The111

Check the "DPI" setting on your images. If that changes, the relative text size can change too. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Look at the title "hoemade." www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I had probably a six pack before we started the plastering. Scott (the guy wrapping me) had just as much. Fortunately he's a big guy so I don't really think it affected him. I was pretty tipsy. There's a reason they call it "getting plastered!" It's sort of peaceful inside that plaster shell though.... www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I made a post a little while ago about the Wes Rich CCM which I built over the past year and a half. Throughout most of the building process, I was being watched by my camera on a tripod. The end result is THIS video. Enjoy.

Just tell security you are a storm chaser on assignment with the discovery channel. I work for Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control in Orlando, and many of our missiles are built in Troy, Alabama. One of my bosses was flying to Troy once to bring them a special tool we had designed to assist in their assembly. Rather than mail it, or pack it in his luggage, he tried to carry it on the plane. When they asked him what it was, he replied defensively, "that's the missile assembly tool!" He never got that one back... we had to build another. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Side mount or top mount? I heard side mount is better! www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Yeh, I thought for sure they made that mistake but I found my old email to them and I actually told them that, for some reason. It's fixed on their site, now.

1TB drive still nearly $400 in Orlando. Lots of other stuff in the store discounted 15-30%, but even the most heavily discounted stuff still couldn't compare with Newegg prices. Sort of telling as to why they're going out of business. Not their fault, just the way the face of business is changing. They were the last big brick & mortar chain that carried things like mobos, PSU's, cases, etc... as far as I know. It's sad, but I can't really say I'll miss them either since I order all my shit online. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Jeff is too busy gliding at 20:1 to punctuate. Horizontal separation is infinitely more important (or more easily controlled) than vertical separation to me. Vertical separation is great in theory but it's hard to control with varying canopy snivels and response times. Somebody may say he's going to pull at 4,000 ft but in reality pull around 3,500 ft and snivel until 2,500 ft. While somebody else may say he'll pull at 3,000 ft, do exactly that, and be open at 2,500 ft as well. Vertical separation is worth trying out in addition to horizontal separation (sort of an added bonus), given that: 1) you don't rely on it by itself 2) you start the breakoff significantly higher which equals less formation time 3) everybody is disciplined enough to pull at their designated altitudes Who's been on RW bigways with staggered pulltimes? What's the first wave of breakoff altitude? What's the last wave? All that said, I'm not sure it's practical. First wave breakoff may have to occur as high as 6-7k ft (just a WAG). Jumping from only 13k ft, our formations usually are still building at 7k ft. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Damn! That is a good deal. So the whole company is going out of business? Their website still has normal prices and mentions nothing of this. I guess I could drive over to the local one tomorrow and see what's up. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Look at the snapshot section. Direct link (since it will be updated soon): http://today.smithsonianmag.com/snapshot/?year=2008&month=01&day=02 www.WingsuitPhotos.com

8 bits (b) = 1 byte (B) Mb = megabit = 1,000,000 bits MB = megabyte = 1,000,000 bytes (not always...) So b or B matters. Also, m = milli = 1/1000. While M = mega = 1,000,000. So, M/m = 1,000,000,000.... capitalization matters, you are off by a factor of a billion if you use the wrong capitalization. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

1.5 MB/s is 12 Mb/s. That's not slow. Units, people. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

16758 kbps down 9627 kbps up 122 ms latency At work. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

My first hop weighs more than 3 milligrams. This thread is full of units which don't exist or aren't measures of bandwidth... "mbs" "mg" and "k". Maybe it seems like I'm being overly picky, but when bandwidth can be measured by MBps or Mbps (and both are radically different), there is no point in comparing numbers if the units aren't clear. "mbs" means millibit second? "mg" means milligram? "k" means kilo-what? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

It's pretty rare to actually come close to your provider's max bandwidth, so increasing that number doesn't always matter. Latency can be much much more important... www.WingsuitPhotos.com

The thing is, we're breaking new ground here... things like the "4th row effect" we've been talking about may prove that no matter how qualified the flyers are, the formation will still get straggled at the back. Burbles will happen, domino effect style. Before you know it even a really good flyer is out of his slot due to chain burbles, and now he's in a position to get seriously fucked if somebody else does a 180. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Yes it makes sense Ed, and it's another nice plan which works perfect on paper. But try to imagine this "double chevron" executing such a serial breakoff maneuver. Not to mention that even if they were all flying tight enough to do that, it would take time to exectue a breakoff in that method. I'm not trying to insult the flying ability of these bigway flockers, I'm just trying to be realistic about where we are as a group right now, and why 180's wouldn't be safe for anybody under those conditions. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I tend to agree that turns greater than 90 degrees aren't a good thing. Take one look at any photo of a Z-Flock bigway, and compare that to how it should have looked. If we can't all fly our static slots like it appears on paper, how much worse are dynamic things like breakoff going to be, compared to theory? In theory turns could go all the way up to 180, but we are not even close to that level of discipline in reality. I have video from past Z-Flock events where somebody in the front would turn ~40 degrees to the right, while another guy about 50 feet to his right would turn only ~30 degrees to the right. As their paths cross, even at only 10 degrees offset, they have very high closing speeds. When you are in the sky with 50 other people it is impossible to get all of them in your peripheral to safely make a 180, and it is impossible for all of them to have you in their peripheral as well. And it's also impossible to assume everyone is where they should be, because that has never happened once. At 3.5 or 3.0 (can't remember) I had a pilot chute in my face more than once despite my best efforts to find a clear piece of the pie to fly into. I would never consider doing a full 180 on a bigway. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

More great views of the beach and the DZ [url http://www.matthoover.com/gallery/skydiving-photos/2007-02/]HERE. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Most bite switches come with 2.5mm stereo plugs... so you shouldn't need to do any splicing. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

But it is possible to orient your head during deployment, when wearing a topmount, such that all inertial forces from the camera are parallel to your neck/spine and load it in compression (which is preferable to a bending load). With a sidemount, this is impossible... no matter how you orient your head you have a load cantilevered off the side of your neck. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I'm guessing that by "flush mount" the QRS, you mean somehow embed it in the top of the helmet? Not possible as it would interfere with the user's head. As far as moving the camera over, it doesn't hang over the right side any more than it hangs over the left. The camera body is centered. Why on earth would you want to make the helmet even more unbalanced? It's already weighted to the left, because of the sidemount video... if you slide the still camera over to the left now you are WAY off balance. Sounds like great neck care. Of course I'm familiar with that, having built one, and I do like the design. But look at the attached picture to see the difference. There is a snag potential in either case. If these QRS plates are so unsafe we'd better ask Bonehead to stop making their Goldmember. Any SLR mounted on top of many of the current freefly helmet designs (narrow top mounting surface), with a bonehead or schumacher QRS... will have a very similar "snag profile" to what Bowen has with his RRS QRS and 40D. Again, it's not my choice, but I see nothing ridiculously unsafe about it. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I agree it is less than optimal, but I don't think it's a death-trap... and given the current options I'm not sure what Bowen could have done differently other than going top-mount (which he definitely did not want to do, but which is obviously my preference). See attached picture. A very experienced camera flyer and forum poster on here posted this a year or two ago (I save all camera setup pics I see, for ideas). He said he had just switched to this setup after making thousands of FTP jumps, and was very happy with this new sidemount setup. This has just as many if not more snag point than Bowen's, and when this pic was posted there were not people chiming in left and right about all the snag points. (No offense to the poster who's setup this is, who I am using for an example). Sure, Bowen doesn't have the experience of the guy above or of Norman Kent, but he does know what risks he's taking, and he did think it all through. We talked this over for several hours a few months back. Sidemounting an HC5 is questionable (sidemounting anything is in my book) but this helmet is probably the best way to do it if you're set on it. Top-mounting the 40D with the RRS QRS adds a bit to the "snag factor" but even with the camera flush on the top plate there is still a massive potential on either side of the camera... the extra height given by the QRS just adds a small bit of length to the back of the "gullies". Once more, he knows what risks he's taking, and he has a cutaway on the helmet AND a quick release lever for the SLR which he has already shown me he can reach in flight. How many here can jettison their SLR by itself, if for some strange reason they can't (or just don't want to) jettison the whole helmet? His primary reason for going sidemount was that he didn't want a bunch of weight on top of (above) his head, which is the exact reason the above poster (with the attached picture setup) swapped from his years of FTP use back to an "inferior" sidemount setup. It's not my choice, but it's a valid one. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Moreover, the point of removing your ringsight isn't to remove snag hazard. I happen to know that Bowen will remove the ringsight for freefly jumps, where he ONLY has video (no stills on top), flies with a wide lens, doesn't NEED a ringsight, and doesn't WANT one in front of his eye... not for snag reasons, but simply because he wants both eyes free for focusing on the jump and having the video there as a jump recorder. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that idea. Mode 1 (tandem) : SLR on top, DV on side, ringsight Mode 2 (freefly fun jump) : DV on side, super wide lens One helmet, two setups, made easier with the removable ringsight. It's not that hard to understand. www.WingsuitPhotos.com