Leaderboard

A funneled exit with a POV video shows close to zero useful information. You see a lot of arms and legs and glimpses of the sky and the plane. If you want to improve your exits via video debrief you need an outside camera. A bad landing with a POV video shows the ground rushing up at you, then the audio records a loud thump. Again, no useful information, other than "don't do that." You can't "get a sense of your pattern" because your depth sense, your field of view, and your perception of the area is completely different when you are there vs when you are looking at a video screen. Outside video is even better for this, and even easier to get. Buy a cheap camcorder and give it to someone on the ground, or your whuffo friend. Or just have them use their phone. Zero cost. And I have seen several videos of incident landings where the camera caused the incident. DSE compiled a list of camera incidents; several bad landings were due to the guy "wanting to get a good shot of my landing." If you have a mal the ONE AND ONLY thing you should be doing is deciding whether to chop and then chopping (or dealing with it some other way.) Not getting a good shot of it for later review. Not getting a good shot to show your friends. Not getting a good shot to post on Facebook and get a lot of "likes." "But I won't do that, I will ignore the camera" you say. Again, I have seen dozens of skydivers say exactly the same thing. Yet for some reason, they don't ignore it when it comes right down to it. You know you have that extra set of eyes there, and you can't ignore it. Nor should you; if you start ignoring the equipment you are using and "forgetting it's there" that's a bad sign as well. You have to understand your gear.

Even experienced skydivers can be distracted by a camera. I know of a couple of them -- one was instructed to ditch the chest camera on a bigway, and another thinks it might have contributed to a Cypres fire. Note, by the way, that "contributed to" is definitely not the same as "caused." Loss of awareness caused it, the camera might have contributed to that. Wendy P.

Nope. The primary issue is distraction. Any camera does that. Because after decades of experience skydivers have realized that the progression is this: 1) There is something that someone wants to do (teach, fly video, jump an HP canopy.) 2) Experienced people make a list of skills required before skydivers can do those things. 3) Skydivers with a high opinion of themselves say "hey, I can do all that" and do it without the required skills/experience/training/feedback. This has happened dozens of times that I have seen myself. The results have been: 1) Nothing bad due to a LOT of luck 2) A scary near-serious accident that doesn't permanently injure them but teaches them that they are not ready 3) A crippling accident that results in them never skydiving again 4) Death. 5) Someone else's death. Sadly 1) is not the most common outcome. And while 2) is something of a good outcome, it turns into 3), 4) and 5) all too often. All ratings in skydiving have an experience component. That's not because people are dicks, and it's not because we just want to "cover our own asses." It's because time and time again, skydivers demonstrate that actual skydiving experience is important. OK sounds like you haven't been in the sport very long, then. Tandem is new. AFF is new. Video cameras small enough to fit on a helmet are new. All of these entail risks. Back in the 1980's, if you wanted to fly camera you had to go out and buy a camera with chest pack tape drive, get the right batteries, design your own helmet and then test jump it a bunch. You could not get into camera "accidentally." And while you were doing all of the above, you were skydiving. People were asking you what you were doing with that helmet. They were giving you unsolicited advice, giving you safety tips or (more likely) saying "you're gonna kill yourself with that thing!" Nowadays none of that applies. You can go to Best Buy, get a Gopro and literally stick it to your helmet and skydive. You can do it on a whim. Someone might say "hey, that mount looks sketchy" if you are lucky. But ten minutes after walking out of that store you could be getting on a plane with the camera on your helmet. So no, we haven't been "doing it like this since forever." Maybe ten or fifteen years - which is definitely not forever. You mention the "100 jumps to jump a square" requirement. That was in place for about 20 years (as a rule) and another 10 years while some people were doing it and some weren't. It wasn't great, but it kept a lot of people alive as we learned how to teach fam-air canopy flight. So perhaps in another 10 years we will have better training programs for video, and we will have better ways to teach it. I suspect it will always contain an experience component - because awareness is not something you can teach. It comes with time.

Something that's important in skydiving is actually being aware of what's going on at the time, really. A video debrief afterwards can be nice, but mainly if it's with people who actually know the answer, rather than similarly-experienced people guessing. The video above wouldn't have been real helpful in diagnosing issues with performance in ways that actual awareness wouldn't have improved on. Because remembering what it actually felt like up there really helps with planning what to change (or not change) on the next jump. POV landings I can sort of see -- not as a regular thing, but to compare with a timed ground video, so that the jumper (particularly one who's having issues) can be coached on what they're looking at when it's time to flare. As someone who has issues with that, well, yeah. Malfunctions -- I can also sort of see, BUT: I can also see the downside of someone making darn good and sure they get a good picture of the malfunction for later analysis (and taking time for photography when it can't be afforded), and that's a bigger downside than a potential future conversation of "see! I was RIGHT (I/you should have/shouldn't have chopped)" So on balance, it's less useful than potentially problematic. So I'm still down with the consider a camera as a specific tool if you're a newbie person. It's generally best wielded by someone who has enough brain cells left over from sensory overload to use it as a tool, rather than as a focal point. Wendy P.

I recently saw the video of the ripcord initiated, spring loaded pilot chute deployment while wingsuiting. It was informative. The pilot and viddy owner is aware of this thread. Perhaps he'll post a link. Be well. Craig

This is why taking a knee during the anthem is such a disgrace.