR conditions or through clouds. It is not only unsafe, but they (the skydivers) would not be able to see the ground and it would make it impossible for them to land back at the landing area which is located at the airport. I not only follow FARS, but we have our own safety requirements that I follow. The only reason why this form is being filled out is because another pilot with no knowledge of skydiving operations is perceiving something he could not see from the altitude and position he was at. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the complaining pilot was one that had registered complaints with the local FAA FSDO office in the past regarding the parachuting of skydivers through the clouds. Even though the FAA has investigated in the past, there has been no action taken since it is difficult to prove. Reporter further stated that safety is always the first consideration before a jump is made, and that it would be unsafe if the parachutist could not see their landing site because of any obstruction such as clouds. The aircraft operated on this occasion was a beechcraft E90 turboprop. Reporter's altitude was 14000 ft and not 1400 ft. It was suggested that the reporter furnish skydiver witnesses for the FAA investigators to interview in order to assure that they were not dropped through clouds.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SKY DIVING PLT WAS RPTED BY ANOTHER ACFT PLT OF DROPPING PARACHUTISTS THROUGH CLOUDS.

Narrative: AS THE PLT OF THE JUMP OPS FOR THE DAY APR/XX/96, I WAS MADE AWARE THAT ANOTHER PLT FLYING IN THE AREA OF THE TRENT LOTT INTL ARPT IN A C182 HAD TAKEN IT UPON HIMSELF TO RPT UNSAFE OPS WITH THE PARACHUTE JUMPING OPS TO THE FAA. HE STATES THAT I WAS ALLOWING THE SKYDIVERS TO EXIT THE ACFT IN SOLID IFR CONDITIONS, AND THAT WE WERE UNSAFE TO OTHER ACFT. AFTER I HAD LANDED THE AIRPLANE I HEARD A CALL MADE OVER THE RADIO TO MOBILE APCH CTL STATING THIS. FROM HIS PERCEPTION FLYING UNDER THE CLOUDS, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO LOOK UP AND SEE IF THERE ARE ANY HOLES OR BREAKS IN THE CLOUDS IN A SMALL AREA THAT HE WAS ABLE TO SEE. FROM AN ALT OF 14000 FT AGL AND THE VISIBILITY BEING UNRESTR YOU CAN SEE FOR MI, AND LOOKING DOWN YOU CAN SEE HOLES OR BREAKS IN THE CLOUDS. IN ABSOLUTELY NO WAY WOULD I ALLOW SKYDIVERS TO EXIT THE ACFT IN IFR CONDITIONS OR THROUGH CLOUDS. IT IS NOT ONLY UNSAFE, BUT THEY (THE SKYDIVERS) WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SEE THE GND AND IT WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO LAND BACK AT THE LNDG AREA WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE ARPT. I NOT ONLY FOLLOW FARS, BUT WE HAVE OUR OWN SAFETY REQUIREMENTS THAT I FOLLOW. THE ONLY REASON WHY THIS FORM IS BEING FILLED OUT IS BECAUSE ANOTHER PLT WITH NO KNOWLEDGE OF SKYDIVING OPS IS PERCEIVING SOMETHING HE COULD NOT SEE FROM THE ALT AND POS HE WAS AT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE COMPLAINING PLT WAS ONE THAT HAD REGISTERED COMPLAINTS WITH THE LCL FAA FSDO OFFICE IN THE PAST REGARDING THE PARACHUTING OF SKYDIVERS THROUGH THE CLOUDS. EVEN THOUGH THE FAA HAS INVESTIGATED IN THE PAST, THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTION TAKEN SINCE IT IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE. RPTR FURTHER STATED THAT SAFETY IS ALWAYS THE FIRST CONSIDERATION BEFORE A JUMP IS MADE, AND THAT IT WOULD BE UNSAFE IF THE PARACHUTIST COULD NOT SEE THEIR LNDG SITE BECAUSE OF ANY OBSTRUCTION SUCH AS CLOUDS. THE ACFT OPERATED ON THIS OCCASION WAS A BEECHCRAFT E90 TURBOPROP. RPTR'S ALT WAS 14000 FT AND NOT 1400 FT. IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE RPTR FURNISH SKYDIVER WITNESSES FOR THE FAA INVESTIGATORS TO INTERVIEW IN ORDER TO ASSURE THAT THEY WERE NOT DROPPED THROUGH CLOUDS.

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.