flyingferret 0 #1 December 17, 2002 Hey all, Have not posted in a while. My new toy (2002 Harley FLSTFI) has been taking some of my time. However, now I have a question. I have searched the forums and dont see it specifically addressed. If I missed it, sorry. We all know safety is good, and snag points are bad. But is side mounting d-boxes, some snag points are inevitable. I have a Batrak, and a bonehead d-box (for a PC-101, and using it with a PC-1 due to lack of availability on a PC-1 box.) Any way you mount this you have a hang over on the front of the helmet or the rear. When I first mounted it, I kinda split the difference maybe a little more toward the back. My reasoning for this was that I was more worried about things getting caught around the front of the d-box. Now I am wondering if I should change my thinking. The d-box is sizable, and I am getting riser strikes too much. I am experimenting with head placement on opening. But I am also debating moving the box more forward, leaving the back 'corner' of the helmet more smooth with less sticking out there. But this means putting a significant edge on the front of the helmet. I would be really interested to know what you guys think, I can try to upload pics if needed. Malachi-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #2 December 17, 2002 I've never had a riser strike that I've noticed, so I can't address that. Moving the box forward will help with wider lenses, though. I'm fine with my .5 on, but with my .3 on I get the side of my helmet in the shot. If you're getting riser strikes, though, I wouldn't cut the box down, cause instead of hitting the box, the risers would be hitting the camera, it seems. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #3 December 17, 2002 Simple solution... top mount it. The 101 box is only .5 inches taller then the TRV style so there are no issues on the top mounting.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #4 December 17, 2002 Well that is one solution, and I might eventually do it. But I freefly and I really like having it on the side both for paralax issues and just for the freefly look I am also working in conjunction with some other jumpers on a totally remote DV solution that would leave only the lens on your helmet. If that comes through, it will not matter any moreBut back to the question at hand: What matters more for snagging, front or back? -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #5 December 17, 2002 Quote . . . and just for the freefly look. Life is far more valuable than fashion statements. You have a LOT of real estate going to waste if you're side-mounting your only camera on a BatRack.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #6 December 17, 2002 Check out this thread http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=238446#238446 for info on why a seperate system is not a good idea. Its been tried and there are more reasons to stay away from this system then there are to go to it. Top mounting while freeflying is just as easy. Hoy do you think they take stills while freeflying? Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JGarcia 0 #7 December 17, 2002 I fly a Bat-Rack and have a PC-100 AND a Nikon N70 top mounted. I would mount the box further front, so IF you ever have line snagging, you could at least use your peripheral vision to help you visualize what's going on. With crap happening behind your head, there's very little you can do but hack away with a hook knife for the rest of your life, or jettison the camera helmet system. Having said this, I must admit that this post is rather disturbing . You would rather have a set up that greatly increases your chance of a line snag partly for the sake of achieveing "the freefly look"???? (I really hope you were kidding) But, you've already had riser strikes???? I know that no helmet is snag proof, but if you're already jumping one that allows for better mounting options, why not consider the safety benefits, if not the practical ones. Additionally, check out Chronicles III and other freefly vids that show some of the world's top freeflyers with > mounted cameras on say, an optik, or even Gaths. I freefly, I flat fly, I fly wing suits, I swoop. Having a top mounted camera allows me to have a safe, versatile setup that I can use effectively on any type of jump. Like someone posted earlier on another thread, it's not IF you get your side mounted camera torn off by a riser strike, it's WHEN. Good luck with your camera flying. --Jairo Low Profile, snag free helmet mount for your Sony X3000 action cam! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #8 December 17, 2002 Quade I totally agree with you. There are a number of reasons I went with sidemount. Actually it was all hashed out on this forum, before I bought the helmet. Nothing seemed to conclusively proof an advantage to top mount. I threw the freefly look in for grins, if I really made decisions based on that, would I be posting here?-- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #9 December 17, 2002 Malachi (flyingferret) didn't mention that he's going to eventually put a still on top of the Batrack, that's the reason he went with it in the first place.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingferret 0 #10 December 17, 2002 Guys, I really dont want this to flame up, so everything that I am saying please take with the utmost respect, I know you guys that do this professionally are way above my experience level. Phree: Thanks, but that thread is a bad example. It is a poor design and most of the criticism is aimed at his design. I really believe the remote optics will take the place of helmet mounted cams within a few years. The technology is just moving too fast for it not too. It will be the ultimate solution to snags. I am just experimenting with a design that is out front of what is readily available. I can go over some of the technology if you want. JGarcia: Also, thanks. I truly regret making the side mount/freefly look comment. I was expecting it to be taken with the same humor as in the freefly forum. Sorry. For some reason FFers like side mounts. If you go back and look in these forums, I did a huge amount of research before I bought a helmet and made a mounting choice. A LOT of people fly side mount cameras most without incident, from what I have seen. I am happy with my side mount, I am just looking to refine it. I appreciate your response, J because it actually addressed the question I asked. I am sorry if this does disturb, and if I am in error, I would like to know. But this is a helmet and d-box made by the same company both designed to facilitate side-mount. My incertainity was based on my judgment in mounting it. I really don't want to start a whole bigger debate of top versus side, etc. By in my opinion, and that is all it is, the people who go in on snags are jumping way more equipment than I probably ever will. That does not mean I think there is no reason for concern. I know of the cosmic phallus waiting to come screw the careless skydiver. But I think the greatest risk is from a lot of equipment, not one fully enclosed d-box mounted on the side. For this reason I do not jump a ringsight and probably wont for a long time. Nothing I do requires one, so why risk it? It already claimed several of our best ever. Please share your experience with me. Quade is a camera legend -- All the flaming and trolls of wreck dot with a pretty GUI. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #11 December 18, 2002 Malachi, I would focus on making your existing setup as snag resistant as possible, which I'm sure you have done already. "But I think the greatest risk is from a lot of equipment, not one fully enclosed d-box mounted on the side" I mean, its not as if your setup resembles Henny's for example..(see attached). IMHO, as long as your d-box has been mounted firmly, and you have taped up as many snaggers as is physically possible, then you have gone a long way to ensure drama free camera flying. -------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iam 0 #12 December 18, 2002 Excuse my ignorance, but why would anyone (henny) want to put so many cameras on his head at one time? "Don't ever knock on deaths door, just ring the bell and run away - it really pisses him off" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #13 December 18, 2002 He earns his living selling footage, and pictures. http://www.parashoot.nl/ you can ask him yourself... If you are filming something that may only happen once, with absolutely no chance of a 'take 2', eg a world record, you had better be wearing more than one camera. That pic is an extreme example though, I seriously doubt he uses that setup for tandem jobs... It looks like he has 2 dv cams, a 16mm film, a 35mm SLR and a medium format stills cam, along with a flash for infill. None of which are unusual on their own, its seeing them all together that blows your mind. -------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
groundrushpull 0 #14 December 18, 2002 If you want an excellent design take a look at RAWA freefly helmets. (check with DeLand in Fla.) they are made in brazil and i have jumped one since may 2001 ~600+ jumps on it with NO Strikes at all! My point is that it comes (when ordered with box mounted on the left side) allready attacehed and is such a clean design there is no need for gaffers tape to "seal up the gaps-cracks" like alot of the other designs I have seen people jumping. John Maggio Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grega 0 #15 December 18, 2002 uff i guess the guy on the picture, before he lands. tights the helmet with cameras on the rope and lets it hangin 20m below him at landing, like the army did with round canopies and heavy equipment "George just lucky i guess!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
