Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Communication Breakdown
Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Routine Training flight. We followed proper procedures by announcing our position with the intent of performing a simulated engine failure to a touch and go at Mulino airport. We were on frequency of CTAF and asked if there were any gliders or jumpers at Mulino. No response! A little closer we announced again asking if there was any traffic; jumpers and gliders at Mulino. Again; no response. We climbed to 2700' over Southwest corner of Runway 32 with the intent of performing a simulated engine fail to touch and go.As we were descending; in our second turn we heard the jump plane pilot say there were open canopies EAST of Runway 32. We looked and saw jumpers between 1800-2000' and on our westbound heading flew NW away from the runway and airport. We were west of runway and jumpers were east of runway. We were scolded by the jump pilot to read the sectional chart. The chart is clearly marked with glider and jump symbology.What troubles me is that the jump pilot monitors both Approach and CTAF. We were on frequency and announced and heard no reports or follow up jumper advisories. If we were in perceived conflict the Jump pilot can very easily shout out jumper traffic if he is monitoring the CTAF.The responsibility for see and avoid is on us but advisories for jumpers is additional responsibility for jump school personnel. My suggestion is for the jump pilot to make multiple advisories and have a ground spotter on CTAF who can call out to any aircraft in the pattern who cause a conflict.
GA flight instructor reported being surprised by skydivers while in the pattern at Mulino State Airport after requesting information several times over the CTAF frequency.