MD80 CAPT EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING THE FREQUENT ATC AMENDMENTS TO PUBLISHED PROCS ON THE BYP5 STAR INTO DFW BECAUSE OF PARACHUTE ACTIVITY.

Narrative

FIRST OF ALL; BOTH MYSELF AND THE FO RECEIVED AND UNDERSTOOD A CLRNC SPECIFYING A TURN DIRECT TO KARLA (I BELIEVE) BELOW A CERTAIN ALT ON THE BYP5 ARR INTO DFW. EXACTLY WHY BOTH OF US MISSED DOING IT; I WOULD HAVE TO ATTRIBUTE TO TIMING. IN OTHER WORDS; WE RECEIVED THE INSTRUCTION WELL IN ADVANCE OF THE POINT; BUT WERE BUSY WHEN IT NEEDED TO BE DONE. IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO USE 'BUSY' AS A DODGE; I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW AND WHY WE MISSED IT. THE REASON THE BYP5 ARR HAS NON-DEPICTED PROCS THAT I AND MANY OTHERS OFTEN RECEIVE IS DUE TO PARACHUTE ACTIVITY NEAR THE BYP VOR. I HAVE HAD OTHER ODD-BALL ADJUSTMENTS TO THIS ARR ON MANY OTHER OCCASIONS. OBVIOUSLY; THIS IS NOT THE IDEAL PLACE; EITHER FOR THE ARR PATH OR THE PARACHUTING; BUT THAT IS NOT UP TO ME. THE TRANSITION FROM THE ALT; CTR'S AIRSPACE TO APCH'S AND THE LNDG SETUP/CHKLIST/BRIEFS OFTEN SEEMS TO COME TOGETHER RIGHT ABOUT THE WORST PLACE. THAT; I SUPPOSE IS THE CHALLENGE. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT SOME ALTERNATE PRINTED PROC THAT AVOIDS THE PARACHUTE AREA BE DEVELOPED AND DISTRIBUTED TO HELP ELIMINATE MAKESHIFT CLRNCES. THIS WOULD GIVE BOTH CREWS AND ATC A BETTER SYSTEM FOR THE SAFE FLOW OF TFC NEAR THIS DIFFICULT TO HANDLE AREA.