champu

Why? Failure to yield is the most common way that a cager takes out a motorcyclist. Lots of car on car collisions as well. I can understand why at certain intersections with poor visibility or other special circumstances you would, much like "no turn on red" signs, want to have them, but they've become standard operating procedure for intersections in a lot of places, and its a terribly inefficient way of handling traffic. I constantly pull up to green lights/red arrows at intersections where these types of signals don't belong, usually a medium to low traffic street intersecting with a very low traffic side street. I wait there as I watch multiple natural breaks in traffic go by, and after the light decides I've waited long enough, a dozen or so cars are stopped, and they have to wait for me to turn. These lights only tell you to stop in two possible situations: 1) When you're already required to stop anyway, and 2) when there's no good reason for it.

It opens slower than the Stilettos I've jumped, that's for sure, but it has very distinct stages which are easy to get used to. Someone said 600-800ft which is probably about right for the whole thing, although it can be somewhat hard to quote an altitude accurately. Once the canopy is out of the bag, I usually get 1-2 seconds of snivel, and then the canopy inflates. Inflation pretty much always takes the same amount of time, and is smooth as long as I'm even in the harness. On a couple occasions, I've had longer snivels that I'd call "opening too slowly." I've mentioned in other threads I don't understand people's desire for "800ft snivels." I certainly don't enjoy this kinda nonsense, and if your canopy does this regularly I'd say there's something wrong with it.

Probably easier than you might think. Especially for motorcycle police as it's essentially all they do. The thing I see the most here in Redondo/Manhattan Beach is motorcycle cops following a long group of people turning left at an intersection and pulling over the last 2 or 3 cars as a group and giving them all tickets for squeezing through after the red left-turn arrow* comes up. It wouldn't take long to rack up 16 tickets this way. (*I've never gotten a ticket for this, but as a side note: I think the red left-turn arrow is the single stupidest traffic signal ever created.)

Classic accuracy has no place in a traffic pattern either. As drafted, these BSRs would require the same separation of such landings from a SLP as would be required for HPLs. My only recommended change in that regard would be to clarify the inclusion of, not make exceptions for, classic accuracy. No one is suggesting that riflemen be stationed in the HPL areas to ensure landing straight in there is more dangerous than landing in trees or power lines. Likewise, no one is suggesting that you "hook it for safety!" (tm) if you do find yourself landing there. Said simply, however, you can not have your cake and eat it to. If a high-performance landing area is set up at your dropzone in the interest of improving safety, its boundaries need to be taken very seriously by everyone who jumps there. It is not, I repeat not, "just another patch of grass." A good comparison was made earlier in the thread to landing on an active runway. If a plane that is landing sees you and can do something about it, he will avoid hitting you. If he can't, you are prop food. If you land straight in (and in a predictable fashion) at the HPL area, people will most likely see you and avoid you. If you fly a weird pattern and end up there and/or they don't see you, someone may get seriously injured or killed.

Just when I had the 4way FS divepool down...

I put about 500 jumps on Stilettos (~150 on an ST107) before getting my KA107. The Katana definitely highlights body position errors more than the Stiletto, but in exchange it has provided me with more consistently soft openings.

Actually, Bill's tone is a little strange considering the content of these two news stories. It has me a bit confused. I suppose we could take an inventory... Prospect of an AQI leader having been killed = A Good Thing. Native Iraqis confirming interest in fighting against AQI in general = A Good Thing Media reporting incorrect or enfeeblingly undeveloped stories = Par for the course. Officials consistently remaining cautious about celebrating something too soon = A Good Thing.

This comment of his from the article, I think, gives a little more insight into his character. About 10-12 years ago I wrote a narrative for school based loosely on the story line of the game by Apogee called Rise of the Triad that was rather violent (3 of the 5 protagonists are killed along with countless "bad guys" often graphically and in emotional fights) I'm glad I wasn't arrested for my story, and I'm sorry to hear this guy wasn't extended the same courtesy. One of the most frustrating moments for any very smart kid who is caught "just being a kid" these days is realizing how much more level-headed and intelligent one is than certain members of the school's administration.

You're probably right, I was just attacking the usual suspects. Also, I've got two PC105s that are about 3 years old, each have at least 400 jumps on them, and I haven't encountered any problems as of yet. Were either the tape(s) or the camera exposed to moisture on the ground or in the air recently?

How old is the camera? (How many jumps on it?) Do you use a new tape when you fill one or have you been recording over the same tape repeatedly? If you do use a new tape, have you been using the same brand tape every time?

And there's the rub... Floating lens elements (Canon's method of OIS) and mobile image sensors (such as Sony Alpha's OIS) are floating/mobile whether stabilization is enabled or not. If the body of the camera is designed in such a way that freefall can disturb these devices, you're hosed before you even open the options menu.

A few notes: -I thought the HV-10 recorded in HDV format, which would mean it can't be 1920x1080, the HDV standard is either 1440x1080i (rectangular pixels) or 1280x720p (square pixels) both using 4:2:0, but I could be wrong, maybe someone else can pipe up here. -It's been said a million times on here: Video cameras are for video, still cameras are for stills. You should not expect to get "good" stills from a video camera, certainly not from a consumer-level camcorder, and certainly not from a camera with no remote shutter release/control option. -The Canon HV-10 is DOA for freefall anyway. I don't know if anyone has tried drastic camera condom/d-box/padding isolation solutions to get it to perform any better, but under most normal setups you're going to get what you see in the video dave linked to. -The PC1000 is a really nice camera. The video quality is probably the best of the PC series, and it's well suited to skydiving. My only nit-pick is that you have to use a docking station to get a firewire port (I loathe docking stations) but I suppose in return you get a little bit smaller camera on your head.

Definitely interesting stuff, and I like large format pieces in general. I still haven't gotten over the "poster kick" that I think most college kids go through, but I've managed to acquire 40x60" versions of everything, and they look really cool. At the grave risk of turning this into another thread about Iraq, I do have a comment about the "Ben Franklin" piece in that series. There's a great deal of, "no war for oil," sentiment out there, and I suppose that's as noble a thing as any to argue. But what I seem to be reminded of most often is how much money is being spent in Iraq, and how that money could be used for other projects, and "blah blah blah... our tax dollars... blah blah blah." Forgive me, but I don't see that as being a particularly philanthropic standpoint. Regardless of what position you take up, it really ought to be about people. Money isn't real, certainly not in the middle of a war anyway.

Yeah, a couple notes about that drawing... 1) I'm treating the complex structures of the human cervical vertebrae as a single pivot point, which my sister (an orthopedic surgeon) would have my ass for, but I don't really care. 2) It's important to note that while the junction between the three rings and the risers is at your shoulders, and you may think of it as a reference when orienting your neck to reduce the torque it experiences, it should be understood that your deceleration begins at the legstraps, and the orientation of your entire back during deployment should be considered whether or not you are strapping bowling balls to your head. /edited to add: "I do vector calculus just for fun. Ain't got a gat, but I got a soldering gun."

So in response to the incident, at least one third of the people surveyed are in favor of stricter laws that they don't believe would be effective... that's good to know. Gun control laws are a bit like pad locks when it comes to preventing crime. They assume everyone out there is a murderer/thief on a scale of 1 to 10. A "1" being someone for whom a very contrived set of circumstances would have to come up before they'd kill/steal. A "10" being the most determined criminal. You can go down to the hardware store and buy bigger and badder padlocks that are more irritating to have to use, but can stop criminals anywhere from 1 to 9. Unfortunately, no hardware store carries a "10" padlock. So the questions that remain are simply: Are we already at 9? If not, where are we? Do we want to be at 9? What would that take?

A picture is worth a thousand words...

The statement was made by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in his 1774 novel Die Leiden des jungen Werther (The Sorrows of Young Werther) "Und ich habe, mein Lieber, wieder bei diesem kleinen Geschäft gefunden, dass Missverständnisse und Trägheit vielleicht mehr Irrungen in der Welt machen als List und Bosheit. Wenigstens sind die beiden letzteren gewiss seltener." "And I have again observed, my dear friend, in this trifling affair, that misunderstandings and neglect occasion more mischief in the world than even malice and wickedness. At all events, the two latter are of less frequent occurrence."

I agree here wholeheartedly, predictability was the focus of my talk on safety day. The thought I asked people to leave with was, "After getting down from any given jump, think about what your entire canopy flight, from opening to packing area, would have looked like from someone trying to follow you. Would that person have any idea what you were going to do next?" And this was really my only concern with the new policy at SDAZ. I think a discernable crosswind leg, combined with the idea of "sticking to your lane throughout final," is important for predictability when you have more than one canopy landing at roughly the same time. What rules need to aim for (besides the obvious, "not hitting each other") is for people to, "Not end up in final appraches that conflict with one another." A base leg that you can see terminate with a turn to final is very helpful to those around you in their effort to land near you safely. I imagine Mr. Burke will find the carving 180 to have the same problems that the SDAZ landing rules have had all along: Works great for the locals, but the tourists, "just don't get it."

Or just every funeral at the rate they're going. But then why stop at funerals? In their ongoing spelunking expedition to the deepest caverns of uncongeniality, just think of all the potential stops they could make. Hospital wards of cancer patients, scenes of auto accidents, etc. Hey! Maybe they could get on Deal or No Deal and when the million dollar case gets opened they can yell, "Serves you right you God-hating fag-lover!" and hold up a sign depicting two stick men having sex while one is grasping at a dollar sign that's just out reach. It's pretty clear to me their only prerequisite for attendance is that it be in poor taste.

I don't think anyone makes an IS lens that only goes as long as 70mm. There's really no need for it. I haven't shot the Sigma 28-70mm, but in general I don't care much for lenses that don't have internal focusing mechanisms, they are slower and feel clumsier to me. I would probably opt for the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF, which is not that much more expensive.

Easily my favorite ground lens. Performs admirably in low light with or without a flash. It may be a little wide at the short end on a full-frame body, but on a crop body the range is perfect. Heh, this is funny to do sometimes... compare: PnS (Canon SD450) vs SLR (RebelXT, 24-70 2.8L, 580EX) in the same conditions...

Some "intelligent design" we turned out to be... while(alive) { if(sense_of_significance < threshold1) { murderous_rampage(); alive = FALSE; } else { glee++; } if(derivative(level_of_education) > threshold2) sense_of_significance--; }

Because I'm a spoiled whiny brat who doesn't appreciate recent advances as much as those who really had it rough, shooting video with five pound cameras on their heads, VCRs mounted to their chest, uphill both ways in the snow. Also, I'm a systems engineer. Sure I do design work from time to time, but I prefer to tell other people what they need to design for me, and then tell them it's not good enough when they're done.

I'd highly recommend the 350D. It's smaller, lighter, has a higher resolution than the 300D, and just all around feels less "first-generationy" if you know what I mean. And with the release of the 400D, you should be able to find 350Ds for a very reasonable price. I don't like the 400D. I think Canon failed to follow the K.I.S.S. rule when they designed the camera. I apologize in advance for the following rant. They want to add a bigger screen and I guess I'm okay with that even though the screen is still useless for judging the quality of the photo. But in order to fit the bigger screen on the camera they had to take away the lcd readout that used to give you all the information you needed about the exposure. So to make up for that they changed the software to put that info on the screen, which now has to be on all the time wasting battery power. So to offset that they added a sensor to turn the screen off when you put the camera up to your face. Sigh... all that nonsense to fix something that wasn't broken...

I guess the thought of someone being punished for a non-violent crime by being subjected to acts that, outside of prison, are considered the most reprehensible thing you can do to another human being is supposed to be hilarious. I know someone who was raped. I wouldn't wish that on anyone as a punishment for violent crimes, let alone something like this. The, "say hello to Bubba" attitude is appalling.