Narrative:

While at cruise, level at 8000' in occasional moderate turbulence, washington center reported traffic in my forward quadrant, climbing to 8500', an small aircraft jump plane. I acquired the small aircraft at approximately 1 mi, 12-1 O'clock, and level approximately 500' above me. I reported the traffic in sight and since I was closing from behind at an angle, told center I would be passing off his left wing. Shortly after this, the small aircraft released a jumper, which I reported to center. At the time I was 500' below and approximately 1000' horizontal from the small aircraft, thus the jumper did not represent a direct threat to my aircraft. However, had my position been slightly different, or had I planned to cross the small aircraft flight path behind rather than in front of the aircraft, this or subsequent jumpers could have. From a subsequent discussion (on another frequency) between the controller and the small aircraft, it was apparent that the center controller had not anticipated a drop at that time and, certainly, neither had I. Obviously, better coordination is necessary in separating parachute operations from IFR traffic. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: heard the controller acknowledge the jumper aircraft, but could not hear the jumper reply. Controller had not cleared the jumper aircraft to drop his group. Does not believe the jump aircraft was in clear communication with the controller. Elected to pass in front of the aircraft when he first saw the traffic because he knew it was a jump aircraft. Questions the establishing of a jump area in the vicinity of a very active IFR arwy system. Changed location of the incident, moving it closer to the designated jump area.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT TWIN HAS CONFLICT WITH SMA JUMP ACFT, BUT TRAFFIC ADVISORY GIVEN AND TRAFFIC SIGHTED. NOTED A SINGLE PARACHUTIST LEAVE THE ACFT AS HE WAS PASSING CLEAR.

Narrative: WHILE AT CRUISE, LEVEL AT 8000' IN OCCASIONAL MODERATE TURB, WASHINGTON CENTER RPTED TFC IN MY FORWARD QUADRANT, CLBING TO 8500', AN SMA JUMP PLANE. I ACQUIRED THE SMA AT APPROX 1 MI, 12-1 O'CLOCK, AND LEVEL APPROX 500' ABOVE ME. I RPTED THE TFC IN SIGHT AND SINCE I WAS CLOSING FROM BEHIND AT AN ANGLE, TOLD CENTER I WOULD BE PASSING OFF HIS LEFT WING. SHORTLY AFTER THIS, THE SMA RELEASED A JUMPER, WHICH I RPTED TO CENTER. AT THE TIME I WAS 500' BELOW AND APPROX 1000' HORIZ FROM THE SMA, THUS THE JUMPER DID NOT REPRESENT A DIRECT THREAT TO MY ACFT. HOWEVER, HAD MY POS BEEN SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, OR HAD I PLANNED TO CROSS THE SMA FLT PATH BEHIND RATHER THAN IN FRONT OF THE ACFT, THIS OR SUBSEQUENT JUMPERS COULD HAVE. FROM A SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION (ON ANOTHER FREQ) BTWN THE CTLR AND THE SMA, IT WAS APPARENT THAT THE CENTER CTLR HAD NOT ANTICIPATED A DROP AT THAT TIME AND, CERTAINLY, NEITHER HAD I. OBVIOUSLY, BETTER COORD IS NECESSARY IN SEPARATING PARACHUTE OPS FROM IFR TFC. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: HEARD THE CTLR ACKNOWLEDGE THE JUMPER ACFT, BUT COULD NOT HEAR THE JUMPER REPLY. CTLR HAD NOT CLRED THE JUMPER ACFT TO DROP HIS GROUP. DOES NOT BELIEVE THE JUMP ACFT WAS IN CLEAR COM WITH THE CTLR. ELECTED TO PASS IN FRONT OF THE ACFT WHEN HE FIRST SAW THE TFC BECAUSE HE KNEW IT WAS A JUMP ACFT. QUESTIONS THE ESTABLISHING OF A JUMP AREA IN THE VICINITY OF A VERY ACTIVE IFR ARWY SYS. CHANGED LOCATION OF THE INCIDENT, MOVING IT CLOSER TO THE DESIGNATED JUMP AREA.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.